Until the 20th century, all cultures believed that men and women had slightly different physical and mental characteristics, and men and women were treated slightly differently. The modern belief that men and women are unisex creatures, that men are sexist, and that women are abused by men, seems to be the result of three groups of people:

1)		The women who are unhappy with their life. They have responded by having a temper tantrum. They are behaving like a child who is blaming his parents for making him miserable.
2)		The women who are unusually masculine, but who assume that they are typical women. That mistake causes them to believe that all women want to get a job and work with men, not wear pretty dresses and spend most of their life having babies and taking care of children.
3)		The Jews who are trying to disrupt society in order to get more control of the world.

During prehistoric times, it was unlikely for anybody to make the mistake of assuming that men and women were unisex creatures. Genetic variations would occasionally create some very masculine women, and occasionally those women might go hunting with the men, but it would be unlikely that any woman would believe that men and women were identical, or that men were sexist, or that women were abused by men.

The masculine women and the feminine men would have spent most of their time behaving like the typical men and women simply because it was necessary for men and women to take different roles in life.

When people settled into cities, the situation began to change, especially during the past century. Our technology has made it so easy for women to make a living that they are no longer dependent on men. Women can now take care of themselves and their children without a man.

It is no longer obvious to children that men and women have different physical and mental abilities and desires, and are designed for different roles in life. This causes many women to assume that women have trouble with certain types of jobs, such as those in science and construction, because men are sexist.

Prehistoric boys and girls learned that men and women were different simply by observing the adults. Today our school system must teach a concept that was obvious to prehistoric children.

The Schools Ministry is required to teach children about the differences and similarities between men and women, and to be intolerant of the accusation that men are sexist, and that men have been abusing women all throughout history.

The Schools Ministry is also required to encourage curiosity and research by ensuring that the children realize that nobody knows much about the differences between men and women, so we need to continue studying the issue.

Many children are upset that their father doesn't spend much time with them, and many fathers regret not spending much time with their children, but it is idiotic to become angry when somebody does not do what we want them to do, or to regret something that we chose to do. It is more sensible to analyze our behavior and try to learn from it.

There is a sensible reason for why fathers don't spend much time with their children. Specifically, women evolved to take care of the children, and men evolved to spend most of their time working, competing with other men for status, and spending their leisure time with other men. Some men also enjoy exploring the world.

Men enjoy spending time with their children, but only for brief periods, such as for 30 minutes, and usually only a few times a week.

In a prehistoric nomadic tribe, the young boys would be in close proximity with all of the adults during the evenings, and the fathers could talk with their children while they were making tools, cutting meat for dinner, or processing fur for clothing. However, our modern jobs and cities are causing fathers to have less contact with their children.

Children today need to be taught that men and women have slightly different personalities and desires, and that children will spend most of their childhood with their mother.

Children must be taught that they should not torment themselves with the assumption that their father is ignoring them, or that he is a "bad" father. The boys should be taught that they will behave in a similar manner if they become fathers. (Harry Chapin wrote a song about this concept.)

Likewise, the young girls must be taught that their husband will not have the same interest in babies that women have, and they should not expect their husband to want to be with them when they give birth, or want to spend as much time hugging and kissing a baby as the women do. The girls must also be taught that they cannot expect their husband to chat with them the way they chat with women, or to form the same type of friendship that they form with women.

The democracies and free enterprise systems pander to us, rather than provide us with guidance, but none of us understands ourselves are human behavior enough to know what will provide us with the most satisfying life. The businesses are pandering to ignorant and arrogant people.

All of us are confused about what to do, and this can result in men becoming obsessed with idiotic goals, such as becoming wealthy or famous, or becoming better at playing golf, or to set the world record for body modification. That can result in men wasting a lot of their time on the pursuit of idiotic goals, and not much time with their wife, friends, or children. That in turn can cause the men to regret their life when they become elderly.

We need leaders who experiment with our culture and provide us with guidance. It is especially absurd to expect children, teenagers, and young adults to make wise decisions on how to spend their life. The younger people need the most guidance.

In order to reduce the chances of fathers regretting not spending much time with their children, the ministers should experiment with activities for fathers to allow them to accumulate some pleasant memories of the time they spent with their children.

For example, the Events Minister could design some city festivals in which fathers and children do things together, and the Leisure Minister could design some recreational activities for fathers and their children. The events could be competitive, such as fathers and their children competing to row through a canal or pond.

This constitution prohibits giving prizes to the winners of a competition, so the purpose of the competitions would be to provide the people with exercise, and allow them to enjoy nature, the city, and the people. It would provide them with pleasant memories to reminisce about when they are older.

The same concept applies to husbands and wives. Specifically, the ministers should experiment with city festivals, social affairs, and recreational activities that allow husbands and wives to spend some time together and accumulate pleasant memories of one another so that neither of them feel as if their spouse is ignoring them.

Since the Clothing Minister must prohibit women from wearing sexually attractive and delicate clothing at their jobs, those social affairs would provide the women with the opportunity to wear the most delicate and pretty clothing and jewelry. Furthermore, some or all of the activities could let the women design and choose the clothing for the men, as suggested in a previous document.

For example, the Leisure Ministry could experiment with a social affair in which husbands and wives get together to listen to whichever of them wants to sing or do karaoke, and the wives choose the clothing for their husbands.

Most people today are too inhibited to sing, but when I was a young child, most people did not have record players, and there was no such thing as a transistor radio. It seemed as if most women would sing in those days. Many of them had been singing since they were children, so they had become very good at it.

Therefore, if children were to grow up in a social environment in which there are very few, if any, professional singers, and in which the children are encouraged to participate in activities rather than watch other people do them, then there will be a lot more women, and men, willing to participate in singing and other activities, rather than watch other people do them. And when we have figured out how to make robots play musical instruments, some people could arrange for robots to create music.

The ministers could also arrange for activities for relatives to get together, and for the adults who do not have or want children, but who want to occasionally have contact with children. For example, the ministers could experiment with activities in which the adults assist the children with arts and crafts, or take the children on a hike in the forest, or help the children learn how to use musical robots, or help the children with costumes for a city festival.

By creating activities, holidays, and festivals to encourage fathers to spend time with their children, and for husbands to spend time with their wives, the ministers will be treating the adult men as if they are children who need a mother to provide them with activities. However, we cannot expect people, especially when they are young, to create sensible activities for themselves.

In every culture today, many of the activities were created by businesses, religions, charities, Zionist group, or other organizations, and for selfish purposes, such as making profit or promoting some belief.

For example, the International Holocaust Remembrance Day is intended to deceive and manipulate us, not improve our lives. Likewise, the Red Bull company, Nike, and many other businesses have created and supported a lot of activities, but they do so for profit, not to improve our lives.

It is better to let the ministers create activities rather than let citizens, businesses, Zionist groups, and other organizations do so because that will allow us to determine who modifies our culture, and we can hold them responsible for their decisions.

This constitution prohibits citizens and organizations from creating leisure or recreational activities, or from making any other changes to our culture. The ministers are the only people who can experiment with culture. If the voters can elect appropriate presidents, then our leisure and social activities, and other culture, will become increasingly safe, beneficial, and enjoyable.

Men evolved to be leaders, and to take care of their wife and daughters. The prehistoric men would have had no trouble doing that because they only had to deal with simplistic problems. Today, however, we are living in such a complex environment that every man is having trouble dealing with it. All of us are occasionally confused, frustrated, angry, and disappointed. We also occasionally regret one of our decisions.

Women and children expect adult men to take care of them, so when they are confused or frustrated, they tend to react by crying or having a temper tantrum, which is supposed to stimulate the adult men into doing something to fix the problem. Unfortunately, the men are so confused with modern life that they don't know what to do.

Instead of analyzing our modern society and looking for ways to improve life for women, the men pander to the unhappy women by supporting the feminist movement. This is as idiotic as supporting a child who is having a temper tantrum.

