Month: December 2017

Why Sex = Love To The Untouchables

What makes a man hate women?  He may not hate them, but what he says gets interpreted as hateful.

Why would he say things about women that anyone would interpret as hateful?  Because women have proven that they don’t love him, so he has nothing to lose by speaking candidly about them.

Where did he get the idea that women don’t love him?  Simply put, no women are sexual with him.

Why does he think that a woman has to prove her love through sex?  He probably never did think that; but the fact that she is sexual with other men is proof of who she loves, and more poignantly, who she doesn’t love.  She didn’t have to prove anything with sex, but she did anyway, and of her own volition.

What made him think that sex and love are mutually-inclusive?  Because he was taught that they were.  He was taught that it was wrong to use someone for sex whom you didn’t really love.  He chose to live by that standard, and and thought women would live by it too.

Why did he assume that women were also going to live by that standard?  Because he assumed that women and men, being equal, are held to the same standards.

Where did he get the idea that men and women are equal?

Yes, where did he get that idea…


The $300,000 First Date

Read this article, and take note of the behavior of this drunken 29-year-old tornado that tears through this guy’s house.  Usually women don’t start throwing massive tantrums and destroying property like that until the guy is a little more entangled with the woman than than a first date (when they are married, all bets are off)…but it’s a teachable moment about just what entanglement really is.  At the very least, it’s a lesson that you don’t take a drunken woman (no, drunkenness doesn’t account for all this – don’t take a woman period whom you don’t know better than that) anywhere near valuable assets that can be damaged.  A woman can be a loose cannon.

Clearly, her plan was to dig for his gold, and when it was looking obvious that he wasn’t going to be her sugar daddy, she retaliated.  She hid in his house like a child and then went on a rampage.  Again, it wasn’t alcohol doing this, it was childishness, and confidence that there would be no consequences for her actions, inasmuch as she is a woman.  That confidence may not be all that unfounded, actually, especially if she gets a woman judge.  We’ll have to see how this story shakes out.  Personally, I predict that she gets a slap on the wrist.  Remember, we are in the age of #MeToo, where a mere disparity in wealth and power between the man and the woman factors into the outcome more than ever.

I am tempted to say that this might have been political as well, but no, I doubt that – female childishness can easily account for this.  I think this is just what it appears to be.



Nice Guys/Betas Are Sexual Academics

No, I don’t mean that they work in sex education (last place you should ever find a cuck like that)…I mean that guys who can’t get women, because of their supplication to women, act that way because their ideas about how to treat women were not learned through experience, but taught to them by gynocentrics – all theoretical, no hands-on.  They won’t ever get any hands-on either at that rate, but women themselves sure as hell won’t cry for these men whom they helped screw up.

You could call an “academic” a person who has spent all of their time in a classroom and none of it in the real world.  In the literal sense, as it pertains to career, academics get little respect from those who learned their trade in the school of hard knocks – “college boys” they call them – because the academic often doesn’t fully understand how things function in reality.  Academics often have little respect for the non-degree people who they have to work with, and a contentious situation often develops; yet, if they can get along well enough to stay focused on the goals at hand, between the academic’s book learning and the tradesman’s raw know-how, sometimes they can achieve great things together.

Now in the case of the sexually academic “nice guy”, great things are not going to happen.  He is not working with other guys as a team, but in direct competition with them.  To make matters worse, his ignorance disadvantage is far, far worse: instead of merely not having a well-rounded foundation in the subject at hand, he as actually been given misinformation and brainwashing to make him behave in a way that’s 180° opposite of what actually works with women.  Few men will try to tell him about his folly, and those who do will be met with his smug dismissal – after all, why should he believe them over women themselves?  Surely the advice from the women themselves would be the best, as it’s coming straight from the source, right?

Eventually, life will force the red pill into his mouth, but that usually won’t happen until it’s too late.  He will be too old and too stunted in his sociosexual development to be able to turn things around.

What will be the gene pool result of this?  Well, after a few generations of nice guy genes being rubbed out, we’ll start to see males becoming less obedient to, tolerant of and sympathetic toward females.  These new males will be tougher and less civilized, as males must become to survive childhood without a father figure – after all, the “alpha fucking/beta cucking” child-rearing strategy, whereby females get the alphas to sire children with their superior genes and then the females sucker the thirsty betas into raising that spawn, can only work until the beta genes are all rubbed out.  When it comes to female genes being rubbed out, you’ll see fewer women who raise their sons to be “chivalrous”…all of this assuming that characteristics that give older, feminist females over younger, gullible males are genetic.

The only hope that a young incel has is to be made to realize that he’s headed in the wrong direction…before it’s too late.  Whatever happens to him to disrupt his course, no matter how drastic, can’t be any worse than ending up far from the goal and not enough time to turn back.

Sex In Swedenistan May Require Written Consent

Just when you thought that Sweden’s sexual politics could not get more absurd…

I know what you are all thinking – that the Muslims in Sweden are not going to respect any such laws – and you would be right.  I can’t imagine being a woman in Sweden, and realizing that my safety depended on people who hand down such absurdities as “written consent”, while at the same time continuing to import Muslim rape gangs from North Africa at as the highest rate possible…

Then again, I can’t imagine what kind of thought process allows people like that to come into power.  Wait, yes I do – it’s call feminism.

Anyone who realizes that feminism is a shit-test, instituted to screen out men who capitulate to its nonsense, can see clearly what the rape of Sweden by Islamic invaders is all about: an orgy for women who dream of Muslim “bad boys” defeating the weak native Swedish male cucks and impregnating them with much higher quality semen.  This is the unconscious group desire of Swedish women (not of all individual Swedes) as we know, but more troubling, it is the very conscious agenda of Sweden’s government.  It’s one thing to have politicians who are merely derelict in their duties to protect their citizens, but in Sweden, the government is actively undermining their own people.

That nation is far beyond the point where anything short of a bloody revolution will bring them back from becoming a failed state under a new Muslim caliphate.  The only way that the real men of Sweden can win back their country is to start with the original culprit…


Silver Lining For Incels In The Era Of #MeToo

What’s the #1 reason that women would try to get at a man who truly keeps to himself?  Rejecting her advances.  That’s not going to be a problem if you’re incel.

Some may have seen the news that a woman politician (and a Democrat, no less) has been accused of sexual harassment and retaliation against a guy who refused her advances.  Of course we all know that this is a one-off, and it won’t lead to a wave of women being accused – what’s good for the goose is not good for the gander, in the eyes of women.  This whole #MeToo movement is not going to work unless there is a double-standard, as is the case with all gynocentric and feminist causes and grievances.  I just need to say that right of the bat: don’t fool yourself into thinking that the tide is turning.

Oh, but let’s take a minute to revel in the irony…

“In its rush to claim the high ground in our roiling national conversation about harassment, the Democratic Party has implemented a zero tolerance standard,” Ramsey said in a statement Friday. “For me, that means a vindictive, terminated employee’s false allegations are enough for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee (DCCC) to decide not to support our promising campaign. We are in a national moment where rough justice stands in place of careful analysis, nuance and due process.”

Oh the wisdom…the wisdom of the presumption of innocence – wisdom they have always had access to, but have brushed aside until they needed it themselves.  Isn’t that rich?

She denied the allegations to the Star in two interviews over the last two weeks and said the lawsuit is surfacing now for political purposes.

Impossible!  Listen and believe – that’s how it works now.  Politics have nothing to do with it, just like the timing of the Alabama Senate race had nothing to do with Roy Moore’s accusers coming forward when they did…or the timing of the release of the Billy Bush tape had nothing to do with the 2016 presidential election…

Anyway, all humor aside, why do I start out with that?  No so much for the main point of the news story itself, but for a nuance within the story.  She retaliated against a guy she worked with for rejecting her own advances…

Before he rejected her advances, Ramsey “repeatedly told me she heard great things from others about my performance,” Funkhouser wrote. “After I rejected her, she told me she now was hearing bad things about my performance and on June 13, 2005, terminated my employment.”

