I listened to a lot of different apologetics-related shows last week, and the very best one was Dr. Casey Luskin appearing on Dr. Sean McDowell’s podcast to discuss new findings about chimpanzee and human DNA. Have you ever heard the argument for common descent that says “human and chimpanzee DNA only differ by 1% so of course they have a common ancestry”? I had a friend in high school who believed that. Let’s see what the evidence says.

This is the YouTube episode from Sean’s popular YouTube channel:

This is 64 minutes long.

Here are the questions from the interview:

• How did you first get interested in the topic of origins, and human origins in particular?
• What interested you in the topic of human-chimp genetic similarity?
• Can you give us some examples of people who’ve claimed that we’re 99% genetically similar to chimps or apes or kind of 1% different from them as they use that to make an argument for common descent slash evolution?
• How do museums present the data to visitors?
• When did that data that questions the 1% chimp-human DNA difference first emerge?
• What is an “icon of evolution”?
• Does human-chimp genetic similarity falls into that category of “icons of evolution”?
• Do you have a sense of how significant this piece of evidence is for supporting Darwinian evolution?
• How was the original 1% genetic difference calculation made?
• So now we have new evidence that the 1% number was wrong. A new paper suggests that there is a 15%. How did they calculate that?
• Are these numbers being challenged? Are critics accepting them, saying this is the new data?
• Now, one response that I’ve heard is that our genome is full of what’s called junk DNA. So, the differences are like repetitive DNA and thus junk. Thus, we can ignore them and get a much smaller number getting closer to that 1% if we assess the genome that way. Is that fair or reasonable?
• Humans can vary by as much as 10% difference in DNA, so is 15% between humans and chimps really a big difference?
• Does a small genenetic difference automatically imply common ancestry or it could be because of a common creator?
• Is this new 15% difference evidence against common descent?
• You’ve written a piece in the New York Post about how this is presented in museums. Did the museums respond at all? And if so, what did they say?
• Are there other areas of scientific misinformation at the Smithsonian that either you saw when you were there in person or you’ve just seen in your research?
• Where does this go next as far as you can see?
• If a follow-up comes in a journal article as prestigious as Nature and they go, you know what, we got it wrong, it’s 0.5% genetic difference and we blew it, whether two years, five years, 10 years, will you come back and say, you know what, I’ll own it.

If you don’t have time to watch the whole video, Casey did write a nice recent article in the New York Post about it.

He writes:

The National Museum of Natural History’s Hall of Human Origins vastly distorts the scientific evidence on human evolution, seeking to convince visitors that there’s nothing special about us as human beings.

“There is only about a 1.2% genetic difference between modern humans and chimpanzees,” the exhibit starts, with large photos of a human and apes. “You and chimpanzees [are] 98.8% genetically similar.”

No doubt you’ve heard this statistic before because many science popularizers say the same thing.

Yet it’s been known for years that these numbers are inaccurate. Thanks to a groundbreaking April paper in the journal Nature, we know just how wrong they are.

For the first time, the paper reports “complete” sequences of the genomes of chimpanzees and other apes done from scratch. When we compare them to humans, we find our genomes are more like 15% genetically different from chimpanzees’. That means the true genetic differences between humans and chimps are more than 10 times greater than what the Smithsonian tells us.

It’s very good for him to point this out, because we a lot of people go to these taxpayer-funded museums and believe things that we now know have been discredited by the progress of science. I had a friend in high school who saw this in some History Channel or Discovery Channel documentary, and he believed it. So I think it’s important for Christians to know that there is evidence available now, to push back against the claim. Even if you don’t know how to discuss it as well as Sean and Casey, you should know how to pull up this discussion, or maybe the New York Post article, and respond.

I have been working on an article that explains some of the reasons why Christian men are declining to approach, date and marry women. My list started off with 16 reasons, and now it’s over 30! There are policy reasons, feminist culture reasons, and feminization-of-the-church reasons. So, in this post, let me talk about two reasons, which came up in a recent TikTok video that went viral.

