Subscribe to the Glazov Gang‘s YouTube Channel.
This new edition of The Glazov Gang features Roy Barzilai, author of The Testosterone Hypothesis.
Roy discussed Sex Wars: Low Testosterone and the Islamization of the West, unveiling how hormones regulate the life cycles of civilization.
Don’t miss it!
And make sure to watch John Guandolo discuss Trump vs. Brotherhood Infiltration, where he cast a disturbing light on the enemy within: CLICK HERE.
Please donate through our Pay Pal account to help The Glazov Gang keep going. Thank you!
Subscribe to our YouTube Channel and to Jamie Glazov Productions. Also LIKE us on Facebook and LIKE Jamie’s FB Fan Page.
Angel Gabriel says
Intuitively, the testosterone hypothesis makes a lot of sense.
Unfortunately, if true, it doesn’t give one much confidence in the over-feminized west’s ability to resist the current Muslim invasion.
Maybe we need to start supplementing men with testosterone to finally get the changes we desperately need.
t. says
Actually what is Roy Barzilai is saying above makes a lot of sense and explains, at least mostly, why there were many examples in the last few years of western non Muslim women feeling a lot of sexual attraction even to outright Muslim terrorists.
For example, that beautiful blonde CIA agent who spoke German and ended up being extremely attracted to that ISIS member living in Syria, originally a German wrapper who converted to Islam. whom she was supposed to investigate and ended up leaving her husband in the States and traveling secretly to Syria to f*ck him.
Also the supposed many women in Europe writing to the Muslim terrorist ring leader, who killed and injured hundreds of innocent human beings in Paris, over two years ago, Salah Abdelsalam, offering themselves to him to carry his potentially “cute” little progeny!
I see similar cases, from time to time, around me, here where I live in the west and many times I wondered what the f*ck is going on! What Roy is explaining above was an added confirmation to what I already noticed and understood.
Paul N Silas says
Check the testosterone level of any group of Army Rangers, Navy Seals, Marines, or Police Officers .Include FBI agents, working cowboys, any blue collar Trump supporters and I’m certain their health is just fine.
As the Duke (John Wayne) said in one of his movies, ” A man’s got to do, what a man got to do”.
Consider this, Jesus’ sacrifice on the Cross, for all of God’s Elect, was the most “butch” thing anyone has ever done.
Cowboy up America! The sh*t is about to hit the fan!
Monty says
The problem is that, as Jesus warned, there has been a great apostasy, a great turning away from Christianity. Jesus said that lawlessness would increase (sure has) and the love of most would grow cold. I’m 66 and I’ve seen all three happening, especially since the 60’s. “Do your own thing” sounds good, but that “thing” has turned people from God. God’s protection is therefore stripped away because people have chosen to reject Him. Now we suffer the consequences. Western Europe especially is virtually “Islam-Lite” because it bends to every Muslim whim. Effectively it is apartheid, under the guise of multiculturalism. Maybe the non-Muslim population will rebel and start a civil war. There may even be a military coup. But it is more likely that Europe as we know it will disappear without a trace. The Dhimmiwits in power have no intention of letting reality or truth hinder their progressive cultural suicide. The USA? Don’t be complacent. Already the stifling illiberal leftism rises to harass and oppress anyone who dares to speak out against the Islamisation of the USA. Perhaps armed resistance to Islam is more likely in the US, but again don’t count on it. If Saudi Arabia complains you can be sure that the government of the day will suppress armed resistance with all its power. It will not be pretty. Turning back to God is the only answer. How long have we got? I don’t know. I do know that Christ will return and defeat all His enemies. In between then and now it could be real messy.
Flavius Claudius Iulianus says
Sorry, I don’t buy it. Another attempt, like Social Darwinism, to transfer biological concepts to the social “sciences.”
Besides, places in the world where machismo is more prevalent tend to be sh*t holes. So his theory doesn’t hold water. In fact, one of the reasons the West has a high standard of living is that, as young boys, males in the West learn that: ‘you can’t control how you *feel* but you can control what you *do*, so behave yourselves!’
Instead, I would present the idea that the reason we lack resolve in fighting back may have more to do with the ever increasing influence of women in our political process. Although the female approach of doing things can result in better outcomes, some situations like that of an invading force disguised as a band hapless refugees requires another.
Anon says
Take a look at the leadership of the Western countries caving in to Islam.
Canada – ruled by a empty headed man boy who is very closely associated with the Ismalis.
Germany – a barren asexcual female.
France – a very effeminate homosexual.
England = a barren asexual female who hates her own people. A clone of Merkel.
Sweden – a male version of Merkel and May. No children.
The men in Sweden and Germany are helpless before the Muslims raping their women and children. They can’t even pick a brick or pipe and whack them about. They do nothing. Those aren’t men, they are nothings.
The people basically elected a bunch of drones and pretty boy eunuchs. And their ministers of defense are almost all women. It’s sickening.
50 years ago these people wouldn’t be allowed near the seats of power. Today the very notion of a alpha male running for office terrifies these people.
t. says
“The people basically elected a bunch of drones and pretty boy eunuchs. And their ministers of defense are almost all women. It’s sickening.
50 years ago these people wouldn’t be allowed near the seats of power. Today the very notion of a alpha male running for office terrifies these people.”
Right on, Anon!
TheBuffster says
I apologize that this is so long. I don’t have any more time to edit it down. Maybe no one will read it, but no harm in posting it. 🙂
I can see many of Barzilai’s points. But as a highly empathetic woman with a well-developed rational faculty I’ve always been an individualist who believes in free markets and free minds, limited government, and individual rights. I don’t think there’s anything compassionate about ignoring the facts of reality and acting on empathy when good sense tells you it must end in disaster.
I’m not laden with testosterone, believe me. And I’ve been of this sensible mind since I was a very young child.
As to the Judeo-Christianity issue, yes, Christianity and Judaism had a good hand in upholding individualism – bringing the idea of all individuals having the same value in the eyes of God – as being brothers and sisters, the children of one divine Father. There is much else in those religions that is valuable, and reasonable minds are able to sift the truth from the fiction and give credit where it’s due. But I’ve always been skeptical of the idea of a god.
From the time I was a little kid I had a conscious need for and insistence on “keeping an honest mind” no matter where that honesty took me, and a recognition that reason was the means with which to seek truth. Early on I had trouble with the idea of the existence of a god. Even as a very young child, I was skeptical, even though everyone around me believed in God.
I felt compelled to work out my own understanding of right and wrong and why right was right and wrong was wrong, demanding of myself that I never believe something just because I wanted to, but only because that’s where reason and evidence lead me. That’s what I meant by “keeping an honest mind”. So I decided to wait until I knew enough to be able to draw a conclusion about the existence of God.
I saw vividly that a mind that doesn’t keep itself honest cuts itself off from the facts of reality and the chance to grasp “the whole truth and nothing but the truth”, and hence the conclusions it draws will be wrong and the decisions it makes will therefore be wrong. Whatever turns out to be the truth, it’s better to know it, whether you like it or not. I could see that I would not be able to stand myself if I didn’t keep an honest mind, that I’d be making myself into a villain if I didn’t stay honest with myself. Keeping an honest and reasonable mind was essential to being a good person.
But I was also extremely feminine in most of my preferences and my empathy was through the roof. I even felt (and I’m embarrassed to say, still feel) empathy for inanimate objects. Consciously I know better and ignore those excess feelings. But they’re there.
So without a belief in God and with all that empathy in my soul, I still worked out a rational set of guiding principles and *why* right was right and wrong was wrong, based on what I could *know* was true from what I could see for myself: every mind has to do its own thinking and come to its own conclusions and should keep it self honest and reasonable because decisions and actions need to be based on the truth. Honest persuasion is the only right way to deal with other minds, because basing choices on the truth is the only way for anyone to make wise choices, so force should not be used except in defense against those who start it.
