A Traditionalist Manifesto?

OneSTDV writes:

1) The nuclear family is the bedrock of civilization.
2) Women are valuable as more than just prostitutes.
3) A romantic relationship has more benefits than just physical pleasure.
4) Marriage has risks, but sometimes they’re very much worth it.
5) Fatherhood is a rewarding experience integral to the emotional health of children.
6) (Modern SWPL) Women can be petulant, mannish, and entitled, but also uniquely endearing as only feminine women can be.
7) MRAs express a female-like neuroticism because they whine and focus so much on what could happen.
8) A return to patriarchy should be the goal, not men going their own way.

Point by point, we’ll examine what’s true and false, right and wrong with this traditionalist manifesto.

1. True. Not only does history inform us of the value of nuclear families to civilization, but scientific studies are in basic agreement that kids, and society by extension, fare best when a married mom and dad (or long term cohabiting couple within a homogeneous culture — see: Scandinavia) live together and raise their children as a single unit. Single momhood is the scourge of civilization, and everywhere you look in the world where single moms rule, you see decay, violence and backwardness. Any government policy that weakens the primacy of the nuclear family is anti-civilization, and thus evil.

2. True (and false premise besides for any but the most aggrieved men). Women are the nurturers of the next generation. Men are simply not as interested in the shit work that goes into the raising of children. Sex and children are a woman’s prime directives, but she offers other positive qualities. A woman’s genuine sympathy for a man she loves can be as powerful as her lust for him. Have you ever had a woman cry for you when you were going through a tough time, so completely did she empathize with your pain and so in love with you she was? If you’ve experienced that, you know how much joy a woman can bring to your life as a man.

3. True. Sex is great, but sex with love is transcendent.

4. Insufficient data. If you are not planning to have kids, marriage is a raw deal no matter how you slice it. Long term committed relationships will offer a man the same happiness he can get within a marriage without the knife’s edge of divorce theft at his throat. If you are planning on kids and you are a man, marriage may be for you. However, you may still be better off informally married; i.e long term cohabitation without any contract signing (though femcunts and their lawyercunt mercenaries are currently hard at work trying to change this). Know that when you enter a marriage every conceivable institution — judicial, media, cultural — is arrayed against your interests, male-hating to the bone as they are in the twilight of America’s grand epoch. Go into marriage with open eyes and you give yourself a chance to fight back the grasping reach of its subversive tentacles from your wife’s psyche.

5. Post hoc rationalization. Once you have kids, would you want to accept that fatherhood isn’t as rewarding as you thought it should be? Of course not. What father would admit that those early years of crapping, vomiting, screaming, crying, babbling ingrate tantrums were really a hell on earth he’d have rather spent playing poker with his buddies? After a certain age — say, 9 or so — when kids become old enough and emotionally mature enough to have quasi-adult conversations with them and impart the wisdom of your fatherly experience upon them do they switch from being net buzzkills to net blessings. And then it all goes to shit once again when they hit adolescence. Nonetheless, fatherhood is integral to kids’ emotional health, despite the fact that kids are a huge fun suck for many, many years. So if you are willing to accept the sacrifices, know that your fatherly guidance will help keep your daughters off the badboy pole and your sons out of juvie.

6. True, but irrelevant. It is possible to meet plenty of endearingly feminine women who don’t possess the suite of unfeminine traits that are the battle cry and parasitic infection of the modern careerist SWPL. As a man with game, you already know that being choosy is your right and your duty. And chicks dig choosy men.

7. Insufficient data. Do some MRAs whine? Sure. Just like some (most) feminists whine, or really any identifiable group of people whines over some unfairness, true or not. Anyhow, one man’s effeminate whining is another man’s truth to power. It’s all in the perception. As men are the expendable sex, the perception will always be, by both men and women alike, that men complaining about injustice or unfairness is tantamount to an admission against interest, tautological evidence that the complaining men wouldn’t have anything to complain about if they were winners in the sexual market. In contrast and in accord with evolutionary theory which posits that the woman’s reporoductive capacity is scarcer and thus more valuable than the man’s, complaining by women is something to be taken seriously. Do MRAs have grounds for complaint? They do. Sometimes complaining is the whine of the loser, and sometimes it’s entirely justified. Similarly, the past may not have been as great as we fondly remember through rose-colored glasses, or the past may have indeed been objectively better than the present. So the next time some feminist cackles about whiny MRAs, ask her (while sporting a most devious smile) if MLK Jr. was a whiny little bitch for agitating for civil rights. Use their liberationist icons against them.

8. True and false. Overeager extrapolation. A “return” to an Islamic-like patriarchy would be a disaster for the West, not to mention a disaster for my dating life. The USA had it about right for two hundred years, before the whole thing began to unravel. Decay follows decadence as surely as decadence has followed success. The Chateau has previously outlined a plan for a return to an American version of palatable patriarchy. As for “men going their own way”: it’s almost a malapropism it’s so utterly inconceivable. It is, not to put too fine a point on it, a big load of sour grapes in the nominal MRA movement. Men truly going their own, vagina-free, way (and not simply men trying to score internet debate points by claiming to go their own way but still banging on the sly) are likely mating market losers who find comfort in pretending to wish away the allure of women. No one’s buying it, just as no one buys the claptrap by fat feminists insisting that fat women are lusted after by winner men and only social conditioning prevents these men from dating all the grotesque and ill-mannered fatties they really desire.

I give OneSTDV’s traditionalist manifesto a B+. Not that it will make a lick of difference. The gears slicked with the sweat and blood of obedient middle class beta fodder have already been set in motion, and the machine demands tribute. Trying to stop and reverse the gluttony of its belching maw is a fool’s errand. There is but one tried-and-true solution: nuke the beast from orbit.

In the meantime, I’ll be poolside, getting my tan on.





Comments


  1. Who the fuck is Roissy to tell anyone what it’s like to have kids. This blog is now B+

    Like


    • Yeah, gotta agree. My almost-2-year-old is certainly a PITA occasionally, but she is also an absolute joy the rest of the time. While I’m sure she will be more tolerable at 9, I wouldn’t trade this age for the world.

      Like


      • on July 23, 2011 at 5:19 pm Chris Beaver

        Just wait until she’s 13-14, pal. Then get back to us.

        Like


      • My daughters are 12 and 18. A crazy, crazy ride but I wouldn’t trade it for anything.

        Like


      • Assuming your 18-year old is decent looking, she’s getting fucked by double-digit-IQ boneheads in high school, and you’re happy?

        Do you lie to yourself and pretend she’s a virgin, or do you embrace the feminizing thought that she’s free to “date” whoever she wants?

        Please tell us more (and pardon my blunt language.)

        Like


    • True that.

      If you haven’t had kids you know fuck all about it.

      Like


    • Why do you read it then?

      Like


    • on July 25, 2011 at 5:23 am Hzzz the troll

      One time, I threw a June bug into a black widow nest because it kept flying in stupid circles. It got munched. Life can be pretty cool sometimes….

      Like


  2. great post

    Like


    • Meh.

      It’s all going to hell in a handbasket. Trying to fix it is like trying to push an ice cube up a mountain during an avalanche. We are past the point of no return.

      This will be the second Dark Age for white people, where it won’t be too long before everyone lives in huts and don’t know how to add 2 + 2. Just like the first Dark Age, it’ll take 500 years before a group of men will have had enough and light the way.

      p.s. RIP U.S. space program.

      Like


  3. Nice 🙂 I’m happy I’m not feminist anymore.

    Like


    • I’m happy I never was. : ) I have an alpha husband of 15 years plus, and we are both still very, very happy. I feel sorry for you kids these days. If it’s nay consolation, we did our best to try to preserve the world we knew and loved, but we were totally outnumbered and outgunned. : (

      Like


  4. 2) Women are valuable as more than just prostitutes.

    Look at the etiquette of the past. When greeting a lady, a man would take off his hat, bow and kiss her hand. Aren’t those things submission behaviour? Why would men do that in ages when women didn’t even dreamed on voting? Because they wanted to raise the status of ladies which had good social conduct.

    Like


    • That is an excellent point. I never thought about it that way. Don’t just punish the slut, but reward the chaste.

      Like


  5. on July 23, 2011 at 3:45 pm Master Dogen

    “Men going their own way” should go whole hog and join a religious community, or become serious scholars of something difficult, like ancient Anglo-Saxon poetry or something.

    There have always been men in the West who “went their own way.” The thing is, they used to be respectable, interesting, occasionally even holy people. Now they just make a lot of cheap, hyperbolic noise on websites with poor graphic design.

    Like


    • Which is why I decided to pursue a sciences major and devote my life to science: When you spend all your time learning about Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, there’s little time to chase tail.

      Like


  6. Your response to men going their own way is pure projection. You, yourself, can’t imagine a life worth living without pussy so you project your neediness onto other men.

    There is nothing wrong with wanting to get pussy, but there is also nothing wrong with choosing another lifestyle. And it is not the case that all true MGTOWs are omega hermits.

    I used to do very well with women, both in the casual marketplace and in a LTR situation. I decided that the benefits of women did not outweigh the costs. And I have tons of artistic and intellectual pursuits that i find waaaaayyyy more interesting than used meat curtains and funbags attached to a third or fourth-rate brain.

    There are more men like me every day.

    Liked by 1 person


    • I agree completely. Women are not worth the effort.

      Liked by 1 person


    • on July 23, 2011 at 10:38 pm Rogue Element

      Agreed. Women are not worth the time, the expense, the effort, the risk, and the aggravation.

      Like


    • …say the men reading a game blog.

      Like


      • This site has great insight on psychology and culture, regardless of whether I am chasing poon or not.

        Like


      • I’m skeptical. The focus of this site is too tight for you to not actually be interested in being more proficient at attracting women.

        Like


      • Other members of society are constantly trying to push/pull men into blue pill thinking and behavior.

        Reading game sites serves as a counter to assist with maintaining red pill state.

        You don’t need to be seeking sex to prefer red pill state.

        Like


      • Why would it matter if you have no use for the knowledge? Practically speaking, game is useful for one purpose.

        It isn’t useful as a lense through which to scrub your toenails or cook your chicken or say hello to the garbageman.

        Like


      • “Reading game sites serves as a counter to assist with maintaining red pill state.”

        I’m not sure what this is saying. Is it saying that “game” is an essentially blue pill phenomenon, or an essentially red pill phenomenon?

        I would say mostly the former.

        Like


      • Ha ha ha! You’re a funny guy!

        Like


  7. Gotzon…

    Such etiquette was reserved for the peerage until pretty late in the game.

    You are describing ‘courtly behavior’ of which the lesser nobility had to submit to their betters.

    Those at the top — like QE II — received so many hand-grabs that it hurt. So a new protocol was established — one gently kisses the hand — normally the ring bearing left hand. This left the noble with at least some function in the right hand.

    Thusly, Popes and Cardinals have their rings kissed. They’re as weak as a young woman, of course.

    Status raising had absolutely nothing to do with it.

    Much, much later, these social ticks spread to the merely wealthy; thence to the upper middle class.

    It’s Hollywood that has warped everyone’s understanding of history.

    Both recent remakes of Robin Hood were loaded with anachronisms — starting with too much steel and technology.

    But then, who wants to see a film larded with poverty, and ugly people.

    Like


    • ‘Courtly behavior’ was established by widows who married early and watched their old husbands die while inheriting their wealth. ‘Chivalry’ was not a concept developed by patriarchy. It was developed by matriarchs who were single mom’s. Not single mothers as we know today. They were widows who had nothing to do but improve society through their sons.

      Like


    • There is no purpose for ‘chivalry’ in a society that has no defined structure for female behavior. Where female behavior is governed by society ‘chivalry’ is a benefit.

      Like


  8. “4. Insufficient data. If you are not planning to have kids, marriage is a raw deal no matter how you slice it”

    I wish someone would have slapped that into my dumb ass head 23 years ago.

    Like


  9. on July 23, 2011 at 4:03 pm Good Luck Chuck

    What’s the difference between a PUA and an MRA?

    About ten years.

    Twenty something guys are particularly guilty of crying foul when they hear a guy talk about how shitty men have it today. Easy to say when you’re fresh out of college and have no desire to settle down and have a family in the foreseeable future.

    Like


    • What’s the difference between a PUA and an MRA?

      An emphasis on results in one’s chosen endeavor.

      A PUA ruthlessly examines every aspect of his game with the goal of improving his results.

      Too many MRAs seem unconcerned that for all their ‘activism’, so feminist seems even remotely worried that MRAs will hold them accountable.

      What results have MRAs delivered towards their stated goals?

      Like


      • What’s the difference between a PUA and an MRA?

        Laying girls or not.

        Like


      • Doug1,

        Are you willing to say that on The Spearhead or A Voice for Men?

        The MRAs there will crucify you for it.

        Like


      • Anon2
        Some will some won’t. I frequent both and even post articles on AVFM.
        Personally I identify as a gender separatist first, sympathetic to the MRA position. You could call me a Crowley Separatist (do as thou wilt and then fuck off)

        Doug1
        I think a better delivery would be
        The difference between a PUA and an MRA?

        laying chicks and laying bricks

        Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 1:18 am Good Luck Chuck

        What CAN be done? I know how fucked up everything is but what am I gonna do? Write letters to congressmen? Picket in front of the White House? Set myself on fire?

        I don’t directly identify with either group but I do use facets of game and I most certainly can sympathize with with Men’s Rights cause. I don’t have the time or the desire to try to change the world. It doesn’t matter what any of us do- things are gonna be messed up for awhile.

        My point is that this shouldn’t be PUA vs. MRA. A lot of guys today who are content with spending hours on end trying to rack up meaningless notch counts are going to be be sadly disappointed when they do think about settling down and they are faced with the stark realization that their future partner is going to come from the same pool of skanks that allowed him to have fun all of those years. There is nothing wrong with getting as much sex as you can, but keep in mind that one day you might find yourself wanting a little more.

        Like


      • “It doesn’t matter what any of us do- things are gonna be messed up for awhile”

        It will require a societal re-boot in terms of thinking.
        And I don’t see that while the FSA – Free Shit Army (<< from another blog) get their handouts. And as long as they get their handouts, they have no incentive to change their thinking. It didn't get this way overnight, & it won't change back overnight. It's a generational thing. And it's going to take one or two generations more to see it, & decide they WANT it to change before it will.

        Like


      • A lot of guys today who are content with spending hours on end trying to rack up meaningless notch counts are going to be be sadly disappointed when they do think about settling down and they are faced with the stark realization that their future partner is going to come from the same pool of skanks that allowed him to have fun all of those years. There is nothing wrong with getting as much sex as you can, but keep in mind that one day you might find yourself wanting a little more.

        You are soaking in it. You are fish, swimming in assumptions and you don’t even know you are wet.

        A person can be surrounded by meaningful love, while dating young beauties. You can have love and meaning with serial monogamy and parallel monogamy.

        Love and meaning are not the province those with lifetime monogamy and children.

        Like


      • But I think the point he’s trying to make is that due to the complaints of the (percieved) lack of virgins or females with low partner counts, racking up high notch counts seems counterproductive. If one wants to be with virgins or low partner count females, don’t sleep with whoever is willing or reward sluts. Just because you’re having casual sex doesn’t mean you should do without standards.

        Like


      • I don’t quite understand what you are saying Renee. That you can’t have meaningful love with high partner count girls? I’ve shown in my life that this is not true. I know it through experience.

        And if you are trying to say that a lifestyle of non-monogamy and serial monogamy doesn’t target quality, I also contest that.

        Like


      • Renee, Renee, Renee. One of the great things about this blog is that it’s host(s) pull back the dainty veneer from pretty social convention to reveal what’s really going on underneath. Mostly, that is. The one thing most readers here still can’t admit is that we can’t simultaneously have a society of Madonnas and Whores. This is the pretty lie even Roissy still believes.

        Like


    • “What’s the difference between a PUA and an MRA?

      An MRA is a political thinker.

      A PUA tends to be apolitical, “naturalistic” in his ethics, oriented toward the social microcosm, and more concerned with personal power and status within said microcosm.

      MRAs have no “stated goals”. They are for the most part theorists and agitators. Their modus operandi is to slowly crank up the heat and pressure on feminism by means of their writings, and by indirect channels of influence. They are also highly effective in raising the level of social consciousness and bringing new recruits on board.

      The unstated goal of the MRA sector is to inflict “death by a thousand cuts” upon feminism.

      MRAs and PUAs, ideally, ought to exist in a happy and mutually beneficial state of symbiosis, with each attending to its duties in its own sphere. Unfortunately, one of those sectors is shitting the bed in a pretty serious way — and I shall tactfully refrain from saying which side I mean. 😉

      Like


      • What I said on AVfM seems just as cogent here.

        From my perspective, MRA, MGTOW, and PUA are separate ways; they have separate goals, separate values, and separate core philosophies. The difference between MRA and MGTOW is not as marked as that between either of them and PUA – but the separation is there.

        As an MRA, I want women to be held responsible for their words, actions, and behavior – just as men are held responsible for theirs. I want them held to the same standards as men, in the workplace, in the courts – no more “pussy pass,” just man-up or skulk out. I would like to see false rape accusations treated, investigated and punished as a felony. I would like to see “no-fault divorce means you divorce the kids too,” and an end to the wallet-rape that is “child support”. I’d like to see “feminism” recognized widely, publicly, and culturally, as equivalent to Nazism or the Ku Klux Klan; I’d like to see these bitches in the slut-walks shamed, scorned, and shunned, publicly and nastily on the Nightly News …

        As a MGTOW, I recognize that I won’t get what I want. I also recognize that I can get along on my own; I don’t have to have “wife and family” to live a good and fulfilling life. I recognize that the only person I have to please is myself, and I shape my life as I want to live it – regardless of others’ opinion, indeed fully and consciously heedless of others’ opinion.

        As a PUA, I wanna get laid. So I learn all the mind-games that will help me get laid, and I spend my time and money and emotional effort on getting laid. If I get good enough at it, I make up books and training and courses so that other guys will pay me to teach them how to get laid.

        There is room for all three in the manosphere; there may even be room within yourself to be all three, at different times in your life or at the same time. But at this time in my life, getting laid is far less important to me than covering my ass (MRA) or covering my tracks (MGTOW).

        Like


  10. on July 23, 2011 at 4:23 pm Neil Hansen

    It’s not really a manifesto so much as it’s just a list of truths. MGTOW isn’t possible unless you use prostitutes. No man can go without pussy, unless he is a monk.

    I went for coffee today in the trendy spot of my west coast city. Lots of SWPL men and women covered from head to tie with tattoos and piercings. If I had any advice for men today, it would be that women, for whatever reason, genuinely want to be regarded as “hoes.” I do not know what explains this phenomenon. Children are the last thing on a woman’s mind, unless she can have them on her terms, like Madonna. Men are simply optional sperm donors to today’s woman. It actually isn’t that bad for men if women don’t really value men as fathers for their children. We just simply pump n dump and pay the monthly $500 and move on to the next bang. Women get complete control of their vaginas. Not a bad trade-off. So long as women seem to have no concern about the future of society or their children, this is how things will be. And there is some data suggesting that children from single-parent families fare just fine. Mind you I am in an affluent west coast city full of whites and asians. The asian women are not yet ready to be regarded as full-blown “hoes”, so they aren’t sporting the tats and piercing – yet. But the white girls are ready…boy, are they ready. I will admit that single motherhood for latins and blacks is the kiss of death. Gangs and violence will surely follow. For wealthy whites, art school and cinematography follows.

    Patriarchy isn’t coming back, not in my lifetime anyway. So I wouldn’t suggest MGTOW; that isn’t possible. I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: you don’t even necessarily need game. There are millions of girls in the Phlippines that need loving. If you don’t have game, just save your money and take your vacay in the Phils. A single man can save $20,000 per year. Play video games and get a happy-ending massage from time to time. Make sure you get your Twinrix and Gardasil shots to help prevent STD’s. In the meantime think of your house you can build on the beach in the Philippines.

    There is no need to go the way of Sodini. There is no need for MGTOW. I know too many guys with multiple girlfriends in the Phils, Thailand and Indonesia to keep an average man happy.

    Yes, I am a little sad that modern women only want to be recognized for their pussies. As I said, I cannot explain this phenomenon. For two centuries they fought against this, and wanted to be valued for their brains. It is indeed a strange world. So when I look at them and see them covered in tats and slut uniforms, I am perplexed. But….fuck it. Save your money boys and dream of SE Asian pussy! There is lots of it!

    Then again, you can learn game. Only about 5 or 10% of the male population knows how to practice it successfully. Me, I am too lazy. And the pussy isn’t really worth the effort. It’s just too easy to get a massage and a bj once a month or bimonthly. If this disgusts you, your only hope is Game. Game requires effort and conscious work. And practice. You need to be socially plugged in. Where do you work? Do you have status? You cannot have Game and also be devoid of some status. You cannot have Game and simply work as a shlub somewhere; your work needs to have some Status, witha capital S.

    Great post, Roissy. Discrediting MRA and MGTOW needs to happen. MGTOW isn’t possible. MRA is the equivalent of feminism. Game is the only solution, but if you don’t have it, I have a solution of my own:

    ASIA.

    Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 1:18 pm Betadyermom

      >>Lots of SWPL men and women covered from head to tie with tattoos and piercings. If I had any advice for men today, it would be that women, for whatever reason, genuinely want to be regarded as “hoes.” I do not know what explains this phenomenon

      I think you have a large group of young men who are pretty much emasculated — both in the economic sense of not having good employment, and in the beta mangina sense. No use being a sweet modest girl to attract that set, so women gravitate towards being “hoes” as a challenge to separate the men from the boys.

      You also have the reality that even the alphiest alpha can indulge in endless internet pornography – these women perform the short-term calculation that looking like cheap strippers is something a lot of guys like.

      Like


      • “these women perform the short-term calculation that looking like cheap strippers is something a lot of guys like”

        As long as they perform like it in bed, in the kitchen, in the shower, in the hall, on the couch………

        Like


    • “Great post, Roissy. Discrediting MRA and MGTOW needs to happen. MGTOW isn’t possible. MRA is the equivalent of feminism. Game is the only solution, but if you don’t have it, I have a solution of my own. . .: “

      Anybody who makes a statement like that is a pussy-worshipping jackass, a wrecker and spoiler, an enemy of men and an enabler of feminism. Full stop.

      I don’t understand such bigotry.

      But bigotry it is.

      I will share your words with others as an . . . example! 😉

      Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 2:11 am Neil Hansen

        How is this bigotry?

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 8:54 pm classic joe

        it’s mostly just stupid. you made assertions, as did roissy, that are stupid. He didn’t discredit anything. Of course MGTOW is possible. Declaring it impossible is just childish. Will most MGTOW types come from the pool of men that aren’t natural female favorites? Of course, the vast majority of guys are in this category and I’m sure the vast majority of MGTOW types are too.

        Nobody is denying the allure of women. What a retarded straw man argument that is. People are saying women failed the cost/benefit analysis. The process of finding this out will result in sour grapes. So what?

        Nobody discredited MRAs either. Your claim that “MRA is the equivalent of feminism” is another idiotic assertion that has no basis. It’s too dumb for me to explain why it’s dumb. I’ll just start swearing and making fun of your cool mask.

        Like


      • on July 27, 2011 at 3:26 pm Neil Hansen

        beta.

        Like


      • on July 28, 2011 at 7:08 pm classic joe

        Stupid people love labels. No argument, no reasoning, no substance at all. You apparently think you’re accomplishing something with this label. What is it?

        Like


    • “And there is some data suggesting that children from single-parent families fare just fine.”

      Where did you get that info? With all due respect if it´s from some feminists, they literally invented out of thin air, in ALL races and ALL social venues, single mother homes fair less than traditional and their children take the toll, I admit that girls are less prone to be complete failures due to single motherhood but that´s because their mother is their ARCHETYPE, the boys are left in the cold and most of them end up being stupid manginas and male feminists when the economic conditions are fine, if they are in the low income bracket, well they will become violent (see hispanics, blacks and white trash).

      Like


      • I see your point Fidelbogen. But be fair. In MRA circles, there seem to be quite a few MRA/MGTOW who do in fact seem to “mimic” feminism. It is almost like they are just trying to do for men what feminism did for women (victim status).

        Granted – there are many sites, like yours and a lot of others that have valid points, and I back them 100%.

        Oh yeah, wasn’t that woman who just cut off her husbands penis Catherine Kieu – wasn’t she ASIAN?!

        I am sick of a-holes telling me all about how “high and mighty” ASIAN women are.

        Sounds like the same pedestalizing happening all over again.

        And look at how some of them are acting now…

        Like


      • Children from wealthy single-parent families may fare better than children from poor traditional families.

