Are We Headed Towards A Permanent Gendered Political Divide?

We discuss the growing gender divide between political parties, especially among youth. Men are trending more conservative while women trend more progressive/liberal. We cover theories on sexual gatekeeping, bureaucratic optimization, and relationship breakdown driving this divide. We also touch on whether masculine parties can succeed given bureaucracy, the decline of democracy in the U.S., and the road towards autocracy or empire.Malcolm Collins: [00:00:00] What if we saw men and women begin to cluster within two parties instead of this urban rural divide being the primary differentiator between the parties? So here I'm going to put up a chart where you see you have a huge explosion of difference in, in South Korea, a smaller one in the United States, a, a larger one in Germany and a large one in the UK as well.

Would you like to know more?

Simone Collins: Hello, Malcolm. We are actually here not just to order Indian food because we're being indulgent and weak. Did you, did you probably see order yet? I did. It's, it's ordered. It's kind of,

Malcolm Collins: Okay, well we are here to discuss a political theory I have had for a while.

And it's weird because I actually. Like, I'm surprised we haven't seen this happen more. And now we're really beginning to see it play out in politics. And I don't like it's one of the theories where I was like, I'm surprised more people didn't have this theory or didn't think this was going to happen.

And Simone pointed out that during women's suffrage, actually, a lot of people did expect this to happen. [00:01:00] I just need to go back to those old articles before ideas like this were banned from the general population. So we need to set a few stages here. Okay. Men and women are psychologically different from each other.

They see the world different from each other on average, not every man and every woman, right. But on average, the necessary throat

Simone Collins: clearing complete,

Malcolm Collins: right. And if you look at, well, I mean, it's, it's, you know, and I, I mentioned this. I often get sad when I think about like Neanderthals going extinct, how cool would it be if like another type of human lived on this world that we could commune with.

And learn from and see the world differently from their perspective, because they'd almost certainly have like systemic psychological differences from us. And I'm like, but we do. And like, even better than that with this male, female thing, you get to like make out with them and you get to choose one as like your primary partner for life.

No, it works well. Right. But there are. [00:02:00] Sustained psychological differences between men and women, which people, I think, you know, the left doesn't want to, it doesn't want to talk about it, it doesn't want to admit it, because they have this belief that all humans are the same, all humans are exactly psychologically the same, all humans have exactly the same proficiencies, and yet somehow Diversity matters.

Diversity doesn't matter if we're not different. Diversity is a thing of value because we are different, you knobs. What you actually mean is you are incapable of dealing with a world in which genuine diversity exists. And this is something we see when leftists start shrieking when they're like, But if you genetically select your kids for IQ, what if your kids are smarter than the general population?

And it's like the world isn't hurt because some smarter people exist. Yeah. Is it, are we worse off for Einstein? Are we worse off for X smart person? Like there is. Well,

Simone Collins: and as a Johnny anomaly argues in the book, future humans I higher IQ is, is pretty [00:03:00] well documented to be associated with pro sociality, you know, plus, you know, a better economy, all these other good things.

So if you are an incredibly dumb person, you want to live where there are smart people, it doesn't matter.

Malcolm Collins: It doesn't, it doesn't, but, but the point being is it's an incredibly sociopathic thing to say and what they really mean by saying that is because the way that their party and their ideology has been able to justify and engage with diversity It's through pretending that diversity doesn't actually exist when a they recognize that through things like genetic selection, human diversity may come to exist.

They psychologically are incapable of dealing with that. And as such, their only action is to maintain human genetic purity and prevent people like us from breeding because they don't like that. pollute the human gene pool with science.

Simone Collins: I don't like our, our, my little pencil neck and our glasses. It's so funny when people like in articles that make fun of us [00:04:00] or in like chat threads that make, or whatever, like Reddit threads and make fun of us for being eugenicists, you know, they accused us of that, even though they're totally wrong.

Then they like proceed to be like, and they're, they're nearsighted. They wear. Thick glasses. Like,

Malcolm Collins: I'm sorry, a eugenics insult though, right? It shows they're the eugenics that they have. It really does inclination,

Simone Collins: isn't it? Yeah. This, it's not a, it's not a good look. Whereas like, if you're excited

Malcolm Collins: when anyone, you know, who wants to have kids and is, is socially responsible as having kids, right?

Yeah. Yeah. But anyway so. I had this theory where I was thinking where it's like, okay, so, and this is true, men and women vote differently, right? They have different views on subjects and they relate to political subjects in different ways that men and women would drift towards sort of their own political parties and that the primary political divide in the world would become a male female divide rather than a party or inclination [00:05:00] divide.

And so, you know, historically, if you look at the United States, what the political divide had been up until recently was an urban rural divide urban populations versus rural populations. And this makes a lot of sense. You know, the urban populations were the Democrats and the rural populations were the Republicans.

And as the Democrats became more of a monoculture, like as the city centers begin to be eaten by the mimetic virus, which is sort of eating the world. And the only place where you could have diversity anymore was within rural population centers. The, the, the Republicans became the party of diversity and the Democrats became the party of conformity.

Now of course they superficially need to pretend like they care about diversity because they want diversity of victims for the virus. They don't care what you look like or what your background is or what you're. Your moral fortitude is if they can convert you, they'll take you. And that's what they mean by diversity, but they, they don't actually tolerate any sort of diversity of ideologies or cultural perspectives.

Outside of in the most token of context [00:06:00] and I can go deep. Well, it's, it's

Simone Collins: it's extremely inclusive and also. conformist. It's inclusive and conformist.

Malcolm Collins: Yes. So, and that's what it means to have a diversity of victims. It's inclusive and conformist. They will take anyone, but once you join, you cannot ideological differ on any meaningful point.

You can't differ on what you think about human sexuality. You can't differ on what you think about gender. You can't differ on what you think about our relation to the environment. You can't differ on what you think about morality. You can't differ on what you think about the fut