How Women Discard Men, and Why

Rarely are women straightforward about why they will discard a man like a used paper plate, because that would involve a lot of emotional heavy lifting that they don’t feel it’s their job to do.  There are a couple of ways to get around that:

1. They wait for him to say or do something that they can be offended by, sometimes even provoking him to say or do it, and then they jump on it, hold it over his head and throw him in the waste basket.

2. They raise the bar of expectations to some unattainable height — often progressively — and then when the man fails to meet that bar, they treat it like a betrayal and in the waste basket he goes.

A woman does this so that she can feel like it’s all his fault.  It’s a real bonus if she can make him feel like it’s his fault as well.

This is just one of many tactics that women have evolved to use throughout the ages, and realizing it can help a man from going into the rut of delusion about what he supposedly did wrong.  If a man thinks that the woman dumping him or not is all up to him and what he does, then when he gets dumped simply because he doesn’t measure up, he won’t understand it.  Leaving a guy is not about making him understand anything, it’s about trading up for another man who has better genes, even if there are no current prospects for her.

The sad truth is that women generally don’t have the kind of attachment to men that they feign having, and that men often have to the women.  It’s more of a utilitarian setup, but that doesn’t mean that women themselves even realize this.  They want to believe that the glue that binds them to a man is more of a complex mixture than it actually is, and that actually explains why they would play games like this in order to protect their egos.  To realize that love is usually not “true” when the rubber hits the road is the kind of self-reflection that women are not inclined to want to do.  They have been taught to believe that they are more than utilitarian opportunists, but not amount of well-intended upbringing and pop culture can change what they really are.

So, if and when a woman discards you, don’t take it personally, no matter what she says.  It wasn’t what you said, it was what you are, and you are not the author of your own genes.  Before you blame yourself or whatever it was she said you did, just keep this in mind: if women actually left men because of what the men supposedly did, there wouldn’t be battered women’s shelters in every major city.

The Lesson of the Pussy March: Modern Women are Beyond Hope

img_4046

As all men should know, the only way to win with a woman is to simply agree with her, and even at that, it’s only a temporary win – you’ll lose in the end, in a big bad way.  Women don’t reason like men do – they tend to emote.  Oh sure, they are capable of being reasonable, but that doesn’t really matter when they are choosing not to be.  Like all other creatures, they are going to do what comes naturally unless there is some kind of reason or incentive to do something else.  For as long as women have been getting their way by running their mouths, throwing tantrums and leveraging their sexuality, what reasonable interaction they may or may not be capable of is irrelevant.

It should come as no surprise that they are going to be pretty easily regimented and used as pink-headed pawns for both the obvious and the more shadowy political forces against President Trump, and the worldwide movement against globalism.  It’s not like they even had to build a new straw man from scratch – the die was cast long ago for this.  The globalist left, which thrives and conquers by dividing people into various groups and then pits them against each other (identity politics 101), makes the most use of those groups that are easily riled up.  While a lot of what we see today of this is a product of long and careful political cultivation – as is the case with Obama-era race baiting and race riots, which any race would be susceptible to – there is a special kind of hair-triggered reactionary utility in women, especially in the 3rd wave of feminism.  For example, all it took was one inarticulate comment from a police chief in Toronto to spark a worldwide movement of “Slutwalks“, which are an assertion of the narrative that women should be able to dress as provocatively as they want and not be raped – which is valid from a legal, moral and idealistic standpoint…just not from a practical one.  When you look at it from a simple risk management perspective – something they don’t merely overlook but explicitly reject, saying that we should “teach men not to rape” instead – it should be easy to see that there isn’t a lot of hard thought and reasoning behind the movement.

If leftist/feminist reactionary movements like the Slutwalks, or yesterday’s Women’s March on Washington and sister movements, were just a comical display of a few fringe kooks here and there throwing tantrums over the inauguration, this discussion would be unnecessary…but no, they are pretty huge – in the millions at a time, albeit not all in the same place.  Of course, the enormity of it all is something they want us to notice, and we do, but not in the way they are hoping.  The message we are supposed to get from yesterday’s demonstration is…well, there isn’t really a coherent message because (owing to the leftist political origins of these things) it basically turned into a mishmash of liberal dog whistle issues.  It reminds me of Occupy Wall Street – does anyone really know what exactly that was all about?  No, because it wasn’t really about anything specific – it was just a big feel-good tantrum being thrown by social justice warriors who felt like they weren’t getting their way.  In the case of this weekend’s vaginal protests, at least it was spurned by them actually not getting their way in the election last November (and it’s about damn time).

So what is the real lesson from all of this?  That is, beyond the fact that women are angry about the election (between Donald Trump winning and Hillary Clinton losing, who knows which is the more bitter pill for them to swallow, or if it even matters)?  I guarantee that it isn’t over any practical considerations, since I haven’t heard anyone say that they are worried about Donald Trump’s “locker room” behavior translating into federal policy that would hurt women.  No, I think that the lesson from it can be found in their numbers: that you could have that many women, all over the country and the world, join such an aimless, thoughtless, pointless blind rage like that is not only a testament to what extent the female gender is marbled with poisonous ideology, but a testament to just how stunted the gender is on the whole.  Look: nobody is perfect, and we all need to be reined in by voices of reason sometimes, but these massive demonstrations makes clear that there is a catastrophic proportion of human females who cannot and will not respond constructively to being contradicted or rebuked.  They are pulling the whole gender off the rails.

Some may say that this is nothing new: when a woman makes her mind up about something, she cannot be swayed, and will not listen to anyone.  While that may be true for most of them, when you have a massive, generations-long infusion of ideology that is carefully designed to dovetail into that tendency…well, it’s like Vladimir Lenin’s seed that will never be uprooted.  Not only does the ubiquity and intensity of this stuff make gender relations utterly hopeless, but when you look at the fruit salad of leftist narratives and proclamations being expressed in these female marches, it’s easy to see where this all comes from.  In this current pussy march (not to be confused with Pussy Riot, although there is enough overlap that it doesn’t matter) you see plugs for everything: socialism, homosexuality, transsexualism (kind of ironic), Islamophilia, abortion, russophobia (the new “red scare” – oh if only the friendly Soviets were still running things!), misandry, anarchy and lawlessness, all mortared together with a sludge of degenerate language, imagery and innuendo – just look at some of their signs, and that will tell you everything.

Now remember, these women are far, far beyond being contradicted or even reasoned with, and they are in the millions – and that’s just the ones who actually took the time to buy a stupid pink hat and go stamping around in the cold.  Sadly, I’m afraid that these women aren’t in the minority – this is what most women are like today.

What can you do about it?  As far as the women themselves are concerned, pretty much nothing.  You can, however, evaluate your own circumstances and plan accordingly – be pragmatic.  This may involve taking some conscious steps in order to get through this life with 21st century females in one piece (maybe):

  1. Limit your interactions with females to the minimum
  2. Avoid forming any new ties with females
  3. Navigate through necessary interactions defensively and with caution
  4. Never invest any time and effort into trying to level with or understanding a female
  5. Learn their mind games, and how to avoid getting snared
  6. Learn how to assert yourself, when the time comes, in a way that disgusts them enough to get out of your life without pissing them off so much that they want revenge
  7. Always be vigilant – remember that females today are legitimately dangerous in ways that they never were before, and you have to stay one step ahead in order to protect yourself

This all boils down to going your own way (MGTOW) in the true sense – that’s not joining a discussion forum with other bitter guys and feeding off each other’s red pill rage, allowing these women to live rent-free in your head.  It’s about going your own way, and not looking back.

Or, if you don’t believe me, take the blue pill…and good luck to you.  You’re going to need it.

What Sex Robots Can Teach Us About a Woman’s Love (That Cucumbers Can’t)

There has been a lot of talk lately about sex dolls and robots, mostly to be used by men as a means to replace women.  That should not be a surprise to anyone, as the pursuit of real women is becoming more impractical, and worthwhile surrogate technology is becoming more practical – inevitably, the shift is going to happen for a majority of sexually disenfranchised men.

But what about a robotic sex pacifier for women?  Common sense will tell you that such things aren’t really necessary for women, for the same reason that Nevada’s first male prostitute in history had to leave the business after a few months because he couldn’t get enough work.  In fact, citing that shouldn’t have even been necessary – again, this is common sense.  If you are still not convinced of this truth, then this blog isn’t for you.

It’s a large world though, and someone is going to try everything, sooner or later.  And so we have Gabriel, the 5’ 9” (that’s your first clue that this isn’t a serious marketing proposition) sex doll for women.

Male sex doll

Even though this isn’t going anywhere, there is something teachable about this article.

“We always assume men are more likely to enjoy sleeping with an object and that women need some sort of emotional connection to enjoy themselves, but that isn’t always the case,” explains Karley.

“These dolls are 100% silicone, which makes the penis feel incredibly lifelike. At times it was indistinguishable from a real one.”

I would go further and suggest that in many respects, it was probably indistinguishable from a real man overall, not in terms of sensation but in terms of satisfaction and fulfillment.

This leads us back around to the same issue discussed above: why would a woman even bother?  For women, the sex doesn’t need to feel real, the way it does for men.  Every man knows (whether he does it or not) how easy it is to reach down and completely short-circuit the only part of the reproductive process that is completely physical on his end; so if there were no psychological or emotional component to sex for a man, no man anywhere would bother going through the rigamarole of engaging with women in order to poke them.  If anyone had sex at all, it would be a purely conscious, intellectual decision on the man’s part – which, of course, it isn’t.   Truth be told, when it comes to the whole of decisions that are made on sexual relations and marriages (by the couples themselves rather than parents, churches, royalty, etc.), most of those that are purely conscious and intellectual are made by women – they decide based on the man’s income, status, and other strategic factors.  That’s not to say that women are generally so intellectual about it – usually their decisions are completely emotional, based on things like height, testosterone indicators, aggressiveness and status/dominance over other males, and so on.  That’s the kind of behavior you usually see in younger women, but with age comes wisdom (sometimes), and so it’s the older women that you see relying on formulas to choose men.

But wait!  Doesn’t that mean that the new found “love” of an older women is less…sincere?  Oh surely we couldn’t say that, right?

A wise man once said that if a woman truly loves you, she’ll live with you in a shack.  That’s the kind of real love that is demonstrated by the typical girl who is crazy about her bad boy – even if he doesn’t have a pot to piss in – to the point where she will follow him into destitution, danger and even her own doom, and all because he has those sexy bad boy genes.  She will take abuse from him, tolerate his infidelity, adopt his stupidity, and allow her relationship with him tarnish her existence in almost every way.  Call it stupidity, a lack of self-respect, or whatever…but you can’t say that her love isn’t real.

Conversely, the women who you are supposed to go for – you know, the self-respecting “strong” women who won’t put up with anything, much less living in a shack (oh, and by the way, good luck in divorce court) – are probably be seen as the more suspect, when it comes to insincerity in their love, for these reasons.  It also raises the question about whether or not they really need a man for anything beyond a utility.  As women become more independent from the support of men, it should follow that they are less willing to have anything to do with men, and marriage should be pretty much gone.  It’s true that marriage is in serious decline, but strangely enough, women seem to complain about not being married than men do, even though they no longer need it.  The days of “housewife” as the default vocation for women are long gone, yet they still want a man for some reason.

Could it be that women need some kind of pacifier as well, to make their bodies feel like they are being shot up with high-quality genes, the same way men’s bodies need to feel like they are actually fertilizing something that is likewise high-quality?  Well, if “love” is all about reptilian brain emotions and top-quality genes, I guess that’s an easy question…but does that say anything different about men?  You might be able to argue that there is a fundamental difference for men when it comes to love if, for example, you took Ephesians 5:22-28 to mean that a man’s love as more genuine than that of a woman, but you’d have to leave the “reptilian brain” biological perspective behind and start getting into theological and existential perspectives to get it done.  The next thing we can look at is people’s behavior, which is usually the best indicator that you’re going to get concerning all things inside.  With that, let’s look at this statement from the article…is it true?

He hit the market in 2015 – along with two other male dolls, Akira and William – and they’re now selling out as quickly as their female counterparts, which Sinthetics launched in 2010.

Honestly, it seems a little bit misleading.  The idea that women would be in the market for sex dolls as much as men simply doesn’t square with common sense.  Most likely, they are produced in small quantities and the male dolls are bought by homosexual men.  Who knows – maybe some people are putting male dolls together with female dolls, and just kinda watching…  It’s a step up from putting a Fleshlight and a dildo together (I think I just thought of a logo worthy of this blog).

There is undoubtedly a line somewhere in the human reproductive continuum between reproducing with a good specimen, and merely feeling like that’s what is happening.  If you couldn’t get any satisfaction from sex without imagining babies being born (I hope no one thinks about that) then birth control pills would not exist; on the other hand, men would not even begin to put up with the nonsense they have to go through to get sex, even with a condom in there spoiling the experience.  As for women, I guess it’s worth acknowledging that cucumbers are a lot cheaper than these £5,000 sex dolls, but again, the veracity of these marketing claims is questionable.  For women, we may not know where that line is until civil marriage is gone and there are no more economic considerations tied into sex and reproduction – that is to say, a time when there is truly nothing left saying that “love” (whatever that means) and a means of support for a woman have to come from the same place.  In the mean time, we’ll leave those philosophical questions to Clint Black.  For men, you’d think we would have to wait until technology is at a point where a sophisticated sexual pacifier can be called good enough, but for the majority of men, the impracticality or impossibility of women is probably going to reach the line first – it’s almost there.

And now you know why the birth rate is below replacement levels in most Western civilizations.  Might as well bring on the sex robots, I guess.

WP: Trump’s election stole my desire to look for a partner

At times, when I look at the people in this world who are losing their shit over the election of Donald Trump, I have to pause — not just to give my diaphragm a rest from laughing and wipe the water out of my eyes, but to actually understand their perspective for a moment.  They actually believe that this is the end of the world.   They have been convinced by the alphabet soup media, and raised-fist leftist professors in academic echo chambers, that Trump and his minions are going to round up everyone who isn’t white and haul them off to the gas chambers in cattle cars, and grab everyone who isn’t male by the pussy.  They actually think that’s what this election result means.

I didn’t say that their hysteria was a bad thing, did I?  Instead, I’ll say this, looking back to 2008 and 2012: payback’s a bitch.

Then I saw this article, and realized that good things are leading to more good things.  The idea of Trump as president causing baggage-laden women to stop trying to attach themselves to a man and tough it out on their own is killing two birds with one stone.

In August, I went on six dates in one week. I had decided that I was ready to look for a partner. Enough of this dating unavailable men a half-decade younger than me. They’d never seriously consider a relationship with me, my two children and our needy dog. No. I wanted to find an equal. A man who wouldn’t feel the need to step in and rescue me. I didn’t need rescuing.

But I knew deep down that was only partially true. I often felt the sort of loneliness that settled in my stomach, starting from a chaotic afternoon with my children, lasting well into the night when I pulled covers tight around my chin.

. . . . .

