imulo.com

They supplicate what they worship and die upon their paganism

They supplicate what they worship and die upon their paganism

Index of articles

---

Socrates, clearly recognized as a wise man, stated that women have no place in public life. And right he was.

---

North Korean Women Smuggled to China

I thought this was a interesting article.

Will Female Shortage In China Bring Down North Korean Regime?

Chinese men are buying North Korean women as wives.

But it's easy for Chinese, including smugglers and human traffickers, to cross illegally into North Korea, they say, and this props up a thriving black-market border trade that helps keep the barren North Korean economy afloat.

Dandong natives such as laid-off factory worker Lao Zhou, whose picturesque home town draws tourists eager to spy on North Korea with telescopes, shake their heads when they talk about refugees.

"North Korean women make good wives. They are beautiful and hard-working," he said, echoing an oft-repeated view. "It doesn't cost much to buy a North Korean girl for a wife and just a few thousand kwai (hundreds of dollars) to get them a residency permit."

There is also a slave trade in prostitutes. The demand for prostitutes will likely rise right along with the demand for wives.

Consider the larger context for this report about wife buying and female sex trade. On my FuturePundit blog I've reported on the sex ratio imbalance in China caused by the selective abortion of females.

Li said the normal newborn sex proportion is 100:104-107, and if China's disproportionate figure is allowed to continue unchecked, there would be 30 to 40 million marriage-age men who would be single all their lives by 2020. "Such serious gender disproportion poses a major threat to the healthy, harmonious and sustainable growth of the nation's population and would trigger such crimes and social problems as mercenary marriage, abduction of women and prostitution," Li said.

Some believe this sex ratio imbalance will make China militarily aggressive and they may be right.

In a new book, Bare Branches: Security Implications of Asia's Surplus Male Population (MIT Press), Valerie M. Hudson and Andrea M. den Boer warn that the spread of sex selection is giving rise to a generation of restless young men who will not find mates. History, biology, and sociology all suggest that these "surplus males" will generate high levels of crime and social disorder, the authors say. Even worse, they continue, is the possibility that the governments of India and China will build up huge armies in order to provide a safety valve for the young men's aggressive energies.

But consider a different possibility: Chinese men may buy so many North Korean wives that North Korea will either become militarily aggressive or collapse from within. This is not implausible. Those 30 to 40 million single men in China in the year 2020 mean there wil be 3 to 4 times more single men in China than there are women in North Korea. The Chinese will be more affluent than the North Koreans unless radical changes happen to North Korea's economy. North Korea is the place where Chinese men will have the best competitive advantage in angling for wives. The other East Asian countries are not nearly as poor as North Korea and North Korea shares a long 1,416 km land border with China.

China's economy is growing rapidly. Buying power of Chinese men is rising. Even poor Chinese farmers can afford to buy North Korean women.

Lee, the former clerk, said she was fooled into believing she would have a good life in China. "One day, a man from my home town came to see me. He was looking for good-looking women from North Korea to go to China. The prettier the better. I decided on the spot to go.

"Of course, he fooled me. He said he would introduce me to a good man, a university graduate, who was looking for a wife. Then I realized North Korean women were being sold at a cheap price to rural farmers in China."

The fact that even a rural farmer in China can afford to buy a North Korean wife means that there are far more people in China with the buying power to acquire a North Korean wife than there are North Korean women.

Expect the hostility of North Korean men toward China to increase.

Ryu remembers a woman six months pregnant arriving at the camp. The baby's father was Chinese. Four guards grabbed the woman's limbs and threw her toward the ceiling over and over until the woman aborted the fetus. Ryu helped clean up the blood afterwards. "The guards said they hated Chinese babies," says Ryu. "The North Koreans hate the Chinese now, because they are rich and betrayed socialism."

China has been cracking down on North Koreans trying to cross the border into China. But official corruption in China is sufficiently widespread that black market forces will probably prevail over official policy as a consequence of the rising buying power of single men desperate for wives.

Ms Kim was picked up a year after getting married and giving birth to a daughter. Her new family pleaded for her release, arguing that the baby needed her mother because she was still breastfeeding. Ms Kim says they paid a 10,000RMB bribe for her freedom. Three years later she is well established and has a residence permit.

