Skip to content

1. Terms of Reference

August 24, 2013

1. Terms of Reference

 Man, woman, love.

Male-female relations.

People have been observing these relations longer than they have been writing their own history, and these relations have always seemed complicated. All the time we hear that a woman is unknowable, she is irrational, she is unpredictable, and love is a mystery.

But what is interesting is that there is indeed a plethora of complicated things in the world, for instance, space stations, microwave ovens and micro-processors that contain millions of transistors,.

How does this work?

Should they wish to, people can arm themselves with books and find out how these complicated things work. Things are knowable, and people have the ability to get to grips with the most complex things.

But love has been the subject of writers’ attention for thousands of years and remains something of an enigma, something unknowable. Male-female relations can sometimes be understood, but in general they remain enigmatic.

This has its own logic, of course, because it should be possible to understand male-female relations, they should be subject to certain rules. They have been created by evolution and so they should not be complicated. All the more so as these relations have been familiar territory for a long, long time now.

Finding a solution should not be complicated, and because it still has not been found then we can assume that the problem has been tackled using the wrong information, the wrong methods, or the wrong people.

Whole volumes have been written about love, but our understanding of it remains rooted in ignorance. Just as it always has been, it remains incomprehensible, woman is unknowable, women’s motives are enigmatic, and love is a mystery.

Love: how does it work? The solution should not be complicated, but it seems so. It is possible that people have always tried to gauge love through love, relations through relations and feelings through feelings. Such methodology is at its core incorrect. Love, relationships, feelings seem to be self-sufficient concepts and phenomena. So why can we not assume that they exist to solve some higher cause?

The title Sex and Rank thoroughly corresponds to the book’s content. It is about sex and how sexual relations are predetermined by a ranking system that can be traced in humans back to the higher apes and which controls all aspects of human behaviour. It is about how this system works in modern communities. Of course, it is also about love. The book sticks to the essentials.

This is not a popularisation but a fundamentally new work of research made purely on the basis of biology, essentially from scratch. The book has been written with the aim of introducing clarity into male-female relations. The challenge has been to condense these relations into a logically adjusted and consistent system which could be used both for analysis and foresight. This system should work on every level, from the individual couple to whole populations, and from the moment when man appeared as a species to the present day. Work on such a large scale will at the same time be sufficient confirmation that the proposed concept is accurate.

Another obligatory challenge the author has set himself is to create a book that is practical, in which each person may discover himself and his own personal behaviour, and may use the skills he has learned to achieve his own personal success. And if success is not achieved, then at least he hasn’t wasted time going down blind alleys. It is often the case that a woman studies something along the lines of ‘How to keep her man’ when in actual fact keeping him is either impossible or simply harmful for that particular woman.

The question often arises: what is correct in male-female relations, and what is not? This book not only answers those questions, but makes concrete proposals for whom this is correct and for whom not. Because what is correct for one person is not correct for another. And what is correct for one age group is not correct for another. And what is correct with one partner is not correct with another.

Male-female relations is a topic that has been discussed for quite some time, and there exists a huge amount of information on it, a jigsaw puzzle containing a plethora of phenomena. Once it has been assembled all the pieces should form a single picture, but incorrect behaviour would not fit this picture. In the broader picture, the problem is with the pieces that are superfluous, not the ones that are missing.

There are many books about sex, but their authors are more interested in the problems of sex. Sexologists and ‘sexperts’ write basically books which are similar to each other, but their view of the world and in particular of sex is specific and seen through the prism of pathologies and deviations. This book proposes a view of relationships, including sexual relationships, from the point of view of biology, and to be more exact, from the point of view of the biology of healthy beings.

Medical evidence tells us that modern society is not healthy. Its health is deteriorating despite medical advances. This is essentially physical health. But since the brain is our most complex organ we can confidently assume that when a person is unhealthy it is the brain that is first and foremost damaged. If the brain is damaged then there is the distinct possibility that our instinct and everything that this contains is also damaged.

Then another question arises, a healthy one in a sick society: how can we define ‘correct’ relations in a society where 90% of people behave ‘incorrectly’? We can, for instance, see for ourselves that people act in wrongful ways and they suffer because of this, and draw out what is correct from what is not. Sometimes, when there are known to be only two possible answers, this concept can also be used, but only as an additional one.

Psychotherapists, psychologists, psychoanalysts and the ‘sexperts’ who cosy up to them do not know what is ‘healthy’ and what is the norm. And what is a ‘healthy’ norm? For them ‘healthy’ means ‘not sick’, but what is ‘not sick’ is for these very ‘sexperts’.

