Background

Sex, Love with "The Other": Singlehood, Heterophily, and Exogamy

Uploaded 3/12/2021, approx. 32 minute read

Every time I hold Minnie in my hand, warm, full of liquids, and I touch my lips to her edge, I think of sex.

Now I know that I'm not Minnie's type of mug, and so I'm very worried about sexual harassment lawsuits. I don't want to end up like Harvey Weinstein.


So today we are going to discuss sex and sexuality between ethnic, racial groups, a very hot-button topic which interlaces with intersectionally, with racism, feminism, the monosphere, misogyny, toxic masculinity, and what I think should become a topic, toxic femininity.

And all this I'm going to put in the context of sociology, urban anthropology, and other emerging disciplines. So it's going to be a bumpy ride as usual.

And just to show you what an amazing wordsmith I am, my verbal pyrotechnics, unparalleled and unprecedented. I'm going to call this video lecture the Unbearable Blightness of Sex.

It's of course a send-off on Milan Kundera's masterpiece, The Unbearable Lightness of Being.


Let's start with a basic fact.

But before we go there, there's a playlist on this YouTube channel. It's called Contemporary Sexuality.

There are a few videos there which you should watch. One of them is about sexlessness among youth, among people younger than 25 years old, the emergence of sexlessness.

Another one has to do with promiscuity. Yet another video has to do with the battle between the sexes, the war between the sexes, the war between the genders. And it's called something battlefield, men-women battlefields or something.

There are two or three videos dedicated to the Manosphere. It's a new phenomenon, relatively new phenomenon, which combines sublimated misogyny with misunderstood and misinterpreted evolutionary psychology and a series of very, very toxic, venomous gurus online mostly.

And all this concoction had reached an explosive point in my view.

So I would recommend that you watch these videos at your leisure. If you are capable, if you can watch them before you watch this video, things will be a lot clearer, but this video is standalone, so worry not.

Let's start with the sex drive.

Some of us have it, with the exception of 190 IQ professors of psychology.

The sex drive is autoerotic. This is a truism. This is a truth that we had been avoiding, denying, repressing, reframing and lying about.

Because we pretend that sex has to do with other people. It doesn't.

The original sex drive, when we are born, because we are born with a sex drive, the original sex drive is of course self-directed. It's autoerotic.

The baby perceives itself as an object of desire. Gradually, as the baby interacts with mummy, the primary caregiver, the primary object, the baby wants her to desire it.

But still, there is enmeshment. There is fusion and merger. As far as the baby is concerned, there is only one organism in the room, baby mummy, mummy baby. It's a single entity.

And so even when the baby wants mummy to desire it, to consider it an object of desire, the baby still is autoerotic.

Autoeroticism is with us for a very long period of time. Some say well into adolescence. And definitely there are numerous adults, especially adults with Peter Pan syndrome, larcenous, infantile, immature adults, and so on so forth, who are autoerotic for the rest of their lives.

And so the sex drive is autoerotic. As we develop object relations, as we redirect our libido, our force of life, eros, as Sigmund Freud called it, as we redirect this long fatale, this force of life outward towards other people, we develop object relations and we develop an other directed sex drive.

The sex drive that is directed at other people is a late development in every human being. And it is intimately connected with and influenced by object relations, the ability to interact with other people non-sexually.

If you have a problem with other people, if you can't perceive them as separate entities, autonomous and independent, if you can't interact with other people via empathy and love, if you have no access to your own emotions and you lack empathy, if you're abusive, if you're toxic, in short, if your relationships with other people are problematic, conflictive, conflictual and self-destructive, reckless, impulsive, defiant, consummation, etc, etc.

If you have disturbed or disrupted object relations, your sex drive is likely to be affected greatly and you're likely to withdraw to an infantile phase where you are autoerotic.

Now when we are atomized, when we are separate from each other, for example, during the lockdowns in the pandemic, when we are atomized, when we are separate, when we have no meaningful contact with other people, we retreat, we withdraw, we go back, we regress to the infantile phase and we become autoerotic and schizoid.

This is very important to bear in mind as we continue our lecture because what is happening nowadays, there was a process of atomization over the last few decades. People had become more and more isolated, more and more separated, less and less trusting, less and less able to interact, social skills have declined, institutions, families, communities, neighborhoods, villages had crumbled. So we were left all alone. It's a solipsistic world. Each one of us is drifting apart like an atom in the air and so we are all becoming more and more autoerotic.

You remember when you're atomized, you become infantile, you regress because maturity and an other directed sex drive crucially depend on interactions with other people, permanent and regular interactions with other people. It's a use it or lose it situation. You don't use your social skills, you lose your social skills, you don't use your social skills, you lose your sex drive.

No wonder sex is on the decline, on the decline and especially among younger groups, the youth because younger people interact via social networks, via social media, online, digitally, virtually they have precious little experience in real life interactions which are the foundation and the precondition and the prerequisite for a healthy sex drive.


One could generalize and say that a healthy sex drive is a thing of the past and what we have today are variants and they are variants of concern.

Some people say old people can't study young people. There's a generational gap in psychology studies and like most psychologists are white males, white old males like my age, dinosaurs. That's of course complete nonsense. Psychology is a discipline, it's not a science but it's a discipline with structures, methodologies and above all it is founded on observations and plus most psychologists use or work with younger members of the profession to gain insight and understanding into the dynamics.

So I wouldn't worry about this too much.

Now I've just mentioned that we are all atomized and what happened is people gave up on all types of connection, not only on sex.

Sex is a language, it's a mode of communication, it's a way of saying something, a way of saying you're attractive, I desire you, a way of saying I love you. Words, you know, it's like a language like words. You can use words to write a grocery list and you can use the same words to write a beautiful poem. You should try it at home.

So the words are the raw materials and they can yield sublime, a sublime experience or they can yield a pedestrian experience.

It's the same with sex. Sex is a language but when people don't interact at all there is no reason and rhyme and pretext to use this language of sex.

So the lower the number of face-to-face interactions, the more people gravitate online and interact virtually digitally and anonymously, the more they fake their profile photos on Tinder, the more everything becomes a simulacrum, an imitation or a falsity, a lie, the less incentive there is an opportunity to practice proper sexuality.

The language of sex, in other words, is rendered redundant rather than communicate profundity, depth, connectivity, relatedness or even mere attractiveness. Rather than communicate anything actually, sex becomes a form of signaling, not language, signaling.

There's a big difference between the two. Language is a vehicle, it's a conduit for content and the content is independent from the language. Signaling, in signaling, the signal is the content, like McLuhan said this.

So the signal is the message and so signaling is actually a primitive form of communication where behavior supplants and substitutes for verbal or bodily communication. So it's a very, very primitive form. It's open to misinterpretation. It's conducive to conflict. And as we will see a bit later, it opens up a universe of bad outcomes.

So we have been atomized, we've been atomized by technology, by urbanization, by the collapse of institutions. We were left all alone, floating in the world, with no one, with nothing. We are not embedded. We have no context. We are not in the fabric. We are nothing. We're just solipsistic, pseudo entities, quasi entities.

Since this happened, we stopped using sex as a mode of communication and we started using the language and we started using sex for signaling.

Because signaling is rare, sex had become more and more rare. People had given up on all types of connections and all types of relationships.

One of the main reasons this is happening and I've dwelt on this reason in previous videos is, of course, gender vertigo. Gender vertigo is the swift, abrupt, largely unexpected in historical terms, shift in gender roles. We should differentiate sex and gender. Sex is mostly biological. Gender is mostly, not exclusively, but mostly socio-cultural. It reflects societal mores and cultural norms.

So, gender vertigo is when gender roles are no longer strictly and rigidly defined. We have fluid sexuality and we actually have fluid gender roles. Femininity and masculinity had become attributes which are not connected, one-on-one, not mappable, not correlated, not highly correlated with underlying genitalia, with sex.

So, gender vertigo is when people are very confused. They are not sure how to be a man, how to be a woman.

And this creates a lot of misunderstandings, a lot of conflict and a lot of aggression and abuse.

Women, especially victims of abuse, had definitely become lately, when I say lately, I mean the last 40 or 50 years, had become much more psychopathic and much more narcissistic.

They confuse assertiveness with aggression and they emulate psychopathic men. It's like women said to themselves, it's not enough to be equal, we need to be men.

And then they took all the wrong models, they adopted all the wrong role models, the wrong men, to imitate and to emulate.

And we see a rise, massive rise in narcissism and psychopathy among women, including secondary psychopathy, which is now gradually replacing borderline personality disorder.

I mean, we think that borderline personality disorder is an element of secondary psychopathy, for example, under stress or subject to humiliation, rejection and abandonment.