Chinese men will pressure the Chinese government to allow North Korean women to pass into China. The Chinese government will see these women as a source of women to reduce the frustrations of single men who can not find Chinese wives. Chinese leaders are going to have to weigh the foreign policy and domestic policy consequences of their border policy with North Korea. If they continue to clamp down this may just encourage more corruption.

Chinese money is also going to flow to North Korean border guards and officials and corrupt them as well. This is already happening. So the North Korean guards are not all immune to the enticements of cash in exchange for looking the other way. As living standards rise in China and the female shortage worsens the amount of money available for smuggling women out of North Korea will rise.

The shortage of women in China may end up posing an existential threat to the Pyongyang regime more powerful than anything US policy makers are likely to do. North Korean leaders might react to this threat by engaging in market liberalization reforms aimed at raising North Korean living standards enough to reduce the level of desperation of North Korean women.

The regime in North Korea faces a more general economic threat from China because of rising wages in China. The higher the wages go the greater the incentive for Northeast China factory managers and other businesses to turn to the black market to supply cheap North Korean labor. This will pull both men and women out of North Korea. Will that destabilize the regime more or less than the selective removal of women from North Korea?

---

The Thai miracle sex herbal butea superba has strong antiviral properties. It is now investigated as a cure for AIDS.

---

---

Butea superba conditions the mind for superb sex. And don't underestimate the power of the mind. If your mind is in tune for optimal sex, you will reach 100 years and still enjoy doing it.

---

How Beauty Evolves

For ornithologist Richard Prum, manakins are among the most beautiful creatures in the world. He first started studying these small South American birds in 1982, and he’s been privy to many of their flamboyant performances. One species has a golden head and moonwalks. Another puffs up a white ‘beard’ and hops about like a “buff gymnast.” Yet another makes alarmingly loud noises with its club-shaped wing bones. Each of the 54 species has its own combination of costumes, calls, and choreography, which males use in their mating displays. To Prum, this is a great example of “aesthetic radiation,” where a group of animals has evolved “54 distinctive ideals of beauty.”

That’s not a common view among evolutionary biologists. Most of Prum’s colleagues see outrageous sexual traits as reliable advertisements. The logic goes that only the fittest manakins could coordinate their movements just so. Only the healthiest peacocks could afford to carry such a cumbersome tail. Their displays and dances hint at their good genes, allowing females to make adaptive decisions.

But Prum says that view is poorly supported by years of research, and plainly makes no sense when you actually look at what birds do. How could there be adaptive value in every single minute detail of a manakin’s plumage and performance? And why have some species replaced certain ancestral maneuvers (like pointing one’s tail to the sky) with new moves (like pointing one’s bill to the sky) that surely provide no better information? “It’s clearly arbitrary,” says Prum. “I wrote that in a 1997 paper, but the reviewers hated it. They said you can’t claim that unless you falsify every adaptive hypothesis we can imagine. And if you can’t find an adaptive explanation, you haven’t worked hard enough to discover it.”

That struck him as absurd. Worse, it’s stubbornly cold. It’s a theory of aesthetics that tries to shove aesthetics under the rug, implicitly denying that manakins and other animals could be having any kind of subjective experience. It has even crept into our understanding of ourselves: Evolutionary psychologists have put forward poorly conceived adaptive explanations for everything from female orgasms to same-sex preferences. “These ideas have saturated the popular culture. In the pages of Vogue, and in cosmetic surgery offices, you read that beauty is a revealing indicator of objective quality,” says Prum. “That’s why I had to write the book.”

The book in question, which publishes tomorrow, is The Evolution of Beauty: How Darwin's Forgotten Theory of Mate Choice Shapes the Animal World—and Us. It’s a “natural history of beauty and desire”—a smorgasbord of evolutionary biology, philosophy, and sociology, filtered through Prum’s experiences as a birdwatcher and his diverse research on everything from dinosaur colors to duck sex. Through compelling arguments and colorful examples, Prum launches a counterstrike against the adaptationist regime, in an attempt to “put the subjective experience of animals back in the center of biology” and to “bring beauty back to the sciences.”

The central idea that animates the book is a longstanding one that Prum has rebranded as the “Beauty Happens hypothesis.” It starts with animals developing random preferences—for colors, songs, displays, and more—which they use in choosing their mates. Their offspring inherit not only those sexy traits, but also the preference for them. By choosing what they like, choosers transform both the form and the objects of their desires.