But two weeks later, the election happened. Once it was clear that Donald Trump would be president instead of Hillary Clinton, I felt sick to my stomach. I wanted to gather my children in bed with me and cling to them like we would if thunder and lightning were raging outside, with winds high enough that they power might go out. The world felt that precarious to me.

My oldest came out of her room the next morning to show me the money the Tooth Fairy had left her. She’d unexpectedly had to have a tooth pulled, and so bravely went through it that I said, “Just think: You’ll always remember the day you got a tooth pulled with the day we elected our first female president.”

When I told her Trump had won, she protested: “But Mom. You said Hillary was going to win.”

“A lot of people thought the same thing,” I said. I hugged her, a little scared to send her to school, out into the big sky country of the red state where we live.

. . . . .

That urge to cling to my family while keeping our foundation strong didn’t mesh well with continuing to date the man I’d been seeing. He also has a daughter. He, too, had been feeling a lot of the same emotions I was experiencing: hopelessness; fear; uncertainty about the future; panic over having to talk to my 9-year-old about anything that might come up at school, or what to do in the instance of sexual assault. But I couldn’t reach out to him anymore. He was too new, too unfamiliar.

. . . . .

I’ve lost the desire to attempt the courtship phase. The future is uncertain. I am not the optimistic person I was on the morning of Nov. 8, wearing a T-shirt with “Nasty Woman” written inside a red heart. It makes me want to cry thinking of that. Of seeing my oldest in the shirt I bought her in Washington, D.C., that says “Future President.”

There is no room for dating in this place of grief. Dating means hope. I’ve lost that hope in seeing the words “President-elect Trump.”

Well, I say good luck to them.  I sincerely do wish them well, and hope that they can be successfully independent of men’s help and resources.  I want to see these women thrive in the Trump era, clinging to their children and safe from this new, mean world, where men might not be systematically antagonized as much as they would have been under the Great Whore of Arkansas.

I say this, of course, for my own sake and for the sake of men everywhere.  MGTOW and WGTOW are complementary forces, and we should all give credit where credit is due.

4 in 10 American Women Obese

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/06/07/ap-first-time-4-10-us-women-obese/

Why the problem is getting worse for women faster than for men remains somewhat of a mystery to health researchers. “I don’t know if anyone truly knows for sure,” Hunnes said. Experts say there are a range of possible explanations, including that many women are satisfied with a larger body size.

Gee, what about the scourge of “fat shaming” and anorexia/bulimia (which men are to blame for, of course)?  Sit tight, they’ll find a way to blame this on men too.  Nothing is the woman’s fault, and don’t you forget it!

See that?  That’s you’re fault, you dangler!

 

Women and Alleged Evolutionary Bisexuality

This is the fascinating reason women have evolved to become bisexual“…

We could go a lot of different directions with this one.

First, it’s not a surprise that something like this would come from a professor of a school of economics and political science, rather than a professor of biological sciences.  Social upheaval is in vogue, and everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.  You also have to watch out when they continually allude to “experts”, which is more of a statement about people whose opinions are preferred, rather than indicating any specific credentials.

At least this theory isn’t as unworkable as some crackpot theories about genetic homosexuality, which are fundamentally antithetical to the genetic process, and frankly quite crackpot, no matter how posh the accent or how many letters behind the name of the theorist.  Even still, I say that it’s still a silly conclusion. The truth is that there is more than one reason that women go bisexual or lesbian, but usually you can tell by what kind of lesbian they are outwardly.

The main type of switch-hitter are the mainstream bisexuals who do it because it’s more socially acceptable, and garners the attention of men.  There is a kind of group fetish among many men to see lesbian sex, which makes any kind of screwing around and experimentation socially permissible.  These are usually the casual ones who are still attracted to men, are still mostly feminine, but have no problem swinging both ways, whether they get anything out of it or not.

Next, you have the mainline lesbians who are genuinely lesiban, for whatever reason, and have always been that way.  Their disposition with men varies widely, but generally they don’t respect men because they see no incentive to.

Then there are the angry rebellious lesbians, who genuinely hate men to their very core, and did so from the time that they were acting heterosexuals.  They tend to go lesbian because they have a real vendetta against men, and it is just par for the course.  It’s they only sexuality that they can even stomach.  They are the lesbians who react to men the way that radical Muslims react to Jews, or for that matter, the way that radical orthodox Jews react to non-Jews…for example.

The article did make an interesting point about polygynous [sic] marriages, which can be applied to the tournament paradigm of alphas with several mates and betas going off to die — the paradigm that humanity is rapidly returning to.  To me, that’s a subject much more worth caring about than lesbianism.

Boycott…Bachelor Party Weddings?

If anyone feels inclined to join this boycott, don’t even take the time to ask the bride if there is going to be a bachelor party — just don’t go.  Stay home.

No, wait — do call the bride, and lay your terms of attendance on her, and then download all of your propaganda on her — oh, and don’t forget to quote your sources, especially if it’s Fredrick Engels.  These people need to know about what a freak you are so they can warn others not to even sent you an invitation.

Yes, this video is a pretty comprehensive example of how screwy and brainwashed these feminists are.

Singles: Just Say NO to Wedding Invitations

This article, which is as insightful as it is cringeworthy, only really falls short in one aspect: it fails to delve into the pack mentality and basic sociopathy of married people at weddings in their behavior towards singles. Other than that, it’s sure to give any prolonged single shell shock.

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/22/fashion/22NOTI.html?pagewanted=1

Here’s the question: why should singles have to put themselves through this crap?  We know why non-singles want them to be put through that gauntlet — it’s fun for pack animals to gang up on and attack the loser, like chickens that will go crazy when they see a spot of blood, and peck another chicken to death.  Why, though, do so few singles seem to have discovered how liberating it is to just say, no, I’m not coming?  I mean, it seems that most married or attached people don’t really want you there anyway, unless they are looking forward to abusing you somehow — it’s nice to have some losers around to make an even more glorifying juxtaposition for the sake of the glorified, but the downside is that it’s kind of like inviting a jumbee to the ceremony.  Everything you do makes them gasp and gossip, so how much worse could it be to just turn the invitation down?

Sometimes you “have” to go, if it’s a sibling or whatever, but I think it should be more than reasonable and understood that you are just going to make a cameo at the ceremony itself and get the hell out of there before the reception.  That should require no explanation of why, but even if it does, it shouldn’t be too hard…well, shouldn’t, but realistically speaking, get ready for a fight.  Isn’t it nice to be so wanted?  Seriously though, they should all understand that inviting you to a wedding is like inviting a white person to a Black Panther rally — the first thought that crosses your mind is if they are inviting you so that they can use you as a piñata, and for good reason because that’s what most singles figuratively end up as at weddings.

The real nasty ones are the wedding receptions where they go the extra mile, beyond the bouquet or garter toss.  I’ve seen weddings where they stage “games” for the singles in attendance.  First, they flush out all of the singles with goading and pressure, and get them into the spotlight of shame, then go on to humiliate them with a game show-like affair, all for the benefit of the happily-attached audience members to laugh at.  I can think of few things more disrespectful than to turn your own wedding into and opportunity to smugly flog those who are simply not lucky enough and attractive enough to be among your social class.  Do the marrieds realize how that makes them feel?  Better question: do they care?  No, they don’t.  All of that is done for the benefit of everyone but the singles being humiliated.  Weddings are rife with tactlessness, but then, marriage is apparently the celebration from being exempt from tact (and tax).

Maybe it takes a real wake-up call, a really nasty experience to make you finally figure it out and contemplate other options.  At the last wedding I went to, the ceremony ended with me being yelled at by a neighbor as the bride and groom were walking back down the aisle: “You’re next!”  Yep, that’s the last time I’ll be publicly tarred and feathered.  In over 10 years, I’ve never been to another wedding.

