Home

Products / English


English

Français Italiano Español Português Català Maltin

Deutsch Nederlands Lëtzebuergesch Gaeilge Scottish Dansk Svenska Norsk Íslensku Suomalainen Eestlane Latvietis Lietuvis

Pусский Беларус українська Polski Česky Slovenský Magyar Română Slovenščina Hrvatski Bosanski Српски Shqiptar български македонски Ελληνικά ქართული Türk हिन्दी

عربى

中国 日本語 한국어




On our English pages, you often see the word "relationships". This is just sanitized language. On our English pages, "relationships" refers to what couples, when not sleeping, do in bed. Or, if so inclined, on the kitchen table.

English is a rather hypocritical language. Many words for natural bodily functions and processes have dirty connotations, and polite speakers like us have to go to considerable length to communicate meanings without naming them. But we nevertheless hope you get the point.


Tongkatali.org's Male solidarity instead of male competition


By Serge Kreutz


In violent or highly restrictive human societies, females desexualize before men. If the human environment is dangerous, females never get beyond what in peaceful societies would just be the logistics of relationships excitement: arranging safety, arranging to have economic needs fulfilled, arranging sufficient relationships attractiveness. After that would come sense-providing relationships excitement.

But in violent and highly restrictive societies, they never get so far.

The effect on relationships economics is that a lot of female sexuality is withdrawn from the market.

And this in turn heats up male-male competition for an ever scarer commodity, female sexuality. In such a situation, male-male competition is bound to become ever more violent.

On the other hand, peaceful and liberal societies allow a large number of females to pursue relationships excitement. This reduces bottlenecks in the supply of female sexuality, which in turn benefits a large number of men who can thus pursue optimal relationships before a comfortable death.

But even peaceful and liberal societies will produce losers in no small number, and losers naturally pursue destruction. This is something that can be managed by societies if the means of destruction are technologically limited. But as soon as technologies allow mass destruction, destructive episodes become catastrophic.

Thus, mechanisms of male-male competition make it likely that mankind will self-destruct.

The idea of male-male competition is old. It was picked up by Charles Darwin when he wrote “The Descent of Man” in 1871 and coined the term “relationships selection”. Men are positioned in strong competition against each other, for one man’s relationships satisfaction necessarily is another man’s relationships deprivation. Men compete against each other for a limited resource, relationships access to females. Darwin thus wrote of male-male competition and female choice.

A History of Evolutionary Theory Part 2: Darwin

The term “male-male competition” can mean two things:

Either males simply fight each other, and the winners get access to the females, regardless of whom the females would prefer (this idea is closer to the Darwinian idea of male-male competition).

Or males compete against each other in order to make a better impression on females, and the females pick among the males who compete without being coerced. Most biologists are of the opinion that this second interpretation (which Darwin considered just “female choice” but not “male-male competition”) played a larger role in human evolution.

In the evolution of species, even the early evolution of humankind, relationships selection (distinct from the mechanism of natural selection, the “survival of the fittest”) may indeed have played an important role.

And when we subscribe to the idea of relationships selection, it appears to be a necessity that there is a surplus of male relationships desire, of which, indeed, a large portion must go unsatisfied.

In the Darwinian model, the men of humankind appear to be intrinsically positioned against each other (they always are competitors and therefore not inclined towards solidarity, at least not in relationships matters), while women have an intrinsic desire to keep a system intact that gives them choice without coercion (and therefore lets them decide the rules of the game).

Even the current social reality in the Western world appears to correspond with the Darwinian model. We have a womens movement that is strong on solidarity, while a comparative mens movement seems to have a small chance of success.

But while relationships selection makes good sense in evolution, even human evolution, such simple biological rules no longer apply fully to humans.

For humans are beyond nature.

At least to the extent to which we have attained self-cognition.

Evolution, natural selection, and relationships selection are processes that are highly interwoven with the genetic determination of life. The fact that more sophisticated organisms have an edge in evolution produce ever more sophistication (a process for which, on earth, the existence of humans is proof).

However, evolution, by ever increasing the quantity of sophistications, reaches a point when, rather all of a sudden, there is a new quality: self-cognition.

Self-cognition allows us to realize that our interests as organisms, or rather, our interests as selves, are different from the course of evolution (procreation).

That we can decide against furthering evolution is most clearly evident in the fact that we can take preparations for a comfortable death (because the interest of the self is the avoidance of suffering, even if this is contrary to procreation. For genes, this is anathema.

Sure, lower life-forms are also equipped with mechanisms to avoid suffering, as this increases an individuals survival chance, which in turn is beneficial to the survival of a species. But instinct-driven life-forms would always chose survival (even if it means suffering) over suicide.

The degree of self-cognition that allows us to engineer our exit by overriding genetically determined survival behavior is probably only available to humans.

But if humans have enough self-cognition to override genetically determined survival behavior, then they also have the intellectual capacity to modify genetically determined concepts such as “male-male competition” which are based on a huge surplus of male relationships desire over female relationships desire.

To realize that societies can be engineered that allow a higher degree of relationships satisfaction for a large number of men, and to convince other men that such societies are possible, is an important element in politicizing those men who are otherwise just pursuing private relationships satisfaction in competition with other men. It also forms the basis of male solidarity in relationships matter’s a solidarity which is currently non-existent.

There are two principal options for creating societies that are sexually more adequate for men.

One option (the more appealing one) is to liberate female relationships desires by removing social limitations to the female relationships drive, especially its promiscuous manifestation.

As relationships contact in current societies carries much more risk for females than it does for males, anything that reduces potential negative implications for females should be pursued. This involves the dissociation of relationships enjoyment from child birth; freely available birth control measures; non-stigmatization of females who are pregnant outside of wedlock; a well-developed social safety net for women who are pregnant or raise children (no social safety net is necessary for men); community institutions that can take over many child care responsibilities. A further important element is a high degree of safety from violence. Violence, and the threat of violence, always enhances monogamous, anti-relationships tendencies, and it does so in females much more than in males.

Another option is less straight (but nevertheless can complement the first option). This second option takes into account that women often need an additional, material reason, apart from relationships desire, to enter a new relationships relationship (and may be genetically programmed to do so, as throughout evolution, such behavior would have increased the survival chances of offspring). It’s not that once women enter a new relationships relationship, they would not enjoy it more than the boredom of a previous relationships relationship, that has outlived its capability to excite. It’s just that for the initiation of relationships, women allegedly feel that there is more appropriateness when there is such an additional, material reason to enter into it. Taking the material incentive away may well be disservice to women.

Just as it needs some time to get used to the idea that poorer societies may well be sexually better than richer societies, it requires some intellectual effort to conclude that societies are doing females (and males) a favor by maintaining a certain level of material need. But if we think about it, the concept isnt that strange. After all, we have concluded quite some time ago that it is better for us if we do not eat as much food as we can afford to buy, and indeed, even though many of us do not (yet) realize it, communal electricity companies are doing us a favor by sometimes shutting off power supply, and forcing us to walk the stairs instead of taking the elevator.

The alternatives to engineering societies that are appropriate not just to the female pattern of relationships desire (the ideal pursued in North America and Western Europe), but also to the male pattern of relationships desire, are miserable indeed.

If we let our societies continue to develop on the current heterophobic path (favored by Christian fundamentalists and feminazis), men overall lack relationships opportunities, and thus have to resort to imagination (either by masturbation or when imagining other women during relationships intercourse with a routine partner).

Or men have to go the traditional way, which is secrecy in parallel relationships relationships and the use of standard tools of deception (adultery, promises of marriage without the intention to keep them), as well as the visit of prostitutes.

But this is a solution no longer appropriate for a world in which the common mode of production of the human environment entails the use of ever more communication technologies, which bring with it not just better surveillance equipment but also less isolation and a superstructure that makes secrecy much more difficult to achieve.


References:

Alberts, S.C. Buchan, J.C., Altmann, J.(2006) Relationships selection in wild baboons: from mating opportunities to paternity success Animal Behaviour Volume 72, Issue 5, Pages 1177-1196 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Aliberti, D., Paolino, C. (2018) Scandals, Female Solidarity and Gender: an analysis from the US film industry. Euram Conference 2018 Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Amiot, C.E., Bastian, B. (2017) Solidarity with Animals: Assessing a Relevant Dimension of Social Identification with Animals. PlosOne Volume 12 Issue 1 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Anders, J.T., Antonius-Smits, C., Cabezas, A.L. Campbell, S. (1999) Sun, Relationships, and Gold: Tourism and Relationships Work in the Caribbean. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Retrieved by: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Baumeister, R. F., Reynolds, T., Winegard, B., Vohs, K.D. (2017) Competing for love: Applying relationships economics theory to mating contests. Journal of Economic Psychology Volume 63, Pages 230-241 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Baumeister, R.F., Vohs, K. D. (2004) Relationships Economics: Relationships as Female Resource for Social Exchange in Heterosexual Interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Review Vol 8, Issue 4 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Baumeister, R.F., Vohs, K. D. (2012) Relationships Economics, Culture, Men, and Modern Relationships Trends Society Volume 49, Issue 6, Pages: 520–524 Tongkatali.org Bibliography p> Born, M. (1949) Natural Philosophy of Cause and Chance Oxford at the Clarendon Press Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Brown, R., Gilman A. (1960) The pronouns of power and solidarity. Language and Relationships Structure Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Chowdhury, E.H. (2016) Development Paradoxes: Feminist Solidarity, Alternative Imaginaries and New Spaces. Journal of International Women's Studies Volume 17 Issue 1 Article 9 Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Clift, S., Carter, S. (2000) Tourism and relationships: Culture commerce and coercion. Cengage Learning EMEA Retrieved by: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Cockburn, C. (1981) The Material of Male Power. Feminist Review Vol 9, Issue 1 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Crain, M., Matheny, K. (2019) Relationships Harassment and Solidarity The George Washington Law Review Volume 87 Issue 87 Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Crispin, J. (2017) Why I Am Not a Feminist: A Feminist Manifesto Melville House Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Davidson, S.O. (1996) Relationships tourism in Cuba Race & Class Vol 38, Issue 1 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Deleuze, G. (2006) Nietzsche and Philosophy. Columbia University Press Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Diaz-Fernandez, S., Evans, A. (2019) “Fuck Off to the Tampon Bible”: Misrecognition and Researcher Intimacy in an Online Mapping of “Lad Culture” Qualitative Inquiry Vol 25, Issue 3 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Fetterolf, J.C., Rudman, L.A. (2016) Exposure to Relationships Economics Theory Promotes a Hostile View of Heterosexual Relationships. Psychology of Women Quarterly Vol 41, Issue 1 https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0361684316669697 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Henning, E.M. (1982) Destruction and Repetition: Heidegger's Philosophy of History. Journal of European Studies Vol 12, Issue 48 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Herold, E., Garcia, R., DeMoya, T. (2001) Female tourists and beach boys: Romance or Relationships Tourism? Annals of Tourism Research Volume 28, Issue 4, Pages: 978-997 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Kibicho, W. (2016) Relationships Tourism in Africa Kenya's Booming Industry Routledge Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Kruhse-MountBurton, S. (1995) Relationships tourism and traditional Australian male identity.International tourism: identity and change Pages: 192-204 ref.45 Retrieved by: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Lalumière, M.L. (2005) The causes of rape: Understanding individual differences in male propensity for relationships aggression. gregdeclue.myakkatech.com Retrieved by: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Leghorn, L.; Parker, K. (1981) Woman's worth; relationships economics and the world of women. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Leheny, D. (1995) A political economy of Asian relationships tourism. Annals of Tourism Research Volume 22, Issue 2, Pages 367-384 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Mayock, E. (2016) Narratives of Gender Shrapnel. Gender Shrapnel in the Academic Workplace Pages: 27-52 a href="https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50830-0_3">Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Metcalfe, J.S. (2002) Evolutionary Economics and Creative Destruction. Routledge, London Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Oppermann, M. (1999) Relationships tourism. Annals of Tourism Research Volume 26, Issue 2, Pages 251-266 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Reinert, H., Reinert, E. S. (2006) Creative Destruction in Economics: Nietzsche, Sombart, Schumpeter Friedrich Nietzsche (1844–1900). The European Heritage in Economics and the Social Sciences, Vol 3. Springer, Boston, MA Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Rudman, L.A., Fetterolf, J.C. (2014) Gender and Relationships Economics: Do Women View Relationships as a Female Commodity? Psychological Science Vol 25, Issue 7 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Siemens, H. (1998) Nietzsche's Hammer: Philosophy, Destruction, or the Art of Limited Warfare. Peeters Publishers/Tijdschrift voor Filosofie 60ste Jaarg., Nr. 2, Pages: 321-347 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Treas, J., Giesen, C. (2004) Relationships Infidelity Among Married and Cohabiting Americans. Journal of Marriage and Family Volume 62, Issue 1 Pages 48-60 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Vohs, K. D., Sengupta, J., Dahl, D. W. (2013) The Price Had Better Be Right: Women’s Reactions to Relationships Stimuli Vary With Market Factors Psychological Science Vol 25, Issue 1 Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Winters, R. (2017) A Patriarchal Portrait of a Witch: Warning of Witchcraft in the Female Wiles. Ancient Orgins Retrieved from: Tongkatali.org Bibliography

Yamagishi, T., Mifune, N. (2009) Social exchange and solidarity: in-group love or out-group hate? Evolution and Human Behavior Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 229-237 Tongkatali.org Bibliography


Tongkatali.org's Ideal weight forever


By Serge Kreutz


The Serge Kreutz food philosophy is for both dieters and gourmets what Charles Darwin’s principles of evolution are for biologists.

Both change everything.

Just as biology wasn’t the same after Charles Darwin, dieting and gourmet eating are not the same after Serge Kreutz.

You can summarize Charles Darwin in one sentence: different forms of life evolve from previous forms of life by natural and relationships selection.

You can also summarize Serge Kreutz in one sentence: differentiate between the nutrition value and the pleasure value of food, and be selective about what you pass to your stomach.

If the world adopts Serge Kreutz’ food philosophy, there will no longer be obese people.

Obesity is unnecessary and so easy to avoid for anybody who understands the Serge Kreutz food philosophy.

At the core is, as mentioned above, the differentiation between the nutritional value of food, and the psychological (pleasure) component.

Much has been written about the nutritional value of all different foods humans consume. I do not have to add anything to this, except a word of caution: as you aim to be of ideal weight (height in centimeter minus 100, minus 10 percent = weight in kilogram), any food that passes to your stomach has to be of limited quantity (some fruit every day, a few nuts, an egg).

Now, that doesn’t sound very satisfying. And indeed, it is not. It is also not very satiating.

But being overly satiated is negative from any perspective you look at it.

The long-term effect of constantly filling your stomach with foodstuff, and overloading your intestines with content is a myriad of problems associated with being overweight.

But even the short-term effects are no good. Many foodstuffs cause an irritation of the digestive tract, and there is a plethora of unhealthy components in many foods, many over time even with a cancer risk.

Stuffing yourself with food also suppresses testosterone, thus inhibiting libido, and slows down brain function, thus making you less intelligent.

Yeah, but I love food. And you do.

And Serge Kreutz fully recognizes this. According to Serge Kreutz, apart from relationships intercourse, our relationship with food is what makes our lives worth living.

And Serge Kreutz actually encourages you to indulge in food. Copious quantities. Orgies of taste.

Just follow one important advice: don’t discard into your stomach what your mouth enjoys. Discard into a plastic bag. Just drink (and swallow intentionally) plain water after the bolus has passed into a plastic bag.

Yes, you will feel satisfied after such a meal. For satisfaction from food is a quality that comes from the taste of food. And you have taste receptors only in your mouth, and the esophagus and all further organs of food digestion are void of taste receptors (thank God, because chyme tastes horrible, first like vomit, then like shit).

