From Salon: The truth about female desire: It’s base, animalistic and ravenous
“Women’s desire — its inherent range and innate power — is an underestimated and constrained force, even in our times, when all can seem so sexually inundated, so far beyond restriction,” he writes. “Despite the notions our culture continues to imbue, this force is not, for the most part, sparked or sustained by emotional intimacy and safety.” In fact, he argues, “one of our most comforting assumptions, soothing perhaps above all to men but clung to by both sexes, that female eros is much better made for monogamy than the male libido, is scarcely more than a fairy tale.”
The implications are huge. As Bergner puts it: “What nascent truths will come into view, floating forward if these faiths continue to be cut apart?”
Sounds blue-pilly to me.
[D: I think you are misreading that.]
Normal people observing obvious things and talking with each other about those things=Evil Misogynists
Get a scientist to say the exact same thing and put it in papers common people can’t (or won’t) read=progress
Ummmm
The Atlantic is late to the party.
5,000 years ago we witnessed Eve being tempted by the serpents as she lusted after da lostasts cockasz.
About 2800 years ago we witnessed Helen deserting her family and causing a war, whence tens of thousands perished.
The important thing to see here is why the Neoconsosnz banned the GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN–because they teach of the TRUE NATURE of women.
Women are only Virgins and nice and good when they are raised by STRICT, HEROIC MEN who reign over their fallen sexuality via their manly honor.
zlozozozozzo
one of our most comforting assumptions, soothing perhaps above all to men but clung to by both sexes, that female eros is much better made for monogamy than the male libido, is scarcely more than a fairy tale.
It is not a fairy tale, it is traditional wisdom. Fire in the hearth with sparks going up the chimney, or in the metal cylinders in my car, rather than the wildfires out west, or when it spills out to flammable objects in the living room.
Because female eros is the way it is, it needs to be constrained by monogamy.
“Some people just want to see the world burn”. Apt description of militant feminists, at least if by “world” it refers to civilization.
Civilization is, after all, a social construct.
GBFM:
Witness certain women in the Bible using sex and/or lusting after lotsa alpha cocka:
Delilah getting it on with Samson and manipulating him right into blindness and telling him the secret of his strength.
Bathsheba bathing on her rooftop (where she knew King David would see her)
The young handmaidens giggling (lusting) at King David who, rejoicing at the Ark of the Covenant’s return to Jerusalem, danced in his linen ephod in public. (A modern day equivalent would be a good looking alpha president or governor prancing and parading down the public streets in his boxer shorts.)
King David proved that there is always a bit of lunacy that goes into being a great leader.
Christopher Titus said…”Screw normal. You know why? ‘Cause if you’re normal, the crowd will accept you. But if you’re deranged, the crowd will make you their leader.”
And that lunacy attracts women.
Nope. I don’t see how this is especially red pill. Sure, there are some evolutionary truths sprinkled around, but the main theme is proving how natural it is for women to be whoring around. Notice how the issue is framed as female sexuality being uncontrollable, ravenous and primal (how romantic!) and thus totally excusable.
————————————–
Well, I guess the first thing to say is how struck I was by the distance between reality and the fable that we’ve been taught most recently by evolutionary psychology, that is, that men are driven to spread their seed and women, by comparison, are more driven to find one good provider, and that, therefore, while men are very poorly suited to monogamy, women are much better suited to monogamy. But that just really doesn’t stand up when you look at the science. The science behind that is flimsy, circular. And the science, when you look at it clearly, that stands in opposition to that is actually fairly strong — still emergent, but fairly strong. And so, that was the first thing that was so striking to me.
—————————-
There are some truths in it, but overall the article seems more bent on promoting a recent political cause (“Women are made to be just as promiscous as men! Yay! Now go whore around!” as recently seen in NYT) than actually bringing up any kind of evidence. For example, look at the conclusion:
————————————–
Certainly, women are no better suited for monogamy than men are. That, I think, is clear. It seems possible, if you look at some of the data, that women are even less well-suited for monogamy than men. It’s important to distinguish between the sexual level of desire, and what we choose in our relationships for all kinds of reasons. But on a sexual level, women are even less suited to monogamy.
…
The simple thing is, I sometimes think we have to be a little braver about just caring more. Caring, and being open about caring about sex, with one’s long-term partner sounds like it should be easy, but I think often it’s not because you can fail and you can feel hurt. And so I do think that candor and caring are important and then signing up to welcome distance back into relationships might well be the root to maintaining passion.
——————————————————–
Yesssss, now that we’ve found that female sexuality has roots in biology rather than culture, women are free to ride the carousel like in prehistoric times, with no regards to consequences!
All of us here know that women are not naturally monogamous. This, however, is because they are wired to belong to harems and quickly trade up between harems if a better man appears, locking down each in turn (but usually not simultaneously). Not because their sexuality is more more powerful, uncontrollable, primal or whatever nonsense these people are promoting.
Is the red pill going mainstream? Do not. Is it going mainstream soon enough and progressing quick enough to change anything? Doubt it, because to turn things around, a lot of men will have to swallow a lot of red pills on many topics and I don’t see it. Hell most people aren’t even upset about the right things
Ps, on of the reasons women are no longer capable of fidelity is because most women think they are incapable of infidelity so they do nothing to ensure their virtues. It plays into how their infidelity is never their fault.
I actually think it is a good development that the feminist nut-jobs are going to run with this. We live in a feminized society that dismisses what men say and pays much greater attention to women. A lot of men (and women) will hear this from those feminists and start thinking about it in a way that they would not have if it came from a ‘knuckle-dragging’ male. The conclusions they come to may not be the same conclusion the feminists would prefer. The more widespread this information becomes the more chance that something will change for the better.
Don’t care what color of pill it represents, its just another thing to bust the back of the stupid microwave and pressure cooker BS
Ps, on of the reasons women are no longer capable of fidelity is because most women think they are incapable of infidelity so they do nothing to ensure their virtues.
This is money. The fall from the lofty heights of superior morality exceeds terminal velocity
Going mainstream my ass. That Salon article is just repackaged, pro-feminist nonsense designed to give women more excuses.
There’s a better red pill book, which came out some years ago:
http://amzn.to/ZmjS0L
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/06/130603142237.htm?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+sciencedaily%2Ftop_news+%28ScienceDaily%3A+Top+News%29
I know Dalrock will want to see this.
Interesting. I had just been reading this guy’s synopsis of his results on Slate XX Factor when I saw that you had posted on it. However, there he comes off as far more blue pill and concerned with how to please women more. At the end of the article he stops just short of suggesting open relationships becoming the norm (because now strongindependentwymen will want them of course) within long-term relationships.
There’s even more of this in his NYMag piece where women are OSSUM for being unpredictable and bored with their men and the few men discussed come off as sackless losers.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2013/05/28/monogamous_sex_boring_for_women.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/26/magazine/unexcited-there-may-be-a-pill-for-that.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
“on of the reasons women are no longer capable of fidelity is because most women think they are incapable of infidelity so they do nothing to ensure their virtues.”
Yes, they think they are all “not like that” when they really “are like that” and therefore do no reflection on their true nature.
@ Hollenhund
Yeah, basically. To the extent that the red pill “goes mainstream”, it will always be presented with a fem-centric spin to it – everything else is presented that way, after all, so why would the red pill be any different?
Yes, they think they are all “not like that” when they really “are like that” and therefore do no reflection on their true nature.
Yes, we are all like that. Knowing and acknowldeging it enables you to draw on God’s grace to be better, more virtuous.
@Deti
Even better, Genesis 39:
The Stantons and Mohlers of the world have rejected the biblical description of women and have substituted a secular and deeply flawed narrative.
IMO the only ways the Red Pill can or will go mainstream are a) repackaged and twisted to justify the Feminine Imperative, or b) armageddon arrives.
Since when is the “red pill” going mainstream? I’m not seeing it. If anything I keep seeing more and more articles like this:
Wife blames marriage for making her fat divorces husband:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2335123/Being-married-fat-Obese-wife-Taryn-Wright-Grays-Essex-lost-7-stone-year-leaving-husband.html
It’s all his fault. Just take a look at the photo-shopped glamor shots in her post divorce pictures.
I read the Salon article yesterday and wasn’t sure what to make of it. The researcher states truthful facts about female sexual impulses but then draws poor conclusions. All his “we shoulds” and “we need tos” are right in line with sex positive feminism.
I think the Salon piece is more purple pill than red pill.
On second thought I don’t think this article is out as any evidence of red pill in the main stream, but rather as an excuse for women to slut it up. “My animal nature makes me do it”.
That’s very close, but I think it would be more accurate to say that whatever a woman wants gets defined in her mind as fidelity. It’s not that she doesn’t think she could be unfaithful in theory; but by the time she’s thinking about being unfaithful, it’s been redefined in her mind as something positive.
David Deangelo said men are faithful to their word; women are faithful to their emotions. Because of that, whatever a woman desires emotionally seems right and good to her. When she meets her boss at a hotel room, she truly feels like she’s being faithful to herself. Her hamster has to rationalize it, but that’s easy.
That’s how she’s born, and how she’ll be if raised to be feral. She has to be trained in virtue to be otherwise, just as men have to be trained in virtues like fortitude. She has to be taught to fight that tendency, and society has to back that up, or she’ll go through life satisfying her whims and considering every one a holy command.
It stands to reason that the mainstream isn’t going to absorb the red pill overnight. Switching from seeing women as pure snowflakes to seeing them as flawed creatures is a first step. Yes, they’ll try to frame it in their usual misandrist terms, but tearing that down has to start somewhere.
Actually CC, I think the two factors combine and are heavily intertwined.
lzozozozozo
many yearsz ago da sigmund freud dude said, “i don’t know what does a woman want? What do womenz wantz?”
well, da gfbfmz put his thinking cap on
and FU FIGURED IT OU?TZ
figured it ourtz lzozlzozzozozoz
what womenz want is
alpha F*%$S
and
wait for it
wait for it
wait for it
wait
for
it
BEAT BUCKSZ!!! lzozozozo
da GBFM composed a new verse today of his classic poemz
for weddingsz zllzozo
hey hearatistetzzz!!!
i am workingz on an extended play song for weddingz!!!
zlzozoozozoz
extra extra large t-shrirtss 4 all da bernankakfied womenzz wedidng addition bridesmaiidszz lzlzozozozozo!!!
i need to send dat fatass birdemadedz some t-shirts!!!!!!
http://www.cafepress.com/greatbooksformen.582539775
“da professional womenz ode”
SPECIAL WEDDING EDITION
alpha fucks and beta bucks
dat is how we roll
da butthexting cockass we fucks and sucks
and in our anuthes it doth deosul
alpha fucks and beta bucks
it is da way of da fed
to transfer assetss to dose who butthext
cuckold dose who pay for our bread
beta bucks and alpha fucks
it’s what day teach us we;’re entitled too
da assetts from betas we plucks
after da alphas desol us through our hole for poo
lzozozlzzolzlzlzlz
SPECIAL EDITION WEDDING CHORUS lzozozozo
i gave it 4 free when i was younger hotter tighter
back in college when i was thirty pounds lighter
can’t hardly wait to butthext yyou in divorce court
and have you fund my favorite buttehxtual sport
gonna buy sexy lingerie with all dat alimonee
fuck & suck alpha cocks as ur beta cock is just 4 pee
tee hee hee teee heee heee l
tee hee hee teee heee heee !
i’m da modern liberated womanz
i buttehxt before and after marriage
and during it too, but not with you
but with the father of da baby in da carriage
lzozozzlozoz
cuckold da betas cockhold da alphas
datsz what day taught us in mba grad school
as da feiisnsits see no truth nor justice in their laws
and say da great books for menz was all fools.
yes, yes, i did very good on my gmats
dey bernenakifed my soul away, left me with cats
zlzlzzozozozo
zlzoozozozozo
http://heartiste.wordpress.com/2013/06/03/big-mistake/
lozozozozozozz
@lgrobbins
Predictably Salon has spun this according to the FI, but the facts about women’s sexual nature being openly discussed in that article (and others referenced in this discussion) are basically what Roissy has been writing for years. We already know it, so what I think most of my readers are reacting to is the spin. But the facts are profoundly counter cultural, especially for modern Christianity. Think of Dr. Albert Mohler and his absurdity, as well as Glenn Stanton claiming women are innately good and naturally want to marry and stay married. Now Dr. Mohler and Director Stanton aren’t just at war with the Bible, but also with science. They’ve made up their own religion, and sooner or later they won’t be able to deny it.
Salon will go out of business before the spinster and mangina writers quit arguing in bad faith.
Dalrock
Looks like you just quoted a false rape claim straight out of the bible.
Btw this is what it will look like. There will never be this I’m sorry for the misandry stuff never. The real test of the red pill is when laws are applied to women just as harshly even with female protest or when the laws of misandry are quietly done away without with out opposition. A divorce here one there were a woman doesn’t get custody. A woman arrested for DV or a man not arrested for defending himself. Enrollment on colleges going from 60% female to 54%. the percentage of women in a field actually going down due to higher physical standards being held to women that are in line with the standards men have. Very subtle changes will be what shows red pill in society.
OK, I see what you are saying, Dalrock. But it isn’t so surprising to see it on Salon because they don’t subscribe to Mohlerian beliefs; slut culture is empowering, dontcha know.
Now, when Christianity Today runs an article on this study, then we’ll be talkin’ progress! Though they’d probably spin it even harder than Salon does.
Dalrock, Good points. Like SMM says, it would really be something if a major Christian publication posted this–something, anything, that shows women as not morally perfect angels.
most women think they are incapable of infidelity
“Right now I feel like (I will always love you).”
a.k.a. “A thief who has not yet been presented with the chance to steal considers himself an honest man.”
@lgrobins
I think we are in agreement that something like that isn’t likely for a very long time. But what makes this so problematic from the modern Christian perspective is they were following the popular culture, imbibing foolish popular misconceptions about women’s sexuality and claiming them as Christian. Now that modern Christians have adopted this foolish worldview, the culture is moving away and leaving them without any cover. If your are Stanton or Mohler, how do you now explain being so contrary to the Bible once the culture swings the other way?
LGR
Would you have any desire to pitch this to Christianity Today with me for their Her-meneutics column? They’ll probably reject our pitch, but someone there would still have to read the pitch and look at the study…so at least one person would have to be hit upside the head with reality. And on the very slim chance they accept it, we could co-author the article. Not that they’d publish it. 🙂
Hamstergesis. They do it all the time. I have had Christians take me to task for sounding judgmental of sluts, and they will quote John 8:1-11 at me but leave off Jesus’ last sentence (“Go now and leave your life of sin.”). This has happened to me more than once; it’s uncanny. Unfortunately for them, Luke 8:17 says
For nothing is hidden that will not be made manifest, nor is anything secret that will not be known and come to light.
Hey Sunshine Mary, the John 8 passage is not present in the earliest manuscripts:
http://bible.org/article/my-favorite-passage-that%E2%80%99s-not-bible
That article is by Dr. Daniel Wallace, who is a New Testament manuscript expert.
SSM,
That sure sounds fun! Do they have an email for open submissions like that?
When women show up to church talking that red pill stuff and start blaming sluts and laws of misandry for men not wanting to man up and marry the churchians will change their tune in what is said be the worship of pussy divine will remain the same. This last couple weeks with the manosphere contact with the churchian blogs has been a real disappointment to me for how wedded to the female imperative the traditional types are. All done with the cover of Christianity. Even if the church parrots the truth it will still be in submission to the feminine imperative.
BTW Dalrock I really liked what you did this last couple of weeks. I hope it has an effect on the “christian” blogs overall in a re pill way.
You want to heal the church? Fine – remove the women from it. In the days of our lord and savior men and women had different worship services. You didn’t get nervous pastors starring out from the pulpit at their Jewish congregations because the sexes were separated. Truth was allowed to be told even if it offended. Now the truth is muzzled at best but the normal case is outright lies to make women feel good. That is the cut and dry of it. If women are to be silent in the church you run a better chance of this if they aren’t there in the first place. Have a separate service for women. The roles are different after all so why other than the feminist demand that they be allowed access to everything based on the concept of “BECAUSE WE WANNA!!!” shouldn’t this be the case?
Its the proliferation of Game & PUA & MRA, who’ll cause the divorce laws to change
Causing the same population explosion as in China & India
As MRA’s & Gamers, will create new types of marriage laws, which allows beta’s to access women
The same type of laws used in China & India
Traditionalists & monogamy, who limit access of women to beta’s, always lead to feminism & mass exploitation of men
Laws fair to men, will correct centuries of exploiting beta’s, leading to mass population explosions in the U.S & Europe
This population explosion will allow beta’s to create new types of marriage, which takes mens biology into account
Traditional & monogamous marriage, is highly one sided, too dependant on the man being an emotionless provider walking wallet, chained to an aging hag
This kind of marriage creates massive amounts of hypergamy, & alienates millions of beta from women
The new marriage will be similar to marriage in China
A polygyny where beta’s are able to take mistresses on the side, & women thanks to feminism will be open to taking cash for sex
This will dramatically open up the sexual marketplace to Beta’s, as Beta;s will be able to buy dates & relationships with women, who would normally never look at Beta’s
It is not the unavailability of women, which causes beta’s to avoid marriage
It’s the nuclear rejections from women which drives beta’s away from marriage & causes them to become invisible to women
Buying dates & relationships, as in China will allow men to dramatically side-step the rejections from women caused by their hypergamous nature
These are the laws Gamers & MRA’s will ultimately fight for
The proliferation of game & MRA, will make the above laws inevitable
The roles are different after all so why other than the feminist demand that they be allowed access to everything based on the concept of “BECAUSE WE WANNA!!!” shouldn’t this be the case?
I have a ton of Muslim friends where I live now, and it is just as bad at the masjid, or so they all tell me on the dl.
Apparently, a couple of years ago, the preacher started allowing women to sit in on Friday prayers (albeit in a different section). As I hear it, the content of the sermons almost immediately degraded. In my area there are a ton of European Muslims from places like Albania, Turkey, and Bosnia. There are also a lot of East African Muslims. All of their women, the blonde Bosniaks to the nubile Nubians, are hot as hell (this is how I got a bunch of Muslim friends, I started dating around lol).
These women are, by all accounts, totally disruptive to the service, and the men all pay attention to what hotties are attending rather than messages about morality. The preacher also spends a lot of time placating them, talking about women’s rights and men’s responsibilities, etc. Just like in y’all’s Christian church, apparently.
I used to go to atheist conferences myself, and these too have been utterly destroyed by feminism. Google “atheism plus” for the details about this. I get pissed off when I think about it. What were once fun gatherings with speeches from scientists and intellectuals have devolved into panels where the trouts start accusing random attendees of “sexual harassment” and discussing “wymynz issues” and the like. It’s pathetic.
Looks like islam is not going to save us after all. Damn it is a bitch having to do your own weight lifting
Not really commenting other than to leave some links.
This is a 6 part series from The Houston Chronicle called
The Evolutionary Mystery of the Female Orgasm.
It doesn’t appear to necessary for pregnancy so why do they have them?
I found it to be most enlightening. The first 3 parts explain why it is a mystery and take on some beliefs as to why women have orgasms, OK, why SOME women have them. Parts 4,5 & 6 are the money parts. Part 4 indicts them as polyandrous by nature. Part 5 and 6 says that orgasms are both an instrument of bonding and evaluation.
It does explain “Women’s desire — its inherent range and innate power — is an underestimated and constrained force”
I recommend the essay as an expansion of your scientific awareness on the subject. Again, as with many Red Pill things, anecdotal evidence may not be the same as data. But our observations back up what it written in this essay and what is written in this essay back up our observations.
Please forgive all the links. It was not posted at one time.
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/a-valentine%E2%80%99s-present-the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-1/43957
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-ii-some-silly-unlikely-hypotheses/44035
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-iii-a-nonadaptive-by-product/44039
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-iv-inducement-to-polyandry-or-monogamy/44073
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-v-an-evaluation-test/44543
http://chronicle.com/blogs/brainstorm/the-evolutionary-mystery-of-female-orgasm-part-vi-a-way-of-communicating-or-manipulating/44577
“Ps, on of the reasons women are no longer capable of fidelity is because most women think they are incapable of infidelity so they do nothing to ensure their virtues. It plays into how their infidelity is never their fault.” –Ton
I think that nails it. Biological urges are inevitable. Giving into them all as if none could cause problems, isn’t because of the power of the urge, but because of the weakness of one’s will, and that is somewhat predicated on whether a person is honorable or not. For any feminists reading this… rape and murder are also biological urges, irrepressible… unless of course one bothers to repress the urges of course, then suddenly they are quite repressible.
“It is not the unavailability of women, which causes beta’s to avoid marriage
It’s the nuclear rejections from women which drives beta’s away from marriage & causes them to become invisible to women” –RMA
Mind you, I’m not a beta… but it’s the availability of good women, or perhaps the difficulty of telling a good women from a broken one that’s in the way, because the latter are so prevalent. The rejection isn’t my main concern, the concern is if I succeed and am worse off for it, ha ha.
8oxer
I used to go to atheist conferences myself, and these too have been utterly destroyed by feminism.
Anyone for a cuppa coffee?
They Call Me Tom
Sometimes being told to get lost creep is the kindest thing that a woman can ever say to any man
Reblogged this on oogenhand and commented:
Like Dawkins and Islam.
8oxer- As far as I know, most of the women who attend Friday prayers with men in Muslim communities are usually there along with their spouse as a matter of convenience (they share a car, for example) or they are converts/Muslim-Americans who grew up here looking to strengthen their sense of community. I have heard that women attending Friday prayers at the mosque is alien to Muslim women in Muslim countries. At least it is that way in my parents’ country, Syria. I am overreaching, perhaps, by suggesting that it is this way in all of the Muslim majority nations.
greyghost- Funny you should mention that meme that Islam is going to save men or the West or whatever it is that certain MRAs sometimes suggest Islam is good for. It has been my experience that Arab Muslims look up to the Western world for guidance in almost every aspect. Hollywood tv shows and movies are subtitled and dubbed (after being edited for sexual content) and broadcast on every Arab channel that I have access to. Everybody consumes a steady diet of feminism through these shows, if they don’t get it elsewhere. Yes, most Muslim women still dress conservatively and care to maintain a chaste reputation, but we’ve swallowed feminism hook, line, and sinker. Careerism and making money of your own is more desirable to traditional families than encouraging their daughters to marry early.
The red pill has been mainstream for decades now. It’s called rap music. This has been the only popular medium that accurately describes female nature, the post-feminist dating market, Churchianity, soft polygamy, and precisely what happens to a community when hypergamy meets male scarcity. Rappers don’t use graphs, cite studies, or use the words “hypergamy” and “feminism,” but they have been documenting this phenomenon since the early 90’s at least.
Ironically, rappers are considered misogynists, even by the same white conservatives who occupy the androsphere. Now white women are becoming increasingly feral, obese, entitled, and hostile to the average beta. White hoodrats are a common sight in major cities. If the canary in the coal mine analogy rings true, this is going to get a lot worse before it gets better.
Retrenched says: Yeah, basically. To the extent that the red pill “goes mainstream”, it will always be presented with a fem-centric spin to it – everything else is presented that way, after all, so why would the red pill be any different?
SSM – I think the Salon piece is more purple pill than red pill
If purple pill is mixing blue pill with red to make it easier to swallow (what men seem to do), wouldn’t extracting just enough truth to know how the game works – but putting a fem-centric spin on it to make it palatable to the wimminz – be akin to a pink pill? Kinda like feminist indigestion pills.
Who the hell cares what Salon thinks. Fuck that piece of extremtentos Alex Pereene!
Here’s the real deal. Either she can control herself or she can’t. The one can be worth marriage, possibly, like a 5 % chance. The other is useless, best for PUA pump ‘n dumps and trash can recycling.
More like a femcunt diarrhea pill. It tastes like crap no matter which hole it goes through.
Previously (on this channel) I have disagreed with Dalrock’s assertion that serial monogamy is a woman’s preferred method of promiscuity. I reasoned, that to regard serial monogamy as promiscuity was to stretch the notion of Promiscuity beyond anything that it might reasonably stand. It seemed to me that female promiscuity – and I had come across some – was when it occurs far greater in extent (higher N count) than male promiscuity, for although many men might be happy to enjoy extra-curricula sex with multiple women, in practise few would ever achieve the same, by reason of the simple fact that most women do not put out with the willingness of a man at a homosexual bathhouse. There is a secondary reason for ease of female promiscuity: they don’t have to do anything, such that one man becomes identikit with any other, – when they are promiscuously horny every man looks like Mr D’Arcy or Brad Pitt – whereas a man has to ‘get it up’, and thus requires a higher level of sexual interest to lift himself from the launch-pad. As a corollary to the second point; when a man does achieve lift-off, he frequently decides that indeed this person who may begin as a casual sexual encounter is sufficiently hot that he would like her to stay around for the long-haul, thus male promiscuity can have beneficial results.
In the light of the above quote from Bergner, am I to assume that Dalrock’s position is now, shall I say, closer to mine than previously.
Promiscuity is pretty much a useless term because its dictionary definition (look it up) cannot be applied to any woman. No woman is “indiscriminate” when choosing sexual partners. Not even sluts. On the other hand, many men are. The word we should be using is fornication.
Soft harem = the form of fornication preferred by men
Serial monogamy = the form of fornication preferred by women
Excellent point about rap E.J.
I think the take aways from the article are the base female sexual attraction parameters:
a) The attraction mechanisms are unconscious (lack of control)
b) It is universal (operates constantly on a low simmer)
c) It seeks males who will impose their sexual will (not males who respect their autonomy)
d) It seeks novelty
Interestingly almost every ‘female rights’ promulgation unnervingly serves to protect these base mechanisms while simultaneously curtailing male prerogatives.
“And so I do think that candor and caring are important and then signing up to welcome distance back into relationships might well be the root to maintaining passion.”
Space. The last frontier.
When I read these kinds of studies and discussions the question that keeps occurring to me is whether facts matter. “Women are [fill in the blank].” Really? Do facts matter or not? Do we reason by anecdote, or by personal experience, or by some silly evolutionary psychology theory, or by “studies” done on 20 year old western college kids (filtered by the gynocentric academy), or what, exactly?
I find these discussions fascinating at an intellectual level, but when it comes to real life none of it matters. I don’t care what “women” are like — I only care what my wife is like.
I don’t care what “women” are like — I only care what my wife is like.
This is the verdict my husband reached as well, but as he was raised on “red pill truths”, he can’t help but notice the truth of much of what his father told him about women.
In the end though, he has a deep and abiding faith in the regenerative power of the Gospel and knows that whatever our sin nature is as men and women, we can rise above it.
@Opus
You are starting from the assumption that for female promiscuity to exist it would have to look like male promiscuity. It doesn’t. Sluts aren’t turned on by every man they come across. In fact, they require more alpha than the average woman. Sluts are ironically sexually attracted to a much smaller percentage of men than non slutty women.
This is the same with female promiscuity. If the woman is attracted to the man she just had sex with (pronounced “in love”), she will wish to stay with him and will set about extracting investment and commitment from him. This tendency is misunderstood as women wanting to commit, but it is about securing commitment from the man. If she isn’t attracted to him, she won’t want anything further to do with him, but this isn’t what she is hoping for when she originally has sex with him.
There is one exception which could be creating some of the confusion on both points; women don’t just have sex out of passion. They also have sex for transactional reasons. They want something, and they think having sex with the man is likely to get this for them. This can take many forms, from the common prostitute to the previously withholding wife who wants to become pregnant, to the woman who has sex with her beta orbiter to keep him on the hook (rare but not unheard of), to the slut who decides to accept her best offer of the night not because she feels the tingle but because she craves the validation.
I’ve noticed a new trend taking place amongst the mega-churches out there. It seems that after they are well established, the preacher/leechers expand their empire and start new churches in other areas, all the while leaving behind one of the associate leeches to continue prodding the herd in the first church. This is mainly happening in the Word of Faith churches, where many of the preachers have their own airplanes, and can fly from a morning service in one area and hop six states over to fleece the flock in an entirely different region for an evening service.
I bring this up to point out that even though the congregations are broke and tapped-out, these guys will find a way to evolve with the feminists and move to where the money is. There is no motivation for these guys to alter their course or repent. Even though the message is that “Give, and it will be given unto you”, life doesn’t seem to be getting better for their people, only themselves. They won’t ever stop pandering to the women, they’ll just move to another area, like a virus.
The only way to stop this crap is the same principle as changing music, movies, television, news, etc. Stop feeding the beast, and it will starve.
@ NSR
LOL. Whelp, I’ve written a query letter to Christianity Today pitching a review of Mr. Bergner’s book (which I actually haven’t read yet) and I’ve emailed Mr. Bergner to see if he’ll do a brief phone interview with me for the article, so I guess I’m going to have to figure out which pill to present to them. Of course, it will be rejected, but I hope the editor at least will look at the research Bergner presents and think about it.
@Dalrock
My hopes are dashed. 😦
From my Pocket Oxford Dictionary:
Promiscuous: Having casual sexual relations with many people. (from the Latin Misceo, to Mix).
It is by reason of the definition that I do indeed assume (as you rightly divined) that female promiscuity would look like male promiscuity. I don’t disagree with the rest of what you say, but in the absence of agreement on the first point it is inevitable that we are not in agreement as to the strength of my corollary (which I saw as a peculiarly more likely male phenomenon).
D’oh, Mr. Bergner just emailed me back and consented to do the interview. Crap! I have to go read his book super quick now. Anybody have any questions they want me to ask him? He probably thinks I’m a real journalist and not some dorky housewife, LOL.
@Dalrock
It has just occurred to me that what you call in females Promiscuity, I would term Fickleness. Is there a basis for talks about talks between us on that proposition; if so I’ll get my people to talk to you people etc etc?
@SSM
I had a look at Mr Bergner’s book (courtesy of Amazon) and knocked it off my wish-list. Struck me as mildly salacious and aimed probably at the female sex – pop psychology – although (if you Americans will forgive me) it seemed typically American (in the bad sense). Perhaps as you are interviewing him you can get his views on the disagreement between myself and Dalrock, as he seems to know all about unruly female desire. In between commenting here I am trying to complete my reading of Professor Robin Dunbar’s The Science of Love and Betrayal (he of the Dunbar 150 number). Perhaps if I manage to do so, I will find something of interest for this blog.
Dear Greyghost:
Looks like islam is not going to save us after all. Damn it is a bitch having to do your own weight lifting
As the original poster pointed out, the minute women invade neutral spaces they are tempted to derail them for use in furthering their own interests. They must find this temptation overpowering, because it eventually seems to happen in every single case.
If someone wants to start a strict male-only church or mosque, I’ll convert and support it for as long as it stays on point.
Regards, Boxer
A polygyny where beta’s are able to take mistresses on the side, & women thanks to feminism will be open to taking cash for sex
All of these betas need to learn how to game women, and spend a year or two on the carousel themselves. The idea that any of them are worth more than a few moments of one’s time is something that will rapidly disappear. I certainly wouldn’t pay any money to have one on the hook. None of them are worth it, and it isn’t necessary anyway. All one has to do is to go to the right places and press the right buttons, and they’ll do whatever you want. Sex with a hot skank is no more an accomplishment than ordering a hamburger, for free, simply for the price of driving to the restaurant.
Regards, Boxer
The red pill has been mainstream for decades now. It’s called rap music. This has been the only popular medium that accurately describes female nature, the post-feminist dating market, Churchianity, soft polygamy, and precisely what happens to a community when hypergamy meets male scarcity. Rappers don’t use graphs, cite studies, or use the words “hypergamy” and “feminism,” but they have been documenting this phenomenon since the early 90′s at least.
Adults only. Not safe for work.
@Dalrock
People who believe like Stanton will spin it the same way he always has, but more. If we’re seeing more female promiscuity, then that’s because men are more promiscuous than before; that men are changing women. If there is strong enough evidence to suggest women have been this way for thousands of years, then they’ll just say this has been the case for thousands of years.
As you show, the story of Potiphar’s wife is right there in scripture. Proverbs is one admonition after the next to avoid the harlot. Stanton, Mohler, etc. are aware of this. What they tell women is that they are Sarah on the inside, but they have been tricked/conditioned/changed into being Potiphar’s wife by bad men. It is their basic assumption; predicated on the idea that they (Stanton, etc.) are God.
The transaction isn’t the exception, but the rule, and we men are largely fine with this unless we’ve watched too much Lifetime channel; to borrow a phrase from you.
Nope. Still very much blue pill. This is just modern feminist blue pill instead of Victorian chivalry blue pill.
VC blue pill: Women are angels who don’t like sex. Only dirty, dirty men like sex, and it takes women to civilize them with their natural graces and dignity.
Feminist blue pill: Women also like sex. Therefore women are just the same as men. Therefore women should act like some feminist caricature of what men are like, slutting it up all the time and never emotionally bonding with anyone or thinking about family. Because clearly, men never do that.
Sure, female sexuality is ravenous, but it is ravenously hypergamous. Male sexuality isn’t. It’s also keyed to the menstrual cycle, which men lack.
@SSM: Ask him about hypergamy. Ask him if he found that the manosphere theory of a few alpha males banging all the females with the betas getting none has merit, except ask it using words he can understand.
8oxer
Women take over when the space is full of “good’ men which by todays standards are emasculated men in fear of the laws of misandry. The early days of the spearhead about the time Glenn Sacks gave up commenting on his blog with fathers and families. Welmer (Bill Price) was just starting out and he had a men speak as men attitude at the time. It was the wildest thing I ever saw. Never in my life have I ever seen men speak absolutely freely and women just plain left the place along. When men speak with out concern for impressing women feminist women get lost real fast. And he was able to make the spearhead a men’s place. Dalrock doesn’t spend much time with supplication either and he has a strong and thriving blog. It is masculine and speaks firmly the truth. The feminist comfort of women is not the goal MGTOW for a good reason and the women follow to be a part of the discussion. Though many have and will try to be the discussion.
Red Pill going mainstream? Only if Aunt Giggle’s approves it.
@Opus
I may have to consider this more, but my first answer is I’m using the term promiscuous more like feral, or unconstrained.
The Red Pill will never go mainstream. It cannot. It’s called Red Pill for a reason. The Red Pill truth is that, again, serial monogamy (i.e. fornication as preferred by women) is not one bit less socially destructive and amoral than plate-spinning (i.e. fornication as preferred by men). But you won’t ever read about that on Salon or any other mainstream publication.
All is proceeding as outlined in Sex at Dawn — which is really THE book to read on these matters. The natural order of things is for people to live in a tribe. Within that tribe six guys will do one hot woman one night, then another the next. Women over 40 or 50 will drop out of the rotation as they lose interest in sex. Everyone is satisfied. However, this model doesn’t work in the current world because we do not have tribal affiliations. Thus, this sort of polyamory is too emotionally jarring. So, I really don’t know where things go that makes any sense …
And now that the topic is the Red Pill again, I think it’s time we discussed another Red Pill truth.
One claim we see repeated over and over in the ’sphere is that women are masculinized in the West while men are feminized, women are implored to „have sex like men” and so on. I used to accept that as self-evident, but if I think it through it frankly sounds like BS.
First of all, what does it mean „to have sex like men”? It means simultaneously maintaining a soft harem of women for casual sex and generally seeking out every opportunity for sex. That’s the male sexual prerogative. If we keep that in mind, it should be obvious that nobody is actually telling women to have sex like men. Not even the sex-pozzie feminists. Nobody is telling women to seek sexual opportunities for the largest possible pool of men. On the other hand, women are indeed encouraged by sex-pozzies to pander to the sexual whims of the top men.
Really, can anyone give me just one example of women being implored to behave like men at all? Are women encouraged anywhere to form clearly defined hierarchies based on merit and abilities – you know, like men do? Are they told to override emotion with reason? To adopt a moral code emphasizing personal bravery and honor? To sacrifice themselves for the common good? Are they told to work like men, to lead other people like men do? No.
Frankly I believe the claim that feminists and other villains of some sort are encouraging clueless young women to have sex like men and be more like men is just bogus and yet another attempt of women to validate their victimhood.
And what about young men getting feminized? Is that actually happening? It’s one thing that they are turned into de facto eunuchs to serve women’s whims. Being an eunuch is a fundamentally male role that has existed throughout history. But are men encouraged to form some sort of, you know, brotherhood? To shit-test women and play hard to get? To override reason with emotion? Are they told they can have it all, whatever that’s supposed to mean? If not, then what’s this BS about men being feminized?
This is nothing new. Most feminists, liberals and such have always maintained that women like sex just as much as men and are naturally just as promiscuous as men. The problem with that is that they have always denied sex differences. Women are pickier than men.
I may have to consider this more, but my first answer is I’m using the term promiscuous more like feral, or unconstrained.
FWIW I cannot go with fickle because it suggests a type of indecisiveness that manifests before the transaction. The flightiness works, but what is being discussed is being mission minded and somewhat desperately selective, if those two words can be used together.
SSM: ask him if he thinks this means we should go back to naming HERricanes after only women!
@SSM
Perhaps review this book at the same time:
“The Evolutionary Biology of Human Female Sexuality”
http://books.google.com.au/books?id=5uVUwCE3Vm4C&printsec=frontcover
but definitely read it before interviewing Mr Bergner – it will be helpful when choosing questions to ask him.
” Being an eunuch is a fundamentally male role that has existed throughout history.”
That’s an interesting observation Höllenhund, the role and extent of eunuchs in history is a very sparse topic that to my mind hasn’t even been touched by the ‘sphere’. The sociological implications fit very neatly with what is happening today, do you have any resources on the topic?
The Red Pill will never go mainstream. It cannot. It’s called Red Pill for a
Agreed. The mainstream, which is shaped, directed, controlled and narrated by the mass media and academic institutions IS the blue pill.
What we’re seeing here is the blue pill disseminators (aka “the Cathedral”) are starting to notice more and more red pill reactionaries speaking up in Blue Pill venues, so they are attempting to co-opt red pill truths back into a blue pill narrative.
Just 4 years ago, any mainstream media source that posted a typical story reinforcing the feminine imperative would be nary a red pill sentiment expressed at all in the comment section. If one was, it would quickly get overwhelmed by all the useful idiots and true blue believers denouncing the red pill commenter. The tide has turned, and we now see the red pill narrative gaining traction in the mainstream discussion.
Now…you almost can’t go anywhere that allows free commentary without encountering some folks disagreeing with the Blue Pill narrative and speaking red pill truths.
News media sights, hobby forums, sports forums, YouTube comboxes etc. are starting to get more and more ugly truths posted contra to the blue pill narratives the mass media and their useful idiots keep trying to reinforce.
The only way the red pill ever goes “mainstream” is if it can truly be co-opted and re-directed towards serving the blue pill narrative.
What we are seeing being done to the MAndrosphere zeitgeist, is the same thing that was done to the Tea Party movement and the Occupy movements.
First they ignored us.
Then, they attack us.
But they are certainly never going to “join us.” That’s where they adopt a new course of action – the co-opt phase.
Keoni, just like the hippy movement of the 60’s, or grunge in the 80’s. Before they really gained traction, there were paper thin waifs walking down modeling aisles in Paris, New York, London, etc, dressed in a co-opted style.
@Keoni
Co-option is a massive gateway for the red pill
The red pill is unique, even if a fraction of the truths in the red pill are adopted, we’ll see a massive shift in the mainstream
The mainsream morons dont realise, the red pill is a one way street
The red pill bloodies the waters for red pill sharks of the manosphere …
The mainstream is the unwitting prey, the red pill is the bait, the manosphere is the shark, waiting for the waters to bloody as the lies of the feminists & mangina’s pretty lies perish aka Roissy
One pointer to the truthiness of this article is that woman have the capacity to have multiple partners in one bedding. They can orgasm multiple times within that scene. Most men cum once and go to sleep.
I wish I could say I share your optimism, rmaxgen. IMO, Any massive shift in the mainstream that results in a wholesale acceptance of the red pill is just going to result in a totalitarian crackdown.
I’m amused at the number of MAndrosphere commenters I see always declaring that they can’t wait for the system to crash and burn so that we can rebuild again.
Not happening. The crash and burn is going to result in the men who pull the levers behind the curtain simply stepping out and exercising their totalitarian agenda openly and brazenly.
@Box8r
“All of these betas need to learn how to game women,”
Most beta’s wont ever be able to learn game, which is why polygyny where betas pay for relationships & dates is crucial if beta’s want to overcome approaching women
Also mistresses as in japan & china, allows beta’s to compete with the harems run by alpha’s
This is crucial, as ALL women want to be in a harem, not a monogamous marriage, which is why pre-selection is so effective on women
If beta’s are able to have mistresses, we’d see a massive population explosion
Beta’s unable to create harems similar to alpha’s is the bottle neck for creating a population explosion …
Marriage will never make a come back in its present form
Monogamous marriage is dead
Keoni Galt seems to have swallowed the whole red pill. It’s good to see. Once you strip away the veil and see the machine for what it is, you realize all of these tools (two party politics, feminism, socialism, cultural marxism, etc. etc. etc.) are just tools to reach their end goal. After it’s all exposed, they’re still going to move forward with their agenda, minus the bread and circuses.
Keoni Galt
You are right. maybe with all of the gun sales and prepper stuff going on more people are red pill than most think. The collapse is going to have a lot of blood shed if it gets that far. That’s why I am all for the sexual assault witch hunt on the military and the openly gay stuff too.
@Keoni
“exercising their totalitarian agenda openly and brazenly.”
The whole point is to excercise their totalitarian agenda openly and brazenly
Which is why fascism is rife
Also note the coming totalitarianism state will have a unique twist …
Totalitarianism & a total population wipe where 60% of the worlds population die, will happen by 2030
2030 is also when we get free energy technologies …
Btw the 60% of the worlds population dead in 2030 will be women
It’s women who are being targetted by the eugeneticists
This is WHY we have feminism today, its to kill off billions of women by 2030
Also note China’s single child policy & the child killing of girls in India, these are all government programs
Feminism is DESIGNED to get the public to hate women
Nothing is a coincidence
The consequences of the horrors of feminism will be felt for centuries
The anger & hate we feel is carefully planned
The red pill will have inevitable consequences for women …
A red pill totalitarian state is better then a feminist infested shit fest
@ Keoni
e.g. one world totalitarian government spying on everyone moving into the end times.
Well when the men behind the curtains pulling the lever step out from behind the curtain…. I can hit a man sized target at 1400 yards with a .338, consistently and in a variety o weather/ terrain conditions. But to do that requires a viable target.
I see your 2 Live Crew and raise a message to blue-pill churchian white knighting fathers out there.. Ice Cube, also quite NSFW:
rmaxgenactivepua
That was some serious dread game man.
sunshinemary says:
June 4, 2013 at 10:12 am
“D’oh, Mr. Bergner just emailed me back and consented to do the interview. Crap! I have to go read his book super quick now. Anybody have any questions they want me to ask him?”
Ask him if he’s read any of Daniel Amneus, Roger Devlin, Debi Pearl, Sylvia Ann Hewlett, Steve Moxon, Bernard Chapin, Phillip Longman, or Roissy.
Pingback: Lightning Round – 2013/06/05 | Free Northerner
And how is this a problem exactly? The only problem is that young men and young women are still brainwashed by society and culture and religion to put any value on the cancerous institution known as “marriage” instead of completing destroying it.
There’s nothing better than the idea that men and women should be free to fuck whoever they want whenever they want. And prostitution should also be legalized. That way we men don’t even have to bother with game or dating a woman and can just pay for sex and be done with it, and thus free to focus on our own lives again.
Legalizing prostitution, and also creating virtual reality porn (and eventually Female Robots) will be the force that truly frees men. Until that day comes, we are still slaves to real life women. Soon though, real life women will become obsolete with all of the new technology coming.
Anonymous June 5, 2013 3:51 AM:
With your call to legalize prostitution, it sounds as if you have never heard of HIV.
VR porn and sexbots, sure, as future liberators of men.
I understand that the GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN and MOSES and JESUS and HOMER and GOD THE FATHER and ZEUS THE FATHER are considered OFF TOPIC in a thread devoted to FATHERS and CULTURE by all the fanboyz raised by fmeinists cum MRAs, but I thought I would try posting this here anyways, to witness it getting voted down by those very same folks and lost souls who need it most:
http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2013/06/05/zeuss-lightning-moses-thunder-da-reason-dey-banned-da-great-books-4-menz-is-dat-da-great-bookz-teach-of-the-true-nature-of-womenz-and-da-honor-of-men/
ZEUS’ LIGHTNING & MOSES’ THUNDER: Da Reason Dey Banned da GREAT BOOKS 4 MENZ is dat da GREAT BOOKZ teach of the true nature of WOMENZ and da HONOR OF MEN.
IN THE MIDST OF ZEUS’ LIGHTNING & MOSES’ THUNDER
A LOST GENERATION OF MEN BEHLD DA GBFM IN WONDER.
AS HE CAME DOWN FROM HIGH OFF THE MOUNTAIN PEAK
TO DELIVER DA TRUTH & HONOR ALL YOUNG MEN SEEK.
lzozozozololzoz
Lots of people talk and few of them know,soul of a woman was created below.
Every day I work so hard, bringin’ home my hard earned pay, Try to love you baby, but you push me away.-
LED ZEPPELIN – DAZED AND CONFUSED LYRICS
Da Reason Dey Banned da GREAT BOOKS 4 MENZ is dat da GREAT BOOKZ teach of the true nature of WOMENZ and da HONOR OF MEN.
HOMER TEACHES:
You have to watch out [20] She doesn’t carry off all your treasure. You know what a woman’s heart is like. She wants to enrich the house of the one who weds her, Never mind about her former children And the husband she once loved. Once he’s dead, [25] She doesn’t give any of them a thought. –Homer; Lombardo, Stanley; Murnaghan, Sheila (2010-07-02). Odyssey (Translated & Annotated) (Kindle Locations 6813-6817). Hackett Publishing. Kindle Edition.
lzozoozozlzozoz dat is because a owmenz is gudied by materialz insticnstinct and mater = mother = matter = material you fanabaoyz zlzloolzolzoz. DA ANCIENTZ KNEW IT–all dat da bernnkeifierz conceal and hidez as tehy d create false LAWS allowing womenz to arbitrarily transfer a man’s property and chirlederen to da state zlzlzlooz!!!
OK EVERYONEZ!!
CLASS IS IN SESSION!!!
IN THE COMMENTS, leave samples and excerpts from the GREAT BOOKZ which teach game!! AND also note how the GREAT BOOKZ they teach thingz GREATER THAN GAME (such as honor and civilizatin and freedom from punnanaizz zlozzoz and freedom form butthext) as there is more to life than being the 27th PUA to game some buttehxt off a modenrz ebebernankifed deousled womenz zlzozolzlzlozlzozoolzolzozlzloz
HEre is one for starters:
lzozozlzozozoz
read homers lodysysyey!! duh!!!!
homer’s odysysey teaches that if you stand up to womenz you get to FUCK them lzozozozo
if you don’t stand up to dem dey turn you into pigs
yes homer was alomst as brrilliaaiant as heartistse lzozozozozo:
HOMER’S ODYSSEY:
“‘And I will tell you of all the wicked witchcraft that Circe will
try to practise upon you. She will mix a mess for you to drink, and
she will drug the meal with which she makes it, but she will not be
able to charm you, for the virtue of the herb that I shall give you
will prevent her spells from working. I will tell you all about it.
When Circe strikes you with her wand, draw your sword and spring upon
her as though you were goings to kill her. She will then be frightened
and will desire you to go to bed with her; on this you must not point
blank refuse her, for you want her to set your companions free, and
to take good care also of yourself, but you make her swear solemnly
by all the blessed that she will plot no further mischief against
you, or else when she has got you naked she will unman you and make
you fit for nothing.’ ”
-http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/odyssey.mb.txt
zlzozozozozoz
ANOTHER GREAT PLACE IS IN GENESIES GENEIS IN DA BIBLE:
16 Unto the woman GOD said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
is it no wonder sad benerneiannkieirz funded fmeinnisnsmz to deconstruct the GRETA BOOKZ AND CLASSIZCXZ? zlozozzlzol
HAMLET: HAMLET
O, that this too too solid flesh would melt
Thaw and resolve itself into a dew!
Or that the Everlasting had not fix’d
His canon ‘gainst self-slaughter! O God! God!
How weary, stale, flat and unprofitable,
Seem to me all the uses of this world!
Fie on’t! ah fie! ’tis an unweeded garden,
That grows to seed; things rank and gross in nature
Possess it merely. That it should come to this!
But two months dead: nay, not so much, not two:
So excellent a king; that was, to this,
Hyperion to a satyr; so loving to my mother
That he might not beteem the winds of heaven
Visit her face too roughly. Heaven and earth!
Must I remember? why, she would hang on him,
As if increase of appetite had grown
By what it fed on: and yet, within a month–
Let me not think on’t–Frailty, thy name is woman!–
A little month, or ere those shoes were old
With which she follow’d my poor father’s body,
Like Niobe, all tears:–why she, even she–
O, God! a beast, that wants discourse of reason,
Would have mourn’d longer–married with my uncle,
My father’s brother, but no more like my father
Than I to Hercules: within a month:
Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears
Had left the flushing in her galled eyes,
She married. O, most wicked speed, to post
With such dexterity to incestuous sheets!
It is not nor it cannot come to good:
But break, my heart; for I must hold my tongue.
SHOEPNHAUER:
The nobler and more perfect a thing is, the later and slower is it in reaching maturity. Man reaches the maturity of his reasoning and mental faculties scarcely before he is eight-and-twenty; woman when she is eighteen; but hers is reason of very narrow limitations. This is why women remain children all their lives, for they always see only what is near at hand, cling to the present, take the appearance of a thing for reality, and prefer trifling matters to the most important. It is by virtue of man’s reasoning powers that he does not live in the present only, like the brute, but observes and ponders over the past and future; and from this spring discretion, care, and that anxiety which we so frequently notice in people. The advantages, as well as the disadvantages, that this entails, make woman, in consequence of her weaker reasoning powers, less of a partaker in them. Moreover, she is intellectually short-sighted, for although her intuitive understanding quickly perceives what is near to her, on the other hand her circle of vision is limited and does not embrace anything that is remote; hence everything that is absent or past, or in the future, affects women in a less degree than men. This is why they have greater inclination for extravagance, which sometimes borders on madness. Women in their hearts think that men are intended to earn money so that they may spend it, if possible during their husband’s lifetime, but at any rate after his death.
As soon as he has given them his earnings on which to keep house they are strengthened in this belief. Although all this entails many disadvantages, yet it has this advantage—that a woman lives more in the present than a man, and that she enjoys it more keenly if it is at all bearable. This is the origin of that cheerfulness which is peculiar to woman and makes her fit to divert man, and in case of need, to console him when he is weighed down by cares. To consult women in matters of difficulty, as the Germans used to do in old times, is by no means a matter to be overlooked; for their way of grasping a thing is quite different from ours, chiefly because they like the shortest way to the point, and usually keep their attention fixed upon what lies nearest; while we, as a rule, see beyond it, for the simple reason that it lies under our nose; it then becomes necessary for us to be brought back to the thing in order to obtain a near and simple view. This is why women are more sober in their judgment than we, and why they see nothing more in things than is really there; while we, if our passions are roused, slightly exaggerate or add to our imagination.
It is because women’s reasoning powers are weaker that they show more sympathy for the unfortunate than men, and consequently take a kindlier interest in them. On the other hand, women are inferior to men in matters of justice, honesty, and conscientiousness. Again, because their reasoning faculty is weak, things clearly visible and real, and belonging to the present, exercise a power over them which is rarely counteracted by abstract thoughts, fixed maxims, or firm resolutions, in general, by regard for the past and future or by consideration for what is absent and remote. Accordingly they have the first and principal qualities of virtue, but they lack the secondary qualities which are often a necessary instrument in developing it. Women may be compared in this respect to an organism that has a liver but no gall-bladder.9 So that it will be found that the fundamental fault in the character of women is that they have no “sense of justice.” This arises from their deficiency in the power of reasoning already referred to, and reflection, but is also partly due to the fact that Nature has not destined them, as the weaker sex, to be dependent on strength but on cunning; this is why they are instinctively crafty, and have an ineradicable tendency to lie. For as lions are furnished with claws and teeth, elephants with tusks, boars with fangs, bulls with horns, and the cuttlefish with its dark, inky fluid, so Nature has provided woman for her protection and defence with the faculty of dissimulation, and all the power which Nature has given to man in the form of bodily strength and reason has been conferred on woman in this form. Hence, dissimulation is innate in woman and almost as characteristic of the very stupid as of the clever. Accordingly, it is as natural for women to dissemble at every opportunity as it is for those animals to turn to their weapons when they are attacked; and they feel in doing so that in a certain measure they are only making use of their rights. Therefore a woman who is perfectly truthful and does not dissemble is perhaps an impossibility. This is why they see through dissimulation in others so easily; therefore it is not advisable to attempt it with them. From the fundamental defect that has been stated, and all that it involves, spring falseness, faithlessness, treachery, ungratefulness, and so on. In a court of justice women are more often found guilty of perjury than men. It is indeed to be generally questioned whether they should be allowed to take an oath at all. From time to time there are repeated cases everywhere of ladies, who want for nothing, secretly pocketing and taking away things from shop counters.
HAMLET:
OPHELIA
Good my lord,
How does your honour for this many a day?
HAMLET
I humbly thank you; well, well, well.
OPHELIA
My lord, I have remembrances of yours,
That I have longed long to re-deliver;
I pray you, now receive them.
HAMLET
No, not I;
I never gave you aught.
OPHELIA
My honour’d lord, you know right well you did;
And, with them, words of so sweet breath composed
As made the things more rich: their perfume lost,
Take these again; for to the noble mind
Rich gifts wax poor when givers prove unkind.
There, my lord.
HAMLET
Ha, ha! are you honest?
OPHELIA
My lord?
HAMLET
Are you fair?
OPHELIA
What means your lordship?
HAMLET
That if you be honest and fair, your honesty should
admit no discourse to your beauty.
OPHELIA
Could beauty, my lord, have better commerce than
with honesty?
HAMLET
Ay, truly; for the power of beauty will sooner
transform honesty from what it is to a bawd than the
force of honesty can translate beauty into his
likeness: this was sometime a paradox, but now the
time gives it proof. I did love you once.
OPHELIA
Indeed, my lord, you made me believe so.
HAMLET
You should not have believed me; for virtue cannot
so inoculate our old stock but we shall relish of
it: I loved you not.
OPHELIA
I was the more deceived.
HAMLET
Get thee to a nunnery: why wouldst thou be a
breeder of sinners? I am myself indifferent honest;
but yet I could accuse me of such things that it
were better my mother had not borne me: I am very
proud, revengeful, ambitious, with more offences at
my beck than I have thoughts to put them in,
imagination to give them shape, or time to act them
in. What should such fellows as I do crawling
between earth and heaven? We are arrant knaves,
all; believe none of us. Go thy ways to a nunnery.
Where’s your father?
SHOPENHAUER:
In India no woman is ever independent, but each one stands under the control of her father or her husband, or brother or son, in accordance with the law of Manu.
It is certainly a revolting idea that widows should sacrifice themselves on their husband’s dead body; but it is also revolting that the money which the husband has earned by working diligently for all his life, in the hope that he was working for his children, should be wasted on her paramours. Medium tenuere beati. The first love of a mother, as that of animals and men, is purely instinctive, and consequently ceases when the child is no longer physically helpless. After that, the first love should be reinstated by a love based on habit and reason; but this often does not appear, especially where the mother has not loved the father. The love of a father for his children is of a different nature and more sincere; it is founded on a recognition of his own inner self in the child, and is therefore metaphysical in its origin.
In almost every nation, both of the new and old world, and even among the Hottentots, property is inherited by the male descendants alone; it is only in Europe that one has departed from this. That the property which men have with difficulty acquired by long-continued struggling and hard work should afterwards come into the hands of women, who, in their want of reason, either squander it within a short time or otherwise waste it, is an injustice as great as it is common, and it should be prevented by limiting the right of women to inherit. It seems to me that it would be a better arrangement if women, be they widows or daughters, only inherited the money for life secured by mortgage, but not the property itself or the capital, unless there lacked male descendants. It is men who make the money, and not women; therefore women are neither justified in having unconditional possession of it nor capable of administrating it. Women should never have the free disposition of wealth, strictly so-called, which they may inherit, such as capital, houses, and estates. They need a guardian always; therefore they should not have the guardianship of their children under any circumstances whatever. The vanity of women, even if it should not be greater than that of men, has this evil in it, that it is directed on material things—that is to say, on their personal beauty and then on tinsel, pomp, and show. This is why they are in their right element in society. This it is which makes them inclined to be extravagant, especially since they possess little reasoning power. Accordingly, an ancient writer says, [Greek: Gunae to synolon esti dapanaeron physei].10 Men’s vanity, on the other hand, is often directed on non-material advantages, such as intellect, learning, courage, and the like. Aristotle explains in thePolitics11 the great disadvantages which the Spartans brought upon themselves by granting too much to their women, by allowing them the right of inheritance and dowry, and a great amount of freedom; and how this contributed greatly to the fall of Sparta. May it not be that the influence of women in France, which has been increasing since Louis XIII.‘s time, was to blame for that gradual corruption of the court and government which led to the first Revolution, of which all subsequent disturbances have been the result? In any case, the false position of the female sex, so conspicuously exposed by the existence of the “lady,” is a fundamental defect in our social condition, and this defect, proceeding from the very heart of it, must extend its harmful influence in every direction. That woman is by nature intended to obey is shown by the fact that every woman who is placed in the unnatural position of absolute independence at once attaches herself to some kind of man, by whom she is controlled and governed; this is because she requires a master. If she, is young, the man is a lover; if she is old, a priest.
lzozolzl good thing
that the GBFM
is a RICH NOBL MILITARY OFFICER
in my ARMY OF ONE lzozlzlzllozozooz
dat is ONE LOTATSSA COCKASZ!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
lzozozozozoz
THE GREAT BOOKS TEACH GAMEZZZ!!!
the following is from: http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/whatathenianmensaid.htm
“1) Aristotle said that man is by nature superior to the female and so the man should rule and the woman should be ruled.[1]
2) Demosthenes wrote “We keep hetaerae for the sake of pleasure, females slaves for our daily care and wives to give us legitimate children and to be the guardians of our households.”[2]
3) “A man who teaches a woman to write should know that he is providing poison to an asp.”[3]
4) Euripides has women characters make disparaging remarks about their sex:
a) I am only a woman, a thing which the world hates.[4]
b) No cure has been found for a woman’s venom, worse than that of reptiles. We are a curse to man.[5]
c) Men of sense should never let gossiping women visit their wives, for they work mischief.[6]
5) Hipponax, whose writing is quite abusive anyway, had this to say about women: “There are two days on which a woman is most pleasing—when someone marries her and when he carries out her dead body.”[7] This aphorism probably should be ignored, coming as it does from a Sixth Century BCE Ephesian whose malicious temperament left him with few friends in the land of his birth and very little good to say about anyone, but the remark is quoted too often today to be left out.
6) Hyperides said, “A woman who travels outside her house should be old enough that people ask whose mother she is, not whose wife she is.”[8]
7) In his Funeral Speech Pericles said, “A woman’s reputation is highest when men say little about her, whether it be good or evil.”[9]
It seems clear, then, that Athenians saw women as beguiling creatures capable of causing considerable harm to themselves and others, and weaker in mind and body than men. Many believed that young girls were somewhat wild and difficult to control and that virgins were subject to hallucinations that could encourage them to be self-destructive. The solution was an early marriage, for only after a woman had delivered her first baby could she be a fully-operational female.
“
zlzozozlolzoz
ONLY THOSE WHO HAVE NEVER READ HTE GRET BOOKS FOR MEN
WOULD STATE
THAT THE GREAT BOKS 4 MENZ
DO NOT TEACH GAMEZ Zlzolzlzlz
Th following is form:
http://www.womenintheancientworld.com/women%20and%20the%20law%20in%20ancient%20israel.htm
“WOMEN AND THE LAW IN ANCIENT ISRAEL
The Ancient Hebrew law code outlined in the Bible unfortunately lacks the detail that can be found in other ancient legal systems such as the Babylonian and Roman, but we can at least summarize the general principles.
1. Marriage was called “taking a wife”
2. It involved sexual intercourse
3. While there was no death penalty in Hebrew law for property crimes, adultery was a capital offence for both participants.
4. Marriage and children were necessary to have a fulfilled life. A childless woman could call herself a mother by giving her maid-servant to her husband as a second wife (assuming, of course, the maid-servant did indeed produce a child).
5. A widow had the right to marry her husband’s brother if he lived in the same town.
6. Polygyny was permitted but uncommon.
7. Divorce was easy for a man and impossible for a woman.
8. Childlessness was the most common reason for divorce
9. The woman moved to the husband’s home and family
10. While the husband was clearly the boss, each expected love from the other and a wife had the legal right to support.”
ONE OF THE MOST HILARIOUS THINGZZ IS HOW
SO MANY FATHERLESS RITALIN RAISED PUSUSYSYSYYSS FANBOYZ SAY
“WELL THE GREAT BOOKS TEACH NOTHING OF GAMEZZZ lzozozlzolz”
THIS IS WHY THE MODERN CHURCHIANZ HAVE BANISHED THE BIBLEZ: lzozozzozo
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/says_about/womens_rights.html
“Genesis 3:16Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.
Isaiah 3:12As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them.
1 Corinthians 11:3But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God.
1 Corinthians 14:34-36Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.
Ephesians 5:22-24Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord. For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body. Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
Colossians 3:18Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as it is fit in the Lord.
1 Timothy 2:11-15Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression. Notwithstanding she shall be saved in childbearing.
Titus 2:4-5Teach the young women to be … obedient to their own husbands, that the word of God be not blasphemed.
1 Peter 3:1Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands.”
SOMEDAY WHEN ALL D PUASZ GET BORED WITH STERILE BUTTOCKINGZ SESSIOZN tehy will return to d a GREAT BOOKZ FOR MENZ RENAISSANZESZ zlzlzlzllzlzlzz
@Keoni Galt.
Agreed. I have been saying it for years. The red pill is going to be co-opted by the blue pill. I have predicted once and again that the new wave of feminism would be based on arguments like the following ones:
-“OK. Men and women are not equals, but women are the most valuable sex when it comes to biology and no society has survived without transferring resources from men to women, so the State should transfer more money from men to women. Men who don’t support women threaten the existence of society so they must be punished”
“OK. I am hypergamous. So what? It’s in my genes. I can’t help it. And, as owner of the valuable egg, I need to have a better man than me, so genes are better in the next generation. I am the vehicle by which natural selection happens”:
“Yes, I have cheated. So what? Everybody knows that women are not monogamous.”
And so on and so forth. There’s an advantage, though. It would be much harder to convince a man to marry once he knows all these red pill truths, even if they have been co-opted by the blue pill.
^^^^
For Jesus was also crucified
By those who needed Him Most
And the fatherless fanboyz also
beheaded Cicero and sentenced Socrates
to Death
Such is the Nature
of the Glorious, HEroic Faiths of OUr Fathersz
and the GREAT BOOKS FOR MENZ
lzozozoz
@Luke
How exactly do you get HIV from fully vetted chicks?
You’re much more likely to get HIV from regular chicks you just met
The chinese & japanese method of polygyny where you pay a chick for a chance to date & see if you want a relationship with her, is alot better then the complete celibate beta’s we have today
Men will always have VR porn & sexbots
But for those men who want more, lowering the entry level so beta’s can actually get a relationship, polygyny is the way to go
Womens runaway hypergamy has to be destroyed, if we want a stable societal chance at repairing the damage women have reaped on our society …
And so on and so forth. There’s an advantage, though. It would be much harder to convince a man to marry once he knows all these red pill truths, even if they have been co-opted by the blue pill.
That is all we need. As soon as men know this is what it is the rest will take care of itself. Feminism lied for a reason. To try and co op the red pill with blue pill lies is the ultimate in irony. Not only will it be hard to convince a man to marry it will be hard to convince a man to not turn to violence. Things come in twos the relationship world of sex and family and the real world of eat and drink to live. Both are inter twined.
@Greyghost
“That was some serious dread game man.”
lol …. Well its coming
Do you really think men are going to stand around & tolerate irrational batshit women, in a strict totalitarian state?
Feminism is designed to destroy women, which is why theyre all single sluts with bastards for children
Government knows, men work harder enslaved to corporations, then they do enslaved to women
Feminism & liberalism is all about wiping out the competition to government enslavement … theyve already destroyed families, nationalism, small business, family businesses
The only choice men have today is to work for a government owned corporation
Marriage is the last straw for men, women really dont realise this fact
Also remember how women protested there were no clinics to murder their own children, in the 18th century?
Everybody will remember the horror of 90 million infants murdered in the space of 10 years by women
imnobody: There’s an advantage, though. It would be much harder to convince a man to marry once he knows all these red pill truths, even if they have been co-opted by the blue pill.
I don’t see that as an advantage, I see it as just the furthering of the longstanding feminist agenda against the heterosexual two-parent family. We need more of those, not less.
Dalrock:
Beta males do not actually enjoy being a bunch of supplicating losers, despite manospheric commentary to the contrary. The only thing that keeps Western men in this perpetual state of self-effacement and emasculation is the non-fossilized belief that white-knightery is the pathway to poon.
If the veil can be pulled back far enough and dramatically enough, the spell will be broken.
The best part of a return-to-sanity process is that it will slowly peel of the most-aware men and women, leaving the remaining pool of true believers to be higher and higher concentration of deluded losers, whom no one will be paying attention to anyway.
I mean, who cares if a fat video game nerd stays in his basement hammering away on the internet about hating PUAs? These people are ignored now.
As the population of blue-pill land reaches every-higher concentrations of losers (due to the smarter people being pulled away) the inflection point will be reached and the lie will die rapidly.
Georgia Boy
We’re or at least I’m here to build a cultural structure with carrots and sticks as part of a healthy society that will make a heterosexual two parent family the best obvious option for the most people. In a sane society on solid ground the beta male (the 80%) has a mate that gina tingles for him. And he has game. marriage for the sake of marriage continuing the feminist agenda just as churchians are with the man-up.
It would be interesting to read about the final fall of Germany at the end of WWII. I wonder how many Germans, finally aware of how Hitler had duped them welcomed the GIs whether publicly displayed or not.
@Scolds Bride
Brilliantly said
This is why I said the red pill is a one way street
Most women support feminism precisely because they cant stand hearing the truth about their own biology from a matriarchial society
This is because women only listen to men in a patriarchial social structure
It requires a male led masculine patriarchial society, to give people the strength to hear & recognise the truth
GBFM- Women and the Law in Ancient Israel
—————————————————————-
I’m not Jewish, so I don’t care what the laws in ancient Israel say. You continue to try to judaize the non-Jews who visit this website. Non-jews don’t live by jewish law. Stop trying to judaize the non-jewish population. If you want to live by Jewish law, convert to judaism and go live in Israel.
People of European ancestry should be consulting the history and laws of their own ancient people. European people have 40,000 plus years of wisdom from their own ancients to learn from.
Hey Fucktard Phil,
I quoted the New Testament, the Old Testament, and the Greeks.
and here again we see fucktards geting their panties in a WAD and RAGING against the GREAT BOOKS.
hey Phil,
did Jesus say that he came to fulfill the law of Moses, as the Bible teaches?
or do you think he came to abolish the Law, as teh buttehxting churchians preach?
are you anti-semetic perchance? do you hate Jesus because He was born, lived, and died a Jew?
@ Phil:
do you not enjoy eating Chinese food? Or Italian food?
Or do you refuse because of your ancestry?
@imnobody00
Your argument has precedent. H.S. Pomeroy, M.D. in his book, “The Ethics of Marriage” lamented that there were some 70,000 supernumerary women in the state of Massachusetts that could be married but were not. His fix – he proposed that single men who don’t marry be taxed and be taxed at such a great amount that marriage would be attractive to escape the tax. He wrote his book in the 1880’s about 125+ years ago.
Lets see, Salon writer Tracy Clark-Flory (hyphenated surname noted) interviews journalist turned author Daniel Bergner, quoting studies by scientist Kim Wallen, researchers Marta Menna and Meredith Chivers, Freud’s protégé Melanie Klein, and even mentions Deidrah, a female rhesus monkey.
As I’ve said countless times before, in a feminine-primary, fem-centric culture, the feminine imperative will only allow women’s interpretations of gender relations to be validated. And again I’ll ask, could a man have written this?
http://therationalmale.com/2011/11/08/could-a-man-have-written-this/
Would a man have gotten a Salon interview for writing and researching the EXACT same data? Or would he have been dismissed as a misogynist before the ink was dry on the books first press run?
When what passes for the Red Pill comes to the mainstream it will be wrapped in a pink chiffon camisole, wearing spanx and carrying a copy of Our Bodies, Our Selves. The mainstream Red Pill will only, can only, be what the feminine imperative will allow it to be.
Hear me now, believe me later,..go ask Vox about it here:
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.com/2013/05/book-review-men-on-strike.html
Once again, only a woman is allowed any red pill credibility.
Propogation of the species isnt everything, if men wanted to they could just herd women for reproduction
A bit like a petting zoo, with a bit more t&a action …
What makes women so dangerous is their ability to make out their biology has value greater then their ability to pop out kids …
Women also cover up women kill their kids on a frighteningly regular basis …
Whats even worse men commit dv & rape in ridiculously small numbers against women, around 0.02% in the military for rape
If 50% of men actually committed dv & rape as feminists accuse men of, women would literally have no sense of entitlement or toxicity
We wouldnt even have feminism
They would all be too busy with their gina tingles …
“GBFM- Hey Fucktard Phil”
——————————————–
What a christian! Look at that language. Guess you aren’t used to people challenging your bs. Tell us more, oh great judeo-christian. Just convert to judaism already. I will follow the wisdom of my own European peoples, while you follow the values of some made up desert tribal god.
“Womens runaway hypergamy has to be destroyed..”
How does being a cad/PUA destroy hypergamy?
Why do so many men waste time and effort telling men to marry vs spending their time changing the laws and culture which make marriage such a shit option?
Hey Phil,
Jesus wasn’t a European.
You say, “I will follow the wisdom of my own European peoples.”
So then you are not a Christian.
You also insult Christians by accusing them of having “some made up desert tribal god.”
I love Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, and find a lot of wisdom in them.
I love my neighbor.
All you can do is spew hate and hurl insults at Jews and Christians on a Christian blog.
Why are you here?
Ton
Why do so many men waste time and effort telling men to marry vs spending their time changing the laws and culture which make marriage such a shit option?
Once upon a time, a cop found a drunk crawling around on the ground under a street light. The cop asked the drunk, “Hey, there, sir, what are you doing down there on the ground?”
“I’m loogin fer my car kees” replied the drunk.
“Well, sir, where is your car? And are you sure you dropped your keys here?” replied the cop.