To be honest, he’s lucky that getting fired was the worst that happened to him.  There are numerous stories out there of women crying rape, etc. due to her advances being rejected by the man; but if you look at how many of these cases fall apart in court or during the investigation, it’s obvious that they were often impulsive acts of retaliation.  They are usually not very well thought out accusations, and frankly, they don’t need to be.  It’s very rare that there are any consequences for false rape accusation, so it’s a low-risk thing for a woman to do; and anyway, many people will still believe her story, and chalk the outcome up to a failure of the justice system to get that monstrous guy.

Bottom line: if a woman, who happens to be morally contaminated by feminism, makes advances in your direction, you’re a sitting duck.  If you reciprocate, you’re going to walk right into her web, become entangled and eventually eaten like a bug in divorce/criminal court; if you don’t, you’re going to find yourself battling for your freedom in a kangaroo court system that is hopelessly biased against you, as a man.  Tough luck, dude.

But wait!  What if you’re incel?  What if you are an untouchable omega, either a prolonged virgin or a non-virgin via hooker, relegated to junk-bond status omega male?

There is a (mostly) baseless platitude that says that women reject low-status males when they are younger, but will go for them later in life “because they have matured” in their tastes in men.  There is some truth to that, in the sense that females aren’t really going for financial resources when they are younger, in part because few males in their own age group have any resources yet to speak of, but mostly because the females are at their highest fertility at that point, and so they want to secure the best (bad boy) genes they can get at that time.  When they get older and their fertility goes down, their priorities shift toward resources, and that’s when beta males supposedly have a shot (to raise the bad boy’s kids and be a cuck).  Roger Delvin and others have postulated that female sexual market value for females is much higher for females early on, but that the tables turn and males eventually become higher value, going into their 30s and beyond.  I agree with the first half of that, but I don’t agree with the charts that show males and females having a crossover point, where males become higher value than females on the sexual market.  Realistic observation will tell you that the gap indeed narrows, but they never really reach parity.  Still, odds do get better for beta males…as if an opening opportunity to get cucked & gutted out by the same females that rejected him during their best years is any consolation.  Many beta males will go for it, nonetheless.

Now as for the omega incel, women will still not touch you with a 10-foot pole.  It doesn’t matter how much money you make, what you look like, what kind of car you drive…you will still be invisible to them at best (or should I say, if you’re lucky).  Despite what they say about how the women will supposedly come running to you the second you stop trying to pursue them, the real truth is that the second you drop out of whatever scene you vainly searching for inroads within, womankind will effectively cease to exist.  “Normal” men would never believe that it’s possible for a guy to live in a major city for literally years without ever even meeting a woman, but that’s because they fall over backwards into into opportunities with women – never believe the “nothing ventured, nothing gained” lie.

It should now be obvious how this actually protects undesirable men from predatory women: when you take the risk of retaliatory false rape accusation from rejection out of the equation, there really aren’t very many more reasons that a woman is going to accuse you.  If you are discreet about your financial prosperity, and you never run for political office, you just might be okay.

Oh, and don’t bother worrying about running for office, if you are an incel…the tradcons won’t vote for any man who doesn’t have a wife and kids, no matter what his politics are.

MGTOW: Don’t Talk About It, Be About It

Why does it seem like MGTOW is more of a tribe that many are trying the be the leader of, instead of the simple phenomenon of men going their own way?

Since the time I first heard of MGTOW, I have seen dozens of proclaimed “leaders” come and go, trying to define it for everyone else and tag on riders that mirror their agenda/ideology.  As much as I appreciate themes like free economics and personal ownership per say, I don’t really see that they are integral components of MGTOW.  What’s wrong with MGTOW being exactly what the acronym stands for, nothing more and nothing less?  Maybe it’s because the phrase men going their own way is too vague by itself; what it needs is proper elaboration, not constant evolution or modification by a loose group of online self-proclaimed experts.  