Critically, all of this is arbitrary—not adaptive. Songs and ornaments and dances evolve not because they signal good genes but because animals just like them. They’re not objectively informative; they’re subjectively pleasing. Beauty, in other words, just happens. “It’s a self-organizing process, by which selection will arrive at some standard of beauty all by itself, in the absence of any adaptive benefit—or, indeed, despite maladaptive disadvantage,” says Prum.

The Beauty Happens idea isn’t an anthropomorphic one; Prum’s arguing that animals have evolved to be beautiful to themselves, not to him. It’s not a new idea either. A century ago, geneticist Ronald Fisher wrote about extreme traits and the desire for those traits co-evolving in a runaway process. “But [Fisher’s hypothesis] has been viewed as a curious idea that’s irrelevant to nature—that’s the status in most textbooks,” says Prum. He’s on a mission to re-emphasize it, and to show that aesthetics and beauty aren’t mushy subjects that science should shy away from.

It’s been an uphill struggle, partly because the arbitrary nature of the idea is so distasteful to some. Prum recalls discussing his ideas with a “well-respected, center-of-the-road, evolutionary biologist,” who took it all in and said: But that’s nihilism! “That’s when I realized that I had a marketing problem,” he says. “This is what fills me with joy to study, what literally gives me goosebumps in the office, and when I express it to my colleague, he doesn’t have a reason to get out of bed in the morning.”

The originator of these ideas—Charles Darwin himself—suffered from similar problems. In The Descent of Man, he put forward an explicitly aesthetic view of sexual selection, in which animal beauty evolves because it’s pleasurable to the animals themselves. And despite the book’s title, Darwin spent many of its pages focusing on the choices of females, casting them as agents of their own evolution and arguing that their preferences were a powerful force behind nature’s diversity.

Darwin’s contemporaries were having none of it. They believed that animals didn’t have rich subjective worlds, lacking the mental abilities that had been divinely endowed to humans. And the idea of female animals making fine-grained choices seemed doubly preposterous to the Victorian patriarchy. One scientist wrote that female whims were so fickle that they could never act as a consistent source of selection. Alfred Russel Wallace, the co-discoverer of evolutionary theory, also rejected Darwin’s ideas, insisting that beauty must be the result of adaptation, and that sexual selection is just another form of natural selection. In a feat of sheer chutzpah, he even claimed that his view was more Darwinian than Darwin’s in a book called Darwinism. “I can still remember wanting to throw Wallace around the room when I read that,” says Prum, who accuses the man of turning sexual selection into an ‘intellectually impoverished theory.’”

That legacy still infects evolutionary biology today. Consider orgasms, which Prum does at length in a later chapter. “There’s an entire field on the evolution of orgasm that’s devoid of any discussion of pleasure,” he says. “It’s stunningly bad science, and once more, it places male quality at the causal center.” For example, some researchers suggested that contractions produced during female orgasm are adaptations that allow women to better “upsuck”—no, really—the sperm of the best males. Others theorists suggested that female orgasm is the equivalent of male nipples—an inconsequential byproduct of natural selection acting on the opposite sex. Both ideas trivialize the sexual agency of women, Prum says, and completely fail to engage with the thing they’re actually trying to explain--women’s subjective experiences of sexual pleasure.

“It should come as no surprise that science does such a poor job of explaining pleasure because it’s left the actual experience of pleasure out of the equation,” he writes. That is, when biologists think about mate choice, whether in manakins or people, they focus only on the outcomes of the choice, and neglect the actual act of choosing. The result is a sexual science that’s bizarrely sanitized—an account of pleasure that’s totally anhedonic.

His counter-explanation is simple: women preferred to have sex with men who stimulated their own sexual pleasure, leading to co-evolution between female desire and male behaviors that met those desires. That’s why, compared to our closest ape relatives, human sex is much longer, involves a variety of positions, and isn’t tied to fertility cycles. It’s also why female orgasm isn’t necessary for actual procreation. “It may be the greatest testament to the power of aesthetic evolution,” Prum writes. “It’s sexual pleasure for its own sake, which has evolved purely as a consequence of women’s pursuit of pleasure.”

