Not even on a date

http://www.agcwebpages.com/BLINDITEMS/2019/MARCH.html

Don’t Drink Near Him: Over the past few years, there have always been whispers of what this A+ list mostly movie actor was like back in high school. They were believable because he had exhibited those same behaviors for several of the years when he first started acting. He would be drinking with a woman and be charming and when she would get drunk he would take her home or to his car and he would rape her. It happened often enough here in town that he wasn’t allowed in some bars. None of the women ever pressed charges, but word quickly spread. Several of his celebrity relationships ended abruptly because of how he treated them. A few weeks ago, I ran into someone who went to high school with the actor and asked about the whispers I had always heard. She said every female in school was warned to never drink alone with him or even near him. She knew multiple friends in school who had not listened to that advice and ended up unable to fight him off because they were too drunk or passed out. Two of those teens became pregnant and one carried the baby to term. The actor knows about the baby but has never recognized it as his own except when he gleefully signed away his parental rights when a man she married chose to adopt the child as his own. The actor bragged that he never had to pay a dime of child support.George Clooney

So much for a game, alcohol is a rape drug.
The company Markle keeps, eh? What a proud feminist.
Don’t let him run for POTUS.

Remember, those women would’ve also been minors. Virgins too, no minimum age.

There’s a superhoe with a similar MO (finding them drunk in clubs) that keeps hiding behind the same-looking women. These people are sick. This type are always called “charming”.

Adding alcohol to unwitting victim’s drinks is hardly difficult but it is low.

Predators don’t care for who but HOW. Typical rules of sexuality do not apply.

How women feel being chatted up

Picture the bus or train creep.

They act like you engaged them in a conversation. That, or you owe them in their mind because forming a sentence is the new standard of bravery for numales. 0-60 or you’re a “bitch”, or, ironically a “whore”, which is who they should be soliciting for that. (Why don’t women like modern men? Maybe because you won’t stop insulting us for having human boundaries?)
Like a dog with a chew toy, they refuse to let you politely leave.
Nothing is more inane than how much they supposedly lift, how much they supposedly make, how good a ____ they supposedly are…

Inwardly:

This applies even if we fancy you at first. The interest level drops. Modern men are more vapid than the average woman in any previous time period. We’re instinctively repulsed by this. Men needed courting so we could slowly care about your bullshit.
What do you think the common whine ‘but he’s different!’ is referring to?

You’re insulting us. We aren’t shallow. You clearly are (with men, it’s science and porn doesn’t help). You get rejected. You call us shallow, despite turning down someone superficially a good catch. You brought it up?

Do you cuss out companies if they don’t select you for a job?

No, that would be stupid. Women talk, so this isn’t any less stupid.

Related to the deceptive guy who claims to be friendzoned (you said you just wanted to be friends, you said you didn’t want to date, you invited hang-outs…) mixed messages weirdos, becoming an ogre that totally justifies your rapedar instinct in .5 milliseconds – you were never in the running because women cannot think with a penis we do not have

At least they can’t complain of something else like strangerzoned. Entitled prissy bitches. It has never been socially acceptable to solicit people in the street. You aren’t arrested, that doesn’t make it normal or acceptable. You’re signalling that you lack social connections or skills to get any woman to pay social attention to you without chasing her. Literally, physically stalking her down a street and yes, it is stalking. At most, they offer you their number, you don’t have to ask. This is how socializing works and you don’t automatically assume it’s a sexual thing. Not everyone is desperate or looking.

OR

this, the apex of the loser pyramid

No means no but no also means fuck off when you have to repeat it.

You can’t change it. It’s biologically impossible. In thinking you can change it, there’s something wrong with you or you’re a rapist who doesn’t actually care what the lady thinks.

Inwardly:

We have a phrase “…who are you?” trans. for Americans: you are nothing to me, leave me alone.

It’s the original stay in your lane. Bosses use it too, it isn’t sexual. It can also mean stop talking if a person must be in a meeting room. It works by the power of awkward silence and body language, like …women.

Then after intruding on personal space in public (every society has rules), being rude repeatedly and trying to force interactions (up to physical contact, unwanted, unsolicited, technically illegal*), you present us with a choice to accept this hostile takeover bid or reject you.