The feminists complain that men have been abusive to women for 6000 years, but that claim is as idiotic as a child who accuses his parents of abusing him. The women have no evidence that they have been abused, and there is no species of animal in which the males abuse the females.

Male animals have an intense craving to impress and protect the females, and parents have an intense craving to protect and take care of their children. There are some men who are abusive to their wives or daughters, and there are some mothers and fathers who abusive to their children, but those people are exceptions.

There would not have been many abusive people in a prehistoric tribe. We have a lot of them today because of:
1) Genetic degradation.
2) The unnatural social environment that is causing us to behave in a bizarre manner, similar to the mice in the utopia experiment.

We frequently misinterpret other people's behavior. For example, when a mother refuses to give her child a candy bar, the child might misinterpret her behavior as "abusive".

This problem occurs with adults, also. For example, the government has put restrictions on how many fish a business can take from a certain lake or ocean, and what age the fish must be, and some adults have reacted to those regulations by whining that they are being abused by the government. However, the officials who created the regulations did so to protect the fish from extermination.

Women are also occasionally misinterpreting their husbands attempt to help them. Three examples are:

Although many or most of the adults and children in the Middle Ages were regularly drinking beer because of the fear of getting sick from the water in the creeks, men have been discouraging women from getting intoxicated and smoking tobacco for centuries or millennia.

For example, until the 21st century, the women in Ireland were not allowed to order a pint of beer at a pub unless accompanied by a man, but men did not put that restriction on women in order to hurt them. Rather, it was to protect them from alcohol and intoxicated men. Men also did not like to see their wives intoxicated around their children.

The feminists who boast about making it acceptable for women to smoke cigarettes and drink alcohol have not improved life for any woman. Rather, they have caused an increase in the number of women who suffer from health problems, and the number of children who suffer from fetal alcohol spectrum disorder and intoxicated mothers.

Women cannot improve their lives by becoming intoxicated with men.

Likewise, encouraging women to become intoxicated in public locations caused more women to be in close contact with intoxicated men for long periods of time, which has resulted in an increase in the number of worthless relationships, lewd remarks, sexual harassment, venereal diseases, unwanted pregnancies, and rape.

Nobody has any evidence that alcohol or tobacco can improve our lives, but there is a lot of evidence that those drugs can ruin a person's life.

The strong craving for alcohol and tobacco among many of the feminists is evidence that the feminist movement is dominated by women who have significant mental disorders. Those women are not providing sensible guidance to women. Rather, they are pushing women into following a destructive path.

Many of the feminists are lesbians, and that might not be a coincidence. We should investigate the possibility that whatever causes homosexuality and other sexual disorders is sometimes also causing other mental disorders. For example, one of the founders of the Irish Women's Liberation Movement, and the woman who is considered to be among the first to pressure men into allowing women to drink at the pubs, is a lesbian named Nell McCafferty.

She also spent some time living on an Israeli kibbutz, but why would that interest her? And what influence did the Jews have on her? Her attraction to kibbutz could have also been the result of a mental disorder.

Men should provide the women with guidance, such as explaining to the women that neither men nor women benefit from alcohol or tobacco, and that children suffer from drunken parents. Instead, most men pander to or ignore the women, and businesses exploit the women, such as creating cigarettes for women, and encouraging them to celebrate Women's Day by drinking pink gin, or one of these other "Fine Drinks" for women.

Men like to think of women as princesses and goddesses, so it upsets us to see women who have scars, crippled legs, or broken teeth. We want women to be healthy and pretty. As a result, men have discouraged women from getting involved with violent activities, such as boxing, bareknuckle fistfights, rugby, and tackle football.

However, many women misinterpret the discouragement of violent activities as proof that men are sexist, abusive, creatures who enjoy denying women their freedom.

The complaints by feminists that men are denying women the opportunity to get involved with dangerous sports is more evidence that the feminist movement is dominated by abnormally masculine or mentally defective women. They are not improving life for women. Rather, they are encouraging brain damage, broken bones, torn tendons, paralysis, and kidney damage.

One of the most idiotic "achievements" of the feminist movement is their changing of words, such as changing "chairman" to chairperson or chairwoman, and changing "cameraman" to camerawoman or cameraperson. The changing of those words, and the belief that women are suffering because the word "man" is in some words, should be used in the schools as evidence that:

1)	Women are less intelligent than men.
2)	Most men do not have the emotional and/or intellectual ability to provide proper leadership to the women in our modern era.

Blaming words for the misery of women is as idiotic as blaming ghosts or the devil. The words "human" and "woman" have the word "man" in them, but that is not causing any woman to suffer. A woman can be a cameraman, a policeman, and a fireman, as decribed here. Nobody would have noticed or cared that there is a "man" in those words if the women had not made an issue of it.

This concept also applies to children. For example, a child who uses a video camera could be described as a cameraman. He does not need to be referred to as a camerachild, cameraboy, or cameragirl. Likewise, a teenager does not have to be referred to as a camerateenager, and a lesbian does not have to be referred to as a cameralesbian.

Some mothers put restrictions or demands on their children that are unnecessary, idiotic, or abusive, such as pressuring their children to play a certain musical instrument or sport, or become a certain religion. However, that abusive behavior is not because women are abusive to children. It is because most women are incompetent as leaders in this modern era.

Likewise, many men put idiotic, unnecessary, or abusive restrictions on their wives, but not because men are sexist. It is because most men are incompetent as leaders in this modern era.

A lot of business executives exploit women, such as by providing them with excessive and unnecessary cosmetics, weddings, baby products, pet products, and jewelry, but they are not exploiting the women because they are sexist, or because they want to hurt the women. Rather, it is because they are too incompetent to provide themselves and their business with sensible guidance, and that has resulted in them pursuing the goal of becoming extremely wealthy and important.

Ironically, one of the reasons that men want a lot of wealth and status is to attract women, and to provide their wife and daughter with material wealth. Those men are exploiting women, including their own wives and daughters, in order to impress and pamper the women.

Most people are overwhelmed with the complexity of modern life, and the result is that we routinely torment ourselves and one another.

Women developed a strong attraction to children, and men developed a strong attraction to women, because those characteristics were necessary for our ancestors. Today those cravings are excessive, and causing a lot of problems.

To a woman, a child is a "bundle of joy", but in reality a child is a tremendous burden on a mother. Likewise, a man regards a woman as a goddess, but in reality a woman is burden on a man, especially if she has children.

The women who were the most successful in reproducing were those who had an attraction to children that was so strong that they enjoyed devoting their life to taking care of their children.

Likewise, the men who were the most successful in reproducing were those who had an attraction to women that was so strong that they enjoyed spending their life taking care of a woman and her children.

Our emotions are so powerful that they are interfering with our understanding of humans and life. Men have trouble regarding women as "female humans", and women have trouble regarding children as "young humans".

Women are likely to regard children as objects of pleasure, and men are likely to regard women as objects of pleasure. It was acceptable for prehistoric people to have such an attitude, but today it causes a lot of problems between mothers and their children, and between men and women.

Our emotions evolved for a prehistoric environment, and they are inappropriate for the complex, technically advanced environment that we live in today.

A man's attraction to women, and a woman's attraction to children, is excessive today, and this results in a lot of frustration, fights, and arguments. Men must exert some self-control over our cravings for women so that we can treat them as female humans rather than as goddesses and sex toys, and women need to treat children as young adults, rather than as toys to play with.

We aggravate the situation by allowing businesses to stimulate men with sexual pornography, and stimulate women with "baby pornography".

