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. 

Remember This Guy?


Yep, it’s Jeremy Meeks – the swingin’ dick bad boy thug from Stockton, California whose mugshot set women’s genitals on fire around the world.  The nice-guy incels took a slight bit of solace in the assumption that he was on his way to prison, and the immature women mooning for him would never get to see their hero rise to the glory they wanted for him…

Ah, how naïve.

According to the news, he’s now rich.  Apparently, modelling agencies and advertisers – who remember damn well what go them in business – knew right what to do with this phenomenon known as Jeremy Meeks.  Now he’s reaping the well deserved (?) (it doesn’t matter – you’ll just drive yourself nuts thinking about it) spoils of having women attracted to him.  Without their help, this genetic god wouldn’t be…well, the genetic god that he is.  Remember women decide a man’s worth – they are the voters.

meeks car

Do you have a car that nice?  Do you live in a mansion like that?  No?  Well then, you should have been a thug with good genes.  Crime pays…when you live in a world where crime turns women on.  Did you think you were going to work hard and make the right choices in life, and that was going to get you where he’s at?  Come on…  And by the way, don’t expect him to get cleaned out in divorce court, because there is no way that his wife is going to leave him.  Women only do that when they want to get the money away from the unsexy guy; conversely, this woman stayed with him in poverty because he was the sexiest man alive.  He may blow it all, just like Dave the bread maker – that I kind of expect because he didn’t get where he got by being smart and resourceful, and those skills are usually required to hang onto prosperity…but then, there will always be plenty of opportunities to rebound for a guy like this, and there well never be any shortage of pussy.

If everything or anything else on this blog hasn’t helped you to unlearn the lessons you have been taught about the opposite sex, and life in general, hopefully this will.

Cougars and Cubs: Gender Revenge?

Perhaps you never would have thought that you’d see women spitefully laud relationships between older women and younger men as a kind of revenge against men for the much more common arrangement of older men and younger women, but now that it’s on full display, you shouldn’t be surprised.

Apparently, French presidential candidate Emmanuel Macron, 39, is married to a woman who is 64 years old.

That cliche-busting fact — a candidate young enough to be his wife’s son, rather than old enough to be her father — is a little social “revenge” that delights many French women

It’s almost not worth hooking up with an older woman just to deny other women the satisfaction…oh, but even more, you would be denying them hope that they don’t deserve.  It’s not just about spite, but also about making older, worn-out sluts feel like they still have high sexual market value, which in turn prolongs their catty, hypergamous high school behavior.  Women don’t “mature” until circumstance forces them too.  Giving older women access to younger men rewards bad behavior.

Lilach Eliyahu, a fashion designer, said the fact that Macron has a wife who “has wrinkles and cellulite makes me think of him as a feminist. He is the opposite of Donald Trump.”

This brings us to an important question: how might this affect the election?

First, one has to understand that women vote with their vagina; meaning that women vote for the candidate that they are the most attracted to, when it’s man vs. man.  Even in the case of Clinton vs. Trump, it was the Donald’s hyper-alpha qualities that gave him a heretofore unheard of 53% of the white women’s vote, against the first major-party female candidate in history.  Try to imagine Jeb pulling that off…(yeah, I know you just laughed, because I did too).

Marine Le Pen is not helped by her gender any, because she’s right-wing, and women are natural socialists, plus you have to consider the Sweden factor – women in France are likely turned on by the influx of violent Muslim rape gangs taking over the country, and Le Pen vows to put a stop to all that.  While this hurts her with the women’s vote, this issue with Macron being seen now as an invirile beta and even a male feminist is a new and important development.  Even some feminists may turn against him over this, though they wouldn’t tell anyone.  A guy like that is good enough to get a pat on the head for being a good little boy and marrying his old hag teacher, but women are going to shrivel up between the legs at the thought of putting a milquetoast cuck like that in charge of it all…yeah, even in France.

I don’t know who is going to win this election, but my prediction is that he under-performs with women, by as much as five percentage points less than current polls predict.  If a man is estimated to be an under-performer in bed, he’ll be an under-performer in all aspects of life regarding women.

No Such Thing As “Divorce”

Most people define a divorce as the end of a marriage, but that’s not actually true, if you think about it.  Certain aspects of marriage end, but others continue, sometimes for years.

Civil marriage is a contract, forming a corporation between two people, of all of their financial and many other legal affairs.  Unlike other contracts, parts of it can be dissolved by one of the parties, for any reason or no reason at all — completely arbitrary.  The parts that are dissolved include: the man’s right to his children; fidelity and exclusivity; shared residence; and of course, sex and love.  Of the aforementioned, the part about children is really the only halfway enforceable one — all of the others are ceremonial, and not actual commitments at all.  The parts of the marriage that continue are the fiancial aspects, most of which are burdens that fall on the man and are predicated on “maintaining the lifestyle that she is accustomed to”.  Yeah, just try to get un-married from those legal obligations.

So many times, I have heard men say it at the time they get married: “Well, ya know, it’s for her.”  Oh, famous last words…  He thinks he’s talking about the wedding ceremony itself, which he couldn’t give a rat’s ass about, but she’s been dreaming about since she was a girl.  What he might stop to think about is the fact that the marriage itself is also for her.  Think about it — what protections and benefits are built into marriage for the man’s sake?  You’ll hear propagandists hock a buch of specious statistics about higher average salaries and healthy lifestyles, as if marriage is an easy substitute for personal motivation toward those things.  The bottom line is that the civil protections of marriage are pretty much all for the benefit of the woman, and what the man got out of the deal was sex and children.  Guess what: in the modern age, all bets are off when it comes to the woman’s “duties”, but like never before, the man’s legal ensarements are enforced with unreasonable callousness and enthusiastic gynocentricism, often by a female family court judge.