So, two of the “feminist culture” reasons why Christian men are declining to pursue women for marriage are:

1. entitlement
2. lack of accountability

Now it’s important to say that I am not talking about ALL WOMEN when I say these things. In fact, if you go back to the 1940s, these flaws were rare. But somehow, they have become dominant today. You can see them in the movies and books that are popular with female audiences.

The TikTok below has over 100,000 comments, and over 1.5 million likes. It’s resonating with young women, and we need to see why.

The TikTok is from Shylee Allen. Her channel is @wildly_shy. It’s 5 minutes long:

Please don’t message the TikTok lady, but please do pray for Boss to help her to make excellent decisions going forward. We get the most amazing results from women who have made mistakes exactly like hers. There are many Christian women who teach other women not to make the same mistakes that they made, and that’s great.

So, there are two flaws in this video, and I want to recommend that Christian men pay attention, because you want to learn these flaws, and make sure that you do not choose to approach, date, and marry women with these flaws. There are lots of women who are anxious to serve the Lord, and they want to help a man who will lead them well. You need to focus your attention on THOSE women.

So, the first flaw in this view is entitlement.

Entitlement

An entitled person feels that they deserve to get a particular outcome, without having to merit it, because of their special privileges or victimhood. One good illustration of entitlement was Tomi Lahren on the Piers Morgan Show, insisting that “real men” give women protecting and providing, without asking for anything in return. Think of going into a store with a gift card, and not having to pay any of your own money for anything under $100. The Tomi Lahren view, and I think her view is shared my other famous women like Laura Ingraham and Megyn Kelly, is that women have a gift card with unlimited dollars for use in the man store.

So, when men ask modern women “what do you bring to the table,” women today reply “I am the table”. Today, “strong, independent boss babes” demand that men pay for everything on dates, despite decrying sex differences as “sexist”. The common motto of modern women in relationships is “my money is my money, and your money is our money”. That’s what men are seeing as “entitlement”.

So, in the TikTok video, the woman felt entitled to a husband who meets all her emotional needs. Since she ended two relationships, clearly she did not get her emotional needs met. So how to succeed on the third attempt? Well, rather than feeling that getting your emotional needs met should be automatic, regardless of which man you choose, women need to test men, and choose one who can actually do the work. And not one who says he can do the work. Not one who she feels can do the work, based on his appearance and words. But one who has a worldview that rationally grounds doing the work. And one who has a record of demonstrated ability at doing the work. And the way to do that of course is just to disregard what the man says, and what he looks like, and observe for 2-3 years whether he is able to do actions that meet her emotional needs. And most importantly what is the worldview that caused him to do it. How stable is that worldview? What evidence grounds him in it?

One specific thing she mentioned was that the man lied about not being able to get her pregnant, and it’s not her fault for believing him. Anyone who has ever participated in a private sector candidate interview knows how to evaluate a candidate’s knowledge and ability. We don’t rely on “first impressions”. We don’t have intuitions about clothes or confidence. We are looking for competence. We hand you a marker, and we make you write code on the white board. We want to see your hobby coding and your Github repository of open source projects. We sit next to you and we pair program with you. We change the requirements, and we ask you how you would adapt your design. We need to help women take the job interview approach to dating, instead of the hedonistic approach. Having fun on dates doesn’t prove that a man can meet emotional needs.

Another problem with entitlement is that women have to accept responsibility for engineering relationship outcomes. Have you ever noticed that lesbians have the highest rates of instability and domestic violence? They have high expectations from their partners, but low ability to meet their partners needs. Women seem to be more likely to accept the “soul mate” view of relationships. They think that “the universe” will “manifest” the perfect mate for them. The perfect mate, of course, gives them everything they want, and asks for nothing in return. Soul mates don’t impose any obligations on you to fuel them or help them, you just “follow your heart”. But that’s not how anything works in the real world.

In the real world, you have to find out what counts as fuel to another person. You have to accept responsibility to fuel the other person. You have to solve problems that are roadblocks to success. In short, you have to run towards obligations, instead of away from them. We need to encourage young people to accept what Dr. Laura Schlesinger calls “loving obligation” in relationships. We need to teach women not to end relationships where their needs aren’t met, but to choose men wisely, and accept the obligation to fuel men so that the men want to meet their emotional needs.