If you really think about it, there is no way you should be expected to put up with that nonsense.  If people truly care about you, they ought to understand. A wedding is, after all, a chance for marrying and already-married people to celebrate not being you. You owe it to yourself to refuse to willingly participate in your own social censuring , or at least limit your attendance to a token obligatory cameo appearance.

You Have Two Choices

Once a man reaches a certain age — that age being the subject of debate, but usually considered around 30 — without ever having had sexual relations and/or a romantic relationship with a woman, he has two options: he can either resign himself to, or embrace (depending on his philosphy) the idea that life-long virginity is inevitable, or he can resign himself to losing his virginity to a prostitute.

Some will argue against this, usually because it’s an offense to their own hopeless romantic bias, but what do they have to offer as a third possibility? The only other possibility is to eventually end up with “someone” and get sex in the traditional, unpaid manner. Just one problem: he can’t decide for that to happen on his own. Sex is given, not procured. The only men who get to have sex for free are the ones who had that gift bestowed upon them by women, not the ones who “worked hard for it”. In fact, men who genuinely work hard to get women are the ones who don’t get women — they went to the trouble because they didn’t know what they were doing.

It seems completely unreasonable to expect a hardcore incel, who has reached age 30 or beyond without ever having had a woman acknowledge his masculinity, to entertain the idea of getting sex any other way than by paying for it. Most people with normal sex lives would feel completely insulted if someone suggested that they should hold out hope for something so hopeless. What sense would it make for someone to make a debut into a life of romance at that age anyway?

Resorting to prostitution is not for everyone. Many people have religious or moral objections to it, some have the same kind of hopeless romantic bias as their sexually active counterparts, and many more simply don’t have the nerve or the money to go through with it. All of these are valid reasons — even the hopeless romantic incel is entitled to his convictions, as long as he’s willing to accept the likelihood of dying a virgin. Lacking the guts to go though with it is one that the least amount of people would understand of forgive, but that’s probably because they’ve never walked a mile in those shoes. Engaging in prostitution, even legal and regulated, is not for the faint at heart. It’s a sleazy affair, something that even the most sexually experienced “normals” would have a hard time bringing themselves to going through with. The unfortunate part about that is that incels can be some of the most faint-at-heart people around, yet they are the ones who are going to have to bring themselves to ring that buzzer and walk through that door. There is never going to be a magic moment of confidence, or a groove to get into that is going to make going through with it easy. There are going to be moments of awkwardness and vascillation waiting for him — he won’t just wake up one day and make it happen when those moments are on their day off or something. They only way to make it happen is to realize that he’s going to have to make himself go through with it, step by step, regardless of his inhibitions.

It comes down to this: is it going to be easier than being a virgin when you turn whatever age you’ve dreaded that happening at? 30 is a dreaded age for most, but 40 is the most talked about number when it comes to late life virginity — obviously the movie about it is a major reason, but even intuitively, it’s the final branding iron of stigma. For some, crossing their most dreaded age of virginity may be the point after which it becomes easier to live with, kind of like a point of resignation and no return. For others, it may be the beginning of problems never imagined.

Everyone’s situation is different, and there are as many different perspectives and attitues on the subject as Carter has pills. The only things shared by all late-life virgins is the fact that eventually, each one of them will reach “that” age, whatever it may be — if death doesn’t come first — followed by certain death. They better be willing to accept having to take their v-cards to their graves if they aren’t willing to bite the bullet and pay to lose it. Most people can count on sex happening without having to resort to prostitution when they are younger, like in their teens or 20s; but the late-life virgin over 30 simply cannot have that expecation any more.

No, it’s not fair, and it may not make any sense, but it has happened nonetheless — you have become a late life virgin, and the clock is ticking. Sex with a prostitute might be in your future, or it might not be, but what most certainly will be in your future are hard choices. They simply are not going to go away.