But even more profoundly, even more fundamentally, we are beginning to realize that women who had been subjected to abuse, victims of complex trauma and complex post-traumatic stress disorder, actually develop situational transient personality disorders. So they become narcissistic and psychopathic.

Judy Thurman, who is the mother of the CPTSD diagnosis, she came up, she was the first to describe complex post-traumatic stress disorder.

Judy Thurman and numerous other very important scholars are advocating to eliminate borderline personality disorder altogether, and actually to eliminate most personality disorders, or at least cluster B, and to subsume them under a single diagnosis of complex trauma.

Now, historically, women had been traumatized much more than men. It is therefore not a surprise that women, now that they are emancipated and liberated and not controlled and independent and autonomous, now that they can show their true colors without repercussions and without punishment and without retribution and without fear, now that they can be themselves.

Because most women had been subjected to complex trauma, most women today display clear signs of narcissism and psychopathy. Most women are grandiose, entitled, aggressive, defiant, impulsive, contumacious, reckless.

Now, there are varying degrees, of course. Some women take it to extreme and this could be easily diagnosed as borderline personality disorder. They are emotionally dysregulated, their moods are labile, and so on and so forth. Some women are more surreptitious, more subtle, so these women would be a lot more passive-aggressive.

These are the weapons of the weak, to undermine, to sabotage, to stall, to procrastinate, to prevent, to forestall, etc., etc.

But anecdotal evidence and recent studies clearly demonstrate that there's a tectonic shift, there's an earthquake in gender roles and that women had adopted a new gender role which is essentially identifiable with narcissistic and psychopathic men.

So now, actually, we have a world which is unigender. There's a single gender with different genitalia. There's men, there's what? I mean, there's unigender with penises and unigender with vagina. It's the same gender.

The distinction had been lost and, of course, because the distinction had been lost, a lot of this sexual attractiveness, because gender roles facilitate sexual attraction. They underlie sexual attraction to a large extent.

With the abolition of gender roles and with the creation of gender vertigo, this had a tremendous impact on sexual attractiveness in ways and modes of social interaction.

Moreover, human bodies used to be in the private domain, people undressed in private, people had sex in private, people went to the toilet in private, and so on. They still do, to a large extent.

But bodies, when it comes to sex, bodies are much more in the public domain. People sexting. People are on cums, c-a-m-s. So people go online on cameras, people sext. People keep digital copies of their bodies, naked bodies, forever. These copies are replicated on numerous servers. There's pornography. There's never been such an explosion of pornography, free pornography. There's amateur pornography, verified amateurs. There's occult pornography. I mean, pornography is all over the place. And for the first time in history, pornography, the majority, the vast majority, the bulk of pornography is actually produced by amateurs and not commercially, not for a fee. Some of them ask for tips, but it's rare.

So people use cameras when they have sex, and then they upload the images or the footage online. People sext, knowing full well that the sexted images would be kept in galleries and photo folders. People use cums with each other, interactive cums.

So bodies have become public domain.

So another element was taken out of sex.

You see, sexual attractiveness, desire, passion, they critically depend on gender roles. We have abolished this. Sexual attraction, desire and passion critically depend on access, on granting access, on the privacy of the body, on the fact that the body is exclusive. If you gain access to this body, it's a wow event. It leaves you speechless. It's something that you so wanted, were so eager and so fervently into it. You know, courting, courting, flirting, they were all about gaining access to someone else's body and mind, but also body.

When bodies became public domain, when bodies were liberated, so to speak, and became shareable, replicable, duplicated, when bodies became artifacts, works of art in a way, and that includes tattooing and piercing and everything. When bodies became raw material, which you could record and share, we took out another critical element in inter-gender sexual attraction.

Because if your partner's body is not private, it had been shared with a thousand other men or women, and if your partner is not exactly a man and not exactly a woman and not exactly in between, and God knows what he is or what she is, what's left? Why would you want to have sex with this thing, which is not a man and not a woman, and whose body had become the public property of everyone? 20% of all couples in the United States are sexless.

The definition of sexlessness is in marriage or in a committed relationship, is having sex fewer than 10 times a year. I believe the figure is much higher.

I would venture to say, anecdotally, it's speculation, it's not backed by research. I think half of all people in committed relationships are not having sex. 10 times a year? Are you kidding me? That's an orgy. These people are not having sex three times a year, once a year. They're not having sex, end of story. I think half of all couples are actually totally sexless. Another maybe quarter to a third have a very low frequency of sex, hypo sexuality, and maybe just 10% are having regular sex, which is defined as three times a week. Three times a week is a fantasy to the overwhelming vast majority of the population of the world, and among people under age 35, the situation is an unmitigated calamity.