The prehistoric men and women evolved to fit one another, so they would have had pleasant relationships, just like the other animals. Today, however, we have tremendous problems with relationships, but not because men are sexist. It because we have dramatically altered our environment while continuing to behave like prehistoric savages. For example:

•		Defective children During prehistoric times, the mentally and physically defective children tended to die at a young age, and some were killed by their fathers. Today, we use technology to keep the defective children alive, and we have laws to prohibit parents from killing their badly behaved children. Women have such a strong attraction to children that they will take care of defective and badly behaved children, but men are less attracted to children, and that can result in men arguing with their wife about the issue, and eventually getting a divorce. Our prehistoric ancestors did not have to raise defective children, so they never had those type of arguments.
•		Are "smash cakes" amusing or obnoxious? How do men and women differ in their reaction? Obnoxious behavior Women have such a strong attraction to children that they often giggle at a child's behavior that men regard as obnoxious or irritating. For example, some women provide their babies with "smash cakes" on their first birthday. This video (photo to the right) shows one of them. In August 2023, it had 25 million views after being posted for only nine months. On 13 June 2024 it had 59 million views. There is no information about who has watched the video, or what their reaction was, or how many people watched it more than once, but I suspect that women were more likely than men to giggle at that video, and become inspired to give their baby a smash cake birthday party. Even though men are less likely to giggle at the obnoxious behavior of children, if we could measure obnoxious behavior, we might find that men are more obnoxious than women, and the reason could be because men are more independent, adventurous, and have a stronger interest in tormenting the people that they regard as inferior. For example, we might find that the initiation rituals of fraternities are more obnoxious and dangerous than those of the sororities. Collecting video about everybody's life would help us to understand human behavior, and the differences between men and women. For example, we could look through the video of the weddings and determine if men are the most likely to smear wedding cake into the face of their spouse. I suspect that the video would show us that men are more likely to play an obnoxious prank on their spouse, friends, and children. The obnoxious behavior of people would have been less of a problem in prehistoric times because they didn't have birthday or wedding cakes, and it was more difficult for them to do obnoxious pranks. Today people need to exert self-control over their desire to be obnoxious.
•		Living in isolation Humans evolved to live in close contact with their friends and relatives, but we now live in houses on private plots of land that are separated from one another, and we are not controlling reproduction or immigration, which results in many of us living among people we don't like, and don't know. Our unfriendly and isolated environment causes a lot of loneliness, especially to the women who remain at home to take care of their children. This is causing a lot of people to be lonely and bored, which can cause their marriage to be unstable.
•		Courtship The method that men and women use to find a spouse is worthless today. The men try to impress the females with gifts and his status, which is an ineffective method for a modern man to find a wife. Likewise, single women find a husband by making themselves look pretty, putting themselves on display, and passively waiting for a man to titillate them. This is an idiotic method for a modern woman to find a husband. To make the situation even worse, most men are too concerned with a woman's physical appearance, and most women are too concerned with status and money. Furthermore, as with animals, we try to impress a potential spouse, rather than let them know the truth about us. We lie to them, and we keep secrets about ourself. As a result of our animal behavior, most relationships today are so miserable that they never progress to a marriage, and most of the marriages either end up in divorce, or are miserable. Most people have such a low success rate with relationships that it is likely that artificial intelligence software will soon be able to make better decisions about who they should marry.
•		Arrogance Prehistoric people were arrogant, but they didn't have many issues to deal with, so it didn't cause any trouble. Today, however, our arrogance is constantly causing problems. In regards to relationships between men and women, our arrogance causes us to avoid considering the possibility that we are the reason, or part of the reason, our relationships are miserable. Most people blame their failed marriage on their spouse, which prevents them from improving their relationships. If a government agency had arranged the same marriages that people have been choosing for themselves during the past century, people would complain that the government is doing a terrible job. They would demand the freedom to choose their spouse. However, when people are given the freedom to choose their spouse, they refuse to blame themselves for their miserable marriage, and they refuse to believe that they need somebody with more talent to either provide them with guidance or choose a spouse for them. This concept also applies to voters. If Russia had gotten control of the USA at the end of World War II, and if they had chosen government officials for the USA, and if they had chosen the same officials that the voters have been selecting, the public would complain that the Russians are tormenting us with incompetent and corrupt officials. They would be especially disgusted with President Biden. They would complain that the Russians are forcing us to accept a senile and worthless president. However, when the voters are free to choose their leaders, they refuse to look critically at themselves and blame themselves for their disgusting government. They refuse to believe that they need somebody with more talent to either help them choose government officials, or make the decisions for them. We cannot improve our marriages unless we are willing to look critically at ourselves, and the voters cannot improve the government unless they are willing to look critically at themselves. We must be able to control our arrogance.

The accusation that men are abusive to women is absurd. Men have such a strong attraction to women that we regard them as goddesses.

During prehistoric times, the men pampered their women with food, tools, furs, and protection, which was beneficial to the women. Modern men are still pampering their women, but our technology allows men to provide their wives and daughters with such excessive amounts of food and material items that some of them have become spoiled, sickly, overweight brats.

This concept also applies to women. A woman's treatment of children is so similar to a man's treatment of women that we can describe it by changing a few words in the previous paragraph:


The men today are not providing their women with appropriate guidance, and the women are not providing their children with appropriate guidance. Although women could complain that they are abused by their husbands, it would be more accurate for them to say that their husbands are inadvertently tormenting the women because men cannot provide appropriate leadership for their wives in this modern era.

Likewise, children could complain that they are being abused by the mothers, but it would be more accurate for them to say that their mothers are inadvertently tormenting the children because women cannot provide appropriate leadership for their children in this modern era.

To aggravate the situation between men and women, modern technology allows women to become more sexually attractive than prehistoric women, and businesses are permitted to use sexual titillation to attract customers. Businesses are also allowed to produce sexual pornography, sex robots, and Viagra. This causes men to be sexually stimulated much more often, and to a greater extreme, than we were designed for.

To further aggravate the situation, many men boast about having lots of sex with lots of women, and in lots of weird positions, and in lots of unusual locations, such as the bathroom of airplanes. That boasting encourages men to believe that they need lots of sex in order to enjoy life. Hollywood movies, such as the James Bond series, also promote the attitude that a man's life improves as he has more sex with more women.

The extreme sexual titillation that men are experiencing today is unnatural, and it is causing a lot of men to look for ways to exploit women for sex, rather than protect them from abuse.

These concepts also apply to women. For example, modern technology and photo editing software allows babies and children to be much more visually attractive, thereby stimulating women's emotions more often, and to a greater extent, than the women were designed for.

Also, businesses are titillating women to an unnatural extent with wedding pornography, baby pornography, jewelry pornography, romance pornography, and cosmetics pornography. Businesses also stimulate women to an excess by breeding dogs and creating dolls that resemble babies.

To summarize this section, it is absurd for women to complain that they have been abused by men. We make our situation worse when we react to problems with anger, accusations, hatred, pouting, rebellion, and whining. It is more sensible for us to realize that we are all having trouble coping with this modern world. We need to look critically at our culture and experiment with improvements to it.

The feminists are not providing us with intelligent analyses of our problems, or intelligent suggestions on how to improve life for women, or improve the relationships between men and women. All they do is make idiotic accusations.

The feminist movement is just a temper tantrum, and I suspect that an analysis of the feminists would show us that most of them are misfits who mistakenly assume that they are typical women, which brings them to idiotic conclusions about why they are having trouble fitting into society and enjoying life.

For example, the women who do not have a strong desire for children will be annoyed by the pressure to become a mother. If they assume that they are typical women, then they will assume that other women are also annoyed by that pressure. This will cause them to make the idiotic accusation that the "sexist" men are forcing women to raise children.

Likewise, if a young girl does not have much of an interest in playing with dolls, wearing pretty clothing, or grooming, she will be annoyed by the pressure to do those things. If she assumes that she is a typical girl, then she will assume other girls are also annoyed by that pressure. This will cause her to make the idiotic accusation that sexist men are forcing girls to behave in an "unnatural" manner.