Yes, I wonder why the rejection rate for cold approaches is almost 100%.

It’s a mystery for all of time.

I have witnessed women troll men who come up to them. Wastehistime was a response to wastehertime, if you look it up. As in, if you want to play emotional head games, women will win. I don’t advocate talking to anyone this desperate because as well as verbal hostility (ugly) they are probably literally violent.

Ask yourself, since male upper body strength is twice that of women, approximately the same divide as regular men to NFL players;

Why should we have to let down gently an entitled stranger who wasn’t smacked as a child?

…Exactly, they’re not our problem. We escape the situation.

The men complaining about women who complain about harassment is like playing spot the vegan but reducing your rape odds. They could go to a gay bar for a month and report on what it’s like…..? They never do.

What to do?

Don’t approach strangers randomly. We can see the stink lines of desperation. We’re embarrassed for you. Think: do they talk to me like a child? Well, you don’t know this is something humans don’t do. So yeah. Valid.

*you can’t just go up grabbing people, that’s assault
if it’s only friendly, you’d do it with men as often

You want a connection, expand your friend groups. Yes, hard work, like all relationships. This also controls for people on your own level who will respond to you.

Note:

Bitch is now a compliment solely because these losers have changed the accepted definition of it.

No, Peterson, no

I tried watching some basic videos I’d never normally click on as a test.
Topics I knew from reading and speaking to experts.
This was the average level of offender. Little scientism neat stories there.

Raises no eyebrows with the Pitbull IQ host who talks too much.

LISTEN AND BELIEVE.

ANYTHING I LIKE IS EVOLUTION.

What is free will, the law or the naturalistic fallacy?

This is him without prep, he only sounds smart when he’s prepared for the conversations.

Jordan Peterson either thinks he’s smarter than he is (read more) or he’s trolling internet intellectuals for shekels, knowing they won’t look it up because who cares about the truth? I bet 2.

He is not an evobio guy, you’d be better off asking Richard Dawkins!
Someone, on Twitter! Please!

The men wouldn’t have been allowed close enough to GET rejected.
Society invented courting and bachelorhood to keep order, once all males were allowed to survive for labour.

Hypergamy doesn’t even mean what these people think, it’s a marriage construct. Nothing to do with sex, especially sterile sex. Biology of fertility and children (evolution) doesn’t apply to the infertile or sterile. STDs don’t apply to monks for the same reason. Where do they get it???

Marriage construct because marriage is how you access resources? Duh?

We have twice as many female ancestors because 1. they did less stupid things, 2. they were more connected to tribe, 3. no intersexual competition that ends in death, 4. no survival based rite of passage (throwing them out when of age) and 5. no need to display to the opposite sex. Most men would have died beforehand or been killed in the attempt to access them long before social rejection was possible. Tribes were NOT PC. There was NO benefit of the doubt, especially for a stranger trying to access the nubile, do not be dense. Men were known to be rapists and that is why rape developed as a strategy, the losers who wouldn’t be permitted mating opportunities any other way. The contempt for everyone in that. Our disgust is a wholesale rejection of our being.

This age is incredibly eugenic because the rapist types are usually sterile/frigid/impotent, pick a term, the kids don’t breed/are aborted or the woman is on the Pill. This is the most eugenic time period in living memory, and in all of human history. It’s a cleansing. Trust Malthus to take out the trash that appears successful in false conditions (socialism). Liberals aren’t even breeding, smart ones!

He’ll never ever talk about that. He would drag his raw balls over broken glass first.

Women would get a say, but more the parents. It wasn’t just the father. Brothers might take the father’s place, say, for a fight, but the mother held sway over the brothers. Experience and blood connection counted.

Mother Nature is a eugenicist. It’s about quality and survival.

Human genocide and rape after war aren’t accounted for either, despite occurring in chimps so he does know, I can assure you. Plenty of men are poor quality, stop stroking their cock Peterson. We aren’t “meant to” evolve for anything, ask JF, a biologist. It’s such a romantic view? What a strawman. Courtly love is recent you dumb fuck? Like I could disprove that with wikipedia, it’s mostly a French thing too, what, did nobody else evolve? Was the memo to the whole species written in Frog?