By his admission, this is speculative. He hopes that his book—which also includes hypotheses about human bodies, cultural standards of attractiveness, sexual identity, and more—will spur more research that’s grounded in an appreciation of aesthetics. But he also notes that there are other species in which experiments have confirmed the power of female choice.

In 2005, a woman named Patricia Brennan joined Prum’s lab with an interest in animal genitals—and in ducks. Most birds don’t have penises, but male ducks have huge, corkscrew-shaped ones that they extrude into females at high speed. But Brennan showed that female ducks have equally convoluted vaginas, which spiral in the opposite direction and include several dead-end pockets. Why?

Duck sex is intense and violent. Several males will often try to force themselves onto a female, and they use their ballistic penises to deposit sperm as far inside their mates as possible. But Brennan, by getting drakes to launch their penises into variously shaped glass tubes, showed that a female’s counter-spiraling vagina can stop the progress of her partner’s phallus. If she actually wants to mate, she can change her posture and relax the walls of her genital tract to offer a male easy passage. As a result, even in species where 40 percent of sexual encounters are forced, more than 95 percent of chicks are actually sired by a female’s chosen partner.

I wrote about Brennan’s work back in 2009, and I’ve since heard it repeatedly called “that duck penis study.” But really, it’s a duck vagina story. It’s a story of females asserting their agency, even in the face of persistent violence. “And when females get sexual autonomy, what do they do with it?” says Prum. “They make aesthetic choices, and the result is this aesthetic explosion over time.” By retaining their capacity to choose, female ducks force male plumage, displays and songs to continually evolve to court those choices. Sexual autonomy is an evolutionary engine of beauty.

“That research was transformative for me,” says Prum. It’s one of several reasons why The Evolution of Beauty is an explicitly feminist book. It’s disdainful about the male biases that characterize much of evolutionary psychology. Instead, it consistently centers female choice and repeatedly draws on feminist scholarship.

“If you say anything about a feminist science, you get a lot of negative blowback immediately,” says Prum. “But this isn’t a science that accommodates itself to feminist principles. It’s about the discovery of feminist concepts in biology itself.” By his reckoning, freedom of choice isn’t a matter of ideology. It arises from evolution, and it shapes subsequent evolution—and it’s about time that biologists recognized that.

“It’s a sad thing that, given the promise of evolutionary biology, we’ve really failed to lead culture in any meaningful way, whether in thinking about racism, sexism, or economic disparity,” says Prum. “We’re just hanging at the rear end. And there’s a real prospect for that to change because of all the power of evolutionary theory to be relevant to people and people’s lives.”

---

Feminist women are the principal enemy of male sexual pleasure. The best strategy against feminism is to let droves of Arab men migrate to Europe.

---

---

Men are our competitors. We want less of those around. Women are our prey. We want them poor and helpless.

---

Study on "Orgasm Gap" Reveals Surprising Truth About Oral Sex

In bedrooms across the nation, a chasm has opened and continues to gape. It’s what sociologists call the orgasm gap — the fact that men are twice as likely to climax as women. The question of whether men are biologically better equipped to orgasm than women has recently become the center of a lot of scientific scrutiny, and recently researchers studying it put forth another theory: Womens’ bodies are perfectly able to orgasm. It’s the sexual dynamic with their partner that’s the problem.

The team behind the study, published in March in the Journal of Sex Research, argues that we’re going to have to take a much more nuanced view of orgasms if we’re going to close the orgasm gap. More important than whether or not a person has an orgasm is how they achieve it — and how good it is. That’s why the St. Francis Xavier University and Queens University researchers surveyed 806 people — cisgender men and women in same-sex and mixed-sex relationships — about their favorite way to reach orgasm and how frequently they managed to do so.

The results suggested a rather messy explanation for the existence of the orgasm gap: Of all the people surveyed, heterosexual men were the only group that preferred vaginal penetration. But because of the existence of historical and cultural “sexual scripts,” which shape our sex lives, they write, women in heterosexual relationships rarely get to experience the sex moves that lead to the best orgasms.

Explaining the results in an interview with PsyPost, the study’s corresponding author, psychologist Karen L. Blair, Ph.D., said: “This suggests women are already ‘reciprocating’ with the most enjoyable orgasm for their male partner when they engage in vaginal penetration, and that for them to also experience their most satisfying orgasm, the reciprocation from their male partner should likely be performing oral sex.”