Those accusations of sexism would be reduced or eliminated if children were given a more realistic education about human behavior. This constitution requires schools to teach children such lessons as:

•		Male and female animals have different mental and physical characteristics because we evolved for different roles in life.
•		Every creature is a unique jumble of genetic characteristics, and there is no dividing line between male and female. As a result, most people will be typical, but there will be a small percentage of unusual people, such as girls who are more similar to boys, and boys who are more similar to girls.
•		Every person should analyze himself and try to determine his particular characteristics and limitations, rather than assume that he is perfect or typical.
•		The proper reaction to a problem is to investigate and discuss it, rather than whine, pout, hate, or have a tantrum.
•		It makes no sense to say that one sex is better than the other. For example, girls should not insult boys for playing in the mud puddles. Rather, children should be taught that boys and girls are different, and that girls do not like getting muddy because they evolved to be mothers, whereas boys evolved to spend a lot of time in nature. Prehistoric men spent most of their time "outdoors", not in a cave or a shelter. That required they be able to deal with rain, wind, storms, lightning, and mud. The prehistoric men who did not like "bad" weather were less successful in life than those who either enjoyed it or were unaffected by it. Insulting boys for playing in mud is as idiotic as insulting girls who enjoy playing with dolls, or insulting a duck for enjoying water, or insulting a cat for licking its butt. None of us want to lick our butt, but a cat is not inferior to a human because it enjoys doing so.

The feminists encourage women to compare themselves to men, and try to prove that they can do everything a man can do. When a woman does something unusual for a woman, the feminists tend to give her a lot of publicity and praise, and point out that it proves that women can do what men do.

Women ruin our social environment when they compete with men. That type of competition creates frustration, resentment, and anger among the women, and it irritates and saddens a lot of men. It is as idiotic as children trying to prove to adults that they can do everything an adult can do.

For example, this document has the title: 5 Women in Science Who Broke Boundaries, Made a Mark in Science History. That type of document does not help us to understand anything. Rather, it brings our attention to the fact that most scientists are men, but becoming aware of that does not help us in any way. Most construction workers are men, also, but bringing that to our attention doesn't help us. That document is as idiotic and detrimental as such documents as:

	•	5 Midgets in Science Who Broke Boundaries
	•	5 Nearsighted Redheads in Science Who Broke Boundaries
	•	5 Anorexic Men in Science Who Broke Boundaries
	•	5 Men with Micro Penises in Science Who Broke Boundaries

The female scientists should help us to understand life, not search for evidence to support their theory that men are sexist creatures who have been oppressing women. For example, this news article points out that "prehistoric hunters weren’t all male" because a prehistoric woman was buried with items that suggests that she hunted animals, and this news article claims that the grave of a woman "upends what's known about sex and gender in prehistoric societies" because she was buried with more material wealth than anybody else in that region.

Three reasons why we cannot use those graves as proof that men and women are unisex creatures are:

1)		There are different ways to interpret a burial. An elaborate funeral of a woman does not prove that men and women are unisex creatures. For example, England spent $200 million on the funeral of Queen Elizabeth, but that does not prove that men and women have identical mental characteristics. It does not even prove that Queen Elizabeth was more talented than an ordinary woman, or that she was admired by everybody. A significant percentage of the English population wants to eliminate the monarchy, and they would not have given Queen Elizabeth an elaborate funeral. If we could analyze the mental qualities of the people who approve of the monarchy, and compare them to the people who want to eliminate the monarchy, we would likely discover that the people who approve of it are less intelligent and creative, and more sheeplike. The the pharaohs of ancient Egypt and the popes of the Catholic Church had extravagant funerals, also, but that doesn't prove that men and women are unisex creatures. The extravagant funerals should be interpreted as evidence that the majority of people cannot make wise decisions about who their leaders should be, how they should react to a death, or what they should do with their labor and resources.
2)		Funerals are emotional, not intellectual The title of this article is: Anglo-Saxon Burials Are Challenging Our Understanding of Gender Identity. The author points out that some Anglo-Saxon graves of women had items that we associate with men, and some of the men were buried with feminine clothing. However, the items that a person was buried with doesn't necessarily tell us anything about the person in the grave. Anthropologists are frequently trying to find a "sensible" reason for what our ancestors have done, which implies that our ancestors were carefully analyzing all of their options and choosing the most intelligent option. In reality, they were more uneducated than people are today, and more likely to follow their emotional cravings and fears. People today are designing funerals according to their emotional feelings, not according to intellectual analyses and discussions. We should assume that our distant ancestors were also designing funerals according to their emotional feelings, rather than according to intellectual analyses. The items that people today put into graves, or leave at graves, are irrational, and we should assume that our ancestors were at least as irrational as we are. For example, some of the items that have been placed at the grave of Mohammed Ali are: • A hand-decorated fly swatter. • Many toy, model, and carved elephants. • A glass bottle with a John Deere ribbon that says "tractor girl." • An adult-sized rocking chair. • Flags from various countries. • A pair of sunglasses with a note that says "The Crawfords were here 6/21/16". • A first-place medal from the 2016 Trampoline National USTA Championship. The people who put those items on his grave were doing so because it provided them with some emotional pleasure, not because they did some research into the issue of what Mohammed Ali might want on his grave. People conduct funerals and put objects in or on graves in order to please themselves, not for the benefit of the dead person. They are using the dead person for their personal, emotional pleasure, which could be considered a non-sexual variation of Necrophilia. This behavior is similar to the mothers who provide smash cakes for their one-year-old babies. People today have irrational funerals, and we should assume that our ancestors had irrational funerals, also, and that some of the objects that they put into graves had nothing to do with the dead person. People today also have irrational birthday parties, religions, holiday celebrations, recreational activities, and contests. However, we did not create our irrational culture. Rather, we inherited it from our parents, who inherited them from their ancestors, and so on. We have modified that old culture a bit, but it has been irrational for as long as it has existed. The reason is because our culture evolved to fit our emotions, not our intellect. The only significant difference between modern culture and prehistoric culture is that our culture has degraded as a result of centuries of manipulation by businesses, religions, Zionist organizations, feminists, vegans, monarchies, Hollywood, think tanks, charities, crime networks, and lunatics. Many of our modern customs are more irrational and abusive than the customs of prehistoric people. For example, our culture today promotes the attitude that children will be harmed if they see naked bodies, childbirth, sex, or breast-feeding. This is more absurd than the prehistoric culture.
3)		We cannot use unusual people as standards. The majority of people are similar to each other in their physical and mental characteristics, but there is always a small percentage of the population that is at the extreme edges of the bell graphs. For example, some men are homosexual, and some men are so childlike that want to be taken care of. There are also women who do not have much of an interest in becoming a mother, and some women like to get intoxicated or use heroin. We must not allow anybody to use the unusual people as proof of what the majority of people are like. For example, some women are taller than the majority of men, and some women are more intelligent than the majority of men, but those women are not proof that men and women are unisex creatures who are identical in height and intelligence. Instead of being surprised to discover that some prehistoric women behaved differently than the majority of women, we should expect a variety of behavior in both men and women.

Women should stop comparing themselves to men. Women should ignore what the men are doing and enjoy being female. They should stop competing with men, and stop trying to prove that men and women are identical in physical and mental abilities.

It is especially important for the women who are unusually masculine to accept the evidence that they are unusual women. They should live the life that they want, and let the majority of women be feminine. They must stop insulting the other women for wanting to be mothers or wear pretty dresses.

Reason #3, listed above, about not using unusual people as standards, applies to the primitive tribes of today. For example, some women recently analyzed the role of women in 63 of the primitive societies of the past century, and they wrote:

A journalist described their research as:

Those feminists believe that the primitive tribes of today can help us understand ourselves, but those tribes are primitive because there is something inferior about them. We cannot use a modern, primitive tribe to understand our ancestors or ourselves.

Those primitive tribes are branches of the human race that are heading towards extinction. They exist in the world today only because we feel sorry for them; they live in undesirable locations of the earth; and we treat them as an endangered species.