The biological norm is replaced by the social norm. What society considers to be correct is also considered to be a biologically correct norm. But it would be right initially to analyse to what extent society itself conforms to the norm. We should add that in the course of time the ‘social norm’ has included paedophilia, homosexual paedophilia, incestuous marriages, female circumcision, marriage by contract, sacrifice of the first-born, ritual cannibalism. Each society considers its ‘norms’ to be true and final, and regards itself as embodying the highest form of social development.

And it transpires that for society norms do not exist. In other words, for people there can be no such thing as a correct norm. Of course there should be correct norms. But only because of various social relations they cannot be deduced.

The technology of searching for healthy male-female relations can be outlined as follows. To begin with, we have to define what are ‘healthy people’. For this we have to construct a system of coordinates in which the idea of ‘health’ would signify something specific and which can be measured. Then we can infer the concepts of healthy men and women and see how they relate to one another.

During our search we will use the terminology of Irenaus Eibl-Eibesfeldt’s Human Ethology and Edward O. Wilson’s Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, fundamental works to which the terms we will use are indebted.

Ethology studies behaviour and its causes. Sociobiology examines the links between biological givens and social behaviour and the other way round. Evolutionary psychology is a derived discipline on which there are as yet no fundamental studies, it tries to explain the causes of various sorts of behaviour and is situated somewhere between ethology and sociobiology. All the science which is used without any evidence is traditional, conservative, officially academic and in its turn is based on modern Darwinism, otherwise known as the synthetic theory of evolution. But as we will show, conservative methods do not at all contradict revolutionary conclusions.

This work was conceived as a fundamental piece of research containing an exhaustive conceptual framework and consequently a minimum of secondary references, and these are used solely to illustrate the text as examples from the lives of animals and humans. In this regard we will use Jane Goodall’s In the Shadow of Man and Through a Window, Frans de Waal’s Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex Among Apes, and Christophe Boesch’s The Real Chimpanzee: Sex Strategies in the Forest.

But even in these erstwhile classic studies there are some unexpected revelations. For instance, Jane Goodall observed a troop in which female apes would act in contravention of ‘correct’ behaviour and abduct and eat the young of other females. Frans de Waal observed behaviour in a zoo that was not thought possible in the wild, namely where the alpha males were sometimes killed by younger challengers. In a restricted space, be it a prison or a zoo, both chimpanzees and humans become similarly much more aggressive. These studies will only be used as sources of factual field data. The observations of their authors will be taken into account, but not their conclusions. 


 Primates live in various places, in the jungle, in the savannah, in cities, in prisons, in zoos. The basis of this book is the author’s field observations of humans in civilization. Yes, it is possible to study primatology by studying chimpanzees in the depths of Africa, and to study humans in books, or to observe people and study chimpanzees in books. This book is not about chimps. It is about humans. Chimpanzees will help us negotiate those questions for which there are no clear answers.

This study does not use survey data, because in an area such as sexual relations people may not give true replies, or may even become conceptually confused. This is the case, for instance, with the concept of ‘the orgasm’, which different people interpret in different ways. A further problem lies in the fact that the majority of people in modern civilization are not healthy, and therefore one cannot trust the majority when searching for the correct human biological variant. The unhealthy mean is not the healthy mean.

This study will use the full range of resources possible. For instance, we know that animals inhabiting similar environments acquire similar forms. Thus, a shark, an icthyosaurus and a dolphin share similar external features, and it is possible that they also share common behavioural features. Man belongs to the top predators, standing at the top of the food chain. Therefore man’s behaviour should share some behavioural features of other predators. The higher the predator is in the hierarchy, the harsher is the interspecies competition. Lions, chimpanzees and bears are top predators, and their interspecies competition is the harshest of all.

When some people read this book they may say ‘That’s not the case’ about something concrete. A woman may say ‘he writes here that women don’t watch porn, but I like watching porn!’ All of these ‘that’s not the case’ statements should be written down because by the end of the book there will be your individual list of nonstandard behaviour. This list can be amended or consciously added to, because what cannot be corrected should be used.

This book describes biological norms which are implemented through biological programming. These norms and programming are disrupted in almost all civilized people, although there are individuals whose norms are still in order. In the majority of people the majority of norms persist.

This book contains forecasts and analyses. A young woman may say ‘I want a Gangbang-10! Group sex-20!’ Bukkake-30!’ Fine, but there is then a 99% probability that she will have no subsequent response to men. On the other hand, the programming of most women in civilization is such that half of them will have no response to men regardless of whether there are twenty men or not. The choice is ours.


In order to make a choice we have to understand ourselves, our likes and dislikes, our programs.


From → Sex and Rank

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: