Odds and Ends, 8/11/21

In der news.

Putting aside Cairnsian theories of "induced mutations" and focusing on the accepted neo-Darwinian paradigm, then vaccines, or anything else, is not "causing" mutations. The mutations in covid-19, or anywhere else, occur randomly, and selective pressures affect which of the mutations increase in frequency. To put it in a crude anthromorphic sense, the virus "wants" to replicate its genome and mutations that promote spread will be favored. I note that a vaccine that controls symptoms but doesn't much affect infection and transmission (like covid vaccines with the delta variant) is not going to be selecting for mutation for the most part. The virus does not "want" to cause illness, it merely "wants" to replicate.

In any case, selection for mutation is no more a reason to avoid vaccination than selection for therapy resistance is a reason for a cancer patient to refuse treatment and just sit back and die.

Consider the following. Imagine someone had to bet their life - a life vs. death wager - on whether something they profess to believe is actually true or not. Do you think they'd still insist on moon landing hoax, moon as a hologram, flat Earth, atom bombings being napalm and mustard gas, and all of the anti-vaxx stuff?

The affirmative action ratchet in the American "movement" works thus: Southern and Eastern European activists are willing to accept NW European leaders - indeed all "leaders" of the American "movement" have been such, particularly "WASPs." On the other hand, NW European activists are not, repeat not, willing to have Southern or Eastern European leaders; hence, the leadership pool is restricted only to NW Europeans, especially "Anglos."

Der Movement weeps; Liddell has a nervous breakdown.

Some say that this is a hoax.  Those men familiar with the perfidious yeastbucket know better. Thus:

To the sensitive young woman who has had the benefits of proper upbringing, the wedding day is, ironically, both the happiest and most terrifying day of her life. On the positive side, there is the wedding itself, in which the bride is the central attraction in a beautiful and inspiring ceremony, symbolizing her triumph in securing a male to provide for all her needs for the rest of her life. On the negative side, there is the wedding night, during which the bride must pay the piper, so to speak, by facing for the first time the terrible experience of sex.

At this point, dear reader, let me concede one shocking truth. Some young women actually anticipate the wedding night ordeal with curiosity and pleasure! Beware such an attitude! A selfish and sensual husband can easily take advantage of such a bride. One cardinal rule of marriage should never be forgotten: GIVE LITTLE, GIVE SELDOM, AND ABOVE ALL, GIVE GRUDGINGLY. Otherwise what could have been a proper marriage could become an orgy of sexual lust.

On the other hand, the bride’s terror need not be extreme. While sex is at best revolting and at worse rather painful, it has to be endured, and has been by women since the beginning of time, and is compensated for by the monogamous home and by the children produced through it.

It is useless, in most cases, for the bride to prevail upon the groom to forego the sexual initiation. While the ideal husband would be one who would approach his bride only at her request and only for the purpose of begetting offspring, such nobility and unselfishness cannot be expected from the average man.

Most men, if not denied, would demand sex almost every day. The wise bride will permit a maximum of two brief sexual experiences weekly during the first months of marriage. As time goes by she should make every effort to reduce this frequency.

Feigned illness, sleepiness, and headaches are among the wife’s best friends in this matter. Arguments, nagging, scolding, and bickering also prove very effective, if used in the late evening about an hour before the husband would normally commence his seduction.

Clever wives are ever on the alert for new and better methods of denying and discouraging the amorous overtures of the husband. A good wife should expect to have reduced sexual contacts to once a week by the end of the first year of marriage and to once a month by the end of the fifth year of marriage.

By their tenth anniversary many wives have managed to complete their child bearing and have achieved the ultimate goal of terminating all sexual contacts with the husband. By this time she can depend upon his love for the children and social pressures to hold the husband in the home.

Just as she should be ever alert to keep the quantity of sex as low as possible…

Anything to divide Europeans against each other is grist for the mill for HBDers, including the HBD Nordicists.

The paper that MacDonald is hyper-ventilating about (which is interesting) actually deals with intra-ethnic variation, as it looks at the components of the different ancestries within Estonians (and "Siberian" is a component there...no surprise if you've been reading my material).

Now, the findings likely will apply to the broad European context, fair enough, but full and honest disclosure would be to admit that the paper looks within a single Northern European ethny.

Interesting article by Dr. Frank Salter.

This has to be the perfect YouTube video for Millennial Alt Right jackasses: Who is the manlet?