The sneaky fucker thing is rape because they have to present themselves dishonestly, knowing their poor quality. They want to force acceptance. You’ll always have the stupid ones as exception thinking it’s about body language or some shit like “alpha dominance” *cough* but even they know to hide, it’s instinct and hardly a social thing, they would sneak into the tribe once the real men were away hunting and the females were vulnerable. They rarely interacted with the men. They’d also be deadbeats after any rape, classic r-type. A male just wanting sex and no investment is not viable, in society, to society, to women or in biology.

This is painful to watch.

Mammals are different. Harlow’s monkeys?

Taking a real thing, interesting and twisting it into shit. It’s like modern art with science. I hope you’re not paying this man.

Of course heroes exist but they hardly bred more than average, Genghis Khan was a rapist. This is known. The shitty males weren’t romancing themselves with stories, what are you on, Jordan? What are you smoking?

We tell stories about bad people far more than good ones. Fairy tales? Old ones?

Beta male has three meanings

  1. shit internet one, means nothing. Used here.
  2. Evobio, deference but not sexual, social with sometimes sexual outcomes, it’s seen in the military and chosen, earned. Royalty’s ancestors were at some point battle victors.
  3. Sexual attractiveness, subpar but chosen nonetheless. This is sometimes used to refer to parents, a little inaccurately. Evolutionally, breeders win. All parents are in the running for alpha but it’s based on quality. Beta bux is not true, as I’ve linked to studies before. Parental Investment shows that doting fathers have better odds than the sneaky fuckers who call themselves alpha but are truly deadbeats. You could relate it to masculinity but it isn’t bravado or aggression, those are low class status signals to get attention. Masculinity has always been the Patriarch, the father figure who stays and is a good man. Greece fell because Zeus fucked around, pagans are scrubbers.

Male feminists (SJWs) have many issues, I cannot list them all here.

They hate themselves, it needn’t be about the women, that’s why they often wanna become women. Trying to gain trust based on lies is the act of a sexual predator, which most douchebags viewing this would call alpha “game” (the game is lying) because they believe all the tropes about cavemen in cartoons, when rapists were brained with a rock (yes, I agree, let’s do that again). You are not smarter than them larping Johnny Bravo. Did anyone respect him?

Empathy in dating women

Higher EQ, maybe listen.

Guys, Here’s What It’s Actually Like To Be A Woman

Plenty of this is factually false like calling hook-ups “short term mating” to feel less like a manwhore, when that term refers to producing children, from a brief courtship, then abandonment and nothing else. Hence the mating part. It also assumes a man can understand women when you’d never see this article written the other way around, women are too sensitive to be that obnoxious. However, the physical risk is medical and true. Anyway, the fact it exists shows up a huge problem men used to understand: modern men lack empathy. They’re broken on it, defective in feeling and displaying it. They don’t even care for their country, family, one another or themselves. There’s a general callousness. It doesn’t come from women.

Minor note: Scientific misogyny is actually worse, because it deceives (everyone). Using big words and bluffing the findings won’t make you right. We still don’t live in that world. Anyone saying it’s easy doesn’t understand.

Women don’t really discuss their everyday problems because they are so common.

Either we expect to get disbelieved, told we should adopt male feelings (we’re not gay and that’s actually a good category argument for mansplaining) or the ever-present fear of harm. Not just physical harm but reputation damage (men gossip and it is vindictive), emotional harm from insults because broflake throws a mantrum and can’t handle rejection, those sort of things.

Confidence isn’t what they want, they want to act conceited and have everyone roll out the red carpet for their entitled ass. It doesn’t happen, narcissistic rage does. Do you want to be on the receiving end of that, for the crime of having a nice ass?

If it’s so scary to talk to the opposite sex (no), you wouldn’t do it. Nobody is forcing you. That’s your gender role and your personal expectations, nothing to do with women. Don’t blame us. We don’t want strangers coming up to us, and in my culture it used to be partially illegal and socially deeply frowned upon. Edwardian women used to be able to beat men with umbrellas for insulting our dignity, there was one newspaper clipping, and they’d frequently wear those gigantic hat pins to stab men on the Transport who got too fruity. Self-defence, legal as a gun should be.

The expectation women should think like men and men are objectively correct on the wholly subjective subject of feelings (not to mention another autonomous human being’s, the definition of possessive) is the reason a lot of those dating guru types are forever alone. Not just single but actively repellent. It’s gaslighting, like the friendzone fraud who keep trying to repeat until she gives in: you want me, I’m best for you, you’ll never do better. Well, that’s her decision and considering you only want her body, you’re averse to putting a ring on it and all you wanna do is bad things to it, you are totally wrong on all counts.

Women don’t work like that.

Again, I have to painstakingly explain this every time the subject of women comes up, you cannot ask a man how women think and assume he’s correct, you can’t even do that with a single woman, there’s a range of normal. Anecdotal fallacy, please stop.

Women don’t work like that.

They are not the same.

This is good, this is fine, this is biological.

Yet the idiots claim women are just as lustful as men, if not more (ignore the rarity of male hookers) and cannot be trusted (look at abuse and crime stats, just look).

With exceptional cognitive dissonance, they go on to say women are aliens and need to be treated in various subhuman ways because it isn’t abuse if they secretly like it, according to the abuser?

On a purely intellectual and logical basis, they are full of shit.
That’s the mindset and behaviour of a misogynist (and yes, the sexes reverse).
Simplest explanation? Occam’s Razor?
The men who are bad with women never consider the fact the entire sex is seeing them clearly and they are in fact bad. Bad prospects, bad at being men and bad suitors. We evolved for this, we evolved to spot this and swerve. All that shit you complain about, the coldness to a total stranger, lying about having a boyfriend, fake numbers and names, the flaking, it’s to get enough distance so by the time the rejection kicks in you can’t kick us. This is good and sensible and right, you’re a spoiled entitled brat if you expect random women to just trust you, randomly. Trust takes years to develop. Instead they say whatever’s convenient to their feelings (actually ego, they don’t really have feelings that aren’t self involved), because the probability of getting punched by a man you rejected (it happens) is totally the same as hearing a word you needed to hear a long time ago and will never take for an answer.

If you don’t respect no, you’ll never hear a real Yes.

This is your fault, as instigator and then disrespecting the etiquette involved in trying to chat someone up.

In an era of acid attacks for rejection and shootings for pathetic scum like Elliot, women are right to avoid men until further notice. Nobody is entitled to approval. Nobody is entitled to respect, but in public, there is a line, there is a wall everybody deserves to be respected, the perimeter of personal space.

Women approaching other women in public is weird and even that isn’t sexual. We made it illegal for charity workers to harass us in public so no, Nice Guy act won’t work.

Women are not like porn. Porn stars themselves need to be paid to act like that. Even they aren’t like that. You’d think this is obvious, but no.

They never treat men like dirt by the way, because they know they’d get hit if they talked all that shit.

If women catch onto this intellectually, there’s apparently something wrong with us.

Nope, you all look dumb, and it’s nothing to do with us. Stop acting black and pull your pants up.
They never mention all those workplace deaths are typically hubris.
Better known as vainglory.

Look at the long term mate choice studies.
What do women want? Empathy. (Search terms conscientiousness and agreeableness, yes, ALL women, huge studies).

What do you refuse to develop? Empathy. You have only yourselves to blame and no, a ‘condition’ doesn’t change the facts. You can develop coping mechanisms to be considerate, you just don’t want to, you don’t see the point. Aspergers for example, is about as bad as sociopathy. We don’t have to sign up for that. You are not a child to mind. You need the basics down.

What do people have in scant amounts for you? Empathy. They can sense you don’t give a shit about them so why bother? It’s the golden rule, not that you’re smart enough to see the flipside, making rape jokes and wondering why nobody trusts you don’t spike your drinks.

Update: See this guy?

https://www.indy100.com/article/woman-summed-up-why-men-never-understand-female-twitter-flowers-address-7987681

Don’t be this guy. The one pretending a creepy man is just being ‘nice’.
Why are the dumbest men so cocky? What are you feeding them America?

The one completely missing the point that stalkers can and do rape and kill. A gay man should’ve asked for comparison.

Which causes more damage in society, the errant pen or the stupid penis?

Saviour complex and toxic relationships

Something I don’t want to mock, excellent!
You’d think for the part of the internet that goes on, and on, and ON about victim complex, they’d also cover literally the other half?

https://everydayfeminism.com/2014/10/savior-complex-toxic-relationship/

“If you want to be the savior, you’re essentially saying to your partner that you see them as a project to be fixed.

Even if the challenge of their flaws isn’t the primary reason you’re attracted to them and even if they want your help, it still sends the message that you think they need to improve and better themselves somehow.

First of all, you’re dating someone, not flipping a house. You might convince them to make minor lifestyle changes, but you can’t expect them to completely overhaul themselves. It’s a little bit condescending to treat them as your personal pet project.

Unless you’re at least psychologically healthy, don’t. Sick people make other sick people even sicker.

Maybe they do want to make changes. Maybe they do have a certain goal in mind. That’s great. Allow them to accomplish something on their own. You can support them without spoon-feeding them.”

Don’t throw off the power dynamic, it’s unhealthy and neither one will be happy.

“You’re their partner, not their parent.”

And there it is.
Paging Doctor Freud…

“Second of all, your partner might be perfectly fine with the way they are and not want to make any changes. If you look for flaws as a means of finding a purpose or direction for the relationship, that speaks more to issues you might want to address within yourself.”

This is a male problem in particular. Hoe > Housewife? Hoe isn’t short for housewife.
They’re a person, they aren’t a broken car. Fix, repair, review are not words you apply to people.
You need to like them and they need to relax and be human around you without panicking you’re jotting a performance review in your head.

You may laugh but I’ve seen a lot of men do just that and wonder why every woman resents them. They intellectualize their controlling tendencies for ego. Golden rule, dudes. They never ‘improve’ other men.

Rescuers have a condition, the expectation you’ll save them back. In abundance of their effort.
It isn’t altruistic unless you mean the pathological kind. It’s calculating and dishonest.
This is why you pay therapists, the motive to help is clear.

If one person is Dad, but Tyrannical Dad, and always right, you’re wrong to be with them. They don’t want a relationship, they don’t want to relate and be vulnerable, they want an assistant.
If they can’t see themselves clearly, they can’t see you over their issues.

“Your partner is not your therapist, nor are they obligated to heal your past wounds.”
^This.

Where do they learn this? Ally McBeal?
I’ve seen men complain woman B, C, D… was evil because they didn’t ‘prove’ they were different from woman A. That’s an issue with woman A. Your issue. Especially if she’s your mother. Without woman A, you’d see those others clearly. They’ll never fix it or admit they seek rescue because it would mean being humble and accepting weakness or wounds. Avoiding help isn’t impressive, ’tis but a scratch, right?
Don’t get me started on the ones so jaded and terrible they’ve managed to turn the greatest thing in LIFE, into a child’s game.
Better to punch yourself in the nuts repeatedly, it’d hurt less.

Even if you do save them, what then? You have nothing in common anymore.

If they’re perfect, why would they stick around with you, the one who thought they were broken, instead of moving onto someone better? Objectively better.

Why hate on fairytales? The originals were hardcore. Anyone who believes the Disneyfied versions is already too simple to educate.

Traits of toxic people and PUA/’game’ gaslighting

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/in-flux/201608/8-common-traits-the-toxic-people-in-your-life
” They focus on problems, not solutions.”
e.g. Critical theory and being ‘unhelpful’ for…?
“They use other people to accomplish whatever their goal happens to be.”
e.g. PUAs. Formal term is triangulation, they tell you what you want to hear.
“They make you prove yourself to them.” You only qualify yourself to a superior, peer must be assumed until proven and isn’t based on a demographic factor, it’s individual. In the reverse…
e.g. Everyone who says, in effect ‘I dislike your opinion, so you’re part of outgroup’, a no true scotsman.
“Beware of people who find fault with you and make you wrong. Loyalty is foreign to them.”
They’re never wrong, are they? 😀
“Toxic people often make you want to fix them and their problems. They want you to feel sorry for them, and responsible for what happens to them. Yet their problems are never really solved, for once you’ve helped them with one crisis, there’s inevitably another one. What they really want is your ongoing sympathy and support, and they will create one drama after another in order to get it. “Fixing” and “saving” them never works, especially since you probably care more about what happens to them than they do.”

