Implications of Family Law on “Chicks Dig Jerks” Phenomenon

by W.F. Price on June 16, 2012

Heartiste (Roissy) has another post up demonstrating scientific evidence for the attraction women feel for dangerous men. Psychological studies have clearly documented this phenomenon, so I think we can safely say it is a scientifically verifiable fact rooted in human biology (as well as that of a number of other animals).

So what does current policy have to do with this? Well, what would you expect to happen when law so humbles men that those who follow it are reduced to obsequious underlings to the women in their lives? Why, women will grow to despise them, of course. Wives will find themselves wishing they could sleep with anyone but their husbands. Men who may have been passably assertive and masculine in a different legal regime are reduced to sniveling “yes ma’am” sycophants.

Eventually, the ones who don’t care – the real criminals – will be the only men left who are deemed attractive.

It’s akin to the argument used against gun control that goes like this:

“If owning a gun is a crime, only criminals will own guns.”

For our purposes, here’s how it goes for men:

“If being a desirable man is a crime, only criminals will be desirable men.”

This has already come to pass in a number of communities, and in the most fertile age cohort. I am fairly certain it explains a great deal of the illegitimacy rate in the under-30 crowd (now over 50%). The men we see impregnating young women are largely those who don’t give a damn about the consequences, and don’t want to play by the rules society expects them to follow.

As for what the consequences of this will be, I leave it to reader’s imagination.

{ 203 comments… read them below or add one }

AfOR June 16, 2012 at 12:07

You have it bass ackward Bill…

The rise of “jerks” is because the wimminz Secret Family Courts have CREATED “jerkdom” and punished “family man-dom”

Now make me a sammich bitch.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 49 Thumb down 26
Andrew S. June 16, 2012 at 12:11

“Men who may have been passably assertive and masculine in a different legal regime are reduced to sniveling “yes ma’am” sycophants.”

Good point. There are lot’s of men out there who are somewhat masculine and willing to fight if challenged, put a woman in her place, and basically just stand up for himself.

The problem is most of these men would rather not deal with being surrounded by twelve police officers, and thrown to the ground while one of them has his knee in your back.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 113 Thumb down 2
dragnet June 16, 2012 at 12:33

Chicks digging jerks isn’t the problem—it’s really just the rough equivalent of men liking tits and ass. The problem comes when societies incentivize criminal- and jerk-fucking by passing the costs of that onto the 80 percent of other guys—instead of forcing women to shoulder the responsibility for their decisionmaking.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 159 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 12:36

Chicks dig jerks, because they command respect, irrespective of social demands on them

The less you give a fuck about what society states, the more it rewards you …

Confidence comes from Demanding respect, your social experience changes dramatically when you dominate & command respect

Masculine basics, women fall in line for strong masculine men, fight back

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 57 Thumb down 5
J June 16, 2012 at 12:39

“If owning a gun is a crime, only criminals will own guns.”

For our purposes, here’s how it goes for men:

“If being a desirable man is a crime, only criminals will be desirable men.”

Pretty much.

I would add to this that women also want beta boys who will buy them dinner, clothes, gifts, and the like. So they have sex with bad boys, to produce more betas, and maybe a smaler percentage of bad boys. Both are insecure men as adults. But they get free, and expensive, jewlery and clothing. All of us are paying for it, while they dwindle their choices in the male population.

Sex from a few leading to no sex at all. Also those dupe into paying for it all, just stop producing.

I think Roissy, Roosh, De Angelo, and their kind do a great service naturally. If you have an action, you get an equal and opposite reaction. Apparently, physics works in the ethics department as well.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 39 Thumb down 6
Anonymous Reader June 16, 2012 at 12:48

Years ago when I was a better student of history I read some works on the 4th century AD. This was the time when Rome was collapsing. Birth rates had plummeted, the military consisted largely of foreign mercenaries, and tribes such as the Vandals cruised across parts of what is now Western Europe with impunity. When these barbarians encountered real soldiers, as when the East Roman Empire based in Constantinople sent a force to retake parts of what is now Algeria, the barbs were crushed. The leader of the Vandal gang that sacked the city of Hippo wound up being dragged through the streets of Constantinople in chains and sold into slavery.

In this chaotic environment, in parts of what is now France, strong men who had strong brothers, cousins, sons, fortified a hilltop as best they could and held off anyone who showed up. In time they agreed to protect local farmers from bandits in exchange for a portion of the harvest. This ad hoc arrangement in time grew into feudalism, the formalized system of loyalties and obligations both “up” and “down” the social structure. This led to the rebirth of a civilized world in Europe.

One thing is for sure: it was a determined, never-in-doubt, man who decided on a dark day that no Roman force was going to save his family or villa from the barbarians, that it was up to him and those men he could trust. I bet he was popular with the women…and brutal to his enemies.

IMO we are breeding our own barbarians within the West.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 83 Thumb down 0
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 12:58

Negging women, knocking women off their pedestal, downplay their jobs & u go grrl lifestyle, backhanded comments …

Tricks of the trade for getting entitled feminist infested Ameriskanks to bend over …

Thats the problem of having a overinflated opinion, & entitlement attitude, its so easy to burst their bubble with a few well aimed negs or backhanded comment

Of course if you demand respect & dominate, overinflated ego’s are easy prey

Overinflated ego’s are built on delusions & illusive entitlement, when faced with a person who demands respect, a reality of strength trumps a womans fantasy everytime

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 45 Thumb down 9
Mojo June 16, 2012 at 13:01

This reminds me of a post Rob Fedders just put up at his NO MA’AM blog.

The system is rewarding the omega criminal/scum class while punishing normative, productive beta men.

(He uses alpha/beta/omega in a different, and I think much more accurate, way than Roissy et al)

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 4
keyster June 16, 2012 at 13:08

Let the declining viral alpha thugs have the growing skanks.
Being the least-best beta provider is “manning down”.
DO NOT be a victim of social pressure to “find a wife”.
Don’t EVER be the man a woman “eventually settles for”.
(You know who you are.)
You didn’t “win” by finally gaining her acceptance.
Your life will be Hell.
The urgency of their biological clock directs their agenda; you’re not “lucky”.
To her it’s all about timing and settling for the least worst man at that time. Once she has what she wants, your value is purely financial.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 93 Thumb down 5
Zorro June 16, 2012 at 13:29

Considering the way our culture is diving into the Estrogen Swamp, the only way a man can remain a man is to keep his hands clear of wedding rings.

Great job, fembots. You’re creating a society where the only man women will want is a man who will not want women.

You idiots.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 93 Thumb down 0
walking in hell June 16, 2012 at 13:32

If a woman’s biology craves jerks and thugs, than it is just as criminal to penalize violence against women as it is to penalize homosexuality for men who are born gay.

The violence against women act should be repealed on this basis.

If a woman is being beaten or raped, all citizens and police officers should be happy that the woman is getting what she wants and applaud the man.

Did anyone ever notice that the more a society listens to its women, the more confused and effed up things get? The day that ALL men– police officers, judges, politicians, and everyone else–stop listening to women and regard everything they say as garbage or having an evil intent, is the day things begin to change for the better.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 26 Thumb down 5
walking in hell June 16, 2012 at 14:00

This phenomenon of women liking jerks is much more prevalent in America and other powerful countries (Russia) where the top dog men have to step on people to get in their top dog positions. Women sense in a jerk, some kind of potential success as measured in imperialistic terms.

In some European countries, if you act like a jerk, many women will turn and walk away and you will never get a second chance. They expect the man to be polite.

I think women in Latin countries appreciate and hope for a kind man, and simply tolerate jerks, because that is what they have had for so long. But I don’t think Latin women swell and moisten up for jerks and thugs like the sick American women do. I would encourage all the men to watch some of the Miss Universe interviews for the past few years. The Latin women come off as the sweetest; the American women and women who come from American-friendly countries (Ireland, England, Australia) come off as sick and psychopathic.

As a man, to act like a jerk in order to get an American woman is one of the most degrading things you can do. It is equivalent to selling your soul for the “grand” prize of a filthy pig or a goat.

Just the fact that you have to act like a jerk to get an American woman speaks volumes about them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 70 Thumb down 6
Observer June 16, 2012 at 14:20

Good article. Reflexively, you could apply the same logic to us in the form of permissiveness towards the fems. We continually shun the Plain Janes and get the prettiest sluts we can find. So what else is Jane to do but join the sisterhood of traveling thong and wandering eye?

So the only way to effectively fight the trend of nastier is better, we need to learn how to value meekness all around. Otherwise society will continue to glamourize criminals and destigmatize whores.

There cleary has not been an adequate cultural replacement for religion in this post-post modern/pre- apocalyptic age.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 32 Thumb down 11
Tim June 16, 2012 at 14:30

@Welmer,

Off topic but you need to see this. New penalties for women who deny access for fathers to their children in the UK. This is a big win for men:

http://www.nationalpost.com/related/topics/kids+lose+your+passport/6772951/story.html

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 29 Thumb down 4
UK FRed June 16, 2012 at 14:40

A book from the 1960′s called “Up The Organisation” said all that needed to be said, albeit for business rather than for life generally, when it looked at an ideal person profile from the point of view of Human Resources and for an Ottoman Turk. Robert Townsend’s conclusion: “We need to start breeding our own Ottoman Turks”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 0
Mojo June 16, 2012 at 14:48

Apologies for off-topic, but this is important. Planned government surveillance of citizens internet, email, phone use and its potential repercussions for the manosphere:

http://neckbeardchronicles.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/bully-state-or-conservatives-are-not.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
walking in hell June 16, 2012 at 15:09

I really think the psychopath trait of women liking jerks is mostly an American and Anglosphere thing. I did not experience it nearly as much in other countries that I lived in or visited.

Just to give you some hope, here are some of the Miss Universe videos I was talking about. I think the sample of each girl is representative of national personality. I can say that for sure that the USA, Ireland, and Czech Republic contestants represent their countries well in terms of looks and personality.

Notice that girls from the Anglosphere are the worst in looks and personality. Notice the subtle bitchiness in their comments.

USA – an effing goat who believes that what she says is important. By far, the worst girl in the contest. Notice how she likes to lecture us guys on what goats like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=avzRmTEbf0E

Miss Ireland – terrible looks and personality that things her opinion matters.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs-V_K7W9iY

Australia – terrible looks and self-centered personality. She thinks she is funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xLJPSjVO4A4

Czech Republic – pretentious and fake. Typical Czech girl.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V_YBfv5VexQ

Poland – nothing special.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wPVWjydUz7Y

Miss Russia – beautiful and funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4LDRAQYz8Ok&feature=relmfu

Portugal – an absolute stunner.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tB8SjmgJNDY

Colombia – not the best looking, but honest.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jQa9QeLImNU

Mexico – beautiful and sweet.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cht5c1-xRzU&feature=relmfu

Venezuela – Very good looking. Loves her family.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r61ijXfbi8Y

Puerto Rico – beautiful and sweet. Loves her family.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DmuUwFbGVHc

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 20 Thumb down 11
walking in hell June 16, 2012 at 15:17

@Tim
“Off topic but you need to see this. New penalties for women who deny access for fathers to their children in the UK. This is a big win for men:”

I saw this the other day and at first I was excited about it and posted it here. After reading it, it is basically hollow. There is no mention of default parenting increasing for fathers. This article simply promises more enforcement of current “visitation.” Anyone can make that promise; in fact that has been promised for the last 40 years.

The passport threats won’t materialize. In fact, this fake passport threat against women is basically the British government getting ready to roll it out in reality on men.

We lose again.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 1
ck June 16, 2012 at 15:25

“IMO we are breeding our own barbarians within the West.”

This is spot on to me. For years I have watched women, some of whom i hqave dated go for the bad bod/loser type. They find it exciting and provides them emotional hi’s and low’s(a drug).. However, I don’t understand why we call them alpha males. I reserve that name for the best of us. The men who take the risks, fight the wars, build and invent and MAINTAIN our civilization.

I’m a decent, successful combat MOS Iraqi war vetern.. But I’m a NOT thug type. So i don’t equate thug with alpha for those kinds of reason. I have engaged in violent confrentation in combat yet women do take me for a “nice” guy. What they don’t get is when they start down the road of misconstruing my kindness as weakness I walk away. Perhaps the difference between a gentlemen and nice guy is the nice guy will fawn attention on a women regardless of how she treat him, a gentlemen treats them well till they show disrespect. They can’t figure out the difference.

I’m 37, have a buisness with 35 employees and do ok for myself. And as many of us one here I’m trying to accept a life without female companionship. I just don’t get it, treat others as you like to be treated.

I’d appreciate some insights in this Alpha/beta casting please. Thanks.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 70 Thumb down 1
Nehalem June 16, 2012 at 15:34

It is actually more disturbing than suggested by Price. Women are choosing to have children with men they do not find to be marriage material. Choosing to deny a child the benefit of a stable home and father.

http://www.startribune.com/lifestyle/158322785.html

“These are not the ‘oopsies,’ the 15-year-olds who didn’t know any better,” said William Doherty, professor of Family Social Science at the University of Minnesota. “It’s more like women are saying, ‘This guy isn’t marriage material, but he’s good enough to have a child with, so it wouldn’t be the end of the world if I got pregnant.’”

Which is disturbing for 3 reasons:

1.) Women are choosing to have a child with someone they will not marry
2.) The whole if a child happens it happens attitude is crazy.
3.) Referring to 2, is the man even aware that woman is okay with having a child and may say “forget” her pills.?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 44 Thumb down 0
AfOR June 16, 2012 at 15:37

@ ck

You don’t get classed as alpha because you took orders from someone else to go to a foreign country and fight.

Both those who gave you those orders, and those whom ain’t takin’ no orders from no fucker, unnerstan’, are classed as more alpha than you.

Women have the hots for that which they cannot control or influence, a serviceman by definition is a controlled being, so you’ll do to be beta provider.

Not directed at you personally, just answering the question you asked.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 40 Thumb down 13
Okrahead June 16, 2012 at 15:47

Repeal the 19th amendment. If womyn do not have the right to vote, they cannot vote to force society’s betas to pay for their bad choices with alpha bad boys. As long as womyn can show up in force and vote for the government to force betas to fork over their wages to support sluts nothing will change.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 56 Thumb down 5
wobbegong June 16, 2012 at 15:50

OT, pity she didn’t get a whole lot more….

http://www.smh.com.au/world/sydney-tourist-jailed-for-false-rape-claim-20120616-20gq7.html

If her BF stays with her, more fool him.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 0
Rebel June 16, 2012 at 15:56

Women liking jerks is a phenomenon that has always existed. It’s probably a question of hormones.