I refer you to my video, Youth Sexlessness. Sex is vanishing, disappearing completely among people younger than 35. The few among them who love sex, who adore sex, who want sex, let alone who are hypersexual or promiscuous, these few, they're frustrated, they're distraught, they can't find partners, they can't find willing partners.

This leads to an eruption of hookups, casual sex, and dating apps, which essentially provide a stream of casual sex partners. People are having casual sex and hookups, not because they prefer casual sex and hookups.

There's a tiny, tiny, tiny sliver of minority of people who are afraid of commitment, terrified of intimacy, and so they prefer casual sex as a permanent mode of sexuality or psychosexuality.

But 99% of people, they don't want hookups, they don't want casual sex, they don't want one night stands. Well over 80% of people who had experienced one night stands feel ashamed and guilty afterwards, they feel bad, they feel egodystonic, even among the young.

And 80% of women who have had one night stands report that the sex was disastrously bad, 60% of men do the same. A shocking half of them, half of men, don't have orgasm in casual sex, and three quarters of women.

So casual sex really sucks, and no one wants it.

But there's no choice, there's no other choice, because there are no willing sex partners to be found.

A sizeable proportion of the population had given up on sex and relationships altogether. Five years without sex is very, very common. Many go 10 years without sex.

When I say without sex, I mean without sex, not even casual sex.

So again, people who have a healthy sex drive, let alone hyper sex drive, very strong sex drive, what are they to do? No one wants to have sex anymore.

So they go to bars and they go on Tinder or they go wherever and they pick up. Casual sex partners, total strangers, they assume also serious medical and other risks. It's reckless behavior, but they're left with no choice because the sex marketplace had dried up utterly.

It's the Great Depression.


And so gradually, as sexlessness set in is the new standard, in studies, people, especially young people, clearly prefer numerous other activities to sex.

Video gaming, even watching movies, binge watching movies, drinking, drinking, they prefer these to having sex.

They sound a bit like they're terrified of sex or even disgusted by sex.

And so sexlessness has become the new normal. That's the new normal.

Sex is the outlier. Sex is the exception, the bizarre exception sometimes.

And as gender roles have shifted and intermixed and the boundaries between men and women became fuzzy and later vanished, disappeared altogether, as elements of roles, as elements of roles, figments of roles, dimensions and determinants of gender roles began to intermish.

Women became more masculine, more assertive, more aggressive, more defined, more narcissistic, more psychopathic, more grandiose, more sexually assertive, more rapacious. Men became more effeminate, more schizoid, more shy, more avoidant.

I mean, there is something which I call gender reversal.

Gender reversal is a way men had adopted elements of erstwhile female roles and women had become men, erstwhile men.

If you go back to the 1950s, the men of the 1950s, they're the women of today. And the women of the 1950s, they're the men of today.

There's been a gender reversal.

And as gender reversal has set in, men began to adopt feminine behaviors.

For example, a wide array of studies reports that it is men who are sexually avoidant. Men are withholding sex.

This used to be a feminine behavior, an exclusive female behavior until the 1960s.

And now men are the majority of those who are sex averse, sexless, avoid sex, and withhold sex.

Similarly, women prefer what is commonly called better males. There are numerous studies. There are like a mountain of studies, which fly in the face of the miktau incel nonsense.

Women do not prefer alpha males, let alone jerks. Women want better males, submissive, kind, empathic, effeminate, soft, understanding, compliant, collaborative, kind, nice, etc.

Women by far prefer better males. And yes, they prefer better males also for one night stands and casual sex, many studies.

And there are these communities of men, I mentioned miktaus, I mentioned incels, red pillows, and so on and so forth, who, I don't know where, which planet they came from.

The amount of unadulterated nonsense these so-called men, wannabe men spew out is mind-boggling, let alone toxic and misogynistic. They're simply wrong. They're wrong about every single thing they say. Even relatively benign pseudo or quasi-rational gurus such as Jordan Peterson spew unmitigated nonsense left, right, and center and get all their facts wrong.

For example, Peterson keeps saying that men are sensitive to rejection. Actually, numerous studies show that women are far more sensitive to rejection and abandonment and humiliation than men.

Men are accustomed to rejection and take it in stride.