We don't know much about our primitive ancestors, but it is possible that one of the reasons our ancestors advanced, while other tribes remained primitive, is because the tribes that advanced were those in which the men and women took different roles in life.

Germany and Japan have been criticized for being more "sexist" than most other nations, but that might be one of the reasons that those nations became so much more advanced than others, and have such low crime rates.

Many feminists have insulted Germany and Japan as "sexist", but we could say that the cultures of those nations are intended to provide guidance to the women, not to abuse the women. For example, Japan has a law that requires women to wait 100 days after getting a divorce before getting married again, whereas men don't have to wait. That law was not intended to oppress women. Rather, it was intended to give the woman and her next husband enough time to figure out if she is pregnant.

The feminists are frequently using unusual people to justify their theories. For example, they will find evidence that a prehistoric woman hunted animals, and was as successful at hunting as a typical man, and then claim that all women are similar to her.

Likewise, they find some of the worst behaved men to prove that men are cruel, sexist, and abusive to women. They imply that those unusual men are typical, but that type of "research" is deceptive, and should not be tolerated.

The goal of a scientist should be to investigate issues and discover knowledge, not look for evidence to support his ideas. A scientist must be willing to consider the possibility that his ideas are partly or entirely false. He should have the attitude of an explorer who is trying to learn about the universe.

However, many of the female scientists and journalists are not trying to discover knowledge about men or women, or trying to help us understand how to improve our relationships. Instead, they are trying to prove something to us, such as men are sexist, or that women are equally talented as engineers, hunters, or plumbers.

For example, the title of this document is "One of The Biggest Hunter-Gatherers Myths Is Finally Getting Debunked". The author claims that "The enduring idea that men evolved to hunt and women evolved to gather is a relatively baseless assumption".

The women who are doing that "research" are not investigating anything. Rather, they are searching for evidence that supports their particular theories, which is easy to do because we can interpret life in almost any manner we please. For example, these scientists believe that some old pieces of wood are from Noah's Ark.

By disregarding the evidence that we don't like, and interpreting other evidence in the manner we please, we can support almost any theory, such as we will go to heaven when we die; we will improve our life if we acquire more money; and we can reduce crime with rehabilitation programs and punishments.

The feminists are telling us what to believe, not providing us with information that they have discovered, asking us to verify that information, and discussing the information with us.

Some of complaints of sexism are due to the ignorance of men, not because men want to be abusive to women. For example, some women have suffered damage to their clitoris as a result of medical procedures by doctors who did not have adequate knowledge about the clitoris. The New York Times published this document about the issue that was written by Rachel Gross, who refers to herself as a "Science Journalist". The title and subtitle is:


Her document has remarks such as:


Her article implies that men are sexist creatures who are ignoring the sexual aspects of women, and have a much greater interest in Viagra, but that conclusion is detrimental and unacceptable. She is pouting, whining, and accusing rather than investigating, analyzing, and thinking. She is not a "science journalist"; rather, she is an angry, feminist journalist.

Her article encourages women to whine, and to accuse men of sexism or selfishness, but in this modern era, women need to display more advanced attitudes. Her article would have been useful if it had been written like this:


That type of article makes people aware of a problem, and it encourages people to experiment with improvements.

The feminists blame men for being ignorant about women's bodies, but part of the reason men are ignorant about women's bodies is because women have evolved such a high level of sexual inhibitions that they are preventing both boys and girls from learning about their body and their sexual characteristics.

Women have such intense inhibitions, and/or such low levels of self-control, that many young girls don't learn about menstruation until they start doing it. That problem is not the result of men being sexist. It is because women cannot control their sexual inhibitions.

Likewise, a lot of women believe that their hair and body odors are evil and disgusting, and must be washed away with shampoo and soap, and covered with hair sprays and perfumes. Their ignorance about how their body odors are, or should be, sexually attractive to men is the result of women being unable to control their sexual inhibitions, not because of sexism.

Furthermore, the reason so many men are obnoxious and lewd is because the inhibitions of women are causing a lot of boys to develop idiotic obsessions with sex and women's bodies.

The only way we are going to create a society in which the men are more aware of women's health issues, and have more sensible attitudes toward sex and women, and in which young girls are more aware of their own body, is to pressure both women and men into controlling their sexual inhibitions and allowing children to learn about the human body. That is likely to require forcing children to become accustomed to nudity, and giving them a more serious and extensive education about sexual issues.

It is impossible for men to understand women when women are too embarrassed to be honest about their feelings and thoughts. Furthermore, every woman is slightly different, so in order for men to truly understand women, we need a lot of them to talk about themselves so that we can get an idea of how they differ, what is typical, and what is unusual.

Furthermore, women cannot expect men to understand them when they insist that we are unisex creatures. Women must be willing to acknowledge that men and women are different.

When boys and girls are below perhaps eight years of age, they are very similar to each other in physical and mental characteristics, and they need to learn the same lessons, such as how to use language, how to read and write, and how to use recreational devices, such as bicycles.

Young children also need to be in frequent contact with one another so that they can learn about socializing, and learn about the similarities and differences between boys and girls.

Therefore, schools should put the young boys and girls together in classrooms and recreational activities.

Boys and girls start developing noticeably different physical and mental characteristics when they are about eight years old, so the Schools Ministry is required to separate the boys and girls when they are about eight years old, and adjusting the environment and curriculum for each sex.

We don't know much about the differences between boys and girls, but we have to start the process with what we know, and as we learn more about human behavior, we can adjust the school environment and curriculum to make it increasingly more appropriate. Some of the differences between boys and girls that have been known for centuries are:

•		Boys have a stronger interest in nature, tools, and science, and girls have a stronger interest in taking care of babies, home related issues, and socializing.
•		Boys are better at working in teams, remaining quiet while they work, following orders, and dealing with criticism. Girls prefer to be their own boss but want to work close enough to other girls so that they can chat with them. Girls also need more praise and have more trouble tolerating criticism.
•		Boys are more competitive, independent, and adventurous, whereas girls are more likely to remain with, and mimic, other girls.

As a result of these differences, the teachers and computer software should put boys under more pressure to learn. The boys also need more competitions, and the competition should be more demanding.

Every culture expects people to control their cravings for material items, sex, alcohol, and other things. Every culture assumes that we can disable those type of cravings, as if there is a switch inside of us they can be turned on and off. Some people even claim that we can choose to be homosexual or heterosexual.

This constitution is based on the theory that our behavior is the result of both our genetic characteristics, and our social environment, but that we cannot control our genetic characteristics. Therefore, we cannot disable or alter any of our emotional cravings or fears, or choose whether we are homosexual, heterosexual, or a pedophile.