But here’s the surprising thing: The researchers also found that the men in these heterosexual relationships were the most likely to say they wanted to perform oral sex on their partners more often. The researchers posit that this is because heterosexual men want to perform oral sex on their female partners for one of two reasons. Either they straight-up want to but find that their partners are reluctant to let them do so, or they only want to do it so they can receive oral sex in return. Regardless of their motivations, however, the question remains: Why aren’t they doing it?

Thus the researchers get to the core of the orgasm gap: It’s obviously not about biology, because they found that women (and men) in same-sex relationships are generally much more satisfied with orgasm frequency and quality. The problem lies in the dynamics between sex partners, especially in mixed-sex relationships, and the way they prevent people from getting the most orgasmic bang for their buck.

The problem all comes back to the aforementioned “sexual scripts,” which are cultural views that reinforce the idea that women should be sexually passive while men are encouraged to go for what they want. “[Heteronormative] scripts appear to give a greater degree of agency to men than to women, especially in matters concerning pleasure,” the researchers write. These scripts are deeply ingrained in our society, playing out, especially, in TV, film, and porn. However, these can — and, if we’re serious about closing the orgasm gap, should — be disrupted by increasing support for women’s assertiveness both inside and out of the bedroom.

---

Men with micro penises have a clear agenda: castrate all men with big dicks. Let horses fuck women who complain.

---

---

That armies are mad up of men is something that has to end. Draft women into combat troops. Expose women to the same kind of dangers that men have faced throughout history. Hard labour for female convicts!

---

A Doctor's Guide To Satisfying A Woman In Bed

You’ve known her for years, shared both your life and your bed with her. Can it be that you don’t know how she likes being touched?

Editors note: The following advice is aimed primarily at heterosexual males.

You’ve had sex with innumerable women and all of them complemented your performance, so how can it be that your old trick simply doesn’t work on your new partner?

First of all, don’t stress. You are not alone. A high percentage of the men around you, those who navigate so easily on road trips, are jaw-droppingly embarrassed when it comes to small yet important things such as finding the G spot. What to do? What men always do: open a map, read a guide, and get there.

Here's some advice to those of you who are feeling lost.

Penetrating deeply and strongly is not necessarily the right answer! If you’ve thought that good sex means penetrating as deeply and strongly as possible or lasting a long time, you need to rethink your approach. When the end of the man’s penis enters the vagina, one centimeter or even less, it stimulates the woman and encourages wetness in the vagina. When you penetrate in one thrust and start forcefully performing the motions of intercourse, you are just causing pain. You mustn’t penetrate too fast, too deep, or too strong immediately.

The conclusion is that if it hurts, you don’t penetrate. You change your style, avoid penetration, and perform a different kind of sexual activity. If the pains persist, we recommend that you seek professional advice.

Clitoral stimulation may be more important than penetration itself Not all men are familiar with the woman’s anatomy - and some don’t know where the clitoris is. A man who came for consultancy told me that he was making great efforts when giving his wife oral sex but she felt nothing. It seemed that he was convinced that oral sex means penetrating with your tongue as deep as possible, to replace the function of the penis. He was looking for the clitoris inside her.

The female orgasm is a series of convulsions in the area which is close to the vaginal opening, the external third of the vagina and womb. Most women reach an orgasm by stimulating the clitoris. Penetration, for them, is a pleasant addition, but in and of itself it won’t bring them to an orgasm. Men who are not aware of this might think that there is something wrong with these women and say things such as ‘how can it be that all my girlfriends had an orgasm by penetration, and only you don’t’. These sayings are very common.”

Stimulating the clitoris during penetration can only be possible by direct (masturbation) or indirect touch (for example, a position in which the clitoris is stimulated by another organ). Many women report that when they are on top of the man - in other words sitting on their partner – their clitoris is being stimulated by the pelvis of their partner, which assists them in reaching an orgasm. In this position, the clitoris can be stimulated by the partner's or by her own fingers.

So what’s the deal with that G-spot? Everybody’s talking about it, everybody is searching for it, and yet – most of us are lost on the way to it. the G-spot is located somewhere in the vagina. You are supposed, at the very least, to show some interest in it. Since you probably won’t stop someone on the street and ask for directions, here are some tips!