The author of the article says:”I think we can safely say it is a scientifically verifiable fact rooted in human biology (as well as that of a number of other animals). ”

A number of other animals…

We live in societies (Western) that encourage the behavior. Why are we then surprised at the behavior of the human female?

The best position to take, IMO, is to accept that fact and either go along or do what we want, regardless of what anybody expects.

Things are the way they are and there’s fuck all we can do about it.
Just don’t give a shit and do what you will!

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4
Justinian June 16, 2012 at 15:57

I wonder if the whole outspoken “bitch” phenomenon is another case of mistaken projection of sexual attractiveness.

What I mean by that is that women find sexually experienced, accomplished men attractive and can’t understand why men would prefer a demur virgin over a carousel-riding career girl.

They don’t get it that men and women look for different things in a mate.

Most men like “nice girls” and strike out when they think that a women would prefer a “nice guy”.

Similarly, women are attracted to assholes and they wrongly assume that acting like a obnoxious bitch will elicit the same tingles in men that they experience themselves.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 53 Thumb down 3
Eric June 16, 2012 at 17:14

Price:

Women in our culture are NOT attracted to ‘strong’ men. If they were, they wouldn’t like jerks and assholes—who are basically dysfunctional weaklings who can’t make it without female enablement. All that this fake study showed was that feminist indoctrination has taken a greater hold on these females and caused them to react in an abnormal fashion.

The reason women go for jerks and assholes is because feminism has taught women to see all men as pigs and as inferiors who can’t survive without a ‘strong woman.’ Female ego-identity is wrapped up in this nonsense, so they need a weak man in order to feel superior to him. The fact that they go for jerks—while avoiding (or breaking down) genuinely strong men; and the fact that they can switch at will from jerks to metrosexual types proves this moreso than some hokey cat-scan proves the opposite.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 25 Thumb down 12
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 17:22

@WalkingInHell

The reason you didnt experience it in other countries, they dont have subsidised sluts competing with government for welfare

Give women brutal feminist laws to wield & their attraction for beta’s go down the drain, the average male cant compete with the social status, feminist laws give women

Women are hypergamous, ie status driven, give them feminist laws which raise their status & the average male cant compete with that sort of privilege or status, women now have legally

In other words having high status & privilege turns a womans sex drive off

Which is why they go for jerks & assholes, they simply exist to destroy societies class structure, which is what all men should be doing anyway

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 6
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 17:27

lol Eric thinks women arent interested in strong men …

I’ve always said anti-gamers suffer from the male version of penis envy …

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13
Eric June 16, 2012 at 17:36

Rmaxd:
I’ve always said that Gamers suffer from inverted white-knightism. LOL. ‘What makes her tick?’ Yeah, really a big deal to men…

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 19 Thumb down 8
Eric June 16, 2012 at 17:44

Mojo:
Rob’s point about punishing the productive while rewarding the scum is really the dynamic in play here. The system isn’t the way it is because women ‘like’ thugs; it’s because they hate productive and responsible men.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 11 Thumb down 9
Sun June 16, 2012 at 17:52

@ Eric

It depends on what our def of “strong” is.

There is a certain air of authority that assholes and jerks give off which is attractive on a subconscious level (primordial brain) that women tend to be attractive too. They view it as “confidence.” And it is true, in a sense. Assholes tend to be (or give the impression of) being very confident. They don’t give a flying hoot what anybody thinks (unfortunately even can be her)…making them assholes. Unless they are trying to impress asshole friends.

They go to such men because it is simply attractive. Feminism actually hates this and tries to make women go for metrosexuals of some sort. Some ambiguous male that “doesn’t know what gender he is (because in feminist theory gender is how one perceives himself or herself).”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 17:56

Go back to your penis envy eric …

Using game to screwing women over, is clearly not white knighting … then again logic isnt exactly your strong suit …

Btw Eric, why do you think women hate productive & responsible men?

I could do with the comedy, feel free to enlighten us with your anti-gaming wisdom …

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 16
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 18:02

@Sun

Everyone knows thugs & assholes give off an air of authority …

Eric’s an anti-gamer, he belongs to a cult, which thinks theres no such thing as attraction & women find thugs attractive, because they hate responsible men …

In short he’s short of a few screws …

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 9 Thumb down 15
Eric June 16, 2012 at 18:07

Rmaxd:
Please tell us again which cult I belong too? (oh that’s right you never have) LOL

‘Why do women hate productive and responsible men?’

Ummm…because they are feminists and hate men, maybe?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 5
Sun June 16, 2012 at 18:11

The classical aggressive masculinity needs to be there.

It is dying and certain (degenerate) types of masculinity are only found in certain cliches. Douchebags, bullies, jerks, business men, surfer boys, musicians, take your pick of group.

It is part of survival. Since cave man days, a woman’s survival often depended on such, and so having such a man was more favorable. However many men have gone astray and so masculinity has changed (i.e. I can drink more beer then you. Ergo, I’m a bigger MAN).

Assholes/jerks/bad boys/whatever you want to call them have “that.”

Unfortunately, they have more then just “that” and “that” is different then other “thats.”

“That” is hard to put into words because words can be deformed and misinterpreted.

It is possible to have that trait that women find attractive and not be an asshole who treats women like shit. It is a fine line and one that many can’t socially decipher when they observe others.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7
Eric June 16, 2012 at 18:12

Sun:
I don’t think that assholes project confidence, they project stupidity. Women see through that superficial veneer and see them as inferiors too.

One reason why I don’t think strong men appeal to the women—the divorce rate. The highest divorce rates are among men in professions like military, police work, firefighting, &c—that require a strong, confident man. On the hand, FBI stats shows that a woman—on average—will leave and return to an ‘abusive’ asshole seven times before she quits him. Then probably, just to move on to another asshole.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 23 Thumb down 7
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 18:15

Btw you’ll never be able to hold women responsible, unless you know how women work …

Women dont use logic or reason, like all parasites, they just feed off the host

You have to know how parasites work socially & the social structures these women create, to prevent them from screwing you over socially & emotionally

Something you’ll never do, if you dont know how women work

Enjoy your lack of game, anti-gamers, now go get screwed over by a Ameriskank, like a good mangina …

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 13 Thumb down 20
TFH June 16, 2012 at 18:18

“If being a desirable man is a crime, only criminals will be desirable men.”

Ferdinand Bardamu had an article in 2009

“When getting laid is against the law, only outlaws will get laid”.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 21 Thumb down 3
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 18:22

military, police work, firefighting etc.

Dont require strong confident men, they require men who follow orders blindly

You need to work on your definition of strong male … back to your anti-gaming board eric

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 7 Thumb down 16
TFH June 16, 2012 at 18:22

Eric,

I’ve always said that Gamers suffer from inverted white-knightism.

You fundamentally have no concept of what Game is.

Sleeping with lots of women at 1/1000th the cost of some beta guy who enters a Marriage 2.0 contract that grants a woman 80% of his lifetime output, whether she stays with him or leaves him, is whiteknighting?

Sorry, but you just don’t comprehend Game..

The biggest element of this is that you don’t grasp why Game is valuable in LTRs and marriages, despite several bloggers devoted primarily to this..

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 25 Thumb down 15
Eric June 16, 2012 at 18:24

Rmaxd:
Read what I say carefully before responding:

I tell men to AVOID entanglements with Ameroskanks. It’s the Gamecocks who try to teach men how to ‘manage’ Ameroskanks better (as if they could LOL).

I agree with you that feminism teaches women to behave like parasites and have an illogical value-system. So the logical thing for men to do is not get caught up with them in the first place.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 25 Thumb down 5
AfOR June 16, 2012 at 18:25

@ Eric
“The highest divorce rates are among men in professions like military, police work, firefighting, &c—that require a strong, confident man.”

I don’t think those words (strong and confident) mean what you think they mean.

The LAST FUCKING THING any quasi military type force wants is strong and confident cannon fodder, oxymoronic.

Women fantasize about dick turpin and pirate jack and ming the merciless, not cromwell, nelson or flash.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 6
TiredGuy June 16, 2012 at 18:27

“Repeal the 19th amendment. If womyn do not have the right to vote, they cannot vote to force society’s betas to pay for their bad choices with alpha bad boys. As long as womyn can show up in force and vote for the government to force betas to fork over their wages to support sluts nothing will change.”

I’ve always thought that voting should not be available to anyone, but the right to ‘earn the vote’ should be open all. Perhaps through a voluntary national service. Or alternatively, anybody receiving any form of welfare or support should be banned from voting. Its obvious that they will vote to give themselves more money, without thinking about the cost.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 2
Eric June 16, 2012 at 18:28

TFH:
The ‘costs’ you mention, assuming that 1/1000 is even accurate, is too high a cost. Suppose a million men learn game. That’s still 1,000 men who are going to get buried by the system whether they knew game or not.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 3
Eric June 16, 2012 at 18:38

AfoR:
True, but the cannon-fodder and scumbags that women prefer for relationships are hardly the ‘Alpha’ men like Cromwell and Nelson, though. That’s my point. The women gravitate towards criminals, bums, and thugs; not men who exhibit any genuine strength or confidence.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
"The One" June 16, 2012 at 18:51

Rmaxd wrote “Overinflated ego’s are built on delusions & illusive entitlement, when faced with a person who demands respect, a reality of strength trumps a womans fantasy everytime”

It’s not just a woman’s fantasy which can be trumped by reality any time. PUAs rely on the same Feminist laws which protect women from accountability. In the absence of protection from those laws, “Game” is no substitute for real power.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
Rmaxd June 16, 2012 at 19:15

@The one

Game isnt meant to be a real substitute for real power

Real power requires a whole different game, its called money & white knights on tap …

Of course if you enjoy getting screwed over by women & used as a walking wallet …

Feel free to enjoy your lack of game …

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 8 Thumb down 13
"The One" June 16, 2012 at 19:30

Rmaxd, young men are better served by being advised to look objectively at real power relationships, rather than learning this false doctrine of “Game”. I don’t even like the name of it. It sounds like a Spike Lee movie.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 6
Eric June 16, 2012 at 19:37

The One:
Recently there was an article on the Spearhead about some doofus who’d impregnated 30 women. The authorities want to castrate him because, aside from the fact that he was ugly, not intelligent, rarely employed, and had a horrible reputation; the womyns just couldn’t resist his ‘alpha studliness’. LOL

The fact that this guy may wind up on the chopping-block shows about how much ‘a reality of strength trumps a woman’s power.’

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 16 Thumb down 4
codebuster June 16, 2012 at 19:56

Just spotted this at the House of Chateau, posted by somebody using my id (funny that):

This is an important post from the House of Chateau. But let’s clarify things:
1) “Chicks dig jerks” is not universally applicable to all women everywhere. It is culturally specific, and from the perspective that interests us, is principally applicable to women of the Anglosphere. The more general, universally applicable law is that women dig formidable men. And within the term “formidable” come subheadings, like “successful”, “confident”, etc. Women dig to be able to defer/submit to formidable men;
2) What Anglosphere chicks dig (thugs) and what they often finish up with (providers) is often confusing to novices to game, but easily understood from the perspective of man as utility device. Even a genetically inferior midget with ginger hair, pasty skin and zero personality can fulfill his utility as a handy device by being a reliable, supplicating provider (this contradicts the evo-psych theorists, because clearly, women do not always select for the best genes). Even an old bomb of a car that gets you from A to B is better than no car. Though you would think, in this era of affirmative action and freebies dispensed to women like confetti, isn’t it easier just to get a job?
3) The alpha/beta dichotomy is false. There are countries on mainland Europe where the contemplative “beta” (for want of a better word) is quite in demand. More specifically, the term “alpha” is a misnomer. Often, all that is required to win the heart of an Anglosphere damsel is adolescent immaturity, which dopey bimbos are likely to misconstrue for confidence/assertiveness;
4) Ultimately though, the real clincher is in a man’s ability to disarm women. Betatude of the clingy, supplicating kind is not only unattractive, but it also spooks women, principally because:
i) it places demands on them to reciprocate – heaven forbid requiring a woman to have a sense of humor, and;
ii) women’s self-esteem issues predispose them to the perception that they are being judged – they are projecting, and don’t like that you might be judging them the same way that they judge you.
With adolescent alphatude, by contrast, you are shifting the spotlight away from them, and making their decisions for them. And if you maintain a robust adolescent immaturity, this has the added benefit that they can continue to feel morally superior to you.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3
DirkJohanson June 16, 2012 at 19:58

A local cop recently wrote that 80% of the calls around here are for domestic violence. Most violence, including rape (when it actually occurs), is from acquaintances.

We are the company we keep.

The regular, hard-working, civil men of this society are doing nothing less than paying for womens’ sex lives with violent thugs.

Meanwhile, god forbid, we are perfectly willing to pay for sex we ourselves want to have, and, except in rural counties in Nevada, we can go to jail.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 36 Thumb down 0
fmz June 16, 2012 at 20:17

Bunch of femmy psychobabble.

Short transalation = Chziks-R-NUTz

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 2
Nemo June 16, 2012 at 20:41

I am beginning to seriously wonder if the ever-increasing rigidity of the laws of the land is a subconcious effort by women to produce *more* criminals.

Stop and think: if you are a woman and you want to mate with a criminal, then it’s perfectly logical to pass a zillion laws to create new crimes and produce more criminals.

“Sexual harassment” didn’t exist forty years ago. At one point, a man needed to actually use physical violence or at least verbalize a threat to do so before he was arrested. Today, just making a woman scared is enough to get a man arrested under “mandatory arrest” laws.

A man who just stands there and silently glares at a woman can now be arrested. Isn’t that an amazing development – after two thousand years of Western jurisprudence, inducing a negative emotion in a woman is a crime. An actual, real, crime.

All of this produces drama and creates chaos, which irritates men and makes women sexually aroused. Is that a mere coincidence or is it evidence that women inevitably prefer emotion over logic and will do ANYTHING to get a criminal / bad boy in their bed, even if it means that their boyfriend is arrested for no crime at all?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 31 Thumb down 1
Eric June 16, 2012 at 20:59

Nemo;
Not only that, but I’ve noticed that women seem to hold an especial pride in having at least one ‘stalker’ ex. It seems like they have to have a ‘bad boy’ in their past as some kind of status symbol.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 0
Glenn June 16, 2012 at 21:14

For the life of me I will never figure out this obsession with the current cultural paradigm. The failed relationship structure of America is not reality. If anyone wants to think the “alpha male” is the minimum-wage guy that fathers 30 illegitimate children with 15 different whores, who are we to stop them?

