Polyamory Is Disguised Polygamy

The Man Who Was once wrote:

The basic problem with the Sex at Dawn thesis is that I just don’t see how it gets around two problems. First, men who get more than their share of sex and who exclude other men will pass on more of their genes. Second, women who only mate with the top males will get higher quality genes for their offspring which means they are more likely to survive and reproduce. Given those Darwinian incentives I don’t see how polyamoury is anything other than a disguised version of polygamy.

To get around this problem one would have to posit some kind of group selection, but that opens up a whole thorny nest of problems. While I find some of the group selectionist ideas of D.S. Wilson rather intriguing, especially as regards religion, I remain extremely skeptical, as the objections to group selection put forward by George Williams and others are really quite devastating. There would have to be some sort of really strong mechanism for punishing cheaters and equally distributing the sex for it to work and I just haven’t seen any evidence put forward of such a mechanism in our evolutionary past.

I’ve cast a jaundiced eye at the Sex at Dawn thesis in this post. The commenter above is onto something. Polyamory — multiple and simultaneous sexual relationships — means, in practice, a few high value dudes hording all the pussy. Multitudinously and concurrently. Polyamory cheerleaders, like Christopher Ryan, note the shape of our penis heads and go on to weave a happy utopia of free love where all the men and all the women get their rocks off whenever and however they wish, like the bonobos (who, by the way, are territorially squeezed compared to their more prodigiously successful chimp cousins). But he has to ignore female hypergamous mate choice and male jealousy to concoct this vision of a peaceful hedonist paradise.

The reality would be considerably darker; women would still want to bang the alpha, leaving the beta male out in the cold, clawing and scratching for rode-worn scraps, but now shackled with the obligation to help provide for kids that are likely not his own. What then happens is a complete breakdown in male investment in women and families. Men spend their working hours battling it out in vast, unproductive “Who’s the Sexiest?” competitions for privileged access to a veritable harem of vaj. If you think this is a recipe for creating and sustaining an advanced modern society filled with creature comforts, I have a grass hut somewhere in the Congo to sell you.

How, in a polyamorous society, are you going to arrange things so that women dispense their pussy equitably among high and low status men? As noted by the commenter, this would require some major group selection modulated behavior to be workable; a woman would fuck for the survival of the tribe, instead of the survival of her offspring. That would be awfully magnanimous of her! It’s like arranging a society where men are happy to boff fat, old and ugly chicks with equal attention to romantic detail that they give the hot young babes.

If anything, a culturally endorsed polyamorous dating market that virtually guaranteed a steady provider payout for disloyal, promiscuous women and their bastard spawn would help resolve the female tension for male commitment and good male genes in favor of the latter. Betas would be sexually shunned even more than they are now. LJBFing and undignified platonic beta orbiting would reach epic proportions. This blog would be classified as treason against the state and an incitement to rebellion and be shut down.

A happy hippie free love egalitarian commune it would not be. Widespread polyamorous practice where childrearing is done by the village and all men, uncertain of paternity, contribute resources to the well-being of the single moms and their unholy bastard squirtage, will not convince women to equally distribute their sexual favors among the men. Just the opposite; it would liberate women to single-mindedly pursue the few alphas in their purview, knowing full well that a beta blood-latticed safety net exists to protect them from destitution. In other words, socially-sanctioned and state-supported polyamory lets women have their cake and eat it, too. The only trade-off is that they will have to share scarce high value lovers with other women. Yet as any tour of a college campus will demonstrate, most women in their prime would prefer to share an alpha stud than extract commitment from a beta schlub. Until the wall looms, that is. Heh.

But why speculate? We now have evidence of what happened to polyamorous early human ancestors in the distant past — they went extinct.

The team found that the fossil finger ratios of Neanderthals, and early members of the human species, were lower than most living humans, which suggests that they had been exposed to high levels of prenatal androgens. This indicates that early humans were likely to be more competitive and promiscuous than people today. […]

Emma Nelson, from the University of Liverpool’s School of Archaeology, Classics and Egyptology, explains: “It is believed that prenatal androgens affect the genes responsible for the development of fingers, toes and the reproductive system. We have recently shown that promiscuous primate species have low index to ring finger ratios, while monogamous species have high ratios. We used this information to estimate the social behaviour of extinct apes and hominins. Although the fossil record is limited for this period, and more fossils are needed to confirm our findings, this method could prove to be an exciting new way of understanding how our social behaviour has evolved.”

Until we can reengineer hypergamy out of women’s hindbrains, advocacy for unconstrained polyamory in all but the most backward societies is DOA.

So what does nonviolent, consensual polyamory look like in modern real life when it’s purposefully tried? (No, it’s not SWPL. Even in that hothouse culture the chicks swarm to the top hipsters.) Think aging beta boomers milking their last ounce of testosterone by swapping barren hag wives. It’s best summed up in the following Chateau maxim:

Maxim #109: Consensual polyamory is a contrived hookup service for undesirable sexual market rejects.






Comments


  1. First

    Like


  2. Maxim 109? I think I’ve missed several.

    Like


  3. that picture fills me with revulsion
    where do you get his shit
    take it down for the
    love of god

    Like


  4. That purposefully emplaced statue of Alice off to the right looking down on these genetic losers is totally priceless. I wonder if someone was being intentionally ironic or dubiously humorous.

    Through the looking glass indeed…

    Like


  5. We have already reached the amorous society.

    Women having children with the bad-boy when they are younger and then marrying the beta-provider.

    What bodes even worse for society is that the women do not even have to marry the provider.

    Our taxes take care of that for her. The State has created a polyamorous society, all run on the platform of “do it for the children”.

    Like


  6. Edit: that should read “poly-amorous society”.

    Like


  7. “Yet as any tour of a college campus will demonstrate, most women in their prime would prefer to share an alpha stud than extract commitment from a beta schlub. Until the wall looms, that is. Heh.”

    Oh yes, this is true. I see it everyday.

    The American Pie Beta House films would like for us to believe that college means free sex with multiple slutty females for every male but that occupation is reserved for only the Alpha males on campus.

    There are boatloads of guys on campus that are getting NOTHING while the alphas have harems. In college where pre-selection and social circle game reigns supreme, alphas can literally do nothing but be alive and enjoy women throwing themselves at them.

    It is fun to watch how women act when they themselves don’t know why they are doing it.

    Like


  8. on November 18, 2010 at 12:32 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    Polyamory Is Disguised Polygamy

    lozlozlzl

    hey the FED funds Polyamory as they have the same pscyhology that all the beat males exist to work and pay off the det created by ben beranke and asscocker tucker max rhymes iwth goldman sax zlzlozllzlzzlo

    Like


  9. I can see polyamory plausibly working in a small, semi-inbred unsophisticated tribe. The “alpha gradient” in a group like this would be very shallow – there wouldn’t be much difference between the top alpha and the bottom beta, as it were. A level playing field. You would expect this in such a group because the entire gene pool is confined to a few dozen humans.

    The addition of male qualities – class, status, wealth – that traditionally attract women don’t really start to show up in human history until the agricultural age when the expanding population allowed natural born alphas to put other men to work or send them to war and thus distinguish themselves from the beta masses.

    Like


  10. i remember that pic from a post many, many moons ago

    Like


  11. I looked at that pic and just threw up a little.

    Like


  12. on November 18, 2010 at 12:35 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    oops sorry for msspleeling abobeve:

    “hey the FED funds Polyamory as they have the same pscyhology that all the beta males exist to work and pay off the debt created by ben beranke and asscocker tucker max rhymes with goldman sax zlzlozllzlzzlo

    Like


  13. on November 18, 2010 at 12:35 pm Beta States of America

    Someone here hasn’t been to a few choice couple’s swap clubs on the US West Coast and in Europe.

    Sure, 80% of the couples are over 50, but the exceptions…oh the exceptions…

    Like


  14. feral1404

    That purposefully emplaced statue of Alice off to the right looking down on these genetic losers is totally priceless. I wonder if someone was being intentionally ironic or dubiously humorous.

    not ironic – barbarously cruel – brutish.
    the statuary only adds to my torment
    Dante has found a deeper level

    Like


  15. The end result of polyamory and polygame seem the same- fewer men fucking multiple women and the bearing their offspring.

    There are subtle diffrences between the two systems that make all the difference in the world however.

    Polygamy is a masculine system, in most polygamas systems the partriarch chooses where the women go; female choice is eliminated from the equation- as is the female hypergamous impulse. In this system, there are disproportionate rewards for certain males, true- but at its base it relies on male cooperation and “beta” traits like family, reasonable parental certaintity, and organization of soceity in a heirarchal structure. These traits are secondary to its patriarchal nature- the father wants whats best for the daughter/family. Beta male traits can thus be passed onto following generations because financial/social success in this system can be translated into reproductive success.

    In sharp contrast, Polyamory is based entirely on female choice. Free love means female choice to follow the hypergamous gina tingle into a different alpha’s arms whenever and wherever the tingle strikes. Consequently, the rule of this soceity is male parental uncertaintity, male peacocking/alpha posturing/competition, and male non-investment in formal familial structures. “Alpha” traits such as narcassism, psychopathy, violent tendoncies, and low future time oritentation are passed on instead.

    So while the end seems the same- fewer men making a larger and disproporate contrabution to the next generation’s genetic makeup, the means makes all the difference in WHO is making the contrabution.

    In other words, Polyamory is female hypergamy in disguise; not formal Polygamy.

    Like


  16. beware of the long ring finger!

    Like


  17. on November 18, 2010 at 12:52 pm Beta States of America

    While its great that most people are on Mel Gibson’s side in Oksana’s unnecessary legal antics, one can’t help but hear how Gibson is a major Beta in his telephone rants to her:

    http://www.tmz.com/2010/11/17/oksana-grigorieva-larry-king-interview-mel-gibson-child-custody-lucia/

    Like


  18. Beta Boomers

    Haha. That’s priceless. I wish i could come up with this stuff.

    In many welfare states now the State is now the default daddy. The biggest daddy of them all. The women at the bottom of the barrel can still fuck the badboy, have his kid and have the state pay for her poor choices through welfare. More ambitious chicks have a harder time since life as a welfare mom at the bottom of society is no fun. They have to try for an oops pregnancy with a richer Alpha, or somehow entrap/cuckold a beta provider.

    Solution is to remove all welfare payments to single moms and force these women to confront the consequences of their actions. To avoid unpleasant scenes of dead babies in dumpsters their could be some sort of a program where Madonna, in conjuction with Time Warner, agree to adopt their babies.

    Like


  19. on November 18, 2010 at 12:58 pm Beta States of America

    Fox News is as bad as CNN in promoting the feminist concept of “Sex Trafficking” as a synonym for prostitution:

    http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/11/17/super-bowlmagnet-for-sex-trafficking/

    Note that the phrase includes all voluntary prostitution.

    The radical feminist rhetoric Fox News in this article uses is no different from CNN and its designed to pretend that we’re all down with making it criminal in the entire US for a man to buy sex the way it is now in Sweden and, soon, Israel.

    Men simply aren’t willing to defend their rights.

    Like


  20. I’ve seen the show Sister’s Wives a couple of times and it surprised me that the women weren’t all that hot – well until he chose #4 after 13 years of no new women. Mind you she was a single parent with three kids — so you think he would have chosen a virgin teen. Hmmmm.

    The man seems very alpha to me – and the wives seem to feel lucky they’ve landed him. I know this is polygamy more so than polyamourous, but interesting nonetheless.

    Like


  21. Why a thriving polyamorous society is perfectly possible… … … if you pass a law that it is illigal to refuse from having sex with whomever asks you for . A hobo or a 70-year old granny for instance.

    Of course it would ruin a civilistation overnight.

    Like


  22. look at that fine document of righteous herbosity!

    Like


  23. on November 18, 2010 at 1:01 pm Beta States of America

    Hadn’t realized Prince William was marrying someone older than he is. Kate’s an older woman.

    That marriage is doomed more than his father’s was.

    Like


  24. Beta States of America: swingers and the polyamorous tend to look down on each other to my great amusement.

    Like


  25. Widespread polyamorous practice where childrearing is done by the village and all men, uncertain of paternity, contribute resources to the well-being of the single moms and their unholy bastard squirtage, will not convince women to equally distribute their sexual favors among the men. Just the opposite; it would liberate women to single-mindedly pursue the few alphas in their purview, knowing full well that a beta blood-latticed safety net exists to protect them from destitution.

    Isn’t this pretty much what the feminists are trying to create by legislative and judicial fiat in the West today? Women can chase the alphas, and the betas have to pay. What’s in it for the betas? Feminists just don’t care what those despicable creatures want!

    Like


  26. all manifestations of polyamory and bsdm in the modern era are nothing more than the sexual revolution for ugly people

    Like


  27. I wonder if there is any public discussion regarding the upcoming Prince William wedding in relation to current UK divorce laws?

    “So when Kate Middleton divorces Prince William, I predict that as a modern, educated woman, she’ll attempt through the courts to retain her entitlement to be the Queen of England. That would be quite the divorce settlement!”

    Like


  28. on November 18, 2010 at 1:10 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    “Lugo

    Widespread polyamorous practice where childrearing is done by the village and all men, uncertain of paternity, contribute resources to the well-being of the single moms and their unholy bastard squirtage, will not convince women to equally distribute their sexual favors among the men. Just the opposite; it would liberate women to single-mindedly pursue the few alphas in their purview, knowing full well that a beta blood-latticed safety net exists to protect them from destitution.

    Isn’t this pretty much what the feminists are trying to create by legislative and judicial fiat in the West today? Women can chase the alphas, and the betas have to pay. What’s in it for the betas? Feminists just don’t care what those despicable creatures want!”

    exactly!!!

    and the fed gets a huge cut as you need the state apparatus to transfer taxes from the alpha men to the docuhecock spawn.

    see, one thing you must remember is that the neocons redifned alphahood as lyng about your heiaght and butthexing butthe x in secrete without the girlths conthent.

    and then they said betahood was all about having character, honor, loyalty and fiath–all of which they found to oppress a womna’s butt tingles lzozozzo

    always wfollorw the money and you will see that the neocnes do everything possible to grow the warfare and welfare states, whcih is why jonah goldberg screams both for more war as well as “women tame men!” as both premises grow teh encons fiat powerbase lzozlolzoz

    and the more terrorisorissnm they incite, the more they can touch people in airprosts, so it’s a win-win situation for the big government asscoeking cock groping enneocns lzozlzl

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2010/11/17/sen_rockefeller_fcc_should_take_fox_news_msnbc_off_airwaves.html

    Like


  29. Roissy hasn’t bothered to look at the reality of sexual marketplace. Did you know there are men the ENJOY having their wives fucked by other guys? Cuckolding, look it up. There are even some guys who fantasize about raising other guy’s children. Explain that, evo psychology!

    Like


  30. I once saw a polyamory documentary of sorts on a free channel in a hotel room late one night. They were the ugliest people I had ever seen: the women were disgusting fat cows, the men were aging paunched creatures with hollow eyes and scraggly goatees, and they were all interested in each other’s genitals the way obstetrical nurses are interested pitocin and effacing vaj. Absolutely soulless.

    And they spoke to the camera as if they were the future!

    I watched it as comedy, which helped to keep dinner down.

    Like


  31. on November 18, 2010 at 1:21 pm Bring The Movies

    I know a couple that were dating for a few years and she brought another man into the relationship. He was very hurt by it but rolled over and let the other guy share his girl. I was and still am disgusted by it. ( btw I LOLOLOLOVVVVVOOVVVVEEEEEE you Great Books For Men, I smile everytime I see your posts. Yes the Fed and Bernakee run the governement and are trying to take over the world down with the NWO!)

    Like


  32. Cue Whiskey rant about how much women hate hate hate betas.

    I think that most men would be in polyamorus relationships (them banging several chicks @ once) if they could pull it off. Females I don’t think are so much cut out for it. Very few chicks I know can be fucking more than one guy at a time and feel good about it.

    To me it seems that things are definitely moving toward the alpha harem model (to the sexual exclusion of betas), though I’m not quite sure if it’s actually the world that’s changing or just my perception of it. Your implication that divorce and child support laws are driving this phenomenon is overstated in my opinion. I think it has more to do with things like the increasing bifurcation and polarization of America into a country of haves and have-nots, the “achievement gap” between men and women in school, and the increasing pussification of the American male representations in the mass media. I think the dominant line of commentary about the NY Jets/Inez Sainz thing says a lot about our country.

    Like


  33. This is all absolutely true.

    The younger set of women aren’t polyamorous: they’re hypergamous.

    The older set of “swingers” are, … well, … dried out. They’re almost never the hot and sexy singles or divorcees or sexy males or females. Ever. It’s so rare, when you meet a swinger who IS attractive, it’s remarkable.

    And anyway, the top men in those groups get all the pussy, anyway. I’ve been told this by several swingers on different occasions.

    SWPLs and lesbians and feminists dreaming of some free love for all future should take note: IT NEVER works out the way they want it to.

    Hippies I’ve known have said the same thing to me.It always fell apart because the men drifted in and out, and the few who were committed did the work of 5 men – until they got frustrated with their women fucking all the drifting alpha dick and giving them scraps.

    Why the fuck feminists don’t get this is beyond me. It’s so damned obvious it beggars description why anyone can be so willfully blind as to miss it.

    Like


  34. Why not allow the designer baby phenomenon and cloning to gain full acceptance so that every man could have wonderful women that look like Kate Middleton and these women:

    http://www.brooksbrothers.com/catalogview/catalog.tem?Page=1&catalogname=WinterD1_10&catalogSize=xlrg

    Especially the blond on page 48.

    It wouldn’t be enough to splice in good genes and splice out the bad, promoting habits conducive for the development of a graceful deportment and poise, the consumption of fewer chemicals and bad fats, and greater care of their skin, hair, overall health, etc., should also help assuage the dysgenic dating market.

    Like


  35. on November 18, 2010 at 1:29 pm Gunslingergregi

    ””””””’ “It should not be that within marriage you owe everything and without marriage you don’t owe anything. When we expect responsible behavior outside as well as inside marriage, we actually reduce the temptation to evade or escape marriage.”

    Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2031962-5,00.html#ixzz15eu68ds1”””””’

    Evade or escape marriage.

    Now that is scary.

    Like


  36. on November 18, 2010 at 1:31 pm Gunslingergregi

    Why is it always about one chick multiple dudes.

    Fuck the equality bullshit.

    Like


  37. Specimen

    I think that most men would be in polyamorus relationships (them banging several chicks @ once) if they could pull it off. Females I don’t think are so much cut out for it. Very few chicks I know can be fucking more than one guy at a time and feel good about it.

    Females are not cut out for it. They hate it. But they do it. Really.

    But you have to set up the frame, and you have to maintain the frame. If you are considered high enough value, some girls will even help you get fresh pussy, or at least help arrange threesomes.

    If you begin the relationship claiming monogamy, it’s more difficult to switch that later. A combination of high value from the girl, strong dominance over her, very sexually and emotionally satisfying household, and her respect for your sexuality and your bad boy ways can gain a man what he claims for himself, with little backlash. I’ve been in some non monogamous relationships, and while they have their added difficulties, they also have added benefits. They can be workable. For a while, at least. Most I did was a year, after which I broke up with the girl.

    The reason most men don’t know what women will put up with, is that we don’t like to put up with the shit they give us when we take what we want. But girls don’t actually break up with guys over fucking other girls. Not nearly as much as you’d think – if you maintain your value the whole while.

    Like


  38. aeofe —

    My girlfriend and I have watched the show, and I have to say:

    “not very hot” ? They’re downright repulsive. Any loser — especially a talks-with-god poser like that guy can assemble a willing concubinage of fat and/or ugly women.

    To be sure, wife #4 is a marked improvement, but you’re right in that its telling that she’s a single mom of three — a MAJOR hit to her market value to any single man open to long-term relationships with attractive women.

    She’s getting a better deal in Mormon quarter-husband bliss than she would get out on the monogamous singles market, while avoiding the awkward questions her kids would ask about the unfamiliar men that stumble out of her bedroom on Sunday mornings never to return.

    Its pretty funny and oddly sad how the fat & ulgy first triumvirate of wives have to choke down their seething jealousy and destroyed egos and welcome a much more attractive woman into their polygamous folds.

    As for the dude, on paper you’d think he’d be lesser alpha, but when you account for the low value of his Smithian harem, he drops way down to lesser provider beta — four times over. Picking up the fat scraps that other betas wouldn’t screw, let alone “spiritually marry” isn’t impressive, and you have to wonder what’s wrong with the guy.

    Interesting, this goes to show that even deranged chubby chasers will yearn for the novelty and variety of a thin woman.

    Like


  39. Until we can reengineer hypergamy out of women’s hindbrains, advocacy for unconstrained polyamory in all but the most backward societies is DOA.

    unfortunately, this is not true. thanks to the bureaugamy of the contemporary welfare state women are free to be both hypergamous and polyamorous. the only difference is that polyamory is expressed serially rather than concurrently.

    Like


  40. Polymary is alive and well …as we talk! In the realm of friendship, NO one can serve all purpose to everyone.
    That’s the beauty of having multiple friends. That way, I can match my desire to that or that friend. I know we are talk about sexual relationships! I’m getting there…..

    It is much more difficult to apply this to sexual/lovers ….that’s why we have to thank sexual transmitted diseases for keeping us in line.

    It is interesting though….Having different lovers for different purposes. I wonder about that being one of the reasons men ands women cheat. Does that mean they love you less, maybe not….They just love you differently!

    Noooo I still want my man allll to myself!!hehe!!

    Like


  41. For instance I met a girl last Sunday. She stayed with me 4 days, and we had a passionate little fuck romance. She keeps asking things like “what are you looking for in a girl”, and “do you like me”, and “are you faithful”, and “don’t break my heart”. From the get go I told her that I’m not all about monogamy, and she knows I have another girlfriend, and that lately I’ve also been dating other girls. She also knows I can fall deeply in love, as evidenced by how darkly my face clouds over and how my eyes threaten to tear if my dead girlfriend is mentioned. Now that she’s at her home, on chat she jokes around asking if I’m fucking now. That I maintained the frame that I may or may not see other girls doesn’t seem to be slowing down this girls infatuation. Because I’m building her infatuation it on a bedrock of sexuality and fun romance, she can handle some tremors of jealousy and insecurity. She feels loved and thrilled, and probably gets a little kinky kick out of the fact that I love and thrill others.

    She’ll visit again Monday.

    Like


  42. The sheer amount of ignorance on display here is startling. Both the article and the comments sound like something out of the 1960’s discussing homosexuality or the 20s discussing interracial marriage.

    I would guess that 99% of the posters above me have no actual first hand knowledge of anything outside of their own serial monogamy or what they see on TV.

    I’d originally planned on posting a refutation of some of the points in the original post, but I soon realized I’d have to pen a comment that was at least as long as the original post.

    I will say this about Sex at Dawn though – the word polyamory is mentioned once toward the end of the book. Once. The authors go out of their way to not offer ‘solutions’ or ‘answers’ to anything. Their thesis has to do with our genetic and cultural history – not our future.

    Really think about what you are saying people. Do you really want to be the equivalent of George Wallace twenty years from now?

    Like


  43. Woops – I misread your meaning, specimen. I thought you meant not many girls can handle the guy catting around.

    You meant not many girls are suited to cat around.

    If that’s true, I’ve met a disproportionate number of them.

    Like


  44. Xsplat is completely right about how to handle it. Keep the frame and maintain it. Do not relent. Keep your value high and your inner game intact. If you let her direct it (“Honey, what about a guy this time?” or “I’m not sure about this anymore. Let’s talk”), then you’re done. Done. Dead. Kaput. Do not give in to her petty jealously. Do not give any ground that wasn’t already planned, like “threesomes only” or something like that. Its a major mind play, but if you can pull it off you’ll set a path of greatness for your younger years and won’t have to end up being the beta cunts that watch their fat ugly wives fuck fat ugly betas.

    Like


  45. For GMFM:

    Like


  46. @xsplat

    “But girls don’t actually break up with guys over fucking other girls.”

    This point has been made many times at the Chateau, but is true, and bears repeating. Your girls can be remarkably tolerant of tom-catting as long as you’re not a complete idiot about it.

    Like


  47. on November 18, 2010 at 2:14 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    zlozozlozozozozozozzoozzozlooz byuteghehgt5hxoloz

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2010/06/09/great-books-for-men-101-lozlzloslzlzl-every-day-in-class-we-woudl-discuss-roissy-a-great-book-lzozlzllzlzl-and-me-lzozlzllzl/

    Great Books for Men 101 lozlzloslzlzl every day in class we woudl discuss roissy & a great book lzozlzllzlzl and me lzozlzllzl dom

    From Days of Broken Arrows: “Honestly dude, I’ve made my living as a professional writer for years and have to tell you this is genius. …” acomment here:

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=142&action=edit

    Neocon Butthex: symbology and terminology in the works of Great Books for Men

    lzozllzozlozozlzlzzollzlz omg

    with all da womnez classes out tehre studying how to get asscoked by men in college and then butthex them divroce court on down th line if igured it would be fun for some men’s classes lzozlzlzlzlz. wheree weo wuodk rea dteh greta books like homer dante shekapre roissy homre virgil dante roissy plato aristitle socrateces ciecero dante lzollzzlzllz omgh yahah

    in our week devoted to keynsiean eocnomics we woudl read tucker max’s tsory about secritive tapoings of butthex without the girl’s conthen as well as charlotte allen’s take on tucker max from the weekly standfardth as they are far more honest about the nature of keynsian eocnomics than are the keynie wieneies. lzozlzllzl

    in the same way the fed butthexes the dollar in secretive meetings after gambling away the peopel pensions, tucker tapes secrteiv etapings of butthex for persoanl profit and publishing enjoyment for teh noeocns lzozllzlzl. in the same way women say they detest assholes, while promoting tehir secrteive tapings ofasscokcing books and repeating the ir PR lies about tehir exaggertaed height and wiring tehm hundreds of thousands of dolalrs from simon and schuster like priscilla painton did lzozlzlzl, the fed says that it’s main job is to fight inflation and prevent bubbles, while it creates both. lzozlzl. i mena how else are you gonna transfer fiat debt into physical property and welath without mba buzzwords and womenz wearing short skirts fronting the inflation and deflation of bubbles up and down up and down as tucker maxth’s cock goes in and out in and out in teh secrteive tpings of tbutthex without teh girl’s contehnt that female execitives and promointent female reproeters enjoy amn d promote zlolzlzl womenz lzozllzlz what is uyp with womenz and asscockers? i’m gonna have 2 ask dem zlzozll lzolzllzzllz lzzolzlz zlozlzlz.

    so you see why the fed loves funding womenz as both exist and have as their fundamental nature to say one thing and do the exact opposiite lzozlzl.

    review:

    THE FED: we exist to prevent bubbles and stave off inflation
    (lzozllzl they creted teh dot com and hosuing bubles to transfer trilliosn in welath zlozlzlzllzllz as teh debt trickled on down and engulfed teh country lzozlzllz)

    WOMEN: We want nice guys. Where ahave all teh nice guys gone?
    (lozlzllzlzl they publish and promote secrteive tapers of butthex without teh girlths contehnt lzozlzlzl whne men ran the publsihing unindustry this didn’t happen lozozlzl which is why teh fed had to fund teh feminsit moevemnt–to get rid of classical NATRUAKL law and ORDER lzozlzlzlzl and thus freedom as there can be no freedom without law and order lzozlz)

    omg lzozlzlz

    the GBFM textbooks are being written! lzozllzlz

    the critics are deocnstructing and debating me! lzozlzlzlzl faster than a neocon on an anus to publish and profit off of secrtive tapings of butthex stories in teh neocn mags and publishing houses!

    lottsa people think i am roissy even my mom called me roissy the otehr night and so did this chick i had over but then i relaized she was saying “your face is glossy” because whe was on e and meth and i had been down there getting my face shellacked on her caidllac pussy lzozlzllzlzlzl

    the debate so far:

    http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/2010/06/lolzlozlzozlzolzolzolzol.html

    I’m pretty sure GBFM is actually a parody of the commenters on Roissy’s blog. He doesn’t beleive any of the stuff. It’s just satire.

    I don’t know why some people seem to like GBFM. I think he’s annoying and I always skip reading his posts.

    Silly stuff. I wonder what valuable purpose it serves. By the way, have you seen the “Robin Hood Oath?”

    http://constitutionparti.blogspot.com/

    Anon and Greenlander…you both couldn’t be more wrong. GBFM has a method to his madness, but the things he’s referring to are very real. Simplified…but when you understand exactly how the Federal Reserve operates, and how the elites have socially engineered society to create the current dystopia we inhabit, you would understand precisely what GBFM is talking about.

    Keoni, I understand that he’s making some valid points. Feminism, the Federal Reserve, government ponzi schemes, etc. destroying this country. I read The Economist cover to cover every single week. I get it.

    I’m just saying that his PRESENTATION is annoying. Why can’t he make his points in proper English and sentence structure like the rest of the civilized world?

    lozlzlzozlzlzl my presentation is annoying. lzozlzl wahahaha whahahahaha whahahhahahahahahahahh!!!

    never in a million years will be betas in tehir singel mom’s basements (lsiteing to her bang fed-funded cock which their real beatdads must pay for lzozozolz) ever call out teh billion trillion dolalr bailouts nor the fifty million aborted fetsuthes nor tghe secrteive tapings ofa sscocking butthexing sessions for neocon publishing and profits, but instead, they will rail against my spelling lzozlzlzlzlzl i can’t decide who is more annoyting the aging neocn ladies or the fanboyz in tehir single mom’s basements lzozlzllzlzlzl

    at least when the tyranny begins the propagnda will be spelled corretcly–that is the fanboys and enocns gretaest concthern, that butthex is spelled properly–buttthhhhetthhxhxhx

    lozlzlllz

    http://www.misandryreview.com/hawaiian-libertarian/2010/06/02/lolzlozlzozlzolzolzolzol/

    lzozlzlzlzlzl

    http://www.inmalafide.com/2010/06/05/the-mencius-moldbug-of-the-roissysphere/

    I secretly think GBfM is Roissy’s alter-ego. lozlzlzzl

    The problem with GBFM is that large swaths of Austrian macro are batshit crazy. When it comes to economics, there really are worse things in heaven and earth than Ben Bernanke. Money is the hardest subject in all of economics and while Ben Bernanke and the mainstream macroeconomists are not the fountains of wisdom they think they are, there are no easy, mechanistic solutions to problems in human behaviour, such as how to best run the currency system. Keynes may have inspired all sorts of silly ideas among his followers, but his essential insight that a demand for money can reduce the demand for everything else is completely true.

    The person writing these posts might be a perfectly cogent individual who’s writing them in jest, but either way, it’s fucking annoying. I wouldn’t be surprised if GBFM is Fifth Column like you suggested MikeeUSA is.

    hey wat d u losers have against star wars figures and using them to demonstrate the basic principles of eocnomics so as 2 ediucate faculty jmembers as 2 the differences beteween keynisain and aystrian eocnomcicici?

    lozlzlzlzl how else is one supposed to demo the fdifference between butthex and holding hands?<<<<<<<<<<<<

    I suppose a Ken doll alternatively butthexing a Barbie and a GI Joe seems more graphically illustrative to me, but there's no accounting for aesthetic tastes, is there?

    “The “Federal Reserve” is simply GBFM’s reference to the power elite…the social engineers of society.”

    I’m sorry, but I just can’t stand by any longer and watch people get played like fools. GBFM doesn’t have some grand theory of the world. He’s a satire of the more outrageous comments over at Roissy’s blog.

    That’s why he uses ridiculous internet slang and vague, ambiguous references to various concepts that have nothing to do with one another, i.e. Tucker Max and Ben Bernanke. He wants to intentionally sound stupid in order to discredit the people who agree with his comments.

    Mencius Moldbug is the wrong analogy. The correct analogy is Tina Fey and Sarah Palin. GBFM is to Roissy’s commenters as Tina Fey’s impersonation is to Palin.

    @Dave from Hawaii

    I don’t think GBFM is clueless. In fact, I think he’s a very clever troll. My question to you: if he has a truly cogent point to make, why is he using the ridiculous slang and obtuse references? Why not just talk like a normal human being?

    lozlzlzlzlzlzlzl yah “Why not just talk like a normal human being?”

    yah why not depocnstruct teh greta books and classics and why not exile fatehrs form the home and wage war on fatherhood and manhood lzozlzlzl yah why not bail out the feminbanks with billions while reclaiming tghe common man’s homes and pensions lzozlzllzlzlzlzllz?

    why not?

    why not?

    why not?

    asstrards aklaklak izkzkzkkz

    i ocunter all the asstards fanboyz in teh thread iwth my gbfm brilliance lozlzl

    lozlzlzlzlzlzl you fucktards

    it’s not a fucking conspiracy theory you fucks

    it’s happeing right out in fornt of your fucking faces you ass fucks

    jesus chcist sometime i lose all hope in men as all you beta mastabetas are playing vidoe games in your single mom’s baesment as she’s banging fed dufnded druggie cock up above and your reall dad has to fund her banging random coks lkzozllzllzllzl omg lzozlzl

    and then you crucify people who spit truth 2 power and go “whahaha whahah whahah poeple at elite institutions are very nithe and they would never bankrupt a country nor would women kill 50,000,000 unborn.”

    wake. the. fuck. up. you fuckityfuckmastabetas.

    women just murderd 50,000,000 unborn by their chocie alone lzozlzlzlz after the fed deosuled them in asscocking sessions in college it was easy to get them to turn on their iunborn lzozlzllzlzl that’s why the bankers fund assocking and fmeinisms lzozlzlz

    and 2 our coutry is fucking bankrup you stupid fucks.

    50,000,000 unborn murdered and we’re trillions of dollars in the hole (lzozlz the gina).

    it didn’t just happen you FUCKS.

    the poeple who count every penny abd whose life revolves around obtaining welath certainly did not place us 14 trillion in debt by mistake you ass cocks. no–they got to spend that 14 trillion created form thin air, which your chidlren and you must now pay off lzozlzlzlzllzlz

    not all of you are stupid fucks, but too many of you are.

    for teh stupid fucks go hang out at maxim and cosmo.

    leave realiuty and truth to the men and the great books 4 men. lzozlzlzlzl

    all you stupid fucks have juyst been passed by womenz who have been trained to tempt and take all that men make–lzozlzllzlz

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/05/the-end-of-men/8135

    lozlzlzllzlz

    relax men

    women may have more jobs and get paid more but remember it’s all in debt-based dollars that ben bernanke prints at will

    see the fiat masters conquered our country and when conquering a country it was custumary to kill the menz and let the womenz live on to pump ‘em zlozzllzl

    but the fiat masterz said “hey why not keep the men aorund lzozllzlzlzlz, and what would be even funnier would be to have the men who create and produce everything be managed by soulless whores who we butthexed at harvard and yale thusly deosulling them. lzozlzllzlzzl! and now the osulles harpies are transferring the man’s assetts to us–the money masters who create money out of thin air; whether the soulles harpies are doing it throuigh marraige and divorce or as MBA managers lzozlzlzllzlzlozzlzlo.” omg lozlzllz

    –http://www.inmalafide.com/2010/06/05/the-mencius-moldbug-of-the-roissysphere/

    and then i stick up for ol roissy roiisy

    name one blog that gets more traffic/comments than roissy’s

    roissy’s got staying power 2 go all night long and then the next whole day and night too nonstop into ten years and a hundred years on down the road like homer virgil shakespeare lzozlzl as rtruth is immortal and does not care what betaboyz think lzozlzlzl

    u guys can’t even compete with a truckload of viagragra lzozlzlzlzl

    lozzllzlzlz

    http://www.inmalafide.com/2010/06/05/the-mencius-moldbug-of-the-roissysphere/

    Like


  48. Mr. Bring the Movies, you don’t get it. You said:
    “Yes the Fed and Bernakee run the governement and are trying to take over the world down with the NWO!”

    Just as the drug cartels of Columbia have bought and control that government, the Wall Street finance cartel led by Goldman Sachs has bought the US government. Bernanke is no more than their puppet and central banking is their instrument.

    Like


  49. And Alice says

    “Lets you and him fight”

    Like


  50. on November 18, 2010 at 2:23 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    tucker max rhymes with goldman sax
    bernanke rhymes iwth spank me
    spanks are on the butt gernally and tucker butthexes and tapes it secerteetly to make losta fat vbernake cash lzozzlzl

    connect the dots poeple!!1

    Like


  51. All the proof you need is just to look at a “polyamory” woman. She’ll usually resemble a deformed, beached walrus. And the men, some lower beta or omega schlub going along with the ride out of desperation.

    Like


  52. Harmonica

    Do not relent. Keep your value high and your inner game intact. If you let her direct it (“Honey, what about a guy this time?” or “I’m not sure about this anymore. Let’s talk”), then you’re done. Done. Dead.

    It’s strange and initially counter intuitive – the more selfish you are, the happier your woman can be. Think of the manager. He is stern, yet supportive. He will fire you, or give you a raise. Think of the dog master. Both care for their charges, but are ultimately about their own rules. The dog does not negotiate with the master about the rules, nor do the employees. Dogs and employees both prefer a strong leader who maintains their respect. Women also would prefer to hate you for maintaining your principles and discretely fucking around than to slowly get bored and irritated with you for succumbing to her imposed domesticity.

    It’s a fine line, but really, it all comes down to this. Please pay close attention.

    The only stage where there is passion and romance is before you are committed. Maintain that stage, to maintain passion.

    Like


  53. There is a reason why patriarchy came into being in the old days, and why there were no successful polyamourous or matriarchal societies.

    Consider being a girl in a matriarchal society. It does not mean that YOU get to run things, it means your mom gets to boss you around. When food is scarce, who is going to get access to your young ‘gina: the handsome young stud who shows up with nothing but a cock and a grin, or the ugly successful hunter who shows up with dinner? A matriarchal society is a brothel society, with your mom as the madam.

    What about the beta men of the tribe? They have little incentive to stick around to protect the tribe and support their sisters, pregnant by some alpha male. Their incentive to to move off and go get something they can trade for access to ‘gina someplace. Any alpha males screwing the hotter women of the tribe have no incentive to stick around if the tribe comes under attack — their incentive is to run off and be alpha someplace safer.

    The women of the tribe have an incentive to turn their non-alpha sons gay, because gay men have less incentive to wander off looking for ‘gina.

    Contrast this with a monogamous patriarchal society: the men have an incentive to accumulate property to pass along to children they are confident are theirs. The beta males get their own women, and thus have a reason to defend the tribal lands. The tribe becomes strong and prosperous, is able to fight off aggression by others, and is able to aggressively take over the lands of weaker matriarchal or matrilineal tribes around them. Eventually, all but the monogamous, patriarchal tribes are killed off.

    Like


  54. “greatbooksformen GBFM

    oops sorry for msspleeling abobeve:”

    Well GBFM excusing himself for a typo.
    I guess now I have experienced everything in this world.

    Like


  55. Micheal C

    A matriarchal society is a brothel society, with your mom as the madam.

    Brilliant. Welcome to India and the system of arranged marriages!

    Like


  56. “Of course they all fuck each other: nobody else will.”

    Like


  57. on November 18, 2010 at 2:46 pm Hungry Hungry Hippos

    “Men spend their working hours battling it out in vast, unproductive “Who’s the Sexiest?” competitions for privileged access to a veritable harem of vaj. If you think this is a recipe for creating and sustaining an advanced modern society filled with creature comforts, I have a grass hut somewhere in the Congo to sell you.”

    Most excellent. One of my favorite posts in a while.

    Like


  58. on November 18, 2010 at 2:52 pm Turds Of Misery

    Not sure if this has been mentioned yet, as I have yet to read the comments…but as a sidenote, Neanderthals haven’t gone extinct. They exist as modern day hominids…

    Like


  59. “Fox News is as bad as CNN in promoting the feminist concept of “Sex Trafficking” as a synonym for prostitution:”

    Exactly: all the feminist activists fighting sex trafficking and child prostitution are really using a bait and switch: horror stories of coerced children and sex slaves are pimped out in order to demonize all prostitution and demand its illegality.

    Like


  60. ““Alpha” traits such as narcassism, psychopathy, violent tendoncies, and low future time oritentation are passed on instead.

    So while the end seems the same- fewer men making a larger and disproporate contrabution to the next generation’s genetic makeup, the means makes all the difference in WHO is making the contrabution.”

    Now that female hypergamous instinct has been unleashed on civilization at the expense of life-long monogamous marriage and family creation, is a polyamorous society where few men monopolize virtually all the women the inevitable end game? It seems to be a self-fulfilling prophecy. In a society that is increasingly populated by men with low future time orientation and narcassistic, psychopathic, violent tendencies, the probability of betas passing on their genes should theoretically decrease from generation to generation. So not only are women socially encouraged to follow their gina tingles into the arms of the nearest alpha cad, this could also become (if it isn’t already) a woman’s most sound reproductive strategy, if she values her child’s survival/reproductive chances.

    Barring massive social and legal reform (highly unlikely) or complete economic collapse (and at this point I don’t even think that would be enough), I don’t see a way around this. Is there any other way to close pandora’s box? Or would that be akin to trying to squeeze the toothpaste back into the tube?

    [Editor: There is a lag time to immolation built in by the accumulated largesse of the state. Once that largesse spends itself out, there will be a return to chaos, and the single moms with their bastard thuglings who no longer survive on the generosity of the state will purge themselves from existence, and the pendulum will swing back.
    Or, we will settle into the “new” old primitive mode, and learn to live again like the less civilized ancestors we thought we left behind.
    A great lie says that progress is inevitable. It isn’t, and it needn’t point in the direction we envision.]

    Like


  61. “Barring massive social and legal reform (highly unlikely) or complete economic collapse (and at this point I don’t even think that would be enough), I don’t see a way around this. Is there any other way to close pandora’s box? Or would that be akin to trying to squeeze the toothpaste back into the tube?”

    Civilization will change eventually. Our feminazi paradise will fall eventualy and a new world will emerge with a new-style religion or a throwback to the ones of old, probably Islam, and we’ll start all over again. We here won’t be alive to see it but it always happens and will always happen until man dies out.

    Like


  62. The woman in the picture is clearly day dreaming about some Alpha asshole that would come to her rescue and beat the crap out of those two beta’s who share her vagina.

    Like


  63. So if women will no longer select men based upon the fittest, why will we not devolve into worms?

    Those limp limbed dweebs in the picture already remind me of our plan to join the Lumbricina.

    Like


  64. polyamory in this context to me just looks like a bunch of old people who want to feel “alive” again and partner swap. or maybe that is swinging. either way that picture pretty much says it all. people in a lower value bracket want to get their good odds back and have a lot of sex…i guess whatever works..

    whats odd is the undercurrent that polyamory is the “answer” to the problems of monogamy. i did meet a young self-defined polyamorous hippie chick once and of course she told me that it worked for a while and then jealousy set in and things got shitty. typico.

    Like


  65. I wouldn’t worry too much about how hypergamy is going to affect human evolution. We can already release viruses and even bacteria that target and change specific dna. We’ll be changing as a species through bio-engineering at a faster pace than we’ll be evolving.

    You can worry about that, if you need some future oriented drama.

    Like


  66. Woops – we can release bio-engineered bacteria that live in the gut and release drugs. Only viruses can target our internal dna.

    But yes, it is currently possible to release a virus to kill all black people, or to make all newborns geniuses.

    Like


  67. Thanks for this post!

    It does absolutely nothing to support or detract from Polyamory but does a wonderful job of proving that the use of $10 words cannot hide an arrogant, ignorant dumbass.

    Connor was right, arguing the misconceptions and ignorance here would require writing volumes with no result. Having a battle of wits with unarmed opponents is a waste of time.

    I hope natural selection eliminates your dna from the pool, and soon.

    Like


  68. Your observations seem to match what I’ve heard from all my contemporaries who ever did the free love hippie communes – pretty much to a tee.

    Like


  69. on November 18, 2010 at 3:42 pm Bring The Movies

    Flahute

    Mr. Bring the Movies, you don’t get it. You said:
    “Yes the Fed and Bernakee run the governement and are trying to take over the world down with the NWO!”

    Just as the drug cartels of Columbia have bought and control that government, the Wall Street finance cartel led by Goldman Sachs has bought the US government. Bernanke is no more than their puppet and central banking is their instrument.

    That is what I meant. Thanks for the clarification. I also enjoyed the quantitave easing video alot, posted it on my Facebook and asked people their opinions on it.

    Like


  70. As a San Francisco resident – where polyamory/open relationships and ‘sex positive’ relationships are fairly mainstream – I can tell you that this maxim is about 98.5% spot on.

    While I’ve met a few legitimately alpha male/beautiful feminine women poly couples, the drastic majority of these people couldn’t get laid outside of their skewed circles. Most of the women are 5’s – MAYBE a 7 on a really good day (…maybe) – who command the attention of socially awkward new age beta males and Aspy’s who couldn’t approach a girl at a bar, let alone seal the deal.

    And, even worse, safe sex is not the rule of the game for most of these sexual dregs. It’s a repulsive culture for countless reasons.

    Like


  71. personally, i have no problem with a bunch of sensitive, ponytail-wearing dweebs joining harems. almost all elements of feminist dystopia require the support of beta males. women can get financial support from the state. they can get sex from alpha cads. and they can get impregnated through science. even with all that, most women still need male attention.

    of all the crappy things you can do to a woman (cheat on her, hit on her, steal from her), the one that elicits the biggest response is ignoring her. the more beta males that leave the marketplace, by either learning game and beginning to act like alphas or by going the omega route and dropping out all together, the less nonsense the average woman will be able to get away with.

    this is the really weird thing about the female mind. with an abundance of men, women are at their flakiest. they buzz around from beta supplicant to beta supplicant like bees gathering pollen in a field of flowers. once the population of men starts shrinking, however, women start to behave much differently. this is despite the fact they wouldn’t have given most of those men the time of the day in the first place.

    Like


  72. @JR – agreed, man. if they’re up for that lifestyle, i personally don’t mind. what do they say, “can’t pick another man’s pussy”?

    The overarching attitude of MOST of these harem men is framed by Goddess worship (see: Arjuna), financially supporting them in one fashion or another (outside of the occasional dinner/drinks), and that general skewed view of Feminine perfection and idealism. It’s off the charts ridiculous.

    Like


  73. A great deal of this is “anti-Racism.” White beta guys are identified as nascent Klan or Nazi party members, so every ounce of testosterone and dominance is wrung out of them in the modern professional workplace. Meanwhile they are the bottom of the status totem pole. What would have engendered a punch in the nose fifty years ago is now a complaint to HR which results in “sensitivity training” for the Beta White guy.

    White professional urban women do HATE HATE HATE Beta males, who **do** adapt to the workplace to be cooperative, supporting, non-confrontational, which is what it takes to get ahead in the modern cube farm to corporate office. Corporate swashbucklers are rare and are mostly entrepreneurs who got big: Steve Jobs, Larry Ellison. Most are nerdy, quiet and steady types.

    But the system of polygamy is breaking down under resource constraints. We are now entering what Ed Driscoll calls “A Rendezvous with Scarcity” where there just won’t be enough money floating around and some will be chucked off the lifeboats. Polygamy is ill-suited to sudden resource constraints, pressure from other competitors, because it does not stimulate wide-deep sacrifice and manpower mobilization, where every guy has not just skills but motivation and cooperation. Be he a guy on the front lines or a mechanic keeping planes flying.

    Like


  74. Connor was right, arguing the misconceptions and ignorance here would require writing volumes with no result. Having a battle of wits with unarmed opponents is a waste of time.

    then why did you post at all? you’re not actually making an argument. did you come here to make a comment so that you could score brownie points with some new-age femist “goddess?

    keep practicing those progressive talking points. that and an Obama t-shirt may just get you access to some Oberlin grads hairy muff.

    Like


  75. We have already reached the amorous society.

    Women having children with the bad-boy when they are younger and then marrying the beta-provider.

    A lot of betas don’t look as bad as those two guys. But there is still nothing available in town except divorcees with 1-3 kids. That’s the reason for computer games and online porn.

    Like


  76. White professional urban women do HATE HATE HATE Beta males, who **do** adapt to the workplace to be cooperative, supporting, non-confrontational, which is what it takes to get ahead in the modern cube farm to corporate office.

    i don’t buy this. women may hate beta males who continually overstep their bounds, but really they just get dismissed as creepy. women tend to feel about beta males the way men feel about sluts. they don’t get a lot of respect, but they are nice to have around.

    at worst, there may be some small amount of contempt that stems from someone giving you for so little effort that which you know you should have to earn (that being sex for men and attention for women.).

    Like


  77. Totally anecdotal evidence I’ve collected:

    * Maxim #109 is on target. Check out OKCupid which is a fairly poly-friendly place. Look for any woman who’s poly positive (you can tailor your match questions to make it easy, there’s 3 or 4 that if you respond positively and make them mandatory, the polys pop right up to the top of your matches). The overlap between total hotties and poly-friendly women is pretty small, I’d venture smaller than the overall population. If you go in considering that poly=”easy”, maybe so, but you’re trading looks for that easy lay.

    * I’ve known a lot of swingers and poly types. For relationships that were opened after marriage (ie they started closed and became open), I’d say 80% were opened at the instigation of the women. Off the top of my head, I can think of one out of maybe 20 that was instigated by the man, and even then, that took some 20 years of him suggesting it. One other relationship I know of was strictly a response to him cheating, basically she decided if he could cheat, then she was going to have an open relationship – his cheating made it OK for her to fuck around. The typical case in my experience has been the woman instigating it, usually with the ultimatum of “open the relationship or I leave”. There’s a profile for this – mid 30’s to mid 40’s, either unable to have children or children are well into their school years. Essentially, these women are done having children and want to have sex for the fun of it. Younger guys are willing to trade down for an easy lay, so here you have a built in way for old-ish women past childbearing stage to fuck younger guys.

    * Cynically, Poly is rationalization for women. Poly women are universally vehemently not “easy” and self-categorize as sluts only in an ironic sense. What that means is that they need a level of friendship and relationship to fuck a guy. What that means, practically speaking, is that game still works.

    Like


  78. One of the many issues extractable from this kind of
    discussion is the evolution of
    aggressiveness/lack_of_aggressiveness.

    The Soviets (now Russians) did some interesting
    experiments with foxes (originally bread for their furs).

    They bred for lack of aggressivness, and hey-presto
    in 50 years they got a new kind of “dog”, i.e.
    aggression-reduced foxes behaving like family dogs
    (just like family dogs are aggression reduced wolves,
    most breeds). Curiously, some physical traits seem to
    be part of the package, such as curly tails, soft/big/floppy
    ears, different facial markings etc. (both wolves and
    foxes seem to acquire these traits when bred for
    reduced aggression). Possibly, this can be explained
    as reduced aggression like the physical suite of changes
    can be seen as forms of neoteny.

    Now, for people, one can speculate (and possibly, do
    experiments) on human cultures, which to varying
    extents put a premium on either aggressiveness
    or non-aggressiveness. Note that aggressiveness is
    not necessarily a great trait for procreation if the aggressives
    kill each other and the non-aggressives live to fight
    (and, particularly, to procreate) another day. On the
    other hand, aggressiveness in many cases seems to excite
    the gina tingle. So the dynamics are complicated.

    Some groups specifically and methodically put a value
    on aggressiveness, “the bold warrior” being almost a
    cult object, etc. Other cultures
    (or sometimes the same ones) put a premium on being
    law-abiding (and thus, largely, non-aggressive). Have Muslims,
    with a religion suitable mainly for caravan-plundering,
    evolved themselves into a more aggressive group?
    Will the current devastation of betas create a more
    aggressive culture in the West?

    Add to this the tricky interaction, usually a field for
    vigorous debate (to put it politely), between individual
    selection and group selection. A group can have values
    such that aggressiveness is not seen as particularly
    desirable. Then, possibly, the non-aggressives breed
    more than the aggressives (at least over a – often much
    longer – life time). And in the end, the group (i.e. the
    women) is taken over by a more aggressive group.

    One could write some interesting simulation programs
    about this. I suspect even moderate tinkering with the
    parameters might produce vastly different results.
    Any takers?

    Thor

    Like


  79. picture of the year

    Like


  80. on November 18, 2010 at 5:19 pm Vincent Ignatius

    What if a virus wiped out 90% of the male population? Things might work out then. Well, society would go to shit as the role of women in government expanded even more, but those last few decades before the collapse of civilization would be a cornucopia of poon for the remaining men.

    Like


  81. How pathetic is this? Does the guy get off on being the third wheel to his ex-wife? And being the beta orbiter to her new husband? Did he voluntarily pay out the ass for the settlement and his ex-wife’s new place?

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stacy-morrison/divorce-dossier-the-soclo_b_783822.html

    In these situations, the woman always has the multiple men in her life, while the guy gets to be alone and the third wheel. The message to its readers are clear: women have privileges and freedoms, and men have the obligations.

    Like


  82. So, this is the end-game for those who go as low as possible for a lay.

    Excuse me while I puke.

    Like


  83. Women feel the effects of riding too much alpha cock. They age 2 times faster then women who stick with one guy. Effectively means the so called “beta” who decides to marry a 10 keeps that ten till she’s 50 and still hot as well as a good companion while the alpha ages until he can no longer get younger women. Lets be serious the only women who give alpha pussy are the women betas date will almost always stay with their beta unless he decides to become an omega door mat from complacency.

    Seriously though, we shouldn’t forget that beta men are 10x more violent then alpha. Always fear the men that feel backed into a corner. Alpha’s by definition are whipped and incapable of the insanity of men with nothing to lose.

    Everyone here acts as if Alpha is the solution and not the problem. In the old days Alphas were executed while the “beta”s held all the power. It’s no different now. The “beta”s still hold the power and still fuck the girls they want. They just have old school believes and not in this liberal hippy alpha male bullshit all you liberals are trying to push. What kind of conservative hates family so much that they want to fuck around and break up their family or others family just for pussy?

    Once you guys grow up you’ll realize that chasing pussy is for children. Real men have other things to do then get their dick wet. I’d rather be immortalized as a great man who has achieved miracles then the old guy nobody remembers.

    You psuedo happiness is all useless bullshit when pussy is the end goal.

    Like


  84. VI —

    Not necessarily, depends on which 10% of the men would be left.

    Worst case scenario, the virus is sexually transmitted (!) and only the 10% who can’t get laid survive … you think they’d suddenly start getting laid?
    The women would probanly go mostly lesbian first.

    Like


  85. Polyamory relationships probably always have the polite lid torn off them when it’s time to make the babies.

    Like


  86. Roissy says something about look at a modern college campus for real world example of the alpha world domination. Heck, I’ve heard that Mtv has shows on that celebrate teen mothers. At least (or worse, depending on your pov of who should be procreating, assuming that college kids are actually smart), these teenage idiots are learning the consequences of their actions.

    But, really, where’s the alpha cad who knocked them up, I bet there’s a few example of nice guys trying to beta on in with the single mom.

    So, alphas impregnate and leave. Life goes on without much heartache from the moms.

    And you know the teen alpha cad is the “bring the movies” guy, not the chess club captain.

    Liked by 1 person


  87. You psuedo happiness is all useless bullshit when pussy is the end goal.

    it’s funny how some people love to assert that their happiness is deep and meaningful, while your happiness is trite and ephemeral.

    Like


  88. “” beware of the long ring finger! “”

    Also beware of the long second toe ! Particularly women that have the second toe longer than the big toe.

    Dem bitches got lots of testosterone floating around inside em.

    Like


  89. “i don’t buy this. women may hate beta males who continually overstep their bounds, but really they just get dismissed as creepy. women tend to feel about beta males the way men feel about sluts. they don’t get a lot of respect, but they are nice to have around.

    at worst, there may be some small amount of contempt that stems from someone giving you for so little effort that which you know you should have to earn (that being sex for men and attention for women.).”

    This doesn’t make any sense. Why would men (the majority of which are beta or lower, by definition) have contempt for sluts (who give it up more easily and who play an active role in driving down the price of sex)?

    “Men hate/dont respect sluts” is a cultural meme that has gained traction because large swarms of men needed a way to rationalize their lack of success with women. Beta male “contempt” for sluts (“I’m completely invisible to these hot bitches, but it doesn’t matter because I don’t like sluts anyway”) is completely different from the contempt females have for “creepy” betas who “overstep their boundaries” and “don’t know their place”. Namely, the former is a hollow defense mechanism meant to assuage some egos. The latter is genuine revulsion.

    In a superficial sense, you are correct, sluts are actively disparaged by men. But only because these sluts are willing participants in the alpha male oligarchy’s harem. Show me a slut who blows a kiss at one of these betaboy slut haters, and I’ll show you a born-again slut apologist.

    Stop overating the importance of the chase.

    [Editor: Alpha males are repulsed by sluts too… as LTR material. Sluts are great for ONSs and flings.]

    Like


  90. I agree… But male ‘hatred’ for sluts and female hatred for betas still aren’t remotely equivalent.

    Like


  91. Just depressing, makes me wonder if the concepts like romance are the invention of betas…rather than women…to make chicks stay with them.

    Alphas make jokes like “why do men pay for hookers”…not for the sex but to leave.

    it said that for most of history, like 10% of cockas had offspring, thanks to what we know as slutshaming and so on, like 70% got progeny. This was good, right? I guess da bitches didn’t think so.

    Like


  92. Well, the feminists have won, matriarchal structural structures now rule the west. But, what feminists don’t see is even though they won a battle…they lost the war.

    Matriarchal societies have always been ruled by patriarchal societies. Gentleman, we will be ruled by the east. Tell, the offspring’s mother to teach the children mandarin.

    Like


  93. History has never been kind to polygamy. Look at the arab/islamic empires and how quickly they fell.

    Like


  94. Polyamory is to mating what socialism is to economics.

    deadbeat omegas demanding their ‘fair share’ of the market from the poon tycoons….

    Here’s a whole satire on this

    ‘From the Office of the Reproducer-General’

    http://www.stephenhicks.org/2010/11/16/from-the-office-of-the-reproducer-general/

    Like


  95. on November 18, 2010 at 7:37 pm Good Luck Chuck

    I know several true alphas who are swingers. These guys are in their 20’s and have status. Their wives/girlfriends vary from high 6’s to high 8’s. They ride motorcycles and are tied in closely with the biker scene and the strip clubs.

    I got a taste of that lifestyle for the first time last month when I took a little road trip with my swinger buddy and his wife. She’s a 6 face/7+ body, 20 something yr old with a masters, he is a bike show promoter with swagger. They brought along a cute little 22 yr old latina. Two “interesting” alcohol fueled nights of bars and strip clubs that ended with the two chicks diving into each others pussies like ravenous wolves as my buddy and I took turns violating them in various ways.

    Can’t say that I hated it but I didn’t especially enjoy it either. I derived more pleasure from having the cute 22 yr old tucked under my arm for most of the weekend than actually banging her or getting “sexual favors” from my buddy’s wife (Due to logistics I didn’t actually fuck the wife).

    Would I do it again? Probably. I wouldn’t mind actually fucking his wife and it would be a situation where any “new” pussy would be handed to me on a silver platter with no emotional ties on my end.

    Maybe I live in a bit of a bubble but I see a fair amount of free love going on. And not just with this group. I know some other couples who dabble in it too.

    Like


  96. @xsplat

    The only stage where there is passion and romance is before you are committed. Maintain that stage, to maintain passion.

    It took until my late thirties to finally get this through my thick skull.

    Like


  97. @j r

    with an abundance of men, women are at their flakiest. they buzz around from beta supplicant to beta supplicant like bees gathering pollen in a field of flowers.

    Nice simile.

    Like


  98. @Anon

    Once you guys grow up you’ll realize that chasing pussy is for children. Real men have other things to do then get their dick wet. I’d rather be immortalized as a great man who has achieved miracles then the old guy nobody remembers.

    You psuedo happiness is all useless bullshit when pussy is the end goal.

    Shame, shame, shame! Lol

    Like


  99. “Polyamory — multiple and simultaneous sexual relationships — means, in practice, a few high value dudes hording all the pussy.” Like in muslim societies where the losers who can’t get four wifes (i.e., the other 75%) make up the suicide bombers rewarded with 72 virgins (yeah, right) to keep them happy and volunteering.

    Like


  100. “So if women will no longer select men based upon the fittest, why will we not devolve into worms?” Well, look at the picture– it’s already in progress. Holy Butthex, Batman!

    Like


  101. Three interesting articles:

    “Women are their own worst enemies, study finds”
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/nov/18/women-own-worst-enemies-study?CMP=twt_fd

    (US) “Cities Where Women Outearn Male Counterparts”
    http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2010/09/01/cities-where-women-outearn-male-counterparts/

    “Fair Pay Isn’t Always Equal Pay”
    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/opinion/22Sommers.html?_r=2&hp

    Like


  102. “So what does nonviolent, consensual polyamory look like in modern real life when it’s purposefully tried?”

    …an average dance club.

    The difference between poly guys and average guys out trying to get laid is only that the poly guys know which guys have been in the women in their circle, if any.

    That’s a step above the normal dating scene, not below…but just a tiny step.

    There’s also the fact that the women in the poly scene are women someone on earth thinks are worth keeping. The same can’t be said of your average club hopper.

    The poly fidelity types are just realistic. The swingers are where most of the nastiness goes on, but they’re still less nasty than the ones out there screwing around with no knowledge of who or what has been there before.

    Some people just have standards. They like the idea of more flexible relationships, but don’t want just any dirt off the street dipping in their stuff.

    Monogamy may be ideal in a civilized culture, but non ideals are just different flavors of non ideal. I’d rather deal with responsible non ideal than irresponsible non ideal.

    If you’re out there in the “sexual market” you are screwing someone’s leftovers, perhaps within days or hours. If you don’t want to know who’s also shagging your slut, then that’s your call, but some guys would rather know.

    Like


  103. @dana

    “all manifestations of polyamory and bsdm in the modern era are nothing more than the sexual revolution for ugly people”

    Actually some girls into BDSM are quite cute. Most of the people in the “BDSM community” however …

    Like


  104. JR — Most professional urban White women would prefer all beta White guys turned gay. See my latest post for some examples. It is as childish as frat guys screaming “no fat chicks!” and based on the transient sexual attitudes of the people doing the screaming.

    In a complex, wealth-creating society, I don’t care if my doctor looking at my X-ray is a fat chick, I care if she’s competent. Same with the technician taking the X-rays. Or the lab assistant processing my blood work. Or the co-worker providing a valuable part of a shared project, that keeps the company I work for afloat (and myself employed). I have a whole other hierarchy of needs, besides just having “no fat chicks” around in my place of employment, or a hospital, or whatever. The same goes for beta males but women under the age of say, 55 generally don’t see it that way.

    Polyamory is just another form of polygamy. Women don’t like screwing beta males. They prefer Alphas, and will get “headaches” to avoid having sex with betas. Only the most ugly are classic polyamorists.

    Like


  105. “Just the opposite; it would liberate women to single-mindedly pursue the few alphas in their purview, knowing full well that a beta blood-latticed safety net exists to protect them from destitution. In other words, socially-sanctioned and state-supported polyamory lets women have their cake and eat it, too. The only trade-off is that they will have to share scarce high value lovers with other women.”

    You just described the Scandinavian Welfare State. I’m a half dane who does not get to live on the good side. I have chosen to make America, even w/all of its problems like fat chicks, my home for a reason.

    Like


  106. on November 18, 2010 at 9:25 pm johnycomelately

    Roissy, you been eating monkey brains or what? The posts lately have been kick arse, maybe its the paleo diet or you been boffing some teens…..

    Like


  107. JR Gorilla,

    That divorce story is shocking – just watch the media attempt to normalise something as deeply screwed up as that. Notice how the kids are an afterthought to these people.

    Like


  108. If there’s free love, it ain’t real polygamy. The main goal of it is alpha seed spreading. This omega bullshit that its about spreading love and free expression is bullshit. When shit goes down and we’re all on our own farms making sure we don’t starve, the men with the most women in-line will have the biggest empires.

    Like


  109. To be fair, Christopher Ryan (author of Sex at Dawn) was taking his thesis based on pre-agriculture society. If you had good enough genes to survive infancy, then you were probably alpha enough to be a solid candidate to pass on your genes.

    Like


  110. on November 18, 2010 at 10:25 pm Good Luck Chuck

    Here’s an example of some quality journalism:

    http://www.aolnews.com/surge-desk/article/report-45-million-americans-went-hungry-in-2009/19720882?icid=main%7Chtmlws-sb-n%7Cdl1%7Csec4_lnk1%7C184698

    Report: 45 Million Americans Went Hungry in 2009

    “Despite the fact that recession appeared to be easing in some places around the country, authorities classified about 45 million Americans as “food insecure” during 2009, and about 6.8 million as having “very low food security.”

    “This is unthinkable. It’s like we are living in a Third World country,” food relief organization Feeding America president Vicky Escarra told the Washington Post.”

    “Paradoxically, obesity rates also increased in almost half of the states in the same year, without decreasing in a single state, suggesting that a poor economy may be taxing not just the quantity, but the quality of the American food supply as well.

    The group hardest hit by hunger appears to be young mothers raising children alone, as well as blacks and Hispanics, who were twice as likely to be food insecure as whites.”

    So 45 million American “went hungry” in 2009? No, wait, authroities classified 45 million Americans as “food insecure”.

    WTF is food insecure? You are either starving or you aren’t.

    To the typical libtard who only reads titles “This is unthinkable. It’s like we are living in a Third World country,”

    Pardoxically, obesity rates are either flat or up in every state in the union.

    Of course, it is the single mothers, blacks, and hispanics that are “starving”.

    Like


  111. “Seriously though, we shouldn’t forget that beta men are 10x more violent then alpha. Always fear the men that feel backed into a corner. Alpha’s by definition are whipped and incapable of the insanity of men with nothing to lose.”

    What everyone leaves out though is that society will return to chaos as soon as the funds run out from Uncle Sugar, but many betas if wise will have armed themselves way before then. They already have if the run up on arms during the election of Obama is any indication. So not only will they have the means to defend, they’ll also have the means to destroy. Alpha’s, their women, and their offspring will be shunned as their actual burden value will make them easy to cast out. That will include acts of violence as the old Klingon proverb “revenge is a dish best served cold” will indeed be just that.

    Like


  112. @MichaelC

    “There is a reason why patriarchy came into being in the old days, and why there were no successful polyamourous or matriarchal societies.

    Consider being a girl in a matriarchal society. It does not mean that YOU get to run things, it means your mom gets to boss you around. When food is scarce, who is going to get access to your young ‘gina: the handsome young stud who shows up with nothing but a cock and a grin, or the ugly successful hunter who shows up with dinner? A matriarchal society is a brothel society, with your mom as the madam.

    What about the beta men of the tribe? They have little incentive to stick around to protect the tribe and support their sisters, pregnant by some alpha male. Their incentive to to move off and go get something they can trade for access to ‘gina someplace. Any alpha males screwing the hotter women of the tribe have no incentive to stick around if the tribe comes under attack — their incentive is to run off and be alpha someplace safer.

    The women of the tribe have an incentive to turn their non-alpha sons gay, because gay men have less incentive to wander off looking for ‘gina.

    Contrast this with a monogamous patriarchal society: the men have an incentive to accumulate property to pass along to children they are confident are theirs. The beta males get their own women, and thus have a reason to defend the tribal lands. The tribe becomes strong and prosperous, is able to fight off aggression by others, and is able to aggressively take over the lands of weaker matriarchal or matrilineal tribes around them. Eventually, all but the monogamous, patriarchal tribes are killed off.”

    BINGO !

    Like


  113. At old guy.

    The worst thing for a progressive liberal government is the traditional family headed by a male. Not only do they make the government less powerful, they make life safer. Imagine that; a bigger, more intrusive government makes for a less safer society until the government starts acting akin to the fascist and communist states. That’s indeed where we are headed.

    When I was growing up, children played in the streets in their neighborhoods. People in those neighborhoods knew one another and looked after each other. These days, children are carted off to parks because of the fear that they will be harmed.

    Something to think about.

    Like


  114. on November 18, 2010 at 11:32 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    what you fuckers

    keep forgeteteing!!!!

    is that the fiat master neocons redifined ALPHA and BETA.

    once upon a time alpha was john wayne clint eastwood thomas jefferson andrew jackson.

    the rifiat beta masters redeifned alpha as being an assocking assocker like tucker max and a pudgy fat cherubic faced mamas boy who shouts for more war and more feminism to tame men zlzozollzooozolz.

    then they took us off the gold standard and put us on the gina tingle standard. everyting is now valued by how much it makes the gina and anuth tingle in womenz.

    if their anuth tingles, then bam! tucker max is a six foot butthexual hero, but because those marines dying in afghanistan in neocons war don’t make the neoocn womenz gina anuth tingle, tehir maiagzines do not report on an d salute the american heroes, but just the short assocking ones who tsay back a=to secrteively tape asscoking sessiosn for the finat matsers zlzozlozzolzlzo.

    unde rthe fed’s gina tingle/butt tingle standard:

    1) marragie came to an end as owmen no longer served god family men husband father, but gina anuth tingles
    2) obama and bill clcnton were elcted presidednt myby massive gina tingling.
    3) vampires undead makeyup wearing nmonsters and secrtiev tapers of assockiing are the new “alphas” and good rugged heroic hardworking men are the betas, as they do not make owmens anuth tingle liek tucker max rhymes iwth goldman sax lzozlzlz

    once upon a time our dolalrs were backed by gold

    today thye are backed by gina tingles

    go to any department store and 80% of it is devoted to weomnz lzozlzlzolololzol

    which happens to be the amount of divorce intaitated by women–80%

    ben bernanke funds womens feminism destruction of marriage as it growns his state power, puts owmen in the work force where bernake can tax them, puts them in college where his heoric deslouoing assocoking asscokers who rhyme with godlman sax can sdesoul women until they are jno longer loyal to god and good but butt and gina tingle linlgle lingleszlozlzlzlzol

    80% of divroces intaited by women as benranke rewwards assocked, desouled womenz with olotsa fiat dolalrz form slave betamen lzozozollzl with which they use to go out to department stores to buy 80% of the clothes to atrract furtue asscockers defined as apllpahsa by the fed lzozzlzl

    but you know what;s funny?

    when ben bernakes dollar goes to zero, the aprty is over!!! lzozozolzl

    no lonegr wil women be funded to be assocked in cocllege and the n assock men in divorce ocurt zlzoozozllzol!

    but intil the dolalr goes to zero, epxect a lot of assocking all teh way on down down down down zlozlzlzlozol

    Like


  115. I watched my mistress lick one of her grad students pussy. She also used to do lesbian sex in front of her loser husband too. I thought the lesbian shit was hot and it was fun teaming up on her with the other chick. I couldn’t stand watching another Guy fuck her but I’ll accept that she still rarely fucks her husband. But that lesbian crap is awesome! She doesn’t want two guys ever and just wants me but she also doesn’t want to leave her husband unless I ‘commit’.

    Like


  116. I know an ex pimp he had 4 bitches.
    Hrs made three grand a night getting the girls to sell their ass.
    They lived together an he maintained their lifestyle with the money they gave him.
    He had MTLR living together all under one roof and they got along just fine.
    Now thats polygamy.
    That’s Game. A true harem.

    Like


  117. At GBFM,

    I always look forward to your posts ’cause you are so correct. I look at the shit today and it’s backwards. Men that have stability and worked have no worth until women deem them useful. But many men now are starting to wise up and not only are they dissing women, they starting to diss the jobs and taxes collected from their labors. Those that remain and the women that are taking over won’t be enough to save it. 14 trillion in debt plus the Fed buying up the bonds now is a signal that it’s almost over. 3rd world status will arrive in the coming years, not decades as many are wrongfully predicting.

    There’s no way in hell now that I recommend any man work and become something that the government can mooch off of. Weasel your way around, rip off the government as much as you can and do what you must to ensure the beast dies. Along with it will be the alphas, their breeder women and their children. That is the only way out now.

    Like


  118. “The beta males get their own women, and thus have a reason to defend the tribal lands. The tribe becomes strong and prosperous, is able to fight off aggression by others, and is able to aggressively take over the lands of weaker matriarchal or matrilineal tribes around them.”

    This is why uberalphas have traditionally been monogamous. Fiercely monogamous. That is what The Odyssey is about. The Iliad being about the chaos caused by hypergamy.

    This ain’t new.

    Like


  119. on November 19, 2010 at 1:00 am lover of women

    @desi..

    dont throw that out there ..that fucks up the whole guilt free pussy playground concept

    Like


  120. jerkdogg–

    A bull/FB from the cuckolding scene comes to Chateau’s.

    Like


  121. 119th

    Like


  122. Investment in Schooling and the Marriage Market: http://econ.tau.ac.il/papers/foerder/4-2007.pdf

    Like


  123. on November 19, 2010 at 2:20 am Professor Woland

    Bastards are the lowest rung in every society. This is not such a big deal in affluent societies because there is little risk of crippling impoverishment or physical harm but it is a big deal in a resource scarce society.

    There were two parts to Darwin’s Natural Selection. The first was reproduction and the second was survival, or the R and K factors. The first part is what everybody focuses on but the second part is equally important. When clams reproduce they simply spew out millions of eggs and sperm with the hope (I doubt clams hope) that enough will fertilize and survive. They don’t nurture their offspring or invest in 529 plans. Humans are a different story. It takes decades to nurture a human child. I’ve known Trustifarians who are in their 30s and 40s who still cannot support themselves.

    Creating Bastards is a risky survival strategy, especially for women.

    Like


  124. on November 19, 2010 at 2:39 am greatbooksformen GBFM

    “on November 19, 2010 at 12:46 am desiderius
    “The beta males get their own women, and thus have a reason to defend the tribal lands. The tribe becomes strong and prosperous, is able to fight off aggression by others, and is able to aggressively take over the lands of weaker matriarchal or matrilineal tribes around them.”

    This is why uberalphas have traditionally been monogamous. Fiercely monogamous. That is what The Odyssey is about. The Iliad being about the chaos caused by hypergamy.

    This ain’t new.”

    Lozozlozl!!! finally one of you fucktards FUCKTARDS gets it close!!!

    the GREAT BOOKS and CONSTITUTION are bout PROEPRTY RIEGHTS that every man has a right to his home wife family EVERY MAN

    bernanke and tucker max thyems with goldman sax gain power by detsorybng the great books and classics and truth and beuaty which is why the FED funds feminimsis and wires fiat dollarzs to tucker max to asscock and desoul your future wife and majke her more loyal to the ebranke tucker max state fascist coperate atsate tahn she is to god family home great book spoetry truth exalthed spirity sioul beuatyt which tehy repalce with butthex. lzozzlzlo

    Like


  125. If anyone want to sublease my most excellent bachelor pad in Indonesia for a few months contact me through my blog through a post in the contact area. I’m planning to visit Shanghai for a while. The cost here is $600/month plus utilities. My girlfriends are not included, but you should be able to set those up on dating websites before you arrive.

    Like


  126. on November 19, 2010 at 3:25 am anthropologist

    “Widespread polyamorous practice where childrearing is done by the village and all men, uncertain of paternity, contribute resources to the well-being of the single moms and their unholy bastard squirtage, will not convince women to equally distribute their sexual favors among the men.”

    Dude – Neanderthals were hunter-gatherers. There was no such thing as private plots of land where a “beta” would have to “support” a “single mother.” The concept of privately owned land or “single” mothers wouldn’t even have existed.

    There were no single mothers or single fathers. Single anything would have meant death. A woman bearing a child isolated from her tribe and kin would have died. Children were social security for grandparents. If you don’t have kin you’re wandering the earth alone and probably screwed.

    It would have been all about kin-networks and larger tribe alliances. Kin would have been the best allies and more kin is much better then less kin. The multiple-partner sex would have taken place in something we’d understand as a line-marriage or group marriage. Intricate kinship networks would foster bonds & alliances that would have helped survival. Sex could have been used to foster these kin-networks. I’m sure there were sexual taboos, but I don’t know what those taboos were. And if these people hunted in groups then “alphas” couldn’t afford to toss “betas” out of the kin network.

    I have no idea what the sexual arrangements were in this sort of community, but I strongly doubt they were life-long monogamous one-man/one-woman. That only makes sense if there is some sort of concept of private ownership of land and that land can be inherited by the child.

    Like


  127. For a healthy society, the slogan should be “A wife for every beta, and a car in every garage”. Otherwise, things are going to rot very quickly

    Like


  128. on November 19, 2010 at 3:40 am Beta States of America

    The NYBTimes surprisingly prints an article against the Paycheck Fairness Act that Pelosi wants to push through before Christmas in the lame duck Congress:

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/opinion/22Sommers.html?_r=3&hp

    Like


  129. on November 19, 2010 at 4:07 am Gunslingergregi

    ””””’r “single” mothers wouldn’t even have existed. ””””

    I disagree. I believe a single mother could have existed at any time in humanity and raised the kid on her own.

    Not an empowered woman of today yea they would die. I mean a real empowered woman with no safety net. Yea no problem at all.

    Like


  130. GBFM

    “Lozozlozl!!! finally one of you fucktards FUCKTARDS gets it close!!!”

    I got your fucktard right here, you bitterbeta James Joyce wannabe.

    I’m not close, I’m dead on.

    Like


  131. lover of women,

    “dont throw that out there ..that fucks up the whole guilt free pussy playground concept”

    Playtime’s over.

    Men are returning from war for the first time since the Baby Boom. Penelopes are wising up.

    Like


  132. “Once that largesse spends itself out, there will be a return to chaos, and the single moms with their bastard thuglings who no longer survive on the generosity of the state will purge themselves from existence, and the pendulum will swing back.”

    “But the system of polygamy is breaking down under resource constraints. We are now entering what Ed Driscoll calls “A Rendezvous with Scarcity” where there just won’t be enough money floating around and some will be chucked off the lifeboats.”

    “What everyone leaves out though is that society will return to chaos as soon as the funds run out from Uncle Sugar, but many betas if wise will have armed themselves way before then. They already have if the run up on arms during the election of Obama is any indication. So not only will they have the means to defend, they’ll also have the means to destroy. Alpha’s, their women, and their offspring will be shunned as their actual burden value will make them easy to cast out.”

    Damn skippy.

    Who thinks the thugs and parasites will be happy to be tossed out of the lifeboats? Complacent about being cast out of the land of free milk and honey?

    We’ve drifted into this post-modern lah-lah land where results and responsibility did not matter as much because there was so much give in the system. Well, that’s coming to an end, and political correctness in all its perversions of logic and reality (gender feminism, multi-culturalism, etc) will not be enough anymore to cowe people into accepting the bullshit.

    “What then happens is a complete breakdown in male investment in women and families. Men spend their working hours battling it out in vast, unproductive “Who’s the Sexiest?” competitions for privileged access to a veritable harem of vaj. If you think this is a recipe for creating and sustaining an advanced modern society filled with creature.”

    For all the people who continually whine in the comments when this blog deviates from simply discussing getting chicks in the sack, read the above quote again…and then again. From what I have read of Roissy, and I read ALL of of its archives still accessible, back to the beginning, it has ALWAYS been about more than pussy, dammit. Roissy has been trying to point out how the whole system is on self-destruct mode, and while he intends to exploit it for all its worth, that does not make the warnings irrelevant.

    I don’t agree with ALL the conclusions he comes to based on his observations, but on the whole, he’s got a HUGE fucking point, and its not all about dipping your wick.

    The people who have gotten used to living off the public teat, and they come in all shapes, sizes, and backgrounds, from run down ghettoes to the halls of power in DC, are not going to simply give up that lifestyle without a fight. They’d rather turn the place into a North Korean style prison than give up their lives of ease and power.

    Best be prepared, folks, because things will get hairy.

    Like


  133. “There is a lag time to immolation built in by the accumulated largesse of the state. Once that largesse spends itself out, there will be a return to chaos, and the single moms with their bastard thuglings who no longer survive on the generosity of the state will purge themselves from existence, and the pendulum will swing back.”

    Full quote from my post pending moderation which got cut off.

    Like


  134. [Editor: … A great lie says that progress is inevitable. It isn’t, and it needn’t point in the direction we envision.]

    An odd thing about Progress or Progressives is that their program is the exact opposite of progress.

    Progress is a social evolution toward civilization and beauty. This was clear to early progressives like Margaret Sanger, with her eugenics project. Today’s progressivism leads to ugliness and ruin. Especially ugliness, with ever-shrinking islands of goodness and beauty.

    Like


  135. If Polymary is alive and well, it got me thinking about about being faithful…….that to remain faithful is a conscious act, one where one is aware and in control of one’s emotions….it is conscious and intentional and that for those that says,” I didn’t know how it happened (the affair). It just happened. Nothing JUST happens. It was a choice–conscious and intentional and to take ownership.

    Like


  136. @Squared

    “Men hate/dont respect sluts” is a cultural meme that has gained traction because large swarms of men needed a way to rationalize their lack of success with women. Beta male “contempt” for sluts (“I’m completely invisible to these hot bitches, but it doesn’t matter because I don’t like sluts anyway”) is completely different from the contempt females have for “creepy” betas who “overstep their boundaries” and “don’t know their place”

    Bitch,

    What are you talking about?

    It’s sluts and not betas that are operating out of their league! You see it ass backwards because of your overinflated girl ego.

    A beta 6 is not gonna even try to pull 9’s (“hot bitches”). He’d be too scared. While a slut 6 has had 5 miles of alpha cock up her ass… and no relationship to show for it.

    When a beta 6 sees that girls of his rank will ONLY fuck dudes that are 3 or 4 points better than her, he has good reason not to be happy. But then, when said girls also spout off about how they are sooo attracted to nice guys, unhappiness becomes contempt. Where it turns to hate is when the “starfucking” sex has the hypocritical nerve to criticize the betas for not “knowing their place”.

    Women calling betas “creepy” is the like the King of England calling the American colonials “uppity” for not wanting the shit taxed out of them.

    Slut meme is classification, not rationalization. It’s simply a way for guys to highlight women’s sexual bullshit . That’s the reason feminists and such fight so hard try to invalidate the use. It’s also the reason your girl brain wants “sluttery” to be about male ego, rather than female behavior.

    Like


  137. Although I tend more toward Doug’s opinions than Audrey’s, it was still strangely entertaining to see the total ownage of Doug and his lies on the other thread (the cheating thread). Old thread, but shouldn’t miss.

    Like


  138. It’s polyamory…..hehe I spelt it polymary…hehe! Here…i got it right now.

    Like


  139. This is why uberalphas have traditionally been monogamous. Fiercely monogamous. That is what The Odyssey is about. The Iliad being about the chaos caused by hypergamy.

    huh? Odysseus is a fictional character. In real life, uberalphas have harems and mistresses.

    If Odysseus were a real person, he might very well have been trying desperately to get back to his wife and son, but he was also probably banging plenty of other girls, and boys since this was the Greeks. Also, as much as he may have “loved” his wife, I’m sure he also didn’t like the idea of some dude marrying her and taking possession of all his shit.

    Uberalphas tend to be fiercly protective of their stuff, including their women, but that don’t make them monagamouos.

    Like


  140. on November 19, 2010 at 10:04 am Gunslingergregi

    Is jr on fire or what dam.

    he he he

    Like


  141. on November 19, 2010 at 10:12 am Gunslingergregi

    Just because the godfather was talking to be monagomous don’t make it so.

    They had mistresses.

    Plus think about it.

    These guys were doing crime when they didn’t even need to.

    Anyone with a family that can work together like that doesn’t need to rob people to get rich.

    They just get rich.

    Motherfuckers working like 24 hours a day and shit in the movie but yea they had to do illegal shit yea right.

    The whole point was to show that families working together was wrong and somehow fucking illegal because it is just so fucking powerfull to have some blood actually looking out for each other.

    Trying to brainwash the masses that you can only get rich in a group with organized crime.

    Bullshit.

    Like


  142. Great ideas, but this just isn’t the way it is in real life.

    Lots of men are still getting married and self selecting out of this. Thus any guy with a normal body with a modicum of self confidence can get laid by multiple girls if he is willing to do so. Most guys just aren’t willing to do so. They may say they are, but most guys arent willing to pursue multiple sexual relationships at once. Theyre too beta to do so.

    You are very correct that most women are willing to do so and there is a hint of hypergamy in their selections, but because so many men self select out of polyamory/hypergamy by getting married or “settling down” with one girl it means that there are not that many men left out int he cold, “clawing” for leftovers.

    Like


  143. RE: sluts and betas

    the thing to remember is that men and women bring different things to the sexual marketplace. and the currency of each sex is a funtion of what they have an excess of and what they lack.

    the average girl can get laid whenever, but in order to find a guy to pay attention to her or commit to her she generally has to put out the promise of sex. the average guy can find a platonic dinner date or girl “buddy”, but in order to get laid has to make it seem like he’s out for more than just sex. the most basic exchange, therefore, is men trading attention to women for sex.

    a slut is a girl who has sex with a guy who has no intention of committing to her and a beta is a guy who pays attention to girl who has no intention of sleeping with him. like evil alpha said, this is purely an excercise in classification and not a rationalization for how i feel about either sluts or betas. some girls like being slutty because it gives them access to higher status guys than they could get if they held out for dates and more. some guys like being the beta buddy because it lets them hang around girls who are much hotter than the girls they could actually bang.

    the point of my orginal response to whiskey was to point out that the way women feel about their beta orbiters is similar to the way men feel about the sluts they bang. there may be times when there is a slight contempt, but it’s certainly not hatred. it wouldn’t make women happy if betas all turned gay or died or disappeared, cause then there would be no one to pay unwarranted attention to them or pay them effusive comments or take them on dinner dates.

    the fact that guys who can’t get laid often feel resentment to sluts is a completely different matter.

    Like


  144. Odysseus wasn’t monogamous, he banged a few chicks on his journey home; the fundamental point though is that as a good man he was trying to get home to his wife and family… The Sirens are actually a great allagory for the rest of the women he encountered on his journey- he allowed himself to enjoy the sensual pleasure they had to offer but he avoided desrtruction by staying focused on his larger goal, instead of allowing himself to drown in temptation.

    Like


  145. internet tough guy with unwarranted, overinflated sense of self worth said:

    “blabla something girl(?) ego miles of cock up slut’s ass and some other nonsensical bullshit”

    Hey creampuff, I appreciate your intervention, but sadly I sense that as a result of your lack of reading comprehension and/or mental retardation, we are operating on different planes of thought.

    I never said that sluts weren’t sluts, that slut behavior wasn’t slut behavior, that sluts weren’t playing out of their league or any of that. I said that, if can agree on the underlying premise that the majority of men are beta and thus aren’t getting laid with the frequency they need or with the kinds of girls they want, their hatred for sluts is largely borne out of helplessness and desperation, as opposed to abundance (as the user I quoted previously tried to suggest).

    Me? I love sluts. If it weren’t for them and the huge role they play in diminishing the price of sex, it’d be tougher to get laid. Bitter betas who endure long dry spells, on the other hand, need to rationalize their lack of success somehow. If you disagree, you haven’t met enough bitter betas.

    But you’re excused. Afterall, what would an internet trash talking tough guy who uses a moniker like “evil alpha” know about betas? Nothing at all, I’m sure.

    As for the rest of your gibberish, grunt and groan for me some more carnival monkey, maybe i’ll toss you some peanuts.

    Like


  146. lol the height of civilization ..a happy pimp with a obediant harem ..later on we could let the kids (girls) we didnt abort once 14 15 go spend time with Uncle Snoop Dog ..and he can break em in ..see if they have any mass appeal ..porno ..street value ..or just domestic ..

    Like


  147. on November 19, 2010 at 11:29 am greatbooksformen GBFM

    “NYCBachelor
    Odysseus wasn’t monogamous, he banged a few chicks on his journey home; the fundamental point though is that as a good man he was trying to get home to his wife and family… The Sirens are actually a great allagory for the rest of the women he encountered on his journey- he allowed himself to enjoy the sensual pleasure they had to offer but he avoided desrtruction by staying focused on his larger goal, instead of allowing himself to drown in temptation.

    holy fuck i can’t beleieve we’re discusisng the great books lzozlzlzl !!

    the fed’s wleel funded feminsisist destruction and descration of our culture failed! zlozlzlzlz butethxhxhxtxxhxt

    oh happy day!!!

    also remember you fucktards that odysseus couls have stayed forever young iwth agoddess, representing me and roissy banging forver young girls–the ideal of beauty, but instead odysseus picked up and got on home

    but now, thanks t9o the fed’s well-funded assckoning and deousling promrgam, roissy and i don’;t have wives at home zlozlzlzzzolzo as we don’t want to be the walking wallet to not a penepelo but to a circe or siren zlzozlzl

    also, you craxy fucks, THERE WAS NO SECRTEIVE TAPING S OF BUTTHECX WOITHOUT TEH GIRLTHS CONTHEN in homer’s odyssey, which is why the weekly standadth repeats the lies six foot tall tlies of tucker max rhymes iwth goldman sax, instead of exalting and conseriving tehodyssey as consteriaves true consteivaes owuld, instead of stuffing tehir cherubuc fat faces with dc pizza and cscreaming for more war more war “WOMEN TAME MEN!” screams jonah goldberdg, sending forth an army of assocked wopemnze deosuled womenz to seize assets from men in the divroce regime zlozzlzlol butzthuheteghzhz

    Like


  148. on November 19, 2010 at 11:57 am greatbooksformen GBFM

    http://www.cnbc.com/id/40257359
    Nearly 1 in 5 Americans had mental illness in 2009

    “CHICAGO – More than 45 million Americans, or 20 percent of U.S. adults, had some form of mental illness last year, and 11 million had a serious illness, U.S. government researchers reported on Thursday.

    Young adults aged 18 to 25 had the highest level of mental illness at 30 percent, while those aged 50 and older had the lowest, with 13.7 percent, said the report by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration or SAMHSA.

    lozozozl this is what happens after 100 years of the fed buttheixng the peopel with the enoeonc definit8ions of good and honor

    neocons ladies wthink good and honor is secrteiev tapiongs of butthex filmed without the girlths contehnt and makeup waering vampire montsers zlzozlzolzoz

    then they drug up all thei girls on prozac and the gusys on rirtalains zlozlzlzolzzlz buttehxing the gilrs into insantisty fed funded anal acockcing zlzozozozol phaemrauscutical companies masisve neocon profit from drugs war porn welfare warfare crazy slutts zlzozoozlz

    Like


  149. on November 19, 2010 at 12:20 pm classicist lady

    the comment about the Odyssey is factually a mistake (as a classicist who has spent years translating it).

    Odysseus is coming back to Penelope, for sure, and loves her as his virtuous wife and keeper of his home, but he bangs many nymphs and pretty young things in the years it takes for him to get back to her, including a lengthy stint on the nymph Kalypso’s island, in which Odysseus makes a speech to her that despite Kalypso’s immortal beauty surpassing that of his wife’s, he has to leave and go back to her (poetic game!) He also has an ambiguous interaction with the fair young daughter of the Phoenecians, Nausicaa. It is implied that there are many others.

    Penelope, meanwhile, is presented as the paragon of female virtue. She’s surrounded by suitors but fends them off with an elaborate weaving project (she says she won’t remarry until she finishes it, and every night unweaves the work she’s done that day). Notice that if the suitors didn’t surround her we wouldn’t have a chance to see her chaste, faithful virtue in action.

    Odysseus= heroic Alpha.

    Like


  150. “More than 45 million Americans, or 20 percent of U.S. adults, had some form of mental illness last year, and 11 million had a serious illness, U.S. government researchers reported on Thursday.”

    Hmmm, this explains the Obama victory in ’08…

    Like


  151. on November 19, 2010 at 12:33 pm Beta States of America

    Again, too many guys here have never been to a couple’s club on the US west coast or Southern France with someone hot to trade. Think “Eyes Wide Shut” without the paranoia and pompousness (or pomposity – whatever).

    Evil and Squared are talking past each other, making separate but valid points. No need for a flame war.

    This blog needs to spawn a talking head on Fox News or other network that will repeat its major goal:

    To do everything possible to lower the over-inflated sexual market value of those men most want to sleep with.

    Put a dollar value on it if you want. Keep it high enough to be realistic but otherwise as low as possible. Let’s just get that value down.

    We know the National Organization for Women is doing everything they can to prop up the price of US women. The Child Support & Divorce Industry, where a man’s risk is proportional to his income, makes marrying or impregnating one way too expensive. They are successfully regulating “mail order brides” and “sex trafficking” (which both CNN and Fox News say includes all voluntary service) to make damn sure that you have to use this thing called “game” which only works for women 2 points higher on the looks scale than you are (after which you aren’t supposed to have any other options – so hit the gym and stay young). There’s a whole laundry list of strategies that federally subsidized “women’s organizations” use to artificially inflate US female value.

    Where’s the National Organization for Men? Of all of the Chateau du Roissy’s thousands of readers per day, where’s the funding of at least one million that will force the GOP to look at men’s rights in the run-up to 2012…or watch themselves get ridiculed into a 1996-style defeat?

    One million dollars would force discourse in the Lamestream Media and in pop-culture.

    Meanwhile, more of you guys should start anonymous blogs and other free Internet pages that use the hottest keywords to bring traffic to the Chateau.

    Like


  152. on November 19, 2010 at 12:34 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    YOU OOPID CRAZY GINA TINGLING ANUTH BUZZIING BITCSTHCCT!! lzozlzlzozozoz

    where’s the fucking mistake gina tingelr anutehet tingly singly lzozlzlzolzoz just causse a you gina tingle sodn’t make it true zlozozoz i mean the fed fiat dollar won’t be tehr eofrver bakcing teh gina anuth tingle standardth zlzozolzolzl

    “classicist lady

    the comment about the Odyssey is factually a mistake (as a classicist who has spent years translating it).

    Odysseus is coming back to Penelope, for sure, and loves her as his virtuous wife and keeper of his home, but he bangs many nymphs and pretty young things in the years it takes for him to get back to her, including a lengthy stint on the nymph Kalypso’s island, in which Odysseus makes a speech to her that despite Kalypso’s immortal beauty surpassing that of his wife’s, he has to leave and go back to her (poetic game!) He also has an ambiguous interaction with the fair young daughter of the Phoenecians, Nausicaa. It is implied that there are many others.

    Penelope, meanwhile, is presented as the paragon of female virtue. She’s surrounded by suitors but fends them off with an elaborate weaving project (she says she won’t remarry until she finishes it, and every night unweaves the work she’s done that day). Notice that if the suitors didn’t surround her we wouldn’t have a chance to see her chaste, faithful virtue in action.

    Odysseus= heroic Alpha.”

    FUCKING STOOOPID BERATINGBERNANKIFIED FED FUDNED FEMINSINST BITCH!!!!!! lzozzllzzozo

    ODYSEEUSINS DOES NOT FUCK NAUSICAA YOU STOOOPID BICTH!!!!

    WHY DO ENEOOCN GINA TINGLING WOEMNS ALWAYS HAVE TO PROJECT THEMELEVS ONTO EVERYTHING all greta literature? lzozzlzozlzozo

    THE ODYSSEY IS NOT FUCKING TWILIGHT NOR HARRY PIIOSTSTSER!!!!

    you write “It is implied that there are many others.”

    show me one exapmle you dumb cuttxctcc cucnctct cuncty cunct

    show me just one exapmle you dumb cuttxctcc cucnctct cuncty cunct

    this is what happens when women study the classics–it is deconstructed and tyransofmred from soarings lofty poetry to sex and fucking and sucking lzozozozozoz just read any fiemisnists lit class it is not about gods law and teh constitution and honor and poetry and nobolobility abut fucking sucking butthex which is why the fed funds fmeinsisnsm to butthex the nation into submission to a debt based baseleelss dolalrr lzozlzolzozoz

    you write “Odysseus is coming back to Penelope, for sure, and loves her as his virtuous wife and keeper of his home, but he bangs many nymphs and pretty young things in the years it takes for him to get back to her, including a lengthy stint on the nymph Kalypso’s island, in which Odysseus makes a speech to her that despite Kalypso’s immortal beauty surpassing that of his wife’s, he has to leave and go back to her (poetic game!) He also has an ambiguous interaction with the fair young daughter of the Phoenecians, Nausicaa. It is implied that there are many others.

    NAME THE “many nymphs and pretty young things in the years it takes for him to get back to her” THAT ODYSSUES BANGS dumb slut fucktard.

    name them

    name them

    name them

    or stuutip

    or shuttiup

    or shuttup

    or shuttup lzozzlolzozozozoz

    why do women think they have a right to fuck of the great books and clasiscs and kill the clasical spirit?

    i mena they have their twilight and harry potter and daytime tv and 80% of all teh department stores and 80% of all the dirvocre inita8ions and 100% of all the 50,000,000 abortion initiations but that is not enough,

    they have to destory kill everything that is good great and noble lzozozlzlz or they’re not ahppy zlzozozolzl buttehxualals slslsl

    the neocons love assockiers butthexesrs vampires makeup waeraing vampires and aborters murderes they hat the great books and classics and mother teresa, who writes:

    ” “I feel that the greatest destroyer of peace today is abortion, because it is a war against the child, a direct killing of the innocent child, murder by the mother herself.”

    “And if we can accept that a mother can kill her own child, how can we tell other people not to kill one another?”

    “By abortion the Mother does not learn to love, but kills her own child to solve her problems. And, by abortion, that father is told that he does not have to take any responsibilty at all for the child he has brought into the world. The father is likely to put other women to the same trouble. So abortion leads to more abortion.”

    Photo of Mother Theresa

    “Any country that accepts abortion is not teaching its people to love, but to use violence to get what they want. That is why the greatest destroyer of love and peace is abortion”

    “Any country that accepts abortion is the poorest of the poor”

    “Many people are concerned with children of India, with the children of Africa where quite a few die of hunger, and so on. Many people are also concerned about the violence in this great country of the United States. These concerns are very good. But often these same people are not concerned with the millions being killed by the deliberate decision of their own mothers. And this is the greatest destroyer of peace today- abortion which brings people to such blindness.”

    “We must remember that life begins at home and we must also remember that the future of humanity passes through the family”

    “The way to plan the family is natural family planning not contraception. In destroying the power of giving life, through contraception, a husband or wife is doing something to self, and so it destroys the gift of life in him or her”

    “Once that living love is destroyed by contraception, abortion follows very easily”

    “It is a poverty to decide that a child must die so that you live as you wish”

    “Be humble like Mary so that you can be holy like Jesus””

    Like


  153. I’m going to agree with Dana and say that BDSM attracts the ugly. I saw this first hand. I joined a submissive women’s group to learn more about it, I’d found a link online and was curious. I’m not claiming to be a beauty, but I’m quite a bit better looking than the average kinkster. I only went twice and I felt ousted. The women were grossly obese and my size alone threatened their position amonst the men I guess. I’m not into play scenes and didn’t attend one, but heck I wasn’t invited anyway- I think they felt I’d get all the attention. I’m a natural submissive and don’t need the lifestyle to behave as one – but I think those in ‘it’ have no other options to get laid. Tru stry.

    Like


  154. on November 19, 2010 at 12:43 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    forgivethe ladies lzozzllz

    for there is not enough butttingles nor gina tingles nor anuth tingles in homer’s odyssey

    and thus they have to add the fucking and sucking in the whole way on home lzozlzolzolzololzozl

    while completely forgetting the ending

    where after all the suitors are killed, odysseues has their whores clean up the blodd, and hung outsied to die zlzolzlzozoz

    fucking and cuskciing with abdandon and undead vampire assocking bullshit did not go down well in the hoemric world, lzozozlzolzoz

    Like


  155. Women do resent and hate “betas” who try to pull above their weight. However, if you don’t try to pull above your weight, you’re gonna be beta for life. So how do you thread this needle?

    Like


  156. http://www.slate.com/id/2274570/

    high school girls dig older men.
    read all about it.

    Like


  157. on November 19, 2010 at 12:56 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    how a modenr enocn buttehxed sdeousled woman reads th egreat books:

    homer’s iliad:
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz

    homer’s odyssey:
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz

    the us ocnstitution:
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz
    gina tingling fucking suckting anytth tingle lzozoz
    fucking and sucking butthex vampies lzozlzlzz

    Like


  158. Women do resent and hate “betas” who try to pull above their weight. However, if you don’t try to pull above your weight, you’re gonna be beta for life. So how do you thread this needle?

    that’s easy. accomplish something with your life that raises your status. in the meantime, learn and practice game.

    Like


  159. Editor: There is a lag time to immolation built in by the accumulated largesse of the state. Once that largesse spends itself out, there will be a return to chaos, and the single moms with their bastard thuglings who no longer survive on the generosity of the state will purge themselves from existence, and the pendulum will swing back.

    This is basically a republican fantasy. Something you can tell your buddies and think, but not say too loud. The problem is, it’s wrong. And it’s wrong because it so little to keep people alive these days in Western countries because of advances in technology when you have rational people running the monkey show. Even in Africa where most countries have idiots in most important positions, they still have the biggest population growth by far in any continent. Protein, heat and shelter can be produced cheaply if the alternatives are dire. And even double digit IQ single moms can do a pretty good job at making clothes, washing or some menial, but demanding task all day, if the alternative is starving or having their toes amputated.

    In a modern society, people are so far from famine and early death in offspring it would take an absolute thrashing of everything that stands to really start killing off stupid people because they can’t produce enough kids. We need to look for other solutions, such as crowding the world with beautiful horny lolitas. 🙂

    Like


  160. on November 19, 2010 at 1:29 pm Beta States of America

    This video captures how we’re all brainwashed to think the woman has higher value than the man who is trying to pick her up:

    http://www.picvi.com/2010/10/10/how-to-pick-up-girls/

    Hint: the guys are not really trying to pick her up

    In terms of not artificially raising future value, let’s make sure everyone knows that plastic surgery is not an option for most women:

    http://www.weirdexistence.com/plastic-surgery/

    How many guys here think more than one or two of the following vintage ads are really sexist, considering its OK in other countries to do ads like this today:

    http://planetoddity.com/shocking-sexism-vintage-ads/

    Like


  161. Excellent maxim, so fucking true.

    Like


  162. on November 19, 2010 at 1:59 pm Beta States of America

    Woman ruins her marriage on a game show:

    Was that famous episode staged? I find it hard to believe it wasn’t all planned.

    Like


  163. I am curious. Since many of you seem to believe that women are inherently hypergamous cheaters worth only pumping and dumping,

    [Editor: False premise. The Chateau has never stated ALL women are hypergamous cheaters, nor has any host ever said all women are only worth pumping and dumping.
    ps uncork the eggplant from your ass.]

    does that mean you concurrently believe you are bastard children quirted out of the skank vag of your whore mothers and that you don’t know who your real fathers are? I mean, if you all believe so strongly that women aren’t faithful then it must follow that every single one of you males on this blog are the bastard fruit of illicit sex. After all, you can’t be the only men on earth with mothers who were faithful to your fathers (especially with your crappy attitudes towards women).
    So, guys. . .
    How does it feel to be the bastard who was plopped out of a whore who screwed around on your Daddy with an Alpha stud?
    Sucks to be you eh?

    Like


  164. on November 19, 2010 at 2:06 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    Dear Fokoru (fuckeuro),

    I think what most men are getting at here is that tdoay’s women have been assocked, desouled, butthexed, and assocked.

    Our mothers were not like that.

    Sure, if you had butthexed and assocked and deosuled our moms and grandmas, they would have been assocked and deosuled, like today’s pre-spinster cock carousel riding women.

    But thankfully, our grandmothers and many of our mothers were not bernankified by the feds asscoking program of death, deconstruction, and neoocn sectirve tapings of butthex lzozlzozozo.

    Many of us men would like to bring order back to society, but the neocnsths keep promoting buttheixng vappire ascokng makeup wearning vampires and more preemoptive wars on foreign shores, abortion, and feminissm sending froth deosuled buttehx women to taje men.

    Thank you for taking your time to express your opinion.

    The rosisy community depnds on peopel like yozuuz, to rock out withoyrou cock out lzozozol

    Like


  165. aoefe

    I’m going to agree with Dana and say that BDSM attracts the ugly. I saw this first hand. I joined a submissive women’s group to learn more about it, I’d found a link online and was curious. I’m not claiming to be a beauty, but I’m quite a bit better looking than the average kinkster. I only went twice and I felt ousted. The women were grossly obese and my size alone threatened their position amonst the men I guess.

    hey think of the extra loonies you passed on – its not like Calga-ree has financial opportunity like NYC.

    you need a manager

    Like


  166. on November 19, 2010 at 2:25 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    loozozozzololzzol

    –http://www.birthornot.com/ “A suburban Twin Cities couple touched off an Internet frenzy Thursday with their “birth or not” website — an online poll on asking whether the woman, who is 17 weeks pregnant, should have an abortion.”

    Give Birth 80.87% (82,273 votes)

    Have an Abortion 19.13% (19,468 votes)

    Total Votes: 101,741

    lozozozozlz you can see that godly men and women voted 82,273 times, while bernankified betas and assocked deosuled bithxhes voted 19,468 times zlozzlzol

    Like


  167. Aoefe says, “I’m going to agree with Dana and say that BDSM attracts the ugly.”

    I beg your pardon. The scene usually consists of older people who appreciate and may need community, but BDSM in general attracts people across the ranges.

    “I saw this first hand. I joined a submissive women’s group to learn more about it, I’d found a link online and was curious. I’m not claiming to be a beauty, but I’m quite a bit better looking than the average kinkster.”

    Not in your age range, you’re not.

    “I only went twice and I felt ousted. The women were grossly obese and my size alone threatened their position amonst the men I guess.”

    Feminine women have a greater propensity to fatness. So do older women, and women who haven’t had the opportunity to express themselves properly.

    Once the fatties are owned, the pounds come off, unless their owners like them that way, in which case, it’s not your business to judge them harshly for pleasing their Masters.

    You can’t really threaten a slave’s position since a Dom can own multiple subs.

    Maybe they thought you were a poser. That’s very simple to solve.

    “I’m not into play scenes and didn’t attend one, but heck I wasn’t invited anyway- I think they felt I’d get all the attention.”

    Keep telling yourself that.

    “I’m a natural submissive and don’t need the lifestyle to behave as one – but I think those in ‘it’ have no other options to get laid. Tru stry.”

    You aren’t submissive. You’re a bottom.

    Like


  168. Beta States of America

    Woman ruins her marriage on a game show:

    Was that famous episode staged? I find it hard to believe it wasn’t all planned.

    I tend to believe that episode true. Every game show has no trouble finding chumps to humiliate for free and free chumps are more economical than payed actors.

    Cop marriages are weird, for girls are ignorantly attracted to just an authority figure, to just a uniform. When the male inside the uniform gets boring and fat, it’s no consolation for her damaged SOCIAL STANDING in having married a person NOBODY wants to be uninhibited around.

    Except other cops.
    Friendship circles are scant and feeble.
    Boring.

    Like


  169. My ex now has two children from two different men (myself being one of them), neither of whom stuck around. She is now in a relationship with the mangina who used to kiss her ass in highschool and who himself has three children from his own ex wife whom he pays an enormous amount of support to, whilst he lives in a ramshackle little apartment.

    I still live a bachelor’s life whilst the other father has remarried himself.

    How’s that for polyamory and well, just plain fucked up…..

    Like


  170. I’d like to add that in my observation, unowned subs have a tendency to be bubbly-fat over a certain age, where Dommes, when they’re fat are more sturdy “built like a horse” fat.

    Male subs (not just fetishy but actually submissive) are often obese, probably because of unmet needs and being feminine to the point they enjoy having a softer body. Their free time pursuits are also often less physical and more intellectual.

    It’s more likely that a Domme would be a fat woman who can’t get attention any other way than a sub. A sub understands the need to be attractive, and that if their Master decides they have to lose weight then that’s what they have to do. You can’t stay owned if you’re unwilling to obey.

    So women who aren’t willing to take instruction, and who see BDSM as a kind of escape from reality sometimes take on the Dominant role so they can be fat and not have anybody criticize them for it.

    If a woman is high T and workhorse fat and legitimately enjoys being on top, it’s cool. She’s found her niche, and nobody can really blame her. If a woman is just looking for an excuse to be unnecessarily ugly, and perhaps punish men, then this is a problem…and it is a problem throughout the scene.

    It’s not just fat chicks who do this though. I have seen a rather hot Domme take physical revenge on a young and truly submissive woman. I’ve never seen a fat woman go that far, but I’ve seen multiple slim ones go haywire. Maybe it’s the cocaine.

    Like


  171. What are your thoughts on hunger gatherer tribes in which many men raise a kid, based on the idea that one of them might be the father.

    “Partible paternity is where the nurture of a child is shared by multiple fathers, a form of polyandry.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partible_paternity

    “given that such cultures are rare, and in-depth studies are lacking, we must necessarily speculate about possible environmental origins”

    To me it sounds like horseshit some anthropologist with a blank-slate bent probably exaggerated and twisted.

    Like


  172. @Good Luck Chuck

    WTF is food insecure? You are either starving or you aren’t.

    To the typical libtard who only reads titles “This is unthinkable. It’s like we are living in a Third World country,”

    Pardoxically, obesity rates are either flat or up in every state in the union.

    Of course, it is the single mothers, blacks, and hispanics that are “starving”.

    “WORLD ENDS: MINORITIES, WOMEN HARDEST HIT”

    Like


  173. That should be “hunter gatherer”, obviously… ^

    Like


  174. @desiderius

    GBFM

    “Lozozlozl!!! finally one of you fucktards FUCKTARDS gets it close!!!”

    I got your fucktard right here, you bitterbeta James Joyce wannabe.

    Good times, lolz

    Like


  175. on November 19, 2010 at 3:02 pm Beta States of America

    Aoefe – The real men on the BDSM scene would not tolerate cows “ousting” hotties. If you’ve seen it happen, than the guys in the particular scene would want to be warned unless they’re part of the 80% of the “masters” on the scene who are losers and aren’t masters of anything.

    I’ve seen first-hand real masters in their 50s recruit women in their early 20s or have them recruited by the older cows whom you painted as jealous.

    The first rule of a decent master is to have no toleration for a woman who would turn a cold shoulder to or oust a prettier woman. They are rewarded for recruiting better looking women than themselves.

    I’m not saying you’re trying to funnel men here into thinking that only Roissy-style game is the way for men to have fun (and that with its “this won’t get you more than 2 points above your station” clause). You probably did feel other women were jealous of you and the particular men you met were possibly not so choosy and not so alpha.

    However, men reading this shouldn’t get demoralized that another apparent avenue to fun is supposedly just a blind alley.

    The great thing about this blog is that there isn’t an economic conflict of interest glaring at anyone (buy my book because cold pickup game is your only hope).

    Still, its sad to see a consensus build at a blog named after the Story of O, that women supposedly don’t fantasize about being tied up, etc, via secret organizations (in chateaus for instance) where men have the benefit of pre-selection (older woman says to a new young woman friend “my dark master told me to recruit someone like you” – that might sound corny but some young women will find any excuse to fulfill their fantasies).

    Guys looking for the variety of experiences that men are built to seek out, can most assuredly find a lot of fun and adventure with the 10% of the couples swap and BDSM scene that is hot and really hot.

    Like


  176. imminent
    Thread Death
    apparent

    mout

    Like


  177. I need to clarify it was a submissive women’s group and no Dom’s were present. They met at a different venue. There were submissive men however. I may have experienced a disconnect with them because it just seemed too ‘out there’ for my conservative tastes. Some were whipping off their tops and showing off nipple rings. I do know that whatever Nicole may say that I was hotter than the women present at that meeting, and no I’m not saying I’m super hot.

    Nicole I remember my first submissive experience at five years old (kids playing – no adults), I’d like to know why you can dismiss me as submissive and say I’m a bottom?

    Also BDSM can be practiced without taking place at a play party. For me, I’m submissive to one, not a group, nor in front of a group.

    Like


  178. “Evil and Squared are talking past each other, making separate but valid points. “.

    @Beta States of America:

    I think we have opposite view points, not separate ones. “Creepy” is a political word that has feminist implications. It is NOT mostly used to describe some universal female repulsion. http://www.alternet.org/sex/148291/why_do_we_demonize_men_who_are_honest_about_their_sexual_needs/?page=1

    And I think it is way more likely that…“Betas are creepy” is a cultural meme that has gained traction because large swarms of average looking liberal girls needed a way to rationalize their non egalitarian love of Alpha cock than Squares’ view that “Men hate sluts” is a cultural meme that has gained traction because large swarms of beta men needed a way to rationalize their lack of success with all the alpha cock loving women of their own rank.

    Like


  179. on November 19, 2010 at 3:21 pm Beta States of America

    Wouldn’t mind getting arrested by these policewomen:

    http://www.weirdpalace.com/indonesian-police-girls/

    Like


  180. on November 19, 2010 at 3:24 pm Beta States of America

    [“Creepy” is a political word that has feminist implications.]

    Absolutely. Guys shouldn’t use this word or tolerate it being used outside discussion of the horror movie genre or when walking a woman home past the graveyard and wanting her to snuggle up closer.

    Like


  181. @Firepower

    imminent
    Thread Death
    apparent

    mout

    Are you nuts? Just when girl-next-door aoefe is letting us in on her BDSM fantasies?

    Like


  182. @j r

    a slut is a girl who has sex with a guy who has no intention of committing to her and a beta is a guy who pays attention to girl who has no intention of sleeping with him. like evil alpha said, this is purely an exercise in classification and not a rationalization for how i feel about either sluts or betas. some girls like being slutty because it gives them access to higher status guys than they could get if they held out for dates and more. some guys like being the beta buddy because it lets them hang around girls who are much hotter than the girls they could actually bang.

    Yes, definite short-term benefits for both sluts and betas, but with compounding long-term consequences that do a lot of damage to both.

    Like


  183. jr and gregi,

    I’m sorry you two are evidently too young to remember it and/or too incurious to find out out how things were, but civilizations at the top of their game are led by uberalphas who are, truly and fiercely, monogamous.

    Eisenhower, Churchill, Bismarck, Lincoln, Washington, Pitt… all the way back to the mythical yet archetypical Odysseus.

    Churchill’s ancestor Marlborough is instructive: banging the King’s mistress at 21, he settles down for good with uberalpha female Sarah Churchill and proceeds to kick the Sun King’s ass all over Europe for the next fifteen years, cementing Britain’s (he used his highlanders to great effect) ascent to Great Power status.

    This is true for one reason only: alphas make better soldiers for the sons of the uberalpha to command, thus enhancing the odds of the survival of his genes, despite his forgoing the usual harem.

    We have achieved this before. We can again.

    It depends on both the men sacking up and the women choosing Penelope over Helen. Female follows male lead.

    Like


  184. Evil Alpha:

    I agree with both of those. How are they mutually exclusive exactly?

    Like


  185. @Firepower – “you need a manager’

    I thought you’d never ask. 🙂

    Like


  186. Nicole is a defender of the ugly, fat subs because she doesn’t have the motivation to lose weight.

    Most chicks in the BDSM world aren’t actually that submissive. They usually have metal damage and go between slut submissive and raging insane. I’ve read plenty of these slave sites before finding this place and goddamn those ladies couldn’t keep their facade going. One post is “I love being my Master’s slave” and the next is “I’m unsure about Master’s choices”.

    Slaves don’t think, bitches. Slaves do.

    Like


  187. on November 19, 2010 at 4:06 pm Beta States of America

    We’re talking here solid beta territory: men who would tolerate their women cyber-snooping:

    http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/Is-it-OK-to-Cyber-Snoop.html

    http://www.bettyconfidential.com/ar/ld/a/5-new-ways-to-catch-a-cheater.html

    There needs to be zero toleration for this from all men, under penalty of death by firing squad. We don’t need guys left in the gene pool who would be OK with women doing this.

    Like


  188. Someone above mentioned how sites like okcupid are an example of a person being “poly” usually = undesirable, and this is also true for those identifying as bi (except for the late teens/early 20s group of girls who say it as the current cool trend.)

    The funny thing is how the far left on okc (and in general) is convinced that all this is biological (which ignores not only the low general attractiveness of those demographics but also the poignant psychological effects resulting from a person’s low sexual market value), but how the same people then brush biology aside too often when it comes to the differences between men and women.

    The pc-ness of the views they want so badly to hold causes them to usually be wrong (or else convinced they’re right on something that has little proof either way) almost all the time. Even a monkey flipping a coin would at least have a realistic view half the time….

    Like


  189. on November 19, 2010 at 4:21 pm Beta States of America

    Still, OKCupid’s blog analysis of actual user habits shows the sick attitude in the US where a 31 year old man is too old for a 20 year old.

    The fact that OKCupid’s managers want to push cougarism is just a very bad business decision. The bread and butter of any website would be older males with jobs/careers. Match.com and OKCupid should be encouraging the youngest women to chat with the guys who pay real money for memberships instead of with the unemployed guys their age who can’t afford $29.95 per month.

    In fact, when the feminist managers of Match.com tried 8 years ago to make it impossible for members to “adjust” their ages in their profiles (a purely ideological decision), many from the demographic of their paying members (those over 30) immediately threatened to quit, so they backed down and quietly allowed “age adjusting” to continue.

    Like


  190. on November 19, 2010 at 4:42 pm Beta States of America

    Interesting pictorial: Women with guns

    http://www.shareordie.in/womens-with-guns-68-pics/

    Like


  191. Harmonica, not knowing my history, it’s not a good idea to make assumptions and swing at imaginary creatures that do not exist.

    I’ve been losing weight on a natural diet and lifestyle for a couple of years now.

    I started in BDSM when I was 15 and weighed 109 lbs. soaking wet…as a Domme.

    Aside of being freaky, I just found myself not wanting to actually have sex with many guys, as they were mentally and often physically wimpy relative to myself. I was good at being the leader, and for the most part, had few other choices.

    Then there were the girls…

    It wasn’t until I met my first husband that I encountered a guy I didn’t want to smack and ask who’s his daddy, who could see there was a vagina under all the leather. He walked into my room, looked around at the rigs and the giant poster of Frankenfurter, and chuckled.

    Chuckled!

    Anyhow, when I’m speaking to Aoefe, it’s not as someone whose entry into BDSM was through the scene. It has been a part of my sexuality since I was a teenager realizing that something was wrong with the world, but perhaps taking a bad turn in dealing with it.

    I have no regrets, as I learned a lot, but in the end, I realized that dominance is relative, and that just because I’m more dominant than the average guy doesn’t mean that this is my identity. If I felt safe to be so, and wasn’t blocked by legal concerns about my age, I’d have been nicely under the hand of a dominant man about 10 years older than myself, at 16.

    …and by all accounts, would have been on a natural diet starting then, which would have prevented the internal timebomb from having ever gone off.

    Fat people aren’t usually born, Harmonica. They are made. It may take some time, but they can also be unmade.

    I am not defending fat subs. I am defending the Master and slave relationship. If he likes ’em big, then that’s his business. If he’d rather have them big than bitches, then that’s also his business.

    When you have a hot woman who is obedient to you and would follow you into hell then you can manage her life, and it won’t be other people’s business how pretty or ugly she is, so long as she’s doing what she’s supposed to do for you.

    …and this is the difference between BDSM’ers and normal people.

    We don’t think people are disposable just because they are, like everyone is, flawed.

    If you do then well, this is why I am not your slave…and wouldn’t be even if I was model thin.

    Like


  192. Aoefe, a submissive woman wouldn’t scoff at a Dom’s choice based on any criteria other than her level of submission.

    You’d get it. You don’t get it.

    Like


  193. Uh. Oh. Firepower has got a real dilemma. The hot black bitch at the top his mind saying no, but his dick saying go!

    Like


  194. I’m sorry you two are evidently too young to remember it and/or too incurious to find out out how things were, but civilizations at the top of their game are led by uberalphas who are, truly and fiercely, monogamous.

    You are right. I was not present when Homer recited The Odyssey in some Athens amphiteater. I guess I’m too young to understand these things.

    What I do understand is that you’ve taken a bunch of men that you personally admire and decided to call them “uberalphas.” Of course, the whole point of the alpha distinction is that women want them, not that other dudes approve of their behavior or their adherance to some moral virtue. This is why when biologists and psychologists and other scientists talk about these things, they use the juxtaposition of ‘dad vs. cad.’ Alphas are primarily self-interested and if they stick to any moral code, it’s usually a personal one.

    If anything, the kind of man you are talking about is best described as a high-achieving beta, the reliable family man and breadwinner. Remember, the great achievment of modern society is that it has managed to mitigate the female preference for alpha behavior and allowed the average beta male to get some skin in the game. We’ve moved from a system where one alpha king or emperor or chieftain ruled supremely and for his own benefit, to one where every man is the “king of his own castle.”

    Like


  195. on November 19, 2010 at 5:25 pm Beta States of America

    Bet no American man reading this article will have already learned about more than 2 of the 10 most famous evil women in history (serial killers):

    http://urbantitan.com/10-most-evil-women-that-you-wouldnt-want-to-meet/

    Why? The feminist US media and educational system wouldn’t have wanted you to get the impression that women could be as evil as men or more. Almost all of what you’ll read in that link was kept from you. Especially when Jewish people talked about the holocaust, they avoided mentioning the woman in charge of the female prisoners at Auschwitz.

    Meanwhile, let’s hear again how the US feminists are right about only “losers” wanting to go to Russia to meet the women there:

    http://englishrussia.com/index.php/2010/10/11/cool-illustrations-by-valery-barykin/

    Like


  196. Embarrassing to admit, but I once got cockteased and eventually LJBFed by a polyamorous girl who became the “secondary submissive” of some polyamorous dude who already had a girlfriend and child. In effect, she told me, “Fuck off, beta, I’d rather be this guy’s concubine than get with you”. She also told me this guy – her “dominant” – had requested that she remain faithful to him, even though he had a live-in partner and child, and she seemed perfectly happy to go along with this arrangement. Fucked up shit, just illustrates Roissy’s point.

    Like


  197. @Harmonica
    “Most chicks in the BDSM world aren’t actually that submissive. They usually have metal damage and go between slut submissive and raging insane. ”

    I can attest to that. I knew one dom/sub pair. She liked playing sub because she wanted attention. When out of scene she was a bipolar mental case.

    Like


  198. I love it how people who can’t get a certain kind of action make assumptions about the people who can.

    This is one reason many young women would rather go to a female Dominant. Too many guys are too feminized not to make the wrong judgements against a woman who is submissive (like most women are) and not hiding it because feminism has made it socially inconvenient to be so.

    Submissive women are not mentally ill. Just because you know a few out of the millions who are nutbars doesn’t make this the rule. There are more “normal” psychobitches because they’re going against their own nature.

    A traditional relationship is just D/s without the props.

    Like


  199. Beta States,

    Never heard of those women, any of them

    Like


  200. Beta States,

    Never heard of those women, any of them. Of course we’re told that only men could commit violent crimes, and that there even needs to be a “man tax” to pay for that!

    Like


  201. @demirogue

    “At old guy.

    The worst thing for a progressive liberal government is the traditional family headed by a male. Not only do they make the government less powerful, they make life safer. Imagine that; a bigger, more intrusive government makes for a less safer society until the government starts acting akin to the fascist and communist states. That’s indeed where we are headed.

    When I was growing up, children played in the streets in their neighborhoods. People in those neighborhoods knew one another and looked after each other. These days, children are carted off to parks because of the fear that they will be harmed.

    Something to think about.”

    Not sure why this is @ me.

    The point of everything that’s happening now is to make gov’t stronger. If you have strong traditional families you don’t need big Daddy gov’t or any part of the Nanny state, thus contemporary divorce laws, etc.

    Like


  202. @aoefe

    “I’m going to agree with Dana and say that BDSM attracts the ugly. I saw this first hand. I joined a submissive women’s group to learn more about it, I’d found a link online and was curious. ”

    Precisely the sort of “group” you should stay away from if you’re interested in the lifestyle. Go to a general, all inclusive munch and cherry pick individuals that interest you. A “women’s group” will always be feminist dominated and will not tolerate a non PC attitude.

    Like


  203. jr,

    “the whole point of the alpha distinction is that women want them”

    The mistress of the King of Fucking England wanted Marlborough, and got him, often. She was far from the only one. Yet he chose to marry and stick with one (superalpha) female, and she stuck with him.

    What I’m saying is that the ultimate passing on one’s seed strategy does turn out to be monogamous at the very top, so those men who manage to pull it off, bringing their civilizations along for the ride, are the ultimate alphas.

    Like


  204. “You are right. I was not present when Homer recited The Odyssey in some Athens amphiteater. I guess I’m too young to understand these things.”

    Get over yourself.

    You know I’m talking about the WWII generation and those who came before that inspired them to lives of manly honor.

    The generation that followed never did manage to attain manhood, so we’re left to pick up the pieces.

    Like


  205. re: old guy to aeofe

    time was adopting an alternative lifestyle led to an auto de fe

    now just mentioning any “lifestyle”=auto teh ghey

    Like


  206. Nicole I don’t remember scoffing at a Dom’s choice. What i said was I appeared to ne a threat to the women in te group i was in. I think there would likely be a small percentage of men who could get women whether they are in the lifestyle or out of it, the majority of Doms’s are fat and/or socially awkward and need the ‘community’ to get any. Do real dominant men exist? Yes, but they don’t need to play at it. Just sayin’

    (excuse spelling darn sarn iPhone)

    Like


  207. “When I was growing up, children played in the streets in their neighborhoods. People in those neighborhoods knew one another and looked after each other. These days, children are carted off to parks because of the fear that they will be harmed.”

    Parks are not safe anymore.

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/kiddie_pawn_shock_KnKyQ0JfMITAIqGawRJf8J

    The best line:

    “Adults allowed in playground areas only when accompanied by a child under the age of 12.”

    Like


  208. on November 20, 2010 at 1:31 am Pro Abortion Guy

    I have probably had at least 26 offspring of mine aborted in my 37 years. I strongly advocate abortion as birth-control because having sex with women on birth-control is not the same as them off of it. Natural women are far more sexy when they are fertile.

    I’m not about to put a rain-coat on my member when I want to spurt into a female.

    Abortion is the way to go.

    Like


  209. […] Evolutionary concepts which draw oodles of righteous ire are egalitarianism, polyamory and jealousy. […]

    Like


  210. on November 20, 2010 at 1:51 am Gunslingergregi

    ”””””Tinderbox
    @Good Luck Chuck

    WTF is food insecure? You are either starving or you aren’t.

    To the typical libtard who only reads titles “This is unthinkable. It’s like we are living in a Third World country,”

    Pardoxically, obesity rates are either flat or up in every state in the union.

    Of course, it is the single mothers, blacks, and hispanics that are “starving”.

    “WORLD ENDS: MINORITIES, WOMEN HARDEST HIT”
    ””””””””

    Yea right single mother starving.

    Who could say they were starving with 650 a month to spend only on food.

    Like


  211. on November 20, 2010 at 1:59 am Gunslingergregi

    If you are a single person, you can’t make more than $1,127 a month.

    to get food stamps.

    So single guy paying child support and making 1127 a month a trying to pay rent and bills really can be starving.

    Like


  212. Aoefe, so you spend one day in the scene, and think you know BDSM?

    You go to one meeting of likely 40+ and 50+ people and decide that BDSM attracts the ugly (moreso than any other social group that isn’t pretty people exclusive)?

    Old guy calling submissive women feminist?

    You are full of shit. I’m done beating around the bush about it. You don’t know anything.

    Not about life, and not about BDSM. You’re a stupid girl, only you’re too old for it to be cute.

    Get over yourself.

    Like


  213. Aoefe, seriously…I have submissive, bottom, and generally kinky female friends ranging from 19 to 40 who make you look like a forest troll.

    I’m going to see if I can convince a few of their Masters to allow them a brief excursion here. It might take awhile, but I think we should represent so some of the guys here can stop sour graping and get a face full of what they’re missing when they hesitate on the real life game practice.

    Like


  214. So is the writer of this blog mean to be an alpha male? How big are you in height and weight?

    Like


  215. Aoefe,

    Don’t conflate polyamorists with real BDSM. Yes there is overlap, but fat chicks who like renaissance/goddess worship shit are a far cry from a yummy 7 or 8 who prefers it real kinky.

    For dominant men, who have an itch that needs scratching, the “scene” can save a lot of time. And while on most typical dates, I could definitely push the envelope… as most attractive women like some occasional man handling… fewer of them enjoy being face fucked till their eyes water. I lived in Nocal for 6ish years and I happened upon a whole different world from what you seem to have experienced.

    There are attractive women out there who are submissive enough that they yearn even to be told what to wear… to a first date! BDSM simply allowed me to find these ladies quicker and for them to find me quicker. A dedicated store always beats a sidewalk sale.

    PS: You ain’t a sub, and the more you argue the more you prove Nicole right! Hillary Clinton was on her back when she got knocked up with Chelsea, but is she submissive?

    Like


  216. Oh I see, if I argue I’m not submissive. Gotcha. Or how ’bout submissive doesn’t equal doormat. Bettin’ you can tell what I think. Crap, I think, that must mean I’m a Domme.

    Like


  217. just because youre submissive to a man you love, respect and are attracted to doesnt mean youre submissive to every douchebag faggot you argue with on the internet

    Like


  218. Another one of the many reasons I love Dana.

    I have respect for the Editor and if he asked me to stop blathering (and he has) I would. There are others here who have earned my trust and respect and have helped me straighten up and fly right when I’m out of line. Otherwise Dana is correct. Why would I bend over for every Tom, Dick and Henrietta on line?

    Like


  219. Nicole I remember my first submissive experience at five years old (kids playing – no adults), I’d like to know why you can dismiss me as submissive and say I’m a bottom?

    aoefoe, she’s trying to “oust” you just like the ugly subs you met in person did. You recognized the syndrome in person, it happens on the web too. Check out her site, she’s strikingly unattractive and has little success in getting anything beyond quick pumps and dumps. Like a lot of women in that situation, her worldview is almost entirely a function of trying to protect her ego — men who don’t want her are intimidated, women who are more attractive than her are plastic and prostitutes, etc.

    She is working to lose weight though, which shows functional intelligence. Thumbs up!

    Like


  220. I respect Nicole’s tenacity, she gets beat up quite a bit at this forum. She has a message and a dissenting opinion should be welcomed because group think can be dangerous. We’ve only sparred on BDSM issues, she believes I’m unschooled. I beg (pun) to differ. It suits her to dismiss me because my truth hurts her delivery. I’m fine with the differences and really don’t need to win. Tiz what it tiz.

    Like


  221. I have never been called stupid. It’s refreshing.

    Like


  222. Aoefe, it’s not *that* you’re arguing. It’s *what* you’re arguing.

    It’s that you don’t see this through sub or even BDSM’er eyes.

    Do you know what a BDSM’er sees when he sees a fat chick on stage or at a party having her breasts bound?

    …that this is a brave and lucky girl.

    It’s about the relationships, not about who’s prettier than who. The scene/community has people everyplace on the looks scale, and when they get together, it’s about sharing their feelings about their relationships.

    The issue of looks does come up in the context of pleasing one’s Dom, and in presenting a properly dominant image. On the Dom side, we discuss the fact that you have to be and look in control of yourself first, before you appear to be credible enough to have control of someone else.

    Thing is, BDSM’ers tend to be looks conscious but considerably less looks obsessed. There’s a difference. Most of Dominants are willing to trade a point or a few in looks to get the kind of person we want. For that reason, there is less bouncing around, and more focus on specific partners.

    Instead of sleeping with five guys to get to the one you want to stay with, you’re getting to know people and even seeing them in action if you like, and when the relationship develops, it develops. The mechanics of a conscious D/s relationship are different from the hookup culture.

    So judging BDSM by the same standard and assuming that the subs were jealous of you…you who weren’t even owned, is just silly. They probably saw you like they see many young people who come in expecting anybody to give a crap how hot they are or not. You were judging them. It was probably in your eyes that you looked down on them.

    You just don’t get it.

    You also don’t seem to get that I’m not saying this to hurt you. I’m saying it to help you either be a better sub or bottom or find another hobby that suits you better.

    Like


  223. Hardyhar, I’ve been married twice, and “pump and dumps” in my case last more than a year. So there’s nothing quick about them. Apparently, most guys I’ve been with think I’m worth keeping, and even those who don’t love me don’t want to throw me away right away.

    My feelings about that are similar to what you’re used to seeing at a higher speed from normal carousellers, but that’s because I’m female and not trying to be a man. One guy can shatter me. I’ll pick up the pieces, but I’m not going to pretend not to hurt.

    You twist things to fit your preconceived notions based on your programming, that have nothing to do with reality. You’re not the first, and I’m positive you won’t be the last. In fact, this same exchange has played out so many times, that I’m getting tired of repeating myself.

    Like


  224. Ahem. Just because you bottom to a man you love, respect and are attracted to doesnt mean youre a submissive. There is no such thing as a submissive bitch… a bottoming bitch.. absolutely!

    Like


  225. If Nicole has hot friends then I have a vagina the size of Manhattan Island.

    Like


  226. I have never insulted you Nicole and don’t intend to now. I get under your skin, I get it. Now let’s play nice or better yet stay off each others St. Andrew’s cross. 😉

    Like


  227. Harmonica, stop being such a girl. It’s making me sad.

    Like


  228. on November 20, 2010 at 9:31 pm rebelliousvanilla

    Fokuro Zensai, just because instinctually we are prone to be hypergamous and whatnot, it doesn’t mean all of us are.

    And dana gets it. I don’t really get BDSM people, but female submissiveness isn’t related to the way BDSM people interpret it.

    demirogue, government power has nothing to do with it. In communist Romania children were having fun outside with each other and we had really low crime. The problem is not having jails that punish criminals, but jails that are sort of like asylums for old people with gyms along with a demographic problem.

    aoefe, I’m not sure if you know the quote that pedagogical ability is a vice, rather than a virtue, if it is used in teaching error. Tenacity is the same. If you’re tenacious in your own stupidity, then it’s a vice.

    Like


  229. “This is basically a republican fantasy.”

    Hmmm, is it?

    “Something you can tell your buddies and think, but not say too loud.”

    Yes, political correctness is an inhibitor when it comes to discussing unpleasant realities. Kind of the whole point of PC thought when you come down to it.

    “The problem is, it’s wrong.”

    How so?

    “And it’s wrong because it so little to keep people alive these days in Western countries because of advances in technology when you have rational people running the monkey show.”

    The reason we’ve made it this far is that we were so far ahead with so much cushion that we could fuck up left and right, fund all sorts of nonsense, and still live like kings. Well, times iz a changin’ as we’ve castrated our own economic capabilities, run what remained of our economy into a ditch just as two of the most populous nations on earth are just gearing up to hit overdrive.

    Advances in technology are set to stomp our ass as we get passed by, choked by regulation and government stupidity.

    And rational people running things? What planet are you on? We have morons running things declaring CO2 a pollutant in order to save the planet, when the planet is covered in plants and animals that produce CO2 as part of the natural order, and has done so before there was anything resembling a human being on the planet.

    “Even in Africa where most countries have idiots in most important positions, they still have the biggest population growth by far in any continent.”

    I’m sorry, but did you just cite AFRICA as an illustration of how flawlessly things work with no trouble at all and as refutation of the Editor’s point?

    Let’s review what he said:

    “Once that largesse spends itself out, there will be a return to chaos, and the single moms with their bastard thuglings who no longer survive on the generosity of the state will purge themselves from existence, and the pendulum will swing back.”

    Rwanda, anyone? Zimbabwe? Congo? South Africa? Liberia? Bloated bellied children covered in flies dying of starvation? Child soldiers?

    Seems like the editor pretty describes Africa much more accurately than you did, and you were the one trying to hold it up as an example.

    Africa is a fucking mess, with mass starvation, genocide and never ending tribal wars in many places.

    Oh, but because they manage to produce people faster than they can kill them they are a model for how peachy things work with no trouble at all?

    Here’s a hint. That large population growth helps contribute to the mess in the first place.

    “Protein, heat and shelter can be produced cheaply if the alternatives are dire.”

    Really? Then why have so many people died miserable deaths throughout the ages if food, shelter and comfort were so easily obtained? And how are things ever going to get dire if these things are so easily obtained? And are people going to be happy with a burger, a hut and a few stacks of wood a day?

    None of these things are produced easily, and they can only be produced cheaply IF there is a well-functioning system and an infrastructure to supply them. This system we built up over centuries and no we are busy dismantling it in myriad of ways.

    And getting them all requires people doing work at some point. The point is that with fewer people having to share more of the load of supplying all this crap to others wanting to suck at the public teat, the system collapses. Whether it simply becomes unsustainable, or the workers get fucking fed up and leave or join the loafers, its a recipe for collapse. When the collapse comes, and people don’t get that free check, or when the money it represents can’t buy shit, you think they’ll just, what? Fade away? Suddenly start working peaceably for it, particularly when they are not used to having to do so, and don’t have the skills?

    Thought experiment which you can easily produce for real to prove whether “Protein, heat and shelter can be produced cheaply if the alternatives are dire.”

    Give everything you own and buy a plot of land, as big as you can afford in a temperate zone. Since you like Africa so much, try there.

    Now, try living there for the rest of your life. Give me yearly updates on how things are going. Let me know how cheaply you are able to supply your own shelter, protein and heat by yourself.

    Now, imagine having to in addition to keep yourself sheltered, fed and warm, you have two dumb lazy fucks hanging around that don’t want to do anything to contribute.

    Will the US and Western Civilization turn into freakin’ Mad Max? Maybe not. Probably not.

    But if you think we’re somehow so special that reality does not apply to us, or that things can’t get really desperate, ask people in Argentina how things are going there, or read about how things transpired under Weimer.

    Or don’t. You keep thinking things will always be A-OK perpetually because of our advanced Awesome Field Generators.

    I’ll be preparing for other eventualities. That way, whether I’m right or you are, I’m covered. You? You better hope you are right.

    Like


  230. […] have some interesting conversations in the abyss.  Yet again though, a post delving into the Freak Zone (in which I’m carrying a V.I.P. card) has inspired the regurgitation of some popular myths in […]

    Like


  231. The points in the article are, as usual, well made. The Sexual Revolution promises a lot in theory, but has been unable to deliver for most people. Of course, it can be argued that this was the point from the get-go: that the Sexual Revolution was a means by which alpha males, or alpha male wannabes (I am thinking of Hefner) could up the number of their sexual contacts while putting other men who are lower on the feeding chain out of the competition.

    Another point to consider is that people form attachments via sex and may not desire multiple partners. The promise of polyamory has always been somewhat of a utopian fantasy for people who are sexually frustrated. We can see the disasters it creates around us today.

    To avoid unpleasant scenes of dead babies in dumpsters their could be some sort of a program where Madonna, in conjuction with Time Warner, agree to adopt their babies.

    I got rid of my TV set years ago, but to see this one in action would get pay-per-view!

    Like


  232. Who would she consider to be the dominant guy, the one in cunt or the one in her ass? Answer: the one in her ass (just ask her bff).

    Like


  233. For those who don’t catch the cultural reference, the photograph is a take off of a famous painting by Manet.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Le_d%C3%A9jeuner_sur_l%27herbe

    Like


  234. I have never insulted you Nicole and don’t intend to now. I get under your skin, I get it. Now let’s play nice or better yet stay off each others St. Andrew’s cross. 😉

    LOL. I’m amused!
    3 feisty women arguing over “submissiveness” makes me laugh. It’s even funnier when 2 of the3 fling feminist protocol with… (I’m not argumentative, I’m just no doormat!) AND (Oh,yes she is submissive, just not submissive with you!) Ahh the irony!

    And then just when I thought it couldn’t get any more comical, a 4th woman with a combo name of rebellious and vanilla adds her “expert” voice to a discussion about submissiveness and BDSM. How oxymoronic! Now my side hurts.

    Me…I’m just trying to set the record straight. Submissiveness is not a sex act that a woman only does for certain “special” guys. Submissiveness is a temperament.

    Like


  235. […] Chateau – “The Sensitive Girl“, “Why Women Get Cheated On“, “Polyamory is Disguised Polygamy” […]

    Like


  236. Submissiveness is not a personality trait, it’s a behavior. You are confusing shy, meek, soft spoken women for women who choose to respect authority. I submit to those who have my best interest, not to those who don’t know me. That would be stupid.

    Like


  237. Nicole it’s ludicrous to say you are trying to ‘help’ me while at the same time calling me stupid and rather unattractive. Apparently some girls would make me look like a garden troll?

    My point was that I’ve never addressed your looks or intelligence. I’m not hurt for the record. I’m conscious enough to know I’m just slightly abcve average in the face and a little more in the booty. I’m saying that I’m MUCH better looking than the women who frequent the scene where I am from. They did not want me part of them.

    Also men are looks attracted first. They have to see the package before they want the inside. Men for the most part in the scene are unable to get the hotter women, they settle. And if as you say these Doms can make their women hotties where the heck are they? Fetlife doesn’t seem to carry them. Yes there are exceptions. Like in everything.

    I agree with Evil Alpha though, submission isn’t just a sexual act which let’s face it the scene is ALL about.

    Like


  238. The men in the Manet don’t look like beta shlubs, they look like a couple of bros who are tag-teaming some random naked broad.

    Aaaanyway… I don’t see all the hubub here. I date multiple women. I have LTRs with multiple women and have for the past 6 years. All of them have their suspicions, but as long as it’s not thrown in their faces then they accept it. Of course if they told me they were dating multiple guys, I’d have to slap a bitch, but so far that hasn’t happened.

    I think a man should be boning 3 girls all the time. When one drops out you need to rotate one in. So not only do you need the 3 mains, you need some orbiters OR you need to have awesome game so there won’t be more than a couple of weeks where you only have 2 girls.

    These days when I have only 2 girls in my life, I start getting antsy. It’s almost like a thirst that I can’t slake without another girl in my rotation.

    Like


  239. Aoefe says, “Submissiveness is not a personality trait, it’s a behavior.”

    No, submission is a behavior. Submissiveness is a personality/character trait.

    “You are confusing shy, meek, soft spoken women for women who choose to respect authority.”

    No, he’s not. He’s basically saying that submissive people, like kind people, look for opportunities to express that side of themselves.

    “I submit to those who have my best interest, not to those who don’t know me. That would be stupid.”

    You submit to various laws regularly, whether or not you have met the chief of police.

    “Nicole it’s ludicrous to say you are trying to ‘help’ me while at the same time calling me stupid and rather unattractive.”

    You are acting stupid in this case, and you are unattractive to me and apparently some others as a sub. This is not to say that you would not be attractive in this way to anyone, but I would not consider you an acceptable risk for more than occasional play.

    I definitely wouldn’t want you around my other subs if I was still active. You’d be toxic to them, and they really have enough to deal with, without someone judging them for not being physically perfect. Even hot chicks have flaws that can become apparent in certain situations.

    “Apparently some girls would make me look like a garden troll?”

    Forest troll, but yes.

    “My point was that I’ve never addressed your looks or intelligence.”

    No, but you looked down on a group of submissive women for their looks without considering their intelligence, their age, their experiences.

    “I’m not hurt for the record. I’m conscious enough to know I’m just slightly abcve average in the face and a little more in the booty. I’m saying that I’m MUCH better looking than the women who frequent the scene where I am from. They did not want me part of them.”

    You don’t know the whole scene in the area. You only saw the ones who were at that meeting. The ones who go to such meetings specifically for subs are usually owned and older…home body type women who need community for support. You have no idea what’s going on in the whole scene, and definitely not on the periphery and non scene people.

    If you were to even visit a BDSM forum online and have a gander at their galleries, you would see people who were everywhere in the looks range and representative of the general population…just without certain kinds of ugliness that is more common among “normals” and less among BDSM’ers.

    Most people aren’t that hot. Why should BDSM’ers have to be particularly hot for it not to be said that BDSM attracts the ugly? It attracts the human who are into BDSM.

    “Also men are looks attracted first.”

    …but not all men are looking for exactly the same thing. Beauty is not something that most people are totally with or totally without. Just as everybody has their share of ugly, most people have something cute about them. Add that to a pleasant personality or behavior that hits someone’s fetish or desires just right, and voila.

    “They have to see the package before they want the inside.”

    Some people want a package that isn’t scowling and doesn’t have diarrhea spewing from its pie hole.

    “Men for the most part in the scene are unable to get the hotter women, they settle.”

    …and you are apparently unable to get them. So you don’t have the option of settling.

    I’m trying to explain to you what you did wrong, and why other subs had the opposite reaction to you than they normally do to young, especially hot women who enter the scene. Usually, their reaction is immediate protectiveness. You should be asking yourself why hundreds if not thousands of female subs report being welcomed with open arms and taken under the wing of older female subs, but you got the cold shoulder.

    You should also be asking why these men who “can’t get hotter women” were not falling over themselves to get next to you.

    Maybe you’re not as hot as what they can normally get, or maybe you’re not pleasant enough a person. Maybe you’re not hot enough to be able to afford being a bitch.

    The wall happens to some sooner than others.

    “And if as you say these Doms can make their women hotties where the heck are they? Fetlife doesn’t seem to carry them. Yes there are exceptions. Like in everything.”

    Community photo galleries.

    “I agree with Evil Alpha though, submission isn’t just a sexual act which let’s face it the scene is ALL about.”

    You don’t know enough to say that. I am still attached to my Master, and we haven’t shagged in 6 years.

    It’s not about the sex. It’s about the trust.

    Like I said, you don’t get it.

    Like


  240. @Seran235
    [QUOTE]
    I’m sorry, but did you just cite AFRICA as an illustration of how flawlessly things work with no trouble at all and as refutation of the Editor’s point?

    Let’s review what he said:

    “Once that largesse spends itself out, there will be a return to chaos, and the single moms with their bastard thuglings who no longer survive on the generosity of the state will purge themselves from existence, and the pendulum will swing back.”

    Rwanda, anyone? Zimbabwe? Congo? South Africa? Liberia? Bloated bellied children covered in flies dying of starvation? Child soldiers?
    [/QUOTE]
    As you note, the only thing keeping Africa afloat is foreign aid (what little of it that doesn’t go into the offshore bank accounts of the corrupt ruling class). Europe and the US have enough internal problems that we will no longer be ABLE to do much about Africa.

    Soon the Chinese will come in, having great need for Africa’s minerals, but no need for Africans. It will then be time to play Cowboys and Indians, with the Chinese as the cowboys.

    Like


  241. Whenever I hear the word, “fetish” I reach for my .45 Colt Single Action Old Army Revolver.

    Like


  242. Crap i always confuse my garden trolls for my forest trolls.

    I am a bad bad sub, now spank me! 😉

    Like


  243. I spank because I care. 😉

    Like


  244. Nicole find some other outlet for your AW needs. Christ, you’ve written more on this blog than the blogger.

    Like


  245. http://www.birthornot.com/

    “You can vote and choose whether we abort or keep our unborn child. For the first time, your vote on the topic of abortion can make a difference.”

    This is seriously f*cked-up!

    Like


  246. Rarfy, if I was an attention whore, I’d do like RV and pretend to be a near virginal 19 year old hottie.

    I also don’t post in every thread, and there are only a few things I bother enough to talk about. This is one of them.

    If indeed this site is about truth, then kinky Dom and regular dominant (the default) men don’t need to be slandered by women who want to make it somehow wrong to be unapologetically and consciously dominant. Nor do those they choose to spend their time with, just because some may not happen to be “perfect”.

    I also don’t want nasty, screwed up people getting the idea that they’re going to find some kind of freaktopia in BDSM. Mainstream life is more of an escape from reality than BDSM because mainstream people hate to be told that beauty can’t be bought in a jar, and that behavior is a huge part of someone’s attractiveness or unattractiveness.

    BDSM’ers *forgive* imperfection, but do not ignore it. In some ways, the practice punishes and then forgives it. It’s difficult to articulate.

    The mainstream twists the definition of perfection until it suits whatever corporate or political agenda is popular that decade.

    An owned sub, barring a legit disease or disability, will never get too fat or unhealthy to kneel, crawl, and otherwise serve her Master.

    “Normal” women get too fat and unhealthy to climb a few flights of stairs without wheezing.

    If we’re going to dick size about who’s prettier, subs or “normals”, then let’s stick to reality: women who love and want to please men want to look good. Women who don’t, don’t.

    So if 60% of the country is overweight, which side do you figure more submissive women are going to be on?

    I was slim until my time bomb went off. When I figured out how to fix it, I started to fix it, and am making pretty good progress. Do you think I’m going to find more encouragement from BDSM’ers, who are mostly hedonists and love real beauty, or from the mainstream?

    I’ll give you a hint. How much encouragement am I getting here? How many guys here have told me I’m doing a good job, and should keep up the good work?

    Of those, how many are “normal”?

    What do the “normal” guys here have to say about my weight?

    …that because I’m fat, I should go kill myself…not improve myself, but kill myself.

    Who’s more twisted and out of touch?

    Like


  247. *chic noir takes a lot at aoefe and nicole getting freaky*

    *face palm*

    what did I just walk into.

    rarfy to chic : tell me about it.

    Like


  248. The Men of America need to get their bitches under control, it’s as simple as that. You let these Females frolic around and pretend that Males & Females are exactly the same, you’re going to end up with a shitty situation. Once the Females fall in line, the Males will fall in line. Unfortunately, creating that balance is easier said than done, but destroying it is easy, hell it took the hippies, feminists, and white knights only a few decades..

    Like


  249. on November 21, 2010 at 11:57 pm unlearning genius ...

    @Thor,
    “One could write some interesting simulation programs
    about this. I suspect even moderate tinkering with the
    parameters might produce vastly different results.
    Any takers?”

    There is no need to write simulation programs. We already have a vast historical record of various civilizations.

    Take for example, the indian caste system The modern “eurocentric” “hbd-denialist” socialistic bullshit ideology thinks it was bad. But that class system was segregated nicely based on IQ and other traits. Intellectuals and other non-aggressive types contribute most to group selection and they are rewarded by being social elites. The warrior class included the mid-high testostorone types. People from other cultures usually ended up as tradesmen (they had money but they did not have status). Lastly low IQ folks who should be contained and not allowed to proliferate. The only hope for the west is to emulate some type of caste system. This ensures that the long term health of the civilization is maintained. (This is already there in some way but the lower classes have way too much power in the states).

    If you study indian history closely, you will also find that too much prosperity was their undoing. Too much prosperity breeds feminine qualities in the populace at the expense of the masculine. The easy takeover of india by muslims was due to the fact that the muslims up until then had established a patriarcal society. They had intellectuals that guided them. They were poor and hungry. They massacred the jaded feminized hindoos. A few centuries later, the europeans would repeat the same feat.

    America and other white nations are certainly headed the way of feminization of men. When i say feminization, it doesnt necassrily mean gay looking douchebags. Any hedonic poon pursuit at the expense of longer term civ building is feminization. Other societies facing reality, being poor and hungry will soon take over. It is a matter of time.

    I quote the great santayana .. “Those who do not read history are bound to repeat it” (?) or whatever.

    Like


  250. on November 22, 2010 at 12:05 am Gunslingergregi

    ””””’LOL. I’m amused!
    3 feisty women arguing over “submissiveness” makes me laugh. It’s even funnier when 2 of the3 fling feminist protocol with… (I’m not argumentative, I’m just no doormat!) AND (Oh,yes she is submissive, just not submissive with you!) Ahh the irony!””””””

    Yea our chicks are trained well about what is actually important to fight about he he he

    Like


  251. on November 22, 2010 at 12:07 am unlearning genius ...

    also .. too much feminine is really really bad .. the feminine is really a break away from reality .. a form of fancy .. women are just the means of leisure for men .. nothing else. It is true that societies can exist where females have more power… but these are utter crap.

    The undenaible greatness of the masculine has led us away from being just another bunch of primates. we still need women to fold our laundry, cook us meals and feed our babies .. but that is where they belong .. in the home .. A woman has no business out of the home… no business in politics ..

    For the merriment of men and to provide them variety… we should also have a pool of public women.

    Like


  252. on November 22, 2010 at 12:15 am Gunslingergregi

    ””””'(This is already there in some way but the lower classes have way too much power in the states). ””””

    Lower classes too much power lol

    Need to be more specific on that one.

    You mean a poor person can still work hard and be rich or that a minority can displace a white man for a job.

    Like


  253. on November 22, 2010 at 12:17 am Gunslingergregi

    Every corporate website I go to I got a freaking minority picture smiling back at me.

    I want to smash the fucking screen.

    Like


  254. @unlearning genius

    The key to expansion (not that I recommend it,
    it causes great wars) seems to be the cultivation
    of nearly-desperate-but-not-cowed class of people.
    (Less clear what the antidote for the target
    civilizations should be, that’s us, forum for
    debate).

    The Nearly-Desperate class in Muslim or other
    cultures with much polygyny are the obvious ones –
    the men without women. Similar results can be
    achieved – deliberately or not – by policies that
    foster massively male-dominated sex ratios,
    as in China and parts of Pakistan – expedited
    through sex-selective abortions, female infanticide
    or death-statistically-through-neglect.

    Another nearly desperate class can be created by the
    law of primogeniture. The eldest son inherits all,
    the second an third sons get kicked out of the upper class
    – to which they have become accustomed – at majority.
    Quelle horreur! One solution was to go into the army
    and possibly carve out a major landholding in Ireland (1100s or so), the New World (mostly 1500-1776, but
    fuzzy at the edges, there were and are many countries in the New World). Or in Africa, first South Africa then
    the rest of sub-saharan Africa once quinine become
    available (otherwise, dead or disabled by malaria).

    Thor

    Like


  255. on November 22, 2010 at 1:43 am Gunslingergregi

    Well they did it with me thor.

    I am about to enter another phase of you will not laugh you will not cry.

    Catch ya’ll on the otherside.

    Like


  256. on November 22, 2010 at 10:45 am Professor Woland

    Women quite often prove their “status” by excluding who gets into their circle. Their pecking order is defined as much by who they don’t associate with as who they associate with. Men on the other hand are not interested in “status” so much as they are interested in moving up the social heirarchy. Men’s fighting can be quite sharp but it is always for position within the heirarchy. This is why men can cooperate so well. For instance, in the military, men will willingly go to their deaths if ordered to do so. The proviso is that they get credit for their actions and a chance to move up. Women on the other hand will try to move up by systematically eliminating their competitors. Female dominated orgnizations are usually characterized by being “all chiefs and no indians”. All men have no use for this and will eschew it if possible which is why having a female boss is can be such a career killer.

    Women who are not interested in beta males for sex quite often will still need to interact with them in order for them to survive. This is particularly true in the work place. Here it is not so easy to out manouvere the men as in the sexual market. The men will always be the hardest workers because they need to rise up the heirarchy. Here , beta and alpha men are simply competitors for resources and influence. In a sense, this makes the women beta’s because they cannot be part of the exclusive circles and are forced to interact with the other betas, both male and female. A true alpha female would have exclusive access to whatever is most desireable while the beta women get second best.

    Like


  257. on November 22, 2010 at 10:49 am Professor Woland

    As a follow up: This is why money is so important to women’s status and the American version of an Alpha Female. It allows them to associate with whomever they wish and never have to rub elbows with the lesser creatures. They shop where they please, go where they please, do what they please and associate exclusivly with other Alphas. Having to work with and muck it up with betas goes directly against the grain.

    Like


  258. Submissiveness is not a personality trait, it’s a behavior. You are confusing shy, meek, soft spoken women for women who choose to respect authority. I submit to those who have my best interest, not to those who don’t know me. That would be stupid.

    @Aoefe

    You are guilty of the same mistake that feminists make when they can’t reconcile sex activities with their political beliefs. They do or wanna do X, but wrongly associate it with “submissiveness”. Yet since no “real” feminist would enjoy “submissiveness”, they feel torn and guilty.

    You however have no political issue with “submissiveness” and so you eagerly adopt the label even though you doing X is not really “submissiveness” either. Submissiveness is a temperament and the realities of a vagina means that dominant women also get cocks put in them.

    And so while I’m sure that you make a fun bottom… for a guy who knows you and has your best interest in mind… You aren’t really submissive. You are way to stubborn for that!

    Like


  259. Interesting food for thought EA, I’ll have to pay some attention to it, test it a bit. I’m open enough , may be difficult for me to be objective though, you know how that is.

    Like


  260. […] GBFM: then they took us off the gold standard and put us on the gina tingle standard. everyting is now […]

    Like


  261. Took me awhile to get around to this…

    It’s just my two cents, but this essay–like most on the subject of polyamory–suggests that “It’d never work, ’cause Alphas will do this and Betas will do that…” etc. etc. etc.

    It actually DOES work, once people think outside the Alpha/Beta ‘box’…and normally, only for the people that do (which is why polys make up only 12-20% of the population).

    We’re mammals, but we’re THINKING mammals (most of us, anyway). And not all of our thoughts revolve around how many children we can sire or DNA we can spread around. If that was the case we’d still be hunting with spears 12 hours a day and fucking (or raping) for the other 12.

    It’s precisely because we have other thoughts and other interests that there’s even a word for polyamory. While we all want mates, we all have some interests in others (sociopaths excluded, of course). The ‘amory’ part of the word is based on love, and that can be physical, emotional or spiritual. You can, and should, love as many people as you can–not necessarily sexually. Most of us, when viewed through the lens of logic, practice ‘polyamory by proxy’, we mate, break up, move on, but remain friends with our ex’s…or we simply cheat.

    Thanks to the Powers That Be (Government and religion), Polygamy is to be criminalized at all costs…mayhap it should be, at least when the element of choice is missing. Jealousy is viewed as natural or at least acceptable (the cause of 13% of all homicides). But polyamory is legal, and polyamorists are the only ones who choose to work on their jealousy.

    Make no mistake, polyamory is no cakewalk, or orgy. It requires more work than traditionally monogamous relationships, which is why most people opt to be serial monogamists.

    Like


  262. Would Tiger Woods be considered a polyamorist? Is the element of truth between partners NECESSARY for the term “polyamory” to apply? If so, how much truth is necessary? Can even a small lie destroy the classification?

    Like


  263. If Tiger Woods had feelings beyond the sexual for his partners, then yes, he’d be considered poly. Since everyone seemed to be a ‘back door woman’, he’s more likely considered a swinger. Unfortunately, not being open & honest about it cost him $750 million. Now his ex can have her own Battleship!

    You’ve got two ‘schools’ of poly, for the most part: those who are in it for all the sex they can get (re: swingers) and those who are in it for the honesty.

    Truth is necessary. Yes, a small lie can destroy the classification. As I’ve learned to my regret, even the truth can.
    Most people (80% or more) cannot handle polyamory. One sex professional (Dr. Susan Block) told me “Most of the country would prefer to just lie and cheat.”
    Polys aren’t better than anyone else, they’re just trying to break out of jealousy and dishonesty.

    Like


  264. “Dispense their pussy.” Nice, like it’s a commodities market. And alphas and betas. Seems to be issue is in your modeling methods as well as, I assume, sour grapes of one variety or another.

    No one is proposing an enforced polyamory society. Do what you want.

    Like


  265. “Most people (80% or more) cannot handle polyamory. One sex professional (Dr. Susan Block) told me “Most of the country would prefer to just lie and cheat.””

    That’s because they barely have the ability to control themselves, let alone work a partner or two. People today are so weak they can even deal with their own natural inclinations to spread DNA. They just want out.

    Like


  266. I’m not a 5th column

    Like