So there's a problem with counterfactual, essentially conspiracy theories, male-based conspiracy theories. Men are not taking this line down. They are becoming more and more aggressive. Men are testosterone-laden. Men are beginning to regard the situation between men and women as a declaration of war, and they are beginning to fight back. They're forming militias, online militias. There's a whole philosophy and a whole ideology behind it.

This is an exceedingly dangerous moment in the history of the species because it might end up very badly.

Women have been pushed back. The pandemic had undone many of the accomplishments of women, especially economic accomplishments, but not only.

I think if we couple this reversal with male anger, male misogyny, male rejection, male hatred, male rage, male panic and fear at losing their exalted superior position, I think that's a recipe for a civil war between men and women.

And let me tell you something. I'll let you in on a secret. Women cannot win this. Women cannot win this. They may end up being serfs and slaves once again.

So women are not being wise. Women, women's in-your-face defiant belligerence is going to provoke men big time, and it's not going to end well for women because men still control many things, and men are far more aggressive and violent with women.

When it comes to war, men will win. Why initiate one?

And yet women are pushing in this direction, clearly, in a variety of ways.

And men's patience, even rational, reasonable, better men, their patience is at an end.


At this stage, when you observe typical interactions between men and women, men prefer just to talk. They just want to talk.

Men flee the scene, run away terrified at the first sign of assertive sexual advances by a woman.

There's a lot of braggadaccio. There's a lot of macho posturing. There's a lot of, you know, but when push comes to shove, when the signal is giving, here I am, all yours, open in every possible way.

Men flee the scene in a majority of cases because they're terrified. They're terrified of sex. Men are terrified of sex because they perceive women as judgmental. They perceive women as aggressive, as defiant, psychopathic, or they perceive women as insane, emotionally dysregulated, mood, labile, bitter, dangerous.

Today, to date a woman, as far as a man is concerned, is a serious lifelong risk.

So men, you know, take the calculus and decide that the prize is not worth the price, and they disengage, and they disengage.

Women had become a lot more antisocial. Women had become a lot more men-hating, misandrist.


And now I'm coming to actually the topic. The topic is that today to find a willing sex partner is like winning the lottery. People lose it when they finally come across someone who actually likes to have sex. People cheat on their spouses, degrade themselves, become submissive, do anything even in casual sex.

Finding a willing sex partner is seriously rare and difficult. Things have never been worse.

And so this leads to phenomena which have never been seen before on such a scale.

Start with heterophily. Heterophily is sexual attraction to another person outside your social group of reference. The social group of reference is known also as the in-group. The in-group is your race, your ethnicity, your nationality, your religion, your neighborhood. This is your in-group. Heterophily is being attracted to someone or having sex with someone outside your in-group, in the out-group. Heterophily is usually very low.

But when people can't find willing sex partners within the in-group, they naturally gravitate to the out-group. And because heterophily is low, this is a recipe for conflict.

Let me try to explain.

If you're a woman and you can't find within your in-group, in your in-group, in your church, in your neighborhood, in your country, in your nation, in your state, in your religion, core religion is you can't find a willing sex partner.

And you're a woman. Then you would gravitate towards another group which is not your in-group. It's your out-group.

For example, another members of another religion or immigrants or ethnic minorities or people who are considered of other races, although race is absolutely counterfactual and sensical construct, but okay, perceived race.

So as a woman, you would gravitate towards males from these groups.

But your heterophily is low because heterophily is low, period. It's a human condition. It's part of human psychology. We are much more attached. We trust much more. We are bonded much more with our in-group than with out-group.

So when you reach out to a member of the out-group, you bring with you, you carry with you, your low heterophily.

And because you have a low heterophily, you have low trust, you don't share the same values, you come from different cultural backgrounds, your communication is disrupted because you don't always understand what he means and he doesn't understand what you mean, etc.

This is a recipe for very high conflict.

Now, for example, some women report out-group, report sort of gravitating to out-groups like, for example, Muslims or Italians. And these societies have a different view of femininity, womanhood and the place of the woman in society. They're a bit more traditional. They are somewhat misogynistic. They're definitely not as progressive and liberal as some parts of the West.

So when a woman from a liberal progressive Western environment and civilization chooses a partner in the out-group, a partner who is Muslim, a partner who is Italian, a partner who is Irish, a partner who is Latin American, a partner who is Middle Eastern, who is Turkish, when she chooses a member of an out-group, she brings with her her prejudices and biases, her law heterophily, and he, her mate in the out-group, brings with him his prejudices and biases.