Likewise, if most of the skanks in America have the hots for tattooed felons, why should we interfere? Such proclivities are purely self-destructive, and their expression of them will only help speed the demise of feminism. So, have at it, girls! Hell, let me step aside so you can more easily go roaring off the cliff. Be sure to sneer derisively at me and mutter “beta male” right before you plummet to your doom.

Few, if any, here will understand that some foreign women actually admire and respect a man that has no criminal record and a decent credit score. Some foreign women are actually repulsed by drunken louts that put the make on everything in a skirt. I know, because I have met many, many such foreign women. They are out there, by the millions. Just as Fred Reed.

I can fully understand the MRM’s desire to bring justice to the family court system, but do we really care about the sexual preferences of females we have absolutely no interest in? Do we even have a dog in this fight? I simply do not understand why we are wringing our hands when we should be pointing and laughing.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 41 Thumb down 2
freebird June 16, 2012 at 21:32

Her cunt was wet with fear,the next morning she made a FRA.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 3
will June 16, 2012 at 21:33

@Eric

Precisely because feminist indoctrination castrated the rule following men that the only “Masculine” men left are criminals and outlaws. Even the appearance of having power or dominance is what is woman attracted to hence the success of the techniques of PUA’s even if they are in reality weak but their hindbrains perceived that anyway.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
will June 16, 2012 at 21:36

@codebuster

Desire is not about morality but what seems best according to their hindbrain. To lambast them for their hypergamy is as futile shaming men who likes hot young women.

Even in societies deeply suppressing the hypergamy instinct Hypergamy is still there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
dicipres June 16, 2012 at 22:31

Great post.

regarding “illegitimacy rate in the under-30 crowd (now over 50%)”

It never cease to amaze me how 50% illegitimate birth rate doesn’t make significant headlines. The beta/good guy type man typically marry a woman he impregnates, these children probably belong to alpha/thugs more than ‘dads’. When cultural limitations and rules break and deteriorate to hedonism (i.e. follow your heard/do what makes you happy/etc. bs) we get back to pre-civilization reproduction patterns.

Our society is going through huge changes, very fast.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 0
walking in hell June 16, 2012 at 23:08

@eric
“I tell men to AVOID entanglements with Ameroskanks. It’s the Gamecocks who try to teach men how to ‘manage’ Ameroskanks better (as if they could LOL). ”

When they are young, many men think that they can play with Bubonic Plague and not get ill. Sooner or later something will happen: one-way-love, false accusation of rape, pregnancy, etc. I just don’t understand why anyone would want to waste time speaking with an American goat, and worse, why anyone would want to have sex with an American goat.

One should be spending there time figuring out how to get all Amerigoats out of their life.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 4
Troll King June 16, 2012 at 23:09
walking in hell June 16, 2012 at 23:12

@eric
“Not only that, but I’ve noticed that women seem to hold an especial pride in having at least one ‘stalker’ ex. It seems like they have to have a ‘bad boy’ in their past as some kind of status symbol.”

What I have seen is that they hold a special pride in having a “stalker” and one “bad boy.” The stalker was usually a computer or science educated type of beta and the bad boy was usually some type of uneducated gangster.

Playing with Amerigoats is hazardous to your reputation. At any time you can be labeled a stalker or a gangster.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 5
American June 16, 2012 at 23:15

The Femi-Nazi construction just uses the facade of womens liberation, in order to “Break” the males.
“Broken” males are easier for the white Gender-feminist establishment to harvest their labors. The establishment wants to “Break” the working class, and keep them in a state of “perpetual matriarchy”, while they themselves send their children to patriarchal schools.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 7
American June 16, 2012 at 23:19

Not all patriarchies are being Broken equally!!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 7
Gilgamesh June 16, 2012 at 23:19

Sure women dig formidable men, but being formidable is enough to get charged with a felony under VAWA. Damned if you do, damned if you don’t and the wimmins still wonder why we won’t marry them.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 18 Thumb down 0
MarcusAurelius June 17, 2012 at 00:51

Good article, Mr. Price, but I don’t think this is the whole story here. The now defunct website nomarriage.com had an excellen quote that I will paraphrase here: “American/western women are the first to push for commitment, and the first to break it.” In certain poor areas (regardless of any ethnicities) you may find this to be the case, women getting with ‘bad boy thugs’ and ‘trailer trash’ and said men abandon ship when the baby comes, but I truly believe that’s only a small fraction of the real problem. The real problem if you ask me is a combination of hypergamy and serial monogamy. It breaks down like this:

Woman gets with bad boy (or even a beta with some looks, status, or game), sleeps with him. Then she pushes for comittment, and often times GETS IT. But just like the trash romance novels they read, it’s not all about snagging the bad boy, it’s about TAMING the bad boy. With her charms, she sweeps the bad boy off his feet and reforms him so that he loves her and only her. The romance novel plays out in real life, but without the happy ending. Against his better judgment, he does commit, and he does make changes for her. The alpha essentially becomes beta in what he thinks is a ltr. But here is the problem: once he becomes the good boyfriend, the good father, morphing from alpha to beta, from bad boy to provider…he becomes boring. Like Frankenstein’s monster, the creator woman eventually comes to resent her creation. He is predictable, boring. She starts to crave alpha bad boys again, missing that excitement in her life. So eventually she claims she’s not haaappy, cheats on him and/or kicks him to the curb for another bad boy….only to repeat the process over, and over again. This, IMO, is one of the main causes of serial monogamy. It’s not just the lust for a bad boy, but the idiotic desire to ‘change’, to reform the bad boy….creating an ever repeating cycle.

How many times have you heard a western woman saying she wants to ‘change’ her man? There is your red flag, gentlemen. They are essentially trying to live out the plot of their favorite romance novel, and leaving their children fatherless in the process.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 1
Andrew S. June 17, 2012 at 04:13

Glen, I agree with you. I have no problem at all with women mating with thugs and bad boys, and like you I think the more the better. Of course I have a problem with men being taxed so women can mate with thugs more easily and have no desire at to continue to fund all of these ridiculous social programs.

I think there are a lot of men out there who wish women would date and sleep with nice guys, but I would imagine as most nice guys get older they would just like to see an end to men paying for women’s lifestyle choices.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 20 Thumb down 0
FFP June 17, 2012 at 06:09

The 50% “illegitimacy” rate could just be co-habitating couples who are not officially married. This is how it is in Europe – many couples don’t get officially married / registered, but still have children who are the biological children of the man who just hasn’t bothered to propose. The couple may get married later or not at all.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 12
AfOR June 17, 2012 at 06:32

Marcus has it nailed…

the FWB that I keep around for light sexual relief are all into me in such a big way because I treat them EXACTLY the same way now as I did when we first hooked up.

BY ALLOWING A WIMMINZ TO CHANGE YOU, in ANY way, shape, or form, you are essentially saying to her “You win, I am beta, may I lick your feet princess”

Wimminz dig men that they CANNOT control or influence.

*****SALUTARY***** lesson watching the wimminz who I have fucked and then kicked to the curb after I have had everything they have to offer, they are all gobsmacked that I blew them out, and their next men are always much more meek and mild than me…. sure, it will wear off when they can manipulate those guys, but the effect is real, and tells you all you need to know about wimminz

They all want fried snow.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 14 Thumb down 8
Opus June 17, 2012 at 06:59

Walking in Hell is quite right. Women wear the badge of having been stalked like war-hardened vets wear medals – and with as much pride. One only has to look at a woman for that woman to accuse a man of ‘stalking’ her and for the white-knights to rush to her defence. It’s a great badge; not quite as good as ‘I was raped’, but effective nevertheless.

The reality of stalking is however very different. Firstly; it is (like Rape) very rare. Secondly; the stalker is as likely to be a female as a male, and Thirdly; a stalker does not want to have sex with you; a stalker wants to punish you for a perceived wrong. (I speak from experience – as a stalkee). Stalking is malign not benign. The stalker is an ineffectual person who stalks as a substitute for a relationship, neither able to leave you be, nor approach as any normal person interested in another, would do.

In all the time I practised Matrimonial Law no one ever came to me to complaing of having been stalked- or described to me (with one possible exception) behaviour which would be regarded as stalking. I understand it is now quite common. The change came about when the Government legislated against Stalking and thus created the very Monster it claimed to want to slay. Women are so many sheep.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 27 Thumb down 3
Attila June 17, 2012 at 07:07

Have some self-respect and a lot of these problems will simply vanish from your life.

People instinctively feel when they can push others around – and when they find out they can’t (even your boss)- they fall into line and back off. I even told my boss one day that just because he signed my performance didn’t mean he was my “boss” and that in order to get respect- he had to EARN it. Now when I run into him and start talking about some issue- I can see his lower lip trembling. Not sure if it was there before -but I don’t recall having seen it before.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 4
Attila June 17, 2012 at 07:16

I have to laugh when I hear younger guys talking about “scoring”—-what they don’t realize is that their “game” is that they are just fulfilling nature’s plan (young stupid males chasing obsessively 5 seconds of pleasure) and short-circuiting the development of other parts of their personality – as they think they are doing what they want- when in fact- they are doing what the lower instinct software wants.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 19 Thumb down 1
walking in hell June 17, 2012 at 07:17

@opus
“Women wear the badge of having been stalked like war-hardened vets wear medals – and with as much pride. ”

I’ll remember this forever; LOL!

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 17 Thumb down 1
migu June 17, 2012 at 07:27

Damn right. When someone pushes you around, you push them down, and don’t let them back up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 1
a_guy June 17, 2012 at 07:32

I think that the confusion in locking down the sexual motivations of women is caused by the definition of the term “alpha male”. People tend to use the term for men the same way they would use it for dogs or wolves; the leader of the pack is the alpha. However, human social hierarchy is exponentially more complicated than canines, so viewing the term “alpha” in the same way will lead to an incorrect result.

My observation is that the term “alpha male” in human society, with regard to the interests of women, applies better to men who follow their own lead, rather than the lead of others. This is different from the canine definition of “alpha” because it doesn’t require the male to have others follow him. It only requires that he doesn’t follow anyone else, or at least, appears not to follow anyone else. He appears to be different, unique.

For example, once upon a time, the only men who had tattoos were the rebel element – bikers, ex-cons, thugs. Women found that sexy because it made those men different from other men. Even if they were stupid or weak-minded, they still had distinguished themselves from the mainstream, thus piquing women’s interest. Bonus points for doing so in a way that actually ran contrary to accepted societal behavior. Nowadays, every idiot has tattoos, so it is losing its appeal. When we get to a point where those few men without tattoos are considered rebels, women will start finding tattooless men as much sexier. The key is how society perceives them. If society views some behavior as being outside the norm, women will find that behavior sexy because it shows that man to be unique.

I believe this tendency on the part of women comes from their attraction to genetic outliers. Far more genetic mutations occur on the Y side of things, from what I understand, rather than the X side, and so any man who exhibits qualities not found in other men would be attractive to a woman on an unconscious level (provided the quality doesn’t make the guy appear pathetic or defective) because the anomaly may provide a beneficial trait to her offspring that the plain old vanilla “betas” don’t have.

Of course, this theory leads to a rather depressing line of thinking, but one which would not be foreign to a red pill man: that hypergamy, where the women constantly looks for the next bigger badder guy to mate with, does not accidentally result in multiple children from different fathers, but, in fact, it is the entire purpose of hypergamy to get the woman to have children with as many different fathers as she can, each father, hopefully, being a unique (thus “alpha”) man. In other words, in a society where the hypergamy impulse in women is not restrained, the women will purposefully have children with different fathers, and will purposefully engage in serial monogamy. The culture of single moms with broods of bastard half-siblings is the INTENDED result of hypergamy, not just an accident of hypergamy. Now we know why all decent civilizations restrained their women.

Even if you are an incredibly studly alpha, in a society where the women are free to do what they want without consequences, you will be used by a woman to produce a child or two, and then she will start looking at other men. It doesn’t matter whether you manage to remain alpha in your LTR, her biological drives push her toward genetic diversity. You may be tall, but that other guy is fast, and that other guy is smart, and that other guy can build things. Why have nothing but tall children, when you can have some tall, some fast, some smart, and some that can build things?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 28 Thumb down 0
freebird June 17, 2012 at 07:37

@Troll King
Thanks for the link to the Michigan lawmakers reciting the vagina monologues.
Representative Lisa,during the abortion bill debate spouted off:
““I have not asked you to adopt and adhere to my religious beliefs,” she said. “Why are you asking me to adopt yours? And finally, Mr. Speaker, I’m flattered that you’re all so interested in my vagina, but no means no.”

Which makes no sense at all to me.
But I’ve heard it before:
Wymyn spouting “NO means NO” entirely out of context,like some kinda Nazi mantra.
WTF is up with that?
Same thing my xgf spouted in court during the false DV hearings.
We spent a lot of time establishing that she had never said “NO” but it was also established that ” I should have known.”
This was in regards to a simple visit to attempt to communicate.
“No means no” Appears to mean”
Shut up you MAN-I’m having it MY way-and I’ve got the courts and an army of cops to prove it.”

The Repub Speaker banned Rep Lisa from speaking again on the floor,as he rightfully interpreted her comments as a THREAT to make an FRA.

Good to see the upper caste being burned by the same stakes they use to crucify the underlings.

At least those cunt rantings will have to be out on the steps,as the “Patriarchy” has banned the rad-fems from spouting aggressive cunt nonsense on the Floor.

The insanity has permeated,the leaven has risen.(Carl Levin-are you reading?)

NO MEANS NO MEANS ANYTHING I WANT IT TO!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 13 Thumb down 2
freebird June 17, 2012 at 07:46

The distillation of this appears to be women think with their cunts,hence the dislike of the word.
Even on the floor of the Senate.the women (9 of them so far)can only spout meaningless mantras enabled by the false DV &FRA hysteria culture.
It says “I’ve got unlimited power.”
I like the pussy,but dislike the cunt that owns it.
Why can’t women think straight,instead of with their cunts?
Is it because they are illogical, or is it because men fall prostrate at the foot of the almighty cunt?

It looks like yelling “No means No”
will actually shut down meaningful debate on the abortion defunding bill in Michigan.
Looks like we have a contender to the throne of the Canadian Supreme Court hearings.
(My cunt is bigger than your cunt)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
freebird June 17, 2012 at 07:53

@migu
“Damn right. When someone pushes you around, you push them down, and don’t let them back up.”

Well yeah, in a normal world.
Welcome to the matriarchal inversion were ‘bullying’ is a crime.

Now into sarcasm mode,add high falsetto voice-
No means no!,now do what I say or I’m calling the cops!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 0
freebird June 17, 2012 at 08:03

“According to its Facebook event page, “VAGINAS TAKE BACK THE CAPITAL,” the performance will feature “Vagina Monologues” author Eve Ensler and a host of Michigan lawmakers, including Sen. Rebekah Warren (D-Ann Arbor), Sen. Gretchen Whitmer (D-East Lansing), Rep. Barb Byrum (D- Onondaga), Rep. Stacy Erwin Oakes (D-Saginaw), Rep. Dian Slavens (D- Canton Township), Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D- Detroit), Rep. Lisa Brown (D-West Bloomfield), Rep. Vicki Barnett (D-Farmington Hills) and Rep. Joan Bauer (D-Lansing) “with more announced soon!”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
freebird June 17, 2012 at 08:13

“Implications of Family Law on “Chicks Dig Jerks” Phenomenon”

It’s clear that the Vaginia’s are making the lawz.

Imagine this:
“Hi, my names Joe Smith,and I’m your Senate representative.
I want you to know that I have a Penis and that issues of the Penis are the most important topic of the day.
It is common knowledge that the Penis has been oppressed for hundreds of years and frankly amends must be made.

If some of those amends involve less freedom for those abusive pedophiliac women,well that is the price of liberation.

My most important business today is to talk about my Penis on the steps of the Capitol building,I hope you will attend as you will be enlightened by what my Penis thinks.

PENIS TAKE BACK THE CAPTIOL!
Yaaaaaay!
BTW-Never forget-No means no,never argue with a Penis holder.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
orecret June 17, 2012 at 08:44

Deny a woman sex and you short-circuit any power that she may have over you. That gives you the power and makes the woman BEHAVE in the hopes that SHE may finally win YOUR attentions.

This makes the woman somehow want you even more. She may outwardly call you an asshole, a jerk, a womanizer, a homosexual, etc. – but inwardly she can’t shake the vagina tingles and feels that she NEEDS to have you.

As I reject ever further the concept of being a “nice guy,” it never ceases to amaze me how much more attracted women have become to me – even the “God, I hate men” hate movement progenitors we call second-wave feminists – whose motto rings in my ears more than any other set of words in the english language. Having heard it so often, I have come to conclude that I am on the right track… The more they seem to hate me, the more they truly love me…

As I intend to tell my boys someday… “never listen to what a woman says, listen to what she does.” Only the latter is a true reflection of her instinctual needs and desires.

Until a man finds that proper woman with whom to raise a strong and healthy family, he can discreetly use high-end “sex-workers” to meet natural needs that are going unfulfilled in an ever-declining and unhealthy civilization.

Time to find those mountaintops gentlemen and build our defenses. The hordes are massing at the gates and the war will be long and costly. Build your strategic alliances and your resilience communities before it is too late.

Orecret

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 17 Thumb down 4
greyghost June 17, 2012 at 09:16

a question was asked earlier about the alpha/beta /thug thing. My take on it is alphas a simply guys that wome desire to fuck plain and simple. We need to think to our own experiences about guys like that we come across. These guys are guilt free and don’t give a shit about anybody but themselves. They are not destructive but nobody benefits from them other than for a woman having a walking gina tingle around or for a guy seeing a new hotty periodicly. If all men were alphas civilization would collapse pretty fast. Thugs are not alphas but being thugs they have the characteristic of not giving a damn about anything but themselves. comeplete burden on everything and everybody civilization with all thugs last how ever long it takes for someone to starve to death. Beta men on the other are the guys that write the bible. They write the constitution. Beta men are full of guilt, and empathy and make moral judgements. Beta men go to working everyday and pay their bills and are so reliable that they are boring and are easy to take for granted. Beta men are so damn productive that rules and laws are written just to get that productivity. Beta men are law abiding and just take it as good solid men. beta men are the reason for civilization. And the solid character of the beta makes a good hostage for thugs and alphas. example Look at the effort we spend amungst ourselves telling us to let it collapse. The society that has it’s highest rewards for beta type men will be the wealthiest and most powerful and able to support the weak and needy. Also resist attack. The succecss of a beta centric culture and society makes it easy for the unsustainable types to think out of their place. (Alphas women and thugs)
That is just the way I see it and my basis for the motivation to be an MRA type. I hope you all can add or subtract from it so other men can get an idea of where to base their own motivations.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 5
Jimbo June 17, 2012 at 09:17

There has been more talk about the vote here recently and I think that is a good thing. There are many reasons why allowing women the vote is wrong. First and foremost is that it is a statement that says that “authority should be shared equally”. Sharing authority with women is catastrophic in many ways for many reasons. One of the things that it means or leads to is the phenomenon of not being able to tell women or a woman anything. That is because given the vote, they will eventually come to believe that they already know it all. That is the state of our messed up American women. They are marching on in absolute ignorant bliss as absolutely unaware of where their march is leading them as they are positive that they are going in the right direction.

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 16 Thumb down 1
freebird June 17, 2012 at 09:36

“My take on it is alphas a simply guys that wome desire to fuck plain and simple. ”

That is why we need to quit using these transient imaginary terms and instead build solidarity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 1
orecret June 17, 2012 at 09:36

“A man who just stands there and silently glares at a woman can now be arrested. Isn’t that an amazing development – after two thousand years of Western jurisprudence, inducing a negative emotion in a woman is a crime. An actual, real, crime.”

In Orwellian terms this would be called a “thoughtcrime.”

…probably the most serious offense one can make against Caesar and those who unthinkingly follow him like sheep…

Spartacus, The Goat

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
JeremiahMRA June 17, 2012 at 10:06

Most of y’all are focusing far too much on the now while ignoring the consequences for the future. Claiming that we men should not have children at all and that we should just watch while sluts and thugs breed while living off our taxes is weak and unmanly. Why whine about it on the internet if you aren’t looking for solutions and you have no interest in the future? To feel self-righteous, I suppose. You’re part of the problem.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 10 Thumb down 21
Firepower June 17, 2012 at 10:24

UK FRed June 16, 2012 at 14:40

A book from the 1960′s called “Up The Organisation” said all that needed to be said, albeit … Robert Townsend’s conclusion: “We need to start breeding our own Ottoman Turks”

See, this was all said FIFTY years ago.

But notice, how NO ONE bred ANY Turks – just effete white sexless drones. With pasty skin and tiny Pareene Glasses.

White Geese.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 8
JeremiahMRA June 17, 2012 at 10:34

I learned a new word today: dysgenic. Definition: Exerting a detrimental effect on later generations through the inheritance of undesirable characteristics: “dysgenic breeding”.

Today, retards and manginas breed while smarties and masculine men breed less. Y’all are part of the problem when your answer is “let the retards and manginas breed, I’ll just sit back and watch”.

Hot debate. What do you think? Thumb up 6 Thumb down 14
cooterbee June 17, 2012 at 10:47

So what? This bunch of cooze likes jerks. If in this very instant they all started to get wet for nice guys, our path should be the exact same. There is nothing… repeat… nothing that any of them can think, do or say that should invade our awareness for a split second.

If you even casually wonder what their motives may be, you are doing yourself a disservice. They own you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
orecret June 17, 2012 at 11:05

yes… except at some point dysgenic breeding fizzles out as it is no longer the fittest form of the species for survival…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
orecret June 17, 2012 at 11:08

…at which point hygenic or eu-genic (please disregard the historical corruption of this last term by the Nazis, amonsgst many others…) breeding takes over once again and those few fittest members can repopulate the planet with healthier members of the species…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Mr. J June 17, 2012 at 11:12

Family Law.

The very phrase is an oxymoron.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0
Mr. J June 17, 2012 at 11:16

“Family law” exists because this country has had a majority moron population for 50 years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 0
VitaminD June 17, 2012 at 11:47

As much as I hate to have to admit it, women fucking alphas even if they are thugs is probably for the best. Alphas dont take shit from anyone. If women continue their current path most of the men in the future are going to be alphas. Feminism only survives on the backs of law abiding beta males. Do you guys really think feminism can survive if the majority of men are alpha males who only care for themselves. Good luck convincing them to get a job and pay taxes for bastard spawn.

The fact that me and many other men are willing to pay taxes to support unproductive parasites is part of the problem. Feminism appears to be a giant shit test meant to weed out men who don’t fight injustice and blindly donate their resources to free loaders. Sure, the majority of men being selfish alphas is going to be a step back concerning the state of society, but we can rebuild and recover.

The current state of things is unsustainable anyway unless us men do something drastic, and it’s better to let it collapse and let the free loaders suffer than to allow for good men to keep being taken advantage of. My hope is that with an increase in the rebellious/independent genes found in alphas that the future generations of beta males are hard working and law abiding, but lack the kindness, submissiveness, and blind devotion to authority that most males have today.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 6
Eric June 17, 2012 at 12:31

Freebird:
LOL–looking at that list of featured guests at the Michigan lecture makes me wonder what would happen to a man who actually showed up. I think he’d be lucky if he escaped on anything but a stretcher.

‘The Vagina Monologues’. LOL. But it’s men who are ‘slaves to their penises’, right?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Eric June 17, 2012 at 12:45

JeremiahMRA:
‘Claiming that we men should not have children at all and that we should just watch while sluts and thugs breed while living off our taxes is weak and unmanly.’

I agree with part of that. If productive men don’t reproduce, it’s logical that civilization will fall while the thugs/feminazis breed feral offspring. However, the conundrum is that our culture is so feminised that the productive men are more or less forced to seek potential wives/mothers outside the culture itself.

But since it’s men in this case who are leading—choosing traditional women—then it will be the productive men who define the culture. The culture will modify somewhat because the women involved are largely from outside it, but still it will be better than what it is now.

The thugs, though, are going to keep breeding because they’re too stupid to do anything else; and the feminist women are keep breeding with them because they’re neurotically driven to feel superior to men. That’s why I think the future will see a sharper division between the middle and lower classes—even to the point where there are closed communities. As far as the tax burden goes, there’s not much hope for the future—we’ll still have to throw the underclass some welfare bones just like keeping wolves at bay; and the cost of security will also go up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
TFH June 17, 2012 at 13:47

Eric,

If you tell men to avoid ‘Ameroskanks’, then by that logic, you should be a huge fan of the PUA Roosh…

He to dislikes American women, and teaches men how to go abroad and get the women there..

So once again, your arguments are not arguments against Game..they are arguments against interactions with American women..

That is not an argument against Game.

Your inability to admit that Game has high utility in LTRs (despite many bloggers devoted to this) also indicates a lack of knowledge of what Game is…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 7
Opus June 17, 2012 at 15:11

Well: I have it on female authority that No (or actually STOP!) means Yes (‘It’s more exciting that way’ she said annoyed that I had stopped). So, No means Yeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeees!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!, and that was what I was supposed to telepathically understand having only first met her an hour or so earlier, so I plead in mitigation of my temporary lapse as a lover that I was not at that time familiar with her thought processes.

Thus: One should NEVER take anything a woman says at face value. The same however is not true of a man – and these Politicians are from the female sex. I do not think that anything they say can be regarded as necessarily true.

Funny: I can only think of one purpose for a Vagina, yet I am now to believe a Vagina makes you strong powerful independent and intelligent. Amazing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 5
Bill Brasky June 17, 2012 at 18:00

Reading skanks’ profiles on POF is unbelievably revealing and depressing.

I could make an entire blog out of this subject, but one from today sticks out in particular.

This grossly tattooed, yet otherwise actually cute 28 year old ended her profile with something to the effect of “I want a man who is right for me. Just because you would make a good father or husband, that doesnt make you right for me.”

Just let that sink in.

I am at the same level of disgust, hatred, and dejection as Soberdownunder apparently is, judging from his last post…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 10 Thumb down 2
Eric June 17, 2012 at 20:33

THF,
I don’t know why anyone would need some guru to teach them how to meet foreign women. I’ve never needed one.

Besides, PUA is designed to work on Anglosphere sluts, so it may plausibly be useful for picking up foreign sluts, too…but considering the surplus of sluts we have here, I don’t know why anybody needs to look for them elsewhere.

Feminised women are taught to hate men; they see us all as dogs who only think about sex. Of course, they’re naturally going to assume that any male who shows interest in them is trying to ‘game’ them for sex. They aren’t being fooled by this stuff—the Gamecocks are fooling themselves into thinking that by playing into the feminists’ hands, they are somehow liberating themselves. Huh?

Foreign women are taught too that men will try to ‘Game’ them for sex; and they learn how to identify and avoid such men. That’s the difference: Game/PUA is suited for a Slut Culture where the genders are in competition. Where genders aren’t in competition; Game/PUA is a liability.

There’s no magic secret or ‘technique’ to non-feminist women. Just be yourself. If they’re not interested, someone else will be. The women there see PUA for what it is: men lowering themselves to the level of Slut Culture.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 4
Eric June 17, 2012 at 20:42

Glenn,
What cracks me up too is, not only do the Gamecocks have an obsession with the current cultural paradigm, they always need some junk-science to confirm it for them. Really, how many guys reading this thread had no idea that women chased thugs until some brain scans proved it? LOL

Besides that, like nearly other one of these studies, the ‘scientific’ sample is taken on a few feminised Anglosphere women—hardly representative of anything. But these Gamesters will take anything these charlatans dish out as fact.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 5
Jim June 17, 2012 at 21:15

No offense to anyone in this thread but….

I never fully understood what an “alpha” male is.

I knew guys that were big football players that did horrible with women. And guys that were 5 foot 6 that my grandma could beat up that got girls like crazy.

It might be just me but I’m still not clear on what makes someone an alpha male or not.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Eric June 17, 2012 at 21:24

Jim:
Actually nobody understands what it is. It’s one of those pseudo- scientific terms that Gamesters use to make it sound like they know what they’re talking about.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 5
Jabberwocky June 17, 2012 at 23:03

“I’d appreciate some insights in this Alpha/beta casting please. Thanks.”

Perception, perception, perception.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Jabberwocky June 17, 2012 at 23:07

Alpha means someone who dominates others. It can be physically, with money, with violence, with clever words, or with charisma. It’s contextual, which is why it may appear cultural, but at the end of the day, being able to get what you wants means you can acquire the resources a female wants.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel June 17, 2012 at 23:09

Jim
I never fully understood what an “alpha” male is.

It’s not that complicated. Self-defining actually in the generally accepted Roissy sense.

An Alpha is a man who gets laid a lot with little effort or who could get laid a lot with little effort if he wanted to. A Beta is a striver who lacks the special Alpha sauce so has to provide resources to compensate. An Omega is mother nature’s QC reject, on the wrong tail of the bell curve.

The potential confusion here is that these categories, defined solely in terms of sexual access, do not necessarily correspond to the way men categorize each other. Hence the sexual Alpha can be a nonentity in the male world and likewise you can find a CEO, an alpha in the male world, who is a total loser with women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 11 Thumb down 3
Jabberwocky June 17, 2012 at 23:18

Women need to “see it” to believe it unfortunately, at least on some level, even a reputation can do the trick. Just like being an attractive women may not equate with being a good baby making machine, it’s the quickest and most reliable way of figuring it out. Young and healthy doesn’t always mean fertile, but often enough its a good bet. Conversely, a women may not be impressed by a large number in your bank account if you never spend it because it can be too abstract on paper, however, if you have less money but spend it on status symbols, she is far more likely to perceive an Alpha. Quick and reliable assessment. A sports car and nice home may not mean you’re even well off, but often enough its a good bet. We’re all more shallow and make more snap judgments than we want to realize.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel June 17, 2012 at 23:31

Eric
Jim:
Actually nobody understands what it is. It’s one of those pseudo- scientific terms that Gamesters use to make it sound like they know what they’re talking about.

That’s the male ego talking. You don’t understand it so therefore nobody understands it. Well, it’s worth repeating.

Get laid a lot or could get laid a lot without trying? Alpha.
Have to work at it and often come up short? Beta.
No chance? Omega.

This isn’t really a game definition, it’s a purely biological definition. The point of game is for a Beta to convincingly mimic the special Alpha sauce. Do it enough and it’s no longer mimicry.

Yes, you can nitpick the Roissy definition. What if you could get laid a lot but reject most of what’s on offer so have a lower notch count than some slumming Beta? Still Alpha.

Not that complicated.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 15 Thumb down 3
Evil Weasel June 18, 2012 at 02:39

William,
I linked this post to my blog. Hope you don’t mind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
finndistan June 18, 2012 at 03:28

In the past, the jerks and such would have a function in the society’s defense, and doing hard work or such.

The criminal jerk have always existed and will always exist, can’t do anything about that. they were dealt with, when it was possible to.

What did not exist was jerk and assholes on welfare. Useless to society human beings who would hang around all day do nothing. Even if they did exist (in the small numbers), women could not shag them due to the risks involved.

today, we got women shagging the useless jerks, the welfare kings, and passing on the productive jerks, as being productive makes you tied to the state and puts you under risk of losing stuff.

This is the new thing that comes with welfare.

The productive people are paying for the sexual fun of the parasites. Especially that now fucking a parasite is made into fashion.

*this weekend was subjected to some more insider knowledge on how beneficial it is to be a welfare king who can hang out 24/7, while having to listen to the involuntary celibacy of men who pay for these parasites’ food, clothing and drinking money.

It is high time to bring the concept of bastardy back and making women and their children pay for the women’s choices.

And Dragnet deserves the 107 upvotes he got in his comment

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
greyghost June 18, 2012 at 05:29

Looks Like a good definition in the context to me Charles Martel. Alpha type guys are pretty much worth less at every thing else. What I think cause the most confusion is that people associate wealth , physical and social power with being alpha. In most if not all cases those men are Betas that are good at what they do. Betas are the productive 80 plus percent of males that can live with out government and laws. All the men here are beta types to me due to the fact they give a damn about something besides getting pussy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 06:00

greyghost
Looks Like a good definition in the context to me Charles Martel.

Well, credit where credit’s due, it’s the Roissy definition, defined solely in terms of sexual access That keeps it very simple.

To look at it a slightly different way, women want two things from men, sperm and money. I have some sympathy for women’s predicament as their genes, their biology, drive them to make choices that are almost always compromises. They want the man with the best sperm but he doesn’t often have the money. They also want the man with the most resources but he doesn’t necessarily have the best sperm. What to do, what to do?

This is the fundamental problem that women have with Marriage 1.0. From a man’s point of view Marriage 1.0 made a ton of sense as men and women paired off in an orderly way with partners of roughly equal sexual market value. This arrangement works fine for a man, but is a bitter pill for a woman to swallow. Forget about Betty Friedan’s “comfortable concentration camp,” what women really hated about Marriage 1.0 was that it thwarted the hypergamy of most women, condemning them to colorless lives with boring men. If only it were possible to arrange society so they could obtain sperm and money independently! But that would require total destruction of the social contract and the subjection of all men to the hegemony of the state. No-one could be that crazy! Right?

Well-loved. Like or Dislike: Thumb up 24 Thumb down 3
Matt June 18, 2012 at 06:54

what women really hated about Marriage 1.0 was that it thwarted the hypergamy of most women, condemning them to colorless lives with boring men.

Charles, you hit the nail on the head… I couldn’t have said it any better.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 14 Thumb down 1
greyghost June 18, 2012 at 07:24

Matt
This is where women really lose. Within marriage 1.0 with hypergamy in check women without an option otherwise invested their energy in to spicing up the family. They kept family memebers in touch,organized and monitered family gatherings. The holidays were a time for a good wife to show off. Women worked to support her family not to be independant from them. God would bless them ladies later in life with grand children. Welmer’s ex will most likely never hold a grand child as a normal part of life. Check this out for the Alpha chaser
http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/04/26/3916368/fort-worth-hospital-works-to-make.html

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 07:39

greyghost
Within marriage 1.0 with hypergamy in check women without an option otherwise invested their energy in to spicing up the family.

Yes. Marriage 1.0 required both parties to subordinate their self-interest to the higher purpose of raising children in a functional family. It turns out men are better than women at this as women are short-term thinkers.

Women are creators of life and destroyers of all else. Men are destroyers of life and creators of all else. Life is hilariously cruel.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 7
codebuster June 18, 2012 at 08:17

what women really hated about Marriage 1.0 was that it thwarted the hypergamy of most women, condemning them to colorless lives with boring men.

Are we suggesting that the current situation is an improvement over the previous one? Where, in the previous situation, women’s choices were compromises, now their choices are just plain stupid, governed more by the laws of proximity, chance and arbitrariness (first-come-first-served). In a very real sense, it holds as true today as it ever did, to say that “the more things change, the more they stay the same.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 08:56

codebuster
Are we suggesting that the current situation is an improvement over the previous one?

It depends on how you define improvement and whose lives are improved and over what time frame. It’s clear that many women are getting more of what they want in the short term from the current societal organization. The fact that the ever-increasing social transfers from men to women are not sustainable is not relevant as women rarely reach Stage 5 of Kohlberg’s Moral Scale.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
greyghost June 18, 2012 at 08:56

You do have a point codebuster. By todays femminist standard as the commenter you quoted sees it it would be boring. But before the laws of misandry removing the fear of economic responsibility the boredom was replaced with fear of having to be responsible for yourself. That is a huge fear for women that is why they are constantly voting for government goodies. Once reality is removed women take the next step and marry based on gina tingle. Now we have the alpha’s and the thugs, and the men that allow a woman to fill her need for social superiority worthless fuck ups women tend to gravitate to that allow them to look down on them. Manginas can get laid. Beta male don’t neccesarly give the natural gina tingles when all is well but when reality is ever present a woman will tingle the gina for safety and security of the solid beta male. That is why the push for college and pay and benefits for women so that they can “not” need a man. It is a disaster because it goes against basic female nature. an example would be the high suicide rate of soldiers. With out question it is due to “family” issues. These men have been stressed beyond any thing they could have imagined to be cucholded, lied to and abused by family laws of misandry. Now bring on a foreign invader beheading and collecting slaves and these same guys become heroes worthy of love.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Seamus the Classicist June 18, 2012 at 09:03

I just love how people project current mores on the past. Women didn’t complain about marriage 1.0 until Betty Friedan’s era. That is because of the rise of Nanny state, before that, Alpha’s and discontented Housewives didn’t exist, because of the problem of sexual reproduction, let me emphasise this for all the Alpha/Beta/Game fanboys: women in the past were limited in their hypergamy by the fact that they had children, a woman who had a child without the secured interest of the father would face a life of destitution and shame. Most men and women in the past accepted the conditions of marriage 1.0 with relative easy, especially in the pre-modern period, because it benefited them. They didn’t sit around all day wondering, “am I happy?”

If Alpha’s existed in the past, who could screw any woman they pleased, it was because they had come in, burned her village down, and murdered her father and brothers. Truth, what people in the manosphere as Alpha is based on Anthropological fantasy, historical unreality and that type of man was the type who ended up in a ditch with people saying “good ridence.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
migu June 18, 2012 at 10:02

Polylogism is how they get away with it.

The Pareto distribution favors polylogism. A different truth for every situation. Men have their logic. Women have their logic. Proles theirs, and bourgeoisie theirs.

If you engage in a form of polylogism you are fundamentally disavowing that there is such a thing as “the truth of the matter.”

If you accept polylogism as axiomatic then you affirm that any truth arrived at is in fact the truth. It is the truth because your logic as a prole is valid because you are a prole.

Now, use real logic to deduce are reduce the above statement to absurdity. I counter with yes but I’m a prole so your bourgeoisie logic does not apply to me.

Now replace prole and bourgeoisie with men and women.

Anyway the conflict sustains itself until all parties are consumed by it, or until surviving parties recognize that there is but one logic, and cooperate with it.

If the reality is hemlock will kill you, then a diet of hemlock will kill you. Even if your logic as a prole, man, bourgeoisie, or woman says otherwise.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
LastCrucible June 18, 2012 at 10:06

You gamers are idiots. What kind of man devotes *that* much energy to manipulating a woman? As a man, your priority is your life’s purpose and mission not a damned woman. As men, we need to become more skilled at discovering our individual missions and gifts and actualizing them. Don’t you idiot gamers get it? Chasing and ‘studying’ women and bragging about your exploits pales in comparison to a man who is a master of self and is living according to his highest purpose. Women naturally gravitate to those men. Those men *naturally* give off an aura of power, confidence and mystery. Get a clue, dumb asses.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 6
LastCrucible June 18, 2012 at 10:19

Self-mastery and actualization gives a true and lasting magnetic quality to a man, as it regards women (and many far more important things). In Africa and other first world countries (yes, first world), there are traditions regarding spiritual growth that admonish men to cultivate and not diminish their sexual energy. One is taught to *ration* his seed and practice sexual discipline. This amplifies is aura, strengthens his spirit and increases his general potency. Stupid ‘game theory’ leads a man toward bondage, general impotence and spiritual death.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 5
LastCrucible June 18, 2012 at 10:36

‘Practitioners’ of game theory have admitted defeat———to women. Pathetic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
Pops June 18, 2012 at 10:52

Somewhat off topic but this is an interesting article:

http://deadspin.com/5914355/how-women-throw-themselves-at-pro-athletes-and-vice-versa-a-publicist-explains

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 11:12

Last Crucible
…..to a man who is a master of self and is living according to his highest purpose. Women naturally gravitate to those men. Those men *naturally* give off an aura of power, confidence and mystery.

And….that would be you? The man with the aura of power, confidence and mystery? Maybe your aura needs a recharge or something.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 11:22

Last Crucible
‘Practitioners’ of game theory have admitted defeat———to women.

Game THEORY is something completely different.

Why do so many people hate on game? Game can be as simple as keeping your mouth shut. Pandering to women is not required. Silly hat and black nail polish are optional.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 11:26

Last Crucible
In Africa and other first world countries (yes, first world)…..

Your point would be stronger if Africa was actually a country and not a continent.

So, where were we. Oh yes. African and other first world countries. Like Europe. I’ve been to Europe. Great country, Europe.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Peter South June 18, 2012 at 11:29

Gaming and thuggery are both rooted in weakness, malleability and lack of self respect.

That is why women find them attractive, like attracts like.

Strong productive men are not attractive sexually speaking to American women. They may be to other women with better values but I’m not yet sure about that.

I think there is always some element of that due to the inherent weakness of women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
Eric June 18, 2012 at 11:35

Last Crucible:
‘Women naturally gravitate towards those men’/

True, provided once again that aura of power and strength (in feminist culture) has nothing genuine about it. It’s no accident, that by Roissyite definition, so many cult leaders were ‘alphas.’ Take a look at these clods: Charles Manson, Jim Jones, Alestair Crowley, Warren Jeffs, David Koresh—not a single one of these kooks didn’t have a harem of willing females at their disposal.

I guess those are the ‘archetypes’ we men should aspire too—LOL

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 2
Peter South June 18, 2012 at 11:36

“Women naturally gravitate to those men. Those men *naturally* give off an aura of power, confidence and mystery. Get a clue, dumb asses”

They naturally gravitate to men who have higher social status than they do and are somewhat weak and malleable. I’m the kind of guy they know they can’t manipulate and it doesn’t go over too well. They don’t bother trying because it’s obvious I wouldn’t piss on them if they were on fire.

Confidence and mystery are entirely optional. When you are in a famous rock band you pretty much point to your penis, I guess there is some confidence but not a whole lot of mystery.

Maybe you can put your penis in a hat and ask her to make it appear.

If you are a guy working in the IT department making 45k a year you can have all the confidence and mystery you want but you’ll be using a lot of hand lotion.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 4
Peter South June 18, 2012 at 11:44

Definitely agree that thug is a DHV and polite, productive guy is a DLV.

The only way polite guy makes up for that is loads of cash and social status to the point where he’s above the laws that make other men serfs.

So you either want to be

Rich guy with a vulnerable side.
Famous person who knows how to point to his penis
Douche bag/gamer who would sell his soul for poon.
Rebel without a cause (or a brain).
Normal, well adjusted guy who sees an escort once in a while.

Honestly that last option is not looking too bad when you think about it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Masculist Man June 18, 2012 at 11:49

The men we see impregnating young women are largely those who don’t give a damn about the consequences, and don’t want to play by the rules society expects them to follow.

Do the rules of society benefit them or women? A lot of these “bad men” started out good men but saw how women and society treat good men so they changed. They may have witnessed misandry from their mothers and other females growing up and learned that being nice to women or a misandric society gets you nowhere and nothing but pain.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Eric June 18, 2012 at 11:51

Martel:
‘Why do so many people hate on Game?’

That’s a fair question. I have nothing really against some men who use Game as a ‘tool’ or self-help in certain relationship situations. But to me, it’s no different than any other form of self-help.

But I think Game has evolved into something entirely independent of the MRM; and a lot of Gamesters have practically made a fetish out it. They treat it like a religious crusade, full of infallible tenets, that ‘real men’ know Game &c. I don’t much difference between Game and what Hugh Hefner was advocating in the 1960s.

The other part of the problem is that Game fails to take into account that feminism has instilled in women a deep hatred of men. The Gamesters assume that since men like sex, and feminised women are sluts, that they must enjoy sex too. Nothing could be further from the truth. Women in our culture don’t like sex at all; they use it as a weapon against men—and men who try to get sex from them are setting themselves up for a very bad downfall.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Eric June 18, 2012 at 11:59

Matt:
‘What marriage 1.0 did was thwart the natural hypergamy of women and condemning to colorless lives with boring men.’

Then how would you account for non-Anglospere cultures where women see traditional marriage and home-building as the highest goal of feminine aspirations? Most likely, what the fall of so-called ‘Marriage 1.0′ did was release the sense of entitlement that Anglo-Puritan culture had cultivated in women. Feminism saw that weakness in our culture and exploited it to destroy marriage.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
Eric June 18, 2012 at 12:02

Masculist Man:
Look beneath the surface and you’ll see that those ‘bad-boys’ are actually playing by our twisted social reality’s rules to the letter. They’re the ones who reached the point where feminism would like to relegate all men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
LastCrucible June 18, 2012 at 12:14

@Charles Martel

Yes, the *continent* of Africa…thank you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 5
Firepower June 18, 2012 at 12:39

It’s been months: As usual, you all talk much about the problems that occurred during my months absence.

But never seem to get around to fixing the ones that existed in January.

migu

Polylogism is how they get away with it.

YOU act like “The Revolution”
is gonna happen
from a comfortable
library bench

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8
Pops June 18, 2012 at 12:43

But never seem to get around to fixing the ones that existed in January.

Can you tell us specifically what problems you have fixed and exactly how you have fixed them?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 8 Thumb down 2
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 12:47

Eric
Women in our culture don’t like sex at all

That paintbrush is way too broad. You have many fixed ideas. You need to open your mind to the idea that you don’t know everything. The trick is to find a woman who likes sex with you. Some men never find that while others are tripping over it daily. Life is hilariously cruel.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Centaur June 18, 2012 at 13:50

About Game….
I know some of the guys in this culture. Nit the guys who want to be gamers, but the actual guys who put out these e-books and do clinics etc. I consider some of them friends so I won’t say much about them, but this game stuff is very much a bit of BS, with some practical advice mixed in..sometimes.
The problem with these Game guys is most evident in this Alpha/Beta stupidity they constantly carry on about. The definition of Alpha is basically as the other poster here said- Alpha is just a guy that gets laid alot. And right there is the problem.. as men, they are still caught in the web of judging a mans worth and rank in society by how WOMEN see men. Your a moron and a douchebag and an idiot? No problem, you are a Alpha guy, the one they WANT to be.
Are you a responsible, brilliant, dedicated craftsman or human being but can’t get laid? well then you are the lowest of the low- and Omega.
And so they are basically adopting womens perspective on men and what matters…all while pretending to be 1. ALPHA,when most of these guys are anything but (here is a way to tell what you are..do you think in terms of alpha/beta? then you are a runt, and you know it)
2. pretending not to care about women and being dominant, all the while doing everything they can to be what women want.

Gamers are mstly younger kids and men raised by feminist women who lack masculine role models.. so they have found these role models by looking at those that women seamed to approve of and emulating them. I have found that most of these guys are good guys who are angry about the lack of masculinity and growing up in such a feminized society and they are trying to find their balls…. unfortunately they ended in the same trap manginas fall into- judging masculinity by womens standards- albeit a different one than women SAY.
There are some good aspects to game, and MGTOW and MRM guys would do well to open their minds to some of it and use it to their advantage… but most of it is BS… trust me, I know the guys selling and making some of this stuff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 12 Thumb down 1
greyghost June 18, 2012 at 14:48

Centaur
Thanks for the input. The biggest problem MRA’s have with game is exaclty what you describe and is also why I refuse as a married man to even think about trying to “game’ my wife.
I do like the idea for young men 15-16 to 25 to know game for the drill of getting these young men to have an idea of female psychology in this current environment. heartsiste does like to throw in some MRA points of view and ideas and understanding from time to time. I see game as a survival tool for young men to get past their horny years. Male sexuality is real and i understand the desire and anything that can be done to help a young man avoid being made a victim of his human nature is fine by me. After a while the young man may grow to be a MGTOW type. The other option is for a young man to be emotionally involved with a woman with full man-up trusting love to be made a fool up and criminalized by the laws of misandry. Teach the boys some game.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
greyghost June 18, 2012 at 14:53

fool of

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
shiva1008 June 18, 2012 at 14:55

“I have some sympathy for women’s predicament as their genes, their biology, drive them to make choices that are almost always compromises. They want the man with the best sperm but he doesn’t often have the money. They also want the man with the most resources but he doesn’t necessarily have the best sperm. What to do, what to do?”

Who cares, no one gets everything they want in life. I want the woman with the most beautiful face, but also a smokin hot body. In reality I understand this is childish and that I must compromise. There is more to life than having an attractive mate.

More advanced civilizations than the West have understood that in order to be happy, we need to reel in desire. Material desire can never be satisfied, because it always begets more desire. This is basically what has happened with feminism. We can see that no matter how many concessions are granted to the feminists, they are never satisfied.

Most of you guys are writing from a totally western perspective, as if all people everywhere are similar to the ones you have encountered in your life. This is understandable, since the mindset we have developed is basically the sum total of our experiences. But in a culture where people are taught to rein in desire and develop character from the start, these issues don’t even come up. You don’t see the Vedas and Puranas discussing women’s hypergamy, because it wasn’t prominent in the cultural landscape. But they do write a lot about just basic human desire or lust. A certain amount of desire is unavoidable, but the more advanced civilizations like Ancient China, Ancient India (and apparently Africa), taught people how to control desire, because uncontrolled desire leads to an uncontrolled mind. And happiness is essentially a mental phenomenon.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 16:06

Good point, Centaur. Out of curiosity I visited “Chateau Hartiste” a couple of weeks ago and ran across his test that supposedly determines how “alpha” you are. I had to laugh: he doesn’t know the first thing about masculinity – maybe his fuzzy hat is too tight.

What struck me the most was that this “test” basically measures one thing: how well you could pick up pretty young women in bars. That’s it. So many of the questions were based on what you would do based on a hypothetical bar scene with a table full of unaccompanied women, that it would be mathematically impossible to even get near “Alpha” territory without being a pick-up artist – as if the measure of a man is his ability to manipulate inebriated young skanks into the back seat for a quickie. That so many guys buy into that nonsense is a sad commentary on the lack of actual men in the lives of two generations of boys – caused primarily by the feminization of our culture and the ridiculous “tender years doctrine” that consigns the male children of divorce to female-led households. So these hollow men can make a quick buck in our cultural vacuum of real men. They’re still beaver-beggars, of course: they’re just better at it than most (and for a fee, they’ll teach you how to be a better beaver-beggar just like them).

Bloggers like Dalrock and bskillet81 often have interesting insights, but they are men. They know better than to fall for, “Alpha = Good = PUA.” Again, they are men. Game gurus seem more like boys to me: whispering about their mostly-imaginary “exploits” in the locker room whenever the coach is out of earshot.

For guys who measure their worth as men by their ability to have sex with drunk chinks, Game may make you a more successful beaver-beggar until you’re timer runs out – at some point “worldly older man” becomes “dirty old lecher” no matter how many game seminars you’ve been to.

I’m lucky: I had a good upbringing with two parents. I grew up with a real father at home and I have defined my own masculinity: it has served me well and it doesn’t involve fuzzy hats or winning the approval of drunk chicks. Having said that, I’m with Greyghost:

The biggest problem MRA’s have with game is exactly what you describe and is also why I refuse as a married man to even think about trying to “game’ my wife.

I’ve been married just under 25 years, and my wife and I have never raised our voices to each other in anger. Not even once. She’s not a doormat and she’s not a ball-buster. I treat her like a queen. The corollary is that (in the words of Mel Brooks), “It’s GOOD to be the King!” Now pardon me while I finish the sandwich she just brought me while I typed this.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Rusty June 18, 2012 at 16:59

Women’s suffrage, Marxism, the “civil rights” movements, radical feminism, modern Christianity, whores as goddesses, good men as slaves, etc., are all fruit from the same poisonous tree of Liberalism. All stem from the lie that every person is the same; that all people are equal or all can be made equal. Until that Enlightenment spell is broken, these evils will continue to plague the planet.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 16:59

Lyn87
What struck me the most was that this “test” basically measures one thing: how well you could pick up pretty young women in bars. That’s it. So many of the questions were based on what you would do based on a hypothetical bar scene with a table full of unaccompanied women, that it would be mathematically impossible to even get near “Alpha” territory without being a pick-up artist – as if the measure of a man is his ability to manipulate inebriated young skanks into the back seat for a quickie.

You can dismiss Roissy if you like, but it doesn’t change the fact that what you’ve just described is a skill that few men have. Our culture is an overlay on women’s genetic imperative to seek out the “fittest” sperm and men’s genetic imperative to try to provide it. That’s biological bedrock. We’re here to reproduce. It’s a good bet there are more men who don’t have this skill who’d like to have it than vice versa.

And you, if I’m not mistaken, are a public sector worker in a childless marriage who was a virgin on their wedding day. That makes you some kind of role model, but not one who could reasonably be described as battle-hardened.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 6
Firepower June 18, 2012 at 17:25

@pops

Yep.
Can you tell me
how many problems
you’ve talked about incessantly?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 7
Firepower June 18, 2012 at 17:35

Lyn87

Bloggers like Dalrock and bskillet81 often have interesting insights, but they are men. They know better than to fall for, “Alpha = Good = PUA.” Again, they are men. Game gurus seem more like boys to me: whispering about their mostly-imaginary “exploits” in the locker room whenever the coach is out of earshot.

That’s false. How do you know how real someone’s blog persona is?

Besides, hat makes you think the 1950′s model of prim Man of The House works today anyway, when you are surrounded ON THIS SITE by men who played by that rule – to only get dumped and financially looted by the little woman?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 17:46

Firepower
Besides, what makes you think the 1950′s model of prim Man of The House works today anyway…

What the–?! A constructive comment! And I……upvoted it. Hell just froze over!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 2
Eric June 18, 2012 at 17:53

Martel:
‘That paintbrush is much too broad.’

I think the statistics on false accusations; the ease with which women in our culture slide from one male to another and the divorce pretty clearly illustrates that most women consider sex only as a weapon.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 17:53

Charles,

We usually agree, but yes, I DO dismiss Roissy. I do not dispute that his techniques allow some guys to mimic masculinity well enough to get tipsy skanks into bed, but I DO dispute his assertion that that skill is what constitutes the pinnacle of manhood. His own words betray his defenders who say otherwise: he himself defines the “alpha” as the guy who can approach a table full of unaccompanied women at a bar and go home with the prettiest one. That’s not my take on him – that’s his take on himself, and I believe him when he says it. I simply disagree with his premise.

I have known plenty of guys who can pick up women easily, and I have never been one of them. It makes no difference: despite several offers I chose to remain celibate until I married, as you noted (as did my wife, who is still pretty enough to get hit on by strangers). But I have also known plenty of women who see through “game” as clearly as I can see through the window in the next room, and the smart ones avoid guys like that like the plague. You and I will agree, I think, that “game” is a rational but nihilistic response to the perverse incentives of the feminist world in which we westerner live, but that doesn’t make it a force for good in its own right. I feel bad for the younger guys for whom the odds of finding what I have are close to zero – it didn’t have to turn out this way, but society caved in to the demands of feminists and now their choices are 1) risk it all on a woman when the dice are heavily loaded against them, 2) be alone, or 3) learn “game.”

I will dispute a small part of this: “..you, if I’m not mistaken, are a public sector worker in a childless marriage who was a virgin on their wedding day. That makes you some kind of role model, but not one who could reasonably be described as battle-hardened.”

Guilty as charged. But being a field-grade officer is not what most people think of when they hear the phrase “public sector worker.” I have led men in harm’s way – I’m not sitting behind a desk at the Department of Motor Vehicles. (For the peaceniks out there: I’m not looking to start a fight about the righteousness of America’s wars: a lot of them really were stupid, but exercising military authority forces one to learn to lead well or face the consequences.) Leadership is probably the quintessential masculine trait, and women are naturally attracted to men who lead (isn’t that what game attempts to mimic?). I do that nearly without effort in ways that most PUAs would never match, yet I could not “pick up chicks” nearly as well as guys like that. If that proves anything, it proves that feminized women can’t tell the real from the fraudulent.

Also, I’m not sure what you mean by the phrase “battle hardened.” Would you explain what you mean by that in this context?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1
Eric June 18, 2012 at 17:58

Martel:
‘Our cultural is an overlay between women’s imperative to seek out the fittest sperm…’

If that imperative overrides culture, how does it happen that women unerringly pursue the LEAST fit males for sperm donors? Or why they flock to abortion clinics whenever that ‘piece of tissue’ becomes a bit too inconvenient?

‘We are here to reproduce’

True. But that only applies to males in this feminised culture. If we want to reproduce, we have to go outside the culture to do it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 3
Eric June 18, 2012 at 18:03

Lyn87;

‘I do dispute Roissy’s assertion that Game is the pinnacle of manhood.’

It’s typical of charlatans like these Game gurus to pretend to have secret knowledge that will turn its followers into super-humans of some kind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 18:03

Lyn87
Also, I’m not sure what you mean by the phrase “battle hardened.” Would you explain what you mean by that in this context?

Just amusing myself. Public sector. Military. Not battle-hardened. You’re a smart guy but you’re always bragging about something. That’s in poor taste given that many of the men here are casualties of the system.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 18:04

Firepower,

You are misstating my position. It’s called the Straw-Man Fallacy. I know plenty of guys who played by the rules and got hammered: my brother being one of them. I have never claimed otherwise.

As for this “That’s false. How do you know how real someone’s blog persona is?”

I simply take him at his word when he chooses to define an “Alpha” as a guy who can go home with the prettiest girl in the bar. That’s not my definition – that is his definition. I have no idea if he is as successful at beaver-begging as he claims, but he admits to his moral nihilism and he sells a product based on teaching the skill to others – call me a skeptic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 18:07

Charles,

Fair enough. Maybe I overdo it, but I try to make a point of establishing my bona-fides, and it’s hard to do that in print among strangers without coming across as a d-bag.

By the way – I’m not one of those who downvoted you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
codebuster June 18, 2012 at 18:23

You can dismiss Roissy if you like, but it doesn’t change the fact that what you’ve just described is a skill that few men have. Our culture is an overlay on women’s genetic imperative to seek out the “fittest” sperm and men’s genetic imperative to try to provide it. That’s biological bedrock. We’re here to reproduce. It’s a good bet there are more men who don’t have this skill who’d like to have it than vice versa.