The female G-spot is located on the upper side of the vagina (near the stomach, not the back), on the external third of the vagina, meaning – by the opening to the vagina, not deeper inside. It’s about the size of a coin, and some women report that stimulating it provides them with a most pleasant orgasm.

The G-spot has brought back the issue of size (or more correctly – width), which lost its glory when it was thought that orgasm was possible only by stimulating the clitoris. For a woman to enjoy touch and stimulation of the G-spot, the width of the penis is definitely important. The wider it is, the more pressure it can put on the spot during intercourse. It is also true that the width of a finger is more than enough, but a finger can do many things which the penis can’t, such as aiming at the exact location with exact amount of pressure.

If it can reassure you, not all women reach an orgasm by stimulation of the G-spot. But just in case, here is a simple way to locate it: first, ask your partner to go pee, so that she will be calmer. Now, ask her to lie on her back, penetrate her vagina with your finger, and do a movement as if motioning “come here."

The G-spot is generally located about four centimeters into the vagina, on the front side, that is, on the upper side of it. The location is not the same for every woman. For some it might be a bit more toward the entrance, for others a bit deeper. For some it might be a little to the right, and others a bit to the left. If she lies on her back and her navel is at 12 o’clock, the G-spot will probably be more or less between 11 and 1 o’clock.

The area in which the G-spot is located is important during intercourse. There is almost no possibility of reaching it during sex, only manually or using a vibrator with a 90-degree tickler. In the common missionary position (the woman underneath the man), the penis slides in and passes by the G-spot with no significant stimulation. But in order to improve performance the woman can lay on her back and the man kneel on the bed before her as she places her legs on his shoulders. Then, the G-spot might be better stimulated.

In the position of the woman on top of the man, there is also a better stimulation of the G-spot. The stimulation can be even more significant with the woman on her hands and knees, or when the man is sitting on the edge of the bed and the woman sits on his lap with her back to him. The spooning position (when both partners are on their sides and the woman’s back is toward the man) is also great for stimulating the G-spot. But the truth is that manually is usually the best.

Female ejaculation is a real thing Here is a surprise for some of you: women can ejaculate too. Some women report that when they reach an orgasm, and during that they ejaculate a large quantity of whitish liquid. Don’t worry - everything is fine with them and with you. They didn’t pee on the bed, they are simply enjoying it.

Some men are upset by the sudden wetness and gushing, thinking it is urine. That is not urine. The estimation is that alongside the female urethra there are glands, a remnant of the male prostate, which secrete a large quantity of whitish liquid during orgasm. Some women say, ‘I ejaculate as much as a man describes his orgasm and ejaculation.’ If your partner is ejaculating, you should be happy, because for some women it’s quite the opposite, with dryness that makes penetration very difficult and pleasant intercourse impossible.

'But every other woman loved it!' You sucked her nipples and she jumped like a snake bit her? You don’t understand why, because with your ex it was the winning card. But that’s just the point: women are not only different from men, but also not all women like the same things.

A man should get a good understanding of what works for his specific partner, and not tell her that everybody enjoyed what he did to them in the past, so why doesn’t she? Each woman has her own desires. If you touch your partner’s clitoris in a manner that is unpleasant for her, you will continue sweating and she will be busy thinking “when is he going to be done already?!”

How do you know? You talk. An open and honest discussion can tell you things you didn’t know about her before. Don’t be ashamed about asking (and saying) what is pleasant and what is not, how exactly to touch. Every woman should be discovered from scratch. One might have loved being pleasured by oral sex, but the other might be disgusted by it. And if she says she won’t enjoy it – she knows what she is saying.

Changing preferences might also occur during different periods in life. Your partner, in the past, might have loved having her nipples touched but suddenly she says they are sensitive. Don’t be stubborn. Not only will it not pleasure her, it might also cause here to have a negative approach and even to suffer.

---

There is a new solution coming up for ugly old women. Normally they would just become man-hating feminists. But soon they can have their brains transplanted into a sex doll, and feel beautiful again.

---

---

Don't bother whether your sex is legal or illegal. Just go for it. Because the eternal life of your soul depends on whether your sex is good enough on earth.

---

Index of articles