Since we cannot change our emotions, the best way to improve our lives is to change our social environment to reduce the stimulation of the undesirable emotions, and increase the stimulation of the desirable emotions. Three examples of this concept are:

1)		Reduce the titillation caused by sugar. Instead of providing people with enormous amounts of sweet pastries, cakes, pies, and meats, and instead of expecting people to control their craving for those sweet items, we would have more success in controlling our consumption of sugar by changing our culture to reduce the titillation. The method that this constitution advocates is requiring everybody get all of their meals from restaurants, and requiring the restaurants to follow rules that are set by the Meals Ministry in regards to the amount of sugar that can put into foods. That will allow the Meals Ministry to restrict all of the sweet foods to lower sugar levels, thereby making it much easier for people to control their consumption of them. Another option that the Meals Ministry has is to restrict the access of the sweet foods, such as restricting people to only one, small slice of a sweet pie on Saturdays. Those techniques are treating people in a similar manner as we treat pet dogs and farm animals. Therefore, in order to enjoy a culture in which the restaurants are controlling our consumption of sugar, we must be able to acknowledge that humans are animals, rather than complain that such treatment is insulting, and that it is denying us our freedom to eat whatever we please.
2)		Reduce the sexual titillation. Instead of allowing women and young girls to dress in sexually attractive manners all day, every day, and expecting men to ignore or control their sexual cravings, we would have a more pleasant social environment by reducing the sexual titillation. This constitution advocates the following methods: • Prohibiting women from wearing sexually attractive clothing, jewelry, and cosmetics while they are working and involved with recreational activities, and restricting that behavior to certain social affairs. • Requiring schools to teach young children about sex, human bodies, and other issues so that the boys don't develop obsessions with sex and female sex organs. • Putting the older boys and girls into different school classes, and prohibiting the girls from wearing sexually titillating clothing, jewelry, and cosmetics while they are in school. • Putting male and female employees into different offices or buildings if they do not need to work together. This constitution believes that humans evolved for an environment in which the men spent most of the day with other men, and the women spent most of the day with women and children. Men and women did not evolve to work together, or spend a lot of time together, except in the evenings. Therefore, businesses are required to separate men and women at their jobs whenever possible. • Providing courtship activities for single people, and prohibiting flirting in public locations. • Prohibiting businesses, journalists, and other people and organizations from using sexual titillation to attract men. For example, the women who appear in television documentaries must be middle-aged or older, dressed in a non-sexual manner, and not have any cosmetics or jewelry. The audience should focus on the information in the documentary, not the woman who is narrating it. • Prohibit journalists, television programs, and other people from promoting the concept that we will have a better life by having sex in strange locations, such as an airplane bathroom; in strange positions; or with drugs such as alkyl nitrite or Viagra. A culture that separates male and female employees, or prohibits women from being sexually attractive at their jobs, is treating humans in a similar manner as a farmer who separates the sexually receptive females from the male animals until it is time for them to mate. Therefore, that type of culture requires people who are willing to acknowledge that humans are animals.
3)		Eliminate the titillation by material wealth. All existing cultures allow people to have extreme differences in material wealth, and this results in people comparing what they have to what other people have, and struggling to get more wealth. This competition for wealth creates a lot of fighting, cheating, pouting, hatred, envy, and sadness. It also results in some people getting involved with jobs they don't like simply because those jobs offer high incomes, and, even worse, it results in some people doing things to make money that are destructive, illegal, or disgusting. Instead of expecting people to understand the concept that "Money cannot buy happiness", and instead of expecting them to control their cravings for material wealth, we would have more success by altering our economic system and other culture so that there is no money, and all of the material wealth is divided equally among the people. That makes it impossible for people to compare what they have to what other people have, thereby eliminating the competition for material wealth and money.

When we are willing to acknowledge that humans are apes, then we can design our culture to suppress our undesirable, animal characteristics, and encourage beneficial behavior. That will provide us with a much more pleasant and relaxing social environment, and it will be much more successful in reducing bad behavior compared to trying to control people with punishments and rehabilitation programs.

Modern technology allows women to stimulate a man's sexual emotions beyond what our mind was designed for. Even though we are capable of resisting the excessive titillation, it is frustrating and annoying to do so. We would have a more pleasant life if we reduced the titillation.

One experiment this constitution recommends is prohibiting women from shaving their body hair, but we cannot judge that type of experiment according to what people "like". Rather, we need to have the attitude of a farmer or a zoo manager who judges it by the effect it has on our lives, attitudes, and relationships.

We must pass judgment on whether we have a better life by allowing women to shave their body hair, or by prohibiting them from shaving.

Men might find women more attractive without body hair, but does our life improve when they shave their body hair?

There are lots of benefits to prohibiting women from shaving. For example:

•		It makes life slightly more pleasant for the women by preventing their skin from rubbing against itself.
•		It eliminates the time women spend on shaving, thereby giving them more time for activities that are more satisfying and beneficial, which is similar to extending their life.
•		We eliminate the labor and resources needed to produce and recycle hair removal devices for women, and we all benefit by eliminating undesirable chores.
•		We reduce the sexual titillation of men, thereby making life more comfortable for both the men and the women.
•		We eliminate one of the excuses that men use for their lewd behavior; namely, that women are provoking men by making themselves unnaturally attractive. Therefore, it becomes easier for men to behave properly around women, so we can set higher standards for the men.

This concept also applies to other types of cosmetic issues, such as whether we should provide either men or women with piercings. Does life improve for us when we pierce our ears, nose, eyebrows, or tongue, and install jewelry into the holes?

The government has control over all products and culture, so they have the authority and responsibility to experiment with these issues. As with all government officials, they must make decisions according to what provides us with the best life, not according to what people want, and they must post a document to explain each decision so that we can pass judgment on whether they are providing sensible guidance and analyses.

The feminist movement is giving girls a distorted view of life by criticizing men but not women. This constitution requires the schools to teach children that both men and women are animals, and that neither sex is better than the other. Both men and women have crude and irritating characteristics.

An example of a crude characteristic of women is that they are willing to marry a man they do not like simply because he has high status. The women who have the most extreme craving for status are willing to marry men who have criminal backgrounds, or terrible reputations.

An example are the women who chase after Hollywood celebrities and billionaires.

They are attracted to those men because of their status and wealth, not because they believe those men will make wonderful husbands.

That crude behavior allows men such as Harvey Weinstein to attract a lot of women. Those women have such a strong desire for wealth and fame that they disregard the drug problems, lewd behavior, and violence of the wealthy men.

Most people consider a man to be disgusting if he gets involved with a woman only for sex, and has no desire to see her a second time. That type of behavior is similar to a dog that is trying to have sex with our leg. However, women who get involved with wealthy men that they dislike are also behaving like an animal, but most people admire them rather than regard them as crude or disgusting.

The feminist movement complains about the violent and selfish behavior of men, but both men and women are violent, selfish apes. Women are "different" than men, not better. An example are the women who killed their husband after arranging for him to get life insurance.

An extreme example of abusive women are those who steal babies from other women, and sometimes cut open pregnant women to steal their baby.

The women who fantasize about stealing a baby but who have enough self-control to resist the urge are the female equivalent of the men who have fantasies of raping women but can resist the urge to do so.

The women who grab and kiss the babies of other women are behaving like a man who grab at and brush up against women.

Both men and women have crude qualities, and we need to understand them and deal with them rather than insult the other sex for having crude qualities.

Some women have reacted to overly aggressive men by becoming terrified, hysterical, or frightened. An example are the women who reacted to Harvey Weinstein with fear, panic, or silence.

We cannot expect a young girl to deal with abusive men, but female animals evolved to deal with sexually aggressive males. Furthermore, humans are more intelligent than animals. Therefore, the teenage and adult female humans should be able to handle the aggressive men as well as, or better than, the female animals.

A female dog does not become horrified or hysterical when a male dog tries to have sex with her, so why should a female human be horrified to discover that a man would like to have sex with her? The women should regard that as typical male behavior.

To help the women deal with a man's sexual desires, this constitution requires:

1)		Educating children on the emotional characteristics of humans and animals so that the girls understand that a man's attraction to women is similar to a woman's attraction to babies. That might be an effective way of helping girls understand that boys want to grab, touch, and kiss girls, just like women want to grab, kiss, and touch babies. Women should not be shocked, appalled, or disgusted that men enjoy their face, hair, body shape, odor, or voice. Women enjoy the visual image, odor, and giggles of a baby, and they should realize that there is nothing wrong or disgusting with men who enjoy such characteristics of women.
2)		The schools should give all of the boys and girls some practice in dealing with overly aggressive boys. For example, a teacher can have one of the boys try to touch one of the girls, and the girls can practice responding properly, as in the image below. When a dog tries to sniff a woman's crotch, she does not become terrified. Rather, she pushes the dog away. Girls should be have practice doing something similar with male humans.
3)		Stop tolerating, ignoring, and giving pity to the men who cannot treat other people in a respectable manner. Those men should either be put on restrictions, or evicted. Women and children are naturally submissive, and they expect adult men to provide them with protection and leadership. The men who do nothing to stop other men from abusing women and children are not doing their duty. The men who ignore abusive men should be regarded as almost as disgusting as the men who do the abuse. We should not allow men in leadership positions if they ignore abuse. One of the reasons that crime and corruption has reached such extreme levels is because there are so many men who refuse to do something to stop it. This constitution suggests putting the boys through exercises in which they take the role of an observer of sexual harassment. This will allow the boys to practice finding the courage to respond in an appropriate manner, such as in the image below. By getting boys into the habit of protecting the girls and demanding other boys behave properly, they might become men who are less apathetic about badly behaved men, and more likely to do what men are supposed to do, which is take care of the women and children.