Aha! Now we come down to brass tacks and the question that really matters. Good posts by Charles until this one. Skills my arse. Women are dead easy… you’ve just got to play into their subjective, solipsistic interpretations of the world, conform to their criteria relating to social proof and type-casting, come with a label attached (what you stand for, what hat you wear, what “type” you are), and the rest is pretty much in the bag, contingent only on her mood and where her fancy takes her… and that’s the most demanding ones. With others, its simply a matter of taking without apologizing, in effect, making her decisions for her. You overestimate the skills of a PUA. All that PUAs are doing is harnessing the easy pickings that come with proximity (mingling in the right place at the right time). I think that lot of PUAs misconstrue proximity for game technique, overlooking the fact that just getting out and making the effort plays the more essential role.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 18:28

Lyn87
Fair enough. Maybe I overdo it, but I try to make a point of establishing my bona-fides, and it’s hard to do that in print among strangers without coming across as a d-bag.

OK. But remember, feed the men first, then the horses, and last, you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 18:42

Codebuster,

At the risk of assembling a circular firing squad, I’m going to (mostly) side with Charles here. As I wrote earlier, I was never one of those guys who could casually pick up women. Proximity didn’t matter much – although it is clearly a prerequisite. I actively repulsed women until I was around 20. But I was a classic “late bloomer” physically and then things started to turn around. But at no point in my life have I ever been “that guy” when entering a room. I’m masculine, not macho, and the PUA “alpha” stuff is all about projecting something that may or may not be there. I don’t have that ability. Charles calls it a skill and I’m inclined to agree with him.

Charles,

Concur. Although I reserve the right to eat before full Colonels and Generals. ;-)
You may be onto something, though. Since I was “invisible” for many of my formative years I may go overboard establishing my credentials. It probably comes with the territory of being a little mousy too – guys like me have to go to greater lengths to be taken seriously than guys with more natural physical “presence.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 18:54

@Lyn87

That was disarmingly honest. You don’t need the bona-fide building to come across as a good guy. Peace.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 3
Centaur June 18, 2012 at 19:37

Game does boil down to some very basic skills.. the more you master these skills the better you’ll do. But the skills are not all that mysterious, neither are they some panacea. Its basic social skills and being willing to put them to use.
Game teaches guys something IN SPITE of itself. Basically, to succeed with women you only need two things 1. Lose your fear of approaching women and 2. Lose your fear of being rejected.
Basically that is all you need, everything else follows. Notice that anyone can do it, all that is missing is the desire to face the discomfort. The problem with game is that it really has nothing to do MRM, or changing our culture to a more fruitful one.
I see MGTOW the same way. Its a survival mechanism that will effect change only obliquely at best. Because Game and MGTOW are adaptations to a dysfunctional environment. I have done, and do a bit of both as well…but I realize that when I withdraw from Women I am basically retreating, I also realize that when I am out there gaming for some ass, I am not doing a damn thing to address any of the problems we all come here to read and talk about.
There will be only one solution, in my opinion, to changing the current culture – Men must be willing to push for legal, and societal changes. Men must get in feminists and the pols faces, not withdraw, and not gaming and pretending to be something for some piece of ass.
We must become willing to put our foot down and draw lines in the sand. To state our honest opinions about the culture of women, to women, publicly, even if it means having to interact with women, or giving up a piece of ass if we do so.
Engaging women by validating their lowest expectations (game) or avoiding women out of fear of consequences (MGTOW) will never change anything. It will only get us by as things get worse and worse. I am not pretending to be above it, but lets be honest about what we are doing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
zed June 18, 2012 at 19:55

Maybe I overdo it, but I try to make a point of establishing my bona-fides, and it’s hard to do that in print among strangers without coming across as a d-bag.

Save it, Lyn. This is the Internet – people can say anything they want about themselves. While Hydrogen is the most common element in the universe, bullshit is the most common element on the Internet.

For example – I am 9 feet tall, and an absolutely stunning shade of chartreuse.

I offer the same proof that most people do regarding what they claim – none.

The Internet is a very strange new environment to people. Even though they are not reacting face-to-face with people, the tend to react as if they were. It’s easy to get drawn into a argument with a faceless, nameless, person, and somehow get caught up with the need to establish credibility and convince them of something.

I speak from experience.

Just as feminism is the new religion of women, “Game” seems to have become the new religion for some men. I consider those guys fundamentally deficient in personal vision which would allow them to discern why artifice may be quite successful as a short-term strategy, but is totally useless as a long-term strategy. Game has become to men what makeup is to women.

No amount of “credentials” stacks up well against someone who says what people want to hear.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0
Ted June 18, 2012 at 20:35

“Firepower June 18, 2012 at 17:25

” @pops

” Yep.
” Can you tell me
” how many problems
” you’ve talked about incessantly?

Doesn’t work the second time around, Firepower. You’d do better to put up. Or shut up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Ted June 18, 2012 at 20:43

@Charles Martel June 18, 2012 at 16:59

“biological bedrock. We’re here to reproduce.”

… and survive. Human children are resource intensive.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Ted June 18, 2012 at 20:53

“Engaging women by validating their lowest expectations (game) or avoiding women out of fear of consequences (MGTOW) will never change anything. ”

But it’s a way of filling in the time until the repair man shows up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 21:23

I suppose you’re right, Zed. But I’m as open about my flaws when they are relevant to my point as I am about about my credentials when they are relevant, so I would hope to get the benefit of the doubt from most guys.

Naive of me perhaps, but hope springs eternal.

By the way, who’s your tailor? Nine feet tall and chartreuse… must be a pain to get a suit that looks right… ;-)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
orecret June 18, 2012 at 21:36

Can I ask a couple of questions here?

What is the point of The Spearhead?

I would like to see Welmer’s answer (Welmer, I would like to see an elaborated mission statement here)… but, I want to know what the REGULARS are looking for here…

Is it to improve the relations between men and women to some sort of optimum (not some ideological ideal… nor some place where we can let our appetites run wild…), where we experience the greatest benefit for the greatest good and restore relations between men and women as best as may be possible? For the greatest benefit of the species as a whole?

Or are we simply talking about short term strategies to meet natural needs like sex, simply having children (without concern for their long term health), avoiding those who would destroy the traditional, responsible male, etc.?

The fundamental argument between gamers and the rest seems to be about the short term vs. the long term… men vs. women OR men and women re-establishing healthy relationships in the longer term…

I, myself, continue to be a romantic. I know, it is stupid. But, Life is hard. I cannot do the important things alone. I need a true partner in Life. (As I would need a true partner in any significant business if I am to succeed in any big way…) I need a woman who thinks long term like myself with similar values so that together we are stronger and able to raise stronger and healthier kids. … and ultimately create a stronger society… Sex, really, is an afterthought.

Yes, there is a natural dynamic between men and women that needs to be cultivated… but, for the purposes of the greater good. The principle of “greed is good” in this situation is self-defeating in the long run.

Gamers reveal to us the natural dynamic that needs to be cultivated, which is good of them to do so… but, THEY exist only to exploit women in the short term, mostly… what is the gamers long term strategy for restoring health to the relationships between the sexes? Apart from game…

The rest of us yearn for healthy relationships in all arenas of Life. The gamers show us how to get half way there and then retreat to a situation which in the long run is detrimental to everyone – men and women, alphas and betas, gamers and family men alike…

Again… I ask you, gentlemen… Why are we here are The Spearhead?

Alphas and Betas need to ask themselves that question at every stage of Life… not just at The Spearhead… but, when we wake up in the morning to don our armor and go to battle for the sake of our wives and children, the greater society as a whole, and Life in general…

Men… why are we here at The Spearhead?

Orecret

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 21:55

Holy crap Orecret: that’s going to start a firestorm! Just as I was about to wander off to bed, too…

I doubt there is any consensus about how to answer your question. The Spearhead casts a wide net, which is one reason it is a flagship for the Men’s Rights Movement (which may itself be a misnomer, as Firepower will be glad to explain in detail).

Other sites with much narrower foci turn into slug-fests even though the regulars start from similar positions and agree on the desired end state. Welmer welcomes nearly all viewpoints. (He exercises far more patience than I would, but that’s why he’s running an influential website and I occasionally comment or write an article.)

But that means there is vigorous disagreement about all the topics you mentioned. We hash it out, we call each other names, we learn from each other, and once in a while somebody changes his mind about something.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
orecret June 18, 2012 at 23:30

…just being able to get laid doesn’t make you an alpha male…

being a TRUE LEADER makes one an alpha male… making society a better place… sacrificing one’s self for the well-being of others… thinking in the long term for the good of the species and the planet makes you an alpha male…

being a parasite upon society doesn’t make you an alpha male…

succumbing to short term appetites; like sex, gluttony, pride, anger, sloth, greed, etc., does not make you an alpha male… It just makes you a parasite and lesser of a person…

Gamers… look deep into your souls… are you truly benefitting the species… or only YOURSELVES… and ONLY in the short term???

I didn’t want to get involved in this debate… but, now, I am calling you out…

Are you (gamers) selfish… or self-less?

Who are you (gamers) really???

Orecret

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
migu June 18, 2012 at 23:48

Revolution?

No firepower. The masses are obese and inebriated. Might get a few riots, no revolution.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
greyghost June 18, 2012 at 23:51

Gamer and PUA have a role to play that is very important to changing the way things are done. MGTOW,grass eaters,peter pans men that are basicly unavailable to women have a huge effect on society and women attitude. The gamers and PUA man the cock carousel and use up the sluts fertile years. MGTOW are the potential beta chumps that marry those sluts and athe payments on them while they divorce the chump and take his kids.I think the PUA and MGTOW are the same guy at different stages oin their life.
The whole point (to me) is to create a large number of childless spinsters that have to work until they die to support themselves. The goal is to have the laws of misandry removed. I do not give a goddamn about the interpersonal relationship between mem and women. It does not matter but the laws of misandry do. It will take a full article and a full thread of comments to see what men get from the spearhead.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
orecret June 18, 2012 at 23:53

… to answer my own question to Welmer … in his own words…

What is the point of The Spearhead???

“…we’re all dedicated to tackling the same injustices and building a better society based on honesty and a realistic assessment of human nature…”

…from The Speahead ‘about’ page…

Orecret… a.k.a. Spartacus, The Goat

Again… my question to the gamers… Why are YOU here???

Orecret

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
migu June 18, 2012 at 23:55

Game and feminism have the same flaw. Both assume that humans are equivalent to dogs.

Then they try and force it, and cry foul when a man or a woman fail to sit and stay for a milkbone.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
orecret June 19, 2012 at 00:25

greyghost -

…by MY defintion, ALL (or most) of the men here are alphas, in that they care about the greater good of society…

…the gamers, apparently, only care about sex… they are a drag upon our society and should be shunned… and shamed… they are playing “negative sum” games which hurt us all in the long run… the pie only gets smaller in the long run with their strategies…

…A TRUE LEADER cares about the overall well-being of his society and is willing to do whatever it takes to see to it that the society benefits from his actions even to the point of self-sacrifice…

Show me the leadership in game… I am open to a change in opinion…

Please…

Orecret

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 2
Eric June 19, 2012 at 00:47

Orecret:
I’ve been asking the same questions a lot longer than you have, and have gotten just about as much of answer as you have so far.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
orecret June 19, 2012 at 00:55

…the problem with gamers is that they are NOT actually Alphas… just pretending to be…

TRUE ALPHAS don’t need game.

Orecret

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
codebuster June 19, 2012 at 01:04

There are many reasons why women make the choices they do in men… and I posit that women are less likely to understand the source of those choices than men are. Here are a few:

1) Type of man. What do you stand for? Career, biker, lawyer, surfer, etc… what cap do you usually wear? Oftentimes, type relates to the men that feature in a woman’s life, from dad, to uncle, from first-time-sex, to sex-in-exotic-locale. A lot of women are looking for their dads. On the other hand, a lot of women are trying to get away from their dads, and an exciting bad-boy is a suitable statement to be making. A lot of women are trying to get away from their husbands… enter exciting bad-boy, stage left;
2) The belief that it is progressive to be getting laid by a bad-boy. The belief that it is hot to be getting laid by a CEO. The belief that it is classy to be getting laid by a lawyer. The belief that it is excitingly forbidden to be getting laid by a priest;
3) The belief that it is hot to be getting laid… by anyone (there is a thrill to be had in “throwing it away”);
4) Pity (but that won’t last);
5) The priority to be provided for. Confusion about priorities… wants to be provided for, but is trying to be progressive at the same time;
6) Intimidated by a “formidable” man (in her eyes), to the extent that she’ll then run to the nearest dive and choose an idiot to get him out of her system;
7) Trying to forget an ex;
8) Ugly, boring, dimwitted providers who won’t stray can make terrific, reliable marriage partners;
9) Attention;
10) Peer pressure (actually, this should be put at the top of the list);
11) It’s forbidden;
Etc, etc, etc, etc.

There are so many reasons why women make the choices they do, that it is easy to get confused by it all. And when PUAs try to slot it all into the context of Game, it turns out that they really haven’t a clue. But there is one principal that must be adhered to religiously:

DON’T SPOOK THE BIMBO

I actively repulsed women until I was around 20.

Nine times out of ten I don’t buy this. Women often fall for “shy guys”, but the shy-guy’s shyness becomes self-fulfilling, puts women on edge, and they spook and run away. So:

DON’T SPOOK THE BIMBO

1. Lose your fear of approaching women and 2. Lose your fear of being rejected.

and?

DON’T SPOOK THE BIMBO

That’s why having a sense of humor is particularly effective in many contexts. To be sure, there are variables within one’s control that can make you more attractive and interesting to women. Feeling good about yourself and body-language are important, irrespective of whether the person you are interacting with is a man or a woman. Sales and marketing 1:001. But the variables do not comply with any kind of formulaic Game approach. And we do need to realize that our culture is sick, and oftentimes the best course of action is to have nothing to do with it, especially when it comes to women behaving badly. There’s a lot of toxicity in our cultures, like their need to be “progressive” or “trendy” and we are best off without it. But above all else remember cardinal rule number 1:

DON’T SPOOK THE BIMBO

It is easy to come to the conclusion that women who go to pickup joints are going there to get… picked up… and that creates its own self-fulfilling reality, because they do get laid. But within each of them is a complex narrative, a web of motivations that is quite different from the simplistic PUA imperative of getting laid. If you don’t spook the bimbo, you stand a better chance of peeling away the layers.

Maintain the edge. Maintain the mystery. But not too much. Whatever you do, don’t spook her, or she’ll flit away and you’ll never see her again.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
orecret June 19, 2012 at 01:14

Who cares if you can get laid?