And that's a recipe for disaster.


So there are also very complex issues which are seriously taboo and forbidden. You can't talk about them in academia. If you do, you lose your job.

So I'm taking a serious risk in discussing these issues openly.

But for example, among minority groups, it could be Blacks, it could be Hispanics, it could be Muslims, it could be Italians, it could be Jews, it could be Arabs, it could be Turks, among ethnic minority groups.

There is this feeling that having sex with a white woman is a form of payback, a form of humiliating the white whore. It's a hangover from colonialism. It's a form of post-colonial hangover. It's like effing the enemy.

So a white woman or a member of the majority is both simultaneously a whore because she is very promiscuous by their standards, by the standards of the out-group. The white woman is very promiscuous, so she is a whore.

At the same time a whore and a status symbol. She is a trophy, she's a prize.

So when a man from the out-group dates a woman from the in-group, a white woman in most cases, at the same time he feels that he is somehow punishing the white majority for their transgressions, historical or contemporary. He is balancing the scales, he is restoring cosmic justice, he is effing the enemy. It's one strand of emotion and thinking.

And the other is, I have made it, I have arrived, I have a white woman, I have a trophy, I have a status symbol, I belong, I'm accepted.

This of course creates what we call in psychology dissonance. And this dissonance is very common among immigrants who had married an in-group member. So the immigrants are considered the out-group by the in-group, by the majority in-group.

When an immigrant marries a woman from the in-group, a white woman from the majority, he has this immediate dissonance in conflict.

On the one hand he is aggressive, he wants to punish her because he had been humiliated all his life by the white majority in-group. And now he wants to punish her somehow. She represents the white majority in-group. She stands in for them. She is like their reification and embodiment.

So it's his chance to get back at them. It's payback time.

But on the other hand, she has this claim to fame. She is his proof that he is integrated, that he had joined the in-group, that he is now a member of the majority, the elite, so to speak. It's upward mobility, social mobility via exogamy.

Now, we'll talk about exogamy a bit later.


I want to draw your attention to a very interesting fact. You can find it in the book, A Billion Wicked Thoughts, which is an analysis of one billion keyword searches on Google, sex-related keyword searches on Google.

Two of the five major searches, two of the five biggest categories of pornography consumed are interracial pornography, black and white, usually black men and white women, 99% of the case.

So black men, a stud, black stud and a white woman. And interracial cauldron, that's when a husband gives his wife to a black man, gives his white wife to a black man and then watches them copulate.

These are two major categories of consumed pornography and they represent, of course, everything I've just said. All these dynamics that I've just described are captured in pornography and render this pornography, this type of pornography, very, very exciting and very, very popular.

Now, exogamy, interracial couples who get married and have children, it's extremely rare. It's extremely rare.

So when a member of the in-group, for example, a woman in the in-group, a white woman in the majority, majority is the in-group, when a woman in the in-group can't find partners within the in-group because all the males of the in-group are turned off, they don't want to have sex, they're terrified of their own females.

For whatever reason, I mean, they don't like, white men don't like white women anymore. That's the truth. That's the unpleasant truth, the unspoken truth, the taboo truth.

So white women have to go outside the in-group. They have to go to ethnic minorities or they have to travel far or they have to go to exotic Latin countries to find Latin lovers, Italian lovers, I don't know what, they have to go to Turkey, they have to go to the Middle East, they have to go to the moon to find a modicum of sex, intimacy, interconnectedness, love, imitated love, fake love, something, even casual sex.

So if you can't find a partner within the in-group, you gravitate to the out-group.

But when you gravitate to the out-group, you encounter your own low heterophily, in other words, your aversion to the out-group, to put it less gently.

Even if you end up with someone from the out-group, you still have an aversion to the out-group that was inculcated in you for your entire adult life. You were told that the out-group is inferior, is bad, evil, is dirty, and so you carry these biases and prejudices with you even when you end up mating with a member of the out-group, that's low heterophily.

And the second obstacle is very rare exogamy.

Even if you date someone or mate with someone from the out-group, you're very unlikely to get married or you're very likely to have a long-term committed relationship.

Exogamy is exceedingly rare.

And so what this creates is a whole class of extended or virtual singles.

Extended singles are people who spend their entire adult life in singlehood. They don't have long-term relationships or committed relationships. And virtual singles are people in a committed relationship, for example, in a marriage, who still behave as though they are single and they go to the out-group to obtain gratification and sex and so on.

They kind of this migratory trend, like once a month they travel to Italy to have sex, or once a month they go to a Muslim neighborhood to pick up a potential sexual partner. Or they have a lover from an out-group on a regular basis, more regular basis, and these are essentially serial cheaters.

The breakdown of intergender communication and intergender sex within the in-groups, the majority in-groups, especially white majority in-groups in urban settings in Western civilization. This breakdown, this divorce, acrimonious divorce, this mutual hatred, this aggression, mutual aggression, this fear of each other are pushing away members of the in-group to look for potential partners in the out-group.

But heterophily and low heterophily and low exogamy prevent these liaisons, prevents these connections from becoming permanent or committed. So the poor people from the in-group who are trying somehow to find partners in the out-group end up being single all the time, virtually or in reality.

Because within the in-group they cannot find a long-term partner. There's no willingness, and no interest, and no attraction, and no will. In the out-group they cannot find a long-term partner because of their own low heterophily and because of obstacles like low exogamy, all kinds of values including religious values that would prohibit long-term liaisons and so on.

Millions of people, what am I saying, hundreds of millions of people are exactly in this condition.


The change in gender roles, stronger women, independent women, aggressive, somewhat grandiose, psychopathic women, turned men off completely.

Women being now liberated and emancipated and autonomous, showed the men in their in-group, the middle finger, and went to the out-group to pick up men. Other out-groups like minorities, other religions, other locations, other countries, so they went to out-groups to pick up men.

And then they discovered to their dismay that members of the out-group have conflicted motivations which I've mentioned before and cannot commit to them. Members of the out-group cannot commit to members of the in-group because of low exogamy and low heterophily.

So these people remain in limbo. They can't find partners in the in-group and they can't find partners in the out-group.

And consequently the end result is a calamitous collapse in marriage rates. Marriage has never been lower. Divorce rates are stubbornly high.

Cheating and adultery are at an all-time high among men and women.

A collapse of monogamy, demise of monogamy actually.

People don't get married. They're not monogamous. They cheat on each other and so on because nothing is left between men and women except visceral, guttural hatred, fear, revulsion, and anticipation of the worst.

This is a really bad situation and it is permeating traditional societies, even patriarchal societies around the world.


This western contagion has already infected the majority of the world mediated via show business, films, the media, mass media, social media.

And gradually what will happen is the entire world will become an in-group. And then at that moment people will give up on any connection, any relationships, any sexuality, and technology will come to the rescue and provide people with artificial synthetic sex partners. Synthesis. Synthesis will become the name of the game. People will have a sex doll at home. Men will have a sex doll at home. Women will have animated android dildos at home. Pornography will become holographic and three-dimensional and interactive. And that will be the end of sex. That will also be the end of human relatedness, human connection, human conversation, human communication. There will be a precious few and underground of people who still want to have flesh-to- flesh sex. They will be frowned upon. People will be disgusted by the idea of touching another body with sweat and saliva, semen, yuck, and vaginal fluids. Absolutely revolting when you can have the synthetic purified, desensitized and sanitized version. But there will be these few, this one percent maybe, who will congregate secretly underground in sleazy clubs and dives to pick up men, to pick up partners for the night, for a quick roll in the hay, and then they will part ways, of course, totally anonymously.

And this is the future of sex. I regret to say. I'm so delighted that I'm 60 years old, 6-0. I've never been happier before that I will not live to see the world of the future.

Because what's coming makes all past dystopias look tame.

No science fiction writer had come close to describing the horrors that await us as a species. The horrors that we had inflicted upon ourselves with our profound lack of wisdom, profound impulsivity, defiance.

We've all become a psychopathic race, and we are doomed to a psychopathic fate.

If you enjoyed this article, you might like the following:

Where Have All the Wo/Men Gone?

Professor Sam Vaknin argues that women have become increasingly narcissistic and psychopathic due to their newfound powers and liberation, leading to a collective pathology. This has resulted in a mass psychopathology that is causing terrifying numbers of suicide rates, depression, and anxiety. Vaknin suggests that we need to acknowledge the truth about casual sex and stop being politically correct to confront the issues bravely and courageously. He believes that we need to rewrite the sexual scripts and restore distinct, clear, and boundaried gender roles to save ourselves from the collapsing gender roles that brought the narcissism pandemic and now the borderline secondary psychopathy pandemic.


Narcissistic Youth Sexlessness: Porn and Relationships in a Dying World

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the decline in sexual activity and satisfaction, particularly among younger generations, attributing it to rising narcissism, inhibitions, distractions, and environmental factors. He notes that casual sex is less satisfying than relationship sex, and that women are avoiding bad sex. The consequences of this decline include a collapse in birth rates and a rise in single adults living without partners. Additionally, pornography is reducing the desire for real-life sex, and dating apps are inefficient.


Women, WAKE UP! Feminism Stole Your Personal Lives!

Sam Vaknin discusses the impact of modern societal norms on women's behavior and psychology. He argues that women have been forced to adopt male values and expectations, leading to a shift in their behavior and self-perception. Vaknin also highlights the negative effects of casual sex and the influence of covert narcissists and psychopaths in victimhood movements. He urges a clear-eyed look at reality and a move away from political correctness.


Women: Just Say “No”! Self-respect, Boundaries - Men Angry, Immature (Pop Red Pill Podcast)

Sam Vaknin discusses various topics in different transcripts. In the first one, he talks about the power dynamics between men and women, where women have gained the upper hand in recent times. In the second one, he blames the emphasis on career and toxic masculinity for the decline of committed relationships and the rise of loneliness. In the third one, he discusses the crisis between genders and suggests that women have the power to change the situation by tightening up their boundaries and getting clear on their values.


Choose Intimacy, not Self-sufficiency: Response to Angry Women

Professor Sam Vaknin argues that modern feminism is a cult that has led to negative outcomes for both men and women. He claims that the hookup culture, which is often framed as empowering for women, has actually led to increased rates of depression, anxiety, and substance abuse. Vaknin believes that the only real empowerment for women can come from stable, loving, emotional, equal, and reciprocated relationships, which are not found in hookups or one-night stands. He also criticizes the idea that freedom of choice should extend to self-harm and harming others, as seen in the anti-vaxxer movement.


Men, We Miss You, Please Come Back! Signed: Your Women

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the current state of men and how it has driven women to behave dysfunctionally. He highlights that men are underachievers, underemployed, and overrepresented in menial jobs, leading to resentment and withdrawal from relationships and commitment. This has forced women to take on both traditional male and female roles, leading to a "unigender" society with blurred gender roles and increased competition between men and women. Vaknin expresses concern for the future of intimacy and relationships, as the younger generation becomes more narcissistic and disconnected from one another.


Casual Sex Q&A: The Fake Intimacy of Bodies

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the impact of casual sex and infidelity on romantic relationships. He explores the psychological and emotional implications of promiscuity, the changing dynamics of mate selection, and the rise of narcissistic and psychopathic behaviors in women. Vaknin also delves into the complexities of intimacy, gender roles, and the challenges of modern relationships. He concludes by examining the impact of mental illness on individuals' coping strategies and their ultimate relationship with death.


Promiscuity: Psychology of Self-Soothing with Sex (oh, and Relationships)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the topic of promiscuity, its various causes, and its connection to mental health disorders. He delves into the psychological and behavioral aspects of promiscuity, including its association with narcissism, psychopathy, and dissociation. He also explores the impact of promiscuity on intimate relationships and societal changes. The presentation provides a comprehensive analysis of the complex and multifaceted nature of promiscuity.


Adultery - the New Monogamy? (2nd World Congress on Psychiatry and Psychology, July 2021)

Professor Sam Vaknin discusses the future of monogamy and argues that it is ill-suited to the demands of modern Western civilization. He notes that casual sex is dominant among people aged 25 to 35, and infidelity is at an all-time high. Women have become richer and more empowered, leading to a shift towards a matriarchal society. Vaknin also discusses the changing nature of relationships and the challenges younger generations face in forming them.


Narcissism= Toxic Masculinity, Capitalism?

Sam Vaknin discusses the collapse of traditional gender roles and the rise of toxic masculinity, which is now prevalent in both men and women. He connects toxic masculinity to Darwinian jungle capitalism, urbanization, consumerism, and spectacle, all of which emphasize escapism and the denial of reality. Vaknin argues that capitalism has transitioned from manufacturing and consumption to spectacle and addiction, making it a form of narcissism. He concludes that narcissism is the organizing principle of the modern world, extending to gender relations, capitalism, and the attention economy.

Transcripts Copyright © Sam Vaknin 2010-2023, under license to William DeGraaf
Website Copyright © William DeGraaf 2022-2024
Get it on Google Play
Privacy policy