Earlier this month, I engaged in a very frank and open discussion with Laura, who runs the website The Thinking Housewife, on the subject of modern women and the prospects of traditionalist conservatism as a movement. Having a great deal of respect for Laura, I wanted to get her and her female readership’s response to the current debate.
Given Hunter’s post below regarding the state of modern women, I reproduce that discussion here as well for everyone’s consideration and comment. Specifically: Given the power in the hands of White women under the current situation and, further, given that even if one posits a multi-racial future with a White minority these White women will still be THE standard of beauty and possess high status regardless, what is necessary to rally White women to the cause of White Nationalism?
Matamoros writes:
Why is it that men are, in general, much more politically involved on the right side of politics than women, especially in the burgeoning traditionalist right?
Some of the answers to that question are, I think, obvious. Men are more involved in politics for the same reason that men make up most of the inmates in prison: They are more aggressive, more insistent and more outspoken than women. Some, especially traditionalist conservatives, also believe that men have an instinctual concern for the well-being of the larger society and culture around them, while women’s instincts run to more domestic, local concerns, surrounding children, education and health.
That is part of it, to be sure. But I don’t think that’s all of it. After many years of thought on this particular issue, I’d like to advance my view of the matter. Please be warned that much of the discussion below is sexually explicit and may offend some. I apologize for that, but there is no way to discuss the matter fully without going into such detail.
First, for the men out there, I’d like to propose a thought experiment. It’s a hard one for most men, but do your best. Imagine that you are a young woman, of college age. Most young women are, when in the full flower of youth, beautiful and graceful. Imagine what the world—what the United States, circa 2009, looks like to you from this vantage point. When you walk into a room, at least half the eyes in the room, male and female, note your entrance, with pleasure. When you smile at someone, especially a man, the man’s face lights up. Almost all television shows and movies are pitched directly at you. Shops, boutiques, on-line websites, all directed personally at you. Doors are opened for you. Invites to parties are no problem.
And sex? Well, perhaps you aren’t getting into bed with The One that you want, but sex is readily available to you. The issue for you isn’t finding a partner, it’s finding one that is worthy of you. And, if worse comes to worse, there is an entire multi-million dollar market of devices designed, very effectively, to provide you with intense sexual pleasure.
Over the course of long personal experience—and I admit that my experience may not be typical, I may be an outlier in this regard—I’ve come to realize that most women are functionally bisexual. That doesn’t mean that they are actively hitting the lesbian bars and clubs, but I’ve been around the block to know that there are a lot of women out there, straight-seeming, who are enjoying lesbian sex flings on the side.
In college, I knew a young woman who was raised in an extremely religious household. She discovered masturbation when she arrived at college. She explained to me what a revelation it was, like seeing the light. I’ve heard this from countless women. Once she discovered it, she was bringing herself to orgasm ten, eleven times a day. While to the casual observer she seemed a normal college girl, she had a boyfriend, a wide variety of vibrators and, through a mutual acquaintance was introduced to all-girl sex club meetings in Oakland, sex romps that involved tens of women at a time. (Though I am a man, I was given a close-up glimpse into young women’s lives at my college because my childhood friend was my roommate and a woman. It gave me an opportunity to see a lot of things that men don’t see.)
As I was introduced into this world, I found that it was not a question of this or that adventurous or confused girl. It was a lot of girls, doing what men get accused of: They were thinking with their genitalia.
Let’s face it, from a purely objective standpoint women are sexually superior. Even with modern medicinal aides, men can’t come close to achieving orgasm at that rate or perform for that length of time. Everyone knows this. Morality aside, from a purely functional standpoint, you put one man in a room with ten young beauties and, try as he might, he’s not going to please all of them in an hour. But one woman with ten men? No problem.
World looks a little different in that context, does it not?
Sex is one of the most important drivers of human behavior. Hell, it’s probably THE most important driver. Politically emancipated, completely able to partcipate in higher education and to achieve professionally, sexually empowered, with a pop culture pitched to your pocketbook and your tastes. What’s to complain about? How many young women in this extremely advantageous position are going to agitate for change? How many are going to march on the front lines to ask that their sexual horizons be reduced? For what?
Racial change doesn’t matter. It’s just more different and interesting types of men who admire you and boost your ego. Heck, the non-white men are even more ego-boosting then the white guys, since they have no qualms about being sexually aggressive and assertive. Social change? Forget about it. I’m in the driver’s seat. I choose my mate, my sexual pleasure, my career and the culture abounds with choices….for me. Political change? See above.
Once you get into that mindset, you realize this: the biggest single factor in the drive to a left-wing nation has been female sexuality. The Sexual Revolution wasn’t about men wanting to sleep around—men have ALWAYS wanted to sleep around. It was about women wanting to sleep around.
Why do you think issues of birth control or abortion set off the firestorm? Why do you think Sarah Palin set off a frenzy? She was a traitor, a threat to the current female disposition. The current anger among men becomes clearly understandable when one understands the above. What is a man to do in such an environment? Either he rejects it and fights a losing battle against the majority of the population that is always going to fight for their interest, sexual above all. Or he accepts it and learns to extract from it what he can while laughing at the doom it slowly brings on (i.e. Roissy).
Laura writes:
I want to thank Matamoros for bringing up the subject and for a very powerful essay. I agree with some of his main points and differ with others. Let’s take a further look at the recent history of female sexuality.
As most of us know, in the ’70s there was an explosion of interest in the female orgasm. The subject was the pet issue of the new outspoken feminists. Activists such as Shere Hite, who wrote her famous report on female sexuality, contended that many women were not satisfied and were unsuited to the ordinary mechanics of sexual intercourse. These activists openly discussed ways in which women might achieve maximum pleasure. The amount of public discussion of bedroom affairs was unprecedented. A new fascination with masturbatory sex broke out, seemingly overnight. Women were strongly encouraged to find pleasure outside sexual intercourse, even with their male partners. This encouragement has continued to this day and, as Matamoros notes, many women encounter it for the first time in college.
No matter how pleasurable it may be, masturbatory sex, whether for men or women, desensitizes. It has a cumulative effect. It makes both men and women – in their own way and for different reasons – impatient during intercourse and with the effort to achieve simultaneous pleasure. It also encourages sexual addiction. The new activists did not care about this possibility of sexual addiction in women. They did not care because they were acting out of revenge for the relative sexual freedom of men and out of envy of male sexual pleasure. It wasn’t nature that had made their sexuality complicated. It was patriarchal power. They also saw no possible downside to unleashed sexual pleasure for women. They were the first humans in history to discover the female orgasm and the appetite of women. Only good could come from that.
Women are known for wanting emotional attachment with sex. But, when their environment brings them to a certain level of arousal, and when masturbatory sex is normalized and given the cloak of innocence, these emotional concerns may indeed become secondary and women can become as promiscuous as libidinous men. Promiscuity is an expression of sexual addiction, but also an encouragement of it. Matamoros is right: Many more women are experimenting with both heterosexual and homosexual promiscuity.
But, the world is not as dazzlingly wonderful for young women as Matamoros portrays it. Many are under unseemly pressure – from family, school, friends and the culture at large – to be aggressive, to suppress their domestic yearnings, and to excel in what was formerly a man’s world. From childhood onward, they are fed constant reports of future poverty, desperation, boredom and inadequacy if they cannot someday pull in a lucrative salary and secure an impressive lifetime paid position. Many enter high school and college with secret dreams of finding one special man and only nominal interest in a career. By the time they leave, they have been transformed into sex-hungry careerists and they act as such during much of their twenties. Are they happy? If so, why do they see therapists so often and talk so much of depression? Is sex a consolation prize for having lost their dreams and their femininity?
Here’s what I think: Sexual intimacy – and plenty of it – is the only thing that keeps this uncivilized state of being in place. It is the only thing that makes a woman still feel like a woman in a man’s world. It’s important to add that the woman who seeks ten or eleven climaxes a day as described by Matamoros is rare and the woman who enjoys sex with ten men virtually non-existent.
Sarah Palin is not upsetting to liberal women because she represents a threat to their sexual pleasures. She is upsetting because she is a painful reminder of all they have lost. Women are acutely aware of the trade-offs. Far from reveling in their power, many are verging on mild schizophrenia or other forms of mental instability, so intense is the pressure for them to be both women and men. At the same time, I do not deny that many have succumbed to hedonism.
Many women find that a life of casual sex has its drawbacks even if they never get pregnant. Those who reach their thirties unmarried after many years of promiscuity or sex in non-marital partnerships find themselves unprepared for marriage. They are sexually and emotionally unprepared. Their maternal instincts have begun to give way. If they do have children, these instincts are suddenly unleashed and often manifest themselves in odd ways, possibly in an obsessiveness toward their offspring that is unhealthy. In many women, all this resolves itself in time. But there is always the awareness of time wasted. They enter marriage and motherhood in a state of arrested development. It takes years to catch up.
Unlike Matamoros, I believe women can be a force in reversing things. Those who gain from this state of affairs, if any can be said to truly gain, are women in their twenties. Married women, women in their thirties or older, and women with children – as well as beta men in their twenties – are the big losers. Married women and mothers have lost the domestic tranquility of the past. They have fewer children. Many have found out the truth about casual sex: Serial relationships damage a woman’s capacity for tenderness, steal her femininity and waste her youth. Being a man stinks. It stinks if you’re a woman. Look at the photo of the female drill sergeant in the recent post. Read her words about her divorce and her soul-searching. For all her power, she sounds lost and uncertain.
And, it’s not true women have more sexual pleasure over the long term. Many more end up divorced and alone. Lesbians resort to toys and cheap thrills. Addictions produce less pleasure over time. Masturbatory sex diminishes the incidence of mutual pleasure in marriage. The highest form of sexual gratification is reciprocal pleasure in intercourse, especially when accompanied by an openness to pregnancy.
Masturbatory sex – with men, with women, or alone – is shameful and self-centered. Our society has lost the shame attached to it, but it can be recovered. Despite all the sexual gratification available to them, women are not sex machines. This is not what they want most or what gives them fulfillment. Fans of Roissy, the website devoted to teaching men how to outmaneuver young women and make the best of their promiscuity, will say this is sentimental nonsense. I appreciate their despair, not their cynicism. Women can be persuaded to change. When much of this disturbing trend began, women acted out of envy of men. There is no real cure to be found in men acting out of envy of women.
Higher education has been the main purveyor of this sexual disaster, openly sanctioning promiscuity and unconventional sex. As it exists today, higher education is a cultural calamity for women, an enemy of family, happiness, and civilization itself. It is during those crucial years that the fate of many women is sealed.
Laura writes to Matamoros:
This is depressing. Tell me what you think the answer is.
Matamoros writes:
[Note: Matamoros wrote the following before reading Laura’s response to his initial essay. See below for his reply to Laura’s remarks.]
I am sorry to be depressing, but I must call it as I see it. What I’m interested in here are free, intelligent women’s views of the situation I set forth. On solutions, I regret to say I have none. The sexual liberation of female sexuality (which, not coincidentally, is seen and celebrated as a revolutionary force in the American university, and rightly so) leads to the “husband-ification” of the state, which we see more and more around us. And the young men I see around me are either completely bought into the current system or have completely checked out.
Insofar as I can imagine any solution, it would necessarily have to involve repressive measures and male authority. A complete impossibility under the current system. I would think that the system will have to degenerate to goverment bankruptcy and a situation where 70% plus of the men out there have no chance at a mate before a revolutionary situation arises.
The problem here is one of sexual power. Men are completely enthralled by female sexuality. Women know this now (though, not completely…I’m still not convinced that the average girl knows how easily she could have scores of middle-aged distinguished professionals dancing to her tune in a heartbeat) [Laura writes: She does not know this at all] and have discovered both the power and the sex a pleasureable mix.
Traditionally, cultures have resolved this problem by repression. The West resolved it through the ideal of Christian marriage and romantic love. But women have soundly turned their backs on both, as neither is in their advantage.
I wish I had an answer.
Mark writes:
The only solution is a return to Biblical Christianity, a gospel of salvation from sin and its “hereafter” consequences. Modern scoffers should once again be brought face-to-face with God’s uncompromising hatred of sin, including fornication. In other words, a return to Truth.
Will it work? Consider the spread of Christianity from the earliest period into the Greco-Roman world. The pagan gentiles who came out of idolatry and into the faith of Jesus Christ had been steeped in a culture of promiscuity, open marriage, and temple prostitution. And it wasn’t just an aristocratic thing: just think of the masses, devotedly attached to fertility cults and religious rites that elevated fornication to an act of spiritual communion. The whole ethos of that civilization was: “If it feels good, do it.” That’s where we are today.
For all the reasons you and Matamoros mentioned, the majority of modern women (and men, who as a rule are insatiably libidinal and promiscuous at heart) will simply not be persuaded to give up sexual libertinism for the sake of being virtuous and playing a self-sacrificing role in restoring the greatness of Western civilization, or honor, or any such thing. They are currently acting out of self-interest; they need to look beyond, and see that their ultimate self-interest lies in repentance and salvation. To quote Scripture: “the pleasures of sin [are only] for a season” (Heb. 11:25). But, “after this, the judgment” (Heb. 9:27).
“After this” is the key.
Laura writes:
“But why does God care about what we do with our bodies?” the modern pagan asks. This innocent skeptic believes in a radical dualism between body and soul. The body is mere instrument for the self, the individual’s spiritual nature. To the Christian, spirit and body are one, mysteriously and exhiliratingly united. Nothing compares to the passion of Christians or of Jews or of the Roman Stoics, who saw adherence to the universal law of restraint and submission as a form of freedom. To the Christian, the body is not mere matter, but infused with soul. Everything physical matters. God cares about our pleasures. Our physicality is transcendent in His eyes. To the Jews of the Bible, the same is true:
I rose up to answer to my beloved;
And my hands dropped with myrrh,
And my fingers with sweet smelling myrrh,
Upon the handles of the lock. (Song of Solomon 5:5)
Matamoros responds to Laura’s initial remarks:
I was hoping that Laura would be able to respond to my short essay in her characteristically intelligent and insightful manner and am beyond pleased to see that I was not wrong in that regard. I thank her for her time and her thoughts.
It appears to me that Laura and I are in agreement on the political nature of the university-led woman’s orgasm movement and how the effect of this movement, and the wider cultural movement towards the normalization of masturbation, has led to emotional difficulties dealing with the reality of human sexual relations. In short, we all know that the pornography-delivery device known as the Internet has led to decreasing satisfaction among men with actual, real women, and the wider sexual choices among women have led to decreasing satisfaction among women with actual, real men.
But the gravamen of Laura’s observation is that however firmly rooted the current sexual system is, and however much it may, as an objective matter, empower women, the reality is that is has not led to widespread female happiness and contentment. On the contrary, as one widely talked about recent national survey revealed, women today are much more likely to be unhappy and depressed then their oppressed grandmothers. As Laura points out, the constant cultural message of woman-as-career-professional and woman-as-sexual-libertine is clashing against what we traditionalist conservatives would identify as the very soul and innate nature of womanhood.
And in any contest between liberal social engineering and nature, nature will win out in the end, no matter how good the orgasms are in the meantime. Therein lies a gleam of hope, I think. And something I did not consider fully enough before reading Laura’s reply.
Let us set aside for a moment the prospect of a major Christian revival. Such a thing is to be desired, of course, but to say that it’s not presently in the cards is an understatement. Not that I am against working for such transformative change, but I believe the situation is so dire presently that urgent action is needed now. And the American people are right now functionally secular, even though as compared with the rest of the West they remain remarkably religious.
A current movement that argued that the current political culture was pulling women into to many directions and resulting in the destruction of the family, with accompanying policy proposals that would involve a nationalist revitalization of the domestic economy so that one wage earner could support a wife and children in the broad American middle class, that might do it.
What would such a movement say to women?
It would say: you were sold a bill of goods. It would say that while you were promised liberty and the pursuit of happiness you instead are shackled to the office chair gulping down anti-depressants. It would say that while you were promised sexual liberty, your sexuality has been colonized by the marketplace, reducing the most intimate of human affairs to a commodity, and now resulting in the actual marketing of sex to pre-teens, by the Walt Disney Company no less! You were promised fulfillment, the reality is a race to the bottom and may the sluttiest one win. It would say that while you were promised Sex and the City glamor and excitement, instead you now have a culture that regards you as a non-entity the moment the first wrinkle appears and the light in your eyes dims ever so slightly. It would say that the Western ideal of romantic love need not be abandoned.
[Matamoros: And I would add here that this Western ideal is a White ideal. No White nationhood, no White peoplehood, and that ideal dies, leaving women in an ever-increasing race to the bottom]
THAT could work. THAT is an appeal to interest.
But make no mistake about it. Any such political program would, rightly, be seen as empowering men at the expense of women. We would argue this is to correct an over-correction, to set the pendulum back where it belongs, but not all would see it that way. Those fully bought into the system—big law partners, big NGO queens, big government officials—would fight tooth, claw and nail. And the young and the beautiful would probably not have enough imagination, especially given the dreadful level of current education, to imagine that their circumstances would ever change enough to warrant considering such a program.
Nevertheless, I believe Laura is on to something here. If the sexual revolution was so great, why the bloody hell are so many men and women miserable?
Laura writes:
Thank you.
Matamoros has said it well. I am very impressed with his remarks and agree with all of the above. I have one general complaint. Matamoros is not a woman. When he originally wrote to me, I rushed to the conclusion that he was, probably because of the intimate details in his comments. I was elated. At last, a woman was saying this. I was beside myself with happiness. The door was finally opening.
I forgive Matamoros for being a man. But it makes me afraid. It makes me afraid for the same reason that followers of Roissy scare me. They simply do not know what lies behind the glowing facade of young women. Women are weak and impressionable. The fun times are momentary. Simple happiness of the sort that was common for women just 50 years ago eludes them.
Twice this summer, I went to the White Mountains of New Hampshire with my sons and husband to climb mountains and walk through the woods for a few days. Both times, I noticed a number of lesbian couples on the trails, quite a few in fact. I suppose hiking is popular for these women as it takes them into the woods and away from the real world. There were different sorts of lesbians: butch-mean ones, middle-aged jaded ones, absolutely normal-looking ones. One had a pot-belly and smoked a cigarette at the top of a mountain with her hands on her hip, tough and angry-looking.
One day were were walking through a parking lot on our way to a trail when we neared a young woman of about 28 who was tying her boots on the curb. Her girlfriend was nearby. This young woman had beautiful light brown braids and a very pretty and innocent-looking face. As I approached her on our way to the trail, I did not hear her say hello. She then spoke up insistently. “Hello!” she said with a smile, begging in a way. It was very important that we say hello. When I looked into her eyes, I felt a pang. I can’t explain it but I felt such conviction that she was trying to hide her unhappiness, to appear normal. “It’s a beautiful day, isn’t it?” she said.
It was a beautiful day, marred for me by what I saw in her. She faces remarkable disappointment in the years ahead. I know that beyond any shadow of a doubt. She is not angry and bitter, at least that’s my guess. Not at all. She is probably in fact a little too romantic. Her original dreams are all there. They’ve just been refashioned into something strange and unrecognizable. I suspect she was no more meant to be a lesbian than my mother, who had seven children.
This is my hunch. She is looking for love in a confusing world. And the world has said to her, “Go ahead. Take whatever you can.”
I had to decide between drinking and driving and I chose drinking. Then I had to choose between drugs and women and I chose drugs. Now, I have no car and no wife/partner. I’m drug free and not lonely. The controlled substance I favored was bumped up the schedule to a felony possession a few years ago so it’s too inconvenient for me to get now. You can’t buy it on the street because Blacks and Mexicans neither use nor sell entheogens and psychedelics. Bob Taylor, one of the first White Nationalist neo-pagans I ever met, told me a story about taking LSD with some Blacks. It was one of the funniest monologues I ever heard. Andy Warhol once said, “Sex is the biggest nothing ever.” Now that I’m over 50 I’m beginning to understand how profound that statement is. Julian Lee has the right idea, but I’m not quite ready for total celibacy yet. The prettier women are the more apt they will be to trade on their looks not their brains. Alex Linder says even the brainy ones can’t think outside the box. I agree. Look what they’re ready to pay for a haircut, a pair of shoes or an ounce of perfume.
If white nationalists give up on women where will the next generation of white nationalists come from?
In all this gloom you’re forgetting something. Most women want marriage and children, and white nationalist men are one of the few groups that are absolutely devoted, at least in principle, to having lots of white children. Women may sleep with cads but most of them regret it in the morning. A good white nationalist man can offer a white woman what she wants most in the world.
So don’t sell yourselves short.
Oldright, I’m not opposed to finding a good white woman and settling down. It’s just that, in the present day, one must be very careful who one chooses. The legal system is too slanted towards destroying the lives of men for me, or any of us, to make mistakes when choosing mates.
I’m so glad I’m not single, and that I did not marry an American woman. Though similar problems exist in other countries, notably Britain (where I grew up), this seems to be a uniquely American crisis. American women by and large are truly fucked up.
I wasn’t always like this. I grew up in a fairly traditional family. Church, boarding (public) school, and parents suppressed my savage instincts, and I grew up a nice, respectable conservative. But gradually my natural proclivities began to show, namely in an obsession with getting pussy and willingness to fight.
Later, in my late 20s, after university and grad school and well on the way to a successful Wall Street career, I suddenly realized that to get women all you had to do was treat them like shit. Be confident, be assertive–and treat the females with contempt. Once I digested this simple rule, I had women practically knocking me down to date me. Enough with chivalry and romantic love. That shit is for suckers.
At about the same time it dawned on me that what my girlfriends had been telling me for years–that I was a rather well-built chap–wasn’t just a pleasant compliment or morale-booster (not that I needed it), but the truth.
Eventually, as I got older and moved to another part of the US, I discovered the ‘cougar’ phenomenon and suddenly my sex life got even better. And, amazing as it may seem, I found that it’s not at all difficult to pick up the odd 19 – 24-year old hottie.
Today, whenever I spot a single American woman who seems a bit sad and starved for conversation–and a husband and baby–I just smile. I figure the stupid bitch deserves it.
I would hate to be a single twentysomething American guy today. I would probably join a conservative church or emigrate.
Will this crisis be solved by a return to Biblical Christianity? Of course not. Things will change only when the situation deteriorates far enough where there is some kind of right-wing/nationalist authoritarian rule, or where enough young Americans convert to Islam (or some other totalitarian cult).
Nature will out.
I don’t view the situation as hopeless. I view it as difficult. Simply put: the current political climate, including liberal politics and massive immigration, favors the narrow interest of White women. The first provides for the now missing and unnecessary husband, the second keeps their status high.
That said, Laura’s comments are really the key. The task of the WN movement is to speak the truth to women they already know in their hearts: that the current situation favors the famous, the young and the beautiful, but does nothing to foster community, children and a place of honor for a woman who actually has wrinkles.
If white nationalists give up on women where will the next generation of white nationalists come from?
Same as always — the dregs.
I’m so glad I’m not single, and that I did not marry an American woman.
I must ask what kind you did marry. I know you’re not suggesting British women are better than American — I’ve been there a few times and always saw far more gleeful miscegeny, and even the British women I meet here usually have black or Middle Eastern husbands/exes. Not trying to pick a fight with you, just asking.
So don’t sell yourselves short.
Buck up, chaps. Your soul mate is out there!
F. Roger Devlin writes eloquently on this subject.
http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol6no2/DevlinTOQV6N2.pdf
http://theoccidentalquarterly.com/archives/vol7no2/v7no2_Devlin.pdf
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/devlin_home_ec_01.htm
http://www.thornwalker.com/ditch/devlin_shalit.htm
If I were a young man in my 20s- I would go to a semi-modern country like Turkey- where societal values seem to be what they used to be in the 1950s in the so-called West- and
stay there. As I see it – the putrefaction has gone on for too long and too far in the US and
Western Europe. You want conservative and not fanatical family values?—then take a little trip to the larger coastal cities of Turkey and have your eyes opened.
If the extensive power of one’s ego ideal casts as far as imaginary scenarios of whore wrangling one is in for a rude awakening when the transaction cost of making bets one’s body cannot cash come home to roost. Light up a fatty, go the the strip club, Beavis and Butthead on Blu-ray is always nice. In short: Fuck it!
I would go to a semi-modern country like Turkey- where societal values seem to be what they used to be in the 1950s in the so-called West
Negative. Turkey is fully modernized technologically and socially. I’m sure there are hardscrabble towns in the East (Kurds, Armenians, Arabs) approaching the older society, but you couldn’t hope to assimilate there. Just because it’s not in the West doesn’t mean it isn’t “modern”, esp. the social aspect. Modernity travels extremely fast. Why do you think we’re in Afghanistan? The system can’t tolerate unpaved roads and segregated schools anywhere. And as a rule the more traditional the non-Western society, the harder to penetrate. This should go without saying. If one has a job that brings one to such places, it’s feasible. Britons in particular are good at that.
In short: Fuck it!
I prefer ‘South Park’, but hell yea.
Women are self-centered and often make choices that have poor longterm consequences. Historically, this has been indulged and their family has been there to pick them up and dust them off.
This is an acceptable state of affairs in a world like the 19th century, when women could not own property or vote, lived in multi-generational farmhouses and had numerous social distractions to occupy their time.
In the modern world, it is not acceptable. We suffer from the result in every aspect of our society.
What to do? Someone commenting to a different article suggested white racialist compounds akin to what the FLDS have done. Guess what? I agree fully.
It is unfortunate, but keeping white women dumb, pregnant and chained to the stove is actually in their best interest and ours.
Mormons are good Nordic stock. Apart from that faith gene thing.
Uh ~ Italian.
Not ideal, but Turkey would be a good place to find a girl. Also, Syria and Lebanon, where there are plenty (IMO) of European-looking women, including for some reason (well, I have my theories) many blonde, blue- or green-eyed hotties, at least from my observations. You might also want to try Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, and Argentina. I recall reading an article a few years ago or so about the increasing trend of German men finding women from the German and other European communities in Brazil (which is basically the majority of Brazilians).
Turks are non-white so don’t go there for a woman. Go to Eastern Europe – the Baltic states, Belarus, Russia, Czech Republic, etc. And it may be a good idea to stay there.
Uh ~ Italian.
You must’ve married her a while ago. Have been there a few times too, and man, Italians are some shallow gregarious folks. Italy has literally the lowest birth-rate in Europe. You must’ve landed an “exception”.
Not ideal, but Turkey would be a good place to find a girl. Also, Syria and Lebanon, where there are plenty (IMO) of European-looking women,
There are plenty of gorgeous women in all those countries, many of them disarmingly white (esp. Syria), but there’s the problem of social permeability, which is very low in Muslim countries. That’s why they come west and marry into our folk, of course. One would need some valid situational “in” to meet a female in circumstances deemed appropriate by the family, and so on. It’s quite impossible to just go somewhere and “find” a female to marry.
You might also want to try Brazil, Uruguay, Chile, and Argentina.
Well, here again, I’ve been to all four of those — and while Uruguay, for example, is a comparatively sane little society with some humble-looking females, there’s the same encroaching social decay owing to urbanism and our friends the Chosen. Uruguay has in fact the lowest birthrate in South America — and is the most homogeneously European. Abortion was recently legalized. The Netherlands, I think last year, had a program of shipping millions of free condoms there to promote “safe sex”. Social permeability may be high at least in Uruguay and Chile (much harder in Brazil and Argentina, at least metropolitan areas — both “peoples” are insufferably conceited, loud, and hedonistic), but unless one is truly willing to assimilate to their chatty, soccer-loving ways, or commands the professional resources to lure a female away from her society, it is again a highly unlikely prospect. The thing is we up here are accustomed to thinking of “Latin women” as “passionate” fuck monkeys who’re all hot for our passports. With the consolidation of modernism in the former “Third World”, these women no longer have need of our passports; their societies are now advanced, healthy, attractive epicenters which they have no good reason to leave, esp. not for kwa, and to which the dross of their part of their world is flocking just as Mexicans and so on have to ours. Take it from one with long residence in almost every part of Latin America under his belt: They’re really not crazy about gringos. Of course if you have the $$$, go for it — you’ll find one in a month. But you’d better like Vallenato and high-heels.
I recall reading an article a few years ago or so about the increasing trend of German men finding women from the German and other European communities in Brazil (which is basically the majority of Brazilians).
That much is true — I encountered about a dozen German men in Uruguay alone who had dark-haired wives. But these dudes seemed to have one thing in common: uber-stiffnecked lack of personality. You know the German type — plaid shirt tucked into his khakis, those rolled up at the ankle, brown loafers, blank blue-eyed stare …
So it makes sense in theory, but it takes a certain type to pull it off in reality. For White Nationalists it holds no promise, imo.
Turks are non-white so don’t go there for a woman. Go to Eastern Europe – the Baltic states, Belarus, Russia, Czech Republic, etc.
Eh, how many times have we all been here. There are white people in Asia Minor and the Levant. You just have to accept that. Russia and Byelorussia you can scratch right the fuck off your wish-list, because it’s hard enough getting a visa extension after your first one month visa as an American citizen (if you’re Amurrcan) in Russia alone; Belarus you would have to make your mission in life to penetrate, though once through it’d perhaps be pretty easy to nab a wife. Czech Republic is “Europe” — forget it, the women are the same as here. No exaggeration.
Anyway — this habit of fetishizing chicks from other parts of the world (as “more traditional” or “more willing”) has to be broken, because from all I’ve seen, modernity has caught up just about everywhere. It really isn’t feasible without resources. But again, if anyone have the resources — go for it.
It is unfortunate, but keeping white women dumb, pregnant and chained to the stove is actually in their best interest and ours.
The only unfortunate thing is that that ever changed.
She is an exception, which is the reason I married her. 🙂
I agree with a lot of what you wrote. It’s good to find someone here who’s not only travelled abroad, but lived abroad too, and is familiar with other people. I’ve been to Brazil and Chile, and we’re travelling to Buenos Aires (and probably Motevideo) early next year. Possibly looking to buy property. Went to Peru last year.
I know the German type you mention. A South American friend of mine whose sister married a guy from Hamburg explained that he was more masculine that her South American male friends, who were too busy primping and preening, and fucking her friends, to be taken seriously. Opposites attract, I suppose, to some extent at least.
I forgot to mention South Africa. I lived there a year. The White girls in SA should be taken very seriously, by white american guys. 🙂
This is all very pitiful and depressing. I feel lucky to have found a good woman.
I also don’t accept the idea that most women are functional lesbians. This does not make evolutionary sense.
What part of Italy is she from ,Admiral? Parle vous les Italien?
I’m too tired to respond to this thread at the moment but I shall add a few thoughts tomorrow.
P.S. Uh,you are very well traveled,would you mind if I asked what you do?
This does not make evolutionary sense.
Evolution isn’t a movie script where everything makes “sense”. Things go wrong, sometimes fatally wrong — species disappear, mutate, or degenerate under adverse circumstances. Among the worst of man’s “circumstances” are bad ideas. The very complexity of our evolution is rendering at least one large portion of us “devolutionary”. I don’t believe “we” will disappear, but we will certainly dwindle to very uncomfortable numbers, everywhere, and that through the withholding action of females in cramped urban environments (even in rural areas).
It isn’t reversible. And very few of us will escape it, i.e. find a wife and procreate.
P.S. Uh,you are very well traveled,would you mind if I asked what you do?
Fuck all, man. I went to those places “on a shoestring”. Which is why the chicks didn’t dig me, LOL.
What part of Italy is she from ,Admiral? Parle vous les Italien?
So you’re a figurative “Euro”, I guess. That’s ok. Se dice semplicemente: Parli l’italiano?
Whodareswings:
YOu probably won’t believe this, but anyway. I am 42 years old, and I have never owned more than 5 pairs of shoes in total at any time in my female life, nor worn makeup (let alone buy it) in my entire female life!
Matamores [11:11]
Slight disagreement, or different interpretation: The task for the WN movement (if it wants to be honest with white women, and white men) is to speak the truth to women they already know: that the current situation PRETENDS TO FAVOUR the famous, the young and the beautiful. And everyone consciously or unconsciously GOES ALONG WITH THAT PRETENCE.
Its the proverbial Matrix Red Pill; you take the pill and you go down the Rabbit Hole, where you can never find satisfaction, because its about competing as men, to have trophy girlfriends and women same as men. But in finding the search for external peer satisfaction/approval of your ‘partner’; you have to suppress your innermost yearnings for the unconditional love of someone who loves ‘YOU’ for WHO YOU ARE. But when you take the RED PILL, you cannot ever be who you are, cause you have to play the game. So nobody can get to know you, least of all yourself, you can’t ask yourself the most intimate questions: what matters to me, what is really really important to me, etc. etc…
Ask Lolly Jackson (owner of famous stip clubs in RSA), he makes his money by making sure his clients never get what they really want; if they did, they would never buy a soda in his strip clubs, let alone a lap dance or stripper! He has to convince them that external stunning beauty is the ‘defintion’ of ‘beauty’. And like rats following the Jackson Pied Piper, men don’t have the courage to rebel, and just be themselves, and find someone whose personality and characteristics they love, and who loves them for WHO THEY ARE, with all imperfections.
Consider, if you want, the possibility, that your definitons of ‘favour’ are as upside down as your defintion of beauty. Only if you are extremely psychologically and emotionally insecure, would you interpret being ‘famous’, ‘young’ or ‘beautiful’ as being ‘favoured’ for the attnetion of allot of men. I consider that anything but something that I would consider ‘favoured’. In fact when I am not in a committed relationship, I deliberately and itnentionally pick up about 5 to ten kgs! It’s just such an easy way of going through life anonymous and avoiding all that predatorial ‘wanna fuck’ sexual attention. Its a way of finding the guys who look deeper, who appreciate character or personality; and if something long term evolves, then i can lose the weight, but when it is lost, i am never under some obligation, to remain skinny, cause i know he is not with me, for my f**kable figure. You will not believe how much subconscious and passive aggressive resentment and reciprocal sense of ‘obligation’ many women carry around, out of the sense that they feel they are obliged to be thin, or ‘not fat’.
My boyfriend when i lived in berkeley had had this great funny libertarian plumber friend. I will never forget a conversation one night about what he thought was one of the most beautiful things about his girlfriend. He said much about character and her sense of humour and loyalty, and my friend george asked, what about physically, turns you on the most about her. His response was, Man, I am one of those Shirley valentine Greek Guys. (Shirley valentine is afunny english movie). I just love it that my girlfriend is so natural and normal, including her few wrinkles. i think they are beautiful, but what really makes me hornyis watching her , she has wrinkles and some cellulite, and when we have sex, the cellulite ripples and I think its beautiful. I thought he was joking. I really did, but he wasn’t; he was dead, dead serious. the men in the room were uncomfortably silent; and he said something like ‘you guys are so brainwashed with your versions of beauty, no wonder you are in here every other day with some new plastic superfical chick, who thinks you are a walking penis with a wallet. You find what you are looking for. I found love, a best friend, a soulmate, who treats me like her king. what more could i ask for.
It’s good to find someone here who’s not only travelled abroad, but lived abroad too, and is familiar with other people.
Ditto. I got so tired of the rampant misconceptions of South America in particular.
Possibly looking to buy property.
In Uruguay? That was my dream for a while. Cheap as it gets — unless you wouldn’t mind Brazil, where you can get a pretty big old chácara down south for dirt cheap (-$10,000). If you think you’ll be set on Uruguay, there are plenty of good apartments in decent barrios of Mv. for not much more, depending on how you like to live, of course. Canelones is where Montevidean families go when they’re sick of the city, always very decent rural / suburban property there in the same price range. I kinda fell in love with Durazno, Tacuarembó and Treinta y Tres — all have the “ghost town” feel, utterly placid, cheap as Guatemala, as beautiful as Colonia, and not a darkie in sight. German blood starts in Durazno, peaks in Tacuarembó. Look into Rocha too — you want to have a little seaside house over there, esp. for just another $10k. Stay away from Colonia and Paysandú : the former gets the tourists (Germans, Jews, Israelis … ), the latter scummy run-off from Argentina, though it could be the Catalan blood, LOL. Paysandú department, then Salto and Artigas, are real frontier country — rednecks and tractors. Most of the interior Uruguayos are originally from Galicia and the Canarios.
Fuck, now I want to go back there. Of all the places I’ve been, in the end the loveliest was strolling the quays in Colonia, seeing these peaceful folk pulled right from the old country. Or trying to find a hotel in Chuy at 3am — just dogs and roosters for company as I went along the street.
Check this out, by far the best real estate site for the Southern Cone: http://www.mercadolibre.com
Also check http://www.mundoanuncio.com.
A South American friend of mine whose sister married a guy from Hamburg explained that he was more masculine that her South American male friends, who were too busy primping and preening, and fucking her friends, to be taken seriously.
That I believe. Doesn’t take much extra testosterone to best the cologne-doused latino. Also, “emo” is very popular among youth in the Southern Cone, esp. Chile / Uru. — as it’s become everywhere.
Hm. Made a long comment in response to you, Admiral, but it appears to have been lost.
Francis Marion Braidfute writes:
Whodareswings:
YOu probably won’t believe this, but anyway. I am 42 years old, and I have never owned more than 5 pairs of shoes in total at any time in my female life, nor worn makeup (let alone buy it) in my entire female life!
I’ll bet you have food issues. You like those $3 Himalayan Sawdust-Carob Chews at the checkout stand at your local food co-op, right? My last tenured Jewish Marxist girlfriend was named Frances. She hadn’t touched any meat since The Summer of Love. What’s with the masculine spelling or your name, anyway, Missy?
The gist of which was that if you’re interested in buying in Uruguay, check out these:
http://www.mercadolibre.com
http://www.mundoanuncio.com
Without question the best online resources for Southern Cone property. Check out Brazil if you’re daring, because the rural properties are the cheapest outside of Uruguay (cheapest of all the Spanish-speaking countries), but residence is trickier, at least for kwans.
In Uruguay stay away from Colonia, Paysandu and of course Punta. Canelones is the rural / suburban refuge from Montevideo, though there are still good neighborhoods in the latter with property in the lowest range ($5000 – $50000 depending on your mode de vie). Check out Rocha too because you will want a beach house for the same price. Interior departments — Lavalleja, Treinta y Tres, Durazno and Tacuarembo — all “ghost town”ish, very pretty and placid, all dirt cheap. Salto and Artigas, and Paysandu dept on eastern side redneck country, lots of Catalan blood and tractors. I don’t know the remaining departments, but they’re no doubt of the same kind as the rest.
Can’t really go wrong with Uruguay, man. Southern Chile’s good if you want a little more “culture”, but costs are much higher and tourist flood heavier. Only buy in Argentina if you really love it. I sure didn’t.
In terms of fertility for women it’s all downhill after age 25 so if you want children young is not optional. And women over 40 have a high risk of giving birth to a deformed or retarded child.
30Whodareswings
>>I’ll bet you have food issues. You like those $3 Himalayan Sawdust-Carob Chews at the checkout stand at your local food co-op, right? My last tenured Jewish Marxist girlfriend was named Frances. She hadn’t touched any meat since The Summer of Love. What’s with the masculine spelling or your name, anyway, Missy?<<
You can bet whatever you like. You could consider it a thought experiment, and explore its possible validity, by a social science process of scientific enquiry; or you can simply just find the quickest demeaning label, you find in your intellectual wordsmith attic and apply. Your choice! 🙂
I have no idea what a $3 Himalayan Sawdust-Carob Chews is. Perhaps you are projecting some of your issues with your former ‘tenured Jewish Marxist girlfriend’? Perhaps you never met a Radical Hon(our)sty eco-libertarian? I love meat, but prefer free range meat. I don’t eat meat that is stuffed full of toxic shit, not to mention overdosed on chemical hormones. I grew upon a farm.
The name is simply a cryptic dischordian mosaic writers pseudonym, representing certain historical persons and ideas, which I like and learnt from:
Francis (Humour of Francis the talking mule; France: original etymology: ‘free’; Francis Xavier’s love of Don Quixote’s ideas of chivalry and honour)
Marion (Shepherd character in Old French lyric poetry)
Francis Marion (Swampfox, founder of Guerrilla Warfare)
Marion Braidfute (girlfriend/wife of William Wallace, the Hero of Battle of Stirling Bridge (11 Sept 1297), and Scottish Independence)
[Dischordian Principle: The human race will begin solving it’s problems on the day that it ceases taking itself so seriously.]
Hope that answers your questions, Sir! 🙂
Of course both show up now, LOL. I guess it was the URLs.
I don’t eat meat that is stuffed full of toxic shit, not to mention overdosed on chemical hormones.
Why? They put hair on your balls.
(Humour of Francis the talking mule; France: original etymology: ‘free’;
In fact the name Francis, issuing from the ethnonym “Frank”, of course, has been traced back to a Proto-Germanic *frankon, referring to a javelin. It is similarly thought by most, I would say, that the name “Saxon” derives from their beloved knife the seax. One would like to believe that the “Franks” were so “frank” and “free”, it became their name, as the Aryans were arya, but it doesn’t seem likely.
Anyway, that’s some complex shit for a bloody username.
The Admiral,
Not ideal, but Turkey would be a good place to find a girl. Also, Syria and Lebanon, where there are plenty (IMO) of European-looking women
Oh shit yeah. And check out Tamil Nadu too, they’re smokin’. (But whatever you do, don’t marry a Jew, because that’s race-mixing.)
I’ve been to Brazil and Chile, and we’re travelling to Buenos Aires (and probably Motevideo) early next year. Possibly looking to buy property.
Hey? Oh, as a prelude to your revolution. Yes of course. I get it now.
Matra,
Go to Eastern Europe – the Baltic states, Belarus, Russia, Czech Republic, etc. And it may be a good idea to stay there.
Et tu, Matra? Then goodnight Irene.
Uh,
Se dice semplicemente
Si dice. But then it’s symptomatic of this whole sorry thread — the blind leading the blind. Wally, about now would be an ideal time to reinstitute that eugenic posting policy.
So you’re a figurative “Euro”, I guess. That’s ok. Se dice semplicemente: Parli l’italiano?
Si,lo so.Scherzavo caro amico mio,uh.E’ poi ,potevi anche usare il formale,cioe’,”parla l’Italiano.” Comunque sei (e’) abbastanza in gamba.Complimenti!
Uh – Been there, done that. But, merci!
Silver – “Hey? Oh, as a prelude to your revolution. Yes of course. I get it now.”
As vacation property. 😉
Francis:
Dischordian Principle: The human race will begin solving it’s problems on the day that it ceases taking itself so seriously.
Discordians are nutcases so blind to the facts about race that their biggest follower, Robert Anton Wilson, didn’t wake up even after his daughter was murdered by a red savage indian.
That’s the problem with not taking things seriously, you can end up living in a racially mixed neighborhood, and that can end with you or your loved ones dead.
White extinction is no laughing matter.
“Evolution isn’t a movie script where everything makes ‘sense’. Things go wrong, sometimes fatally wrong — species disappear, mutate, or degenerate under adverse circumstances.” uh
I do not watch television, so I seldom liken anything to a movie script.
All things in the natural world make sense; only human models of them fail to add up. Moreover, things do not “go wrong,”and species do not “degenerate.” The environment changes, allele frequencies adjust and species adapt. Some go extinct.
Nature also discriminates. Some allele mutations are tolerated, while others are lethal. Occasionally, some confer an advantage. You may have noticed that your sex drive is fairly powerful, sometimes overwhelming. This is because sex is vital to the perpetuation of our species. We can readily adapt to changing diets, climate shifts and other relatively minor changes, but there is no adaptation to 90% homosexuality. This would have been strongly selected against long ago.
I believe that homosexuality is a combinatorial, bell curve phenomenon. There are likely multiple alleles that cooperate to produce it, like intelligence. Women, generally are more verbal and detail oriented than men, while men specialize in spatial and mathematical skills. Human culture is such that males with strong verbal skills have a selective advantage. My background is in science and my verbal skills are adequate, but some of you fellows clearly have verbal talent that is superior to mine. Probably because your brains are feminized enough to confer a verbal advantage, without producing homosexuality. Polygenic traits like intelligence and homosexuality generate bell curves when plotted. At the high end of the feminization bell curve, there is increasing verbal and other feminine skills, until at the extreme end, homosexuality results. A simlar dynamic likely underlies autism, bipolar disorder and schizophrenia. Sickle cell anemia is a simple, single-gene example.
If you accept this view of homosexuality, you may understand why I do not accept the proposition that most women are “functional lesbians.” Moreover, because of the disproportunate burden that females bear in the sexual transaction, the raising of children, it is likely that female drives may be even stronger and more selective than those of males, as compensation. This is supported by the higher incidence of homosexuality in males.
‘but some of you fellows clearly have verbal talent that is superior to mine. Probably because your brains are feminized enough to confer a verbal advantage, without producing homosexuality.’
Are you calling ,uh, a faggot?
Silver,
Si dice.
I was doing some translation from Spanish at the moment. Associational error, I assure you. But thanks.
Euro,
Scherzavo caro amico mio,uh.
Di dove sei allora? E scusa, non ho mai imparato le forme di cortesia!
Ahh, the insufferable jeeboo-worshipers coming out of the woodwork.
39OldRight
>>That’s the problem with not taking things seriously, you can end up living in a racially mixed neighborhood, and that can end with you or your loved ones dead. White extinction is no laughing matter.<<
I never said I consider ‘white extinction’ a laughing matter. I don’t think White extinction is a laughing matter; although in certain perspectives, it may be. I mean if not enough consider it a matter of concern that they are willing to unite around, and really be united, cause they care about some common themes, then in the big million trillion year scheme of things it may be a ‘laughing matter’ (idiot whites thought they were superior, but couldn’t even get it together to work together, kind of perspective?)
See Wake Up Whitey!, for my efforts on behalf of the conversation.
So, what I am saying with ‘Francis’ is many things, but in terms of being serious. I am a big fan of listening, asking questions, really making an effort to understand what another says (Note, Not what I imagine they said, but what they really said, what they meant! So when they reciprocate and give a shit, about what I really mean, then that to me, means they take me as serious, as I do them. If they can’t be bothered, and simply jump to erroneious conclusions, and start flinging insults; then Francis arrives in full force, and simply refuses to be insulted. Then ‘Francis’ simple receives all insults, as jokes and enjoys the laugh.
So, you have my undivided attention, if you want it. I listen, cause I like listening, and I like hearing what others opinions are.
So, my apologies if you thought I meant that ‘white extinction’ is a hilarious joke. I don’t think it is, except perhaps, in a satirical manner, or as stated above.
The “gender gap” is really only among the unmarried. Married men & women are about the same on the left/right scale. My guess is that women are generally more moderate politically. They are less interested in politics, and it is the obsessive nerds who go to extremes.
How to find a nice girl? You want a girl that is pretty, intelligent enough, and not a slut, right?
Have you heard the proverb, “Don’t fish for trout in a herring barrel?” If you are looking in the nightclubs for a young woman who will love you, be faithful and raise bright children, she’s NOT in a sleazy dive getting smashed and rubbing against her dance partner. If you go there and hook up with her, take her up on her offer and take her home to bed, then why are you surprised when she later breaks your heart by sleeping around?
The nice girls are likely either at home, in the library or shopping with her mom. Church is a likely place.
But what if you’re secular and can’t stand organized religion? What then? Well, are there any middle aged ladies next door, at your workplace or the supermarket checkout? Be nice to her. Do her a favor, pay her a compliment. Why? Because she DOES know where the nice girls are. And if she likes you, she might be willing to host a dinner and introduce you to her daughter or niece or best friend’s daughter. Old women LOVE matchmaking.
This is a subject matter that does need to be discussed as it affects the ability of white people to attract suitable mates and reproduce. I do believe the distrust and hate between the sexes is more acute in America than anywhere else. I’m not a world traveler but the few times I’ve been around foreign women they seem to act more feminine, deferential and respectful towards men.
Female bisexuality is much more prevalent than in the past but nowhere near 90%. I speak from personal experience and various studies and news articles published over the years. In 2003 yahoo.com published a university study (can’t remember which one) that found almost 16% of women reported having both male and female sexual partners at present or at some point in their lives. That was up from 1% in 1980. The survey authors expected the number could reach as high as 20-25% by 2015 or so. This was attributed to the increasing earning and political power of women and liberal attitudes towards sex and relationships. There isn’t a social stigma for so called alternative lifestyles so women are giving it a try.
It seems women in the 16-25yr old age bracket are most likely to engage in this type of behavior. I dated several women in my early twenties who reported having to fend off male as well as female suitors in night clubs. The homecoming queen my senior year is now cohabitating with a female police officer. The homecoming queen from the year after I graduated cohabitated with a female bodybuilder for several years. The latter was bothersome because she was a very attractive, all American type of girl which left many people scratching their heads over the matter. Right after my older sister went to college she called me one weekend and informed me that while she was showering two girls in the next shower stall were doing the deed. Believe me the stories don’t end there but I think I’ve made my point.
I don’t think this is a natural state of affairs at all. My own crack brained theory is that the root causes for female sexual deviance lies in the breakup of the family, increasing family dysfunction and weakening family bonds, feminization of men and fathers, anti-male /pro-lesbian propaganda on television (and movies) and feminist brainwashing especially in the hallowed halls of our universities. Today’s women, despite the tough girl facade, are more insecure and confused than previous generations.
Keep in mind lesbianism was becoming a major problem in Weimar, Christian Germany until the dreaded pagan Adolf Hitler corrected the problem….with the force of his personality more than anything. He inspired them to embrace their natural roles as wives and mothers.
I’m at a loss for solutions but regrettably men do (in most cases) have to resort to the tactics encouraged by people like Roissy in order to have sexual relations with women. We live in barbaric times and playing the gentlemen gets a man nowhere these days, so we must adapt. We don’t like it anymore than the truly nice ladies out there but we have no other choice. What’s a man to do in this matriarchal yoke we live under? I cringe when I hear a woman say she yearns for a nice guy because she chooses the cad every time.
Well Said S(46),
It appears some are fixated on their symmetry defintions of beauty; and ain’t yet developed enough character in themselves, to appreciate the beauty of character in another.
Excellent advice: “Don’t fish for trout in a herring barrel?” Perhaps some may listen, and if not. Ces’t la vie! 😉
Ahh, the insufferable jeeboo-worshipers coming out of the woodwork.
Hush, child. The grown-ups are talking.
“I’m at a loss for solutions but regrettably men do (in most cases) have to resort to the tactics encouraged by people like Roissy in order to have sexual relations with women. We live in barbaric times and playing the gentlemen gets a man nowhere these days, so we must adapt. We don’t like it anymore than the truly nice ladies out there but we have no other choice. What’s a man to do in this matriarchal yoke we live under? I cringe when I hear a woman say she yearns for a nice guy because she chooses the cad every time.”
I’m thinking out loud and I haven’t any statistics, just a hunch. If I’m wrong, I’ll retreat.
But consider, in the 1950s, a girl got social approval, status and support for saying “no” to sex. So if she told her young beau, nuh-uh, he understood that it was not necessarily a personal rejection.
A young dating couple in the 50s subconsciously understood it was his job to pursue and hope to persuade and her job to prevent the sex from occurring too soon. This gave the couple time to get to know each other before difficult decisions about acceptance or rejection had to be made.
Today, a young woman who wants to say no has these realities to contend with: Since there is no society-wide approval for girls to say no, her beau is going to take no as a personal rejection, even if what the girl really wants is “not right now, but someday.” She must decide very quickly if the guy’s worth it, and if he looks like he might be, she has to say yes to sex very soon after meeting or risk hurting his feelings and losing him.
So a shy guy (Roissy’s beta) today who doesn’t push the girl doesn’t get the girl, because she, as true to her deepest nature, expects him to try to persuade. (The 50s shy guy was safe to try persuasion, knowing he was off the hook for actually having to perform because it was her job to say no.) BUT, a girl who is dating today’s non-shy guy (Alpha) who is pushy about sex has no good way to say “no” without hurting his feelings and driving him off before she even has made up her mind. So, they fall into bed on the first date, and she maybe gets pregnant, and he’s not happy with a chick he doesn’t have to work to get, and it all falls apart. The girl is brokenhearted that she had conjugal relations with a man that doesn’t love her, feels badly about herself and desperately falls into sleeping around, looking for love. And the men end up bitter that all the chicks are sluts.
At least, the above would have been my 50s mother’s explanation for the mess today.