In the summer of 1970, when I was 14, my mother arranged for me and my brothers and sister to go to a summer camp for several weeks. At that time, a lot of us children were very ignorant about sexual issues. There was no Internet, the schools did not provide any useful sex education. It was also a time when a teacher could be fired for being homosexual.

One of the men who was working at the summer camp was a school teacher from another state. One night he comes into the building where all of us boys were sleeping, and wakes me up and tells me he needs some help doing something with the horses. He smelled like some type of alcoholic beverage, so I assumed he was drunk.

After we did whatever it was he needed help with, he put his arms around me and hugged me for what seemed like many minutes. I had heard about homosexuals, but never met one. My initial reaction was shock, and then it occurred to me that since he is a teacher, if I were to complain about him, he might get fired, and he might react with anger towards me.

One of my kneecaps was shaking a bit, and I was worried he might sense that I was frightened, but after a while he let me go, and I went back to sleep.

At that time, I had so little knowledge about sex that I assumed that homosexuals only hold hands, hug, and maybe kiss each other on the cheek. Some boys would occasionally insult somebody by telling him to stick something up his ass, or "suck my dick", but I thought those were just insults, not things that people actually did. When that man hugged me, he reaffirmed my suspicions that homosexuals only hug each other.

At the time the incident happened I wanted to complain about him, but the next morning I decided that being hugged by a drunken man was not a serious problem, so I decided to avoid him. During the following days there were two more irritating incidents with him, but they weren't bad.

One or two days before we were to go back home, he got drunk again in the evening, and somehow pressured me into helping him plan some type of event for the camp. So we went to his cabin and we discussed whatever it was. There was one chair and desk in his cabin, and he was sitting in the chair at the desk, and I was sitting on his bed.

When we were finished with whatever it was he was planning, he came over to the bed and sat next to me. Somehow he got me down on my back and he pulled my pants down a bit, which was another shock to me. Why would he want to get into my pants? He put his head near my crotch, and I could feel my penis getting warm. Rather than be afraid or angry, the best description of how I felt was bewildered and confused.

I was wondering if the warmth was because of his breath, or if he was actually kissing my penis. I was on my back, and I could not see what he was going because all I could see was the back of his head.

He would occasionally ask, "Are you ready to cum?", and I would respond, "Come where? What are you talking about?", but he never answered me, apparently because he was so drunk. I was unaware of the word "cum" and assumed he was saying "come".

After a while he stopped, and he rolled me onto my side. I was relieved to think that he was finished and I was expecting to get out of there soon. Then I felt his fingers around my butt and I thought "What he is doing now?" And then he shoved his penis into my butt, and I was shocked to discover that people actually do such a thing. I had never expected that.

Afterwards he asked me to come home with him and live with him. I had the feeling that he was extremely lonely, and that he was so drunk that he believed that I was in love with him.

I decided do call my mom in the morning and get out of the camp. But the next morning I decided there was no sense in complaining about him because I would be leaving in two days, and no amount of complaining would undo what he did. So I ignored him from then on, and never told anybody about it.

Two of the interesting issues about this incident are:

Why don't children, teenagers, and especially young adults, put up more resistance to the abuse?

In my case, part of the reason is because I was so ignorant about homosexuals and sex that it never occurred to me that anybody would want to do the things he did. The parents who believe that they are helping their children by keeping them ignorant are fools who are making their children more likely to become victims.

Another reason children allow abuse is because children are naturally submissive to adults, especially to adult men. Children evolved for an environment in which the adult men protect them. Therefore, in order for children to resist the abuse of adult men, they have to overpower their emotional cravings to trust and be submissive to a man. That is possible if the children have had some education about the issue, and especially if they have had some training, but otherwise it will be difficult for them the first time they encounter an abusive man.

Another reason children are likely to allow abuse is because they are physically weaker than an adult man. Although I was 14 years old, I was becoming increasingly weak, especially in the evenings, as I described here. Perhaps I would have had a desire to resist him if my body had the typical levels of energy and strength for a teenager.

Also, he was not trying to hurt me, and if he was, I certainly would have had a desire to fight him, and to call the police.

Charlie Chaplin became famous and wealthy by making drunks and losers seem amusing.

I think another reason I became a victim is because none of my relatives or friends were alcoholics, so I was not familiar with people who were drunk, so I did not realize how unpredictable they could be.

To make the situation worse, Charlie Chaplin, Foster Brooks, and other comedians would sometimes imitate drunks, which made them seem amusing.

Since then I have come to the conclusion that people with drug problems are suffering from some type of significant physical or mental problem, and they are potentially dangerous to themselves and other people.

My experience with that homosexual man at the summer camp undoubtedly made it easier for me to react in a more sensible manner with similar situations that occurred later in life, such as the intoxicated man who wanted to try some of the idiotic activities he saw in a pornography movie.

In my case, I initially wanted to expose it, and I would have done so except that it happened late at night, and by the next day I had lost interest because I decided that nothing can be done to undo it, and I was not interested in revenge.

Also, the sexual hysteria and paranoia in the USA at that time made me worry about what sort of remarks I'd have to put up with from my relatives and from the kids at school. Not many people can deal with sexual issues in a sensible or calm manner.

An interesting aspect of sexual abuse is that if the victims were to complain about the abuse, they might be able to prevent the person from abusing other people. However, it did not occur to me until I decided to write this section of the document that he might have abused other teenagers. I assumed it was just happening to me.

I had no idea that sexual abuse was common around the world, and that a lot of the pedophiles were doctors, FBI officials, Hollywood officials, Boy Scout officials, military leaders, teachers, and other people in positions of authority. Keeping children ignorant about crime is making it easier for them to become victims.

Prehistoric children regularly observed the teenagers and adults flirting and having sex, and they would have also occasionally seen one of the girls slapping a boy for being too aggressive. Today, however, children are not learning those lessons.

In order to reduce sexual abuse, we need to educate children about sexual issues, and we should give them practice in resisting abuse, and in helping other people resist it. It is absurd to keep children ignorant about sexual issues and crimes.

Providing children with valuable knowledge and exercises will not guarantee that they become educated, improve their self-control, develop a useful skill, treat other people with respect, or behave less like an animal. Every child will react differently to an education.

All of the existing cultures give pity to the children who dislike school, have trouble learning information, or have trouble behaving properly. Many people try to fix those children with punishments or rewards, or by pressuring the teachers to lower the standards for graduating.

However, this constitution does not support the belief that we can fix a person's bad behavior with punishments, pity, or rewards. Instead, the children who have trouble behaving properly must be regarded as misfits in this modern era. They might have been successful in a prehistoric tribe, but they do not have mental qualities necessary for our modern world. They should not be allowed in influential positions, and they should have restrictions on reproducing so that there are fewer of them in every generation.

Children cannot benefit from a sex education course designed by religious fanatics, or by transgenders and homosexuals who teach children that they can choose whether they are homosexual or a man or woman, or by pedophiles who teach children to have sex with adults.

Sex education courses have to be designed by people who realize that humans are animals, and that we have sex for the same reason animals do.

