Showing posts with label #lies. Show all posts
Showing posts with label #lies. Show all posts

Wednesday, 28 November 2018

Forget Why

Why is irrelevant.

Do you get that? Completely irrelevant.

There is no rational why.

I remember back to the ending "conversation" with my last girl, must be close to three years ago now. ("Conversation" hah! She turned up at an awkward time of night, barged in, and was basically being a self-centered bitch on the whole instead of leaving me alone when I made it clear that I wasn't interested any more.)

I got her the hell out of my home in the guise of "dropping her off to her hotel". She asks if she'll be seeing me again.

Me: No.

Her: Why not?

Me: I don't want to.

Her: Finish that sentence! (A quite loud'n'clear self-centered "I am entitled to know why!")

Me: I don't want to see you again. (Yeah, it's a total lack of interest, now stay the fuck away.)

Her face scrunches up and she heads away to her room, probably because I shattered her heart'n'soul. I leave, not caring at all.

Yes, teh wimminz would call me a fuckin' psychopath. Given what she did to me, there was no interest left on my side. That is my "why" for treating her like that.

Yet still. There is no "why" in life.

There is only: I want to X/I don't want to X.

I want to see you again. I don't want to see you again.

I want to fuck you again. I don't want to fuck you again.

I want to read that book again. I don't want to read that book again.

I want to see that movie again. I don't want to see that movie again.

I want to continue hanging around those people. I don't want to continue hanging around those people.

Why? I can come up with a million "reasons" for "why". They're not relevant. Not really. The "why" is just the brain attempting to provide a rational reason of some type. A rational reason for an internal emotional reaction.

Essentially it boils down to: I want to / I don't want to. The rest of the palaver is just social self-justification and face-saving.

In the guts of it, the want-to/don't-want-to is an emotional inner reaction, not something intellectually reasoned out. Not in the guts of it.

She wants to fuck you. She doesn't want to fuck you.

She wants to fuck you again. She doesn't want to fuck you again.

Why do you care why? Why do you want to know why?

Forget why. There is no why. There is only a gut-basic reaction, a feeling, of: "I want to / I don't want to".

She wants a boyfriend. She doesn't want a boyfriend.

She wants to be married. She doesn't want to be married.

She wants to be married to you. She doesn't want to be married to you.

She wants to part her legs for you. She doesn't want to part her legs for you.

Even when the basic "I don't want to" shatters her/your soul. And you, or her, start going down down down the rabbit-hole of emotional turmoil and horseshit.

>>>> Why?!?!?!!!! <<<< Add insistent whiny brat emotional crap as appropriate. You and/or her both.

There is no why. Down at the core, it just fucking is.

Make me want to, rather than not want to. Teh wimminz, leftists, femiwhores, the unwashed mass of generally shitty people on the whole, will never truly grasp that. Make me want to, rather than not want to.

Being a complete cunt is not making me want to X. It makes me not want to X. Fill in the X with whatever is appropriate.

Summertime in New Zealand. I'm starting to do more outdoor stuff.

Why? I want to. There may be many "reasons". They all boil down to: I want to.

Deep down in the guts of it. It's an emotional thing. There's no real reason as such for it. That's why.

Saturday, 9 June 2018

Dying of Laughter

Strangely enough, once you get further into the Red Pill/MGTOW mindset - the lies aka toxic crap which is served up from teh wimminz just starts to make you laugh.

This particular one made me choke, I laughed that hard: 50 Things That Make A Man More Attractive (According to Women) (go ahead, it's on archive.is - no clicks from here for those fuckers).
Don't believe the rumors - women aren't just looking for abs, man buns, and impossibly white smiles (though they're all definitely very nice things). Most of the qualities ladies look for aren't even down to physical appearance, so don't stress if you haven't been hitting up the gym. Because there are just so many ways that men can be attractive, we've had to compile a mega list of 50 items. So, settle in and get ready to learn what women want. #41 is the most important according to women!
Time to translate this dogshit propaganda-shaming-hit-piece to reality:

1/ A sense of purpose. Because that can be twisted to becoming something that matches her puposes.

2/ The ability to fix things. Enjoy your honey-do list - slave.

3/ Love for his family. This can be twisted to caring for her and her womb-turds - slave.

4/ Goals and dreams. They can be twisted for her purposes - especially, twisted towards making $$$ to sustain her in the manner to which she wishes to become accustomed.

5/ Possession of some old-school class. Ahhh, chivalry is so very dead...dead, dead, dead...feminism killed it with extreme prejudice...but don't worry, she will happily train him to be an attentive slave.

6/ Communication skills. So she can gather ammunition to fuck you over mentally and emotionally for the rest of your life.

7/ Attentive in the bedroom. Though a 7+ inch dick that's massive around helps good too.

8/ Has good manners. Because the words fuck off you crazy cunt hurts her feelz.

9/ Confidence without the attitude. Not that she knows the difference.

10/ The ability to make people laugh. She's very happy to laugh - so long as you're paying the bills and otherwise entertaining her.

11/ Admitting when he's wrong. And he's always wrong, even when he's not - it's ever so nice to aver and affirm to her that you're a pussy who is easily pushed around.

12/ Intelligence. Yeah, no...it only counts if he's easily manipulated despite his smarts, otherwise he might catch on to the bullshit.

13/ Not afraid of commitment. Not that she knows what that is. It's also really unfair when she drives him away with her bullshit - he's afraid to commit!

14/ Full of surprises. The nice ones which involve giving her expensive gifts and paying her attention, not the ones involving surprise buttsex.

15/ Cooking skills. Her having to do so much around the house - it's nice when it can be pawned off on her slave.

16/ Dad potential.
17/ Motivation. It saves her from having to crack the whip. Yeeeee-hah! Move it, slave!

18/ Unafraid to grow. In the directions that will benefit her.

19/ Loveable nerdiness. Heheheheheheh! Yeah...

20/ Good cuddles. Because it's all about her.

21/ Willingness to help out. Take out the garbage. Slave.

22/ Ability to have fun. So long as she's having fun - entertain meeeeeee!

23/ Concern for the environment. Cheap shit from China is more important - there is no environment there. At least it's not in her back yard.

24/ Loves our flaws. Her most important flaw being the extreme number of cocks that she accidentally fell on.

25/ Strong moral fiber. Yeaaaah...it's always fun to break that down, she if she can get him to cheat with her...that cock in her mouth tastes very sweet, just like victory...

26/ Courageousness. She's not gonna fuck him, but she does appreciate him doing shit for her.
27/ Faithfulness. Blindness to her fucking around helps, too. No, you can't paternity test that womb-turd I pushed out - don't you truuuust me?!

28/ A sense of protectiveness. Variation on another white-knight.

29/ Emotional stability. It's so much fun trying to break this with every load of random emotive bullshit that she can dream up.

30/ Financial maturity. Cha-ching! $$$$$$$$$

31/ Good grooming. As Popp once said: She marries the pretty-boy, and 10 years later finds out that he's gay.

32/ Patience. It's so much fun for her to jack him around. Great emotional payoff for her when he loses it, too.

33/ The ability to forgive and forget. Like those 32 cocks she accidentally fell on. Not that she will forgive and forget anything that he does.

34/ Responsiveness. He's paying attention to me! How cuuuuute! (But only if she wants to fuck him, otherwise it's creepy as fuck shit.)

35/ Curiosity (especially if it's about her and her life).
36/ Respectful of boundaries. Her boundaries - heaven help you if you start inquiring what she was doing last night with the girls with Chad.

37/ An interest in the world. Because travel on his dime is sooo much fun. Hey, is that some new dick I can accidentally fall on?

38/ Health. Only if their health levels match, and once there's a ring on it she'll pull the pin on the fat-grenade.

39/ Not afraid of PDA. You sensitive new-age guy soyboy you...oooo Tyrone over there looks extra-spunky...

40/ Willingness to say I Love You. It better be in the form of an expensive fucking ring, honeymoon, wedding dress, and 1200ft McMansion. Slave.

41/ Appreciation. You will appreciate her. She gives not one shit for you - until the $$$ suddenly hit a bump or disappear. Then you'll know all about it.

42/ Physical desire. She can always find someone else. The sex dries up once the "I do" has been said. (As one poor bastard reader of mine found out within a year. Sheeit.)

43/ Leadership skills. At work only, because that translates to more $$$ for her to spend. Don't even think about pushing her around, you male chauvinist pig sonofabitch.

44/ Authenticity. It's okay for her to play you, it's not okay for you to play her. You male chauvinist pig sonofabitch.

45/ Decisiveness. So long as she doesn't have to think and it all goes smooth and sweet. Did I mention about pushing her around? You male chauvinist pig sonofabitch.

46/ Reliability. It's always nice to have Ole Reliable White Knight to pull her out of awful shituations (spelling deliberate) that she got herself into. It's also nice to cry on your shoulder about Jesse being a bastard - before she goes and fucks him again.
47/ Integrity. Which she knows nothing about herself, but she's real happy that he's not gonna do something dodgy on her. Pussy.

48/ Domestic ability. Slave.

49/ Generosity. Hand over those $$$ fucker.

50/ Self-respect. This is to be crushed. With extreme prejudice. Slave.

After all that sarcasm and hilarity - I leave you with a toast. I raise my Grand Marnier to you my Brothers. Always, go your own way.

Sunday, 8 April 2018

Why Women Are Dishonest

Over on /r/MGTOW is a very basic question "Why are American women so dishonest about what they find attractive?":
This makes me annoyed. Why are women so dishonest about what they like. For example in a reddit once I talked about body image issues with men and how they were unhealthy. Of course some chick barged in and said she "only likes what is on the inside and does not like muscly guys"
this made me annoyed and I told her she was full of shit and knows it.
(got banned from that sub by king arthur's white knights at the round table lol).
She denied up and down how she was not attracted to muscly guys. On campus, i see chicks talk about how they "don't like muscly guys" well, their behaviour shows otherwise they are constantly flirting with muscly guys.
Hey nothing wrong with that! you like what you like just be honest!
I can actually SYMPATHIZE with a lot of women.
I shamefully admit I have gay tendenceies. Like I have been physically attracted to fit muscly men. (lol I know that is super gay but I am being 100% honest.) some of those guys had shitty personalities but I liked them better than the smaller nice guys because of their physical appearance.
Why are guys more honest about what they like in a woman?
like most guys like genuinly curvy women (NOT fat) with, large breasts, and thick lips and healthy skin and a nice personality.
Why do women lie about liking "nice guys" but don't just say: "I like a muscly assertive man and am not interested in smaller passive guys".
That would solve 90% of dating issues today.
Its as if guys would say: "I don't like sexy chicks, I like fat chicks with a nice personality" But then they would blow off all of the fat chicks and only pay attention to the hot chicks.
What is so hard about this?
sorry for my spiel.
Ignore the bit about him having gay tendencies: that's his biz and I'm not going to attack him for his honesty. See, he is asking a very relevant question - no matter who asks it.

I'm also cutting his question down to the bare-bones essentials. Not just American women - all women are dishonest. Not just about what they find attractive - dishonest, period, about everything.

They are dishonest - they lie - to stay in practice.

They lie to their family, friends, boyfriends, acquaintances, random people in the street.

You know the types of things. "I'm on the pill." "It's your baby." "He raped me!" "It's not my fault!" "I couldn't do X because of Y (bullshit reason)." "I didn't know!" "I was with the girls. (She was getting fucked by Chad.)"

Most of all, they do this so that they can lie to the Police, Judge and Jury, their Lawyer, the world at large, etc - when it comes down to the final crunch. That time in front of the police, the lawyer, the court. They can lie with an absolutely straight face as they make claims that you are violent and abusive and should never-never-never be allowed anywhere near the children. Though you should pay her out the wazoo for raising them.

By the time she's finished with lying about you to all and sundry, you are the type who would rape your own children and kill and eat the babies that resulted from it.

Oh sure, there are a very rare few (the 10-20% who got snapped up real young and who actually stay in a relationship because they are near-NAWALT material) who don't lie all the time. That still leaves a lot of room: "only" 30% of the time, rather than 100% of the time, is still lying.

Old joke: How do you tell when a woman's lying? She's talking.

Good luck with all that.

Brought to you by Crap-Colored Glasses™, only $1k the pair and cheap at 10x the price.

Sunday, 27 August 2017

Confused Poison

A long time ago I wrote about women lying even to themselves:

Female Best Intentions

Female Doublethink and Self-Deceit

I've been thinking further about this off-and-on for the last couple of years, though it's been a slow process. (Many other things contributing to being busy-as and competing to take up my personal life.)

It has slowly grown upon me that women are poisonous. Yet, not in the way you might think.

The poison is inside.

Yes, many of them go into situations with the best intentions. All concealed by personal self-deceit, so that they don't screw their "performance" up.

Now lets look at this deeper.

There is something about a man that fascinates her. Interesting. Irresistible. To the point where she will hang on his every word, do what he wants, etc.

If she's lucky (and he's not) eventually she "captures" that man.

That is the point where she starts, for some unfathomable reason, to poison everything that fascinates her about him.

I experienced this myself in the most intimate way. Back before my marriage, I did a lot of walking: beach, hill climbs, semi-tramping, swimming (in the sea), etc. Quite active.

When my wife-to-be and I got involved, she "liked" the same things. The chameleon at work, hah!

Marriage. *BANG* No further interest in the things that I did.

Oh, I could do them. I was free to do that by myself.

If I didn't mind being sub-rosa guilt-tripped because of it. Being made to feel like a bad person for going off by myself.

Not spending every single moment with her was A Bad Thing™.

Eventually I crumbled, slowly poisoned, my life more and more constrained. Only what *she* wanted mattered. Doing things with *her* was all that was allowed.

An insidious, creeping poison.

Now, dig into her psyche. Where the self-lies and doublethink and self-deceit hide from her, herself, what she is in the process of doing.

In her mind (and that of women, and those who subscribe to women's thinking - aka all the pathetic men out there who would happily lick up her runny shit for a sniff at that vagina) she's not doing anything wrong. It's just "oh...you don't want to be around me..." And sub-rosa patheticness and tears, etc.

If you're anything less than hard as stone, you'll eventually succumb to that treatment. Hell, even stone will eventually wear away.

Especially if you're not consciously aware of:

1/ what she's doing

2/ without her actually knowing

3/ and what the end result will be

The end result is a shell of a man who she eventually frivorces and dropkicks out of her life - because he's literally not the man she married. Literally. As Anonymous stated on Personal Time and Space is Golden for Men: his counselor spent a couple of months talking with him about what he likes to do in his life.

It's all been poisoned, shit upon, ripped away.

However. Due to plausible deniability, due to self-delusions, due to personal doublethink - she will absolutely deny that she has done anything to cause this change. At all. And 100% believe in this denial.

It's quite plausible too, when you consider that no thought or retrospection is involved on her part. She doesn't reflect on it, her part in the process never happened. Massive mental disconnect, very childlike on the whole. Women, the most responsible teenager in the house. Confused as hell, even about themselves.

In this situation, it's a subtle poison - a toxic waste - that she doesn't realize that she's dumping out there. One which slowly kills everything that she finds fascinating and amazing about her man.

The personal scars resulting from her own poison have by this time screwed up her own life. She's going to be pulling that freight-train of bullshit, spite, and bile around forever. Again, she doesn't see the destruction that she's caused - nor that it's her own fault. For her own self-protection, she is incapable of seeing it.

Similarly, women "friends" rally around her - because they cannot see it also. Deliberately, for their own self-protection as well. So they look to protect themselves, each other, and blame the "other" for the situation. In this case: the man.

It's 100% scapegoating behavior. We all do it: damn niggers/jews/asians/etc. Fucking bosses. Useless workers. Stinking money-grubbing rich bastards. Shithole bankers. Greedy fuckers have done fucked up everything.

Whenever something goes wrong, it's damned hard to look at it and decide if it actually was ourselves responsible for the mess. Ultimately responsible - whether individually, or in aggregate.

A lack of self-awareness, lack of reflection, and lack of thinking through - very thoroughly! - the consequences will do that to you.

In the end, the poison is comprised of confusion and self-deceit. A poison that will result in destroying everything that you (men and women) find worthwhile, transcendent, in this world.

As an example: look at the third-world hellhole we are turning our society into.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not sure if you're still out there and reading this, Anonymous. I've gone down many rabbit-holes over the past couple of years. If you're still there, hopefully this will continue to resonate with and be of worth to you.

Thursday, 22 December 2016

Dying or Growing

What many people still do not realize is what the entire BS about the Brexit and American Election is actually about.

Now, us out here in the desert of the real world know it in our guts. Even though we can't articulate it that well, we know. It was a choice between growing or dying.

Originally I was thinking it was a choice between stasis and growth. Something about that seemed wrong, though. A little bit off. After all:

* the telecom bust

* the dot-com bust

* the (massive) property (and banking) bust

These three things by themselves wiped out a good chunk of an entire generation's savings in the past 20 years. With those savings went a good chunk of that generation's hopes and dreams.

That situation wasn't even remotely stasis - it's things getting flushed down the crapper. Getting measurably worse.

So Hillary promises no changes "business as usual", while Trump promises changes. Hillary promises to continue the destruction that's happening, Trump promises to start things growing again.

No real surprises why Trump won. Despite the overwhelming BS from the media, despite the delusional conviction of the Leftists that everyone who disagrees with them is insane and A Bad Person™, the average person could see the writing on the wall.

This simply proves that Leftists are insane or mentally defective. To the point where they probably should be locked away for the good of society, like any other sick and deluded psychopath.

See, sensible people are all about reality. Try something, if it doesn't work, try to figure out why and/or don't do that any more. (Like jamming your fingers into a power-socket or leaning on a red-hot stovetop. Sensible people learn, generally quickly.)

Leftists are incapable of seeing reality - they can only see the warped and twisted map in their head. This makes them incapable of learning. When they try something and it doesn't work, they just do it again. Over and over and over. Doubling down on their delusions every time.

Pure definition of insanity right there, doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

It's no wonder that they have the urge to wrap the world (and themselves) in cotton wool. It's a defense mechanism. That way they can continue to delude themselves that Rotheringham never happened, Cologne never happened, the gang-raping of a young boy in Norway never happened, the rape of a young girl in Idaho never happened, and pizzagate never happened...

I throw in pizzagate just to add another search-result to the pile out there. I don't seriously imagine that we'll ever learn the truth of all that. Far more likely that a few people will quietly disappear or the like. I do think that there's some serious shit going on with it, though.

Just like the whole Obama's birth-certificate fiasco. The issue isn't anything to do with if Obama was born in the USA or not - the issue is really why did those fuckers in Washington feel the need to lie about it?


Also, what else are they fucking lying about?

Because that bullshit - an officially-released document that is revealed to be a forgery, no less - completely, finally, and totally undermines all credibility of the American Government. When it comes to anything and everything, they will lie and cover it up. They cannot be trusted in any way.

Swallow that bitter black pill down, America. Keep a very close eye on Trump and co. I think that we will find out within 3-6 months what the next 4 or 8 years of Trump's term(s) will be like. Also, the remainder of our lives - and those of any children, grandchildren, et al that you may have.

Will America continue to die? Or will it start growing again? Will the West be dying or growing once more? Ditto for society? Will we be able to stand once more and stride confidently into the future? Or do we hunker down and passively resist an overwhelming tyranny?

Stasis as a civilization, as a society, is impossible. You can't balance on the edge of a fucking razor-blade, you will go one way or the other. Despite the mental delusions of Leftists and Feminazis, what is currently happening cannot stay as-is: it must change, for the better or worse.

No matter how much teh wimminz scream and howl and bitch about it, if it should go against their delusional desires - it will be done.

Wednesday, 30 November 2016

Gone Girl Doublethink

So an old working-buddy of mine has been struggling the last month or so with the fact that his wife and him split up. (Delivered out of the blue. By her. On a weekend. As is anecdotally common.) I'm wondering how long it will before she gets on tinder, looking for her first dose of post-separation hot-beef-injection. Also what it will do to him when he finds out.

Thinking about this brings to mind a personal Gone Girl, from back in the days when I used tinder semi-regular. Also, about the self-protective doublethink mentality of girls on tinder in general.
My particular Gone Girl was a blue-eyed redhead. Probably rate her a 6-7, closer to 6 - she would have been a stunner in her youth, age 44-ish at the time of meeting. Pleasingly slim and firm body (she swam daily) with a slightly tired face (that's what made her closer to 6). She made all the right noises about me, was interested, etc etc etc. One thing was wrong though: pinpoint pupils.

At this point I knew: she wasn't actually interested, she just wanted someone to get her rocks off with. Some casual chit-chat and she revealed that she'd been separated for 6 months. Yep, she just wanted her first dose of post-separation hot-beef-injection - I was available and had the muscles she liked and had the right mix of intellectual and bloody-minded personality to make me plausibly seem to be her type.

BUT there was no way she was gonna say "I just wanna get my rocks off" - far too slutty for the ego to take (she was a self-proclaimed intellectual). So she was looking for something long-term.

Okay.

So, after a decent enough time of chatting, getting to know each other via text, etc - on the second date she got her rocks off.

A couple of days later comes the expected text (note that this is the actual text - I took a screensnap and keep it in the cloud, just in case of a false rape allegation):
After much thought and deliberation I am only ready to be friends. I hope that is okay with you. I really like you but I don't think I'm ready for more right now. :-( *cuddles*
 At this point she has sub-rosa doublethought herself out of her predicament:

* she's gotten her rocks off
* she's convinced herself that she's not a slut, it was simply a mistake, and is now virtuous
* she's offered an olive branch, a sop, to the guy she got her rocks off with

These are all self-affirmations of empowerment and virtuousness. She's reasoned out that what she really wanted to have was just a mistake, she has re-framed it in a better light, and she is now a born-again virgin once more.
Now on my part, I can:

* accept and be an orbiter in the hope that she'll jump my cock again one day (win for her)
* be a passive-aggressive pussy towards her (which is nasty of me and validates her decision)
* ignore her because she's fucking mental (which is also nasty of me and validates her decision)

Note that all three leave her validated - whatever I might do she wins emotionally and socially in the doublethink sweepstakes. I personally chose the last option: ignoring her because she's fucking mental. At least that way I don't have to deal with her bullshit.

So, I'm not 100% sure how profiles are on tinder and online dating these days - there used to be a lot of blank ones on tinder, no text at all. (At least that's more sensible than the fucktards who are "420-friendly" and shit like that. Talk about advertising your stupidity.) Why might this be?

It's so she can say whatever might seem appropriate to the man that she finds attractive, when she actually wants to get her rocks off. Doublethink.

Which brings me back to my friend, separated from his ex. How long might it be before she jumps on tinder looking to jump on a handy cock?

I'm picking another five months.

Here's to you buddy - it's gonna be a rocky road, and this is your second wife that's jumped ship. Hopefully you ain't dumb enough to try for a third time.

Thursday, 13 October 2016

Check Your Privilege

No, not your male privilege. Shut your mouths, you feminazi hoes - unless you want a dick in it. Then get down on your knees, we'll oblige.

Your fuckin' urban privilege, you white university educated bitch.

Over on Cracked there is a two-page article about How Half Of America Lost Its Fucking Mind. It explains the whole Donald Trump phenomenon, referencing and explaining the tropes behind movies, and lays it out like shit on a shingle.

It's actually quite fuckin' awesome.

Which leads to a question, for all those feminazi cunts out there.

If Donald Trump is a rapist to be reviled and all that sorta shit...

...who the fuck bought 80 million copies of Fifty Shades of Shit?

(Yeah I know, thought I'd run outta stuff to say for the moment. Who'd'a fuckin' thought.)

Friday, 19 August 2016

Social Dysfunction

More and more women openly exhibit what can only be described as social dysfunction and deviant behavior.

Which is pretty much what we're all on their case about, out here in the desert of the interwebs.

Which is why we'll never be mainstream (thank God!).

At any rate, you can see it in all their interactions. With everyone. The frenemies, their boyfriends, their workmates, all that stuff: cuckoo coco-puffs out the wazoo.

They state that men are socially clueless...then go to stab their "best friend" in the back at every possible opportunity.

They can't even be happy, bubbly, and joyful with themselves. (I've met exactly one girl like this - happy, bubbly, and joyful - in the past 6 years - she was 19.) So twisted and fucked up that they have to warp everything into misery - and drag everyone else into the same fucked up state.

So pathetic. "Like, wow, man" levels of pathetic.

It's worse, though. Because most of us men are so fucked up that most of us listen to them. (Have you really listened to them? I mean, really? It's an unending drone of minutiae and drivel. Enough to drive you out through insanity, to the clear and calm waters of peace on the other side.)

We men on the whole listen to them - at least enough to try and shut them up by giving them what they say they want. Because of this, we have warped our entire social structure into the same dysfunctional state as their fucked up heads.

To illustrate:

A male teacher fucks a 14yo female student. Rape! Instant 10 years of getting assfucked by Bubba and the rest of the boys.

A female teacher fucks a 14yo male student. She gets put on the sex offender list. A slap on the wrist with a limp noodle.

This isn't just double-standards and hypocrisy (though it certainly is that).

It is prime warning that our society is dysfunctional to an extreme.

(Was it 21 Jump St - the movie - which featured an "underage" undercover copper fucking his teacher? This deviant behavior is considered to be so normal that it's now popular entertainment?)

Brought to you by Crap Colored Glasses™, only $1k the pair and cheap at 10x the price.

Saturday, 30 July 2016

Welcome to the Divorce-Grinder

Thanks to the men over at /r/MGTOW, I have discovered this particular webpage:

Marriage Statistics

Back on my post What do you like to do? I showed that it was more like a minimum of 53% of marriages end up in divorce (because the divorces were only reported from 44 of the states in the USA). In the page above they state 50%, though I can forgive them for that.

What I find very interesting is the failure rate of first marriages (a couple of tables up from the bottom):
First Marriage Survival (Probability of lasting more than 10 years) [Bold mine. - BPS]
Probability that a first marriage will survive 10 years = 6.6 % - 1 in 15
If there was no birth during marriage = 3.7 % - 1 in 27
If there was a birth before marriage = 6.5 % - 1 in 15
If there was a birth 0-7 months after marriage = 7.4 % - 1 in 13
If there was a birth 8+ months after marriage = 7.9 % - 1 in 12
If true (and I can see no reason why it wouldn't be - in fact, given the under-reported divorce stat I could make a case for these survival stats being slightly higher than reality) then this has to be the absolutely most damning piece of evidence against marriage in the USA. The entire Western World. (Hell, the entire world, period!)

So, look at those two statistics on that page. I'm'a spell it out:

50% of all marriages fail
--vs--
6.6% chance that a first marriage will survive 10 years

So the second statistic seems to be saying: 93.4% of all first marriages will fail within 10 years.

Which means the 50% of all marriages failing - might actually be within the first year. Only.

This fits in with my old post re the Real Divorce Rate in NZ.

I find this a very difficult poison pill to swallow. I can imagine it, though. If you think about it, reporting on the long-term chances of a first marriage failing at being over 93% - you'd just destroy the institution utterly. Not even the most stupid of male fools on this planet is gonna go for that. Maybe if you lobotomized him first.

It's more palatable (though still painful for men) to say "yeah, 50% of marriages fail". Try to minimize even that, sweep it under the rug, keep it outta the mainstream media as much as possible. Yeah, it won't happen to you, buddy. You live a charmed life. You're special. You're different from the rest. Yeah.

It doesn't seem like it's completely true, though. First year, sure. Further down the line though, once you've been her slave for 10 years, when there's some fairly substantial goods and money gathered together and put aside...

*pop*

...there goes your bubble.

From the above, 2.077 million men a year get married - of which ultimately 93% will be thrown into the divorce-grinder within 10 years of getting married. That averages out to 1.93 million married men every year getting screwed over and being stuck for x number of years (say, another 10+?) filling cupcake's pocket. During which time cupcake goes out and gets her vag crammed with as much cock as possible. (Anecdotally and depending, anyways - some P is Q != all P is Q.)

The more successful female predators getting a larger chunk of a slave's life due to being more patient? This really *is* the Art of Whore. The lawyers who take advantage of this, who feed off this, are the true bottom-feeding scum-sucking filth of this world. It's absolutely no wonder that divorced men with children loathe the Family Court system.

So. That's something pretty bitter and poisonous to have to swallow down, even for us men who've had our eyes opened to the bullshit around us. Just a matter of time, you're sure to be reamed anyway. Nothing else that I can think of shows as starkly just how disposable all men are in the eyes of the female sex.

Including our own sex - I ain't the sharpest tool in the shed, yet eventually even I twigged. Someone else will have caught it too. They know. They didn't open their mouths to try and sort it out - why/why not? Who knows?

By extension, it shows how truly screwed our civilization, our society, really is.

In my zombie-blue-pill-blinkered days, I basically had zero chance of achieving the lie that I'd been told all my life. No wonder that so many men these days resist the truth. No wonder that so many younger men resist marriage - they know that it's under-reported. It's actually way, way worse than we (at least, old fogies like me) had ever thought.

We are going to watch our civilization, our society, burn to the ground. I can see nothing that could possibly stop it, with that kind of shenanigans going on. Too much headwind against it. It would have to be an extremely radical (aka bloodily forceful and violent) social restructuring to actually make it worthwhile for men to keep things going. I don't know if the Western World has that kind of force left in them any more.

Brought to you by (an especially bleak look through) Crap Colored Glasses™ - only $1k the pair and absolutely priceless when it comes to getting pre-warning of your entire life and society and civilization and world going down the crapper. Probably sooner than you'd think and a helluva lot sooner than you'd like.

(I wonder what Terrence Popp and Blake of Redonkulas would make of this set of stats? Or Breitbart? Or would it be just too damn much to choke on?)
==================================================
ADDENDUM:

For a second and closer bleak look:

2.077 million marriages
-1.93 million eventual divorces
= 147,000 marriages every year which actually survive more than 10 years

Pathetic. Plus note that I don't comment upon the "happiness" of said marriages.

Monday, 18 January 2016

Hypergamy or Lazy Parasite?

Commentor Sven Sversen makes a great long comment on my post about women being Infantile:
"Hypergamy" is a term borrowed from biology, I believe. It refers to a preference for mating *upward*: Men don't want girls they look up to (Pyjama Boy does, if he wants a girl at all, but he's defective). Girls are only attracted to men they look up to. They are *only* attracted to men they consider superior to themselves.
Yeah, yeah, men *fantasize* about 10s. And some fantasize about girl-power action hero fantasy characters. But basically all men can happily be in love for their whole lives with very ordinary women who they consider weaker than themselves. If a man thinks his wife is stronger than himself, every man and every woman (most especially his wife) thinks he's a pussy, defective. A loser.
A man is happy if he's the source of strength. A woman is happy if HE is the source of strength. She is *miserable* if *she* is the source of strength. That's hypergamy.
Women absolutely require that their man be emotionally and physically stronger than them, and dominant. Dominant in an effortless, casual way. If he's not smarter and higher earning too, he'd better be a hell of a charming SOB.
I know a female statistician married to a senior fireman. You know how women are about firemen. He's a level headed, responsible man who leads men, sound judgment, proven physically brave, a great father, and pre-selected to hell and back -- well out of her league by any sane standards. She's unhaaapy because she makes more money and he doesn't put her in her place. Silly bitch. She should be on her knees thanking God for letting her have this man in her life.
But he doesn't know how to put her in her place, and she makes more money.
That's hypergamy. Nothing to do with pre-selection. It's about relative "value", as women perceive it in their narrow little pea brains. That woman has an IQ nearly as high as mine and knows ten times more math -- and she's got the brains of a goldfish.
I was just thinking about the dominance thing the other day. I'm pretty funny, faster on my feet than most. I have a hell of an imagination. I can improvise the craziest shit. It takes all that every day to keep my girlfriend submissive, and she ain't in my league by half, on looks or anything else. Plus I earn twice what she does, and she knows it. Silly American bitch. Delusional.
If I've got to work to stay on top of this one, WTF is the average guy supposed to do? Nine hours hanging sheetrock or some shit and he's supposed to come home and effortlessly dominate an exchange of repartee with some angry fat skank? How about you boil the fucking spaghetti and shut your trap, Jumbo?
Maybe you MGTOW guys have a point. These dumb bitches are psychotic.
For the record it looks like the term Hypergamy comes from the Social Sciences, according to Wikipedia (there's some contention between Evolutionary Psychology and Social Learning Theorists). It is very much worth reading what Wikipedia says about it - though keep in mind that Wikipedia is only the topmost fluff-and-bare-bones of any subject. We also need to keep in mind that anything to do with society and social sciences is open to observer bias and interpretation (including our own).

(I find it interesting that in India, the higher cost of arranging dowries for their daughters is causing some rural Indians to commit female infanticide in the form of aborting female fetuses. This makes me think back to the old times when men wanted SONS to help them on the farm, 'cause at least they were useful...)

(I also find it very interesting the feminist analysis/slant/propaganda HAH! They can say all they want that hypergamy must be analyzed in the context of a patriarchal system - doesn't mean that assertion is true. More on that later)

Definitely men would prefer a lower-attractiveness, less-hassle woman long-term. It's bad enough to be coming back from a hell day and then have to deal with someone who's decided to be Mz Bitch™ for the evening and night...you get no fuckin' rest. Which is their MO, if you're tired out you'll be more likely to give in and give Mz Bitch™ what she wants.

Totally correct about men and women being miserable if they think the man is the weaker of the couple. Yet it seems to happen all the time. Why the misery? It's social conditioning - the man should be the stronger, the woman the weaker. Yet, thanks to female machinations in society and laws: upon entering the marriage the man has no power, the woman has all the power. Instant reversal of all the power dynamics.

Further she will deliberately attempt to change her man into something weaker. Which is why so many men end up as hollow shells. Read my post on Personal Time and Space is Golden for Men - especially think about the bit in the middle regarding domestic abuse, flipped on it's head, if she were another man pulling that crazy nagging shit. On the whole, deliberately turning the man she loved into a nothing that she'd rather not waste spit upon is psychotic to an extreme.

So let's look at this harder. Women *say* that they want a man superior to them etc...yet their *actions* are a constant attempt to deliberately destroy that man. One of the things that we are so big on in the Manosphere, the PUA's and MGTOW's and MRA's alike, is a pragmatic rule of thumb: "When words and actions do not match, always believe actions."

By their actions these women are saying: "I want to destroy you."

Which action-message is pretty-much confirmed when we start looking at the statistics regarding common male-destructive situations involving: false rape accusations, false domestic violence accusations, and frivorce. Think about that, when you think about your constant struggle with being dominant over your self-stated bog-average and very-far-below-you girlfriend.

Let's look at your senior fireman. Strong, handsome, a leader - unfortunately his wife makes more money than he does. This makes him unhappy because as the highest money-earner, she's the one in control and he's not really able to put her in her place - which both situations likewise make her unhappy. Why might this be?

Once I read The Predatory Female and The Manipulated Man (both in the list of Worthwhile Books page up top) I realized three things:

1/ Women are parasites.

2/ Parasites are lazy.

3/ Women are therefore lazy.

And that is the root of so-called hypergamy.

Women are marrying up - to guys who make more money, or are of a higher social standing/caste than they are (which usually includes money) - because they can then slack off, pump out a couple kids, and be fucking lazy with the excuse of "looking after the children". (I remember that Terrence Popp put out a video about women pumping out kids every couple of years. Also look up the concept of baby-jail and women having whoopsies to deliberately trap men.)

This is why your fireman's wife is unhaaaapy. He's unhappy because he's been conditioned all his life that "the man brings in more than the woman", it's part of the social memes that we all run mentally. She's unhappy because she can't be a lazy cunt and slack off while bringing up kiddies - one of the easiest jobs out there, especially these days.

'Cause she's gotten used to a certain amount of dollars coming in, y'know, the lifestyle-thing and all to which she has become accustomed...she's not attracted entirely to the man above her, she's attracted to the potentially lazy life that he represents, and her current hubby just ain't cuttin' it on that front.

Recently I've been putting up the posts about interchangeable, and a couple of those posts are about society and relationships. The whole basis of those posts, the underpinning, is laziness taken to an extreme.

So let's have a thought-experiment. Let's suppose that you demonstrate the following:

1/ Paying cash for expensive things of quality (not crapple status items and electroshit hybrid cars, but *true* quality)

2/ Being quite happy with second-hand stuff that is cheap but serviceable

3/ Having absolutely no debt of any kind (no credit card, no car finance, no mortgage, no bank loan or overdraft)

4/ That you work only the required hours to do the above - by choice! - and absolutely refuse to work harder/longer

I know two guys in exactly this situation. One has a house of his own that he paid cash for and he never bothers with women. He never has. He got the money together by living with his parents until he was 29-ish, he's now pushing his 40's. He's basically invisible to women, plus being totally not interested.

The other guy is 27 and rents, probably will for life. Without fail, every time, the woman in his life eventually breaks it off - calls him a "loser" - and forgets he exists. Utterly dead to her. (I'm almost in this situation myself - while I like fucking women, they don't tend to stay long once they grasp how my mentality works - which is "buy to last a lifetime". I will not buy certain things more than once.)

Why does this happen to these guys?

Because they're not easy prey. Neither of them. The parasite cannot lure them into the debt-trap of buy-buy-buy, new-new-new, upgrade-upgrade-upgrade, must-keep-up-with-the-Joneses, etc for her benefit. She cannot leech off of them. Once that becomes clear she reverts to her default of laziness. Fuck it. All men are interchangeable. I'll go find another loser that I can wrap around my finger and turn into my slave.

It's also very interesting to note that those four things make up a good start to the ideal partner - for a man. You might call that the mythical NAWALT, which I have written about a couple of times.

The feminist slant on Wikipedia states:
Feminist analysis of hypergamy says the practice needs to be understood in the context of a patriarchial system: ...
Yet when we flip it on it's head, when we look at it in the context of a matriarchal system where the women call the shots, where the women receive the benefits, and where the women are the ones in ultimate control - it looks a helluva lot like a parasite fastening onto a host, a slaveowner driving their slave to the ragged edge and an early grave.

No wonder they demand that it be examined in the context of a patriarchy, examining it in the context of a matriarchy makes them look like parasites and slaveowners.

But then, we already know that slavery is alive and well.

And now it is my Monday AM. Time to sleep, to give over the on-call to someone else later today, do my work, go to the gym, and finally go for a relaxing wander down the local beach. No woman earbashing me, no parasite leeching off me...a Man's heaven on earth...

Friday, 15 January 2016

You Can't Negotiate

The problem is that when you are interchangeable - you can't negotiate.

Let's say that you're living in a country, call it whatever the fuck you want, and you've surrendered to an invader. They come in with their jackbooted troops, stepping on anybody and everybody they want, raping teh wimminz, killing the men who protest.

You now can't go back. Your country, your way of life, has already been handed over, now owned by the enemy. You do what he fuckin' says upon pain of death. If you're really lucky someone outside the entire mess will take up your cause.

So now all workers are interchangeable, anyone can take your place. You can't go back, you have no power, and if you don't like that they'll simply replace you.

Which IMO is all 110% relevant to the poor bastards in the Men's Rights Movement.

Men are already conquered, socially the country and society is ruled by teh wimminz and their quisling bootlickers. If you don't toe the line they gut you socially and hang you out to dry. Using the law and false rape accusations if they decide to fuck you over more permanently.

Think it can't happen to you? Because you've gone ghost? If you somehow piss off teh wimminz they will go out of their way to fuck you up big-time.

There are NO repercussions for them, even if you manage to prove your utter innocence and are completely exonerated.

Judge: "She lied to the court? You naughty girl."

Highly effective indeed. Like a slap on the hand with a fistful of cooked spaghetti.

Which is why you can have crazy shit like a wimminz who gets a restraining order on her boyfriend - still fucks him - later admits to all and sundry that she lied - and is STILL supported by all her female friends and the males who want to drop a fuck into her but are too chickenshit to outright ask if she wants a shag.

Monday, 21 December 2015

Female Life Choice Stupidity

Hold tight, this is gonna be harsh. Feminists, rejoice in your screwing-up and screwing-over of your own sisters. And the next generation of kiddies too. As a minimum.

So here, I am going to dig into the Child Poverty Monitor for New Zealand (note that the website says 2015, but it's actually based on 2012 statistics - it's supposed to be updated every 5 years). Here is the opening graphics from that page:
I will say, I find these pictures hard to take - 'cause I'm a really soft-hearted bastard when it comes to kids, grouchy and mean-spirited as I might come across here. You'd probably expect me to make nasty comments about if they're better boiled, roasted, or fried.

Have to admire the marketing and artistry that went into those images. Especially the kid with the Buzzy Bee - brings back memories of the one that my brother and I shared as a kid. Very well-designed to tug the heartstrings. You will note that the only male father-type shown isn't the type of man who wears a suit.

Now to give these numbers a cold, hard look:

14% material hardship
9% severe poverty
29% income poverty

Which adds up to: 52% of New Zealand children living in conditions of poverty. Of course, they may be misrepresenting the numbers - however, material hardship/income poverty/severe poverty I will assume to be completely separate poverty brackets. So I can with reasonable confidence add them together to get total poverty percentages.

Here's another nasty statistic. In New Zealand, 49% of children are born to single mothers (according to the NZ Government's own statistics).

Hmmm. Interesting.

What is the most important decision that any woman can make in her entire life?

Children.

Who she has them with. When she has them. Where she has them. How she has them. Why she has them.

Yet a large % of women and her parents are fucking this up.

They are making a major life-changing decision in such a wishy-washy, lackadaisical manner that it screws up their life for the next 20-odd years.

That's the prime years of their life, too. When they are young, when they should be alive and filled with joy and happiness. When they should be part of a well-knit and loving family, community, helping to bring up strong and wholesome children to be proud of in their later years.

Instead they're stuck with doing their best to make ends meet - even with the help of das guberment and it's confiscatory taxes, plus stealing money from the pocket of the putative father.

Stupidity uber alles.

I'm not saying that these women are dumb. Far from it. Some of them are quite smart chicks. Unfortunately when someone with a 161 IQ turns around and becomes a single mommy ("it just happened!" - fucktard) I simply have to shake my bloody head at them. What organ were you thinking with, girl?

And we disparagingly say that MEN think with their dick.
==============================
Let's dig through a few more things on the Child Poverty Monitor front page:

* Staying home from school because they don't have the full uniform - I'm kinda torn with this one. One hand says "school uniforms are expensive bullshit" while the other hand says "school uniforms are necessary to stop the kids from dressing inappropriately". Comes down to it: if the schools are that Nazi-like...I have no fucking idea.

* Many children don't go to the doctor when sick because they can't afford the appointment costs and medicine - semi-bullshit. Children under 6yo have no (zero) fees. Recently this has been extended to children under 13yo. That's an improvement, which is what the site is supposed to be set up to track anyway.

* Staying home from school because they don't have a lunch to take - semi-bullshit. I see, very often, very fat women (I'm talking Beluga fuckin' Whale size) with skinny children. There's food there. It just ain't goin' in the right mouth. The government also provides free breakfast since 2013, in the form of milk and weetbix.

* Doing badly at school, not getting a good job, having poor health, falling into a life of crime - I will say "yes" to that. All of these are contributed to by poverty. Been known for yonks.

* Digging further in, the incidence of child poverty in 1984 was 15% and now it's 29% (how the hell that adds up to 52% of children currently living in poverty I'm not sure - but we'll run with it for now). So the incidence of poverty is rising. I would go along with that - the incidence of juvenile delinquency and crime and general stupidity is rising as well, probably somewhere along the same rate.

* Take part in our campaign and tell New Zealand #itsnotchoice - BULLSHIT! It's not the child's choice, but it sure as shit was the momma's! He was good enough to part her legs for. He's not good enough to be her husband and help bring up children. He's making enough that it's worth stinging him for child-support for the next 15 years. She can fill her fat belly but not her kiddies.
==============================
It's interesting to me to note that the rise in child poverty seems to rise with the incidence of numbers of single mommies:

1986 - 5.8%
1991 - 7.0%
1996 - 7.8%

I can't find statistics for the rise in single mommies for last few years, beyond the 49% of all New Zealand children being born to single mommies. That alone is shocking enough, though. There must have been quite an explosion. If I assume that a single mommy has 2 kiddies on average, that means 25% of women in NZ are single mommies. The chances are probably much higher that it's only a single kid though, so maybe it's more like 40% of women are single mommies.

You can add to that the results of the 53% divorce-rate that I touch on here. The kiddies from these divorces most likely end up in the poverty-bracket also. They certainly end up in the "troubled" section of society.

Riddle me this: In what fucked-up society is a businessman who makes $150k a year - who certainly never beat the shit out of his wife - suddenly hit with a divorce/frivorce - and is considered by all and sundry to be a loser and not worth spit?

Remind me again: Why we are paying for these mutilated beggars?

Friday, 10 July 2015

Love Is A Many Splendored Lie

"I love you."

Yeah. You keep saying that.

"I love you."

Uhuh. Heard you before.

"I love you."

Whatever.

The word "love" - as repeated in various ways and with various intonations by teh wimminz - has as many and varying meanings as a woman wants to give it. Most only in the moment. To revise in the future when it's convenient. As fickle and changeable as teh wimminz themselves.

Which is fuckin' hard for us men to figure out. We use words in a manner which is pretty-much unvarying. We don't want them varying in the insane and roundabout ways that teh wimminz adore. Reason being that "run for your life there's a fuckin' sabertooth chasin' your ass" is a message you don't have the time for leisurely contemplation over - to try and figure out the real meaning that that cunt Sue was trying to put across in her sneaky little put down. Oh, that bitch!

"I love you."

Pull the other one, it's got bells on.

"I love you!"

I love you too, but I'm not in love with you.

The light dawns, both figurative and real. The seduction has faded with the night. The bloom has gone from the rose. The glaring light of day exposes the shabby furnishings and mean room. The Empress' clothing is strewn over the floor. The artifices designed to simulate a youthful shape are laid bare. The sagging and wrinkled flesh is plain to see.

"I love you." With a forlorn and lost look on her face. An ersatz - or real? - shattered heart on display. We will never know. We can never know.

Manipulation and lies, as natural as breathing.

For most (if not all) women the "I love you" is a reflexive and empty mouthing designed to elicit a trained Pavlovian response in a man. "Be my slave." For the moment, for a long time, for eternity? Or do you just want that horny little itch scratched again before I get on with my day?

More truthful might be her saying: "I care about you."

Do you? Do you really? Is that why you deliberately mess me around? Is that why you attempt to twist me into crazed distraction? Is that why you attempt to see how far you can push the boundaries, beyond all sanity, and then insist that this is normal and expected?

I luuuuuurve you too.

Friday, 5 June 2015

Luke, I Am Your Snake-Oil Salesman - RooshV

So I found the videos and time to watch Roosh and Bar Bar and Sandman. It's interesting, the chutzpah of Roosh. "I am the father of the manosphere" and "I created Roissey and Rollo Thomassi" and "how dare you". While I haven't really seen that people have turned on him - with that attitude I wouldn't be at all surprised. He ain't helping the process none.

A part of growing up and becoming a mature adult is rebelling against your parents. That helps you to fly from the nest and get out the door on your own. The amount of venom involved depending upon various factors - I sometimes think that a big part of it is how controlling your parents are. The manosphere seems to be going through a growing-pain, thus the bullshit going down at the moment, thus the "backlash" between various parts of it.

At any rate, here is Roosh, in the video which seems to have sparked the drama (to paraphrase: "this is just drama, I've seen it before in the past ten years, it'll go and be back again"). I think that the most peculiar part is the appeals to emotion and authority - plus the drama that he's causing using his shaming language and personal attacks against those who he seems to feel are against him:


The bit about him being the father of the manosphere is a hoot - last I saw, Strauss and Mystery and Tyler Durden would be more accurately the fathers of the manosphere. At least, the PUA part of it, as it were. My softback copy of The Game was printed in 2005, the events in it must have started around 2001 (hardback would be printed 2004, minimum a year for writing the book, and it supposedly spanned 2 years of time).

Hell, Tony's Lay Guide was around before then: in 2000 it went more commercial, prior to that you can pick up the free copy. There's plenty of archives of it out there. It was what triggered Neil Strauss to go PUA and see what the hell was going on in that subculture. So that said, Tony was the "father of the Manosphere". If we really needed a specific father to point out, 15+ years down the track.

Make all the claims he wants, it doesn't change the demonstrable fact that Roosh got in early and milked it for what he could, as it were. Now he's pulling a Tyler Durden, reinventing himself and trying to milk it for more. You made your mark, you catered to a certain segment of the Manosphere, and you have helped a certain subset of people get what they want: sex with lots of good-looking girls.

No problems. About any of that. Just don't try to be overdramatic about it. Or get pissy when parts of the Manosphere grows in directions that you don't seem to like - you never controlled it and you never will, whatever you say. It's bigger than you. Admit it and fuckin' deal with it like an adult.

So. Neomasculinity. As Sandman basically said: funny how it looks a bit like MGTOW 1.0, from the No-Ma'am website.

Like Bar Bar, I must ask: if Men are supposed to become neomasculine - new masculinity or new men - and follow the older, traditional ways - where's the women for them?

Are they supposed to be spontaneously created out of the ether?

What, all these sluts (married or not) that the PUAs have been fucking up the ass and doing ass-to-mouth with will suddenly get themselves a spontaneous case of Born Again Virgin? Their mental and emotional brokenness will suddenly heal? They will magically go from well-sullied whores to perfectly virginal, loyal, and loving Unicorns in a heartbeat?
Roosh bewails that his beloved Polish girls have turned as shitty and depraved as Western women - a process he helped along with his various books, giving Western men the idea to try their luck there and other places overseas. I distinctly remember reading a post where he remarked about them (Polish girls) going out nightclubbing, their fickleness, drunkenness, etc - just like the good time girls women I see down the bars in New Zealand. Now he expects these (in fact, any) girls to spontaneously change and Woman Up for these New Men that he is creating.

In the end he's just Creating a Better Beta.

In the end he's just catering to the feminine imperative.

In the end he's just making a better Man - and then saying to those Men "man up and marry those sluts". He hasn't changed the women's behavior and mentality any.

There is another thing about this that neither Sandman nor Bar Bar caught, too - I don't know why. The most basic thing about this whole Neomasculinity bushwah going on. That is: it doesn't address the fundamental fuckups in the system. That it's still way too easy for women to shaft Men, if they get bored or want to step out or find someone more to their liking.

It seems more and more like Roosh is just looking to make a few more bucks off some new crop of hapless, naive Men who've been hurt already. Go ahead, sell more snake-oil - I'm sure that someone will buy it. You're not addressing the basic disease, you're not lancing the boil in the system, you're not administering antibiotics, you're not sucking-and-spitting the basic poison which laces society these days.

You can make "new" Men. It doesn't make these "new" Men invulnerable. It doesn't make these "new" Men able to survive the system currently in place. Sure, it might make their chances of success with women higher. Sure, it might make their chances of a successful long-term marriage with women higher. Yet they can still get shafted by Team Womyn™ whenever she desires, for little or no reason.

The MRAs and MGTOWs are attempting, each in their own ways, to kick the system as-it-is into cardiac-arrest. To address the imbalances in the system. To slap it upside the head and correct the nuttiness. This attempt of Neomasculinity - while interesting - does nothing to correct the system as-it-is. It simply appears to be an attempt to make a socially-acceptable "PUA-Lite" from which more money can be made.

As for some of the rabid fanboi's in the PUAsphere, once more ragging on the MGTOW (go see Vox Day's blog if you really give a flying fuck about this bullshit). I see vast amounts of shaming language and personal attacks and rampant emotionalism. (Emotionalism like a woman having a shit-fit? Hmmm!)

They are still unable to conceive of a Man who doesn't think that a vagina is the end-all of man's approval and worth in this world. Because all their life revolves around is getting laid. The fact that anyone else chooses differently seems to make them insecure about their choices in life - because they may have yet to understand that they have no real desires of their own, that they are still following someone else's script, for someone else's profit.
Hopefully they will eventually be able to step back and say like an adult: "Okay. I might not agree with your choices, however I'm not going to give you shit about your choices. In fact, I will give you a thumbs-up for making your choices and sticking by them. Good on you." When they can do that, this brouhaha will (hopefully) die down and we can get back to looking at the problem which caused us all to end up out here in the first place: the bloody gynocentric society we were born in.

That said, even while this crap and brouhaha is going down. To all you PUAs: may your notch-count of sexy chicks climb. I view you Men as a filtering mechanism. You filter out the mentally- and emotionally-damaged women so that other Men don't have to. They just have to look at the girls you fuck and avoid them like the plague. Thank you for that.

I will leave you with Sandman's and Bar Bar's videos on this little brouhaha:

Saturday, 30 May 2015

NAWALT's Are Irrelevant

I believe that I've said before about YAWALT's and NAWALT's and the like. How statistically hard the latter are to find.

I've also mentioned off and on concepts like: "if you don't actively oppose it, then you are implicitly and passively endorsing it". Yes, women in general, I'm once again talking about that lunatic who wrote the S.C.U.M. Manifesto - and who shot Andy Warhol (wait femiwhores, you say that's not relevant? I think it was plenty relevant for Andy, getting it through both of his lungs, spleen, stomach, liver, and esophagus).

Now we have this gem of common-sense. Again from /r/MGTOW, courtesy of Darth-Sin:
I would also like to add more to the irrelevance of NAWALT. This is inspired by an article titled. "Why The Peaceful Majority Is Irrelevant" 
http://cjunk.blogspot.com/p/why-peaceful-majority-is-irrelevant.html 
The crux of this article applies to NAWALTs and why they are irrelevant or more specifically, why they have made themselves irrelevant by virtue of their actions. 
Historical and biological lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points. NAWALTs have been made irrelevant by their actions. [Or lack thereof. - BPS] 
Where were the NAWALTs in the 1600s when women in England moved en masse to ban coffee shops an gathering spaces ?
Where were the NAWALTs when American women made the push that resulted in Prohibition and all the shite that came along with it ?
Where were the NAWALTs when women in UK were handing out white feathers to publicly shame men to fight in a war that killed millions of men and left millions more disable and shellshocked ?
Where were the NAWALTs when modern feminism was making a big brewhaha about destroying the family unit ?
Where were the NAWALTs when they instituted no fault divorce laws and made most of the men pay for alimony and child support ?
Where were the NAWALTs when they instituted discriminatory policies on the basis of sex, skin color and ancestral origins to achieve "equality" ?
Where were the NAWALTs when feminists made the push to brand all men as sexist misogynistic rapists who hate women ?
Where were the NAWALTs when feminists decided to push the Patriarchy Theory, which is a conspiracy theory with no basis in history or logic or reality ?
Where were the NAWALTs when they made the education system more favorable towards women and girls at the expense of men and boys and then proceeded to criminalize male behavior in schools ?
Where were the NAWALTs when they made the workplace environment saturated with political correctness nonsense and harassment laws to make women have an illusion of safety and security ?
Where were the NAWALTs pushing for equality when it came to conscription for war ?
Where were the NAWALTs when feminist was pushing the narrative of men as bumbling fools in the media ?
Where were the NAWALTs who spoke against criminal laws favoring women and creation of female safe space when in reality it was men who are in higher danger from all forms of violent crime ?
Where were the NAWALTs that spoke up against and pushed against nonsensical things that have no basis in reality such as female rape culture and the wage gap ?
Where were the NAWALTs when one brings up the issue of male genital mutilation ?
Especially when one brings up how the foreskin of the penis is used for the make up industry ? [In fairness while this is true - the amount of foreskin is miniscule per femikook using this shit. It just gives them sick and twisted tingles. Though that's bad enough and makes her an instant candidate for the kook-ward. I mean, what if I used circumcised clits in my toothpaste, for a nicer and brighter smile? Cue screaming shit-hemorrhages from the femikooks-in-waiting. - BPS]
Where were the NAWALTs speaking up for male victims of domestic violence and male victims of war ?
Almost every women you meet will tell you that she is somehow "different", that she is somehow "special" and she is "not like that". [The chameleon hides well. - BPS]
Yet, where is the evidence for this ? Women across history have had multiple chances, time and time again, to prove that they are NAWALT or to prove their NAWALT-ness. However, each and every time the chance props up, all we see are dismissive laughter or male shaming or silent consent or indifference or a combination of these things. [Ignore their words, (in)actions show the truth. - BPS]
At best and I emphasize and stress on the word best, we have one or two or perhaps five women in a population of millions of women who prove themselves as NAWALT or at least appear to be NAWALT. Karen Straughan, Diana Davison, Erin Pizzey, Esther Vilar, to name a few. The number is so small that is statistically insiginificant. One might as well be looking for a specific subatomic particle in a haystack.
So there you go fellas. Another compelling reason why NAWALTs are irrelevant.
There you go. Let me get at that electron microscope, I have a haystack to examine atom by atom...nah fuck it, I've got way more important stuff to do.

Tuesday, 19 May 2015

Caricatures of Men and Women

The media (in the form of entertainment) portrays both men and women as immature caricatures of what they should be. We see this all the time these days: wimpy ass-kissing men, strong ass-kicking women, etc. This appears to be feminism's message of "women are as good if not better than men" and everybody's noses are rubbed into this from a young age.

Given these as examples, with no real mother/father role-models, is it really surprising that the younger generations have turned out the way they have? Women insanely overconfident, men insanely underconfident. More: encouraging women to become insanely overconfident, plus discouraging men from gaining normal confidence and making them insanely underconfident.

It strikes me that many of the stereotypes from the Manosphere - Alpha, Beta, Gamma, Delta, Sigma, Lambda, whatever - are based upon these caricatures. Similarly, it strikes me that much of the reason that some segments of women go for certain types of men (scummy "alpha"-types) is also because of these caricatures - it's what they see and expect.

Yes, there's a lot more involved in this process than just the media - I'm simply picking on *one* of the causes. One that I think is quite strongly involved in the process. When children are plunked down in front of the idiot-box to keep them occupied while the parents or single-mommy does stuff, there is a golden opportunity for both marketers and social manipulators to get their claws into a freshly-malleable mind.

As an update: I see that Vox Day has been posturing again. Ragging once more on a certain segment of the manosphere male population, to whit: the MGTOW. Tch, tch. When he does that, it's a prime example of leftist/feminist shaming language coupled with an inability to accept other people's point of view, coupled with immaturity - and like calls to like.

Is he being willfully blind? Or just deliberately stupid? Doesn't he realize that there's at least 10x the number of MGTOW out in the world than the other manosphere guys? Just because they don't give a toss for your dogshit doesn't mean that they don't note you flinging turds in their direction. All he's promoting is divisiveness - or is that his plan? Is he actually a "useful idiot" or shill for the feminists/establishment?

Like calls to like: immaturity might explain a bit more of the business between immature women being attracted to posturing know-nothing criminal-loser-scum "alphas". Their posturing is a sign of great immaturity, striking a chord with the immature women. Which is why we get criminals and other worthless types siring more children upon the immature children that are the modern women.

More thoughts, regarding having to "game" your wife all the time. For sure, keep things fresh for the both of you. Yet when you have to constantly entertain someone - it shows in my opinion a great shallowness and immaturity on her part. If immaturity is all that they respond to then that's a sad indictment regarding their mentality.

Round and round the cycle (of immaturity) goes.

Tuesday, 12 May 2015

Intellectually Dishonest: Academia

All right, I said that I wouldn't write-and-publish stuff that struck me immediately. Here I go, doing it. So sue me.

This concerns Phillip Zimbardo, famed of the Stanford University Prison Experiment (Lord of the Flies, etc).

Now, I'm going to assume a certain amount of media distortion. (Bad News Sells/If It Bleeds It Leads.)
Zimbardo gave a TED talk in 2011 outlining the problems facing young men's social development and academic achievement, which he puts down to excessive use of porn, video games and the internet.
Here is the article which includes the short TED talk about this also (dating from 2011). Watch the 5-minute video and see if you can spot all the instances of what I will label "willful bias" (try not to cringe in the process).

Unfortunately it comes across as another "blame the men" message. Research 20,000 boys/men who prefer to associate with other men, play games, and watch porn rather than interact with girls/women, have a life, etc. There's something very wrong here. Kneejerk reaction: we will blame the internet and pornography for rewiring these men's brains.

It ends with the subtle man-up message: "But who should care? The only people who should care about this is parents with boys - and girls. Educators, gamers, filmmakers, women - who'd like a real man who they can talk to, who can dance, who can make love slowly, and contribute to the evolutionary pressures to keep our species above banana slugs. No offense to banana slug owners. Thank you."

End scene from "The Crowd Goes Wild."

Completely missing one supremely obvious question that he should have asked: "Why are 20,000 men preferring to associate with other men, play video games, and watch porn - instead of interacting with the opposite sex and being horny little shits like they should be?"

I'm not going to bother eviscerating the video and article any more. You-all have the nouse to do it yourselves.

Overall it looks like Zimbardo has the willful blindness of Academia - which I suppose is understandable, he wants to keep his job. Even if you've got tenure, if you still want to get funded to do research: you have to toe the party line, not anger the feminists and other vested interests, etc. Which further illustrates the bias behind everything which comes out of academia, even when they're supposed to be completely independent.

Ending with basically worthless talks and articles like the above for who-knows-how-much-money wasted.

It is no wonder that the West is in decline. When intellectual dishonesty from our brightest minds does not permit us to actually dig down to the actual roots of the problem, no push to fix the problem will be effective.
---edit---
I see that Uncle Bob beat me to the punch on this one. Ah well!

Thursday, 7 May 2015

Social Deconstruction: What Rape Culture?

It's time to roast these assholes, with their eternal paean regarding "rape culture", over a slow fire. Maybe we'll get lucky and can make them cry bitter tears of ultimate shame in the process (though they're generally shameless). Let's get started.

First, let's define the assholes involved and why I call them that:

* academics - pushing their theories out into the world (technically I am one of these)

* feminists - attempting to push their agenda and hopes of personal social relevance upon others

* feminist-indoctrinated - this is your average female who has gone to college (or watched too much TV)

* manginas and white knights - enablers and pussy-beggars ("oh you poor dears/do you want some dick?"), no you ain't getting laid

* the media - jumping on everything sensational in an effort to make $$$, rather than to fact-check and share real news

Now let's look at the feminists basic rape-claim from decades ago:

* 1 woman in 4 gets raped during her lifetime (ignoring the "eye-rape" claims of really fucked-up women)

Finally let's look at the mathematics:

* there are 322 million people in the USA (Wolfram|Alpha)
* that makes 161 million women
* that makes 40.25 million women get raped (in America)

If we define a lifetime as being between the ages of 15 and 45 (as the "rape-worthy" agespan category for all but really weird guys):

* assume that perhaps 1/3rd of women are currently in the "rape-worthy" agespan = 13.42 million women
* the agespan is 35 years * 364 days in a year = 12740 days
* that's 13.42 million women / 12740 days = 1053 women get raped every day in the USA

Time to check the newspapers. Births...deaths...marriages...where's the "rapes" section? Even if only 1% of these rapes were actually reported, that'd make a half-page to a page. After all, we *know* that bad news sells. The media even has a saying: "If it bleeds, it leads."

So what do we actually see leading? We see one rape splashed all over the front page of the newspapers. For a week or a month. Then it's back to the bloody Kardashian's or whichever stupid cunt "celebrity" who "accidentally" let her personal nudie pics out onto the interwebs for all to see.

Fucking. Bullshit. Exposed.

So, what's all this crap about a rape-culture? Hysteria. Attention-seeking. Pushing an agenda to change the social mores to make themselves feel important and relevant in the world.
The socially-irrelevant and actually-powerless, agitating to make themselves seem (and feeeeeel) more important than their actual pathetically lowly and worthless status in society. "Look at me! I've done this to help raise awareness about <bullshit feelgood garbage>!"
Stick a fork in 'em. Oh yeah. They're done.
--edit--
As Mindstorm points out, I messed up my calculation - the real numbers are more like:

* assume that perhaps 1/3rd of women are currently in the "rape-worthy" agespan = 13.42 million women
* the agespan is 45 - 15 = 30 years * 364 days in a year = 10950 days
* that's 13.42 million women / 10950 days = 1225 women get raped every day in the USA

Mindstorm also pointed out that the actual demographics give higher numbers of woman so I dug up some more information from Wolfram|Alpha and found that there are 62.5 million women between the ages of 15-45 in the USA:

* 62.5 million / 4 = 15.625 million rapes
* agespan 30 years * 364 days in a year = 10950 days
* so 15.625 million women / 10950 days = 1427 women get raped every day in the USA

I'm still looking for the "rapes" section in the newspaper - did somebody pinch it?