Highlite History Politics

The vote, the draft, biology and cultural evolution

It’s not a popular fact these days to point out there are biological differences between men and women but of course, given the course of our historical evolution as a species men and women were given rols suited best to their generalised traits.

Men were to fight, hunt, defend, build and women’s roles were somewhat more supportive; gather, raise children, prepare food, take care of the sick. Both were equally important and both were equally respected.

Both men and women did such good a job, we as a species evolved to a point where men were capable due to the support of the women to build a society where our day to day excistence became less an issue of survival and we went from necessities to building a society based on luxuries.

Mind you to keep the lights on, people still had to work in coal mines up until late in the 19th century. Living was good but it was still hard work.

Somehow later in the 20th century the sentiment arose our western society was based on some toxic masculine patriarchy. A patriarchy both men and women worked hard to acheive.

Women were offered the vote at the same time men did but they massively turned it down because to vote meant you were elligible for the draft.

This is why women vote differently to men. By en large women don’t suffer the consequences of war when their vote leads to the need for millitary intervention.



It is like Stefan Molyneux pointed out countless times, if you don’t have to face the consequences you don’t have any skin in the game. Like an outsider deciding what a company’s policy should be without ever having invested a dime into that perticular company.

Womens approval has historically been used to trigger men into risking their lives in war

It was always all through history the consent or dissaproval of women which decided how meny men were willing to risk their lives in wars. One well documented fact in support of this statement is the white feather movement, where women shamed men not enlisted in the army with white feathers. The consequence was sexual ostracism.




Another strong example in the other direction was the Vietnam war where traumatized men who couldn’t dodge the draft (usually poor boys) were called babymurderers and bombarded with rotten food upon return. Usually in fact by rich boys who had the opportunities to dodge the draft and women.

First hand testimony of a non conscripted vietnam veteran.

Historically speaking women and children always went with the conquerring tribe.

Historically speaking it were always men that died in conflict, after which women and children were taken into the conquerring tribe. This meant women instinctively knew matters of defending the tribe were logically assigned to men whom were expected to back up their decisions with physical force should the need therefor arise.

excerpt : Sexual Paradox: Complementarity, Reproductive Conflict and Human Emergence


That’s where the romanticisation of two men physically fighting over a woman came from in the latter part of the middle ages. This is where the modern day cuckolding fetish stems from. In it’s ultimate form it’s the woman leaving with the superior man.

I hope you enjoyed this blog, if i missed any relevant information or given any information that is not correct, leave a comment and i will dive in to it as soon as possible.
Have an awesome day!

Political and cultural blogger, keywords; freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of thought. Politically incorrect and thought provoking.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *