Who will win if it is a fight to the death between the Bonobo and the Common Chimpanzee?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_chimpanzee

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonobo

Are you thinking what I am thinking?

We know who superseded Neanderthal Man, don't we?

To get an idea of what it would be like to live as a Bonobo, look no further than the family life that Woody Allen and Mia Farrow had.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/10625798/Woody-Allen-denies-molesting-Dylan-Farrow-in-open-letter-to-New-York-Times.html

If Mia Farrow and Woody Allen both invited you to spend the weekend with them at the same weekend and you could only accept one invitation which you know would never be repeated again, whose would you accept?

Nothing to do with his eyes, Neanderthal man became extinct when homo sapiens discovered marriage

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/445425/20130313/neanderthal-man-brain-large-eyes-homo-sapiens.htm

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2012/01/two-anthropologists-in-arizona-appear.html

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2010/11/why-neanderthals-died-out.html

Two anthropologists in Arizona appear to share my extinction hypothesis for Neanderthal man

I think the Amalekites are supposed to represent - matriarchal Neanderthals. Balaam called them "the first of nations" in Numbers, 24:20.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 5, 2015

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/05/science/05nean.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neanderthal_extinction_hypothesis#Division_of_labor

The reason why Neanderthal man died out was because Homo Sapiens discovered marriage before they did.   There, I have said it, and you have read it here FIRST.

I believe that for PC reasons that the division of labour hypothesis was ignored because it would inevitably lead to awkward questions being asked about feminism, which it would be HERESY to question.

Why Neanderthal Man died out is explained at http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.com/2010/11/why-neanderthals-died-out.html

Neanderthal man lived in a matriarchy (a society that condones female promiscuity eg feminism) while Homo Sapiens lived in a patriarchy (a society that condones male promiscuity and supports the institution of Marriage).

The feminist doctrine of gender equality inevitably makes it promote the idea that women have the right to be as promiscuous as men, ignoring the fact that it is women who get pregnant and are the ones left holding the baby and expected to look after their babies.  Now feminist orthodoxy (which is Communistic in nature and application) decrees that  taxpayers (who are mostly male) are to bail out these Slut Single Mums who have fucked up their lives.  Eventually, this will drag everyone else down to their slut and bastard level.

Indeed, Slut Single Women who have fucked up their lives are currently being glamorised.

Mary F Pols, who allowed a penniless and jobless loser to impregnate her in ACCIDENTALLY ON PURPOSE wrote a book http://www.amazon.co.uk/Accidentally-Purpose-one-night-unplanned-pregnancy/dp/0141038403/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1328012408&sr=8-1 which is now a US sitcom http://www.cbs.com/primetime/accidentally_on_purpose/.  You gotta hand it to the Americans for having the knack of making depravity wholesome.  Another example is COUGAR TOWN.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cougar_Town

It would not be fair to call Neanderthal women "sluts" because a matriarchy - as the Neanderthal society must have been because they had not yet discovered the institution of marriage - would not be familiar with the concepts of sluttery AKA fornication AKA adultery precisely they operated a kind of sexual communism or a free for all fuck fest that we in the West would be all too familiar with.

Patriarchal Homo Sapiens who created the institution of Marriage had men who would take more of an interest in their offspring, stay with the women who bore their children thereby producing progressively better offspring that also retained the culture of their ancestors.   (This made them culturally more sophisticated as well as facilitating social cohesion.)  The patriarchs operated a kind of sexual meritocracy and efficient labour division between male and female roles, which would have been the beginning of Eugenics (an ideology that concerns itself with improving or at the very least maintaining the quality of the generation for that society), while Neanderthal man became progressively more degenerate.  In the end, they died out after the matriarchy (who were slut and bastard people) was easily defeated by the patriarchy (who respected the institution of marriage).

There are lessons to be learnt from this by the slut and bastard governments of the 21st century West, I would have thought, but they are probably too slut and bastard to listen to reason now.

Why Neanderthal Man died out

I think the Amalekites are supposed to represent - matriarchal Neanderthals. Balaam called them "the first of nations" in Numbers, 24:20.

— Claire Khaw (@ntfem) September 5, 2015

http://discovermagazine.com/2004/apr/who-killed-neanderthals0419

Because homo sapiens discovered marriage and supported family values while Neanderthal man did not.  (There is of course a moral in this somewhere.  Can someone tell me what this might be?)

Neanderthal man was matriarchal, homo sapiens patriarchal.  The latter defeated the former because the patriarchy is clearly better-organised, more cohesive and stronger as well as more likely to ensure that the male who is the best provider gets to reproduce, thus producing a better quality next generation, instead of the  free for all fuck-fest you get in a matriarchy in which the poor and depraved breed with the stupid and slutty, lowering moral and educational standards as well as the quality of the next generation, as we are seeing now in the 21st century Britain.   Currently, most babies born in Britain have mothers who are Slut Single Mums who couldn't find a husband or who didn't know or weren't told by their slut and bastard liberal parents not to have a child out of wedlock.

http://www.topix.com/forum/afam/TFTA600695RFVNVH1

http://www.nowpublic.com/strange/most-british-babies-now-born-out-wedlock-some-migrants-its-tiny-minority

If a patriarchy is a society that condones male promiscuity, then the matriarchy is society that condones female promiscuity. It should be reasonably clear by now which is the lesser evil.

Of course, there is no evidence of this to support my contention and the few anthropologists I have approached are either too busy or too afraid to discuss this with me ie that Homo Sapiens, who institutionalised marriage, easily defeated the Neanderthals who had not.  In any case, I do not see how the institution of marriage can be inferred from archaeological evidence anyway. Even if archaeologists claimed they found wedding photographs, wedding rings, marriage contracts, decrees nisi and absolute belonging to long dead homo sapiens but none to Neanderthal man, those of us who remember the Hitler Diaries would treat it with healthy scepticism, I hope.  

My point is that they *cannot* prove my theory wrong. It is quite simply unassailable. 

It is so obviously, beautifully simple. Is there a prize for me to claim? No anthropologist can disprove this theory anyway.

My penetrating insight astonishes even me. It seems that I am after all a genius. It is really now time to stop being modest. If I don't blow my own trumpet, no one else will.

I have already contacted the Royal Anthropological Institute http://www.therai.org.uk/
and was advised to contact the British Association for Biological Anthropology and Osteoarchaeology.  http://www.babao.org.uk/index/index

It is to be hoped that a Claire Khaw Anthropology Prize will be created in my honour and awarded every year to prize-winning anthropologists.  I have in mind that Bruce Parry http://www.bbc.co.uk/tribe/bruce/index.shtml and fancy giving him one.  Actually, I wouldn't mind giving the delightful and delectable Dr Alice Roberts one too.