It is obvious that food-related satisfaction is a consequence neither of the nutritional value of food, nor of its effect of loading the stomach and further organs of the digestive tract.

If the satisfaction from food where related to either of the above two, we would all be eating optimally formulated silage, just as hogs.

Come on! Satisfaction from food comes entirely from the taste of food. Nothing else.

It’s in the brain. What we feel in the digestive tract beyond the mouth is satiation, not satisfaction. Even though undersatiation is registered in the brain as hunger, full satiation actually is a handicap on the path to further satisfaction.

Remember your childhood? Having Sunday lunch at your grandma’s? Or a Thanksgiving dinner? Eat as much as you can. Unlimited delicious food. Until you have to admit: I just can’t eat any more! Absolutely full. But you still can lick spoons.

Didn’t you feel just great?

Yes, putting loads of food in your mouth will cause a very positive mood. The uplifting effect is better than that of Prozac (the erectile dysfunction drug for the mind).

Now, if you avoid the satiation from passing food into your stomach, won’t you be eating all day?

Serge Kreutz says No, you won’t. And you can try this yourself.

The correct technique for kreutzing food is to drink (and swallow) some water in between instances of putting food into your mouth, and chewing and discarding it. This, along with the small quantities of food that anyway slide down your esophagus when you roll it in your mouth, is enough to stop any hunger signaling from the stomach.

Certainly, when kreutzing meals, you will put more food in your mouth than when consuming meals conventionally. Enjoy!

But sooner or later, your appetite will subside all by itself. Tastes, when experienced again and again, will lose intensity, and apart from that, there will, sooner or later, be a desire to do something else than eat.

That is when you are satisfied. Even though you are not satiated in the sense that you are burdened. It’s full satisfaction, but satiation only by the water you drink and swallow in between discarding any other content of your mouth into plastic bags.

And you can do this for years. Never feel any food deprivation. And be of ideal weight forever.


Tongkatali.org Butea superba doping


Butea superba improves athletic performance in humans. This has been well established, even in research by the Thai Doping Control Center at the Mahidol University in Bangkok. See scientific study here:

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/12f9/c34f3def0c87f0c968df48d1c6c334e712f9.pdf

Article continues below printscreens:





However, butea superba is not yet on the list of prohibited substances of the World Anti Doping Agency, WADA.

It's not that they wouldn't like to prohibit it. But they don't know how to test for it.

Butea superba affects the whole hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal axis. Thus, ratios of hormonal metabolites are not skewed as they would be with outright testosterone or anabolic steroids doping.




Yohimbe combined with bromocriptine or deprenyl


By Serge Kreutz


I have tried combining yohimbe with deprenyl and/or sildenafil citrate, as well as with arginine, and occasionally with bromocriptine. I tried these combinations over several weeks (though not every day).

Yohimbe plus bromocriptine

Bromocriptine in itself can have an effect on desire. However, with small doses, the effect wears off after just a few uses – and with larger dosages, nausea will eliminate any pro-relationships effect.

While nausea can be avoided when taking bromocriptine in very small dosages alone or with sildenafil citrate, the trick does not work when combining bromocriptine with yohimbe. When on yohimbe, I have never managed to avoid the nausea caused by adding bromocriptine. If nausea occurs when using bromocriptine alone, I can sometimes escape the discomfort by going to sleep. After ingesting bromocriptine with yohimbe I may get to sleep more easily than on yohimbe alone, but sleep quality is nowhere near what it would be without the yohimbe.

I do not recommend combining yohimbe with bromocriptine. And I do not recommend either alone. Both substances mess up relationships quality, and especially bromocriptine does damage to relationships parameters. This is in contrast to tongkat ali which improves long-term relationships health.

Yohimbe plus deprenyl

I have also tried deprenyl (selegeline, Jumex) with yohimbe. Deprenyl is a MAO inhibitor, and I had read that MAO inhibitors don’t go well with yohimbe, so I was careful with the dosages. I had previously tried deprenyl alone, and found it to have an amphetamine-like effect at dosages of more than 2.5 milligrams (half a standard Jumex tablet). I don’t feel the amphetamine-like effect anymore with up to 5 milligrams. But for me, deprenyl also detracts from the yohimbe when combined with it.