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 8:57 pm classic joe

        of course, and children from two parent families where both parents are retarded probably do worse than children from wealthy single-parent homes. Do you really not understand why that isn’t relevant?

        Like


      • on July 27, 2011 at 3:24 pm Neil Hansen

        no.

        Like


    • sounds like San Francisco Whores to me.
      they will sour your outlook on life.
      Get out of S.F.

      Like


  11. A surprising analysis for this blog, but surprising in all the right directions. Insightful and skillfully argued, with more than a few painful truths. Will force me to reconsider some recent decisions.

    Like


  12. I’d take issue with #8. I don’t think we will have a return to patriarchy, but we will have widespread chav-ism. Beta males are going extinct, and you’ll get nothing but hyper-violent chavs since that is the easiest and most consistent way to score women.

    Right now we are eating the seed corn of civilization, akin to the Greeks in the Euro 1999-2008. The bill is coming due, as single motherhood obliterates social capital and investment in kids, to the point where every guy is between the Situation and Levi Johnson. Which means BTW a quick end to PUA when the balance tips to violent d-baggery. How many PUA at Council Housing Estates? Indeed how can that society function when there is no more middle class because all the moms are single?

    Like


    • You, sir, win the prize. Oh, but the state will support those single mothers, feminists say… like we have in the ghetto now (certainly not middle class). Violent-douchebaggery is indeed where we’re headed… and you all, out there, thought A Clockwork Orange with Alex unleashing some of “the old ultraviolence” and having a threesome with two underage chicks was too far-fetched? PUA is based upon tricks that provoke emotional responses in women and a no-cosequence environment. Decay of traditional morality and self-restraint (well, feminism, but let’s not name names) has let hypergamy loose on the female side. Eventually, mate guarding/poaching will get violent because PUA tricks are just that, tricks, and not the actual Alpha behavior they signify… and some women out there find violent jealousy on their behalf a turn-on. Don’t rub the lamp if you don’t want the genie to come out, as the old saying says… unfortunately, we have. There will a period of retrenchment, when we realize that civilization is a good thing and why we stopped action like paleolithic thugs in the first place, but things will get nasty before then until we learn. I only hope we can manage to keep our way of life and don’t end up speaking Arabic or Chinese out of it.

      Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 4:58 am Neil Hansen

        I don’t think we have to worry about speaking arabic or chinese, but we do have to worry about speaking spanish. I suspect we’ll look like a latin american banana republic by 2030. Mixed martial arts and ultimate fighting will be ubiquitous, as will be graft and cronyism. We’ll begin to be pulled into the South American sphere of influence and pull out of Asia. Coups will become normalized. Defaulting on loans will also become normalized. All this will only get worse. The only option is Game. Game has the potential to get you out of any jam you are in.

        Like


      • “Mixed martial arts and ultimate fighting will be ubiquitous”

        Nah. Check the border now. It’s not MMA, it’s full auto. MMA requires energy, training, & discipline. Much easier to be lazy & pull a trigger.

        Like


      • Aye, chupa mi virga, puta! (And very machismo-oriented.) Get back in the kitchen and cook me some tortillas– don’t burn them like you did last time, bitch!

        Like


    • We’ll have a return to patriarchy. Patriarchy was never an accident of history, but rather the structure left standing when different social structures clashed on the field of evolutionary battle.

      The accident of history was the discovery of science, which then led to engineering, which again led to the ability to extract massive population sustaining resources from the earth’s crust. This increased the planet’s carrying capacity by 1-2 orders of magnitude, allowing a respite from immediate evolutionary pressures for a few hundred years.

      But this was a one off. Which humans, having evolved to evolve, evolved into by multiplying. So, now we are again closing in on carrying capacity. And carrying capacity may even be shrinking, if the Peak-this-or-that’-ists are correct.

      And once that happens, evolutionary pressures make themselves known again. And patriarchy will return.

      I don’t know when you last visited the British and European “council houses” where the term Chavism was born. In many places the social structures there are increasingly becoming dominated by patriarchal culture, most often by rapid increases in Muslim populations. I never thought I would hear teenage / early twenties chav girls wish they were still virgins and regret their “fall”, but it’s becoming increasingly commonplace as the alpha males of their dreams and tingles won’t even give non virgins the time of day as potential long term mates. This trend now looks to be counteracting, and indeed overwhelming, the desperate efforts by Western tax feeders to drag second and third generation immigrant girls downtown to “check out boys.”

      Like


    • @Whiskey:

      I’d be interested to hear on what basis you feel that “beta males” are “going extinct.”

      Like


  13. Evolutionarily speaking sex is pointless if not for children.

    Sex is to make children.

    Marriage is to raise children.

    Cultural suicide for those who dare contradict the merciless god of demographics.

    Like


    • Plenty of hot Asian chicks, so not really worried about demographics just now (although I will admit that Chinese demographics are much worse than even Mid European ones).

      Like


    • You forgot one –

      – boobs/breasts are soley for breastfeeding newborn and growing infants. *running out of the thread*

      Like


      • Secondary sexual trait too.

        If the sole purpose of boobs were feeding, then it would be pointless to be so heavy and protuse. They must also say “See? I can breastfeed a lot of kids… “

        Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 6:22 pm old guy, lower case

        Not just for breast feeding infants. Breast milk is excellent in your morning coffee and on cornflakes. It also makes excellent ice cream.

        Like


      • tsk, tsk, tsk, Old Guy you outta be ashamed of yourself stealing food from babies!

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 2:08 am old guy, lower case

        There was PLENTY.

        Like


      • Boobs are there to attract men. They are the human equivalent of a peacock’s tail. Men are attracted to women with larger breasts therefore breasts got larger. Large breasts are mostly fat, not milk glands and storage tank.

        Female Chimps and Gorillas are quite flat chested and still nurse babies just fine. Flat chested women have no problem nursing. Their breasts swell up a bit when nursing but not much.

        Like


      • OG,

        You’re right it doesn’t matter the size of a woman’s breast b/c she will still be able to breastfeed – but women’s breasts *are* primarily for breastfeeding children.

        You said:
        “Men are attracted to women with larger breasts therefore breasts got larger. ”

        Hmm. But not all men are attracted to large breasts. And some don’t care one way or another if they are large or small. Therefore, I’m not so sure that some breasts are larger simply to attract males. I think some breasts are larger b/c of diets. In certain cultures where there is a fat enriched diet I would believe over time the females would develop larger breasts vs. ones that have a more lean less fatty diet. Also, hormones in foods today are causing young women to develop very large breasts early before they hit puberty.

        Like


      • @Neecy
        “But not all men are attracted to large breasts. And some don’t care one way or another if they are large or small.”

        That is all it takes. Having some men prefer larger breasts gives women with larger breasts a reproductive advantage. And I don’t believe it is just a few, but rather most men prefer larger breasts up to a point, with the optimum size for maximizing mating potential with most guys being in the B – DD cup range where most young women fall. Even a B cup is larger than needed for baby feeding.

        Look at your own picture, if that is you. You are wearing an outfit that emphasizes your breasts. And you chose that image for your avatar. If you didn’t think your breasts give you an advantage, you wouldn’t display them so prominently. I am old enough to know that women never look the way they do by accident. Women seldom wear clothes that draw attention to a large stomach.

        Note: You cannot tell the sex of adult Chimpanzees by looking at their chests, but you can with most humans.

        There are two types of evolutionary advantages, survival and sexual. A sexual advantage increases your chances of having offspring as opposed to making it easier to eat or making you less likely to be eaten. Humans and our ancestors have been at the top of the food chain for a very long time. We didn’t need to evolve to eat or avoid being eaten. We evolved to out compete each other in sexual competition. We have a dual selection process where in addition to the typical arrangement of females selecting males, desirable men are picky about which women they will mate with, so both sexes have had to evolve to be what the other prefers.

        Fat in the diet doesn’t make men grow breasts unless they are super fat. Native people living the traditional lifestyle are seldom fat. Fatness is an artifact of food surpluses and idleness that only rich industrial cultures have. Our physical form was set long before that.

        And yes, hormones in food affect our physical development. That is a coming crisis in the world. We need the chemicals to make enough food to feed this many, but the chemicals are dangerous to our long term survival. How that will be resolved is anybodies guess. But women had boobs that were larger than needed for feeding babies when using compost was high tech farming.

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 4:35 am Betadyermom

        It’s the size more than the shape. There’s an obvious, and instinctual difference between a perky fertile teenager and a 30-year-old who’s had a couple kids. The size just helps advertise.

        Of course, that is why we have brassieres. (Looking at your profile pic and imagining the spool of industrial-strength wire under there.)

        Like


      • “Boobs are there to attract men. They are the human equivalent of a peacock’s tail. “

        If you wanted to go along with Desmond Morris, you could say that they (boobs) evolved in mimicry of buttocks, as a secondary sexual attractor when the Naked Ape switched to frontal copulation.

        Like


    • @Anonymous
      “Evolutionarily speaking sex is pointless if not for children.
      Sex is to make children.”

      Not completely true. Sex binds males and females together. It is a characteristic of the great apes to have sex for social reasons in addition to procreation. This would not be a part of our behavior unless it conferred a survival advantage.

      Like


  14. “Single momhood is the scourge of civilization, and everywhere you look in the world where single moms rule, you see decay, violence and backwardness. Any government policy that weakens the primacy of the nuclear family is anti-civilization, and thus evil.”

    There was a Black woman who initiated a “no wedding, no womb” campaign for Black American women to start taking note that if they are not married or in LTR’s with stable men, they should avoid having children out of wedlock. Or at least start taking birth control.

    Boy o Boy did the White feminists, liberals and Black female idiots come out in full force attacking this woman. Saying that women can do the job alone (raising kids) and stable family units are not needed for kids to grow up well adjusted and healthy. SMH. I was very shocked at how the feminists would disagree with this notion, and uphold and support women(mostly poor and whom would be draining gov’t $$$ for these kids) bearing children without fathers being present. It’s a drain on the economy, neighborhood and gov’t dollars. Not to mention takes a terrible emotional toll on a child who does not have a father present. There is scientific data that supports the important role of the father in any child’s life.

    Like


    • on July 23, 2011 at 5:06 pm Good Luck Chuck

      How dare we question the ability of a single woman to provide an adequate upbringing for her bastard children? It’s all about HER.

      This is what feminism and liberalism is based on. They love to run up the bill as long as someone else picks up the tab.

      Like


      • Bastard be late with child support, I need some Lee nails! Really, Good Luck Chuck, you have broken the code on liberal/feminist thought: paying/responsibility is for other people, never one’s self.

        Like


      • This is why I simply cannot get with modern day feminism. Its literally encouraging women to destroy the traditional family unit that IMO helps for a better more stable society. Add in that its very self centered around “certain” women. They don’t care about these poor women having baby after baby and the drain it is on the mothers, the children, society and the gov’t. All they see is their world and everyone is supposed to fit in it.

        Like


      • Like Kelly Mac said in her critical article “Infidelity: Being Unfaithful Makes Me Happy”:

        “These women lie to themselves, they lie to their families, and they’re lying to us. Or maybe I’m being too charitable, and they aren’t lying to themselves at all, but just telling themselves something to make themselves feeeeeel better and have orgasms without all the effort of making a connection with another human being. Like their husbands. Their selfishness speaks for itself.”

        http://www.blogher.com/infidelity-being-unfaithful-makes-me-happy?page=full

        Like


      • Well that’s the world we live in today. Those are the women who get lucky enough to find good husbands to marry them, then they turn around and take it for granted all in the name of sex. People don’t want to do anything that requires work to improve what they are missing in their relationships. Some women truly want to be and act like men – like the author said, when women start thinking this way, we’re doomed.

        Like


      • @ ANON below me. i just want you to know i did see your comment and responded to you twice but for some reason i think that reply link is screwed up. maybe the post will show up later.

        Like


      • It’s called “socialism” which is the bastard offspring of Karl Marx. Hillary Clintoris is a huge proponent, as she points out in her book, “It Takes a Village.” Single moms, day care, disposable dads.

        There is no greater enemy to the nuclear family in the West than the fucking left wing.

        Like


    • No wedding, no womb, no problem.
      Shut up & bend over.

      Like


  15. hey roissy, how do u explain this:

    http://avoiceformen.com/2011/07/23/amazing-atheist-weighs-in-on-the-talk/comment-page-1/#comment-59504

    Fathers make better parents.
    Repeat that mantra every chance you get(and everywhere, news comments, blog or e-zine comments or just on the street). Sure there are some bad dad;s and some good moms but, that doesn’t change the fact that using logic in your choices on how to deal with children is a superior method of child-rearing.

    if women are better childrearers, why are single dads and gay parents so much better than single moms?!?!

    Like


    • “Single moms” — You’re self-selecting women who are bad parents: They put themselves above their children. Compare single moms to, say, widows.

      Like


  16. how many strippers, porn stars, other sex workers grew up in a nuclear family? how many people sitting in jail grew up in one? single moms ruin society. there is no other way to say it.

    Like


  17. #1 really should be #1-10^1000. Everything stems therefrom.

    Like


  18. on July 23, 2011 at 5:18 pm John Norman Howard

    As for “men going their own way”: it’s almost a malapropism it’s so utterly inconceivable.

    I don’t avoid the company of women… but I do deny them my essence.

    Like


  19. Polygamy should also be legalized. And if you’re worried that it will become a free for all, I can’t imagined it would. There aren’t that many women out there who want many children from many different fathers. there are however, many women who are willing to share a husband if he’s fucking man enough.

    It would work itself out. Only faggot pussies would want to share a woman, and the women who want to be mothers don’t want faggot pussies.

    Like


  20. Outstanding article. Point 8 will be back when wone get a good dose of MGTOW. But it won’t be like in the good ole days. That bitch is going to get old working pumped and dumped childless and never married and best of all not entitled to any man’s labor either directly or from the government. That is the MGTOW I’m talking about.
    Game is the key to making it happen. Knowing women and how they are, and the reliable beta male all ofthe points will fall in line.

    Like


  21. The nuclear family is just a weakened form of the tribal unit. A family living in a box does not socialize children as well as a group of 25-45 people of varying ages. It’s the lowest common denominator of optimal child rearing.

    Like


    • on July 23, 2011 at 10:35 pm Rogue Element

      That is correct. And if the father is not present, the child’s uncles (and great-uncles) fill the role. Large extended families are the best way to socialize children. For most of human history people lived in extended families. The nuclear family is a relatively recent invention. It is a false dichotomy to assume the only two choices are the nuclear family and single motherhood. OneSTDV is wrong as usual.

      Like


      • I wouldn’t call him wrong. The extended family is itself dependent on the nuclear family. (After all, from where does it extend from?) The atomized nuclear family is the recent innovation. The nuclear family has been around since time immemorial.

        Like


    • This is an insight that will be loudly ignored by the lifetime monogamy crowd.

      Like


  22. I have a disagreement with number two. Women are only more useful than prostitutes if they allow men some access to family life and the law acknowledges the importance of fathers. The harm that getting women out of the home has caused the economy, the family and the educational institutions in this country cannot be overstated.

    Like


  23. roissy, you have heard it time and time again, but you are a solid writer. as someone who has read the greats and has worked with many other writers, i feel i am equipped to give praise on this subject. i know you have no english or creative writing degree which confirms my own belief that to be a great writer you must write and read, and save your money on useless degrees. carry on.

    Like


  24. “The nuclear family is just a weakened form of the tribal unit. A family living in a box does not socialize children as well as a group of 25-45 people of varying ages. It’s the lowest common denominator of optimal child rearing.”

    Explain every single point as well as every single implication.

    Like


  25. on July 23, 2011 at 5:53 pm My Name Is Jim

    Long Live the Patriarchy!

    Like


  26. I do agree that a lot of MRAs are whiners. For one thing, for all their ‘activism’, feminists never worry about getting in trouble with MRAs for saying something misandric on national TV.

    So MRAs are not really a pressure group if no feminist or mangina is afraid of being held to account by MRAs.

    Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 1:33 am Good Luck Chuck

      It’s pretty hard to hold anyone accountable when the vast majority of society is on the opposing side.

      When the shit hits the fan and everyone has to wake up to the cold hard reality that feminism fucked everything up, then people will start to listen. Until then about all you can do is grumble about it, enjoy some cheap sex with women who don’t deserve more, and plan to exit this cesspool as soon as possible.

      Like


    • MRA seems to be mostly an internet circlejerk which is self-contained in their own little corner of the blogsphere. There doesn’t seem to be whole lot of “advocacy” going on — there’s no organization, no spokesmen, no media talking points, very few allies in academia, etc.

      Seems like a lot of MRAs use it as a form of therapy. So, yeah, they come off as whiners — a lot of complaining and not a whole lot of action.

      Like


      • a lot of complaining and not a whole lot of action.

        This is the center of it.

        MRAs want to fix the problem. So they talk about what the problem is. Never realizing that social problems don’t have social causes – they have technical causes. Human culture is embedded in the modes of production and other tehnological facets that now make up how it functions.

        MRAs can not even see the causes, let alone agree on what effects they’d like to see.

        PUAs don’t have to know what the causes are, they are clear what effect they want, and they work towards that. It’s very personal, and achievable, on an individual level.

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 4:24 am Betadyermom

        They’re just a useless lot. Back in the 1980s, radfems sat down with the social conservatives in the Reagan administration and created a policy argument to ban pornography. Meanwhile, MRAs try to ally with other fringe groups like white supremacists, which is akin to loudly proclaiming your own irrelevancy. Its not just causes & effects, they have no clue how the game is played, and have surrendered before it even started.

        Which is too bad, because I think there if there was a sane, policy-oriented movement to reform the divorce and child support laws, it might have a shot within 10 years or so.

        Like


      • @Betadyermom:

        What is the source of your knowledge about “MRAs”?

        I’m acquainted with some of the main players in that sector, and I can assure you that nary of a one of them has any affiliation with white supremacists. But since you’re so smart, maybe you can tell me something I don’t know. Answer, please. Or else STFU.

        Like


      • Sure, the guy at inmalafide.com (or is that white nationalism, I can’t recall). And all of the more banal takes on HBD which seem to encircle the MRA-o-sphere.

        Regardless of one’s opinion on this stuff, it is incredibly fringe and toxic to the mainstream political spectrum. Not to mention entirely useless, if the goal is to change the parameters of family law.

        Like


      • “MRAs can not even see the causes, let alone agree on what effects they’d like to see..”

        I happen to disagree. I’ve met quite a few “MRAs” who seem to have an excellent grasp on what the problem is.

        But perhaps you can explain yourself more fully? Awaiting your reply.

        Like


      • Should I just repeat my post that you quoted in full? Did you see mention of technology in there?

        MRA attribute social effects to social causes. I’ve never seen them attribute social effects to technological causes, nor have I seen them admit that you can’t change the social effects of technology without changing technology.

        MRAs thing society is socially created. One big social construct.

        Like


      • MRA seems to be mostly an internet circlejerk which is self-contained in their own little corner of the blogsphere. There doesn’t seem to be whole lot of “advocacy” going on — there’s no organization, no spokesmen, no media talking points, very few allies in academia, etc.

        This. Everyone agrees that their goals are the right ones, but no one has much confidence that they are taking tangible actions towards these goals.

        The instances of ‘activism’ are few and far between.

        This is why PUAs and MRAs don’t get along even thought they naturally should. PUAs are results-oriented, and MRAs just don’t seem to be.

        Like


  27. Once you have kids, would you want to accept that fatherhood isn’t as rewarding as you thought it should be? Of course not. What father would admit that those early years of crapping, vomiting, screaming, crying, babbling ingrate tantrums were really a hell on earth he’d have rather spent playing poker with his buddies?

    IIRC, Bryand Caplan dug up a study showing that parenting for most people in an intact relationship does bring a slight boost in happiness. It is the single parents that drag down the happiness numbers for parents. Which isn’t surprising. Being a single parent sucks.

    Parenting isn’t for everybody, but it isn’t the buzzkill it’s sometimes made out to be.

    Like


    • Yes, but if you are comparing life satisfaction of a parent in a two parent household to a cubicle drone, and coming out slightly ahead, that doesn’t inform if life as a self employed PUA would be more fulfilling.

      Like


  28. For good and for bad, we’re going to go back to traditionalism anyway:
    http://fora.tv/2010/09/05/Eric_Kaufmann_Shall_the_Religious_Inherit_the_Earth

    Like


  29. Beta males are going extinct

    No, they’re not. Alphas (HMV) are banging a lot, but they’re not having many children. There is some concern about an increase in fertility among lower class alphas (HMV), but beta males are still ahead.

    Like


  30. on July 23, 2011 at 6:31 pm traditional girl

    I like what OneSTDV has to say. I also note that many of his statements function as a guide for the individual to maximizing his utility/pleasure. Like, well, most of the glorious content on this site. To wit:

    “4) Marriage has risks, but sometimes they’re very much worth it.”

    Worth it?

    In any one moment marriage may not be “worth it” to a given individual, male or female. Not all of us are awakened to the transcendent pleasures of a life of virtue.

    But when we favor superficial individual utility over tradition, those who choose what they believe in the moment to be the path to greatest personal good may be surprised when they eventually look out their windows to find… the collapse of civilization.

    When you’re stuck under a pile of rubble with marauding hordes approaching, all that supposedly maximized utility won’t mean a thing.

    For me, the traditional appeals because it is traditional, not because it seems to be good. Traditional values have — by their very characterization as such — survived.

    Like


  31. Those who breed will inherit the Earth and the breeders who most successfully protect what they have claimed will hold onto it for the longest.

    The ways in which they achieve this and what happens after they do should be obvious to you all by now.

    This has all happened before and it will all happen again. In this world and others, for every single particle.

    Like


  32. on July 23, 2011 at 6:39 pm commenter99

    This blog sucks now. Get off the reactionary politics and stick to pussy

    Like


  33. Sounds like Roissy wants some kiddo’s 😛

    While this is a blog about game I respect you Roissy and the active commenters (many of which are almost as entertaining and occasionally moreso) to understand that you’ve misclassified and villainized a component of the superorganism of society (beta males) by proxy of the response women have while interacting with them.

    This in itself is the root of the problem. The key component of each expressed beta behavior is it’s a warning, it’s not an action. It protects emotion instead of illiciting it. And THAT’s not even the point.

    I have faith that you guys will come to a valuable solution, here’s some of my thoughts on that:

    Think birth control (you have), but what part of the a womans cycle does that leave her in? What does she go seek out rationally because of this? Beta males. What does she actually want to ride 2/3’s of the month? The alpha cock carousel. That’s one side of the coin.

    What does infinite access to porn, and eventually sexbots create? Satisfied (and thus FULLY enslaved) beta males.

    If think about these things without making it wrong you can see there are two core behaviors that need to be expressed to lead a more consistently happy life with more fulfillment:

    It needs to be okay for guys to beta out sometimes

    It needs to be okay for girls to slut it up sometimes

    It’s also possible that people just WANT IT TO BE BAD so they feel a different type of emotion while doing these things.

    The nuclear family is just an outmoded learning mechanic. I learned more from video games, living on the street, stealing to eat, and hacking websites then I did from any outdated lesson any of the families I grew up with gave. I am not saying its sucks, I am just saying theres something better on the horizon were all gonna have to adjust to.

    Like


    • Your two points of “okay for guys to beta out sometimes” and “okay for girls to slut it up sometimes” are both right and wrong.

      The whole point of marriage was to provide avenues for these two things to happen WITHOUT damaging society as a whole. Saving sex for marriage allowed a girl to “slut it up” with her husband in a safe environment. Letting guys “beta out” with their wife provided them the ability to relax WITHOUT abdicating their responsibilities.

      The problem right now is that modern society encourages women to slut it up all the time. This leads to many children out of wed lock with a mother that is not only unfit for parenthood, but also doesn’t have the resources to raise them. Men are told to get in touch with their “Feminine” sides (which is essentially what being Beta is), so they wide up being Beta all. The. Time. Men then begin to get apathetic and depressed since no man is intended to act like a woman. The result is we have lots of men that tune out and devote all their time to ultimately useless pursuits (racking up their pussy count, video games, developing an encyclopedic knowledge of the exploits of Wolverine, etc). Nothing gets built or invented. The result is that civilization starts to crumble and implode.

      Notice how sixty years ago, before the current Feminist bullshit started, the US had a space program that put men on the moon. The auto industry was without peer. Manufacturing was in full production. Technology was being improved by leaps and bounds. The economy was booming. All of this was because men were working. That’s what a family is supposed to do. It provides a framework to motivate men to produce. It gives them a reason to change the world.

      Fast forward to now. Now we have the nuclear family shattered, lots of poverty stricken single mothers with delinquent kids, fathers that are not involved in their children’s lives, men that don’t build or create, etc. Notice how the economy is now decimated, the space program shut down, the auto industry is a shell of its former self, little to no manufacturing, etc. This is not an accident.

      The nuclear family is not an outmoded relic. It is the cornerstone of Western (and an argument could be made for every advanced) civilization. That you learned more from video games, theft, living on the streets and computer hacking rather than your parents/family is terrifying. I don’t know you so I have no idea what your life is like. Maybe you took away good lessons from your upbringing, but most people won’t. They’ll learn that pimping (or whoring), drugs, guns, etc. are the only way of life available to them. That will lead to violence, gang warfare and general chaos.

      When traditional marriage and the nuclear family disappear, civilization is not far behind. The template for a successful society has always been the same. It has been through all the great societies from ancient Rome to the United States until about sixty years ago. I’m not entirely sure why people are suddenly believing that we know something that those that went before us didn’t. The traditional ways WORK. I honestly don’t understand why people can’t figure that out.

      This shit tore Rome apart, it’ll do the same to us.

      Like


      • Matt said: “When traditional marriage and the nuclear family disappear, civilization is not far behind. The template for a successful society has always been the same. It has been through all the great societies from ancient Rome to the United States until about sixty years ago. I’m not entirely sure why people are suddenly believing that we know something that those that went before us didn’t. The traditional ways WORK. I honestly don’t understand why people can’t figure that out.”

        He’s right. With all our time taken up by mate guarding/poaching and pumping/dumping, how the f*ck can we plan for the future and otherwise do anything constructive? We can’t. Period. Ghetto riffraff can play this all day because they don’t have a job, anyone to support or anything to work-for in the future. A bunch of trolls taking what they want, women gravitating to the most obnoxious of them at the time and begatting unsupported children… why work when you can just take what you want and get sex from appreciative women? We can’t sustain anything we have like that,

        Like


      • Yes Matt’s awesome he always brings the real 🙂

        Anon,

        And that is what’s scarey about where we are going – when dominant culture starts talking this way. I can tell you as a Black woman that sees this lifestyle ruining Black communities, families, and seeing the pure trash, violence, lack of common decency and respect for people and life in general that has become common in this areas, that the dominant culture does NOT want to follow this structure and way of doing. You have a perfect example right before your eyes of what happens when there is a complete disregard for traditional structured families. The society will be a bigger picture of the smaller sub cultures/communities who have suffered b/c of this lack of understanding.

        Like


  34. Roissy:
    “And then it all goes to shit once again when they hit adolescence.”

    this is mostly because of the schools’ social environment (high school is the most useless and retarded place you’ll spend years of your life in) and the fact that most fathers these days are beta males.

    When I was in school I couldn’t stand my father because he was in some sort of approval seeking mode with his sons. It irritated me on a subconscious level, sort of like a woman who has to suffer the presence of a submissive man.

    Had he simply been more confident and less submissive to the system and the school and to my mother I wouldn’t have been a typical unpleasant stressed out frustrated teenager.

    Like


  35. “Not that it will make a lick of difference. The gears slicked with the sweat and blood of obedient middle class beta fodder have already been set in motion, and the machine demands tribute. Trying to stop and reverse the gluttony of its belching maw is a fool’s errand. There is but one tried-and-true solution: nuke the beast from orbit.”

    Almost sounded like it was written by the old Roissy…

    Like


  36. on July 23, 2011 at 7:25 pm Mr.Banana'z

    Beta males will put nuclear families back on the map with the point of a gun. It’s a myth that beta males are wimps. They are wimps when it comes to women but they have no problem killing other men, especially alphas who steal all the women. Death and violence is all that follows when beta males are denied access to women. Beta males made tools such as guns, bow and arrows and other efficient weapons to put alphas in their place. Betas are the ones who made the nuclear family because they saw the destruction and death that follows when you let women chase alphas. Not that the beta males of the past were angels, they did it mainly for the pussy of course. But I’m sure they realized only 2 scenarios can happen. You force women and men to create a family together and have a prosperous society, or you let women fuck alphas each night and have a violent hell hole.

    The way I see it is that the balance has been disturbed. Too many alphas are being born from single mothers. I dont care what anyone says, a good civilization cannot be sustained when there are too many alphas. Alphas don’t settle and have nuclear families, they just make alpha thugs. These alpha thugs then kill each other and cause the crime rate to skyrocket. How can any society be sustained when there are males killing each other every night?

    Even if beta males do nothing and this society falls, the alphas will kill each other and put back the natural order of things. Lots of betas and a few alphas.

    Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 8:32 am more than 100 less than 1000

      nice comment

      Alpha could evolve – towards making the entire environment better…and there would be levels of alpha

      a king in a swamp ..still lives in a swamp..and a man who eats and makes love regularly – looks at things differently than those who dont..but he has to socialize with those who dont …

      you eventually get an intelligent alpha Kublai Khan for example ..surrounded by other lesser alphas..but being guided by a higher code..

      just some thoughts

      Like


    • Anyone who uses the term “alpha thug” to denote most alphas is not worth reading.

      Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 7:27 pm Mr.Banana'z

        I did not use alpha thug to denote most alphas. But when a alpha has a child with a low class single mother what do you think is born? Or are you one of those people who refuse to believe a thug can be alpha? That a leader of a prison gang is just a angry beta at best? The prison system is packed with alphas who refused to bow down to societies laws. Alpha comes in all shapes and sizes, and most alphas being born today are good for nothing thugs. I notice there’s a certain hesitancy to accept that criminals can be alphas. But that’s the way it is. Theres rich alphas, poor alphas, kind alphas, etc. Get over it.

        Like


      • I did not use alpha thug to denote most alphas.

        …and most alphas being born today are good for nothing thugs.

        As I said, not worth reading.

        Like


      • “But that’s the way it is. Theres rich alphas, poor alphas, kind alphas, etc.”

        “Alphas don’t settle and have nuclear families, they just make alpha thugs.”

        Try again.

        Like


      • …and most alphas being born today are good for nothing thugs.

        Rubbish. You confuse natural tendencies with culturally induced behavioral patterns.

        Like


      • You are confusing black ghetto thugs with alphas. They only seem like alphas in the confines of their tiny little worlds. In the wider social context, they are omegas, because they are economically and socially impotent. Everything they have, from their homes to their cars to their food, is only there because we allow them to have it (by not locking them up for their crimes, or by giving them welfare). They can bang ghetto wildebeests all day long, but do any of these guys get with hot 9s and 10s? naw.

        Real alphas are CEOs, political leaders, rock stars, entrepreneurs, philosophers, and craftsmen. Or at least that’s the message I think we should focus on with the younger generation of men.

        Like


  37. Artem,

    “I do agree that a lot of MRAs are whiners. For one thing, for all their ‘activism’, feminists never worry about getting in trouble with MRAs for saying something misandric on national TV.”

    Interesting that you say this. Sharon Osbourne has just taken a hiatus from The Talk.

    In the words of Angry Harry – we groweth

    Like


    • @Snark:

      That is the first I have heard about Sharon Osbourne taking a hiatus from
      ‘The Talk’. Score one for the (MRA/activated non-feminist) side.

      Like


  38. As for point #1, there’s also the Idiocracy question for society that this blog has touched on, why be a science geek if it’s a pathway to unwanted celebacy as the bitches line up for non-productive studs. Nuclear families reward men for their work, benefiting society.

    For point #2, it seems sad that a lot of girls these days are cashing in their hottest decade to be profit on their looks instead of focusing on point #1. Marriage would seem to reward a hottie more than the story of the Hog’s n Heifers redhead’s days of shaking her ass on a bar.

    Like


  39. The value of children is that your DNA is getting propagated. I doubt that enjoying parenthood is rationalizing after the fact, despite the objective unpleasantness of having to care for a hairless animal that shits on itself. Humans instinctually care about their children and derive pleasure from seeing them mature, we didn’t evolve to fire and forget like reptiles. Of course if your wife can get a hot beef injection from Eduardo the pool boy and then get the government to refuse you a paternity test, I lean more towards the Jonathan Swift school of dealing with infants.

    Like


  40. “If you are not planning to have kids, marriage is a raw deal no matter how you slice it.”

    I’ve come around to this point of view. I’m a winner in the marriage lottery, if you wil, but I now consider such level of legal commitment sans children to be pointless.

    “A “return” to an Islamic-like patriarchy would be a disaster for the West, not to mention a disaster for my dating life”

    Forget Islamic; how bout Catholic, Victorian or Amish? nevertheless I take a contrarian view on this. Libertine societies like ours vulgarize women to the point they’re jaded, unappealing, shaved-cunt, tattooed slut. Girls in traditional societies are more open to charming stealth rouge Game, and fucking them is more rewarding.

    Like


  41. I hate everything about PUA, but this is why I love your blog, Roissy — posts like this one. You yourself realize that PUAism and the way women are these days is bad for society at large.

    The nuclear family is the bedrock of civilization — the nuclear family based on monogamy.

    I don’t want to use the word patriarchy though — patriarchy sounds to me more like polygamy, with patriarchs with many wives ruling like tribal chiefs.

    Monogamy, gentlemanliness, romance — these were things that helped western civilization to succeed beyond any other civilization. And as much as feminists like to condemn dead-white-male “patriarcy”, western civilization built a society in which women were more respected and honored than anywhere else.

    Like


    • I don’t think anyone here is arguing against any of your points. The question is what to do about the current state of affairs. Continue to be ground up in the blades of the machine, in service to some higher ideal that the other side no longer honors, or start taking back your own life for the short time you remain on this earth?

      Like


  42. Being a father has its good days and bad days. It is a complex game to play well, and a very expensive hobby. It can become a horror show for the unwilling forced to play. I advise young men to be careful where they plant their seed.

    I only discovered the MRM in the last few months, though I have realized the need for men’s liberation for a long time. Unfortunately, the least marketable types seem to be the face of the movement; the whiny bitch MGTOWs and the woman haters. I love women, I am just sick of their current behavior and political bent. I do not want to foreswear or enslave women or return to Victorian patriarchy any more than I want the West to continue upon its current path. Women have escaped the constraints of the old marriage bargain while leaving men stuck with their ancient roles and responsibilities. It is time to achieve a new balance. The law and government agencies have to be moved from being pro women to neutral in all male – female disputes. That alone would do much to improve our culture. From there society should be allowed to evolve as it may.

    Monogamy was created by dominant females and beta males to get rid of harems. The dominant females wanted the dominant men themselves and did not like being replaced by new younger women as they aged. The beta males hated the fact they they were defacto eunuchs while the guys at the top had herds of pussy. Marriage empowered the vast majority of women compared to the harem system. Marriage got the Beta Herbs laid for the first time in history. The Feminists and Progressives seem to miss this point. If they destroy monogamy, the natural order will reassert itself. It already has in the ghetto, where I’d bet on long odds that a small fraction of the males, the large dominant ones, are fathering the vast majority of the illegitimate children. I.E., they have virtual harems now.

    Like


  43. PA,
    CR did say the US had it right for 200 years before the whole thing began to unravel. I guess things were pretty good until about 1976 in his opinion.

    Like


  44. “5. Post hoc rationalization”

    It’s impossible to get how rewarding fatherhood is until you have a son. Playing with your nephew is nice but it comes nowhere near it.

    Like


    • It’s also impossible to get how rewarding it is to be 40 and not tied down with a wife, an ex-wife, a kid, or any support payments, unless you are living it.

      Like


  45. “Girls in traditional societies are more open to charming stealth rouge Game”

    Probably why so many women enjoy reading novels and watching movies about past times. They just seem more romantic.

    Like


  46. “After a certain age —say, 9 or so —when kids become old enough…”

    You’re looking at this way too rationally. With respect, like a virgin turning up his nose at the ridiculous mechanism of copulation. When you see a baby, a toddler, or a little boy who looks like you and in whom you recognize your own quirks and qualities, and you know you’re the most important human being in his life and understand your responsibility to guide him into life, and he thinks you’re a superhero… the word “rewarding” is inadequate.

    Like


  47. Heartiste, as an alpha, is missing some of the context of MGTOW.

    If someone is 21 and MGTOWing, his point stands.

    But a lot of men go through their 20s unaware of game working crap jobs while getting no attention from women. But by the time they hit their 30s, things frequently change. Women in their age group — older, uglier, fatter — because they no longer command the attention of dandies and thugs, start swarming the previously ignored men. But such men are not only of increased financial stature by this time, but also have enough life experience where they can see the miserable fate of their married friends. Love no longer looks magical, but as something risky and mercenary. Even the beauty of youth looks fleeting.

    Society frequently pressures betas to marry such worthless people, for Teh Commen Good or something. MGTOW is like, “Uh, thanks for hitting on me old slutty Miss Walrus, but no thanks.” It’s not a monkish act of self-abnegation. It is exactly what it says it is — going your own way.

    Like


    • Right on dude and I think he is just looking at MGTOW from the perspecitve of a young man. So of course it doesn’t make any sense to him but when you get older and the question gets directed at you a million times, “why aren’t you married?” The expectation is why haven’t you married one of these used up old sluts so she can retire from her grinding career at your expense.

      You see it for the scam that it is. Ex party girls that gave it up for the whole football team but then later in life suddenly expects to be Queen of your castle with nothing left to offer but liabilities. That is when going your own way starts to make more sense.

      I don’t see PUAs, MRAs or MGTOW as any one group superior to the other. I think it is just a natural progression for most men to start out PUA, become an MRA when he notices how biased the system is against men, then finally realizes Going His Own Way maybe the saner route for himself later in life.

      Look the bottom line is that no man puts up with the same crap in his 40s or 50s that he did in his 20s or 30s and you young guys will say the same thing when you get there too.

      Like


      • Exactly! There are more young men like me in their 20’s that are going their own way because we learn from the mistakes of our elders.

        The best thing about life is that experiences are ABUNDANT! You don’t need to get married, buy a home, work for 30 years, get divorced or do anything yourself; Just listen and talk to older men who lived and breathed these exact same experiences.

        Older men are our greatest resources because they have been their and done that.

        MGTOW is about Freedom and self expression. Working 40+ years in a 9 to 5 is old news. Getting married is overrated. It’s about opening your eyes and realizing that CHANGE is inevitable. Therefore you must CREATE YOUR OWN LIFE rather than accepting the life society wants you to have.

        Yes, American society has changed. Yes, American women are a pain in the ass. Yes, Old used up sluts expect the men they ignored 10 years past to BUY them. The question is: What are you going to do with your life now?

        Get a passport and I guarantee you will never be the same.

        ASIA, Africa, South America – Everything is abundant. Great food. Hot women. Sun all year round. Affordable living. Rich culture. Recreational drugs (if you use them). Taxis. Wives. Language Lessons. Health Care. You name it. Everything is accessible to the average man in foreign countries. Most western men (due to higher wages) will live like a king.

        Carve your life out of dreams. If you’re a 26/36/46/55/66 year old man who wants a hot 25 year old GF while you play golf, sip Coconut juice all day, and smoke cigars. You can do it.

        Your only limit in life is your MIND!

        Like


  48. Elmer writes :

    Women are competing for jobs but are not creating them.

    Other than providing a mass market for their vanity products, they are not forging new industries or technologies.

    They are marginalizing that small percentage of men who passionately innovate, destroy, and create ideas and take the risks to drive them to actualization

    Though men shank me and insult me, only men provide me with opportunity.

    Women can only insult me and deprive me of opportunity.

    Only men, and only a small fraction of them, take the risks that create industry and opportunity.

    Women can only serve as mere functionaries in man-created structures.

    When an organization becomes feminized, priority shifts from efficient and profitable production of goods and services to development of labarynthine rules for the comfort and security of women.

    Ossification and organizational death are inevitable

    Like


  49. […] I have been accused of “whining” a lot.  What I’m doing is not “whining”, but speaking truth to power.  Anytime someone speaks truth to power, the first defense is to accuse that person of “whining”.  With Mens Rights, the accusation used to deflect the real issues is about not getting laid.  (Even Roissy has sort of admitted this is the case.) […]

    Like


  50. on July 23, 2011 at 9:20 pm Rogue Element

    OneSTDV is the ultimate nerd/dork/geek/dweeb/herb/etc. He is incapable of learning game, and doesn’t want other men to use game. His babblings are an attempt to convince men to abandon game and wallow in herbitude. He is an *OMEGA*. He wants all other men to be omegas too, because only then would he have any chance of getting laid. If you follow his advice you will never get laid. Anyone who takes him seriously is as omega as he is.

    Like


    • I get that feeling as well. I do think he’s a good writer when it comes to race/liberalism though.

      Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 12:00 am Rogue Element

        Yeah, that’s a pattern I’ve noticed. Writers who are realistic about race are frequently unrealistic about sex. They take tough stands on racial issues but put the women of their own race on a pedestal and act like supplicating betas. They don’t seem to realize that they are weakening their race by encouraging the princess/entitlement complexes of the women. Nor do they seem to realize that their white-knighting plays into the hands of the feminists and thus advances many leftist goals. Women are adept at manipulating those guys.

        Like


    • Rogue: “OneSTDV is the ultimate nerd/dork/geek/dweeb/herb/etc.”

      nah, the crazy Norwegian Templar who killed 90 people is much worst than him. At least OneSTDV’s manifesto isn’t 1,500 pages long and he doesn’t play World of Warcraft

      Like


      • One may disagree with the methodology, but Breivik wiped out nearly one sixth of socialist nomenclatura’s offspring. He identified his enemy, and targeted the weakest spot.–its future.

        In that sense, he was not as crazy as it may seem to a cursory observer.

        Like


  51. I for one wouldn’t believe or even think that patriarchy is one it’s way back envouge, I prefer to be real about the future of men’s roles/opportunities within this ever so rapidily degenerate western civilization. MEN NEED TO LEARN GAME, from emotional mastery,social dynamics, and basic human understanding,to mastering a skill/trade, and know how to manage one’s finances to aquire more resources. Having a firm understanding of these aspects on a man’s life will build prudence within a man; allowing his rational/logical mind to foresee unbeneficial situations and aviod useless people. Once men realize that pussy is as plentiful as oxygen and water, yet no where as essential as these elements; legions of men will undoubdtedly come to the conclusion that sex as recreation is POINTLESS, men will pursue more worthy endeavours that will enhance civilization. I believe that once the vag-veil has been lifted from over men’s eyes it wil usher forth the dawn of a great testicular-awakening; subsequently we will see a large demographic of women in the west begin to qualify themselves to men of substance,in terms of usefullness/efficiency in raising a family, and not just in terms of sexual value and financial networth. The image of the “empowered female”(which we know as code-words for “hoe”,”sluts”disquised as career women), or any other fallacious label that women have blindly given themselves over to, will within a few decades be viewed with repulsion/contempt. As women come to the realization that they can not portray themselves as sex objects/cum receptors and hope to be taken seriously for LTR’S. Even now there are millions of women lamenting on how they have wasted precious years chasing after corporate prestigue or the false idol of diva-hood. If we want to see any positive change in society we have to be that change, and it all starts and ends with GAME.

    Like


  52. Large levels of illegitimacy indicate a father shortage, which indicates that the marriage terms are too unfavorable to men to equalize supply and demand. The last time supply and demand was reasonably equal was 1830 or so, at which time marriage was severely and radically unequal in favor of men, and to the disfavor of women, marriage being a contract in which a women irreversibly gave up extensive rights over herself, her property, and her own body to a husband, in return for his irreversible commitment to support her and his children by her.

    The natural state, absent contract, is that a woman can abort, or give up children, and the father, similarly, has no obligation to support his children or their mothers. Couples can leave this natural state only by formally witnessed contract, that is to say marriage, which contract has to have terms that reflect supply and demand.

    Such a contract, to equalize supply and demand for fathers, cannot treat men and women as interchangeable, it must give men terms that are nearly the opposite of the terms it gives women – the woman must commit to lover, honor, and obey.

    Like


  53. in the past, a woman who was physically attractive and sexually forward was a prostitute and a courtier at best. she was viewed with a mixture of pity and contempt within society. no normal woman wanted to be her, or be like her. this is the first time in history where “normal women” want to be her, and even worse way past the time that they even have the ability to be her; ie past 30; sad.

    Like


    • This isn’t the first time in history. Do you imagine the United States is the first civilization? Do you imagine Rome, with it’s 2000 years of history, didn’t try everything we’ve tried in the 200 years we’ve been around? It’s all been done and there’s nothing new under the sun.

      Like


  54. on July 23, 2011 at 10:25 pm Malcolm Tucker

    Should in one hand and shit in the other. Then tell me which one fills up first.

    I live in reality, not Shouldsburgh: population you. Fucking deal with it or prepare for a lifetime of disappointment followed by a return to the uncaring nitrogen cycle.

    Like


  55. What a stupidly narrow definition of MGTOW you have.

    Like


  56. I strongly believe the key to victory is simply outbreeding. The fact is, conservatives, especially religious conservatives, have way more kids than liberals. Feminists hardly have any kids, and abort a good deal of the ones they could have had off. There are plenty of conservative women out there who want to have big families and value traditional gender roles (heck, they even demand them), but you won’t find them in decent numbers in places like D.C., NYC, SF, Massachusetts, etc. You will in the Dakota’s, Texas, and the rest of the South. Best thing I ever did was join the military – almost every base I can get stationed on is in the south, where military men are revered, and got away from Assachusetts where a decent woman is a needle in a haystack. See, guys like us, just have to leave to the Red States and let the blue states burn.

    I’d like to point out that the same phenomenon we’re experiencing occurred in ancient Rome. The patriarchal families outbred the immoral folks, and patriarchy re-ruled Rome. It’s happening now as the birth rate of the SWPL’s and their cohorts are null. Look at Europe, they lose people every year, their population drops as they’re balkanized by Muslims. Leave the liberals to themselves and fight for state’s rights so they keep their schemes to the state level and destroy themselves. Screw going out and gaming girls in the cities in hopes of finding a good one, especially D.C… I live in D.C. for awhile, and it’s all just careerists and liberals. You just might meet a decent one if you work in Republican politics, but that’s it.

    Like


    • Red states, baby!

      Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 3:08 am Malcolm Tucker

      It’s a good thing that government welfare job allowed you to expand your horizons.

      On the taxpayers’ dime of course.

      Like


      • Well, it says something when the only way a young man is fit for marriage is when he comes with a large government social subsidy (healthcare, base housing, etc.) So of course the breeders are hanging around the military bases.

        Like


      • Well I left an 80,000 year job so I had cash beforehand, and a boxing career, I just wanted to do something really cool, so I joined up. I love the military. I love the travel, the PT, the uniforms, the people, the guns, engaging the enemy – everything. I would not work for a million a year instead of this, I swear. the women are a great benefit too, although I hope to just find a wife soon, being religious I’m not into taking advantage of all the girls with a military fetish (tons, even in the liberal states).

        Like


      • Hooah! Like Batman says, “Chicks dig the car.”

        Like


      • Yeah I’m pretty glad. I get free everything and if I take a girl out in uniform someone always sends a nice bottle of wine to the table. As an officer, it’s 10 times better, and the enlisted guys have it good in regards to women. Not to mention, many of the girls in the military are cool too. Anyway, thanks for expanding my horizons with your cash. I was poor so you financed my liberal arts degree too (federal aid).

        Like


      • Yeah, all that welfare for him and all he has to do is spend some of his blood or die defending the likes of you. Well thought out pal. /sarc off

        Like


      • Right – he should attend a military funeral for a 19 year old private and tell his mother and fiance he died doing a government welfare job. I don’t see how anyone can call a job that has you working 23-48 hours without sleep fairly often, has you getting shot at for months on end in some mountain in some 3rd world country and killing yourself in PT week after week a welfare “handout,” but some people have no respect and no brains.

        Like


  57. […] multitude of levels. I think it likely just implicates frigidity and nothing more in a partner. As Roissy has expressed, I really have no interest in regressing into some kind of Islamic-style patriarchy where the women […]

    Like


  58. “4) Marriage has risks, but sometimes they’re very much worth it.”
    Loving someone and being committed to him is natural…for me.

    “3) A romantic relationship has more benefits than just physical pleasure”
    Benefit?…if we thought less of benefits, we would be happier and genuinely more selfless in both romance and physical pleasure.

    “8) A return to patriarchy should be the goal, not men going their own way.”
    Welcome to my( traditional Chinese) family! I will elaborate soon…hehe!!

    I have thoughts about the other points in the Manifesto, but too tired to type.. yawning…hehe!!

    Like


  59. Once you have kids, would you want to accept that fatherhood isn’t as rewarding as you thought it should be? Of course not. What father would admit that those early years of crapping, vomiting, screaming, crying, babbling ingrate tantrums were really a hell on earth he’d have rather spent playing poker with his buddies? After a certain age — say, 9 or so — when kids become old enough and emotionally mature enough to have quasi-adult conversations with them and impart the wisdom of your fatherly experience upon them do they switch from being net buzzkills to net blessings.

    My kids are in the early stage (oldest one is four), and sorry, I love being a dad, it’s not a buzzkill at all despire the crapping, vomiting, screaming, crying, and tantrums. They are incredibly cute, it’s a blast watching them develop and grow, and I wish I’d had ’em sooner.

    Like


    • I think that implied in Roissy’s point (especially in the context of all of his other posts in this blog) is that not all men are like you – especially the bad boy alpha males that women like to reward with sex.

      Now, to be clear, I’m not saying that men like you are a tiny minority. You are certainly a large minority if not a majority of men. The problem is that women do not reward men with sex for this trait, especially in their prime years of sexual attractiveness (15 to 25).

      Like


  60. Patriarchal societies do indeed prevail over matriarchal ones but never because of women freely choose that kind of arrangement. Ever. Women are generally insensitive to the question of prevailing – ie, winning – because their deep brain automatically assumes that they are there to fuck the winners whomever they turn out to be.
    However, when the matter comes down to simple survival – or not- they often can begin to see the light. But we are in a time very far removed from that.

    Like


    • Exactly. It is a lot easier for us to be loyal to a winner than a loser.

      Like


    • A woman’s preference is irrelevant. They just happen to prefer the men who ignore their preferences and do whatever they want. Life is endlessly ironic.

      If it was up to women we had to depend on their willingness to persevere against what they think is practical or possible, we’d be living in grass huts.

      Like


    • Women are generally insensitive to the question of prevailing – ie, winning – because their deep brain automatically assumes that they are there to fuck the winners whomever they turn out to be.

      Women have no personal minds. The nazi fuckers will screw whoever rides into town to steal them, and love the man for it.

      They are born to be stolen.

      Indeed – women have no need to win at anything, other than getting the man for the job.

      Like


  61. on July 24, 2011 at 12:00 am Rogue Element

    The first item in the list is just plain wrong. For most of human history people lived in large extended families, which were the foundation of civilization. The nuclear family is a relatively recent invention, which came to the fore with the advent of the modern urban/industrial economy which required people to move frequently in search of work, thus breaking apart the old extended families.

    Now even the nuclear family is breaking up. No doubt the modern globalist/corporatist state would like to reduce us all down to atomized individual production/consumption units with no family or personal ties that would interfere with labor mobility and the maximization of profits.

    Like


  62. Andrew Berwick’s Manifesto

    2083 A European Declaration of Independence

    littered with patriarchal talking points.

    Like


  63. …they are here to fuck the winners whoever they turn out to be…

    Like


  64. A bit old and sorta off-topic, but may of interest here…

    “Infidelity: Being Unfaithful Makes Me Happy,” by Kelly Mac
    http://www.blogher.com/infidelity-being-unfaithful-makes-me-happy?page=full

    She actually disagrees:

    “Woman, you can have it all! Isn’t that what they tell us? Who cares if you don’t qualify? We’ll lower the entrance standards. Who cares if it hurts someone else? Who cares if you only see your children on weekends because you are working so many hours pursuing your ‘fulfilling career’. It’s the quality of the time that counts, not the quantity, right? They’ll understand. Don’t they want Mommy to be happy? Who cares if your husband is getting your boyfriend’s sloppy seconds? Doesn’t he want Goddess…erm…Wife to be happy? After all, if she’s happy, she’ll be a better wife and mother, right? Wrong! What a complete and utter crock. …”

    More of the same follows in the article.

    Like


    • As per usual the feminists in that blog replying to the article with “that’s not what feminism is about, it’s about equal rights”. Repeat the same shit until it becomes true in their own mind.

      Like


      • True, femisists don’t believe “feminism has set up an excuse for women in our society to act like self-absorbed, narcissistic, spoiled-rotten princesses with the patience and maturity of a 2 year old” but…

        Like


  65. Marriage will exist regardless of how hard men try and dismantle it via game. Culture functions impartially just like evolution. Marriage allows women to monopolize utility from their male partners. While seemingly a “mistake” for men from an evolutionary perspective – ultimately it’s a landmark achievement for our species as a whole.

    Like


  66. Kids are also hideously expensive.

    Like


  67. Wake up to reality! We live in a Matriarchal Country(America). Left wing of the Matriarchy=Feminism. Right Wing of the Matriarchy= Traditionalism.

    Both Feminism and Traditionalism are Female Supremacist hate movements.

    Both Feminism and Traditionalism rely as a prerequisite the dehumanization of males(boy’s, young men, men and older men).

    Both Feminism and Traditionalism rely as a prerequisite the glorification of females(girl’s, young women, women and older women).

    Don’t trust traditionalist’s! They are pathological liars like feminist’s. Sick sociopaths that want to force their role playing game on everyone. Ask these traditionalist’s where they where in the 90’s when the war on males was jacked to the extreme by traditionalist’s in Washington D.C?

    Like


    • Yes, you agree with me that matrons (women who are taken care of by a single man) and beta males ally together for the sake of “society”, which means all female centric concerns.

      Males who advocate lifetime monogamy aren’t really thinking of the children. They aren’t really trying to keep society from going downhill due to single parent families. They are trying to secure supply of pussy.

      It’s a simple game theory strategy. The social conservatives are communists. Not fiscal communists, but social communists. They want to impose social rules, such that each man gets one vagina, so that they don’t have to compete in the sexual marketplace.

      All this talk of the greater good is really just the greater good of their collective individual penises.

      Like


  68. btw am I the only person who noticed that you’ll always see hordes of feminists and self-invested AFCs posting on game blogs about how much they hate game blogs, but you’ll never see men who believe in game posting on fem blogs about how much they hate fem blogs?

    Like


  69. The 8th figure concerns my latest entry, on a generation of men raised by women.

    Like


  70. I was walking my Awesomely Giant German Shepherd, and he got loose and went running bizerk around a park. I got him under control, and away from a group of annoying little rascal kids (some of the kids I disliked honestly, because you know who they will group up to be.)

    But then, as I sat under a tree with my dog, this tiny little boy comes running all the way across the field going “You run so fast! I can’t keep up!”

    My heart broke. This kid had guts and was just a great kid. So he pets my dog and says “Does he bite?” and I look at the kid and smile and say “Yupp!” The look on his face was priceless.

    Anyways, long story short, kids are great and I can’t wait to be have my own.

    Like


    • Bzzzzzzt ….. wrong.

      Some kids are great. Most aren’t.

      Just like George Carlin once said ..”Kids are just like everybody else. Some winners, … a whole lotta losers.”

      Like


  71. There will never be a ‘return’ to anything, our society will just evolve in order to deal with new personalities and objective conditions, as it did in the past. The reason ‘marriage’ is hopelessly screwed is because the values/standards which characterized the era in which it grew are almost totally absent. The only thing which has really survived is the simple event of getting married; everything else — the sexual morality, cultural expectations, gender role expectations, etc. — has been swept away. How in the world could any institution survive that kind of transformation, especially one which involves living human beings?

    The real truth is that ‘America’ is not really a ‘society’ anymore, and as a consequence it isn’t governable. A nation is a group of people who possess distinctive characteristics which separate them clearly from other groups. In a real nation, you are supposed to be able to take certain things for granted because otherwise there is nothing keeping you together. What is more fundamental to a nation than how its next generation is created and raised?

    America is more like a collection of societies living in the same area. Obviously, it doesn’t make sense to try and encourage a single cultural institution for all of these separate societies. Marriage might work for some individuals, but at the societal level it is clearly useless.

    I think the next big chapter of history in North America will be the splintering of the population into various societies in a formal sense. Right now there is already massive informal division, the next step is formal separation. Look at European history, the same pattern of gradual division and eventual separation is clear. Why would North America be any different?

    Like


    • “I think the next big chapter of history in North America will be the splintering of the population into various societies in a formal sense. Right now there is already massive informal division, the next step is formal separation. Look at European history, the same pattern of gradual division and eventual separation is clear”

      i.e., Balkanization. Blue state “coasts” vs. fly-over country.

      Like


    • The reason ‘marriage’ is hopelessly screwed is because the values/standards which characterized the era in which it grew are almost totally absent.

      Miles off. A dimension off, more accurately.

      Society didn’t change for social reasons. It changed for technological reasons.

      Unless you can undo the available technologies, you won’t undo the social changes.

      The arrow of time is not cyclic. Technology is a one way parabola. The future is not going to be a shiny new version of the past.

      Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 7:53 pm old guy, lower case

        “The future is not going to be a shiny new version of the past.”

        Nice sentence.

        Like


      • Yup… if, like Satayana said, you’re condemned to repeat the past because you’ve forgotten it, it’s likely to be a sh*ttier version.

        Like


  72. Blah blah blah

    And this OneSTDV complains about the whiners? He does seem the biggest one.

    Correct: in any group there are whiners, but as stated several times, when a man is ruined by society, why should this be a shame? It is the first step to recovery.

    Leave alone MRA, they have a capability to provide data and evidence way beyond this One-what blogger could ever do.

    Marriage has benefits? Provide data. MRA can provide statistics and experience about courts, media, cops.

    Not going on their way? If it seems a loser move, many MRA does not mean it as a refusal of sex altogether. Just the crap called marriage.

    I am starting to believe MRA in abstract is too complicatd to understand for the average internet user (or blogger like that). MRA relates to men’s rights, not state, not religion, not any fucking else. No men’s rights? No civilization. Realize it.

    Like


  73. How does an ethno-nationalistic patriarchal atheist find a women of acceptable genetic quality and mental programming to breed with in this sea of man-jawed lawyercunts and fat proles?

    Like


    • Breeding…. A swatch in Eastern Europe, Starting on the west with Czech Republic, through Slovakia and southern Poland, going through Ukraine and north central Russia, looping north to Baltics.

      Pick your location, and learn the lingo.

      Like


  74. Men have never changed, they’ve always thought with their dicks.

    In the past, women have thought with their uterus, and chosen the man who will best provide for it.

    Now that women are thinking with their clitoris, all societal hell has broken loose.

    It won’t last forever though, the majority of men eventually find the endless pursuit of pussy and the constant evasion of fatherhood to be hollow. This happens much, much sooner in women.

    Women do what they are told, and right now they are told that having kids and finding a husband is beneath them.

    Only about 1 in 5 white women stay unmarried throughout their life, while about 1 in 2 black women do.

    I would say 1 in 4 is the breaking point for white women before we start seeing them undo their conditioning and listen to the women who’ve been saying feminism is wrong.

    Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 9:00 am more than 100 less than 1000

      “stop thinking with your clit” just great!

      Like


    • the majority of men eventually find the endless pursuit of pussy and the constant evasion of fatherhood to be hollow.

      I’ve always thought this accusation of bachelorhood being a hollow life to be stupidly blinkered, ignorant, pedantic, and arrogant.

      As if you can’t find god and beauty and love in the eyes of a one night stand.

      It’s offensive the level of arrogance breeders spew.

      Like


      • A lot of the difference between the daddy types and the one night standers comes down to libido.

        Most men suffer a sharp drop in libidio after the early 30’s. Quite a few men, who get neither exercise nor sufficient sun, never had much in any case.

        The only people who really understand or sympathize with high libido men are *women.* And they scorn the lecher until the moment we slip it in.

        It’s an enjoyable part of the human farce.

        The idea that men are more sexually hungry than women is the most absurd idea there is. It’s just that most women never get that switch flipped; once it happens, you will happily learn the emaning of depravity. Men are scared of women like this and they should be. 😉

        Like


      • Breeders??

        Your parents were breeders you jackass.

        And I’m the arrogant one?

        Go kick your dad in the nuts and punch your mom in her uterus. I believe they are the source of your pain.

        Like


      • You have deflected from my point with angry insults.

        My point stands.

        But I bet it can’t even register in your synapses.

        Like


    • We think with our balls, not our dicks.

      Like


  75. on July 24, 2011 at 7:28 am more than 100 less than 1000

    How much has the embracing of (prison) RAP culture as a fashion contributed to societal decline..though only a 4th wave (??) – (1st being feminism 2nd forced communism/socialism 3rd – 60’s embrace of extreme narcissism – these are just a guess of course)

    The weakness of the middle of the bell curve in population intelligence gives those with advertising skills (usually bought by corporations) an unbalanced degree of power in a society where morals, common sense, rule of law are secondary and declining in importance.

    Fashion dictates now ..like religion and government before it.. it’s fashionable to be incompetent, a liar, a cheater, a whore, selfish, arrogant, entitled, a complaining small minded half educated cancerous human…and be rewarded for it. (ex: Snookie, Sex and the City, Snoop Dog, Howard Stern, Hefner)

    Like


    • “How much has the embracing of (prison) RAP culture as a fashion contributed to societal decline..though only a 4th wave (??)”

      HUGE. I saw the decline start to happen sub culturally within the American Blk community within a decade once gangster rap hit big. Then it went mainstream (gangster rap) and now look at our culture. If you listen to any popular radio station and listen to the lyrics of the songs, its pretty much a no brainer as to PART of the reason why society is the way it is and why many women feel sleeping around is rewarding and ok.

      Most people don’t want to touch rap b/c so much money is being made from the top to the bottom. People would rather let a genre of music continue to drag down society then, set it a flame….

      Like


  76. on July 24, 2011 at 7:37 am more than 100 less than 1000

    Fashion has screwed everything from science (global climate change) to democracy (election of Obama) with no accountability for accuracy or results.

    Too many want the freedom without the accompanying responsibilities, anyone that dreamed of being the BOSS and has their own business knows its far harder and more work..building that business than being an employee that punches out a 5 pm.

    All human relationship is built on economics ..thats what Ayn Rand tried to say but bungled though her unchecked ego and over reliance on mental capacity. (though a herculean effort by her for the mindset of the era)

    Big govt, media, religion, corporation, education eventually destroy potential and feed off the results of healthy human actions based on economics

    Like


  77. About 99% of these problems would go away if fat women would lose weight. Here’s why:

    1. Most feminists are fat. If they’d put the pizza down and lose weight, men would desire them and they wouldn’t hate men anymore.

    2. Without fat feminists pushing their weight around, women will no longer be programmed to believe that the idea of the nuclear family is BS.

    3. If fat women would lose weight, they wouldn’t be so jealous of skinny bitches getting the best men, and betas wouldn’t be insecure about being betas, as there would simply be too many hot bitches for even the alphas to fuck.

    4. Fat women losing weight means more marriages and more children, and our demographic wouldn’t need mexican immigration just to avoid extinction.

    Like


    • If fat women would lose weight, they wouldn’t be so jealous of skinny bitches getting the best men, and betas wouldn’t be insecure about being betas, as there would simply be too many hot bitches for even the alphas to fuck.

      You can test this hypothesis by visiting an area where the women remain skinny.

      Betas abound in skinny land too.

      Like


      • I didn’t say betas wouldn’t exist smartypants.

        And where in America are all the women skinny? Sounds like you have a treasure map.

        Like


      • I’m not in America.

        Oh, I thought you implied that there would be less betas if the girls were hotter.

        I’m in SE Asia, and that’s not what I see. Most girls are slim, and most guys are betas.

        Like


    • Had a nice outing last night with a mixed group of friends — guys and gals, all fun and attractive. That is until we had two late arrivals to the group, both female, one of which is a former-fattie that looks decent and the other probably the nastiest whale of a girl you’ve ever laid eyes on…. anyway, to get to the point, as soon as the nasty arrived, she immediately shat on everyone at the table with varying degrees of insults and complaints.

      Evening was sufficiently ruined because. She also made jokes about the news the guys having his penis cut off and tossed in the garbage disposal by his wife — she thought it was “great.”

      Like


    • I learned #3 very well in the nation of Turkey. Throngs of beautiful, skinny women everywhere. Enough for betas to enjoy by all means. Even some total fatass, nerdy kid who had to come along on the trip got the attention of some cute girl, and I still send letters back and forth to some of the women I met there, who are cool people.

      Like


      • Where in Turkey? I hear that it varies a lot regionally. Not disputing you – I just want to know where to go 🙂

        Like


  78. I feel for the older players who have to choose between kids and single life. That decision is a tough one to make. I have at least 15-20 years till I have to even consider that which I’m grateful for.

    Like


  79. Halt the press.

    3. True. Sex is great, but sex with love is transcendent.

    What?! Alphas are capable of falling in love?! Does this not question the very foundation of this blog and it’s views on emotional attachment?

    Level of respect rapidly falling. Next you’re gonna tell me you’re romantic.

    Like


    • The concept of love and alpha disposition are not mutually exclusive.

      Like


    • Alphas fall in love repeatedly, and the owners of this blog have talked about falling in love repeatedly.

      Love is a biological response that we can’t control. If you don’t have it you’re either lying or broken inside.

      http://roissy.wordpress.com/2008/01/02/grabbing-2008-by-the-zeroes/

      13. There is no such thing as unconditional love. If a girl gains 50 pounds her boyfriend will fall out of love with her. If a guy loses his job and drifts into months of unemployed depression his girlfriend will fall out of love with him. Thinking clearly on this will give you the best chance to find real love.

      14. Never compromise on love. It is the only thing in this world that isn’t bullshit.

      15. Many of you will think #14 contradicts #13. You would be wrong.

      Like


    • What? A strawman that has never been posited and been refuted dozens of times is again not existing?

      Snarky wonders!

      Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 2:30 pm Neil Hansen

      Jenny Hao…nice to see you again. Yummy!

      Like


  80. I always believed MGTOW was simply “living and dying without ever marrying” rather than “living and dying without ever fucking”. As the second, it is totally pointless to even discuss about it; I advocate the first only, especially because marriage is, at least now, the ultimate consumerist trap set by those wanting you to be a good, AKA stupid, tax-paying, government’s supporter and obedient citizen. OneSTDV seems to follow the many who, no matter how fucked up of a deal marriage is for men currently, still want to push men like lamb into the slaughter because he actually believes the apocalypse is going to come (now in the form of human extinction, because the flames of hell were causing laughs) by a mere decade of suspending marriage. Women and the white knight society are never going to learn as long as betas keep marrying those 30s used up slutty broads. Only when thousands of women go the way of Liz Jones and their misery, humiliaton and lifelong loneliness becomes public knowledge, the young women will learn to skip the hookup and the carousel. A generation may be lost in the process but the sacrifice is necessary.

    I’m only a MRA in this sense. All the rest “let’s learn to clone so we really don’t need women anymore” is silliness.

    Like


  81. MGTOW is a fine idea. I wish it had been around when I was younger. But, like everything else, it will take work. MGTOW is not synonymous with sitting in your parent’s basement playing computer games all day. For example, workaholics, who now rely on their wives for a social life, will have to take more responsibility for their social contacts. This is good.

    Hopefully, as our society matures, an “eligible” never married man in this 40’s will not be seen as a freak. Think of the advantage to a never married 49 year old man finally getting married to a 32 year old woman with the marriage contract explicitly written that two to three certified, aka paternity tested, children must be produced or the marriage is null and void. Now, would be something. A man could have a full, interesting life, and then settle down.

    A danger to avoid for MGTOW is to be consumed by an obsession. The unmarried gunner in Norway seems to have become obsessed by the “destruction” of European culture, and became violent. If he had had a family with 5 children, I assure you he would have not worried quite so much about European culture. He would have been living in, and building, the culture without even really thinking about it.

    Anyhow, I am really glad to see gay marriage take off. This will very soon level the playing field for both partners in divorce situation. Gay men, unlike straight men, are not shy about pushing for their rights. What is not to like?

    Like


    • “I wish it had been around when I was younger”

      Gramps, it was. It was just called “marching to a different drummer”,
      and it DIDN’T have a “movement”.

      http://nationalatlas.gov/articles/people/a_gender.html

      According to the 2000 census, there were 138.1 million males in the US.

      That means 138.1 million ways for men to go their own way (lower case).
      (MGTOW in all caps to signify “The Movement”)

      I’m 48. Never heard about this so-called “movement” until this thread.

      What works for me, may not work for you, due to time, circumstances, etc.

      And vice-versa.

      Lead or follow, but get the hell out of my way.

      Like


  82. Lot of hate from married beta males trapped with kids. They pore over your every word looking for the smallest of holes so they can chime in that the ball and chain lifestyle is superior. Dealing with a 2 year old is a joy because of the “look” she gives you? Sorry, I much prefer the look of a 19 year old girl when she sucks my dick with one hand gently massaging my balls.

    Hey I think it’s time for you to pick up Trevor from soccer practice. Take the minivan. Make sure to fill up the tank or wifey is going to withhold sex tonight. But don’t worry, she’ll still let you jerk off in her chubby paw while reading a celebrity gossip magazine.

    Like


    • she’ll still let you jerk off in her chubby paw while reading a celebrity gossip magazine…..

      ….while watching Oprah.

      Like


      • Dude, that’s worse than being an a deployment and forced to jerk off to Cosmo as the closest thing to porn available.

        Like


    • “But don’t worry, she’ll still let you jerk off in her chubby paw while reading a celebrity gossip magazine”

      If you are that lucky.
      And if you are that lucky, buy a lottery ticket when you fill up. Because you will have just as much of a chance at winning.

      Like


    • I’ve only read about 1/10th of the comments in this thread, but all of the “parent” responses I saw were friendly or thoughtful in tone, hardly beta-rage. Needless to say, if you have a fat wife who is making you run errands, you’re doing it wrong.

      Like


    • But unless the love is coming from a child, or your wife, its hollow!

      Hollow hollow hollow!

      Like


    • I would think after a certain age it would be more fun to teach a son game than to actually practice it yourself.

      Like


    • HA HA! OWNED!

      Like


    • on July 24, 2011 at 8:06 pm the_alpha_male

      A lot of men love family life especially with their kids. This is even more true of betas/omegas.

      I don’t see what is so controversial about this.

      Like


    • Roosh, my good friend! 😉

      Anything ya wanna say about MRAs, dude?

      Like


      • Roosh is not the only one who says MRAs don’t get laid. Doug1 said it further up on this thread too.

        But Roosh and Fidelbogen seem to be archenemies, even though they look like identical twins (check out their websites – separated at birth).

        Like


      • @Avinicus: Yes, I noticed that. Apparently Doug1 is a p*ssyworshipper in some manner or form, as is Roosh. Politically worthless. Plays right into feminist hands. 😉

        Like


      • So howcome you are so different from your identical twin Roosh?

        It could be a film or something : separated at birth, one became a PUA and the other became an MRA…….united years later in the manosphere..

        Like


      • Hmmm. Interesting concept there.

        But then, I myself am not an “MRA”.

        I think it’s about time we phased out “MRA” as nomenclature. What do you think? 😉

        Like


      • Enough with the winking emoticon already!

        Like


      • I’ll decide when enough is.

        Like


    • Some alpha males, like you, are simply scared.

      You know how to bed 1000’s of women, but you have no idea how to raise a miniature version of you, and the prospect of doing so scares you more than a beta trying to talk to a pretty girl.

      You’ll denigrate fatherhood and piss on marriage, because deep down you know you couldn’t hack it.

      If only your dad was as scared shitless as you are.

      Like


      • Even if all your points were granted, what you say is still deflection and does not address the original point that being successfully single is a great deal more fun and satisfying that being a successful parent.

        Like


      • I piss on marriage because I have been “fucked over” twice by women who professed to “love me until death do us part”. Unlike them, I took my vows seriously. Never again will I take a marriage vow.

        Like


      • I had enough of marriage simply by watching my parents’ shit marriages throughout my childhood. I have no desire to replicate those errors in my own life now that I’m an adult and free from that tortuous misery I was raised in.

        Like


  83. on July 24, 2011 at 12:45 pm Once Upon a Time

    I find this to be interesting albeit one point of view on traditional marriage vs. NY state marriage.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/print/272527

    Like


  84. on July 24, 2011 at 1:15 pm ElectricAngel

    The EXTENDED family is the bedrock of civilization. Removing grandparents from influence over grandchildren has led to two deleterious effects: lack of long-term reinforcement of societal norms, and creation of a class of “greedy geezers” whose pension-funded indolence comes at the expense of investing in the young. A society can do this, but really only once, as it eats the seed corn of future successful generations. Our society, pouring trillions down the rathole of Medicare since 1965, is now at this point.

    Like


  85. @ Lara, above…

    Thanks for your honest answer. I asked the “would you fuck a guy you could beat in a wrestling match” question because I think it illustrates, in a different way perhaps, the whole point of this Blog: that women prefer a man who is stronger than they are, and hate a man who is weaker.

    I assume your answer wouldn’t change even if the guy you could beat was a kind, decent, honest man who would otherwise make a great mate/father/provider?

    Like


  86. Wouldn’t matter. If I could pin him to the floor and count to 3, he’s not my type.

    Like


    • But therein lies the rub…WHY wouldn’t he be your type ? What does your ability to defeat him in wrestling, or not, have to do with whether he’d be your type or not?

      Like


      • Because women expect men to be physically stronger than they are. I don’t think most men would be attracted to a woman that could beat him in a wrestling match, although there might be some that would like that.

        Like


      • I agree with you….but I guess the point I’m trying to make is why, in today’s day and age, it should matter at all to a woman whether a man is physically stronger than she is, or not. Why should it matter, if men and women are equals…??

        I think the answer is closely related to the whole point of this Blog — that women prefer dominant men, and dislike men who are their equals, or their inferiors.

        I wouldn’t have a problem dating a woman who could beat me in wrestling — but as you correctly note, very few, if any, women would date a man they could so defeat. This simple fact, more than anything else, illustrates the total hypocrisy of modern-day feminism.

        Like


      • You’re wise to address a question to Lara. She is the best female commenter: consistently truthful and therefore informative about the female mind as it really is.

        Without reams of blather and favor currying with alpha. Good job Lara.

        Like


      • Thanks. There used to be some female commenters who were better than me, but they don’t comment much anymore.

        Like


      • Agreed re: Lara. For some time now she’s been the only female commenter around here I can tolerate consistently on either a conversational or a social level (i.e. she’s both a good contributor and pleasant to be around). Many of the other female commenters can go jump in the lake and most of the more long-winded ones I skip right over their palaver. 90% of them come on here, a male blog, wanting to prove how exceptional or clever they are, when in actuality they’re unfeminine (high-T) or just plain abrasive as a human.

        Now that I’ve talked you up, Lara, go make me a sandwich. There’s a dear.

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 3:58 am Emma the Emo

        I like your point :). I lived without a man for the longest time and haven’t needed protection, so living where I live at this time doesn’t require a man to be strong. He doesn’t need to be rich either, because I have some money myself. That’s all very logical, but doesn’t seem like it changes what women want it a man anyway (although I might fuck a guy I’d beat in a wrestling ring, if he’s otherwise acceptable).

        Like


      • You haven’t needed protection because you have MALE friends, neighbors, family, and cops.

        You haven’t needed money because you have MALE-created job opportunities and/or MALE-taxpayer-funded assistance of varying kinds.

        You need males to stay alive, but our modern world has pulled off the trick of convincing you that you’re doing all that on your own. You go girl.

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 12:56 pm Emma the Emo

        DiamondEyes,
        What part of “living where I live at this time” don’t you understand? You don’t think I know that stuff, do you? Of course there are cops and socialism/feminism making sure I don’t need strong wealthy individual men in my life, that’s the point! That means I can date people who can possibly be poor and weak, and it wouldn’t matter.

        Like


      • Love it, Emma….! Thanks for the reply; it’s honest and accurate. But tell me: if we wrestled in a ring, and you defeated me, would you really consider sleeping with me (assuming you were attracted to me that is) — ?

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 4:47 am Emma the Emo

        Sisyphus,
        I guess I would, if you were adorable enough and I was single.

        Like


  87. The idea of democracy has poisoned peoples thinking abilities.

    I didn’t create the world that I’m in, and I don’t get to choose and then vote for my Utopia.

    Democracy is not the reality we are living in.

    MRA, exactly like feminists, are entirely caught up in the land of should be.

    Like


    • “…the land of should be.”

      Otherwise known as the personal autonomy of the conscious mind.

      Like


  88. The urge to reproduce is part of man’s inherent biological programming and has nothing to do with selflessness. This deep urge drives much of his action, consciously and subconsciously.

    Man’s genetic structure is designed to find a mate. Everything else is secondary to this imperative.

    Romance at its core is designed to delude humanity into thinking there is such a thing as ‘pure love’.
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    Fathers need to constantly deny the fact that their use, beyond procreation, is window-dressing, saying things like ‘rewarding’.

    Men who eschew this family life are of two kinds: those who have a higher purpose in life than to follow this animalistic urge. The true artists/philosophers.
    And the dogs. The men who take a road lower than that of the reproducers, indulging in nihilism.
    _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

    Society requires more reproducers than nihilists in order to maintain its numbers. When this fails, and birthrates drop, usually facilitated by nefarious ‘forces’, great upheaval results, morally and otherwise. We in the West have been living through this endgame for decades, with the Great Conclusion about to unfold.

    Like


    • Romance is to love what “beginner’s luck” is to skill. It’s a short term euphoria intended to give you the motivation to work for the next lifetime with that person, and a glimpse of what you could have if you do.

      One of the big problems with both men and women now is that they are taught to think that romance is love. So they ride the emotional wave of romance believing that they’re in love. When the romance is removed, they think that the love is gone. They split, then try to find new partners.

      Older generations knew better. When romance dissipated, they started to work on building the love. It took longer, but the end result was an actual relationship built on trust and connection instead of a transient feeling.

      Actual love takes hard work. It’s a lifetime of work. The end result is akin to what the initial romance felt like, but deeper and more satisfying.

      Like


      • I totally agree with this.

        Like


      • Who told you all of this wisdom? I agree with all your posts I managed to read. I’d like to know where did you read all this you now write on this blog?

        Like


      • I hope you’re referring to Matt and not me….?

        Like


      • Yes, to Matt.

        Like


      • Only a woman would think of matts comments as freaking wisdom, to everyone else its common sense …

        Like


      • Deeeeeeeeeper! More meaningful! More real!

        Not like that hollow feeling you get staring into the eyes of a lover you haven’t been fucking for 25 years.

        No, more deep that that!

        She’ll even wipe my ass when I’m old! That’s so deep, and meaningful!

        Fuck that deep meaningful noise, thank you very much. I can find my deep meaning in the here and now, and with complete perfect strangers. And with new lovers. And with lovers I’ve been with a moderate amount of time.

        Your meaning is meaningless.

        Like


      • I totally agree with this, too.

        Like


      • “I can find my deep meaning in the here and now, and with complete perfect strangers. And with new lovers.”

        Xsplat, I believe you do. But what will happen when you will be 70, 80, 90? Will you be able to find meaning in having sex with old ladies?

        You should think about future, too. You’re not going to be young forever.

        Like


      • I’m not going to purchase your love insurance policy, Maya.

        I have full confidence in my current love solvency plan.

        Like


      • So what are you going to do when all your lovers will hit the menopause?

        Like


      • !!

        What gave you the idea that I’d be dating women even close to menopause again?

        I paid my dues when I was younger.

        I’ll continue to focus on young women for as long as possible. Eventually, one day, I might have to date as old as 30, or even 35. But don’t assume that.

        It may be rare for old men to date younger girls, but I’m a rare guy. This is what I do, and I’m good at it.

        I’m mid forties and date early twenties girls. The last girl I broke with was 19 when she met me.

        I fall in love easily and aquire love easily.

        That may be difficult to swallow – I know it’s in women’s interest to deny that reality. Some men can happily trade up to younger mates over and over until they die happily in the arms of their latest devoted young lover.

        Like


      • @ Maya:
        “So what are you going to do when all your lovers will hit the menopause?”

        Go younger.

        Like


      • xsplat,

        I believe you. It could work. For you.

        But the problem is: Women who fall in love with you, don’t want to be replaced with a younger one. It’s every woman’s nightmare that their lover will leave them for a younger girl.

        I’m interested how do you break up with your lovers? I’m sure they are not happy when you find out they are too annoying/too slutty/too old for you?!
        What do you say to them?!

        Like


      • I travel out of their country permanently, sometimes.

        The last girl went nuts on me, so effectively she broke up with me. She wanted to stay with me, but was acting psycho and threatening me, leaving me no option. Self preservation.

        I’ve had many of the usual breaking up scenarios, sometimes with the girl leaving me. One girl died. Another I just moved out of her city. Another out of her country. Two before out of their country, 20 or so in that country – who knows – just the comings and goings of lovers. The one before I moved out of her country. The one before I moved out of her country. The one before I moved out of her country.

        So – I guess that’s the pattern.

        If you don’t want to be left, don’t date a man with a passport.

        Like


      • “Eventually, one day, I might have to date as old as 30”

        What?! 30 is old? And you’re mid-forties?!

        Like


      • Comment to Maya in mod. Short answer – I usually leave their country.

        Like


      • What?! 30 is old? And you’re mid-forties?!

        What’s your point?

        Like


      • Oh. (I hope your comment appears) You leave their country … But aren’t they hurt when you leave? Don’t they want to stay with you?

        Like


      • Yes, sometimes they are horribly, horribly hurt.

        Like


      • “What’s your point?”

        Um, I’d delete this comment if I could. 30 is old for me, too. I’d marry a 20 y. o. girl if I was a man. I just get a bit sad every time men say they only like young women. I’m 26 and unmarried, I keep repeating this, I know, but it’s … annoying.

        Like


      • “Yes, sometimes they are horribly, horribly hurt.”

        So what do you do when this happens? Just go and forget about them?
        Don’t you ever feel bad about this? Or think what happens to them after you leave them – like are they able to find a new boyfriend or are they still in love with you for 2 more years?

        Like


      • I’m not a sociopath, and can be literally profoundly empathetic, so yes, it does pain me when a girl is crying herself to sleep for months at a time.

        But it’s not always that bad. Sometimes I’m easily forgotten. And sometimes a girl will leave me.

        Like


      • Oh, and everyone moves on eventually.

        Even if it can take a while.

        Like


      • “… can be literally profoundly empathetic, so yes, it does pain me when a girl is crying herself to sleep for months at a time.”

        But more important then her feelings towards you is the fact that she’s not pretty/young/smart enough for you and that you need a new lover?

        I’m wondering how you explain these things to them? What do they say?! Do you tell them the truth?

        Like


      • I always tell the truth.

        I may be an asshole, sometimes, but I’m a truthful asshole.

        If I’m seeing more than one girl, they’ll know. If I won’t marry them, they’ll know.

        There were many reasons for breaking up. People do that all the time. Serial monogamy is common – it’s not some new lifestyle that I invented.

        Like


      • Boredom is one reason to leave, when the girl didn’t feel that way. Another, of course, would be escaping BPD or other weirdness. Another would be getting away from the insanity of mutual infidelities. Another would be leaving the country for business reasons unrelated to relationship. Another would be because she loved me but I didn’t love her anymore.

        But I’ve cried my share over girls leaving me. I’ve cried an ocean, and still had oceans of grief inside me.

        Like


      • Dear xsplat,

        “Another would be because she loved me but I didn’t love her anymore.”

        Heh. This is a fear of every woman. Fortunately, Lady Gaga has an advice for us girls. Read her famous quotation:

        “Some women choose to follow men, and some women choose to follow their dreams. If you’re wondering which way to go, remember that your career will never wake up and tell you that it doesn’t love you anymore.”
        — Lady Gaga

        Smart, isn’t it? I’ve seen this quotation everywhere on Facebook. Apparently girls already believe this is a smart choice to do.

        Like


      • “remember that your career will never wake up and tell you that it doesn’t love you anymore.”

        Have it painted on a sign, tattooed on the back of your hand, etched in stone, etc.
        Read it every morning when you wake up at 45 with a house full of cats.

        Like


      • Rick,

        I’m not a feminist nor I think Lady Gaga is right. She shouldn’t be spreading such negative messages to her fans, in my opinion.
        Don’t you understand what I wanted to say? That this thinking is very prevalent and approved of. And I understand why Lady Gaga thinks the way she does. :S

        Like


      • Yes, I do understand. Wasn’t clear enough that it wasn’t directed at you, but to “Apparently girls already believe this is a smart choice to do”

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 4:23 am Emma the Emo

        Is this a gender difference? I can’t feel much more than lust for someone I’ve only been with for a month, I don’t actually know them, so I can’t say there is much emotional intimacy yet. How come it doesn’t bother you that you still don’t know that person who you say loves you?

        Like


      • I have to believe that lifetime monogamy guys are simply not good at forging alliances.

        I can have a girl eating out of my hand and following orders and being a devoted love slave to a degree 100 or 1000 times that a old guy with a lifetime partner can.

        A man can be a woman-whisperer, and have incredible facility at engendering respect and trust and obedience.

        It doesn’t take 50 years of marriage.

        Like


      • …says the old westerner who’s idea of “good game” is to move to a third world shithole and lure its starving female populace with his “charm” and “alphaness”.

        you’re a small, delusional fish swimming in a pet-store aquarium, fagsplat.

        Like


      • Haha I REALLY agree with this….!

        Like


      • As if it would make any difference to you if I was also sexually successful while in the west.

        You’d put down any man fucking young girls who advocates fucking young girls.

        Like


      • “As if it would make any difference to you if I was also sexually successful while in the west.”

        but you arent. and you wouldn’t be.

        don’t get me wrong, i’m happy for you. i think your story serves above all as a neverending source of hope for the rest of us. afterall, if even some decrepit, objectively unattractive troll like you can just pack his bags and go live out his hedonistic fantasies in a place where girls will barter their ass for a little food and shelter, anybody can. it’s good for the soul to know that should worse come to worse, the fagsplat option is always available.

        with that said, you’re still a delusional schlub.

        Like


      • Anon, you are not interested in what is real or true. You want to make an argument against my lifestyle through slander, by claiming that it is only attainable through prostitution and fucking women of questionable character and biology.

        Argument by assertion, with no curiosity about fact checking. Never mind the facts, SLANDER! Ha ha ha! Slander!

        Woop ti doo da. Heard it all before.

        Like


      • i dont have a problem with your “lifestyle”/prostitution-y relationships.. i take issue with the smug tone of your posts, and your delusional belief that your relationship success in third world shitholes grants you license to talk down to those of us who live in a substantially more challenging dating environment. the reality is that any western guy could do well in your corner of the world. ANY western guy.

        http://www.practicalpickup.com/life-through-the-eyes-of-a-beautiful-woman

        want some facts? here are some facts:
        1) by your own admission, you’re a below average looking man, in the 3-4 range.
        2) you’re old.
        3) you’re an entrepreneur living in a foreign country, meaning you probably do well enough to carve out an ok living, but it’s unlikely that you’re ultra wealthy, so you don’t have that going for you either.
        4) you have zero social capital outside of your starving-woman niche.

        5) and the most important fact of all: even with game, a guy like you could do no better than a monogamous relationship with a 30+ y/o 5-6 in a western country.

        so fuck off with your condescension, fagsplat. you’re no reference point, and your “ability” has little to do with your success.

        Like


      • Anon, some of your characterizations are true, some not.

        So what? What I say is steal accurate, even if I am ugly and living in SE Asia.

        If you want to disagree with stuff that I say, then do that. If you want to be cranky at me for choosing how to most prosper, stop being a jealous crank and make your own choices that give you personal advantage.

        Of course I do better here than in the west. Why would I remain in the west, knowing that I can do so much better here?

        But it is ignorant of you to assume that young girls can not be attracted to older men, and only use them as beta providers. You think that because you MUST think that. It would hurt your self esteem too much to consider any other option. Each 1/10th of a second holding that thought would be a mini firecracker going off in your head.

        Like


      • For you, if a cute young girl is with an old ugly guy, it is obvious that she’s with him for the money.

        That’s because you have never conceived of a situation where she is not. You literally can not conceive of it. You also can not even try to.

        It’s my experience, year after year with scores of girls, that getting a young hottie to fall in love with me is easy and common. And that’s whether I’m too broke to afford a haircut, or whether I’m wealthy enough to earn in a day what a local makes in a half a year. Whether the girl is has sat on a hundred cocks or zero.

        Thousands of miles away and never having met either me or my girls, you may assume you know what is “really’ going on.

        That’s your failure of imagination.

        And lack of confidence.

        Like


      • They love your disposable income then.

        Like


      • In your worldview, you need no evidence for this. No other option is possible.

        Like


      • “If you’re rich, I’m single” works over there like it does here. Seen too much “I love you, no sh*t, G.I., you buy me Honda” overseas.

        Or, in the totally mercenary bent… as Stanley Kubrick depicted it.

        Like


      • Again, you refuse any evidence to the contrary.

        You hold that worldview, that women can not be attracted to older ugly guys and can only be attracted to their resources, because any other view is to painful to you. Any other view would be an admission of relative sexual failure.

        To think that young pretty college graduated women – some virgins – could have an emotional connection and even fall in love with a much older man who is way below their attractiveness level would literally blow your mind.

        To hold that thought would have you waking up in a mental institution.

        Like


      • matt i can always count on you to bring the real! 🙂

        This is so absolutely true and thus why so many marraiges & LTR’s today fail. I have a co-worker whose happily married, still gorgeous and has a great family life who said the same thing you are saying. When I see her and her husband together its pretty clear they got the memo – they look extrodinarily connected and happy. She told me her husband is not a romantic AT ALL but she understands that “romance” and “love” are two different things.

        Too many women & men get antsy at the first sign of having to work beyond those “warm and fuzzy” feelings once in marriage or a LTR. Too many people get caught up in the infatuation part of “love”. We live in an impatient society & world – and believe that relationships have also suffered from this impatience and need to build on something deeper than initial feelings of lust, infatuation and romance.

        Like


      • Wanna wrestle?

        We still have a mud match on the books….yes it’s me…..

        Like


      • LOL Hey! I’m so glad you have a name now. Where have you been? Preparing the arena?

        Like


      • Yep….preparing for the match of the century….me and you in a duel to the — well, not to the finish, exactly….but close enough!

        Like


      • Can’t wait I got my gear ready! 😉

        Like


      • True this.

        Curious Neecy, are you Dominican-American? Guessing by your pic of course.

        Like


      • No Doug, I’m African American.

        Like


      • Matt is marriage material.

        Like


      • Yes, more than easily domesticated. Born and bred already domestic.

        Like


      • Not really xsplat. I know what I want. If a woman measures up, then I’ll marry. If she doesn’t, I leave. If she tries to domesticate, then I leave.

        I know what I want to accomplish before I die. If I meet a lady that’s worth the time, she can come for the ride. If I don’t, then I can do it myself.

        Alpha means knowing what you want, pursuing it, accomplishing it and not apologizing for it. It’s leading. It’s substance over style. It’s more lasting. It’s more satisfying than learning how to trick women into bed.

        It also attracts women that aren’t on the carousel. Those are the only women worth the effort.

        Like


      • It’s not really an insult to say that you are born to be domestic. Isn’t it likely that we have genes that make us desire the domesticated, monogamous life? Isn’t it likely that some of us are more caddish, through temperaments that we were born with, and some of us are more paternal?

        My beef with your argument is to say that your way is more deep and meaningful. I find that both arrogant and ignorant.

        Like


      • More satisfying than trying to trick women into bed.

        Yes, and my serial monogamy is more satisfying than some other straw man.

        Pullllease.

        You aren’t even paying attention.

        Like


      • Matt you’re an example of a REAL alpha. I’m really impressed. : )

        Like


      • seems he has at least two fans already 🙂

        Btw. Matt, why are you still single???

        Like


      • Uh back up ladies and hands off he’s mine! Plus my biological clock is ticking faster! Lol

        Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 6:09 pm Neil Hansen

        It’s not really a cad/alpha dichotomy here. Xsplat is more a chameleon. Matt is more mammalian.

        Like


      • Alpha means knowing what you want, pursuing it, accomplishing it and not apologizing for it. It’s leading.

        It’s more satisfying than learning how to trick women into bed.

        These two statements are contradictory. Alphas do not have to “trick” women to get them in bed.

        You are confusing “Game” with “BS’ing”.
        Instead of calling it “Game”, you could call it “Having Your Shit Wired Tight” or “Psychology 101”, but “Game” flows off the tongue easier.
        “Game” is nothing more than knowing what makes someone tick, then playing to it, aka psychology 101.

        Like


      • what,

        yes, he seems perfect. I asked him already to marry me… but he doesn’t notice me 😥

        Like


      • I wonder how many marriage proposals contributors here tend to get?

        I’d suppose it would depend on your dating emphasis and style. The pump and dumpers not getting many, on one end, and on the other the very romantic guys also not getting many.

        The sweet spot would be the middle, where you are a romantic libertine.

        Like


      • Yah Matt, you’re too sirius. You need to put What on yer giggletron, then she purrs like kiteh.

        Like


      • lol!! you’re cute!

        Like


      • Maya

        You can’t ask…They are the hunters, let them ask. hehe!!

        Like


      • Maya,
        Hmmm, Matt is not perfect yet…he hasn’t made me laugh yet. Humor is important to me. I think that will get us by those difficult times. : )

        Like


    • We are facing existential concerns far more grave than social or economic issues. Technology is changing the rules – who is fucking who won’t be on your mind when the terminator comes knocking.

      Like


      • Technology is not advanced enough to produce a Terminator style threat. If AI ever gets to the point of producing a simulated self-awareness, (after having worked in it for awhile, I have little faith that it will in my lifetime), I have no illusions that we’ll be able to fight against it. It would outclass us by many orders of magnitude in speed, accuracy and strategic ability.

        I’m a Computer Scientist/Software Engineer by training and trade. I do not worship on the altar of technology, I do not fear it, nor do I believe it to have some kind of transformative power over the human race. It’s a glorified tool. Nothing more.

        My main concern right now is the poisonous garbage that’s being spewed by schools, media, Feminists, etc. It’s a perversion of what a functioning society should be and is teaching people to be narcissistic monsters. If that were fixed, then maybe we’d have to resources to advance tech to the point you’re worried about.

        Like


      • The terminator was meant as an analogy for an unknown X.

        It could be a microbe created in a lab.

        If you don’t believe in man made existential threats existing as a likelyhood in your lifetime, then there is a reason for that, and nothing I or anyone else can say will change your mind.

        Some people believe in a heavenly afterlife.

        Ya, dude, it’s all good.

        Like


  89. 1) The nuclear family is the bedrock of civilization.
    As are extended families and clans, and even loose shifting bonds of kinship. Newscientist ran an article that purported that one of the earliest cities housed the family units grouped not according to kinship at all.
    2) Women are valuable as more than just prostitutes.
    Yes, they cook, clean, give love, and make good personal assistants.
    3) A romantic relationship has more benefits than just physical pleasure.
    What, you mean mental pleasure too? Sure.
    4) Marriage has risks, but sometimes they’re very much worth it.
    Sometimes. Sometimes I roll a six.
    5) Fatherhood is a rewarding experience integral to the emotional health of children.
    Or unclehood or grandfatherhood.
    6) (Modern SWPL) Women can be petulant, mannish, and entitled, but also uniquely endearing as only feminine women can be.
    I don’t know what this sentence means. Modern SWPL women, as compared to who, are uniquely endearing? Non-modern non-SWPL women? If by being different they are differently endearing, then, umm, ok.
    7) MRAs express a female-like neuroticism because they whine and focus so much on what could happen.
    More because they whine and focus too much on what should happen. Too head-spacy, not enough dick-spacey. Not embodied in practical concerns.
    8) A return to patriarchy should be the goal, not men going their own way.
    Should is an impotent, meaningless word. I should have five digits growing out of each fingertip. We can’t all agree on what should be our mutual social goals. That is mathematically impossible, because evolution IS game theory in action. We MUST have competing agendas, according to evolution. Some of us will disagree with whatever social agenda is proposed. There is no group should, and can not be, and never can be.

    Like


  90. MGTOW sounds like immature 13 year olds who can’t get laid. And even if they did get laid and end up doing the MGTOW thing it sounds gay. So either way you lose.

    Like


    • Disagree…MGTOW sounds like men who see the marriage landscape for what it really is, and choose not to risk their time, money, and balls on the good faith and promises of a modern day American female.

      Kudos to them for not doing so.

      Like


      • Sisyphus,

        Can you help me out with all these different acronyms pretty please! (1) MGTOW (2) MRA (3) SWPL

        Like


      • MGTOW = Men Going Their Own Way

        MRA = Men’s Rights Activist

        SWPL = Stuff White People Like

        Only for you…..

        Like


      • Thanks babe you’re the bestist! 😉

        Like


      • on July 24, 2011 at 6:04 pm Neil Hansen

        MGTOW – pronounced, “mingtow”.

        SWPL – pronounced, “swipple”.

        Like


      • Thanks Babe, you’re the best!

        I forgot one more SDTV?

        Like


      • on July 25, 2011 at 2:51 am Neil Hansen

        “OneSTDV” means “One Standard Deviation”. It’s the name of a blog by a guy who often comments on the inferiority of blacks, to be blunt. It shows how much variation, statistically, there is from the average. The blogger refrains from making judgments; he just shows statistics which demonstrate blacks performing poorly on a wide variety of tests.

        Like


      • What about that match of ours ?

        Like


      • Thx Neil for the info and heads up!!!

        Like


      • MRA = Male Renaissance Agitator, Men’s Rights Advocate, Men’s Rights Activist, and various other interpretations.

        The ‘MRA’ phenomenon is virtually impossible to pin down. And there is no “MRA movement” — that is a trope which the feminists invented, motivated by their need to create a strawman target on which to deflect their anxieties.

        Any more questions about matters MRA or MGTOW, just ask. I’m a fairly authoritative source. More so than you’ll find locally. 😉

        Like


      • Thx Fidel! Hmmm. Maybe I need to start a WRA group. You know the women who are not feminists but aren’t doormats either? Not sure if there is a middle ground group of women like this around similar to the MRA. Gives me some ideas though 🙂

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 3:42 pm Neil Hansen

        One other thing: a swpl (swipple) is a white left-wing urban hipster who eats gluten-free muffins and listens to NPR. (just in case you didn’t know)

        Like


      • Left wing White guys? Yeah they’re the most racist (they just don’t know it) lol

        Like


    • MGTOW doesn’t mean never getting laid again, it just means staying the fuck away of marriage and relationships.

      Like


      • So – no relationships either.

        That rules out a good portion of intimacy with women.

        I don’t see this as men going their own way. Men want intimacy with women. It’s men avoiding a problem area in their life that they wish they could deal with directly, but can’t.

        Like


      • “Men want intimacy with women.”

        That is a presumptuous global statement, one that you are not qualified to make. You should learn to speak for yourself.

        Like


      • I disagree that it is presumptuous.

        All men get angry. All men get happy. All men get horny. All heterosexual men want intimacy with women.

        Like


      • No Xsplat, it is presumptuous.

        Have you personally polled every man on earth, about that question?

        I think not.

        And if you looked around, I guarantee you’d find quite a few who would say “no”.

        So, ditch that little word “all”, because you have no warrant to be using it.

        Like


      • All is close enough to the truth.

        How about, roughly 99.999999112%

        Yes, not all men have any sex drive. But it’s is closer to the truth to say that all men have a sex drive than to say most do.

        Like


      • @xsplat:

        Gonna disagree again.

        Having sexual desire, and wanting intimacy, are not the same thing.

        And as a matter of courtesy (and proper form), I would not presume to know whether Joe X. “wants intimacy” with women. If Joe indeed “wants intimacy”, and wants to make that information known to me, then I am sure he will take the initiative. Otherwise, Joe remains a “mystery” — and that is a fact which I respect. After all, who the hell am I to tell Joe X. what he is thinking?

        Like


      • Fidelbogen, I take it as a reasonable assumption that all men share certain biological emotions.

        Would you argue that it is not accurate ENOUGH to say that all men sometimes feel anger? That all men sometimes feel horny?

        You say that the emotion of wanting intimacy is too complex to be a base and inevitable biological emotion that all men certainly sometimes feel.

        I find that my assumption is perfectly reasonable.

        Now that’s not to say that desires can’t be suppressed and twisted and even disolved. But the base biological urge is for more than dick rubbing. The base biological urge men are born with and never entirely escape from is an intimacy.

        This is hard wiring – not social coding.

        Like


      • Just as certainly as all babies are born primed to bond emotionally with their mother, all men are born primed and desirous to be intimate with a personal sexual mate.

        Like


      • I think with the MGTOW is whether or not this desired intimacy with women outweighs other concerns, such as building a badass career, invention, mathematical formula, etc. For some men, their sex drive may be lower than other men, or they may be so distracted by their work, that they don’t have time or think too hard about pursuing nookie.

        I agree with Roissy that they’re dating market losers though, simply by the fact of their lowered sex drive or lack of attention at honing dating skills. But I think what’s important is whether or not this fact bother them.

        Like


      • @xsplat:

        It looks like we are talking past each other.

        Okay. I can grant everything you say about “hardwiring”, and still insist that as a matter of courtesy, one ought not presume to know what is in the mind of another person.

        Or even large numbers of other persons.

        To my ear, your statement that “all men desire intimacy” rings about the same as “every normal boy likes to play baseball.”

        Both statements could be construed as presumptuous. . even oppressive.

        It’s an ethical-philosophical question, not a biological one.

        Like


      • I disagree with you that I must be polite by not being presumptuous. My only duty is to be clear and accurate.

        P.C. thinking isn’t nice, it’s oppressive. Your desire to not oppress is oppressive. Your taboo gets in the way of unhampered unrestricted knowledge of the world as it is.

        My presumption is reasonable, and will stand until I’m shown that the world is not as I presume.

        I will not be finger wagged into not making reasonable assumptions. That’s how thinking works.

        Like


      • I am not a cultural Marxist.

        Don’t call me “PC”.

        And don’t presume to know what is in my mind.

        Ever.

        Be polite, and ask.

        And if I feel like telling you, I will.

        Like


      • Fidelbogen, I, like everyone else, has a mental map of the world. I don’t care if you find me impolite for expressing it.

        You are welcome to tell me what’s on your mind, or not.

        I don’t care if my mental map offends you.

        Like


      • @Xsplat:

        That’s okay, you are welcome to your mental map, just so you make it clear that it IS a map! 🙂

        Like


    • I’m a MGTHOW and my son doesn’t think I can’t get laid.

      Go ahead and get married. I want to drink your tears as she rapes you in court.

      Like


  91. on July 24, 2011 at 5:01 pm Green Gangrene

    Have you read the manifesto of the killer in Norway? He talks about promiscuity in that a lot. Roissy, read it. He has some points worth discussing. (Not the killings ofc)

    http://www.scribd.com/doc/60739170/2083-a-European-Declaration-of-Independence

    Like


  92. There will never be a “return” to anything, patriarchy or otherwise. Read your Marx, there’s thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. Synthesis becomes the new thesis. You can’t ever return to the ways of the past once they’ve been gone for a generation or more.

    Like


    • Marx my ass! Thesis, antithesis, synthesis is Hegelian, Marx just nationalized it. Does not mean it’s a 11th commandment, regardless of provenance.

      Feminism in different forms has been tried throughout human history. It always ended in an abyssmal disaster for the societies that succubbed to it. Or incubbed, either of them.

      The next stage after this disaster fully enfolds would be a return to a strict patriarchy, not to the “masculine lead” of the modern classically liberal system or the last 200 years..

      Like


  93. on July 24, 2011 at 5:39 pm Sergeant Pingas

    Hey Roissy, word to the wise, but I think the guys from Paul Elam’s site are pretty pissed at you:

    http://avoiceformen.com/2011/07/24/and-then-they-fight-us/#comments

    Sting Chameleon: “Check the comments, it seems that these weak excuses of men want to pick a fight with us.”

    I think they’re already starting to filter in. Isn’t it weird how the people who bitch the loudest about “shaming language” are the ones quickest to resort to it?

    Like


  94. Cadnerd, you’re a winner! puurrrrrrrr…..hee! hee!

    Like


  95. This is Jen

    “delusional shlub” that is perfecion!

    Like


  96. Corporations, and their symbiotic relationship with politics; together with the influence they wield over the unquestioning, obedient hordes via the media and marketeers have as much to do with the breakdown of the traditional patriarchy and the nuclear family as anything else.

    Feminism is just an added insult.

    Like


  97. Ah… Neecy
    Show me yur tits.
    Just do it. You will not regret it. I will never tell your mother anything about it. I might fuck her… but neither of us will ever tell you about that. Trust me. For the same reason you can trust your mom. Because both of us are innocent.
    See, I know you want to show yur tits. I can tell that your sweet, brown nipples are trapped in a kind of agony – needing and wanting so much to burst out into view – but are nevertheless held in confinement… but by…what???
    Ancient predudices are not good reasons to keep your clothes on when there is a camera right in front of you.

    Like


  98. Dunno, neecy. looking at your pic, babies won’t notice.

    Like


  99. MRA seems to be mostly an internet circlejerk which is self-contained in their own little corner of the blogsphere. There doesn’t seem to be whole lot of “advocacy” going on — there’s no organization, no spokesmen, no media talking points, very few allies in academia, etc.

    Not so.

    There is a lot of MRA activism going on, such as lobbying, protest demonstrations, legal advocacy, and so forth. I’ve participated in my share of it. Thing is, it does not reach the radar screen of the prestige media or academia (or rather, reaches the screen but then is excluded because of political bias). But MRA activism is proceeding slowly and surely…

    Like


  100. Shark

    btw am I the only person who noticed that you’ll always see hordes of feminists and self-invested AFCs posting on game blogs about how much they hate game blogs, but you’ll never see men who believe in game posting on fem blogs about how much they hate fem blogs?

    Youve got the right result for the wrong reason. Fem blogs would just ban.

    Like


  101. You can’t be a decent PUA (an alpha) without being an MRA.

    One of many reasons: An alpha will have 15 year olds clamoring to get to know him while lying about their age and anglo-saxon culture is prepared to destroy his life if he doesn’t check IDs constantly.

    Guys who don’t have that problem are not alpha (or they’re really ugly alphas) because even if a man concentrates on dating older women as a matter of preference, the pre-selection will cause younger women to approach him. So all alphas will hope that MRAs can roll back the unfair laws like “absolute liability”.

    And that’s just one small example of how being a PUA means you have to think like an MRA.

    I’ll describe the current state of the MRM in a Good News, Bad News format.

    The Good News is that Fathers and Families (dot org) has been a highly successful MRA organization over the past two years.

    First they managed to recruit Glenn Sacks, who had been the undisputed leader of the MRM (see glennsacks.com).

    Then they adopted a two prong strategy to introduce the two most publicly popular MRA concepts as proposed new laws and then they got those laws passed in key states like California.

    Concept 1 – Shared Parenting – They said “If women are equal to men in the work world, then men are equal to women as child caregivers, so children have to be with their biological fathers half the time, not just every second weekend.”

    The feminists have furiously fought this saying that this would allow men to stalk their ex-wives (whom the men would apparently still want to fuck); but legislators felt covered enough by the logic to vote for the laws in some states.

    Does someone have details on this? I don’t have the time to check further.

    Concept 2 – Family Courts Cannot Screw Soldiers in the Field – This type of cynical new state law was written by MRAs (Fathersandfamilies.org) and what makes them cynical is that all the politicians who voted yes were implying that civilian males can still be indiscriminately screwed by family courts. They’re written in the classic feminist style = pure cynicism designed to be politically popular.

    But these laws are major milestones. All a civilian male has to do now in California is challenge the law that states that only active duty soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan cannot be screwed by family courts.

    So the MRM may have already started the pendulum swing back in the other direction.

    Now the Bad News:

    The Tyranny of Google: Most men complain about the loss of their rights anonymously because Google enforces political correctness. This also means that competent businessmen haven’t been the ones to use their real names to challenge feminist laws like VAWA in the past 10 years, leaving only unemployed schizophrenics like the last guy who challenged VAWA in 2007.

    It’s great that guys like AB Dada are posting here with their real names. More such guys are needed who can then take pre-written court challenges down to the local federal courthouse and post them.

    US Justice System like that of Ancient Rome: While it only takes about $10k to challenge a law with a lawyer officially (and it’s technically free if you go pro se), the MRM would really need to spend $100k on an inside the beltway lawyer who could lobby behind the scenes and conduct counter-blackmail procedures (the feminist/gay DC law firm Arnold & Porter consistently tries to blackmail those who challenge feminist laws and they tampered the jury in a case against a Maryland based marriage agency which got convicted of the crime of having originally introduced a woman to a man whom she later falsely accused of abuse in order to avoid being deported – the agency is still appealing the outrageous ruling – I forgot the name).

    So we would need to raise $100k to fight any one law.

    That shouldn’t be too hard if even one multi-millionaire is reading this right now and wants to step up to the plate and create an organization that would complement Fathers & Families but maybe go after the laws that hurt single guys (PUAs) more than fathers like the ones that try to regulate our hetero sex lives.

    Like


    • @Jerry: You seem to have a rather one-dimensional understanding of the so-called “MRM”. You grasp only one aspect of it.

      However, your grasp upon that one aspect is quite solid. I grant you that.

      Like


  102. I find it incredible that any male would turn against a movement that works to ensure your normal human rights are not destroyed. That is ofcourse unless you’re a feminist adherent. A couple of which I notice here..

    Like


    • Hello, ChristianJ! 🙂

      Like


    • Feminists and PUAs are like Bonnie and Clyde. It’s pretty obvious when PUAs are shaming MRAs using the exact same tactics.

      Like


      • Actually, the former ideological alliance between PUAs and feminists (the brainwashing of PUAs by feminist thought) is mostly history but one still has to watch out for manifestations of pedestalization and misandry that were strong two years ago in this blog’s comment sections.

        Back then it was the norm for men to hate on other men for “not having the game” to get along with women no matter how ideologically feminist specific women were and no matter what type of indoctrinated environment a man was operating in. You could never blame a woman for something she said in an interaction.

        The PUA idea was that the man was always to blame and that only his actions could determine success or failure in the game of seduction. The idea that third parties weren’t spreading a cock-blocking message was ridiculed.

        The Chateau and the invasion of MRAs into the PUAsphere have destroyed this misandrist PUA view in the past few years.

        Years ago, PUAs hated on men over 35 who, like pro athletes apparently, should have “retired” with a hottie wife but were still active beyond their “expiration date”.

        That was pure feminist ideology and a lot of PUAs were brainwashed by it, including one or two older married guys who should have known they could get divorced or their wife could die of cancer and that being a PUA means potentially being one for life at least off and on (going after the younger, hotter, tighter women for life).

        Then there was a condescension for men who would go overseas to date which the feminists and many in the PUA community would say was “surrendering” and “not having the balls or the ability to date the superior feminist women of the west”. The PUAs who thought this way were seriously brainwashed by the feminists. The best argument against this was that no man who flies to Italy to buy a Ferrari can be accused of doing so because he’s probably a bad driver.

        And then there were the PUAs who completely sided with the feminists and the religious right by making up a reason to hate those who would pay for sexual activity, like saying it was gamma no matter if the woman who’d been convinced to take money had been a virgin from an upper middle class family or a STD-ridden hooker on Times Square at 2 in the morning. Feminists and “Christians” had said this was an exploitation of women where the man’s enjoyment apparently shouldn’t count. Too many PUAs shared the idea that the man’s enjoyment of sex wasn’t the main reason for being a PUA. The Chateau ended that bullshit with the post last year that noted that, if a man with a hot partner decided one evening that he wanted to get a quick lap dance or whatever from another hottie and didn’t have the time to run normal game, the behavior couldn’t necessarily be labeled on an alpha, beta, gamma scale.

        Even as late as 2010, the animosity with which some so-called “PUAs” thought of someone who would get the occasional lap dance had clearly been borne of indoctrination from the fems or the religious right and it was clear that, if this animosity toward occasional paid sex continued in the PUA community, men wouldn’t be motivated to keep paid sex legal (their old age options open) and the men who pay non-criminals.

        Finally, there used to be an idea in the PUA community that men were automatically no longer alpha if they succumbed to sexual activity with a 17 year old, even where that’s legal (mostly everywhere still).

        The idea was that “real men don’t do kids”. That nonsense came from severe feminist and-or US evangelical “Christian” indoctrination. The Chateau (in posts such as Hank Moody and the recent one about the actor who married a 16 year old) has noted that legal teens are adults and what most men want (even if older women make better LTR partners) and that PUAs should fight to stop new and higher age of consent laws.

        The PUA community has turned 170 degrees in the past two years to be mostly against anti-male feminism.

        The only feminist idea that many PUAs might still agree with, including myself, is that premarital sex is a great thing for those of us who don’t want to get married.

        Like


      • Thank you for pointing out the PUA – feminist connection.

        Which, by the way, is still not entirely dead. I can see it in present comment section.

        The PUA sector still has too many militant pussy-worshippers. That makes them a feminist tool, unfortunately. But If they could just get THAT shit outta their system, they might redeem themselves. Time will tell.

        Like


      • So a man who masters the art of getting laid without being a woman’s provider, effectively bypassing the entire edifice feminists constructed to enslave men, is actually in league with feminists?

        This is ignorant, and is what gets you called ‘FiddleBooger’ by Roosh and others.

        By shifting power back to the man with Game, the PUA undoes a lot of the power feminists have forcibly transfered to women.

        Wanting to optimize one’s own sexual desires is not ‘pussyworship’ any more than the Three Tenors are slaves of opera.

        Do you have no sexual desires? Judging by your eff’ed up comment that female breasts are supposed to look like an ass, maybe you don’t.

        Like


      • Actually, Fidelbogen was just agreeing with my list of ways in which the PUA culture had been pro-feminist two years ago. His views on MGTOW are another issue entirely. I’ve disagreed with him for years on that (because I need to date really hot women all the time) but I’ve found him to be a smart MRA otherwise and I’m glad to see he found this blog.

        Like


      • “Feminists and PUAs are like Bonnie and Clyde. It’s pretty obvious when PUAs are shaming MRAs using the exact same tactics.”

        A prime example would be their use of “you can’t get laid” shaming language. Feminists and PUAs both do this.

        Personally, I despise double-standards. Therefore, feminism’s “fish without a bicycle” philosophy had damned well better be available to BOTH men and women.

        So anybody (e.g. the above-named PUAs) who would employ “you can’t get laid” tactics upon men, is a feminist tool.

        Like


      • While I won’t get into the argument about it being good for a man to go celibate, there is something to the “you can’t get laid” admonishment that feminists like to see used to “get men into line”.

        A great example of this is about to happen on the thread below (nesting comments create an “out of time” sequence) regarding the feminist concept of “Stalking” (a philosophy that women are victims of men based on a presumption that his physical presence would be unwanted even if this has never been stated nor implied by the woman).

        A tool calling himself “Jason” goes on the attack below about a sentence I included in a field report two months ago where I said something like this IIRC “Don’t try this at home but I actually disobeyed all the PUA and western culture’s rules by showing up at the retail store place of work of a 10 who hadn’t answered some phone calls; all her coworkers loved me and she couldn’t help smiling, gave me a date and now we’re moving forward”.

        “He” was attacking me for succeeding via a contrarian move not advocated in the Aspergy PUA Handbook; a move that I explicitly said was not something other guys should try.

        This kind of “Asshole Attacks Someone for Succeeding” phenomena used to be the norm here in the comment section and it only served the feminist interest much as I described in an essay above.

        The obvious implication of such unnecessary ad-hominem attacks is “You didn’t really succeed because you didn’t follow the rules. She was too young and naive anyway. You exploited her. It shouldn’t be true that women in Asia or Eastern Europe respond to that”.

        It’s not the norm to nitpick about other guys’ success anymore. I think guys are catching on that the nitpickers are either:

        1 – Feminists or old female Christians sock-puppeting as males.

        2 – Aspies in their mother’s basements with no real success with women who misunderstand the concept of “male solidarity” by feeling they have to burn with hatred toward a guy who doesn’t seem to be following the Beginners PUA handbook.

        3 – An American or British male living in the feminist west who has absolutely no idea what he’s missing by living in a feminist part of the world. As @Gorbachev has said over and over “Expats have to keep quiet about most of their sexual exploits because the poor saps living back in the States or England simply would not BELIEVE that life could be that good for a man elsewhere”.

        Like


      • In order to understand women, one must go through the five stages of grief. Until acceptance, one can not be smooth with women. Every interaction will be a disappointing frustration, or the lead up to one.

        MRAs are generally not yet at at the stage of grief that is acceptance. They therefore are not optimally good with women. And some focus too much on fixing social problems, which distracts from working within the system – again not optimal for getting laid.

        Like


  103. On point 5, men do stuff. Young children don’t do much. The negative aspects of children are typically in the early years. I could see the same with my father. Once I got to a certain age, he would look forward to seeing me. Then I got to an age were I saved his ass. I also help a friend of mine save his father’s ass.
    However there is a critical point to this. You don’t go to see him in the Christmas play as a rule. You don’t sit in the bleachers while he plays soccer. That’s feminized, SWPL bullshit. My father used to play baseball on empty lots. He didn’t have his father watch. Children come along when daddy does cool stuff. You know, its supposed to be the father doing his thing while his son learns. Its not children deciding what they want to do with daddy tagging along. Its supposed to be the children tagging along. You take them fishing, hunting, white water rafting or mountain hiking.

    Like


  104. #2. F yea. Woman are the new provider. I know a LOT of men who are living off the girlfriend or wife. Wives making 6 figures (sometimes mutli-6-figs), while the guy was a retail job loser who married rich, and has bogus job, barely even a career. LOTS of men are straight up GOLDDIGGERS today. In other families, they’d be on the street (or a 1BR apt) if not for the wife’s serious income.

    Like


  105. Women more valuable beyond sex? You better fucking believe it. These guys are god damn LIVING OFF these women. Losers who have quadrupled their social status b/c the women are more educated, and earn more than men. Sex? Nigga please. These guys would be married to these chicks even if their dicks were cut off. The female is the god damned SUPPORT SYSTEM for the entire lifestyle.. These fucking losers would be living in 1BR apts if not for leeching off their wives and girlfriends. Instead they live in 4BR Colonial houses in the elite part of the country, exotic vacations every year, country club memberships, $30k private schools for their 6 year olds, and $75k bathroom renovations…..all b/c the WIFE IS PAYING THE BILLS. Men are marrying UP in fucking droves. Sex? Almost beyond the point. Wake the fuck up. Women marry up in status, except when they CANT. I’m a hardcore bachelor, but fuck all mightly, I see a lot of guys getting some seriously fucking free rides, while I bust out a living, working on the weekends, and these bitches are at their backyard pool, and driving the wife’s BMW.

    Like


    • WTF are you blathering about? Being some lawyercunt’s house bitch?

      What percentage of couples do you see this dynamic actually happening in – 1 or 2%?

      Like


    • player hater

      Like


    • How is a guy’s social status quadrupled by being the bitch of some wealthy broad? In most guys’ eyes his status is negative. You’re envious of bathroom renovations and a colonial in the ‘burbs? Are you a chick?

      Like


      • Dude,. the guys I know who have pulled this off are rubbing elbows with serious power players. People you’ll never even know EXIST. You think you’re all that with your bullshit $150k cubicle job? Trust me, these women are providing the fucking LIFE for these guy. Only a dumb fuck would think women are only good for sex. I know fucking radiologist chicks who have 2000 sq foot penthouses in NYC pulling down $800k+. They OWN this SHIT.

        Like


  106. The first year and especially the first 6 months of a new child suck, but after that it really is great. You don’t have to wait until your child is 9 to have meaningful conversations. Having a son is easily the most satisfying experience of my life.

    A lot of people are turned off by other people’s children and I will admit, most other people’s kids are annoying pains in the ass, but that’s because they’re never disciplined and don’t understand their place in the pecking order, the BOTTOM. I highly recommend fatherhood. It will provide a good man with a north star that will shine for the rest of their life. It gives you a stake in the game and the future and you will never be confused about why you are here ever again.

    In today’s environment, I think men should pick their mates based on 2 factors. If you split after having children, how cooperative would she likely be (or how insanely vindictive?) AND what is she bringing to the genetic table as the mother of your children. Is she healthy, intelligent, good looking, no history of serious medical problems in her family.

    Like


  107. Get ready for the feminist bloggers to claim that the Norway Killer was an MRA.

    Like


  108. Good to see Jerry back in the mix. I, for one, could use a quick rundown of going to the physical location of a girl you’ve met because she’s not answering your calls and you suspect she’s having trouble with her phone. Is this the activity of a PUA or MRA?

    [Editor: That is something stalkers do. Have stalkers ever been attractive to women? Exception: If the physical location is a bar or coffeeshop you frequent regularly. Don’t mention that she didn’t answer your calls. Act as if she left no impression on you at all.]

    Like


    • In the Anglosphere it is what stalkers do. In many countries, women don’t have the money on their prepaid cards in order to phone guys back. And the concept of stalking is feminist if it applies to a man’s just politely coming around to a physical location when there’s been no direct indication of bad will on the woman’s part (probability that the SIM needed to be topped up).

      In other countries, women don’t control the frame or the environment like that and their coworkers will judge a man by what he’s like when they see him, not by the idea that he’s doing something supposedly socially unacceptable just by being there.

      I only did that once in my life. The one time I tried that was with a 17 year old 10 about two months ago and she is now one of my girlfriends as a result (past the 18th birthday but that would only matter if we were in California or Utah). Yes, she had been shit testing me by not answering. Yes, she liked the fact that I didn’t let that end the relationship.

      10s behave very differently from other women. They can put up a huge barrier before male suitors and then sit back and wait for the guy who comes through.

      Flaking is not a logical thing women do, meaning it doesn’t mean she’s not interested but rather that’s she’s flaky.

      But, since women control the social frame in the USA and England, no man in the USA or England has the option of going to a woman’s physical location to sort things out and flaky women just have to get older and more logical on their own.

      Again, the word “stalker” only exists in feminist countries.

      Like


  109. Hi Editor: If only Jerry could set us all straight on this procedure once and for all. I know he would if he were around, but he’s probably en route to check on a defective phone right now.

    Like


    • @Jason

      Again, asshole, the one time I did that I got a 17 year old 10 as a result. They behave entirely differently from older, less good looking women.

      You can take your passive aggressive shaming tactics elsewhere.

      Yes, she had been shit testing. But she wasn’t anglosized, never heard of feminism and did not know the concept of what “Stalking” is (a feminist concept).

      The fact that you let a simple sentence in a large field report two months ago get up your ass like a baseball bat, shows that you’re not really interested in learning about contrarian moves that can work in rare instances (the theme of that field report is that 10s behave differently from other women) but in good old American or British water carrying for the feminist frame.

      Like


    • Also, it is a feminist concept that, if a woman does not answer a few of a man’s calls, that she feels he has lower status or that any casual observer, especially a group of supposedly anti-feminist males, would feel that he has lower status because of her flaky actions. One supports feminism by assuming any given woman has relatively higher status than than a man simply because of her flaky actions.

      The reality is that a lot of flaking in the non-feminist world is done by women who don’t believe a high status man is interested in them for anything but sex. In the feminist west, I’m sure there are a 1000 equally nonsensical reasons for flaking that have nothing to do with the woman making a logical decision not to date the man.

      Flaking is not necessarily an indication that a woman is not interested so much as it is an indication that she is not as logical as a male.

      Only 10s can or should get away with flaking however. All men should leave the others to their fate of living with a bunch of cats. 😉

      Like


  110. on July 25, 2011 at 4:32 pm Abelard Lindsey

    I find Roissy’s critique to be very moderate and quite reasonable. He says that nuclear families are essential to raising healthy, socially functional kids. He also says that women are to be valued for more than just sex. I fail to see anything objectionable in what he said here.

    I do make two comments. I notice the usually attempts to “proselytize” having kids towards those who may not want them. I always find this irritating. If I choose not to have kids, that’s a personal choice and it is not for total strangers to question personal choices I make for myself. This is rudeness in polite company and is not acceptable.

    Secondly, there are reason why a guy may choose not to get married and have kids that has nothing to do with feminism or other traits that ladies may have that MRA types object to. Maybe I like to travel or do outdoor sports. Maybe I want to be independently wealthy by age 50 and hang out on the beaches of S.E. Asia. Maybe I’m just not a “kids” person. People on both sides of the issue seem to lack the imagination to comprehend these possibilities.

    Like


    • That you consider concerned fellow citizens strangers is part of the problem.

      Everybody’s strangers, and nobody is accountable to anyone anymore.

      Though I tend to take the road less travelled, this is only because I’m capable of thinking as an individual without harming myself or others unduly. Most people don’t have the equipment for this, so I don’t recommend that what’s good for me as an individual is the measure of how society should be managed.

      People should be in each other’s business more. Guys who don’t want to see their cultures die should be encouraging their fellow men to make babies in stable families. It’s not rude for them to suggest it. If you don’t want to, then just don’t.

      Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 2:51 pm Abelard Lindsey

        I lived nearly half of my adult life outside the U.S. and have found just as many entrepreneurial-type people who share my worldview outside the U.S. as in it. I identify with those who share my worldview, period. People who do not share my worldview are those I regard as strangers, regardless of geographical location. It is silly that I would do this any differently.

        People should be in each other’s business more.

        I don’t know what social circles you move in. But I can guarantee you that this is considered highly offensive in the circles I move in. My personal life is private, period. Unless I’m acting in an obviously self-destructive manner (such as drug addiction) or involved in criminal activity, all of the people I know personally would not even dream of questioning how I manage my personal affairs.

        I’ll make you deal. I’ll stay out of your business. You stay out of mine.

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 3:35 pm Abelard Lindsey

        I’m capable of thinking as an individual without harming myself or others unduly. Most people don’t have the equipment for this,

        I’m just curious. Do you think this is mostly genetic or environmental?

        Everyone talks so much about how IQ and Executive Function are mostly determined by genetics. Perhaps this trait is genetic as well, which suggest possibility for intervention in the eugenics sense.

        Like


      • on July 27, 2011 at 9:52 pm Abelard Lindsey

        People should be in each other’s business more.

        In psychology, this is an example of boundary issues. Boundary issues are where the patient believes that they should involve themselves in or care about the actions of others even when those actions have nothing to do with the patent themselves. Boundary issues are considered an indicator of mental illness.

        Like


  111. The MRAs play defense. It’s thankless and ugly and against our instincts, and I salute them for it.

    On the other hand, I cannot understand blind dumb old beta funding the whole machine designed for grinding him down. That particular form of suicide we might, how about it, name herbicide.

    Like


  112. on July 25, 2011 at 6:20 pm Abelard Lindsey

    Fred Reed’s latest relates to this:

    http://www.fredoneverything.net/Disengagement.shtml

    Disengagement is far easier without wife and kids than it is with. The problem with the fixed patterned life is not the women, but the corrupted social institutions. Having kids brings you into daily contact with institutions (education, medical, etc.) that those who don’t have kids hardly ever deal with.

    Like


    • on July 26, 2011 at 2:05 am Neil Hansen

      Fred is God.

      Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 2:52 pm Abelard Lindsey

        Yeah he is.

        He lives as expat. I lived as an expat for 10 years and will likely do so again at some point in the future. This is why I can relate to Fred.

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 3:31 pm Neil Hansen

        I lived in Thailand for 8 years and moved back to staid, solid Canada three years ago. I get peace, order and good government in Canada in exchange for fun, sun and babes. It’s a cruel trade-off, and I will be ex-patting myself again soon. I’ve been reading Roosh, and next time it may be Brazil, with Mexico or the Philippines as back-up in case that doesn’t work out.

        Like


      • on July 26, 2011 at 3:37 pm Abelard Lindsey

        Cool! And yes, I agree with you that the tradeoff favors S.E. Asia over the “good government” (talk about an oxymoron) of Canada.

        Like


  113. on July 25, 2011 at 9:18 pm not too late

    “5. Post hoc rationalization. Once you have kids, would you want to accept that fatherhood isn’t as rewarding as you thought it should be?”

    Let’s assume that is the case. Bright, beautiful, talented, loving kids, are damned rewarding. Stupid, ugly, incompetent, mean little bastards, not so much.

    Like


  114. this post should be called David Brooks vs. the Nihilist. David Brooks offers preposterously naive happy talk with a conservative veneer.

    1) The nuclear family is the bedrock of civilization.
    Yep.

    2) Women are valuable as more than just prostitutes.
    Nice sentiment, but losing their virginity at age 14, sexted at 15, first home made porn at 16, first gang bang at 19. You are right, they are more valuable than prostitutes because they are all amateur porn stars.

    3) A romantic relationship has more benefits than just physical pleasure.
    YEP, but it sure as hell has more headaches with your dramaqueen bitch.

    4) Marriage has risks, but sometimes they’re very much worth it.
    So does skydiving, but I prefer not to do either without good reason.

    5) Fatherhood is a rewarding experience integral to the emotional health of children.
    YEP. especially when you get one weekend a month.

    6) (Modern SWPL) Women can be petulant, mannish, and entitled, but also uniquely endearing as only feminine women can be.
    Pass the bong. They are hopelessly unappealing, which really is the heart of the issue… why in gods name would you destroy your freedom and risk litigation and jailtime to marry some entitled bitch. And marriage is risk of your life being oblitereated… it is one of the most dangerous things someone can do.

    7) MRAs express a female-like neuroticism because they whine and focus so much on what could happen.
    Regrettably it does happen all the time. And if you haven’t been through the prison gang rape of the divorce process, feel lucky to be married to a fat hag.

    8) A return to patriarchy should be the goal, not men going their own way.
    true, but in todays world this is blowing the whistle to climb out of the trenches at the somme.

    the reality is that you can live the happy traditionalist life, prenup in hand, but finding the right woman and surviving is a homeric odessey that requires game and a woman worth it… it is a lifetime project and should be the focus of responsible and not feckless men.

    Like


  115. Neecy
    Maybe it is best if you put your clothes back on and find the door.. Your lard-droop over your pussy made my cock freak out in fear.
    It does not matter if you understand; just go…away

    Like


  116. Different PUAs, be it bloggers or ones I’ve known in real life –and I’m talking real PUAs and not keyboard warriors — elicit one or another response on my part.

    Some of them, I like and respect. Others, I wouldn’t shake their hand or at least I’d feel an urge to wash my hand afterwards if I did.

    Like


  117. MGTOW is doomed to failure, but not because of men’s libidos. In reality, a substantial percentage of (white and Asian) men can go without sex – they already are, afterall.

    Rather, MGTOW can’t work because the white beta population can be subsidized by Mexicans. “Dropping out” is actually what the financial elites and women of America want the betas to do.

    Like


  118. Here is a great beta song:

    Like


  119. @Jerry

    Loving this stuff. Actually, the comment I recall was you saying that in E. Europe it was “perfectly acceptable” to track down the girl if you suspect she’s been “having trouble” with her phone.

    You’re something like 60, right? The tableaux of you trolling into a retail shop to accost a 17 year old (and her friends no doubt “loving” you) is a fun one to replay in the head. You interpret this as shaming, but it’s more voluntary credulity on my part. I want to think you’re out there actually doing this stuff!

    Generally I just like to hear your unsolicited defenses of paying for sex (or a lap dance (??)–does anyone with even minimal game think of a lap dance as “getting” anything?). I would likely lean towards paying for sex at your age to sleep with the hottest of women again, but I wouldn’t frame it as a continuation of an alpha frame. It’s a logical compromise when sleeping with 40 somethings gets old, but it’s a still a recognition of the fact that 60 year olds don’t game 17 year old 10s. They’re not on the field, sans money, fame, prospects of citizenship, etc.

    Your myopic writing style is fascinating though. You seem to believe that lack of self-awareness (all these 17 year olds just “love” you) is a positive rather than a failing. While unflappableness serves an alpha well, pretending as if there’s nothing discomfiting about a 60 year old dude sitting around in a room with a bunch of teenagers is some dark comedy. I know you “work out”, but really no one’s buying it. Still it’s fun to hear, and it’s certainly intriguing to think about what kind of principles you’re defending/espousing in coming up with this stuff.

    Like


    • Jerry,

      Feminist shaming language has been so disgustingly effective that rather than celebrating the tactics of older guy who wants to get with 17 yr old pussy, we instead find manginas actively shaming you and implying that you’re something called a “stalker.”

      Next thing you know they’re calling you a “p e d o” b/c you want to fuck a beautiful woman of 17.

      And this on a “game” blog. That’s how bad things have gotten; that’s how disgustingly feminized almost every western man is.

      These raisin-balled manginae are bad f’ing news my friend.

      Like


    • @Rarebird

      Anyone can see the feminist-inspired shaming in what you just wrote and that 10:1 odds are that you are a female (if male, your brain is wired female).

      You don’t WANT a world where men date women with large age differences. That was bullshit where you said you’d like to believe.

      The shaming language was just dripping off of your every word and its notable that you brought up the canard that I apparently paid for sex most of the time or was advocating having paid sex during my (and others’) successful campaign last year to get the Chateau to stop shaming paid sexual activity (because that’s what the feminists want PUA leaders to do while they and the their “Christian” allies pass laws making paid sex a criminal activity). I’m completely against the use of professionals, where no game is required to convince them to do what they had not been planning to do or even thinking about.

      The Chateau, apparently seeing all the feminists and aspies attacking innocent things like spontaneous non-professional lap-dancing for a twenty dollar bill, sensibly wrote that paid sexual activity cannot necessarily be categorized as beta, omega or alpha without looking at the details of each case.

      The words “Yes, but it’s not alpha’ are, therefore, no longer a valid way for a sock-puppet to shame something she or he would probably like to see criminalized.

      Anyway, you were just saying “Give up all men over a certain age. Just give up. Working out can’t help a man stay in the game with young women just like working out cannot help an older women stay sexually attractive to younger men”.

      Sorry, asshole, but nobody’s buying your equalist ideology.

      The #1 drive of feminism is to shame older men into not dating younger women while trying to educate younger women not to date older men.

      Your comment smells like a dead rat as a result.

      But I’ll play your game right back at you:

      First of all, I’m nowhere near 60 but Steven Segall and Bruce Willis are that age and could do just fine with women at the age of consent. Segall didn’t have to act in the filming of “Machete” recently.

      So it just isn’t true that a man of 60 can’t pull 17 year olds regularly. I’m about a decade younger than that, however.

      I know that feminists really, really, really wish this were not true. This makes you a feminist troll for at least carrying water for them on this point.

      A new girlfriend, aged 20, thinks I’m mid thirties. So does the one that I supposedly “stalked” by visiting her store in what was a rare exception to game principles six weeks ago. The fact of the matter is, when not indoctrinated with feminism, young women really don’t go out of their way learning how to accurately ascertain how old a guy is. They don’t care that much.

      And I get along better with well-off young women who don’t need US citizenship than with peasants who, contrary to the bullshit feminist “sex trafficking” propaganda in the US, are not prone to socialize with foreigners in large numbers. Nice try, however, to forward the big feminist meme of downplaying the success of men who get laid overseas.

      So, yes, from that one field report where one sentence seems to have gotten up your rectum like a baseball bat, all the 17 year old’s colleagues did like me and now she and I are dating (she turned 18 this month).

      I wouldn’t have bothered to published the story if it weren’t true, and it says something about your support for the feminist frame if you need to harp on it as a way of making sure PUAs keep supporting the broad American feminist definition of so-called “stalking”.

      It’s a fact that Anti-Stalking Laws are anti-male and a major MRA issue where the problem is that Americans and Brits have broadened the definition of a word that doesn’t even exist in non-feminist cultures.

      How did Americans and Brit “males” turn into such wimps that they will let themselves be shamed into regulating themselves in terms of where they physically go.

      How low have western “males” fallen when they refer to speaking with a 17 year old female as “accosting” her?

      Scenario: A supermarket cashier gives you her phone number at a night club but later flakes. You shop at that store all the time. Would an Alpha stop shopping there? Answer: No (he’d try to use a different cashier maybe), but you’d be surprised how many American betas would do just that out of fear that she’d tell the manager that they were “stalking” her.

      There’s the famous story of the two Chase Bank employees dating in Manhattan where the guy was in IT at the Wall Street tower and the girl was in marketing at the Midtown building. Well past the kissing stage, he happened to be at a meeting in midtown and the meeting ended at 5PM. This was in the 90s before cell phones so he just went down to her floor to see if she was still working. She wasn’t so he used one of her desk Post-Its to say he’d dropped by after a meeting. She broke up with him the next day in an email saying “You probably don’t need to be told why” and he wrote back “Yes, I understand. I shouldn’t have done that.”

      WTF? The guy did nothing wrong and it’s long been a problem with the PUA community to coddle various American anti-male attitudes in young women, by pretending that a man who fails with a woman actually was entirely at fault because he “violated a game principle” = “violated a feminist stipulation on how men are supposed to behave”.

      This blog at least heavily slams illogical behavior, especially on the part of many indoctrinated American women.

      I want to think you’re out there actually doing this stuff!

      Great. Now we’re getting somewhere if you’re male. I’d have to be mentally sick to the extreme to spend time lying my ass off on a blog, so Occam’s Razor should tell you, if you’re male, that I’m telling the truth and that, if you want to date college students, you might want to wake up, listen up and start trying to get a decent sex life for yourself rather than spreading your bile on behalf of those who don’t WANT what I’ve written to be true. Your first lesson, if male, would be to GET THE HELL OUT OF THE USA.

      If male, you’ve surely never been outside of the feminist world because I’ve seen ugly short guys do better than I do.

      @Gorbachev has written that most expats have to shut the fuck up on PUA sites because nobody would believe them when they describe their social lives. That’s sad for the poor souls stuck living among feminists that they can’t even believe what life could be like for them themselves if they only traveled some. Expats couldn’t care less if an idiot decides to be the horse who had been led to water but refuses to drink.

      And no, before you ask, I’ve never exaggerated anything to fulfill the ideological premise that men can date much younger women. For instance, I originally wrote that the 17 year old above was 18. That’s because I hadn’t learned yet that she was lying about her age when we met.

      If anything, by pointing out that flaking is epidemic among the hottest women, I’m doing the opposite of exaggerating how easy it is to date younger women. There’s nothing easy about it.

      It’s rough. It’s stressful. It reguires many hours at the gym. It requires putting up with brains that probably won’t be completely developed until age 23.

      I can see how most 25 year old guys would give up on dating 18 year olds. They’re a pain in the ass.

      But it can be done and needs to remain legal.

      And when a man can date one type of woman, he can date several of that type. Think about it. That’s what this blog is here for.

      I agree the general message is ideological. So is it’s opposite ideology: Feminism. I’m in your face for that reason.

      Like


    • And if a man met Brittany Spears herself at a night club and convinced her to lap dance for him for $100, that would be alpha without question.

      It was ideologically important for me and others last year to make damned sure that the PUA community did not follow the feminist party line that paid sexual activity was never alpha, no matter what.

      The feminists were using PUAs to recommend approved activities.

      One needs to go with the assumption that, if the feminists would approve of a PUA meme, it’s probably in need of changing so they’d be suitably horrified by it.

      Like


      • 1) Not sure what your deal with lap dances is. They’re not appealing to me in the least and vaguely humiliating in several ways: you pay, you don’t really get anything, and you get the afterglow of sexual frustration.

        2) Bruce Willis is not an example of the idea that 60 year olds can date 17 year olds. He is rich and famous. 60 year olds do not date 17 year olds unless there is some exceptional outlying quality. I think this is just common sense and game shouldn’t be expected to remedy such large physical gaps. It’s not a failing of game, just a natural limit of life.

        3) I’m not sure why you’re arguing that I don’t want men to date women with 40 year old age gaps. No problem with it, but it’s just not realistic, and certainly not realistic as a continuous life strategy.

        4) The possibility that you are mentally ill has not been overlooked!

        5) Arguing that whatever I say is “feminist” is not an argument. I’m also not sure why you are so concerned about being “shamed.” I hope I wasn’t shaming you–I was celebrating the awesomeness of you tracking women down at physical locations. To clarify: I don’t really care whether this is termed “stalking” or not, it’s just not attractive and perhaps some mythical 17 year old gives you a pass on it, but it’s not a “contrarian” move–it’s just some needy desperation.

        6) Your chase bank and grocery store examples are inapposite. Nothing wrong there. Different from going out of your way to see if a girl was having trouble with her phone. Even in Eastern Europe, people don’t have trouble with their phones. She must have been getting paid at this retail job of hers, so she could probably afford the few nickels to take your calls.

        7) Paid sex is not alpha. It may not be beta in certain instances where convenience is paramount, but there is nothing alpha in its demonstration. Why do you care about how it is framed in comments on the internet though? Just do it if you like. But certainly the qualities this blog talks about as alpha are not put into use when you pay for sex. Are you DHVing, dominating them, tingling them? No, you’re paying them.

        8) More field reports!

        Like


      • think you are spot on ..difference between hunter killer and beggar ..advanced begging concepts not really alpha

        here in brasil… there are guys who wait in front of busy restaurants and help you park ur car ..and offer to wash it..or put cardboard on the windshield .. they are in general a pain in the ass ..no one needs or wants there help..but they are accepted..here’s the funny part..

        if you talk with these begging car parking helpers from their perspective they are working ..and indeed work at that restaurant..

        Like


      • ps

        my real problem with most of this is content without context.. arrogance is ugly confidence is cool … playing well can be admired..winning by cheating should not be.. I am aware the definition here for ALPHA expands and contracts .. I think learning to play the game well in understanding womens true motives …not what they say.

        Most PUA’s are lacking in skills understanding ability appropriateness.. …look at that video of the comedian jumping around women in London
        women are not an enemy to be conquered… conquer yourself first

        Like


      • The comedian got the numbers of two 19 year olds while he only failed with older less attractive women who really had to stay loyal to the boyfriends they had or risk being lonely for life.

        Game is not a sport to be judged by outside referees like ice skating or gymnastics.

        I don’t know how old you are and you don’t sound like a male but, if you are a male and wouldn’t have sex with a willing 18 year old virgin, then you’re more a faggot than a PUA.

        Like


      • 3) I’m not sure why you’re arguing that I don’t want men to date women with 40 year old age gaps. No problem with it, but it’s just not realistic, and certainly not realistic as a continuous life strategy.

        You claim to be able to say what is realistic, but when anyone describes a reality that doesn’t conform to your expectations, you simply discount it.

        That’s called confirmation bias. You discount any information that doesn’t agree with your premise.

        I once dated a 21 year old. The year before being with me she was with a 60 year old man. He had told her he was forty. After she found out the truth, she stayed with him. They lived together. She was 20 at the time. I lived with her for a year as well.

        The girl who I made orgasm fifteen minutes ago was never with another man, and had never orgasmed in her life before meeting me – not even on her own finger. She turned 22 while living with me. I originally told her that I was 39, but when she found out my true age, she didn’t even blink. By then she’s already hooked and in love.

        Oh – but your confirmation bias won’t allow you to believe that young women are succeptible to love with anyone but similar aged men.

        That’s weak thinking on your part.

        Like


      • @Jason

        1 – If you can’t get off with a good lap dance set done by a 9 or 10, you might be gay. To be humiliated by it means you’ve swallowed a feminist or religious meme OR you read some early PUA literature which tried to fit it’s ideology into the feminist/religious world view. The normal human male will allow a 9 or 10 to get him off without him having to think too much.

        Getting your rocks off doesn’t have to be ideological. Drop the crap about being humiliated by strippers.

        2 – Bruce Willis, John Travolta and Steven Segall could score women in their late teens even if they weren’t famous. It’s the projection of power that works, not the power itself.

        That you’ve got to get into your concrete block.

        What kind of mangina are you that you want to believe that, when you’re 60, you won’t be able to get laid with a hottie? Where does that kind of “sexual attractiveness death wish” come from?

        What do you need to read to understand that women don’t consider looks and age to be in the top 3 priorities?

        Don’t you know that Height is more important than Age to women?

        A 6’2″ male in his fifties with game will beat a 5’9″ beta male in his twenties every.single.time if they both meet her at the same time.

        If you’re really male, why do you wish there to be a “male menopause”.

        I know. It’s the way feminists WANT you to think. They want you to accept a “male menopause”.

        3 – You do have a problem with age gaps although you shouldn’t. Most importantly, you need to recognize that the #1 drive of feminism is to shame older men into not dating younger women and educate younger women into saying “Ewwwww” when given the idea of dating older men.

        If your enemy is feminism, then the enemy of your enemy is your friend. No need to think “Gee, I think I’ll side with the feminists to support them on the issue that irks them most about men”.

        As to realistic, a 30 year age gap is very realistic where feminism hasn’t poisoned women’s minds. Even then, it’s realistic.

        Those who have told you otherwise are older women.

        4 – OK. Great. You feel the need to say that a man who says, on a PUA blog that stresses dating younger, hotter tighter women, that he dates gorgeous young women with a 30 year age gap, has to be mentally sick. He has to be lying.

        I understand. (/sarcasm)

        5 – You ARE arguing from the feminist position. You don’t like large age gaps. The #1 drive of feminism is to prevent age gap relationships. Therefore, you are motivated by feminist thought even if you don’t fully realize it.

        And why do you still have a baseball bat up your ass that, once in my life, I correctly recognized that the best thing to do one morning was to walk into a store and get a date with someone who wasn’t good at phone communication (and, no, women who don’t earn much at their jobs often go weeks without the money to make outgoing calls)?

        Whether that’s “attractive” or not in most situations is not relevant. I’m fully aware of what western women feel about guys showing up unannounced (feminism has trained everyone well on this).

        It worked in that one situation and that’s why I mentioned it off hand.

        You need to understand that different cultures have different ways of thinking about men (some are actually pro-male).

        Also, if a woman doesn’t answer her phone, it doesn’t mean she thinks the man is lower status than she’d prefer. In my case, the young woman didn’t think I was serious about a relationship. I convinced her otherwise.

        No need to have a baseball bat up your ass about that “Jason”.

        It takes a really, sick asperger’s type of mind to continually harp on the idea that I did something wrong in that one instance.

        I got the date. I got the girl.

        If she was mythical and I didn’t just have a spaghetti dinner with her, then why would I have originally exposed myself to Aspie ridicule by writing that I’d gotten a girl doing something against PUA doctrine?

        Think about it. Go back to the original post and ask yourself why I’d make all that up. It’s just a sentence stuck in a long field report.

        And note from that thread that, @AB Dada and I just had a quick misunderstanding where the consensus of the commenters was that we were talking apples and oranges, different kinds of game and different theaters of operation. He has a different MO in life as he prefers to LBJF 9s and 10s and get them to help him secure 7.5s whom he finds more loyal and stable. His harem, last time I checked, consists of 4 women with an average age of 28. That’s not more “realistic” for a 37 year old man. It’s just his preference.

        6 – I didn’t go out of my way to see this girl and successfully get the date. Most young women outside the feminist west actually do have issues with not topping up their prepaid SIM cards all the time.

        You are hating on success; or trying to say I made the elaborate story up or that, if it happened, I really got rejected and she never dated me. I don’t know why I’d go through the trouble to make a field report up.

        Again, why the baseball bat up your ass arguing about someone else’s successful in a MINOR interaction with a woman?

        Is it because, like Rebecca Watson in that elevator, you don’t think it WAS a minor interaction?

        You feel I violated a major ideological principle of yours?

        The only thing I can come up with is that you feel a strong need to defend the feminist ideology that “Stalking is wrong and defined as a man showing up physically without warning. There is no excuse for that in 100% of cases”.

        Just pull the baseball bat out of your ass and we’ll all get along just fine.

        7 – Nobody was arguing last year that any kind of Paid Sexual Activity had to be considered “Alpha”. The ideological imperative in 2010 was that the PUA community recognize that it’s an MRA issue that such activities on the part of the man (customer) not be criminalized.

        Israel and France are trying to criminalize johns worse than they are criminalized now in Norway and Sweden.

        This meant that it was necessary for PUA leaders not to join the feminists and the religious right in trying to shame such activity and call it Omega or even “always beta”.

        That said, I’ve noted that it actually would be alpha if you met Brittany Spears at a night club in LA and got her to do a lap-dance for you for $20. The reasoning is that she wouldn’t really be doing it for the money but because of the thrill. Money is just a prop. And convincing a group of non-professionals to do sexual things for money they don’t need, but because they want a thrill, can’t be ruled beta or omega. If you’d prefer to go back to your hotel room alone and not watch the group lose their clothes, that’s your own asexuality issue. I would call you a beta or worse for that.

        In any case, the faggots like you who would be “humiliated” by a woman giving you a lapdance, need not expend any time trying to humiliate those who would not be humiliated by having a hottie on their lap.

        It’s better for you to spend the time you would have argued with me, by discussing the latest moves by feminists to criminalize “johns” in France, Israel or Norway. That would show that you care about the options you might need when you are 70.

        Review:

        A – Feminists desperately want to shame men who date younger women

        B – Feminists desperately want to retain the frame that “Stalking” is an issue and that men should, in all cases, only be encountered when summoned.

        If the shoe fits, where it.

        Like


    • pretending as if there’s nothing discomfiting about a 60 year old dude sitting around in a room with a bunch of teenagers is some dark comedy.

      Pretending?

      I understand that some guys have an innate sense of strangeness – perhaps a form of disgust or dis-ease – when they see huge age differences. To them something feels off.

      I get it that some men honestly have these feelings. They can’t shake them, and nothing anyone says will change that.

      However many men don’t have this feeling, and we have successfully romanced younger women. It’s in many ways similar to romancing an older woman, except you play up your authority more, and she is younger, tighter, and hotter.

      The guys who get ill feelings with large age groups seem unable to fit into their mental maps all the data that comes in. They discount huge chunks of reality, just because that reality makes them feel bad.

      Young girls are a viable romantic option.

      There are endless real life examples of this, and some men have decades of example after example.

      Like


  120. on July 26, 2011 at 4:35 pm Abelard Lindsey

    I don’t get the proselytizing of the kids thing. You know, if you were offered the opportunity to start in or invest in a business or, perhaps, an expat job opportunity, you would not just jump in. You would do some due diligence and decide if the opportunity was real and what the risk/benefit trade off was. This is considered rational as such an opportunity could cost up to several hundred K in money and 5-7 years in opportunity cost. In the case of having kids, you’re looking at a 20 year commitment and at least several hundred K in costs, if not more. It seems quite silly that due diligence is considered rational and proper in the first case but not the second.

    It seems to me that since the second represents a larger commitment on one’s part than the first, that one should want to do even more due diligence and forethought in consideration of the second than the first. It seems that this is incomprehensible to certain individuals on the blogs when the subject of kids comes up.

    Like


  121. […] One of the biggest strengths of mens rights is it’s ability to provide data and evidence: Leave alone MRA, they have a capability to provide data and evidence way beyond this One-what blogger could ever do. […]

    Like


  122. pretending as if there’s nothing discomfiting about a 60 year old dude sitting around in a room with a bunch of teenagers is some dark comedy.

    Pretending?

    I understand that some guys have an innate sense of strangeness – perhaps a form of disgust or dis-ease – when they see huge age differences. To them something feels off.

    I get it that some men honestly have these feelings. They can’t shake them, and nothing anyone says will change that.

    However many men don’t have this feeling, and we have successfully romanced younger women. It’s in many ways similar to romancing an older woman, except you play up your authrity more, and she is younger, tighter, and hotter.

    The guys who get ill feelings with large age groups seem unable to fit into their mental maps all the data that comes in. They discount huge chunks of reality, just because that reality makes them feel bad.

    Young girls are a viable romantic option.

    There are endless real life examples of this, and some men have decades of example after example.

    Like


  123. Have you ever let a young woman who was not emotionally mature go..meaning you knew you could use your ability to get what you want from her but knew it would have an eventual bad ending for her..or in general not an educating or enlightening or loving experience for her ..because she has easily percieved needs.. even though it’s legal.. she is willing ?

    Thats the prob imo …most cant say no because they operate from starrving begging mindset..

    Like


    • I have no idea what you are talking about.

      I don’t consider my influence to be negative.

      I realize that a lot of people consider sex a perversion and the more they give it to people they aren’t going to marry, the more they are corrupting and ruining and degrading the person.

      I feel the opposite.

      Like


      • Im not sure you have NO idea what Im talking about.. so every woman you ever met that you could sleep with that you wanted to, you did?

        Sex is not a perversion but me playing chess with beginners and winning over and over and over ..not impressive ..now playing with their emotions dreams expectations aspirations.. with only a concern for myself ..not the way I operate

        an influence ..like certain chemicals mixed together have reactions.. those reactions are defined by some as good some as bad ..an 18 yr old pregnant in one culture is great news in another it’s an agonizing decision and pressure

        Power is a responsibility or not?

        Like


      • ps just re- read my post ..I call bullshit ..you understand exactly what I meant ..you are a smart guy..maybe a guy like jerry fully self deluded doesnt ..I am sure you do..

        Like


      • I think I implied that I understand you, but that I feel the opposite as you do.

        What you see as corrupting I see as educational and liberating and a celebration and a personal growth.

        Like


      • Yes, I still don’t really know what you are talking about.

        I don’t give false expectations when I seduce.

        Sometimes the girl will insist on holding delusional expectations, no matter how many times I interrupt her delusion with wake up calls of cold splashes of reality, but my only duty is to be honest – not to avoid being part of the mental mistakes she insists on making.

        Do I sleep with every girl I get the opportunity to? I usually date out of my league, so such opportunities don’t just walk up and tap me on the shoulder. I have to work on them. So, yes.

        Like


  124. so since we are trying to understand each other ..

    a starving man is always hungry ..and even when food is plentiful doesnt turn down a meal offered ..it has become a habit for him

    there is a completely different operational mindset that doesnt come from habit

    .. not saying YOU..but men who have no self awareness about the ripples they create in others lives ..or worse pretend that these are great learning experiences for a young 18 yr old kid are not being honest or fair … getting back to the original point..you may have it together thru self awareness and appropriate affection.. the guy above ..I wouldnt let him alone with any women I care about under the age of 30 ..his mindset is shown..

    Like


    • What guy above do you refer to?

      “or worse pretend that these are great learning experiences for a young 18 yr old kid are not being honest or fair”

      I’ve been careful to cultivate my sexuality. I don’t pay for sex and I don’t sleep with people I don’t want to be intimate. My habit is to feel strong love. This is a careful choice of mine. I’m confident that my sexuality is always a positive personal influence.

      Like


  125. seduce means to lead astray – I find seducing to be vampiric..

    I lead people towards their best selves ..men women boys girls..all ages ..doesnt matter because I dont come from need or want..

    I stopped acting like I was a starving begger

    Like


    • Seduce means to be led astray?

      That’s a negative association you have built up. I’m glad I haven’t chosen to create and reinforce that negative association.

      We seem to have widely disparate emotional tones and categories associated with certain behaviors.

      As for starving, I’m not sure where that fits in. Sure, no one wants to be starving or to have that lead to decisions you’ll later regret. But even if I’m lonely and desperate for sex, I still don’t see getting some as corrupting.

      I’ve never had corrupting sex.

      I just don’t view young girls as pure innocent babes that get corrupted by fucking like you seem to do. Not even the virgins.

      Like


    • @brasil61

      You are clearly mentally sick if you think relationships with good men, who have the experience to give great advice, hurt the women they give the love, affection or advice to.

      Smart men date out of their league, looks-wise. Unlike loser betas, they don’t project the way men think (that looks are #1) onto women who consider other aspects of the opposite sex more important, such as sense of humor, knowledge, feeling that he will always be there at least as a friend, etc.

      So it’s incumbent upon a guy to date out of his league if he has a good measure of the more important things women want. Age difference is usually the only way for men to date out of their league but it’s all about looks, not age.

      It just happens that the best looking women tell men, when the men ask, that they are 18.

      Men would prefer to hear “I’m really 35 but I look 18”.

      The young woman I “stalked” by physically approaching one time and securing a date with her, just spent 4 hours with me including cooking a great spaghetti dinner. It’s possible she thinks I’ll marry her. We do talk about that. But because she’s out of my league, she won’t be hurt if I don’t marry her. But what she *knows* is that I will always be her friend.

      It’s outrageous that any man believes relationships hurt women so much.

      It would be worse if I were dating a much older woman and talking about marriage while not really being ready to follow through. Younger women can cut men slack on not being ready to commit because they are also feeling apprehension about committing.

      Noone I’ve ever dated has been “pumped and dumped” in terms of my not taking their calls anymore. The 19 year olds I dated when I was in my late thirties are now thirty-somethings themselves and mostly all good friends.

      The one who died of cancer wrote me a long letter goodbye specifically outlining how I’d brightened her life in the time we were together.

      Women prefer 5 minutes of love to a lifetime of a boring relationship.

      If a man must break things up, he let’s her do it and think it’s her idea.

      If a woman gets fat due to poor diet and lack of exercise, she’s broken a major social contract and he is not responsible for her happiness in terms of having to marry her.

      Read this blog’s archives. There should be ZERO bullshit coming from males on the issue of dating younger, hotter, tighter women until one dies of old age (my uncle died of a heart attack in a sorority house at age 75).

      But then, I’m sure we’re dealing with feminist trolls on this topic.

      Like


      • got me dead to rights shamer beta and feminist troll – insightful read into my points made, intelligence and psyche ..no wonder you are a huge success with the chics

        do you understand what this phrase refers too

        “Me thinks thou dost protest too much.” ..

        Like


      • @brasil61

        Lady MacBeth fits your personality and what you’re doing. Think about it.

        Like


  126. Betadyermom

    Sure, the guy at inmalafide.com (or is that white nationalism, I can’t recall). And all of the more banal takes on HBD which seem to encircle the MRA-o-sphere.

    I assume your referring to Ryu. He is a WN – not that you will make a distinction between the two…”White Supremacist” is a stronger pejorative.

    Regardless of one’s opinion on this stuff, it is incredibly fringe and toxic to the mainstream political spectrum. Not to mention entirely useless, if the goal is to change the parameters of family law.

    The subject of race realism is toxic to race deniers, not reasonable, rational individuals. You would be surprised how much of us there are. Sure it is not mainstream – the chilling effect of political correctness cut deep…but there will be a pendulum shift soon. Count t on it.

    Like


  127. se·duce (s-ds, -dys)
    tr.v. se·duced, se·duc·ing, se·duc·es
    1. To lead away from duty, accepted principles, or proper conduct. See Synonyms at lure.
    2. To induce to engage in sex.

    starving eat any time you can = sex any time you can get it

    you stated you date out of your league so you dont turn down any opportunities..

    I dont have a league ..so if I choose to sleep with a woman it is on my terms ..not hers..

    the guy above..in the 80’s ..he used to wait till the end of the night at a club and swoop down on the very drunk helpless or insecure..it was always descibed as a score.. ..we would call these guys vultures..in fact one guys nickname was vultch ..you out there Johnnie ..true ..its a style..

    Like


  128. “I’ve been careful to cultivate my sexuality. I don’t pay for sex and I don’t sleep with people I don’t want to be intimate. My habit is to feel strong love. This is a careful choice of mine. I’m confident that my sexuality is always a positive personal influence”

    nice very commendable and healthy awareness of yourself ..cant ask for more..imo ..drink to you..

    Like


  129. @Jason

    The bottom line is that, while it might not be alpha in your book for a man to open and establish attraction with a group of 4 college girls at a bar and convince them to go back to his place for a strip tease before his wife comes home (doing all this to conveniently save time)…

    BUT, you would probably be a faggot or an omega to refuse to come along and watch.

    The baseball bat up your ass on this says you’re neither – you have to be an ideologically inspired female.

    Like


  130. Ideologically, it’s disappointing to see so many beta males write about how their lives will never be as exciting as those of movie stars.

    Who says game can’t make your life BETTER than that of movie stars?

    Where does the ideology come from that says “stay down, you could never have the options of Bruce Willis?”

    Most movie stars don’t really have any game. Look at Mel Gibson. Look at the way Paul McCartney and Alec Baldwin found themselves squirming under the family court systems.

    Jack Nicholson is one of the few movie stars I’d imagine have any game.

    And I know he’d do just fine at his age if he wasn’t famous.

    Like


  131. @Jerry

    Your last name wouldn’t happen to be Sizzler by any chance?

    I know you enjoy re-framing what I’ve said to be “ewww, an age gap” but of course all I’m saying is that 30-40 year age gap relationships are not realistic for most guys, and they’re not realistic for most guys who know game. Age might not be a top priority for women, but it’s hardly meaningless either. The exception, of course, is likely you, who blessedly for all of us takes breaks from your teenage stable to post voluminous essays in blog comments.

    So, not wishing for a lack of hotties in my golden years, but simply understanding that age does matter at a certain point (as do looks).

    We can just “agree to disagree” in feminist parlance on whether Bruce Willis or the others you mention would do just as well with very young girls regardless of their wealth or fame.

    So, as for getting off via a lapdance, maybe you are the kind that likes to jizz in his pants, but I’m thinking of some slut rubbing up on you in a strip club for $20 while the goons you’re with jeer and then she abruptly stops and leaves when the song is done. Kind of depressing if you get off on that kind of thing.

    As far as the paying college girls to strip before your wife comes home, I think this is another awesome example of the kind of stuff I hope you are really doing. I mean, sure I’d look at some college chicks get naked, but it’s a whole other thing to go to a bar, meet women, and tell them to come home and strip for money. What kind of fantasy is that? I’d rather just game them and try for the SNL. Your whole I’m-paying-but-in-control thing is just never going to pass as alpha. Come to think of it, it’s the kind of thing some old creeper who tracks down women at physical locations would think up!

    ps. I don’t think the chief objective of feminism is to shame men away from age gap relationships. Your paranoia has clouded the larger picture for you. Feminism is about taking power away from men in a zero sum scenario.

    Like


    • @Jason

      You’re starting to sound a lot more like you’re really a male now, mainly with the sincere line about hoping I haven’t been making things up.

      You are entirely correct that a 30 year age gap is not realistic for most men including most men who know game. If a man has smoked a lot or spent much time in the sun, he probably can’t do more than a 15 year age gap, regardless of whether he lies about his age. Long telomeres (good genes) are necessary because, in the first days of a relationship, she has to think there’s only a 10 or 15 year age gap, at least in the Caucasian world.

      And gyms are empty around the world. Every time I’m working out in an empty gym, I know I’m bypassing much younger men as competition.

      But the biggest factor is that men in the west have been beaten down to be defeatists on the subject.

      The Chateau says that a man’s age, to a woman, needs to be “How old do you think I am? X? Correct” or, in the USA, exactly 10 years but not more than she says her age is. What’s great is that the youngest legal women have no idea how to judge a man’s age. A 30 year old woman, on the other hand, can guess the real age of a man quickly.

      In many foreign countries, American men are treated like rock stars (or movie stars) because they have the same accent, clothing style and demeanor that the local women had dreamed about since they saw, for instance, “Die Hard”. That is why I’ve been enjoying life overseas. Foreign women have actually told me “You act and talk like Bruce Willis,” where this is so because they have met no other Americans beside me.

      Think about that for a second: If the only other American guy that a foreign woman has ever seen was Bruce Willis, then she’s going to see more similarity than difference upon meeting a similar looking American compared to all the local guys.

      American women have seen too many American guys so there’s no way you’re going to remind them of any famous American.

      In fact, this factor is so cool that I strongly believe any American man is stupid not to move to a pro-American country where US males are treated like movie stars.

      It’s also a big factor that a man live in an area where the female to male ratio is higher than 1.2 to 1.0 in real terms, which somehow tends to make it so there are 5 hotties for every single male (or 20 hotties for every alpha).

      A man shouldn’t live in a country or city where he isn’t spotting at least a 9 every few seconds while riding in a taxi.

      I understand that the highest suicide rates among American men are where the female to male ratio is below 1 (par). Alaska and Colorado and, sadly, the US military in the barren middle east, drive men to do themselves in.

      I really do spend most of my time dating serious (traditional like Amish) young women and trying to find the one(s) to have kids with, so I’m not into paid sexual activity all that much unless a cool opportunity arises (I see a group of hotties getting drunk).

      I go to a night club only once in three months, preferring day game where I meet women who don’t smoke, drink and have to be home by 10PM.

      I’ve only ever seen good professional lap-dancing by college students on the US west coast and midwest, as well as in Canada. You don’t wear real pants but a clean pair of sweatpants and catch a solid, fresh smelling college freshman as she comes on her shift. There won’t be any leering men around you because such low lifes can’t afford to be there, especially in a bad economy, and you can choose your seating. It’s the only thing I miss about North America. In Europe you don’t get that because European strip clubs are just fronts for brothels and the girls don’t seem clean enough for me to want to be near. I think of intercourse only as something I’d do with a virgin or low counter.

      Regarding working the whore fantasies of non-pros (total amateurs): I find it is easier to game a group of women than it is to game an individual woman. You can tease them all about coming home with you to strip as a group and it won’t sound serious enough to be seen in a bad light (they’ll be entertained)…but most importantly, Group ASD is easier to lower than Individual ASD (Anti Slut Defense).

      The Closer? Tell them you’ve had a fantasy about stripping yourself in front of a group of clothed women. The acronym for this is CFNM.

      There is virtually zero ASD to get around if you start with that. They will all agree to watch you strip. You just have to have the guts to do it. And I know most guys, even those with great bodies, don’t have the nerve.

      But once they observe your ass back at your place or one of their places, they will feel comfortable in seeing you again and returning the favor as a group on another evening. Unless they are drunk in which case they will start stripping when you do on the first go round.

      Later you work on getting the one you like best to start seeing you for real. She’ll already feel comfortable with you in a bedroom so the relationship will move along quickly if it moves at all.

      That’s all just one strategy one can use to “mix things up”.

      Regarding paranoia about feminism: They really do troll around the net and feminists really do consider older men dating younger women to be the biggest thing they’d like to “socially reengineer”. They want to criminalize prostitution for that reason and, as part of the zero sum game, they are forever expanding the definition of “stalking” and making new anti-stalking laws.

      Like


  132. @Jerry & xsplat,

    You guys show heroic patience with these snivelling losers who deludedly believe that 18 yr old women are “fragile” “children” “hurt” by fucking and coming with a “creepy” older man.

    Yeah, real “hurt.”

    The rot is deep in the wood. And xspalt my friend, it’s not some “genetic” twist of the strand that makes these manginae haters. It’s hardcore feminist indoctrination from the Matron Mafia.

    These quislings have neither the brains nor the sack to enjoy a life of pleasure.

    Fuck ’em.

    Like


    • n/a – if those are the ideas you took away from my posts ..ur an idiot..

      Jerry comes off as beggar game.. and xsplat I have to take at his word…

      as for 18 yr olds… I can beat them in EVERYTHING …business education application patience ..so …obviously I can out wit them..if I wanted for my personal satisfaction… it DEPENDS on the way the 50 yr old guy acts
      my bet is most come off as beggars ..

      I’d bet if you saw the video of certain guys lives on here ..it wouldn’t look anything like what’s advertised ..that’s the funny thing about self -perception

      look at dork pick up game dude ..he is so out of it ..he posted that ..proudly ..most men w self respect would look at that and say ..sheeeesh ..I have to learn something ..or maybe this isnt for me..

      Like


  133. That murderer in Norway killed some major hotties. Their photos are now in newspapers everywhere and I’m finally feeling the gravity of what he did like a seat belt during a sudden stop. I couldn’t imagine killing a potential mother of my child. The victims would have been as fertile as women get. He should have been hunting for phone numbers.

    I’m wondering if he felt they were out of his league and that he wouldn’t have a chance gaming them. He was only 32 but Norwegian society is apparently so equalist that he could have been trained to think there could never be a connection with women 10-15 years younger. His ideology might have taught him not to game the mostly white, native Norwegian, hotties he shot.

    I know he never read this blog. Couldn’t have.

    Like


    • Jerry, your comments on this thread have been awesome!

      On this one, however (granted, on a different topic), you started off great then went downhill fast. Disagree with their politics all you want, oppose the invasion of those who refuse to assimilate, yada yada… but he killed dozens of healthy young white people (and in many cases pretty girls/soon to be pretty women – as you noted) .

      He was not “trained to be equalist”, he is just an evil piece of shit. (A former friend described him as cold and calculating..)

      Like


  134. This issue about sucess of two parent households is not a race issue, comments stating blacks and latins kids turn out bad kids. There are many black and latin countries where the two and single parent households turn out great and educated kids, Without the help from the government. The us has a sad educational system, so blame it on the us, not an entire race. Get out more.

    Like


  135. So I now have a Christian cross as my automated avatar on the new blog. 😉

    Related to the conversation above, let’s ask ourselves:

    How many women over 50 could go out tomorrow and get an 18 year old male off by sundown if she wanted?

    The answer is the majority of 50+ women could at least get their hands down a young man’s pants without him resisting too much and many cougars would be welcomed before groups of young men for a striptease.

    How many men over 50 could go out tomorrow and give an 18 year old female an orgasm by sundown?

    The answer is almost none (could move that fast) and those born in a misandrist society would erroneously find it hard to imagine any male over 50 being welcomed before groups of young women for a striptease or ever bring an 18 year old to climax.

    Does this mean that older women are more sexually attractive to younger males than older men are to younger females? Does this mean that the body of a 50+ female is inherently more sexually attractive than the body of a 50+ male?

    The answer, of course, is a resounding OF COURSE NOT.

    It is common knowledge and evolutionary biology demonstrates, that older men are logarithmically more sexually attractive to young females than older women are to younger men.

    So why do so many western males not really believe the truth?

    The only reason why female cougars might *seem* to be doing better than male “cougars” is because of the following factors:

    1 – Western feminist propaganda, which can also cause western 18 year old females to feel disgusted by older men they wouldn’t have been disgusted with if they hadn’t been propagandized about it.

    2 – 18 year old females have more options/power than 18 year old males

    3 – 18 year old females are slightly less inclined to get into STRs and ONSs than their male counterparts

    But even still, even in the west, at any moment a male over 50 is more likely to be having sex with an 18 year old female than a female over 50 with an 18 year old male. Even when taking into account all the furtive cougar one night stands.

    And it’s not just because of power, authority, status, etc. (nor is it only the super rich and famous getting such action).

    The older male body is more sexually attractive to young females than the older female body is to young males.

    Common sense and evo bio prove it. Yet feminized westerners don’t want to believe it.

    This is why American males have to recognize how misandrist it would be to accept or be amused at the idea of naked 50+ cougars in bed with their college age nephews but be disgusted at the very thought of a naked male in his fifties in bed with their college age nieces.

    If your nephew and his friends would be entertained to the max by seeing by 50+ cougar professor strip, your niece and her friends would be entertained to the max if their 50+ male college professor did the same.

    Unless they are in certain parts of the feminized west.

    Like


  136. […] criticizes and praises OneSTDV’s “Traditionalist […]

    Like