The woman in our TikTok clearly felt entitled to certain outcomes from her marriage and motherhood choices. But what preparation did she make? She should have prepared herself to choose a good man by learning about religion and morality, so that she could choose a man who had a good reason to be moral when it went against his self-interest. She could have prepared herself to supply the typical kinds of fuel that men respond to, like food, sex, conservative politics, watching sports and playing co-operative video games. But if you watch that video, you can pretty clearly see that she just sees herself as a victim of “the patriarchy”. She talks about what she wanted as if it was a guaranteed outcome, but she has nothing to say about her process for choosing a good man, testing him, or meeting his needs.

The second flaw is lack of accountability.

Lack of accountability

A person who lacks accountability makes foolish decisions that are unlikely to produce the desired outcome, and then complains to others as if the predictable outcome of her choices was completely unexpected. You would think that after having TWO children with TWO men who she dumped, she would see that the problem is her own choosing. But she doesn’t see herself as responsible at all. And she’s screaming and crying about her innocence very energetically! she telling other women “I made no mistakes at choosing men, so if you choose a man, you won’t be able to do any better than me. So don’t date or marry men!” That’s like saying “I took a course in math, and I failed! So don’t you take a course in math, or you’ll fail too!” She refuses to accept that her failure was related to her own choices, and that someone who makes better choices might get better results.

There seems to be an epidemic of women going on social media and complaining about the shortcomings of their boyfriends and / or husbands. But what they don’t understand is that thoughtful men see these complaints about husbands and boyfriends as huge red flags. All it means to men is that if a man approaches a woman who complains about the men she chooses, then he will be the next man that she complains about on social media. If good men see a woman complaining about her ex, we know right away that she either 1) failed to choose a good man, or 2) failed to keep a good man. And then we don’t get into a relationship with someone with either of those problems.

The lack of accountability problem is a widespread problem. It’s not this one TikTok and the 1.5 million likes. Look at the voting trends of single women over the past decades. While married women are about 50-50 conservative vs leftist, unmarried women vote about 70-80 percent leftist. That’s a lot of women. They see government as a substitute husband. When they make mistakes, like bad marriages and student loans for useless degrees, they want the government to swoop in and give them no-fault divorce cash and prizes, single mother welfare and student loan bailouts. So, this problem is very widespread – and we should all care about it.

When I talk to conservative Christians who are “pro-child” and “pro-marriage”, they inevitably agree with women that the bad outcomes of a woman’s choices are never the woman’s fault. It’s always a man’s fault. For example, one pro-marriage advocate I know thinks that women should just be able to choose a man who is attractive to her, and then expect him to change after marriage. I will never forget one Christian woman who commented on my blog. She claimed to be a Christian and went on and on about how her ex-husband had mistreated her. I asked her “how did you test him to see if he really believed in Christianity, and had acted on it?” She said “he was not a Christian”. So I said “why would you marry a non-Christian man, and then think that he would act like a Christian?” And she replied “the Bible applies even to non-Christian men”. So that is the level of lack of accountability that men sometimes see. And I would really like to invite “pro-child” and “pro-marriage” Christians to start talking to women who have this problem about it. Women aren’t going to be empowered to choose better men unless we ask them to.

Advice for Good Men

Sometimes, men (because we are impressed with looks) will chase after women who are attractive, even if they have these two flaws. I want Christian men to stop choosing bad women. Don’t look at youth and beauty. Instead, choose good women who want to help you to achieve results for the Boss, women who follow your lead. It should be seen as a huge betrayal of God to give your time and money to women who aren’t interested in serving God. Choose good women. Choose women who choose good men, and choose women who accept the obligation to treat good men in the right way to fuel those good men to do good things.