A lot of men assume that sex is intended for our pleasure, and that the more sex they have, the more they will enjoy their life. There are also people claiming that sex and masturbation have a lot of benefits, such as these 10 benefits, or these 11, or these 17.

Although it is possible that there are some health benefits for sex and masturbating, we should promote a more realistic attitude toward sex and masturbation. Specifically, that sex evolved in animals for reproduction, not for our pleasure. As with food, we can enjoy sex, or we can do it to excess, spread venereal diseases, or get involved with idiotic sexual activities.

It is detrimental to keep children ignorant about sexual issues, but it is also detrimental to provide them with unrealistic information. For example, some men have picked up the belief that a woman is a goddess that exists for our sexual pleasure; some men picked up the belief that a wife should be a household servant and mother; and some men picked up feminist belief that men and women are unisex creatures.

Those unrealistic fantasies are causing men to torment themselves, their wives, and their children by expecting life to follow their particular fantasy. It can cause them to have arguments or become disappointed when women do not behave as they expect, or when sex is not as exciting as they expect. Those disappointments can cause them to want to get a divorce and find a more exciting woman, or try to increase the sexual pleasure with pornography, orgies, children, or drugs.

In reality, a woman is a female of a particular species of ape. Women are not princesses or goddesses, and sex is not the source of human happiness. The relationship between male and female humans is the same as that is for other species of apes.

Specifically, sex is a small aspect of our lives, not our major source of pleasure. Sex is a trick to make us reproduce and form a relationship. Sex is a major source of pleasure only to people who are suffering from some type of a problem, and who are using sex to bring some pleasure into their miserable life.

A person who has a properly functioning brain and body will get most of his pleasure from having friends, working with them, and having meals and leisure activities with them.

We also get more pleasure from affection, such as hugging, but there is not much affection in modern societies because most people have so many sexual problems and so little self-control that a person who shows affection to someone else, especially to a child, is regarded as making a sexual advance.

There are also so many men who have such obsessions with women's crotches and breasts, and so many men making lewd remarks, that many women avoid being affectionate with men.

If we can find a way to prevent the men from developing obsessions with sex and women's bodies, then we might benefit by allowing more affection between men and women.

It was difficult to raise children in prehistoric times. Although one child was not much of a burden, the prehistoric women got pregnant on a routine basis. Even though most children died before they became adults, the parents had to put a lot of their time and effort into raising children.

To aggravate the problem, and the death of so many of their children would cause emotional anguish to the parents. Therefore, the parents had to have enough of an attraction to children to continue trying to raise children rather than become discouraged.

Life was much easier, more relaxed, and more pleasant for the prehistoric men who did not have children, and the men who did not have a wife had an even easier life. However, none of us descended from those men. We are descendants of the men who were willing to devote their adult life to taking care of a woman and her children, and who were not discouraged when some of their children died.

Why would a prehistoric man be willing to devote his entire life to taking care of a woman and children? Why would he choose to take on such a burden?

The only men who were willing to accept that burden were those who had such a strong attraction to women that they did not regard a woman as a "burden". Rather, they regarded women as a pleasure.

There is a song with the lyrics, "He ain't heavy, he's my brother". If we could go back in time and ask a prehistoric man if he ever gets tired of taking care of his wife, he would reply, "She's not a burden. She's my wife!"

The same concept applies to women. Raising a child in prehistoric times required a lot of time and effort from the mother, and it resulted in a lot of disappointments because most of the children died. The women who did not have children had a much more relaxed and pleasant life.

However, we are not descendants of those women. We are descendants of the women who were willing to devote their adult lives to taking care of children, and who were not discouraged when some of their children died.

The prehistoric women who were willing to tolerate such a burden were those who had such a strong attraction to children that they did not regard children as a "burden". Rather, they regarded them as a pleasure.

If we could ask them if they get tired of taking care of their children, they would respond: "They're not a burden. They're my children!"

Every culture puts pressure on people to get married and raise a family, but but this Constitution requires the ministers to prohibit citizens and organizations from putting pressure on people into doing either. Instead, marriage and children must be regarded as an optional burden.

Children must be taught that they should get married only if they are willing to do the work required to make a marriage stable and pleasant, such as analyzing the problems that they experience rather than reacting with anger or pouting. The schools must also give children a realistic view of the burden of raising children, such as dealing with diapers, vomit, and crying.

Unfortunately, telling a person that marriage and families are a burden is not necessarily going to help the person make a sensible decision because we have such strong emotional cravings to get married and have children that we are likely to believe that we will love the burden.

This problem is most obvious with pet dogs. Children and adults always insist that they are willing to accept the responsibilities of a pet dog, but after a few months, a significant percentage of both children and adults lose interest in the dog, and the dog becomes neglected and lonely.

In prehistoric times, the men and women who could not form a stable relationship were less successful at raising their children, but during the past few centuries, it has become increasingly easy for divorced couples to successfully raise children. The government is also frequently taking children away from incompetent parents and giving them to somebody else to raise. There are also men marrying divorced women and raising the children of her previous husband.

Although some of the divorces are due to environmental issues, such as raising children an unrealistic views of marriage and sex, some of the divorces are the result of people with genetically inferior minds. In order to reduce divorces, we need to pass judgment on why people are getting divorced, and experiment with ways to reduce it.

The divorces that are due to some environmental issue can be reduced by altering our culture, but if we determine that a person has gotten divorced because of his inferior genetic characteristics, then his children should be marked as low priority for reproduction.

To complicate the issue, as pointed out in other documents, it might be an advantage for us to consider divorce when we get beyond the age of 50 or 60 because of the deterioration that we go through after that age.

The schools are required to teach boys that women are "humans with female characteristics", not goddesses, sex toys, or servants. The boys should understand that having sex with a woman is actually a chore, compared to masturbating, because women are difficult to please, and they are not in the mood for sex as often as men.

In order to please a woman sexually, a man has to be willing to put time and effort into understanding what they want, and have the desire and stamina to give it to them. If a man doesn't want to put the time and effort into pleasing the woman, then he should not get married because that will result in an unsatisfied wife.

The boys should be taught that they can understand how burdensome a woman is by noticing how strongly attracted they are to women. Their attraction to women is intense because the burden is so significant that the only prehistoric men who were successful in raising children were those with an incredibly powerful attraction to women.

It is detrimental to suppress a divorce because it results in the couple having a miserable marriage, which is unpleasant for everybody.

Also, if the couple is incompatible because their mental problems prevented them from choosing a compatible spouse or dealing with the problems of marriage, then their children are likely to have the same mental problems, thereby creating more people with miserable relationships.

We do not benefit by forcing people to do something they don't want to do. Forcing people to remain married is tormenting them, and it can create unpleasant and awkward situations for their friends, children, neighbors, and coworkers.

This constitution makes it as easy to get a divorce as it is to change the furniture in our homes. A wife is allowed to divorce her husband for any reason, and at any time. She does not have to justify it to anybody, or get her husband's approval. Furthermore, women will not have any financial pressure to remain in a marriage because every adult is provided with a home, food, and everything else they need, including child support.

By making it easy to get a divorce, the men who cannot satisfy their wives are much more likely to get divorced than they are in the existing cultures. The men will also have an easy time getting a divorce from women who turn out to be neurotic.

If boys are educated properly, they will realize that their attraction to sex is just a trick to make men compete for women, and then spend the rest of their life taking care of a woman and children. That knowledge should help the men make better decisions about whether they should get married, and if so, to who, and how to treat her.

The schools are required to teach girls that their emotions fool them into believing that children are "bundles of joy", and that a child is actually a tremendous burden. Instead of titillating girls with photos of adorable babies, the girls should be provided with realistic information about what raising at child requires from a mother.

The girls should be taught that they can understand how burdensome a baby is by noticing how strongly attracted they are to babies. Their attraction to babies is intense because the burden is so significant that the only prehistoric women who were successful in raising children were those with an incredibly powerful attraction to children.