So this makes you wonder if the only reason marriage still exists today is because men just aren’t thinking about it, or are ignoring the facts, or if pressure of tradition is really that great — or all three.  If a man ever brings these obvious problems up, the typical retort will be something like, “Well, you have to make sure that you marry the right one, see…”  Do these people ever stop to think about this?  Essentially everyone who gets married thinks they’re marrying “the right one”, but at least half of them are wrong, so what makes any man think that he’s got a handle on vetting women any better than the next guy?  If anything, those who pressure young men into marriage (parents, aunts, etc.) only cause them to ignore inhibitions that might save him from disaster…ah, but then, it’s all for her, after all.

The Bandito and the Biker

Just think…  This piece of shit has a woman, and you don’t.

You can bet that she stayed with him after this.  Hate to break it to the biker, but she was probably impressed with her boyfriend’s behavior – it showed that he has good genes.

Women’s choice in men says everything you need to know about them, not just as individuals but about womankind generally.


Researchers Blame Millennials Yet Again For the State of Marriage

It’s starting to become a joke.

Another blaring headline, this time from Bloomberg, that reads Young Americans Are Killing Marriage heads up an article with “new” research showing how the marriage rates have declined for 25-30-year-olds since 1980, and draws the same predictable conclusion: that the blame rests squarely on these despicable “kiddults” who are failing to grow up.

Every time you see an article like this, there is never any shortage of voices bringing truth and clarity to the issue, usually found in the comments section.  There’s usually no way to know for sure the age of those commenting, but they almost all speak the truth – that the rise of feminism and no-fault divorce has killed marriage, while poor economics and worthless education delays it further.  It’s no mystery to regular people what has happened in the last 50 years or so.

You would think that the think tanks who come up with these socially conservative studies, like this National Center for Family and Marriage Research or perhaps the National Marriage Project at UVA, would have picked up on this stuff by now and would have pushed it to the forefront, right?  Yet, you never seem to see that.  Even if they give those ideas a token acknowledgement, the conclusions they draw always seems to whitewash that, and leans right into traditional Protestant/feminist/complementarian male-shaming.  The dishonesty of it is troubling enough, but do they think that their strategy of pressuring men to marry with these things is actually going to work?  Seriously, is whining about the status quo, and ignoring the reason that are obvious to everyone else, going to produce even one more marriage?

It’s never a good idea to assume that people are in a vacuum, but sometimes their rigid agenda really makes you wonder.

How Women Use Pepper Spray 

This is an example of what modern women think is a justified use of self-defense spray..

It’s called “female entitlement”.  It’s only going to get worse if allowed to go unchecked.  What can you do about it?  Simple: carry pepper spray also, and make sure to get in the first shot.  Always assume that when a woman is getting angry with you, she’s about to spray you…because she probably is.

Oh, and don’t let the NAWALT cucks tell you that this doesn’t represent most women.

The Billboard of Gender Futility

A headline on Drudge Report today read, “BLLBOARD FURY: PROTEST PLANNED“, and featured the picture below…


Now when you see this, what is your first reaction?  Most of us probably think that the sponsor is some socially-conservative Protestant do-gooder, who thinks they can shame men into returning us to some Victorian era of chivalry and male headship, despite impossibly feminized modern headwinds.  That’s likely an accurate description of those responsible, although the “organization that bought the space doesn’t want to be identified”, the article said (how very interesting).  They are probably on the same level as those who posted billboards years ago with sayings like, “Just keep swearing…God is going to make you sit in traffic even longer.”

For a moment, the idea of a protest over the sign was refreshing, as this should offend every man who feels that he shouldn’t have to be a walking ATM to have worth — not that “real men” have the time to go out and protest things like this.  Ah, but of course, it’s not men protesting…yup, it’s women who are up in arms, and not on men’s behalf, but because they feel that it’s sexist against women.

“We are NOT protesting that the sign is capable of existing, or the people who put it up, or the ad agency, or the right to put it up. We are protesting patriarchy and sexism, and that this antiquated way of thinking about women exists at all.”

There you have it.  It is sexist and patriarchal to expect gratitude from women.  Of course these women aren’t against men providing, as taxpayers and bureaucrats, providing all kinds of help and incentives for women — as well as handicaps for men — so that they can “compete” in the real world and someday close that (fake) gender wage gap.  But the thought of a man and a woman living in a traditional “nuclear family” situation, and the wife having gratitude for her oppression?  Totally unacceptable.

This is another example of what you are dealing with in modern women.  This is how impossible, irrational and inclement they are, and why going your own way is the safest and most practical life plan.

You’re damned if you do and damned if you don’t: they’ll get angry if you provide for them, and get angry if you want them to take care of themselves; they’ll get angry if you “ogle” them, and get angry if you give the the cold shoulder; they’ll get angry if you don’t chase them, and get angry if you don’t take the hint and buzz off; they’ll get angry if you make more than they do, and get angry if you make less than they do; they’ll get angry if you don’t treat them like a “lady”, and get angry if you “put them on a pedestal”; they’ll get angry at men for dominating the workplace, and get angry at men who don’t have a job; they’ll get angry for suggesting that men are better at anything, and get angry if you don’t grab something off the top shelf for them; they’ll get angry if you favor traditional gender roles, and get angry if you don’t pay for the date; they’ll get angry if you believe that there are differences between genders instead of “gender” being a social construct, and they’ll get mad if you dare hit a woman.

In modernized women, you are dealing with immature people who are always angry, confrontational and don’t know what they want.  Don’t ever give someone like that a vote on the course of your life.  There may have been a time when marriage worked, but that is a bygone era…and don’t let some anonymous billboard social trolls convince you otherwise.  Let modern women tell you themselves, in their actions and reactions.