Brutal patriarchy

[Admin]

In brutal patriarchy elite males have totalitarian control over everyone else including females.

This makes it possible for the society to reach a very high fertility rate since females can just be reduced to property and impregnated by force over and over again. Over time societies implementing these aggressive policies would expand their population over time taking over the world until there is brutal patriarchy everywhere.

Females might actually be selecting for this without realizing the future consequences since ruthless males will be able to acquire more resources and thus get higher reproductive success. Males that are agressive when it comes to breeding will do better in terms of reproduction and thus agressive breeding strategies among males will become the norm eventually.

Also since only males are subjected to brutal female sexual selection they will improve more than females resulting in males eventually dominating society again.

Once males are already in control the ones being most agressive when it comes to breeding the females they own as property will to better in terms of reproduction and thus over time males will become increasingly brutal in forcing females to have as many babies as possible, females would be forcefully bred right from the first period and this would continue until they are 40 to 50.

 

[Admin]

Female childhood under brutal patriarchy
Females would be raised to obey and to as they are told or they would be punished. Their schooling would be limited (to save money) and a lot of focus would be on taking care of children.

Girls would be taken from their mother at age 2 to 11 and then being raised by the husband. The husband may force his child-brides to engage in non-reproductive sexual activities, he would however have to be careful not to ruin her reproductive abilities and thus probably have to refrain from vaginal sex until she is physically ready for this.

 

[Admin]

Can female sexual selection be preserved?
Females can be allowed to choose between multiple males, once they have selected someone he would become her owner and she would not have much in terms of rights.

This would result in a 2-stage process where you first need to be appointed as candidate and than ultimately selected by a female to be a master.

 

[Admin]

Forced breeding
He will only ejaculate outside the pussy if all his female breeding slaves are pregnant. If all his females are pregnant then they might be forcefully deep-throated or be anally raped. He might have sex with her while she is breastfeeding.

When she isn't forced to have sex or take care of children she might be allowed to study things so she can be useful to society once she can no longer have children. The husband may rent her out to do work but she will not be allowed to have vaginal sex with other males.

 

[Admin]

Infertile unattractive females
The ruling male elite may decide to simply execute females once they are no longer useful, it can be that the owner of her simply decide to kill her. Another possibility is keeping unattractive females around as long as they can work and pay taxes to the system.

A lot of jobs that needs to be done to not require much in terms of skill, it can be taking care of all the children females are forced to have.

 

[Admin]

Infertile attractive females
They cannot provide much value to males that are going to reproduce. They can however be useful for sex-work or to simply give males that shouldn't reproduce wives.

If there are not enough infertile females for these things we can simply forcefully transition males to increase the number of non-reproductive 'females'

 

[Admin]

Baby quotas
With baby quotas we can allow females to remain relatively free while still reaching desired increase of population and thus there might not actually be any need for brutal patriarchy.

The increase of birthrate from baby quotas will be less than than if direct force is used to breed females (due to difficulties enforcing quotas) but it may still work better for society since it will be easier to make room for the increased population size.

We cannot assume that max fertility rate is ideal in terms of societal survival of the fittest. With baby quotas we can expand the population as more land/resources are available.

There is no need to use military force to conquer new areas if people can simply leave to live in other countries.

 

[Admin]

Punishments
Females useful for breeding would not be killed, if they refuse to cooperate and doesn't accept their brutal oppression they will simply be restrained so they cannot do anything to resist and then they get impregnated anyway.

If a female is physically punished the goal would be to inflict pain but not do serious damage. Needles are useful for this since these injuries heal afterwards. Electricity is another option.

 

[Admin]

Forced teen pregnancies
The fertility rate can be effectively raised to about 7 by using coercion to impregnate young females. When they are 13 they select a partner that will take care of them and impregnate them until they are 23 ± 5. Some females will be allowed to donate eggs instead of having to be the property of a male for years.

This can be individualized to target females suitable for reproduction, thus you essentially get punished for having 'good' genetics.

 

[Oxblood]

That’s a good idea and solves a lot of incel issues.

 

[Admin]

That’s a good idea and solves a lot of incel issues.

Well what ISIS did was to simply kill the males while using the females as sex-slaves.

Even under brutal patriarchy there would still probably be a lot of males unable to reproduce, it's just that it wouldn't really be females decising who, it would simply be about what group of males that managed to grab power.

 

[Admin]

Can this be avoided?
It's unclear if the "societal survival of the fittest" mechanism alone would lead to brutal patriarchy, when it comes to societal survival the birthrate is just one of many factors.

But it's still beneficial for individual males to forcefully impregnate females when it comes to spreading their DNA and thus we may see human males evolving to become increasingly brutal in oppressing females.

There would also be evolutionary pressure on free females to select ruthless males to reproduce with, having sons that later to on to forcefully impregnate females.

 

[Oxblood]

She is not so attractive: https://www.google.it/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/06/nadia-murad-isis-sex-slave-nobel-peace-prize

Probably reproduction done in this way is not fun. The attractive females will have a shorter attractiveness span with this brutal patriarchy regime.

 

[Admin]

Does gynocentrism prevent brutal patriarchy?
Humans are biologically predisposed to prioritizing the well-being of women and children and this may result in brutal patriarchy never becoming viable.

Females also generally behave in ways which people like more than males so it's unnatural wanting to oppress them, most misogynists are males who are unattractive and cope with "females are bad" (becuase all females reject them, as they should).

Males are by nature disposable and thus people will naturally prioritize females and this is due to biology.

 

[Admin]

Fertility will increase by itself?
People who value having children will end up with more reproductive success than people who are not very interested in children and becuase of that we can expect the fertility rate to naturally increase over time in a free society without coercion.