And the best world would be one where everyone saw this wisdom and lived by it and built its laws on it.
There was a lot more, but those were my rock bottom fundamentals. If people want to live and to be happy, that’s what they have to understand and live by, and if they do they’ll get along and make the best possible world together.
I was in grade school during the sixties, and because of my guiding principles I took an interest in what was going on in the world, especially in the USA, where I lived. I was glad that the Jim Crow laws in the South were being challenged, because the law should defend everyone’s rights equally and governments had no business distinguishing between people on account of of race or religion or anything like that. Every person had the same individual rights, and the purpose of the legal system was to defend those rights for all. No favorites.
But I was very upset by some of the demands that activists were making, because they crossed the “no force” line.
I thought that while judging people on their race was wrong, if you owned a business you should be free to run it according to your own judgment, even if that judgment was stupid or wrong. Those who wanted to integrate their businesses should be protected from Klansmen vandalizing and intimidating them, but those who still wanted to segregate should be free to do so without intimidation as well. It’s their property it’s their judgment, it’s their call. Everybody lives by the rules of liberty – everybody eschews the initiation of force. That way even people who can’t stand each other for whatever reason can still live together in the same town and changes can come as people’s minds open to reason and evidence.
Sure, it hurts to know that some people don’t want to deal with you because of your race, religion, etc., but that just opens an opportunity in the market for those who *aren’t* bigots. And then you’ll be doing business with people that you know want your business and aren’t so bigoted that they don’t want your money. If the law does its job defending everyone equally from the initiation of force, then the market and reason can be free to work toward a good outcome, and if some bigots get to live as they please… so what? They can’t force their way on anyone outside of their shops. And they can’t force anyone to shop at their shops, either. So people who don’t like their restricted shoppers policy can shop where everyone is welcome instead.
You can’t force a mind. That is a fact of reality. If a person is wrong, but think’s he’s right, force won’t change his mind. Unless what he believes – the way an Orthodox, Koran-thumping Muslim believes – that he has a right or duty to force his ways onto others, he should be free to do what he will with his life and property, associate with whom he will. His life and his mind are his, your life and your mind are yours.
Respecting other’s right to their minds and choices, even when you don’t like them, is the basis of good will and good peace even among people who dislike each other. That ethical respect creates a sense of security and benevolence between whoever agrees to respect those rights. But when you start to erode that agreement it will continue to degrade in increments, the way the slowly boiling frog gets cooked to death.
That’s how I’ve come at human relations all my life, without being religious, because it’s reasonable and based on the facts of reality – the nature of human minds – as I know it first-hand.
The combination of the Judeo-Christian and Hellenic heritages lead up to the Age of Reason and the Enlightenment that enabled a US Constitution to be created. But it’s not losing *faith* in those religions that’s the problem today. It’s the losing of knowledge of the *history* and achievements of that heritage that’s the disaster. Demonizing that history is disaster. And demonizing reason is disaster.
There are always people who think they can perfect society by imposing some amazing plan *by force*. To hell with winning over minds. They know best, and they’re going to destroy all the unbelievers – the freedom lovers, the Bourgeoisie, the Christians, Jews, atheists – whoever won’t conform. But to do this Utopian job one has to unseat Reason from her place. You need something like a Prophet of Allah or a destructive, anti-objectivity philosophy like Postmodernism, to seduce or intimidate minds away from doing their proper job. You need to install that mind-numbing doctrine in the school system and get it into the culture. Once you’ve done that you have a chance to make your own special nightmare come true.
If I, who despise Islam and look with horror on the masses of Muslims who have entered Europe, can see the necessity of honesty, objectivity, individual rights, and all that’s good in the Western heritage without believing in a god, then it’s not the lack of faith in Jesus or God that has disposed the West to be vulnerable to Islam. It’s the abandonment of objectivity, reason, and keeping an honest mind that’s done the despicable job.