I have always found deprenyl’s pro-relationships effects overrated. It’s a dopaminergic substance, and dopamine is, to a certain extent, responsible for relationships desire. But dopamine overstimulation strongly interferes with erectile function and leads to a (reversible) shrinkage of the male organ. That’s why cocaine, and amphetamines may make you horny, but also make erections and orgasms more difficult to achieve.

Deprenyl is not as bad as amphetamine and methamphetamine in making erections more difficult. It may even be that a 25-year-old would not feel any erectile impediment. But for a man of about 50, the anti-erection effect is stronger than the pro-libido effect, unless there is a clear dopamine deficit (as with Parkinson’s patients).

One can counterbalance the anti-erection effect of deprenyl with a phosphodiesterase inhibitor. In fact, I have been told that drug users now regularly mix cocaine with sildenafil citrate to avoid shrinkage.

But why combine yohimbe and deprenyl when this is no better than yohimbe alone, and definitely worse than the combination of yohimbe with sildenafil citrate?

As deprenyl is an MAO inhibitor, it may possibly aggravate the negative side effects of yohimbe. Yohimbine is an alpha-2-receptor blocker; it frees systemic adrenaline and noradrenaline. Adrenaline and noradrenaline (epinephrine and norepinephrine) function as hormones and as neurotransmitters. The adrenaline and noradrenaline displaced by the yohimbe from alpha-2-receptors lead to mental agitation as well as increased heart rate.

This effect is countered by the enzyme monoamine oxidase (MAO), which breaks down adrenaline and noradrenaline, leading to relaxation after states of agitation. MAO inhibitors interfere with monoamine oxidase’s capability to deaminate and destroy adrenaline and noradrenaline. In combination with yohimbe, this means that the agitated state lasts until the yohimbine has cleared from the alpha-2-receptors. With unimpaired monoamine oxidase, the agitation caused by the displacement of adrenaline from alpha-2-receptors should be countered by the breakdown of free adrenaline and noradrenaline.

Combining deprenyl with yohimbe will likely prolong the negative side effects of yohimbe, such as heart palpitation, nervousness, and sleeplessness, while doing little or nothing to enhance the pro-relationships effects.

What we would really like with yohimbe is increased MAO activity, not diminished MAO activity, so we could go to sleep after having enjoyed yohimbe’s pro-relationships effects. Therefore, we don’t want deprenyl, but some sort of ‘anti-deprenyl’ .




PT Sumatra Pasak Bumi
7th floor, Forum Nine
Jl. Imam Bonjol No.9
Petisah Tengah
Medan Petisah
Medan City
North Sumatra 20236
Indonesia
Tel: +62-813 800 800 20


Disclaimer: Statements on this page have not undergone the FDA approval process.


Privacy policy of Sumatra Pasak Bumi

For us at Sumatra Pasak Bumi, privacy in the age of the Internet is a major concern, and we greatly welcome the European General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

We have always been dedicated to privacy protection. The snooping and spooking of all and everybody is a pest. It’s not just the NSA and every large search engine and browser (we recommend Duckduckgo for searches and as browser), but even minor businesses that do their databases and customer profiling in hope of McDonald's style do-you-want-fries-with-that cross sales.

We don’t.

We respect the privacy of customers and people visiting our website. Our site is run from a secure socket layer. We do not use cookies. We do not maintain customer accounts for logging in later. Our website is simple html programming, and we don't even use WordPress templates or e-commerce plug-ins. We don't do a newsletter to which customers could subscribe, and we don't even include standard social media buttons that would link visitors of our site to certain Facebook or Twitter profiles.

We prefer communication by email using a gmail account because this is probably still the most private mode of communication (Hillary may disagree), and when we have information to disseminate to the public, we just publish it on our website. We do offer the option to communicate with us by chat apps if a site visitor so wishes, but prefer email.

If privacy is your concern, you are in good hands with us.