Can you have a HEALTHY relationship with a woman?

Are you a REAL MAN if you can’t answer YES to the last question?

A Platonic relationship of higher love is more valuable than all of the pussy in the world…

Orecret

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
Eric June 19, 2012 at 01:22

Codebuster:
‘Don’t spook the bimbo’

Playing with Amerobitches is like playing Russian Roulette with five loaded chambers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
migu June 19, 2012 at 02:20

Spook the bimbo. Otherwise you’ll convince yourself she is a woman.

Or just go with it and reap what you sow.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
Ode June 19, 2012 at 03:15

Heartiste (Roissy) has another post up demonstrating scientific evidence for the attraction women feel for dangerous men.

The gladiators of the Roman Empire did not enjoy a long life or a high social economic status, actually most of them were slaves, but damn did they get a lot of pussy! Based on people’s dairies, there’s plenty of historical evidence to prove that plenty of women lusted over these dangerous men, but there is very little historical evidence to suggest women for example lusting over the civil engineers of the Roman empire yet they built roadways, aqueducts, and monuments that would not be superseded in grandeur for the next thousand years.

History teaches us that women are attracted to alpha, not beta-males.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
greyghost June 19, 2012 at 04:07

orecret
don’t be too logical. The difinition is based purely on female gina tingle. An alpha is purely female desire to fuck that man period. Leaders and productive types are beta men. In the context of a solid reliable man alpha is a negative. In a healthy society alpha are the Cads that excite the young pussy. When the concept of 80 percent of women go after 20 percent of the men he is in that 20 percent. Those guys do not lead betas. That 20 percent includes betas (athletes,rich guys, musicians etc) , thugs and criminals. The whole concept and terminalogy is purely based on sexual arousel of women and nothing else. When men study and look at what is going on they try to put logic and explain it out load and try to find a repeatable and predeictable outcome of sexual arousel and attraction (gina tingle). We’re talking women here so straight forward logic, well, if you are here you understand. The concepts and logic is in the industry called “Game” it is basicly female gina tingle psychology and is very effective. The biggest problem with it is it goes against the foundation of the beta male. The psychology for a man (beta) is that he has to turn off his guilt and natural concern for the whole,while alpha’s and thugs don’t have that problem for there is nothing to turn off with them. It is the number one reason the men here and MRA’s in general refuse to accept the concept of “game”. Young men due to the natural sexual desire (sex drive) combined with blissful ignorance along with lack of maculin culture will readily jump on game. When I was young and had those romantic crushes i would have loved to be able to get the girl of my dreams. (as foolish as that sounds) If you look at it like that right or wrong based on mature logic it will help to understand what is going on. ( very powerful human emotions are involved here)
I hope that helps explain it for you. And as you think about it you can see the connection it has with the MRM and MRA’s for it helps explain some of the reasons for the madness of feminism and the laws of misandry in family law.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pops June 19, 2012 at 05:54

@Firepower

Yep.
Can you tell me
how many problems
you’ve talked about incessantly?

I didn’t really intend that to be a yes or no question, so I will ask a different way. What specifically have you done to solve problems and what have been the results?

As for your question to me, very few. Notice that I comment rarely, probably less than you do, and when I do, it is to counter what I feel are off base or silly statements.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
zed June 19, 2012 at 06:50

By the way, who’s your tailor? Nine feet tall and chartreuse… must be a pain to get a suit that looks right…

I use the same tailor the Incredible Hulk does – when you are a huge green beastie, clothes do NOT make them man. ;)

I missed the first part of the conversation, so I should have probably kept my mouth shut, but your past posts left me with an impression that you are sincere. That alone is something of a rarity on the net.

I certainly spent plenty of time in the trenches of the net trying to convince some pig headed asshole that I was RIGHT! And, I would trot out my experiences and credentials somehow expecting that would give me additional credibility.

The problem lies in the fact that those “bona fides” carry no weight at all with people who have not had similar experiences and do not even understand what they mean, much less attach any significance to them. When I finally learned how to get out of my own frame, I realized that onlookers only saw 2 pig headed assholes arguing with each other.

Communication proximity does not equal social proximity. Being honest about one’s “flaws” does not give the impression of soul-searching honesty, but rather gives people who want to convince (or just attack) you more ammunition.

Personally, I found that interaction on the net drove me less nuts once I started leaving my personality out of it and stuck completely to principles.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
orecret June 19, 2012 at 07:05

Thanks for the last comment, greyghost.

I guess, then, that I have rejected “alphahood” for “betatude” in the best interests of the society as a whole.

I am pretty much MIA right now, living alone on a mountaintop… fending off the advances of hordes of women… yet still attempting to build a stronger and healthier society through strategic alliances and community BUILDING…

No “alpha” could ever shame me for that.

Thanks for the lessons and the solidarity, guys…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Firepower June 19, 2012 at 09:15

Lyn87 June 18, 2012 at 17:53

Charles,

We usually agree, but yes, I DO dismiss Roissy. I do not dispute that his techniques allow some guys to mimic masculinity well enough to get tipsy skanks into bed,

Why are you concerned with what tipsy skanks and puas do in bed – are you some kind of bluenose Puritan? It seems out of place – and not your business.

Straw Man? I’ll raise you your argumentum ad ignorantiam or “appeal to ignorance” for you say:

“Game gurus seem more like boys to me…”

Then glorify Dalrock as the counter, The Moral Ideal – without having evidence of either.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6
Firepower June 19, 2012 at 09:20

migu June 18, 2012 at 23:48

Revolution?

No firepower. The masses are obese and inebriated. Might get a few riots, no revolution.

Very true. I see it, sadly, more each day.

But if so, then there is no chance for changing the issues discussed here. The mrm will fail.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5
Charles Martel June 19, 2012 at 10:28

greyghost
The concepts and logic is in the industry called “Game” it is basicly female gina tingle psychology and is very effective. The biggest problem with it is it goes against the foundation of the beta male. The psychology for a man (beta) is that he has to turn off his guilt and natural concern for the whole,while alpha’s and thugs don’t have that problem for there is nothing to turn off with them…….When I was young and had those romantic crushes i would have loved to be able to get the girl of my dreams. (as foolish as that sounds) If you look at it like that right or wrong based on mature logic it will help to understand what is going on. ( very powerful human emotions are involved here)

Dude, you hit that one out of the park. Feminism is abhorrent in many ways, but the one that pisses me off the most is that it takes cynical advantage of the decent, honorable impulses of most young men and uses their good intentions to destroy them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 0
codebuster June 19, 2012 at 11:03

I want to add a further comment to my last post about spooking chicks, that may have been lost in translation. Basically, I’m alluding to the famous rationalization hamster that CH often writes about.

Women will tolerate a lot of poor behavior in a prospective utility device or exciting bad-boy. They will amicably tolerate your bad language, your leering gropes, and your perving at other women. They will good-naturedly tolerate your faux pas, your poor dress sense and your bad breath. But they can’t tolerate being spooked. Being spooked is the game changer that changes everything. So what does being spooked mean, and how does it relate to a woman’s rationalizaton hamster?

Think of the rationalization hamster as a furry little animal that you are playing with. While you have its trust, it will happily frolick about in the sawdust, cheerfully playing fetch with parcels of food and shiny objects (negs and encouragements) and letting you scratch its tummy. But the moment you spook it, you lose its trust, and it will scamper into the farthest corner, or the blackest hole, and you are going to have a job on your hands to win back its trust. Same with women. With well-executed Game, you can play a woman like a fish, feeding out the line, reeling it back in, playing her and teasing her. But the moment you spook her, maybe by taking a neg too far, it’s like the line is broken, and your quarry will be off to the deepest depths of the ocean and you will never be able to coax her back to the surface again.

/sarcasm (a bit of truth laced with humor)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Firepower June 19, 2012 at 11:19

Tad June 18, 2012 at 20:35

You’d do better to put up. Or shut up

Fwisky.

Poops June 19, 2012 at 05:54

I didn’t really intend that to be a yes or no question,

Both you brainiacs: see that shiny blue FIREPOWER thing that flashes when you drag your MascuMouse over it? It’s called a link.

I posted all that stuff (including solutions) over at my site – so if you two finally grow a pair and post there, fine. or both of you stfu.

I’m NOT reposting my stuff and clog Price’s site and get him into more trouble – I respect him too much for that. Still: I’m unsure if I even want folks like you two lil’ fellas that don’t know how to click on a link.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 8
Pops June 19, 2012 at 12:22

I posted all that stuff (including solutions) over at my site – so if you two finally grow a pair and post there, fine. or both of you stfu

Clicked on your link days ago. Clicked on it again. I see much incessant talking. Can’t find any solutions. Maybe you can quote yourself for us. I’m sure that Price won’t mind.

Also, “grow a pair” is a female/feminist shaming tactic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 2
Firepower June 19, 2012 at 15:39

Yeah, plops – you n’ tad really tore up the comment section.

But, Thanks for telling me
what Mr. Price
thinks.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 6
Lyn87 June 19, 2012 at 18:23

Firepower,

You really should work on your critical thinking skills. Roissy’s article is the topic of this thread and we were talking about game, because he writes about it – a lot. I made a comment about the topic. Yet despite the fact that Roissy’s writing is the topic of this thread you came up with this pointless rant: “Why are you concerned with what tipsy skanks and puas do in bed – are you some kind of bluenose Puritan? It seems out of place – and not your business.”

Seriously? How much of a White Knight do you have to be to defend the honor of drunk skanks and the PUAs who write incessantly about shagging them?

Oh, and look up, argumentum ad ignorantiam while you’re contemplating that: although you can spell it you obviously don’t know what it means.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 1
Pops June 20, 2012 at 07:18

Yeah, plops – you n’ tad really tore up the comment section.

I was going to comment on posts with solutions, but I couldn’t find any.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 1
Firepower June 20, 2012 at 08:16

@ Lyn87

Well, ya caught me. Your comments (and plops’) are pretty much pointless crying since you’ve been here. I figured I’d post factual info to confuse and astound you – sorry: I am the 10th Member at The Spearhead. I joined up when “welmer” had few allies.

Both you and plops’ online venting is a great help to his cause.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 4
Lyn87 June 20, 2012 at 14:09

Firepower,

I used to think the other guys were being too hard on you by calling you out on your insults and lack of insight. Now I’m convinced they were actually holding back.

You throw out shaming language in almost every post.

You rarely if ever cite facts.

When someone states a position you disagree with you go after the person rather than the argument.

Although you occasionally use Latin phrases through the magic of cut-and-paste, you don’t know what they mean. Seriously, argumentum ad ignorantiam? Did you assume that because you don’t know what it means that I wouldn’t either?

You Sir, are a troll.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
woggy June 20, 2012 at 15:36

Lyn,
What you seem to be omitting (at least for this discussion) is that you probably have your own brand of Game.
It’s just not the kind that would have you talking the pants off a woman not worthy of tomorrow morning.

PUA game?
Feminists INVITED it, and with their incessant, overt desire to control men through sex, they DESERVE to be pumped and dumped.

And then there’s “orecret”, the one that believes we should all get along with women.
Wouldn’t that be nice?
Never happen though, and there’s never been a time in history when that would happen.
I’ve never been able to get along with ANYONE, all of the time, nor has any other faulty (all of us) human being.
Where it’s different today is that faulty women (all of them) are being upheld as morally and spiritually superior to men. A woman can have you locked up with a mere phone call!
No evidence of wrongdoing needed.
In light of that, all this smarmy talk of “getting along” – as if that is the magic bullet – is moot silliness.

Men need to be warned. The time for “getting along” was squandered long ago – by women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
orecret June 20, 2012 at 20:50

Woggy -

You’re likely correct about “orecret” … that’s why you can find him living ALONE on a mountaintop…

…unfortunately, the desire [to have a healthy relationship with women] ain’t the reality…

and orecret is a realist… a lonely effin’ realist…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
orecret June 20, 2012 at 20:57

The reason Orecret (me) sometimes displays a different signature is that he is of different opinions on the matter… (I can relate to nearly every regulars opinion online here at The Spearhead)

Sometimes, most cynical… sometimes, almost hopeful…

Be it Orecret of Spartacus, The Goat… He sits on the mountaintop…

…ALONE…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Brigadon June 21, 2012 at 11:25

wanna know the true secret behind game?

stop being scared.

that’s what essentially all game boils down to. all the ‘lines’, the ‘techniques’, the ‘shit test negs’, all these tools that have been put out by gamers that may or may not work wind up working simply because of the fact that they give guys confidence.

fear is not sexy.
even the BEST gamers will tell you that they have ‘off nights’. If their techniques were guaranteed to work, they would never have an off night.

The most important rule, though, has always been “get out there and do it’. practice. lose your fear.

They could be telling you to wear your socks inside out to get women. If you truly believe it, you will lose your fear, and be fully confident. That is more than likely to give you EXACTLY what you need to get laid regularly with even the hottest of women.

Cowardice has been, and still is, the most universally reviled human flaw in existence.

I support game, because it teaches you how to behave without being dominated by fear.

to quote Dune:

I must not fear.
Fear is the mind-killer.
Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
I will face my fear.
I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
Only I will remain.

Believe it or not, lack of fear is one of the most attractive traits imaginable for a male.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
BSLDoc June 21, 2012 at 19:24

I have from time to time in recent months visited this site. I am extremely impressed at how intelligent, eloquent and well versed you posters are. It is truly a shame that the modern “woman” is unable to grasp what magnificent partners, fathers and mentors all you could be. It is a tragedy, not so much for us, but for the masses of women who will realize this as they saunter off alone one day to their graves.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
Brigadon June 23, 2012 at 06:49

Everyone dies alone. No one can go with you into death.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
ralph gorman June 25, 2012 at 22:19

The basic problem with giving women the vote is that women are children. They want what they want and that’s it. There are innumerable examples. Take maternity leave. Women scream that they have a “right” to reproduce. Of course they do – on their own time. But no one dares to tell them that they do not have the right to do it on the company’s time – because baby making is not a job function. They scream “pregnancy discrimination’. But no one dares tell them that it is the pregnant female who is discriminating against the employer whose business she is disrupting – not to mention the non-pregnant employees who must do double duty.

And so it goes with fanny patting court martials in the military. No one tells them that if they are going to defend their country they should at least be able to defend their cunt from their own troops. No one tells them that killing their own baby at the abortion clinic is not putting the interests of the child first. No one tells them that people who coin expressions like “male chauvinist pig” have no right to sue for sexual hostility, etc.

Women are children – and giving them the vote has only reduced the entire society to their level of childishness and petulance.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: