Explaining sex, marriage and problems thereof in this era

Men have sex for the pleasure, women for the ego trip.

Stay with me, it’s worth it. I’m giving away Woman Inc. trade secrets here. Don’t use them for evil.

It’s erroneously claimed women fantasise about rape. Hell no. No woman has ever done that. It’s a fear worse than death for women, just ask us. Although rape can be a cause of death in women, like the stadium girl during Katrina, who was gang-raped to death (heart attack). It isn’t that… thing, by definition, as one cannot fantasise about a thing we do not want (paradox) and we see the life outcomes on actual rape victims, as bad in adulthood as if it happened as a child. Women do not fantasise about the act or the supposed sex, then. There’s something symbolic in being wanted, taken is a visual proof. We desire to BE irresistible. Look at Aphrodite, goddess of love and pleasure but not her pleasure, that of men. Men gain pleasure (now called male gaze, it’s real) even by looking at her (imagine the howling if bikinis were banned and reconcile the popularity of porn voyeurism versus imagination) and yet the Bible condemns this as the act of lechery, further, as a crime of adultery. …Why? …. Anyone?

I expect the manosphere to rip this one off too. Fuck you guys. At least link me.

Re Venus/Aphrodite and why cults of Satan worship her/Divine Feminine and worship with orgies as their ritual (nb. any fornication counts):

She is not an object, she is a deified subject who draws pleasure to her like a whirlpool of power. She is called vain, for being honest about her allure, she loves to be irresistible. That is what women want, not men. All witches are also enchantresses of men. Men are the source of their power, even Biblical kings. Men are made weak only by desire. the Bible warns men to forswear fornication (to retain spiritual power) and avoid seductive women entirely. Sexual desire flowed to women empowers the earth and its creatures (women) as well as its ruler (Satan). Women are not servants of the devil, though, since it’s men, who are serving their energy up, gladly. They are told they need to, they have to, that it’s good for them physically and socially. Father of Lies is whom? Look at all the lust over Hollywood celebrities and porn, two faces of the same location. Films intended for minors now have sex scenes and it’s considered normal. Men are the weak point in the species because earthliness (worldliness) is not a part of their natural energy, the lure is greater. Women already have a connection to nature via her menstrual cycles. So all major Satanist figures are men. Women have no seed to sacrifice (Onan’s sin) and no energy (active) to give.

Masculine women have sex for the pleasure, effeminate men for the ego trip. This is why slutty men and women have a cultural stigma as inferior quality in personal character, or whorish (or the rake, the cad etc), women as animal (base material nature) and men as trying to prove something about themselves by ‘notch counting’, objectifying the women out of personal insecurity (weakness, from degenerating the originally pure Jesus-like soul of the man, making soul ties that bind and curse the man’s life/witch women ‘cursing’ their prey, the Witch seducing the pure boy in the Wardrobe film, objectifying effete/weak men as animals to serve their pleasure – Circe to Pinocchio). Worldliness destroys men and nothing less. In Pinocchio, they were turned into donkeys/asses, related to horses. What does the Bible, Song of Solomon for example, say about such things? Other parts about anatomy? … I’ll let you draw your own conclusions, how they were using those boys once they became worldly… what were centaurs known for? https://www.boundless.org/relationships/solomons-line-on-premarital-sex/

https://biblehub.com/ezekiel/23-20.htm

That is the modern era, where male virginity is shamed. Male purity and power over any women mocked.

Traditionally?

Meanwhile, the alpha woman is desired irresistibly (read: LOYALLY) by the alpha male, and the alpha man like a king desires only his alpha woman like a queen. His possession technically (so he has more duties) but both powerful, each body belonging to the other as the Bible decrees. Aragorn and Arwen. K-selection. Prosperous order, God’s path. Two energies made one flesh in union. The two made whole, or HOLY. Good tree producing good fruit. All myths and scriptures describe the same things.

The mistake of degenerate ancient pagans was to make the fertility goddess a man, because they liked men. Man are not fertile. Women are fertile. Mother Earth is fertile. Material things are fertile physically e.g. Lady Luck for cash gambling. The goddess of the mint, where gold coins were made. Men are immaterial, the cerebral sex. A male fertility goddess is not worshipped for his sex (or in Zeus’ case, rape) but his virility. As mentioned before ‘the embrace of a god is always fertile’. But look what happened to the Greeks and Romans, compared to the Empires of Christian societies, where the man is pure (free of sin, free of corruption, clear-THINKING) before marriage like Jesus then devoted to the family by clear cerebral choice and oath. Patriarchies are made by controlled masculine energy (self-control > self-mastery > The Masterof the house/womb) and from this, lineages are produced, great houses and legacies, by working with the woman’s inherent materalism (taming the dragon of Medusa-like rage) or I guess woman’s prima materia, her womb. The womb is an oven in alchemy, called furnace, pregnancy is a ‘bun in the oven’. The woman (womb of man) has generative power as wet (yes – lunar cycles prove it) and earthbound by the male’s seed of heat (primal fire, desire) and air (his cerebral, immaterial nature from God, Lord of the Sky/Heavens). Earth+Water+Fire+Air = Life, through the vesica pisces portal of the vulva. …I guess I also just explained the reality of alchemy. This would be referenced in weddings, right? It’s in the Bible like ‘my cup runneth over’ as material prosperity, blessed by the grace of God, especially when one is kind to women (like Jesus!) as we see in stories* but what about the words spoken? What was chosen? Why?

SO what are the vows? Let’s test this.
To husband: honour and OBEY.
To wife: love and to CHERISH.
If either party neglects these gender roles, the marriage and its union is doomed.

The man agrees to desire her and be loyal to her. What is the most common cause of divorce? Adultery. Most common cheat? Husband. Not ‘having and HOLDING’ was he? Opposite of cherishing: rejection and humiliation. Why is Medusa angry? Rejection, broadly. Rage caused by men (here rape) kills men. It all fits. Hera, also angry. Why? Only when he cheats. Again, it all fits.
The woman agrees to respect him, honour his place above her (equal yoke of protection) because that in turn protects their fruit (children) in devoted sanctity and to provide this fully, she must obey his wishes because her vantage point is material, lower -but not inferior- than his pure (before marriage, chaste, Christ-like) spiritual origin in energy terms. Woman made of rib (material) and man made of God’s ‘dust’, (air) of pure spiritual will. I AM – is God’s name, God is his Will. His Will be done. Yada yada. Aside: It’s impossible for a woman to be corrupted by the physical nor fully understand the spiritual (no female disciples). Made complementary in energies, as a couple, to produce both sexes of progeny. The success or failure of any marriage thus falls squarely on the husband’s shoulders, as it is his duty and responsibility to lead the union. The vows aren’t just words, but an oath. A commitment of the very soul of man itself. No time for careerism or time with the boys, family comes first. Prov 31, study the husband, his qualities.

And if God had a sex himself, as the creator and birther of the birthers, God would technically be a woman, by his own choice (will) of role allocation. The linguistic has caused confusion since Babel.

God concept = male if in Heavens. Creating souls.
God physically = female if on Earth, creating bodies (so sent a son as progeny, a child not conceived by the materialism of sex, spiritually pure masculinity, a lamb). If Christianity’s God has you worship a total virgin, what would Satan? Satanism tries to turn Earth into Revelation’s Whore of Babylon, stealing power from God.

So if Satan had a body, Satan would also be a woman (watch Ninth Gate). Anything materialised is feminine. Naturally, God’s place is in Heaven, ‘He’ would never materialise to become a She, so it’s purely theoretical. But the Anti-Christ would likely claim to be, and hence be female.

Looks like Amber Heard. The sheer irony. Somebody tell Johnny.

Husbands are the maintaining energy between two planes of creation, with religion.

Two planes intersecting, forming a cross….

Religion gives the cross meaning.

Don’t take my word:

“What shall I say, O my son?

What, O son of my womb?

from Prov 31, included that wording in the Bible, not really a metaphor as often claimed, it’s God speaking to you as the maker of your maker (mother, Holy ‘Father’ to, Lording over-), also Prov 31:

“Do not spend your strength on women

or your vigor on those who ruin kings.”

spend their spiritual energy materially, thereby also old slang for ejaculation
much later, we had ‘spend a penny’, to urinate – the cost of public toilets. pre-dec.

and

“The heart of her husband trusts in her,

and he lacks nothing of value.”

AND he gains
AND

A husband’s devotion to his wife is his material expression of his love of God.

It’s all right there. You don’t see epic love stories of a woman’s devotion, do you?

re holy dynamic

Many daughters have done noble things,

but you surpass them all!”

Charm is deceptive and beauty is fleeting,

but a woman who fears the LORD is to be praised.” God’s creative power being a higher thing.

Main cause of marital arguments? Money. Section of life? Career. Careerism of either party kills marriages and their sanctity but especially male careerism, it’s abandonment of the primary spiritual commitment. Now you know why the 20th century pushed it on men as desirable to abuse one’s wife and children. How so? Why the Mad Men ideal (and why make that show?)… well, neglect is a form of abuse. The children get neglected. No paternal role model, marriage has no head. A headless body flailing about. Mindless, aimless, but bodily – easily tempted and tainted by worldly things. No wits to resist, no guidance or moral authority. Household has no direction, home empties. No active, masculine energy. Employer rapes it, so Fight Club references the distinct impression that modern bosses rape their male employees of their direction, purpose and life’s energy. Wife is abandoned. Feels undesirable. Her righteous anger at this incorrectly makes him think more retreat will fix it. Man is now effete seeming, passive energy. Emasculating himself. Children sense it, act out, no moral authority will punish them effectively. Children go astray morally. Viscious cycle. Marital failure spirals. Man may leave entirely, the deadbeat or remain absent spiritually as guiding marital force. In either case, union dissolves without his steady stream of energy placed on it. Man’s energy must go somewhere, hence secretary cliche. The reason behind argument, a vow made to place energy. Woman placed in home, energy present. Void of husband? Unloved, uncherished. Nothing to give to children without personal loss (as women = passive). Feels helpless without her man, turns to spiritual intoxicants to blot out misery through the physical, her realm (alcohol, food, sex, smoking, sloth). Life outcomes of absentee parent, kids: not good. The spiritual and the material are not separate. You’re just not looking. Husband/father corrupts his wife and their union’s fruit, children, by omission – neglect and spiritual abandonment. His resentment is self-directed but acted-out in a passive way – like a woman, flees. His leading duties are neglected, so the union erodes. Like Medea, women are rageful out of revenge for being wronged. Cannot be active, becomes more passive out of spite. May be parasitic. Crazed/feared woman always made that way by men in every story e.g. bunny boiler, former mistress or wife.

It applies to a great deal of pop culture. Most people don’t see it.

ONE MORE TEST

Example? Name another cliche trope re women. Love triangle. Symbol: irresistible plus masculine, evolved competition. She gets the best mate, the one who desires her most and, here’s the purpose, would sacrifice the most for his family with her (i.e. God’s spiritual purpose of devotion and loyalty in men). So loyalty in men is praised, cowardice disgraced but there’s no female equivalent of cowardice.
If you look at Hera’s rage in myth at a body-changer admitting women enjoy sex more, that’s why fertility gods are correctly women – never heard of a man have multiple orgasms. Meanwhile, a man’s pleasure in life and with wife is in the CHILDREN, his lineage and legacy. Male depression and suicide dovetails nicely with the lowest marriage (and reproduction) rates ever. BOOM.

Blow me Peterson.

I do wonder how many male suicides have no (surviving) children. Women simply caretake pre-existing family.

*Fact: Men unkind to women suffer materially their whole lives, self-cursed by the material and their rejection of its God-designed representatives. The material is not wrong, sick or evil per se – only perceived so by the weakness of effeminate men who cannot control/influence it and thusly, feel impotent. If you get the dragon, you did something to deserve it. If Lady Luck hates you, start being a gentleman to woo her. Civilized cultures raise men as gents and the ladies arrange themselves, reflecting like the moon to their sun, the quality and calibre of their society’s men. That’s all a society is. The quality of its procreating men, the fathers and husbands. THEREFORE, EVERY SOCIETY IS A PATRIARCHY. A strong (healthy) or weak (dysfunctional) one. Their control of that role. Is it too much, too little? Is there proper energy exchange? Chivalry isn’t historic, it describes a sophisticated power dynamic of holy energies. It was a Christian series of metaphors. Only the West nailed this, for a while. Look what we achieved with it. Then we let it slip, for domineering over the feminine to ‘prove something’ (egocentric stupidity, selfish, too desperate, ultimately impotent) or degeneracy (self-weakening of men via desires rather than morally weakening women, the soft watery mirrors of solar, fiery light). Weakened men (clue: mutilated manhood, less pleasing to women in studies) prefer to push degeneracy to entice their fellow man competition into destroying themselves.

But if anyone asks, I don’t know nothing.

What PUAs get wrong about ‘alpha wolves’

https://broadly.vice.com/en_us/article/pick-up-artists-dont-understand-what-alpha-even-meansas-evidenced-by-wolves

Everything?

Alpha means being a Patriarch – married, traditional, monogamous, loyal, fertile.

They’re trying desperately to signal K-selected traits with an r-sexuality.
That’s why it fails. No, you fail, you’re inferior socially, found wanting.
It’s easier to signal being a good father and run (cowards) than to actually become a man.
There is also the matter that Alpha is an animal aristocracy, not only are you born into it but high fitness isn’t limited to males, there are Alpha females obviously because the Alphas of the pack are K-selected aka the Alpha Male only lies with his female. This isn’t a lion/pride arrangement and in prides, the lionesses hunt (work).
Protean displays as mixed messages?
Protean displays are done by defensive cowards when faced with a predator…. actually yeah, PUA < most women.

‘But it’s the alpha/beta hierarchy that’s really having a renaissance online. And its current use completely ignores the science behind it. So I went to a wolf park to study their “on the prowl” behavior.
“[Alpha is] a term that was coined in biology, just the first Greek letter in the Greek alphabet, just a convenience thing,” says Monty Sloan, senior animal curator and staff photographer at Wolf Park. “And it’s been kind of undermined by public perception of what that might mean.” First of all, wolf packs have two alphas: a male and a female. “There’s always two alphas in a pack. That’s what defines a pack. The pack might be two wolves, but socially, they are dominant. They are alphas. If more wolves enter the pack, they’ll submit to those two. And what you’ll see is a linear hierarchy develop.”‘

Like a ….class system?

Alpha is a power couple.

If you’re not married to an alpha while being one yourself, you’re not Alpha with a capital ‘A’, at most potential.

I’ve been trying to correct them on the ethology for years.

‘These two alphas are usually a breeding pair, and in wolves found in the Midwest, wolf packs are usually a nuclear family. This is why some wolf researchers have abandoned the term alpha altogether, like David Mech, whose book The Wolf popularized the idea of an alpha wolf in the 1970s. “[T]hey are merely breeders, or parents, and that’s all we call them today,” he writes on his academic website. Rather than one alpha male having some harem of lady-wolves at his beck and call because he’s so strong and butch, the alpha male is daddy.
You don’t fight to get to the alpha position, you usually inherit it. You’re usually in the right place at the right time,” says Sloan. “All you have to do is have offspring, and the offspring are going to grow up submitting to their parents. That’s all it takes.”‘

K-SELECTION.
Genetic superiority, proven by wits.

Genetic suicides or deadbeats can NEVER, EVER BE ALPHA.

I’ve mentioned the Darwin of why on here, it’s the Parental Investment theory.

Do they listen? No. That would involve real self-improvement and the sunk cost fallacy of bullshit e-books has wormed into their brain. Love is not a game unless you’re crazy. Taylor Swift crazy.

‘According to To Be An Alpha, a website dedicated to helping men become the alphas of their pack, alpha males that take control are “vocal and loud” and “aren’t afraid to get physical.”‘

Obnoxious and boyishly immature? Entitled?
They’re trying to rebrand a gobby chav teen as the epitome of masculinity?

‘Dominant breeding wolves aren’t afraid to get physical, but they don’t start fights either. “You don’t typically see a dominant wolf going around, parading around acting tough and aggressively confronting the other wolves,” says Sloan. “When you do see that, it’s usually a sign of a lack of confidence. Ironically, the animal is not very confident if it’s doing that, and it’s not comfortable at all.”‘

Freud. Signalling masculinity, like talking about it, means you aren’t. You’re lying and hoping people won’t forget you exist. That’s narcissistic, that’s solipsistic (wait, no, just egocentric and selfish). The abuse of ‘solipsism’, which funny at first as intellectual posturing, now grates.

Any man who must say I am King, isn’t a King?

If you insist on picking a sex that leads the Alpha debate, it’s female.

Another major misconception is that alpha males are dominant over alpha females. “The dominance between the sexes is not that important to them,” says Sloan.
The wolves I visited at Wolf Park were a group of siblings: Kanti, Bicho, and Fiona. Kanti is the alpha male, Fiona is the alpha female. She is also dominant over Kanti. “If there is an altercation between the female and Kanti, Kanti is on his back submitting,” says Sloan. “Even though she is much smaller than him, she is the dominant wolf in the pack.” This is typical of the packs in Wolf Park.’

tfw literal animals are more socially intelligent than you, Roosh V
It’s Bateman’s Principle, the mother makes babies and in K-terms, that’s all that matters. Eggs > Sperm
Women are more selective, women need to be protected but this is from other males, sexual competition.
How many men would die for their woman/children? How many of those are men?
Yet they claim they want a Patriarchy. Surrrre. Patriarchy isn’t male liberty, it’s male enslavement to women. At least, in Darwinian terms but at least the good men survive biologically. Women’s lib was liberation for the sexuality of men to fuck and run. Sexual Revolution was terrible for women, great for men. If you take away our vote and retain your own, all the legs will be shutting. And then other men will take yours, based on history.

“It turns out, not even peacocks truly peacock. We may think their visual display is pretty enchanting, but peahens aren’t always looking at the display. They’re listening. Peacocks vibrate their tail feathers in two distinct patterns; they twerk, essentially.”

shh, I enjoyed letting them make fools of themselves and it makes them easier to avoid
God Bless Ed Hardy for that.

Peacocking is actually about male attractiveness, genetic beauty i.e. the gym does nothing, lookism is real.

Are modern artists, con artists?

You be the judge. This has been going on at least a century.

http://www.artinsociety.com/the-controversies-of-constantin-brancusi-princess-x-and-the-boundaries-of-art.html

In person, ordinary lighting:

More like Princess XXX.

See also:

http://livehopething.blogspot.co.uk/2015/02/tin-of-shit-valued-at-8000000.html

“Critics of modern art will at least applaud the irony. The Tate Gallery has paid £22,300 of public money for a work that is, quite literally, a load of excrement.”

At least they’re not taking the piss.


That’s this one.

Similar postmodern horrors at http://www.oddee.com/item_98781.aspx

You think the poo emoji is bad? They want to make an Emoji Movie.
You haven’t seen the like of Shit Fountain.

http://weburbanist.com/2010/12/19/poop-culture-11-examples-of-excellent-excrement-art/

21st century. No flying cars, this degeneracy.

Some of it is self-aware in a good way.

“Seeing your ideas live on in the works of others”
If feminism were this witty, I’d be one.

I know that one by experience.

I see you rip-off merchants, and I won’t be blogging (here) forever. I’m getting tired of the meme thing and looking into other arts, one day I’ll submerge from this.
Good luck finding me again to pinch things wholesale when that happens.

 

Manosphere wrong on evolution again

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2015/11/the-science-of-sex-most-important.html

I mentioned parental choice obliterates most of their theories. In favour of Dad-types. In evolutionary terms, the man who reproduces is the Alpha. Notches count for nada. It’s like the spergs who record a tally of all the sexual acts they’ve done with a woman. Like, do you want a medal? It’s somewhere here just check the evolution tag, probably. Maybe the little girls marrying creepy old men myth.

No matter how much evidence stacks against their silly little notions of supremacy, they’ll never admit they’re being unscientific. Sometimes, we’re worse than the feminists.

This aims to be a neat summary. Neat explanations are frequently superior.

The system of parental sexual choice seems to be unique to humans – which makes it a matter of exceptional biological interest: we may be the only species that has not evolved to choose our own mates.

<laughs in CH’s direction>

…Another way of describing this is that parents screen or filter prospective spouses – and individual preferences only work within this pre-screened and filtered population. Consequently, modern men and women are not adapted to select a partner from an unscreened population – and not equipped with the proper instincts to assist their choice; so they are vulnerable to deception and exploitation.

Much like a…. game….

…In sum (and in terms of their biological fitness) modern men are too worried about working hard, and not worried enough about meeting and impressing individual women.

The opposite of MGTOW. (lmao)

So men and women who are apparently, in biological and historical terms, extremely well-qualified as potential husbands and wives, remain unmarried and childless in large and increasing numbers.

Social Alphas.

…Another omission is the role of intoxication by alcohol and drugs. Much of modern sexual behaviour is initiated in parties, bars and nightclubs; and occurs more-or-less under the influence of intoxicants – and this in itself deranges delicate brain functioning and destroys the benefits of behavioural adaptations that may have taken centuries or millennia to evolve.

An intoxicated person is maladaptive.

The first thing a traditional society would do is ban nightclubs.

Repost: ‘Alpha genes’, Patriarchy and the Alpha Female

Why? Easier to search for. The reddit trolls can do their worst (bitch). Slight edits made.

Yup gentiles are lesser beings

The ‘alpha genes’ are the ones that get passed on in a Patriarchy. The genes of the titular Patriarch, the dad. Cads are scum in these societies, along with tarts, not fit to lick their work boots. The beta male in a Patriarchy is the man who cannot or will not become a responsible husband and father. They’re the status level of the Japanese herbivores. Alpha genes build and reaffirm their own societal structure, they aren’t cucked out to the reckless hedons.

Cad and tarts who cannot settle down (even settling with one another) will have an atrocious later life. Nobody will support them. There is no support network. Those who will not, for whatever reason, will not be given the opportunities by Patriarchs, created by Patriarchs, that should go to the other Patriarchs (this is why men only got hired in certain fields beyond requirement, because women weren’t Patriarchs either) in the hope of future reciprocal investment or family connection (by marriage). The old boy’s network has no room for bachelors. They have no skin in the game, they have no social proof. They cannot get on professionally, nor will any respectable family introduce them to their daughters. You’ve heard the idea of hiring a man preferentially because he had a family to support, right? The Patriarchs’ network at play. Just like voting rights being accorded by property ownership aka societal investment required to support a family. This was also open to women once they could inherit prior to being open to all men (read: the nomads asking we end universal suffrage are retarded). Once rooted in a place for life, you’d better behave. It’s a check, it’s all a check. Pass or fail. Like the Church law. That’s why we have religion. And God is a literal father. God is also All-Father, Lord of the Universe.

laughing rdj crack up

I love it when (always male) atheists brag and you can almost see the religious people in the room shrinking from their lives and refusing to help them in future.

The ‘alpha female’ does exist, much to the hatred of cads because she shows them up. Feminists have tried to emulate this woman unsuccessfully by mimicking her external appearance (this doesn’t work with virile men either). She is respected by these men, these Patriarchs, and allowed as an exception despite her sex (which they graciously overlook) because she fits the criteria and behaviour (character, honour, must support a family for practical reasons) and doesn’t cause trouble. She deserves to be there. Powerful men aren’t misogynistic, that’s from a position of role insecurity like all sexism. They look forward to additional competition, in fact. She becomes a woman at home as a man ceases to be a professional upon leaving work, there is role flexibility, the family and its structure and support are important.  Alpha females are rare (the product of two alpha parents and their quality) but demonstrably exist.

Weak men (virginTOW, many PUA) hate them the most for supplanting ‘their’ role they refuse to take up and further insult, out-competing them. They will imply they are promiscuous (in spite of contrary evidence) because they need to believe it would be possible for them to achieve it themselves (and reaffirm their ego) and so insult their lucky mate too (like saying he’s being cucked when he clearly isn’t and we live in a world of DNA testing).

Why do they do this?

IF the barriers to entry aren’t one sex (m/f) like they mistakenly thought it was (told by feminists harhar) but the other sex (promiscuity/quality scale, r or K) their worldview collapses. They become ‘bad men’. They fail in life. It was entirely their choice, they cannot blame women for it. The music stops.

I fucked up, they know subconsciously. What do I do? I must fix this. What can I do? What are they doing?

Their reaction to this is a furious rush to Have it All (settle in the case of feminists and ‘players’) and convince themselves they’ve beat the system (sound familiar?). Predictably, they fail because people see them for what they are – desperate and faking it (we use various psychiatric terms nowadays).

They can’t stand happy monogamy. They hate it. Of course they can’t fake it. They burned out their pleasure circuits on meaningless drinking, drugs and one night stands. They are incapable of fully pair bonding anymore and until recently, saw this as a sign of their success as men (not being tied down) because they were lied to about the ideal nature of men (not sociopaths using people up like soul food), when it betrays a broken lack of human empathy and connection in the cold light of day. Of course no one in their right mind would take them after their ruin and shame. If they do manage to trick a poor sap (see the Simple decision game theory post), they will still cheat. If their spouse is Mr or Mrs Perfect they will cheat even more. They hate their spouse and they hate their marriage. They deserve divorce. Both sexes deserve to be divorce raped because they breached the contract and entered into it dishonestly. This is why society (Patriarchy) pressures marriage – K opportunity arises from it. These people are brats. The support network and opportunities dry up and they blame…. the system. Oh what a shock. It isn’t their fault again.

Myth: There are no successful Matriarchs (and by extension, Matriarchies).

Matriarch societies like Italy do pretty well. They’re at First World standard. Much of Europe is Matriarchal, the women run the house. If you disagree, you don’t know Europe. The men wanted to strike out because the home was secured. We all know about Tiger Moms by now. Genius women were allowed to play with the Big Boys – so long as they didn’t try to lower or alter the standards. Hello, Hypatia, anyone? Supreme BAMF. The beta males of that society thought she made such a disgrace of their manhood by existing they tore her apart. She’s the Patron Saint of the Alpha Female. Being an alpha female is more dangerous for this reason. Both women and weaker men are trying to take you down (this fed into the narrative of oppression). Many limit their influence to the privacy of the home for this reason (and we never hear about them in MSM because they’re happy).

War and r/K

That’s the connection I see.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/nation-wimps/201510/the-mating-game-is-changing-and-you-wont-believe-how

A paucity of men would naturally recreate this condition post-war. The remaining men would be the fittest by Darwinian standards, connote status and unconsciously wish to repopulate. Yes, we called this the Baby Boom.

Women do not like sharing their resource, husband, as men do not like consolidating theirs (on one woman, if they are not in love). Men see women as a valuable resource when scarce (a society where most were married and time on the market ‘in society’ was short) but in modern times, most young people are on the shelf, and have advances from their elders to contend with too.

It won’t remain this way. Already I see this happening in real time.

As resources (economic) contract, women will find their voice and demand (marriage or nothing) what they wanted to ask to begin with. Women don’t want to date. It gets boring. Neither do men. Both want something else. What else do the men offer now? ‘Muh dick’ is going to be a sick reply, a base animal response, some women will no doubt become prostitutes to fill the demand when the economy tanks and continue to fund their lifestyle. This is the traditional way and it’s going to happen. Men are not entitled to sex (read: female fertility) but believe this because it’s been practically free for so long. They have forgotten its value and with it the value of women. Why grow up? Why be a real boy when they have all the ‘rights’ and none of the responsibilities? Women are not entitled to male resources either but many aren’t even being given the chance at marriage, and the divorce system can be understood as a form of social reparations from this. It encourages marital settling in women, because if it doesn’t work out with the manchild Mr Second Best, you get a cash bonus from his failure to be a fit husband and can try again, with a persuasive dowry.

The original fault lies with men. If they refuse to grow up and lead, the other issues usher forth.

Feminism has robbed women of the confidence to ask that ONE important question (you want to be a housewife???) and subsequently taken away many of the attributes a man would seek in a wife for good measure.

Further, at least some of what is being reported as rape stems from regret over drink-fueled encounters devoid of emotional connection.

Bingo. Alcohol makes people desperate. Women don’t want casual sex, feminism told them they did. It’s the man’s fault, men have the active role and refuse it (they won’t ‘man up’), then wonder why society is slowly collapsing around their ears. He deceives her, to get sex, then he wonders why she uses his lies against him in a trial.

I describe you, you hate me. Really, you hate yourself and everyone knows it.

Promises are verbal contracts, college students are mature enough to know this. Consent is based on verbal conditions, so promises become vitally important. The seduction laws will end up coming back in and that will be the end of PUA forever. Hallelujah.

A symptom of this manchild phenomena is that women have had to become more masculine to compensate, simply to survive in an atomized society alone. Certainly, there is a little more competition but it’s simply out in the open now. We’re told it’s empowering to be a bitch. Any man wishing to criticize women for doing what it takes to survive in a world without men is a male gamine, a manic pixie dream boy, yet to grow up.

They meet a guy, he calls every couple of months, they spend a night or two together each time, and then they’re miserable because they’re emotionally attached to him and want more from him—for which he might even call them “needy” or “greedy,” should they summon the courage to ask.

That level of entitled bullshit from men (love, affection, sex, cooking, company – the role of a wife, free) is going to fly straight out the window and clear into the Sun, never to be heard from again. She plays her poker chips too early and loses them. Women are beginning to see their fault and Millennials are beginning to reject feminism.

The imbalance is being corrected.

“Relationship preferences and sexual behavior of individuals are responsive to context,” Schacht says. “Men want fundamentally different things from relationships when males are rare than when they are abundant. The rare-male male is the stereotypical fling-seeking cad we expect him to be. However, the abundant-male male is the committed, devoted male from the age of Camelot.”

Patriarchy is coming back.

The manboys should be scared. A boy has a natural enemy – man.

p.s. This explains the entitled character of the stereotypical Baby Boomer.

p.p.s. The ‘alpha genes’ are the ones that get passed on in a Patriarchy. The genes of the titular Patriarch, the dad. Cads are scum in these societies, along with tarts, not fit to lick their work boots. The beta male in a Patriarchy is the man who cannot or will not become a responsible husband and father. Alpha genes build and reaffirm their own societal structure, they aren’t cucked out to the reckless hedons. Cad and tarts who cannot settle down (even settling with one another) will have an atrocious later life. Nobody will support them. There is no support network. Those who will not, for whatever reason, will not be given the opportunities by Patriarchs, created by Patriarchs, that should go to the other Patriarchs (this is why men only got hired in certain fields beyond requirement, because women weren’t Patriarchs either) in the hope of future reciprocal investment or family connection (by marriage). The old boy’s network has no room for bachelors. They cannot get on professionally, nor will any respectable family introduce them to their daughters. You’ve heard the idea of hiring a man preferentially because he had a family to support, right? The Patriarchs network at play. Just like voting rights being accorded by property ownership aka societal investment to support a family. Once rooted in a place for life, you’d better behave. It’s a check, it’s all a check. Pass or fail.

laughing rdj crack up

The ‘alpha female’ does exist, much to the hatred of cads because she shows them up. Feminists have tried to emulate this woman unsuccessfully. She is respected by these men, these Patriarchs, and allowed as an exception despite her sex because she fits the criteria and behaviour (character, honour, must support a family for practical reasons) and doesn’t cause trouble. She becomes a woman at home as a man ceases to be a professional upon leaving work, there is role flexibility, the family and its structure and support are important.  Alpha females are rare (the product of two alpha parents and their quality) but demonstrably exist. Weak men (virginTOW, many PUA) hate them the most for supplanting ‘their’ role they refuse to take up and further insult, out-competing them. They will imply they are promiscuous (in spite of contrary evidence) because they need to believe it would be possible for them to achieve it themselves (and reaffirm their ego) and so insult their lucky mate too (like saying he’s being cucked when he clearly isn’t and we live in a world of DNA testing). IF the barriers to entry aren’t one sex (m/f) like they mistakenly thought it was but the other sex (promiscuity/quality scale, r or K) their worldview collapses. They become ‘bad men’. They fail in life. It was entirely their choice, they cannot blame women for it. The music stops. Their reaction to this is a furious rush to Have it All (settle in the case of feminists and ‘players’) and convince themselves they’ve beat the system (sound familiar?). Predictably, they fail because people see them for what they are – desperate and faking it. They can’t stand happy monogamy. They hate it. Of course they can’t fake it. Of course no one in their right mind would take them after their ruin and shame. If they do manage to trick a poor sap (see the Simple decision game theory post), they will still cheat. If their spouse is Mr or Mrs Perfect they will cheat even more. They hate their spouse and they hate their marriage. They deserve divorce. The support network and opportunities dry up and they blame…. the system.

p.p.p.s. You know it’s bad when Roosh, of all people, suddenly wants to get married. He senses the window closing. He doesn’t get it – you can’t switch sides. You can’t change teams. As an adult, you choose by your actions and on those he will be judged. We don’t ask job applicants whether they think they should get it, we look at their CV. Self-respecting women will look at the way he’s treated women, the verbs he uses like bang as if we’re ketchup bottles and make up some excuse.