What’s the best way to avoid women like the one in the TikTok? Avoid women who have red flags. Easy degrees are a red flag. Debt is a red flag. Tattoos are red flags. Piercings (especially nose and tongue) are a red flag. Spending a lot of money on make-up and cosmetics and cosmetic surgeries is a red flag. Excessive spending on displayed wealth is a red flag. Leftist politics is a red flag. Liking fiction like “50 Shades of Grey” is a red flag. Liking movies like “Titanic” and “The Notebook” etc. is a red flag. Seeing Christianity as life enhancement rather than self-sacrificial service to God is a red flag. Astrology and manifesting are red flags. Posting selfies of travel / entertainment are all red flags. Seeking attention with immodest photos is a red flag. Screaming and crying on camera for sympathy and money is a huge red flag. Men, we need to choose better women! Women who work for the Boss. Women who respect and value good leadership from good men.

By the way, if you’re a good man, and you want to learn how to choose better women, check out the YouTube channels of Emily King and Jedediah Bila. If you’re a woman who wants to avoid making the mistakes of the TikTok lady, you’ll like them, too.

I have spent over 25 years in information technology, and most of the companies were large IT companies. Large IT companies tend to emphasize diversity, equity, and inclusion more than smaller companies, which have to perform in order to stay afloat. And that means making sure there is an equal balance of genders, ethnicities, etc. in every different area.

Here is a very interesting post on the relationship advice forum of Reddit:

Hi all I’m posting this on an alt because I know a few of my friends are following me on here and I don’t want this spilling out until I have some clear thoughts on what I want to do.

The author – who uses Commonwealth spelling – has a short summary of her post at the top:

A colleague (27M) joined our firm last year and since then he has had zero issues socialising with the guys we work with but always finds an excuse or says no to hanging out with the girls after work, even if we go out together as a whole he rarely talks to us and its making some of my friends uncomfortable.

And then here is the long version:

So early last year our firm hired Dan (27M). In the first few weeks he was really quiet and didn’t talk much and that’s just how we thought he was. Every conversation with him was short and to the point and never deviated from work, asides from pleasantries (Have a nice weekend etc). About 2 months in he started becoming a bit more friendly with the guys in our office and they would hang out every so often and have normal conversations. However, whenever any of the girls in the office tried to do so he would quickly change the conversation back to work or just not reply. Even now after a year of Dan working with us he straight up refuses to socialise with the girls in the office and it is making them feel uncomfortable. He avoids any discussion of himself outside of work related events and future plans and doesn’t ask any of the girls either. Where as he is, what I can only assume, pretty good friends with the guys in the office.

Even on work meals out to celebrate events he is only doing the bare minimum when it comes to conversation with the girls where again with the guys he talks to them like there is no problem whatsoever. I don’t know if I’m overreacting but one of the girls is considering go to HR about this because she is saying its creating a hostile work environment. Dan treats us like he treats clients we work with; cordial and strictly about business and its wearing thin now.

Any advice is appreciated.

Many young people today don’t see the workplace as being about work. They see it as a time of socializing. And they get angry when people don’t socialize with them. They want to be allowed into a man’s personal space, even though they are the kind of people who go straight to HR whenever anyone disagrees with them, or refuses to make them happy. Many of these women are single mothers who divorced the father of their kids.

I actually left my last job and took a lower salary job, because I was being harassed by a woman who had no college degree. Her official title was “Software Engineer”, but she didn’t write code. She just supervised deployments to production. She was very attractive, and had had cosmetic surgery done – her chest was super-sized. (I heard her explaining why she did it to one of the Indian workers one day). She was also about 6-8 years older than me. She started to get very angry with me for not giving her attention at work. She would come to my desk and talk about how politically conservative she was (she must have heard that I was conservative). But I didn’t want to have anything to do with her.

I blogged previously about a woman who accused a man of grooming her because he didn’t want to get more serious with her. Men are getting tired of this. If you know any young women who are wondering why men don’t talk to them, maybe it’s because many young women are not pleasant or safe to talk to. Even if a particular young unmarried woman is safe to talk to, men will judge her based on the majority of single, unmarried women. It’s just not safe for men to have non-business conversations in the workplace with young, unmarried women.

The juice isn’t worth the squeeze.