Joel A. Seely says
Nicely said. I agree with all your points and try to live my life likewise.
t. says
I enjoyed you sharing with us a thought provoking personal information about yourself.
“then it’s not the lack of faith in Jesus or God that has disposed the West to be vulnerable to Islam. It’s the abandonment of objectivity, reason, and keeping an honest mind that’s done the despicable job.”
OK, but what is/are the root cause/s of the abandonment of objectivity, reason and keeping an honest mind?
The problem of the west regarding its response to its conquest-in-progress by Islam runs deeper and more complicated than that but not difficult to discern.
Human beings always need to believe in something, including those who profess to be atheists, agnostics or even those so called rationalists These belief systems are formed and reinforced through conditioning, gradually and usually over long periods of time. They are forged and fortified either unconsciously during childhood or consciously during adulthood, such as in the case of atheists who were born in a practicing religious family but once enough grown up, started their own journey toward atheism.
While the west abandoned its Judaeo-Christian faith, traditions and forgot its own history, it gradually replaced them with another set of values, priorities and hierarchies, one of which if not the mother for all of them is materialism.
The repetition verbally and internally, through mental rehearsing, of these values, priorities and hierarchies over time make them solidly entrenched into the unconscious and once adults, people start taking decisions and acting in way consistent with this imprint in their unconscious, many times to their own detriment without them seeing the correlation between the two.
Children in the west, since a young age, are exposed to socially permeating ideas like “time is money”, “maximizing profit”, “the bottom line” , “I don’t care who you are as long as we can do business together” and of course to top it off, the maddening levels of exposure to relativism and political correctness, from kindergarten to university and the media.
Once adults and in positions of authority and power, from the President of the US, elected congress and senate members to other governmental leaders, what would be most influential in their decision making processes and taking action?
Why successive American administrations, presidents looked to Saudi Arabia as an ally, praised Islam, and one of them took it upon himself to be Islam’s defender in chief, given the beheadings, lashings, cutting hands of thieves and worse than worst human rights record?
Money! I hope that the current crisis facing the west regarding Islam will lead many to have a deeper examination of themselves, their belief systems, values and priorities in life, before it’s too late.
O. G. says
“When sexual preferences are exercised by women freely and unrestrained, this behavior destroys civilizations. When women are able to choose, polygamy, so-called harems, develop after a certain time. If women are allowed to express their voices in the field of the security of countries, then these nations will perish, inevitably.”….
https://translate.google.com/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=y&prev=_t&hl=nl&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fannaschublog.wordpress.com%2F2017%2F05%2F31%2Fwenn-frauen-staaten-zerstoeren-und-andere-unbequeme-dinge%2F&edit-text=&act=url
t. says
Wow O. G.,! Thanks for posting the above link for this very informing article.
I couldn’t stop myself from reading the whole thing even though I was very busy.
Here are two sample quotes from the article:
“Societies with oppressive morality code get what they call “expansive energy”. And this energy allows the cultures to penetrate weaker ones. If one compares the modern Western world with the Islamic one, one can exactly see the results prognosticated in Unwin’s theory. With the permission to provide women with free fucking, the West has de facto entered a matriarchy.”
“Western men have given Western women the freedom of will and the choice in the community. And Western women just choose who will take them back to them.”
The photo following the last quote in the article was very poignant- Muslim men in rage!
Andy King says
Doesn’t socioeconomics in the West, particularly Europe have a big influence too?
i.e. Low wages and high living costs makes having a home with bills to pay, food and clothing to buy, harder to achieve!
Therefore, even having a family becomes financially less viable. Unless of course we follow the 3rd. world model of living in shanty towns etc., and breeding like rabbits, to increase the misery!
Also, add in Cultural Marxism (Political Correctness) which is changing societies! Is this contributing to the issue?
Lon Spector says
Issac Newton died a virgin. What does that mean for his theory?
In any case, once the White, Christian, European male is genocided will the European female
also emasculate her new Arab overlord? Probably not. Only white skinned guys are wussys.