The tribalism seemed the worst in the MGTOW Forums, and thank goodness those days are gone…well, as far as I know, or care (please take note).  Still, there is a cetain amount of tribalism around bloggers, youtubers, etc. and their loyal hangers-on.  By the time you have online social media wars driven by pack mentality against “intruders” who bring contrary ideas.  It’s also pathetic when you have certain MGTOW pundits like Sandman whom guys actually pay to sound off on the issues, as if they were fortune tellers or prophets.

For one thing, tribalism is antithetical to MGTOW in the first place, is it not?  For another thing, if these guys have really gone their own way, how much left is there to talk about?

I’m not pitching the line from the blue pill folk, saying that once you go your own way, you need to be silenced and made to go away.  I think that the most valuable information in the mgtowsphere are the basic facts and stories about what happens to guys who stay in the matrix.  That said, the last thing MGTOW needs is a sense of community.  It’s called going your own way, not going into a huddle.

So how would I elaborate?  How would I define describe MGTOW?  I would simply put it this way: to go one’s own way is to avoid entanglements, as much as possible, with females.  Does it really need to be more complicated than that?

I think that if everyone accepted that simple principle, we’d at least have more people knowing where they stand on the issue.  Right now, most people on the inside and outside probably think that it’s synonymous with MRA.  Well, when you have guys who carry the MGTOW sign while preaching men’s rights activism really loudly and still getting entangled with women, how can people not be confused?  Oh, that’s right…there are “different levels of MGTOW”, which is strange because everyone seems to want to stay a green belt, right?  Guys want to divorce themselves from womankind, but they still want to get laid somehow — being a monk or a recluse isn’t cool.

No no, I’m not getting back on cocaine…I’m just going to nibble at it.

Turd Flinging Monkey has some of the best commentary on the subject, and I respect the fact that he is being real about the sexual side of things, going all-out on love dolls.  On the other hand, I was a little bit disappointed at his video, “Talking Shit with Jaydie” (what I saw of it anyway, because I could only bear so much of it)…I mean, why someone like him would give time and attention to, and throw pearls of wisdom under a little twat like that is hard to explain, other than chalking it up to that good ol’ hardwired leash of influence that few men acknowledge, and many others think they can somehow beat — kind of like those people who think that they can drive drunk.  Now I’m not saying that Jaydie is going to worm her way into TFM’s brain or anything, but I do know that that’s how it starts.  Just because the average woman may not know how to change a car battery doesn’t mean that they aren’t very clever social tacticians and manipulators — never underestimate the amount of leverage they have on you as a man.

Avoiding all path-crossings with them is kind of hard, if you don’t live in a deserted island; but there is a difference between doing what you have to do in order to navigate around them through life, and becoming entangled.  Where is the line?  I would take it to the point of refusing to give them your contact information or befriend them on social media, unless it’s for strictly professional reasons (in which case you can put up the professional barrier and compartmentalize that engagement off from everything else).  I also think it’s wise to steer clear of any non-essential conversations with them, thus preventing them from finding a way to get into your head.  It’s understandable to make an exception for females in the family, but in some cases, even they may use female manipulation tactics on you, and it may be necessary to limit those relationships as well.  

Once you realize what MGTOW really entails, you may decide that it’s not quite for you, but unlike the futile exercise of trying to appeal to women, at least you’ll be clear about what the terms are.  No, you don’t have to be part of some online club and cheer on MRA rants — and as a matter of fact, you don’t even need to identify with the MGTOW acronym, because it’s a phenomenon that needs no name.  It’s a simple matter of having a true understanding of the hazard known as modern females, and staying away from that hazard.  It’s not a misogyny thing either — to quote a line from The Gods Must Be Crazy…

Even a poisonous snake is not bad.  You just have to keep away from the sharp end.

Just always remember: women, like men, are people…and that’s where the similarities end.  Do not become entangled.  Even the most innocuous and innocent-seeming entaglements can turn into big entanglements..and before you know it, you are in a bind that you wish you were out of.  It’s like one of the pilots’ favorite sayings: it’s better to be on the ground, wishing you were in the air, than being in the air and wishing you were on the ground.