“My car is down the block and thash where I dropped my keys, tryin’ ta open th’ door!”, the drunk sputtered as he continued to crawl around.
“Sir? Excuse me, but if you dropped your keys somewhere else, why are you looking here?”, inquired the cop.
At this point, the drunk stood up, stared the cop in the eye, and contemptuously slurred, “S’obvious! The light’s much better here! S’too dark down the block to find ANYTHING!”
That’s why. Because the light is better on the “manUP’ corner…
Glenbert, IMO the only way to reign in hypergamy is for the saying “bros before hoes” gets put really into practice. When the cad/pua folk are fucking someone else’s wife,” because he must be “beta” or else she wouldn’t be looking for it”, then they are reinforcing this woman’s behavior, and showing their own form of hypergamy.
They are no better then the woman they are fucking. Actually, they are worse!
They take no responsibility for the destruction of families, the single mother families and the havoc that such families wreak on our society.
But you know, men can’t control their sexuality! Sure…….
People of European ancestry should be consulting the history and laws of their own ancient people. European people have 40,000 plus years of wisdom from their own ancients to learn from.
I’m at least as lily-white as you are, and I try to consult the history and laws of everyone, taking the best bits as I find them, and leaving the nonsense aside.
Most whites and blacks in North America are nominally Christians, which is a religion founded by a Jewish rabbi (Saul of Tarsus, a/k/a St. Paul) and largely built on the intellectual work of a pagan convert in Africa (Augustine). Neither of these characters was what a strict racial type would call either “white” or “black” (they were both most likely mixed).
The fact that someone doesn’t look like he might be a close relative doesn’t mean he doesn’t have anything interesting to say. Furthermore: I find the crypto anti-semitism and racism in the manosphere annoying and sorta tedious. The biggest white knight manginas are those you find at stormfront and other racialist sites. Likewise, the biggest crypto-racists are feminists like Gloria Steinem, who are often trotted out when the ruling class wants to bash blacks on the downlow.
I’m concerned about the well being of all my brothers, and those who harp about race and ethnicity tend to divide men needlessly. Feminists and their mangina footsoldiers have won big by just this tactic, and the longer that we fight among ourselves, the further the day comes when we’ll finally find some justice in this world.
Dalrock said:
The Stantons and Mohlers of the world have rejected the biblical description of women and have substituted a secular and deeply flawed narrative.
Aye, the Stantons and the Mohlers of this world are now the theological majority. It has become established churchian doctrine, across all denominations, to ignore the gender dynamics of biblical adultery. When was the last time you heard a sermon or attended a bible study addressing this? Not within the last three decades, I’d wager.
Pingback: Red Pill Science?
LeoG
Glenbert, IMO the only way to reign in hypergamy is for the saying “bros before hoes” gets put really into practice.
Perhaps you should provide your definition of “hypergamy”?
When the cad/pua folk are fucking someone else’s wife,”
Which, by and large, they are not. Because by and large, PUA’s are providing the “cock” in the “cock carousel” that plenty of women willingly ride in their 20’s and early 30’s.
It is a common White Knight notion, that somehow the poor, innocent girlies are being fooled into hook up after hook up by the devious, craven, Cad. The reality is not that at all: the women want to be sexed by an alpha, or an “alpha enough for tonight” . Why?
Because of hypergamy, that’s why.
because he must be “beta” or else she wouldn’t be looking for it”, then they are reinforcing this woman’s behavior, and showing their own form of hypergamy.
You use that word again, I do not think it means what you believe it means.
They are no better then the woman they are fucking. Actually, they are worse!
Of course. Because women are never responsible for their actions, right?
They take no responsibility for the destruction of families, the single mother families and the havoc that such families wreak on our society.
Yes, it is true that women take no responsibility for the destruction of families, or for babymomma famiiles, nor for the havoc that their “choice baby” wreaks on society. That is what you meant, wasn’t it?
But you know, men can’t control their sexuality! Sure…….
Oh, “Leo”, you need to put on a better beard than that, if you are going to dress up and play “manly man”. Do run along, dearie, the adults are discussing serious issues. There’s a good girl….
The author seems to be equating desire for monogamy with lack of sexual passion, which are two entirely different concepts. Evolutionary psychologists don’t argue that women aren’t as into sex as men are–what they say is that women’s sexual desire is concentrated toward a small number of high status men, while male sexuality can be instantly switched on at the sight of any reasonably viable woman. This notion certainly has not been disproven by science.
Check out my red pill blog: http://suppressedtruthsociety.wordpress.com/
Funny, Anon, you cant even put up a fake name. You miss the gist. Take off your roissy coloured glasses and try to find what I am really saying.
Leo G you are not doing a very good job here.
Cross post from unmasking feminism :
Christianity has never been about women, the bible has never been about marriage
The bible is first & foremost about respecting the sexuality & authority of men
The Bible is about the truth, its a patriarchial masculine male led authoritarian bible
It’s only by respecting & obeying the sexuality & authority of men, you find god
God might have given man the word
It’s clear, the bible is written by man, all of its authors are men
The BIBLE IS WRITTEN BY MEN FOR MEN
If you dont understand the important of this fact, you wont understand the word of god
God gave MAN AUTHORITY over all of his creation
It’s about time women started realising MAN HAS AUTHORITY OVER WOMAN
When you claim independence of man, you’re directly going against the word of god & the bible
God gave MAN AUTHORITY over all of his creation
The BIBLE IS WRITTEN BY MEN FOR MEN
Women are meant to find god, by obeying the authority & morality of man
” .. he proposed that single men who don’t marry be taxed and be taxed at such a great amount that marriage would be attractive to escape the tax. “
My, the Yukon sure is lookin’ purty at this time o’ year .. y’could send them the old maids, y’know ..
rmaxgenactivepua says:
June 5, 2013 at 11:01 am
@Luke
“How exactly do you get HIV from fully vetted chicks?
You’re much more likely to get HIV from regular chicks you just met”
There is up to a SIX MONTH lag from becoming infected with HIV (and thus capable of spreading it via sex) and when being HIV-positive starts to show up on the tests. Further, over 5% of HIV NEVER show up on the tests at all, even when someone has every symptom and is clearly dying from it. The only real solution (aside from celibacy) is monogamy, with both partners being either virgins or celibate for six months since their last previous sex partner (and tested before starting the new relationship).
@Luke
“over 5% of HIV NEVER show up on the tests at all,”
The rate of HIV is too low anyway, just like HPC everyone has it, but its the auto-immune response which causes it to become dangerous
Basically if you’re reasonably healthy, you’re not going to get AIDS or cancer
HIV & HPC are both overblown hype by pharma
The real danger is from antibiotic resistant STDs, which ARE testable & preventable
Most western women, especially women who cock ride are notorious for carrying everything from boils to STD’s, theyre hygiene is notoriously poor
Even worse for party & club chicks
Promiscous Sluts arent known for their hygiene or health
Making prostitutes much safer for the average beta
Again games ideal
Most beta’s dont want to learn game … just look at the delusional anti-game forums, these guys are incapable of doing anything to have a relationship with women
Women today are far too masculine for most beta’s
Pingback: Gladiator Sex, Russell Crowe vs Russell Moore | Feminism is Empathological
These studies appear to conflate physical arousal with “what would women do if society weren’t in the way,” which is simply foolish. We have seen what women will do in a society that encourages them to follow their base instincts: spend their twenties screwing around, and then their thirties regretting it. Even the New York Times will publish stories by middle-aged women who regret their non-marital sexual experiences. Studies of women who self-identify as “exceptionally open to casual sex” find that the women aren’t as open to casual sex as they thought.
This is because we (well, real women, I guess) are about more than physical arousal: we are also emotional and intellectual creatures, capable of denying quick pleasure for our long-term interests. Society is also anything but repressive towards female sexuality; I spent my teens and twenties getting mocked relentlessly for having actual sexual morals (i.e. don’t do it outside of marriage). I’m not sure how any researcher can say, with a straight face, that our modern society represses women’s sexual expression.
Eh, these ‘studies’ are all about getting the buyer to accept damaged goods.
@Bridget
“capable of denying quick pleasure for our long-term interests. ”
Not quite, women are notoriously hormonally challenged …
Most women’s promiscuity & sexuality is triggerred by how many men she’s banged
If a woman has access to large amounts of alpha’s, she has enough men to trigger her promiscuity & she eventually turns into a slut & whore
If a woman has limited access to men, her sex drive is limited to her bf or husband
A womans sex drive is completely attached to a man
Women literally have zero sex drive independent of men
This is why lesbians, need the dominant, submissive dynamic to have sex
Its virtually impossible for a woman to get turned on by a submissive submissive dynamic
Basically women have zero sex drives, without a man to trigger them
Yup, the more men back off and leave women alone, as feminists have been demanding men do for decades, the more their pimps have to ratchet up the marketing hype.
I was telling someone just last week how jesus was wrong when he predicted the meek would inherit the Earth. Instead, it was the bogus.
Yup, the more men back off and leave women alone, as feminists have been demanding men do for decades, the more their pimps have to ratchet up the marketing hype.
This is because men withdrawing from women takes away their greatest leverage.
For example, consider the following article:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-06-05/trade-wars-chinese-empire-strikes-back
Classic Sun Tzu: Avoid your opponent’s strengths, strike at their weaknesses.
MRAs and others ‘fighting’ against feminism would do well to heed this advice, as most attempts to attack or reform existing systems are essentially striking at feminist strengths. Yes, a few isolated battles may be won here and there, but the war is being lost because it is being fought on their terms, on their home ground.
Short of conditions that physically or economically force society back to a red pill basis, the red pill will not and cannot go mainstream because as others have noted above, the mainstream is the blue pill Feminine Imperative.
This is why with the exception of Black Knighting*, one of men’s most potent weapons is MGTOW.
* Examples of Black Knighting:
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.jp/2013/03/black-knights.html
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.jp/2013/03/black-knighting-and-bbc.html
http://alphagameplan.blogspot.jp/2013/04/a-black-knight-in-action.html
I rather liked Bridget’s above comment; which gelled with my own slightly exaggerated view that women can only have sex when either they are being paid for it short term i.e. prostitution, or long-term i.e. marriage. Bridget refers to middle aged women who regret their non-marital sexual experiences. This put me in mind of the seeming non-stop accusations in recent months in the U.K. by just those middle-aged women who when they were largely in their mid-teens gave it up to various – then – wealthy and famous disc-jockeys. They are now spinning it as (child) abuse and rape but what I suspect, is that as a wedding-band was not forthcoming they are now disgusted by their youthful promiscuity, especially when in the cold light of middle age, those aging, balding, pot-bellied pensioners no longer look like the sort of man who they would be attracted to. There can be only one acceptable (to their hamster) explanation – RAYPE.
Attempting to persuade young women to be confident in expressing their sexuality (i.e. screwing around) on the basis that if it feels good it must be good, or worse, that in doing so they are demonstrating their equality with men, is the cynical rhetoric of some aging lothario keen to persuade a young woman to sleep with him. No man was ever so encouraged: men have throughout history been castigated (like Casanova) for successful promiscuity; women throughout history have never gained a good reputation for facilitating male desire, beginning with Shamat in Gilgamesh, Calypso in The Odyssey and doubtless any number of females in the Old and New Testaments. ‘Go and sin no more’ was what Jesus said to a grateful and repentant Mary Magdeleine, not ‘go feel confident in your sexuality’. Modern-day Mary Magdeleine’s wish they had known a latter day Jesus.
rmaxgenactivepua –
“It’s about time women started realising MAN HAS AUTHORITY OVER WOMAN”
Amen!
I almost just cut and paste your entire comment here – I agree 100% with what you wrote.
It is refreshing to hear the truth in plain language.
BTW, ctrl C for your line here cost me an entire 200+ comment I was about to post at Sunshine Mary’s but it was worth it – thanks!
@BC
Actually, I was adding to FH’s comment, but MackPUA v2.0 jumped in between. So there was an implied/missing “and” in my first sentence: as men have backed off from women AND as they’ve made themselves much less attractive (that damaged goods thing) their extra-special wonderfullness has to be extolled all the more strenuously by their lobby. But if something has to be promoted and hyped 24/7/365, well, one should and would be naturally suspicious that it’s a pig-in-a-poke.
You may well be right about MGTOW, but there is a sense in which it’s just following feminists’ orders. If feminists want to make it the crime of sexual harassment to show a woman unwanted attention, compliance is not risking violation by showing any woman attention which is not explicitly wanted by her according to a document signed and notarized by her and delivered in advance. There’s an actual sexual harassment consent form out there, but it’s meant as a joke, as handing one to a woman ‘cold approach’ style would itself constitute a violation.
One of the more astute observations zed has made was about how the “R” in MRA is all about the rights of men to have relationships with women, relationships which practically all women say they want, and complain endlessly about not having – all the lonely feminist spinsters, the man shortage-ists, et al. The fact that so-called regular women haven’t put two and two together and fought the feminists back for what they have stolen from women is one of the many things making women less attractive, their lack of empathy for the situation men are in. If women won’t fight for their rights to have relationships which they seem to want a lot more than men do, why should men? Because it’s our ‘job’ to save the world and women? FTS! On the other hand, there’s no instance in all of history of women liberating their men from tyranny, feminist or otherwise. So don’t anyone hold their breath for that to happen.
Neither of the new-fangled boxes for men of these feminist-dominant times (MGTOW / MRA) is anything to get very enthusiastic about.
“bridget says:
June 6, 2013 at 2:32 pm
These studies appear to conflate physical arousal with “what would women do if society weren’t in the way,” which is simply foolish. We have seen what women will do in a society that encourages them to follow their base instincts: spend their twenties screwing around, and then their thirties regretting it.”
Dear Bridget,
It are women heading the companies and publishing houses that encourage women to act like sluts. Tucker Max rhyems with Goldman Sachs buttcocked a girl and taped it secretly, and the woman Charlotte Allen lauded him, repeating his lies that he is a six-foot-tall butthextual hero at the Weekly Standard. Although his film lost around $10,000,000 on a $12,000,000 budget, charlotte allen referred to him as a successful filmmaker because his film makes fun of fat girls, and too, because he fucks girls in the ass and tapes it secretly. Meanwhile, Priscilla Painton, editor in chief at Simon and Schuster advances him hundreds of thousands of dollars for his next buttcocking book.
And so we see, Bridget, how women run things when they are in control.
Bridget writes,
“Even the New York Times will publish stories by middle-aged women who regret their non-marital sexual experiences. Studies of women who self-identify as “exceptionally open to casual sex” find that the women aren’t as open to casual sex as they thought.”
Yes Bridget, of course. Women regret their dumb choices when they wake up at thirty and ask two questions, “Where are all the good men?” and “Why is my butt sore?” When men ran things, they kept the secrteive tapers of butthext away form their daughters, whom, as Bridget stipulates, are incapable of proper judgment, just as Eve was incapable of proper judgment, and sucked on the serpent zlzozoozo.”
Bridget writes,
“This is because we (well, real women, I guess) are about more than physical arousal: we are also emotional and intellectual creatures, capable of denying quick pleasure for our long-term interests.”
Actually Bridget, when grown women at the Weekly Standard and Simon and Schuster are promoting, publishing, and lauding buttcockerz and secretive tapers of butthext who lie about their height and succtetehd, it appears that they are navigating not by God nor Jesus nor Moses nor a Higher Code of Honor, but via their butt and gina tingellozzozzlzozlzo.
Bridget writes,
“Society is also anything but repressive towards female sexuality; I spent my teens and twenties getting mocked relentlessly for having actual sexual morals (i.e. don’t do it outside of marriage). I’m not sure how any researcher can say, with a straight face, that our modern society represses women’s sexual expression.”
Yes Bridget, now that society is run by feminists and their ilk, slutty, immoral behavior is encouraged. This is because women lead via the base–the buttcocking and butt and gina tingelxoxlolzzzo. This is why women will destroy a fmaily and initiate 80% of divorces, because their butts or ginas tingelzlzlolzozoedzlzlzzo tinglzozozoed lzzzzozlzzo. Women will forgo faith, family, and their children–their husbands and fathers–society, civilization, honor, and decency–all for a good buttcocking.
That is why Bridget, when women run things, buttcocking is exalted over the Honor of God and Man, as our present reality offers irrefutable proof.
@Hannah
Thanks Hanna, I wasnt sure how well it was going to be received
I was literally pissed off at the comments over at Unmasking Feminism, making excuses for not teaching game & the truth about women to christian men & women
Its infuriating seeing so called christians, who really dont want men to learn game & do something about the sluts invading their churches
I was thinking of making a blog to kick christians asses into shape, even red pill christians havent got a clue what real christianity is about
Basically The bible is about being Ruthlessly Masculine
The word might be written in the bible, but its really through understanding the nature & biology of man can you really understand what the bible is really about
Man is THE most important part of the bible, without man there is no justice, morality or ethics
If you dont have a clear understanding of masculinity & the authority man has over the world, you will never get close to god in any shape or form
Our world is the bible … our world IS the word of god come to life
Every single bird & insect, is a living scripture …
You CANNOT avoid sin, by interpretations of scripture, interpretations of scripture leads to worship of culture
The ONLY way to avoid sin, is to follow nature & biology
Nature & biology IS the word of god
Our biology are living words of scripture, this is WHY game is so important to men & women
“Being in the mainstream” means that Manosphere views affect legislation and legal judgements, business products, marketing and hiring, and the allocation of political and tax resources. Films, TV drama, novels, plays and editorials usually follow – unless they are PR and agitprop in disguise (feminism was very good at agitprop disguised as fiction). Getting mainstream means getting the attention of business and politicians. Business wants to see the money, and the politicians need to see the votes. Women get all this attention and special treatment because, in the end, they spend lots of money on useless shit, and have convinced their elected legislators that they are a bloc vote with a number of important common interests. Bullshit of course, but everyone believes it. This brings us to…
Obstacle One: remember that most men think it is entirely acceptable to be manipulated by women (http://sevendialsx.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/finally-i-understand-normal-and-it-isnt.html). There must be a gene is that makes it possible to tolerate women’s manipulation, random feelings and off-topic thoughts, and I don’t have it, and most Manosphere guys don’t have it. Regular guys have it. They don’t hear the misandry, they ignore the dumb male stereotypes in movies and TV. If AVfM did start a legal action, most men would wonder what the fuss was about.
Obstacle Two: men are notorious for not buying useless shit, and the whole ghost / minimalist thing doesn’t help. Men do buy a lot of stuff, but it’s mostly necessities: food, rent / mortgage, school fees / costs, car costs, holidays, water, electricity, gas, fixed line and broadband… stuff like that. Stuff they are going to buy whether anyone pays them any attention or not. Business doesn’t need to address men, since men are going to spend most of their money anyway. It does need to address women, since they buy lots of optional shit, and are prepared to go into debt to do it. (Some men also buy lots of stupid crap, but it’s usually electrical or to do with cars. It’s stuff they find for themselves and needs a minimum of marketing.). Same goes for votes. We’re going to need to convince the elected legislators that we are a group with significant common interests. See Obstacle One.
Obstacle Three: in public, as opposed to specific forums like this, the Manosphere will have to get off the religious kick. Dropping a Biblical reference into a serious discussion on social / political policy, at least in Europe, will get your pass revoked.
Bring on the agitprop disguised as culture. Get it published. Don’t give up because the Wimmiz have it all Under Control (The Menz had it all Under Control in 1963 and look where they are now.) Practice the wisecracks, put-downs, agree-and-exaggerate and other Roissy-style tricks. Stop whinging about how awful women are, and turn it into a moral issue. Stop making evo-psycho excuses for certain aspects of women’s behaviour (shit tests, hypergamy, flaking, “challenging” and all that stuff) and just call it what it is – rude, crass, coarse, thoughtless and worse. While you keep telling them that “science” says they can’t help but frivorce, flake or test, they have an excuse. There is no excuse for the shattering rudeness of turning a date into a job interview or a wife still “testing her husband for fitness” after, well, the wedding.
Otherwise, no, an article in Salon doesn’t do it.
Dear Leo G,
Yes! Correctamundo! Love your words!
“Leo G says:
June 5, 2013 at 7:56 pm
Glenbert, IMO the only way to reign in hypergamy is for the saying “bros before hoes” gets put really into practice. When the cad/pua folk are fucking someone else’s wife,” because he must be “beta” or else she wouldn’t be looking for it”, then they are reinforcing this woman’s behavior, and showing their own form of hypergamy.
They are no better then the woman they are fucking. Actually, they are worse!
They take no responsibility for the destruction of families, the single mother families and the havoc that such families wreak on our society.
But you know, men can’t control their sexuality! Sure…….”
It is quite remarkable
How many Churchian “Christians”
Seek salvation in buttcokcing other men’s wives
as opposed to
living by the Code of Honor
the Mosaic Ten Commandments
the Law which Jesus came to Fulfill
but i have witnessed many churchians here
raging against Jesus
calling His Words “Noise”
screaming that he came to Abolish the Law
so as to sanctify their buttcockingz
as they try to transform the noble, exalted Jesus
into their own base likeless
call Jesus a “made up desert tribal god”
and exalting the pagan over the divine Law.
they have evil, lustful hearts
which covet the butts of other men’s wives
and so they rage against GOD and MOSES and JESUS and ZEUS
and the GREAT BOOKS FOR MENZ zlolzzlzozolz
Dear Bridget,
Are you saying that when women do anything that is immoral, it is because society is making them do it?
Have women no free will nor conscience of their own?
You write, ” We have seen what women will do in a society that encourages them to follow their base instincts: spend their twenties screwing around, and then their thirties regretting it.”
Where, throughout the history of the world, have women created a document stating “Thou shalt not fornicate?” or “Thou shalt not buttcock,” or “Thou shalt not commit adultery?”
Dear Bridget, did not women–the feminist movement deconstruct the GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN which teach women not to fornicate nor buttcock, but rather to be loyal to faith, family, and men?
Bridget–in your opinion, did the feminist movement deconstruct the GREAT BOOKS and BIBLE and HOMER because “society encouraged them to?”
Why is feminist literature void of morality and filled with gina and butt tinglezlzlzozo? Is it because “society forces” feminists to pen immoral, amoral drivel?
When Eve fell to the temptation of the Serpent, was it because society forced her to?
If society exhorts women to be immoral, are women capable of choosing morality and reballing against immorality? Or does society also exhort them to never rebel?
Why are 80% of divorces initiated by women? Are they responsible, or is it because “Society” is acting through them.
Opus,
Leave Mary Magdalene out of the slut talk. Mary Magdalene is referenced in the beginning of Luke 8 (and other Gospels) as a woman out of whom Christ cast devils and the first to whom Christ appeared after His Resurrection. The unnamed “prostitute” who anointed Christ’s feet in front of the Pharisees appears at the end of Luke 7. The mistaken identity is based on the proximity of their references in Luke.
Per GBFM, read your Bible.
@key
I have never read The Bible.
I believe you will find that the Roman Catholics are of the view that MM was a whore – unless they have lately had a reformation on that point.
Opus,
Individuals of such a notion could not be less correct. Beliefs and views don’t have anything to do with the matter. It’s right in there in Luke 7 and Luke 8. They’re not like book chapters, just a few sentences. I encourage you to look for yourself. Search an online bible for Magdalene. You are just a few keystrokes away from dispelling this particularly aggravating misconception.
Opus has apparently never read HOMER nor the BIBLE nor the GOSPELS nor any of the GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN as he has written:
“No man was ever so encouraged: men have throughout history been castigated (like Casanova) for successful promiscuity; women throughout history have never gained a good reputation for facilitating male desire, beginning with Shamat in Gilgamesh, Calypso in The Odyssey and doubtless any number of females in the Old and New Testaments. ‘Go and sin no more’ was what Jesus said to a grateful and repentant Mary Magdeleine, not ‘go feel confident in your sexuality’. Modern-day Mary Magdeleine’s wish they had known a latter day Jesus.”
llzozozozozozozozoozozozoz
99.99% of men’s present day problems and crises can be traced back to the fact that they hate reading, imbibing in, and exalting the FAITH OF THEIR FATHERZ lzozlzlzo.
The OT/NT only mention 2 types of women of which men can marry.
– The harlot
– The virtuous women
~Shalom
@rmaxgenactivepua “real danger is from antibiotic resistant STDs”
This is true. In addition- genital herpes/warts which are asymptomatic (ie 60% of the population !!!) and will cause complications for women who are of childbearing age.
Any man who is looking at prospective wife material – ask to see all health care records and tests(if there aren’t any – caveat emptor)
….speaking of red pill realities regarding the nature of women…
Of topic, but:
Mad at your husband? Frame him for sending ricin to politicians.
—–
You might recall a while back when President Barack Obama and New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg got letters containing traces of ricin poison. It was big news for a while, and some poor guy in Mississippi got the initial blame.
Well, it turns out that a woman who was mad at her husband sent those letters, in an apparent effort to frame him for the crimes.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/07/justice/ricin-letters-arrest/index.html?c=homepage-t
“…sources told CNN last week that the wife told authorities she found a suspicious container, and ricin research on the computer that she and her husband shared.”
“A law enforcement official told CNN’s Susan Candiotti that they believe Richardson sent the letters herself. She was angry at her husband, the official said.”
Just imagine had the investigators NOT considered her credibility, and just went full-throttle after her husband. What a thing to be falsely accused of.
I guess that since the culprit turns out to be a woman, the main stream media will bury this quickly.
Crosspost from apocalypsecometh …
But Sturgess, Sunshine Mary & Dalrock & Athol Kay says its not Christian & marriage is a life long commitment …
Which only benefits the woman & blueballs the man after she looses her youth & fertitlity & turns into an aging hag, at the age of 40 ….
Monogamous marriage is dead, it died as soon as men lost their god damn minds & tied themselves down with sexless geriatric hags at the age of 40 …
No amount of red pill game is going to magically change your 40 yr old hag of a wife
Seriously find a new system which gives a crap about men, & stop pretending monogamous marriage gives a crap about mens biological imperative
Marriage has & will always only benefit women
Allow men to bang younger hotter chicks, when the wife turns into a sexless geriatric at the age of 40, or we’ll continue MGTOW & PUA
Theres no point calling us sinners, we know thats a con too … run by women
Our ancestors understood the nature of women very well, If you ever are in Ireland, you can find representations of the Sile na gCioch in many old Irish churches. Feminists have adopted this symbol as their own.
The Red Pill on race is also making its way into Salon.
http://www.salon.com/2013/06/05/white_pride_in_my_classroom/
A white nationalist is humanized. Imagine that.
At the risk of this thread developing into a ‘mine is bigger than yours’, I feel compelled to contradict GBFM’s assertion that I have never read Homer; I have read The Odyssey (though regrettably not in the original Greek) – but not the Iliad. I make up for that regrettable lapse by having read the anonymous Epic of Gilgamesh, (though not in the original cuneiform) which is where the whore Shamash, comes from, and which predates Homer. Further back than that one cannot go. I get my knowledge of Delilah, not from the OT, but from Milton’s Samson Agonistes.
Clearly there is a certain amount of confusion as to MM, and I am indebted to key for his attempts to bring me up to speed, though I have to confess a certain disappointment, for the idea that MM was a rampant whore is (I would say) more satisfying from a literary point of view – promiscuity is worth feeling repentant about I’d say. ‘Go sin no more’ was the admonition to her or so I had thought. In addition to never having read any of The Gospels I have also never read any of The Apocryphal Gospels which intrigue me greatly as one is entitled The Gospel of MM and she turns up in some of the others – so I understand. Whenever I see young ladies, otherwise asserting their Agnosticism, wish-listing such books on Amazon, (as they do) I know exactly what is motivating their penitence.
Since coming here a month or so ago, I keep coming across this: Marital Rape.
Somebody help me out if you will… is ‘Marital Rape’ not a contradiction in terms???
A man and his wife in a COVENANT with the marriage bed UNDEFILED….
What am I missing here?
Marriage 2.0 confers no rights on the husband, only obligations. Conversely, it imposes no obligations on the wife, but gives her rights.
The concept of marital rape is only possible in the context of women’s fried-ice, oxymoronic version of marriage, a one-sided contract, aka an “adhesion contract”.
In practice, it’s no different from notarized dating, or conditionally shacking up.
I’ve gotta say, I agree with MaxPUAv2.0. Marriage in both it’s forms I’d oppressive to men. A man friendly system would allow men to trade up to younger and hotter once she gets old WITHOUT ANY REPERCUSSIONS.
Of course, there would be nothing stopping a man from being loyal to one woman, if that’s what he stupidly wants to do. But if a woman were to trick a man into doing something so crazy, She’d have to do some major manipulation. Like kissing his ass, cleaning HIS house, cooking him gourmet meals, ect.
@Hannah
Marital rape is a fictitious term, coined by the suffragette movement, to bring in no fault divorce law
Theres no such thing as marital rape, if he wants sex & you’re not in the mood, suck it up
You’re there to serve him & be submissive to his sexuality
@rmaxgenactivepua, @Liberty, Family, and Masculinity
Well, the obvious problem to allowing men to “trade up” and marry a younger woman later in their lives is one of mathematics: there aren’t enough young women for each man to “consume” two: one during his own youth, and a second during his middle age. It would just be a mildly softer version of the system we have now, where a large fraction of betas don’t have any meaningful access to either the sex market or the marriage market.
suck it up
🙂
Right, Max… and if she still says “No way, Jose!” you report her to the Marriage Police who will make everything right for the man?
But let’s not get sidetracked. As I said earlier, the real problem (for women, at least) is not that men are raping their wives too much, but that they’ve backed off and are evidently raping them insufficiently, so to speak. How else to explain 70+ million copies of Fifty Shades of Grey sold?
Some years ago there was an essay on how what the cuntry is suffering from is a mass epidemic of female sexual frustration – which is why they’re all obsessed w/rape.
So I can see the next new national campaign in the war against men – to remedy all the problems caused by the last round(s): “Man up and rape your wives more, guys!”
“Come on, we know you can do it, you brute.”
lolzzl
There is no greater pain in the ass on god’s green earth than someone who follows you around demanding that you master her.
– John Gordon
Men are passive to their wives by laws of misandry. Plain and simple. Women are sexually frustrated and hate their wimp ass husbands because the guy has a gun to his head that she wants there. As TFH always mentions she can’t put two and two together. It is the laws we get the laws and all of the social issues will take care of themselves.
There is no greater pain in the ass on god’s green earth than someone who follows you around demanding that you master her.
– John Gordon
Excellent!. This as clear a complaint against Game. Its not an argument against game existentially, but it is a clear and accurate value judgement.
Game is a science developed as a response to the laws of misandry. With out misandry there is no reason to study why being a “good” man is such a losing endeavor. A good man frivorced loses every thing and demonized as an abuser and kills himself. Never gets looked at by women that screw players and natural cads. All by law. I hate the idea of gaming a wife but it is something you have to do by law. (makes you hate women if you think too much about it) Get rid of the laws of misandry.
Actually the Apostle Paul pointed out “game” and “players” out a long time ago (he was anti-game & anti-players )
Older women they can teach the younger women to love their husbands and children, to be self-controlled and pure, to be busy at home, to be kind, and to be subject to their husbands… Similarly, encourage the young men to be self-controlled (corresponds with 1 Tim 2:15)
This flys in the face of current society (love husbands, self controlled, pure, busy at home, kind & subject to husbands) which means they do NOT as with men to be self controlled.
@ Greenlander
It wouldn’t be a “softer” version of what we have now. It would be a harsher version. And it’s not about trading up to marrying, it’s just trading up whenever you feel like it. Women couldn’t trap their baby daddies, men could be as big of cads as they want to be with no repercussions. Instead of men having to be responsible for womens choices, women can be responsible for their own choices, and men can be free to do whatever the hell they feel like doing. Men could be truly free, to be PUAs or Fathers or whatever else they want to be. It’s all about taking away the states power against men, and men running their own lives for their own benefit.
The State has been the biggest white knight in history.
And if a girl gets gang raped in the streets it’s her own fault for not being escorted by a male relative. Don’t expect me to pay for armed police officers to roam the streets to protect her. It’s not my job to ensure her safety unless I’m getting something out of the deal.
There’s a new movie out called The Purge. That is the Red Pill going Mainstream right there.
Better see The Purge before you decide its red pill. They can make feminist trope out of post apocalyptic dystopia. Know that.
I really like that felicitous quote, courtesy of Martian Bachelor, by John Gordon (who he?). I like it because I can think of two women who tried that on me – it’s a form of fitness test – and demanding women like that are simply very bad news. No matter what you do, it is not going to be good enough, and the strange thing is, the women who ask to be dominated and treated like shit are always the ones who are the assertive themselves and the most in-your-face. As I have often observed, good looking women are the most pleasant; the fugly ones are the ones with the attitude problems. Their calculus seems to be that if they are sufficiently noisy other women will be intimidated and thus they will have a clear run at the Alpha males. It seems to work too.
The irony is (as with sadists and masochists) that if you do master them as they desire, then you will only be doing their will, so they will ultimately still not be satisfied. You would only be mastering them if you did it on your own volition, but hang on – that would be patriarchal oppression and thus rape. In fact come to think of it, I read of one guy who doing just as required was sentenced to eighteen months imprisonment for doing just what the bitch wanted.
John Gordon wrote The Myth of the Monstrous Male and Other Feminist Fables in 1982. He had gone to grad school with famous radical rape/porn feminist theorist Robin Morgan, and thus had some unique insights into the second wave’s development during the 70s. Last I heard he was an English prof at Connecticut College (used to have a faculty webpage).
Here’s the full quote: “I speak as someone who learned the lesson, from women: Not too much polite, please. Please to beat your chest a bit. If you want to get laid, you’ve got to chase and you’ve got to push. Not too much — that’s called ‘rape’, and you’ll live to regret it, boy — but enough to show you’re serious.
…there is no greater pain in the ass on God’s green Earth than someone who follows you around demanding that you master her.”
There are a few others at an unfavorable (curiously) review at a well-known online bookseller named after a major South American river:
“So this book is about feminism and sex. About feminism and money, feminism and politics, feminism and anything else, it has nothing particular to say… What (feminists) haven’t faced is the potentially ruinous contradiction between those positions and the implications of their continuing, and at the moment escalating, campaign against male lust. Yet that, clearly, is the issue of the hour, on which the success of the whole agenda may well turn. It’s time we faced that one, too.
“…for the last ten years or so feminism has in fact been quite possibly the most prolific single fountainhead of fashionably malignant and fraudulent drivel on the national scene.” (Pg. xiii)
“This book’s main thesis is that such a return (to ‘purity crusade’ rhetoric) … is certain to prove fatal to any coherent feminist vision of sexual equality now in currency.” (Pg. 10)
“There are certainly, for instance, scads of bright feminist women — so why are almost all feminist books so desperately dumb?” (Pg. 31) [“Lean In” anyone? lollzzl]
“A Sunday School teacher of mine used to tell my class, almost thirty years ago, that lust was brief; now she’s dead, but my lust lives on.” (Pg. 176)
“First and foremost, the public enemy at the top of the feminist list was male lust… it is safe to say that no other group since the Medieval Cathars has been so devoted to the proposition that humanity is redeemable precisely to the extent that it can refrain from sex, or at least refrain from enjoying it.” (Pg. 195)
Anybody up on those Medieval Cathars?
The truth about female desire: they’re all Green Orion Slave Girls now!
Martian Bachelor: Cheers for that little mini-review. Another title for my “to-read” list.
The thing with the term ‘marital rape’ is that it relies on people ignoring the follow up questions, the first being, if you don’t want to have sex with that guy, why did you marry him? The second being, if you don’t want to have sex with the guy, why did you have him commit to forsaking all others?
The red pill is definitely going mainstream in a social sense it’s just not being reflected in the media (probably because the feminists don’t like it). The reason some guys here are still unaware of just how big and rapidly progressive the manosphere is becoming is down to the route it has taken. Many would-be beta providers are becoming red pill aware but are still completely in the dark about the existence of the actual manosphere.
Many incognito red pillers are likely to explain these issues to their peers in simple blue-pill/mainstream terminology to avoid having to translate all the manosphere-specific terms and to distance themselves from any real life taboos that may come from associating with an online ‘misogynistic’ community. Something as simple as explaining that waiting for a woman to reach her late-20s/early-30s and deciding she’s “giving up on bad boys” in favour of “nice guys” only to expect twice the effort and dedication of the nice guy in exchange for half the affection and respect she gave to the bad boys is actually the raw end of the deal contrary to pop culture’s beliefs has a huge impact on a young man’s way of thinking.
Much of the information is already recognised on a subconscious level so this triggers the innate inquisitive nature in most young men to further investigate these circumstances and subsequently leads them to blogs like this one (or for the less studious, YouTube vlogs that talk about the same topics). As time goes on the information filters further into their social circles and at a faster rate and starts a ripple effect and becomes part of everyday conversation. At some point many of the topics will help make sense of the behaviour of the female counterparts they interact with on a daily basis and cement the beliefs of young men as well as removing some of the taboo of having an anti-feminist stance.
Dalrock I don’t think you realise just how many young men heed your wisdom without spending a single second reading your blog. Many are still in red-pill limbo but they have grasped the fundamentals without even knowing it, I suppose we can call it the blue-cased red pill phenomenon. Believe me the word is out there, I can’t see too many more of those “how to have it all”-type videos being made in the future.
My pleasure, Boxer (and anyone else). I think I noticed the title in the bibliography of one of Warren Farrell’s books, maybe The Myth of Male Power, so I’ll “pay it backwards”. lol
Definitely a good one for any Summer reading list. I still make use of his observation/deconstruction of the way feminists finagle the issue of sex differences, since they’re just as intellectually dishonest now as ever, and of course not only on that topic but all of ’em.
@Opus
I believe you will find that the Roman Catholics are of the view that MM was a whore – unless they have lately had a reformation on that point.
Further to the remarks by Key, the RC church now regards the identification of Mary Magdalene as a prostitute as mistaken. According to Wikipedia, the change happened in 1969 under Pope Paul VI, but it seems that it was done without much fanfare because the error had been committed by an earlier (and respected) Pope, Gregory I in 591 AD.
@Greenlander
Right, so all the alpha’s who monopolise all the chicks on the carousel, arent depriving beta’s of women now?
The more Beta’s have access to women, the less women get monopolised by Alpha’s
Men are emasculated today, PRECISELY because the vast majority of women are monopolised by Alpha’s
Basic maths
@Martian Bachelor
Since when have I advocated men game women?
I emphasise women HAVE to learn how to hold themselves responsible for their own actions
& I emphasise men be masculine & dominant & assert their authority over women
It is not a mans duty, to correct a womans shit tests & batshit crazy behaviour
If a man wants, he can teach a woman how to correct her behaviour, through understanding the cores & principles of game
Red pill women HAVE to understand, their husbands gaming them will NOT stop them from shit testing & testing the authority of the husband
Women have to learn to control themselves & hold themselves responsible for their own actions
Women HAVE to learn to correct their irrational behaviour & their shit tests, if she cant, she is unfit for marriage
THIS IS HOW Christian men & women can apply game, without the immorality of game & pickup
@ rmaxgenactivepua
Thank you for posting that. I have always held onto that – but could never quite “spell it out” in a clear concise manner as you just did.
greyghost says:
June 9, 2013 at 12:51 am
This. The current state of domestic relations law is this country is both necessary and sufficient in and of itself to keep marriage an untenable prospect for men. Unless and until this body of jurisprudence is radically overhauled, no amount of other effort is going to produce meaningful improvement in the state of marriage.
Warren Farrell’s “The Myth of Male Power” is a so-so book, notable only for being relatively early for such modern works. I suggest instead any of Bernard Chapin’s “Women: Theory and Practice”, Rich Zubaty’s “What Men Know That Women Don’t”, or Steve Moxon’s “The Woman Racket”.
rmaxgenactivepua are you mackPUA? Or do you just both say similarly incisive comments?!
@Hannah
LOL does it matter?
Thanks for the compliment
I left mackPUA a question on the ‘what is the manosphere’ post… and then he/you disappeared… I wondered if he/you was ok/alive! He he 🙂 If it’s you perhaps you wouldn’t mind answering it when you have time? Thanks in advance!
@Hannah
Oooh ok,
Heres some poetry for those waiting for Dalrock to recover from his Hol’s …
An Avatar is a permanence of character through prose
Its in the unknown, when your writing is at its greatest
It comes to the fore
Of course I’m evading, as mystery has more uses then a statement or intent
The mystery of mystery is its own reward &
Of course
A mystery is an unrequited unknown, its unmeasurable unknown leads to unrequited curiosity, an unknown never spent …
tada!!! lol
Mack – I must have gotten a misimpression from the PUA part of your previous handle, but I don’t have the team of assistants to check dozens of back posts to redetermine whether my take was correct or not.
Like feminism, “game” is slippery enough to defy definition if you criticize it — but everyone knows exactly what you’re talkin’ bout if you praise it. In the proper company, of course. That’s how it appears to work.
I have nothing against idealism, but am more interested in illuminating what is than I am in what people should or HAVE to do.
+1 on Zubaty, though I read the earlier version of What Men Know…, Surviving the Feminization of America. It was a special order at the indie bookstore next door to the liberal arts college, and I still remember the snarky/smirky look on the SWPLy woman clerk’s face when I went in to pick it up… PUArtistry, only Martian style!
Whoever gets stuck with all the useless stupid troublesome women is a big omega loser as far as I’m concerned. Any alleged red-pill variety is right up there with Bigfoot in mythological status and reported sightings. (The thing I get from Dalrock’s is that they’re not hanging out at church, which I avoid religiously anyway.) YMMV.
Whoever keeps bringing up the sexbots stuff, don’t hold your breath until they get past the uncanny valley, and program them to act like women (instead of that unfeminine pornstar nonsense.) So far the only good thing that’s come out of it was the chance to watch Canadian lawmakers jump at shadows.
@Martian
Game isnt just about picking up women, its about understanding the biology of social intelligence
.
The application of game to marriage is important, as
Men & women are socially intelligent in different ways
Men are logically socially intelligent
Women are hierarchial & biological, & use feedback from large families & communities, as social intelligence
Happiness for men & women is determined by how biologically correct, the feedback they get from their environment
If men get masculine & dominant feedback from their families, they remain happy & satiated
Feedback reinforcing feminine & tradition, keeps women happy & satiated
The common denominators are intelligence, the social contextualisation of logic & intellect
Happy third blog anniversary, Dalrock.
And Happy Father’s Day to all the fathers here!
Agree with sunshinemary. Happy Father’s Day Dalrock, and to all the decent, hard-working father’s out there, not least of which is my own dad, have one on me. That also goes for those brothers who have been separated from their kids for whatever reason.
Pingback: Testosterone Link fest Episode 5 | About Lifting