So while using government incentives to increase fertility rate is a viable short term strategy it may not be the best long-term strategy

 

[Admin]

Physiological autogynephilia
Females who have a strong pregnancy/childbirth fetish driving them to reproduce will end up with more reproductive success.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Breeding/

https://www.reddit.com/r/knockmeup/

This may however come with downsides such as severe autogynephilia also becoming common among males (to the point where it has a fitness cost) and other traits that causes females to have more babies may detrimental in terms of societal survival of the fittest.

 

[Admin]

Eugenics under brutal patriarchy
When females do not have much in terms of rights we can subject them to various forms of eugenics such as forced surrogacy or forced egg donations. We would be able to control how many children each female have and be able to control who will impregnate her.

Since human rights in general wouldn't be much of a thing the rulers could experiment freely with genetic engineering to create new superior humans, countries with emphasis on "human rights" would be unwilling to go that route and thus quickly fall behind.

 

[Admin]

From quantity to quality
Higher birthrate makes it possible to export or euthanize a large portion of the people being born and focus on the ones that are most promising, thus from quantity we can also get quality provided we can get rid of a lot of people somehow.

Exporting people will also export the culture of the society resulting it in spreading in addition to the gene-flow that will be created.

 

[Admin]

Mandatory reproductive sex
One method to raise the fertility rate without reducing females to property is to make it mandatory for them to engage in reproductive sexual activities. Exceptions would be made in the case of females ill-suited for reproduction.

This will result in females that can get pregnant easily enjoying more reproductive success, thus in a sense you would get punished for being healthy (being forced to have more babies) while females you have issues (such as genetic flaws) would escape.

It's unclear how to best enforce a policy like that, it can be examining females to make sure there are semen in their vagina. Birth control will not be allowed obviously, abortion would require government approval. Females not complying with this will be reduced to property of a male appointed by the government or be subjected to forced IVF:

Another possibility is to install video cameras in the homes of women so female government officials can verify that the females are indeed having reproductive sex.

 

[Admin]

The eugenics case for female freedom
By allowing females to remain free we can see which of them that are good for society and use them for breeding (such as forced egg extractions).

This does not however mean females shouldn't be forced to have babies, we can still have some degree of forced breeding (such as when they are teens) and then use additionan forced breeding their genetics is wanted by the government. Then we will select for females who are strong enough to do well for society even after being subjected to forced breeding.

 

[Admin]

Artificial wombs?
It's unclear if this will ever become a viable options for humans but if it come early it would offer an alternative to forcing females to become pregnant. Even if it does become reality the cost may turn out to bee too high making traditional reproduction more viable.

Just relying on artificial wombs is dangerous since then we become even more dependent on advanced technology.

If artificial wombs become viable at large scale then it's very likely government will limit your ability to use them to reproduce. It might end up being so restricted you end up having to rely on real human females instead even though it would have been more economical to use artifical wombs.

 

[Admin]

The fairness instinct
Primates have a primitive instinct making us value fairness a lot, this vestigial trait causes a lot of troubles in human civilizations.

Humans will typically not accept a system where one gender has it clearly better, in the past we had a system where the sexes did different things but it was not clear what role that was the best one, today we are not even comfortable with that.

What we have is gynocentrism pushing in one direction and egalitarianism pushing us in another direction. In the case of car insurance egalitarianism won in a lot of countries making it illegal to give people higher rates only for being male.

But in order to have clearly oppressive patriarchy we end up having to go against both gynocentrism and egalitarianism and thus we might not see it becoming widespread any time soon.

 

[Admin]

Will infertile females be worse off in a brutal patriarchy?
While it is possible that fertile females will be treated worse via forced breeding (raped over and over again) the most likely outcome is infertile females being treated worse since they are less valuable for society.

Fertile females would get protections to prevent them from being seriously harmed (in a way that would impair their fertility) such safeguards would not be afforded to people who cannot have children. There would also be safeguards in place to prevent fertile females from being impregnated by males ill-suited for reproduction.

Males would not be safe either since they could be forcefully feminized chemically and often also surgically to become sex-slaves, the demand for infertile sex-slaves would be far greater than the supply, young males would specifically in danger when it comes to this.

 

[Admin]

Male leadership
A truly meritocratic system will be dominated by males since elite males have an intellectual advantage over elite females, this is especially noticable in intellectual competitions such as chess, go, starcraft, etc.

The only female go player who has won a major title is Rui Naiwei,

As of March 2017, the top rated woman in chess is Yifan Hou, with rank of 117 and a rating of 2649. The 100th ranked player is Evgeniy Najer (male), with a rating of 2659.

 

[Admin]

Will genetic engineering eliminate the need for forced breeding?
It can be argued that a society archives quality via successful genetic engineering of humans will be at an advantage over societies that doesn't resort to genetic engineering. This does not however eliminate the big potential advantage a society utilizing forced breeding would have, instead it makes the gap even wider.

Let's say a genetic modification as a side-effect makes child-birth even more painful (such as preventing epidurals and other pain-medications from working) in that case females may need to be forced into pregnancy since they would otherwise avoid it due to how painful it is to give birth.

If genetic variations is introduced to add diversity and allow for new superior (for the society) humans to be created then more births might be required to see the full diversity that is now possible with the genes that have been artificially added, then we can see which genetic combinations that are more successful and over time breed superior humans. Taking shortcuts by micromanaging breeding (forced sterilizations, detailed engineering, etc) is unlikely to have the best result since it's difficult to know the consequences of changing DNA.

https://vintologi.com/threads/eugenics.844/

We probably still need to result to trial and error and give it a lot of time, be happy with minor generational improvements and not rush these things.