It’s good I already mentioned pick-up and ‘game’ because it actually follows the stages of gaslighting abuse.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/communication-success/201704/the-7-stages-gaslighting-in-relationships

I’ll illustrate with examples, where possible.
1. Women are worthless. Counter: then why are you obsessed with them? You don’t base your life around something worthless. [They don’t want women to be happy without them and without being their hookers, hence the contradiction with the Western value of liberty and tradition of not being promiscuous and degenerate (applies to both sexes). They implicitly believe ‘Women should be forced to sleep with me’. Hold up there, Mohammed! They bought into the lie of porn – all women want you and they’re ‘playing hard to get’. Sexual entitlement is the secret of a loser’s desperation. The women in porn are paid to act interested, even they’re not. They also conveniently forget a supposedly desirable harem is marriage, with Middle Eastern duties on the man, the man is 100% financially responsible and the women don’t work. They refuse to get married once and object to that polygamy because it reduces nubile supply.]
2. Women are (various bad things, implying men are not). No proof, no comparison of data from both sexes. Long opinion pieces. Counter: Differentiate that from sexism. [Third-wave Feminists do this stuff too, but everyone’s already explaining that.] Negging doesn’t even work, just look at their ‘success rate’. The terms are so Orwell.
3. (They literally tell their followers –cult– to escalate whatever criticism comes their way after attention-whoring –peacocking-, so I don’t need to put anything here. They literally use the word escalate, even when what they’re escalating e.g. ‘kino’, code for physical contact, is illegal aka assault). Search PUA+game+”escalate”
4. Aside from continuation long after it’s socially acceptable, stalking, doxing and harassment, I’d also include dogpiles and other ways to get their internet boyfriends involved to keep punching down. Because punching down, 5 or more against 1 is so much better? ‘Amused mastery’ isn’t what it sounds like, it’s the denial and dickishness women uncannily and universally despise about just these guys, since they refuse to admit any useful point (brick wall) and deny-deny-deny while claiming women are the ones denying reality. They laugh at the frustration, like children, oblivious to how stupid they objectively look (also to other men).
5. Google “dread game” it’s literally this stage. Seriously.
6. ‘Beta game’ aka pretending to be a decent person for a little while. Narcissists do this already but male borderlines need to be told how to imitate it, to get the supply they need. Most ‘game’ is feigning K-selected characteristics that are evolutionally desirable while hiding what they really are, that’s why they burn out like the psychopaths they stupidly admire – it’s one big act. They pretend being fake men for years is a strength and sunk cost means they never admit it. That’s what all the ‘macho man’ fake masculinity spiel is, they’re trying to convince themselves of the delusion. Ask them how their mother’s doing. Better yet, ask her WTH happened.
7. Look up all the quotes and forum topics on ‘game’ sites describing all women as whores that want to be raped and choked, specifically. Sometimes beaten, with fists or a belt. They really do think this, they’ve projected all their desensitized sick porn habits on the Evil Lilith Judaism myth. Men don’t dominate women, they never have, they work with women on mutually agreed upon goals, the sexes cooperate or those examples die. They’re thinking of sexual domination because they don’t think with Upstairs Brain.

In effect, these males want sex slavery without the balls to run their own life, a Mommy replacement. Remember, one of Mohammed’s ‘wives’ (captive slaves) poisoned him.

They’re not joking when they say they don’t want women to have rights because they don’t see women as human. In which case, their sexuality is dubious (bestiality? which religion is that common to again?) and they can’t expect women to do any work, including childcare. Let alone their ‘share’ of the housework.

‘Game’ proponents pretend to teach the socially inept how to find wife material. They lie to other men to make shekels and seem respectable. That’s why I did the still-popular post on What does it get you? Less than the average guy, guessing. That’s without going into the brown caste of most game practitioners, desperate in their White and Blonde fetishes/Fevers. But sure, it’s the women gagging for you, huh? They don’t select for the quality or marriage, those males (not men) don’t see it, don’t value or respect it and couldn’t keep it if it managed to fall from the sky to their lap. They sexually select (DARWIN) for cheapness, easiness and sluttiness. No wonder they keep finding women to be sexually damaged, emotionally disturbed (the ones attracted to them) and disloyal. They’re signalling what they are. Birds of a feather…

Remember!

The one common denominator in all your failed relationships, is you.

A shrink on sexual harassment “can’t you take a compliment?”

It’s odd how men will admit women are sensitive about their appearance then continue to attack us on it.

Yeah, that’s bullying. Even in school, that is not flirting.

A delightful, common sense explanation.

In before autism;

If you DON’T ‘believe’ in sexual harassment – go to a gay bar on a Saturday.

See how long you last.

That is a woman’s life.

Men are lecherous pigs, regardless of sexuality. What does a lecherous woman look like? A man.

Since any reading this and disbelieving are cowards, simply ask every woman you know and care about (assuming any stuck around you) about their experiences. There are always experiences, regardless of ‘age’ and seeming ‘fuckability’. Don’t talk over them excusing it, just ask the question, shut up and listen.

Actually, 9/10 male rudeness is the inability to shut up and listen. There are studies.

OT Rape accusations imply guilt. A totally honest man needn’t fear them.

https://www.jeunesepayne.co.uk/single-post/2016/11/07/Sexual-Harassment-%E2%80%9CCan%E2%80%99t-you-take-a-compliment%E2%80%9D

“When someone shouts across the street at me “show us your cunt”, or even just wolf-whistles, it’s not because they think it’s going to make me feel good.

It’s a reminder that they could overpower and attack you. R-types don’t care for rule of law, Ks are respectful (either ignoring you in public or getting introductions the decent way).
I saw a very right-wing blog post an article about how the author could easily rape any woman he likes.
In quite graphic detail and practically frothing at the prospect. I don’t read that blog anymore.
This was supposed to scare us all straight (and into agreement with him).

Rape isn’t funny to women, it appalls us (ESPECIALLY the conservative ones), it’s worse than murder. Imagine getting castrated, male power stripped and stolen. Rape is worse for women, at the very least for the conception aspect. A man joking about rape is an r-type trying to pass for K (strong). Those are the worst.

When women see a man seriously laugh (not from shock, but enjoyment) at domestic abuse or whatever sexual ‘prank’ is going on, it would be like watching a woman laughing at a man gored on barbed wire in WW1. Our thought is always the same: what if that were me?

This is why women choose compassion in mate selection studies.

Which sex has the blacker humour?

“Can’t you take a joke?”

Is civilization a joke? They make me wonder.

This is why the right wing’s reputation suffers. Manwhores cosplaying Patriarchy. They seem to think it means concubines and slavery, rather than monogamy and industry.

As for the genuine conservatives…

If they can’t fuck it or kill it, they’re probably going to insult it.

It’s not a well-intended or genuine interaction. They’re not even under some misguided impression that such comments will make me want to have sex with them.

Some are truly that stupid.

Thought process as follows:

If I make her hate me, it’ll remind her of my mother/her father.

Presuming all fathers are incompetent (r-selected) as his. Another layer of insult.

Resent women? No! I simply happen to crush and abandon them all by sheer coincidence!
Distrust women? Sure! They made me leave them! Projection’s only real when women do it!

It’s simply an exertion of power. The aim is to get approval or laughter from others, and discomfort or gratitude from me.

That is better known as sadism.

It is caused by degenerate media, especially the supernormal stimuli of HD streaming online porn.
I guarantee you 100% of those males are porn addicts, the female leches too. The testosterone has to go somewhere, they lack the impulse control (hypofrontality) and time preference to do something good with it.

A compliment is something you would feel comfortable giving a man, woman, or child because you believe it would make them feel good. You’re not boosting anyone’s self-esteem by reminding them that, by society’s standards, “you look acceptable enough for me to fuck”.”

There is always the insult that your primary value is whether they’d use you as their whore.

They’re calling you a whore.

That’s what no woman will admit.

You’re soliciting women on the street. As a whore. But at least whores can charge.

They refuse to accept they’re being rude but they wouldn’t say it if children were present. They desperately want attention but project this onto the provocateur (and looking good isn’t an excuse for anything, is it?) although differing tastes apply, so you can’t even hide your attractiveness since they’ll always be someone Into That. [cough pervert cough]
In conclusion, blame porn. Speaking to people like that (a whore) might not even be acceptable in a purely sexual, private interaction. If they’re smart, they’d leave immediately. It’s demeaning, dehumanizing and morally bankrupt, like the source.

Provocateur is a word I use deliberately… it’s never applied to men, is it?
There’s no such thing as Adam Teasing and Taharrush ‘games’ go after… which sex?

Misandrist women avoid men but misogynistic men seek out women.

Hello, the bulk of MGTOW.

They seek women out to punish them [1]  for what is perceived (projection) as the other’s wrongdoing. It’s never them, never examine the self!!!

Sexual predators, sexual sadism.

I guess womb envy comes into it somewhere but mention that after they play the feminist ‘Penis Envy’ record for the millionth time and suddenly the concept might be shaky? [SJWs lie, r-types lie, logic is a lie to them, thinking is K]

1 Who are you? You can’t lose the chub and get a good job, get out of anyone’s face. At least join a church or Greeenpeace or something. A useful Crusade.

I know, I know.

“Yes, but –

What about men?”

…What about the men?

Where are the men when this happens? [2]

Women exist, women are the fair sex. Women will be sexually harassed as long as we live. Men need to police other men, we certainly can’t.

Think too of the racial and class angles.

Is this acceptable as a way to treat people in the first world?

2

Sign of an r-type male: when you defend a woman from attack (and attack it is), you get accused of White Knighting. Yes, but White Knights are a good thing (Ks) and protect other Ks from monsters…

They never speak to men that way, knowing the odds of an altercation. Cowards to boot. Sexual competition makes the rabbit flee. At times, they’ll use the term incorrectly (in defense of another r) as a compliment of her sexual quality (lie) to get her into bed. It uses triangulation, the common manipulation tactic. Are those men crazy? Probably male borderline, it’s under-diagnosed. It would explain their romantic or intimacy issues that can be masked socially to some extent. R-types fear intimacy because it leads to responsibility and commitment, turn-offs. R/K does neatly align with attachment conditions (anxious-avoidant, secure)…. with the Mother (Freud wins).

Another sign “why are women so easily offended?” [3]

Only the ones around you.

Hm.

Yes, it’s definitely us…

all three billion of us, currently. And they say women can’t do maths?

3

Prelude to gaslighting, All women are crazy bullshit. Pathologizing a problem makes it go away!

See also the classic “why won’t women-” do whatever Lord Fauntleroy wants?

Narcissistic entitlement brewing up to rage. Histrionic, effete rage.

5 types of sexual coercion

A lot of men don’t realize that rapists often get a Yes on something else (foot in the door technique) then act like it means something else after the fact.

Just look at prison rape. You accept a free muffin at lunch, you’re later told you agreed to be their bed buddy.
That’s a male example of sexual coercion and men are rightfully terrified of it.

Coercion vitiates consent. It’s in the law, on the legal books.

https://www.bustle.com/articles/67926-is-it-rape-if-you-say-yes-5-types-of-sexual-coercion-explained

“You’re my wife/girlfriend, you are supposed to be having sex with me.”

A girlfriend owes you nothing.
A wife owes you something, but not constantly like a servant.

Many cultures teach us that sex is an inherent part of marriage. Many people take that a step further, and believe that being in a romantic relationship with someone makes you entitled to have sex with them.

They don’t believe that. Believing something doesn’t make it so. They’re lying to blackmail that person.

“You owe me” isn’t a belief.

The problem with that skewed thinking is that it leads some people to act as if taking on the label of “wife,” “girlfriend,” or “partner” suddenly makes your body their property.

I guess this relates to the idea of owning one another, which is true in a spiritual sense with spouses but doesn’t extend to constant entitlement, it relates to the idea that men always have to be up for it like robots and projects it onto the woman as her fault if he isn’t.

Unless you’re Catholic and never use contraception, it has nothing to do with Go forth and multiply, and has nothing to do with Christian duty. Prior to any duty, you should know what you’re agreeing to.

“If you don’t have sex with me, I’m breaking up with you.”

“If you don’t sleep with me, I’m going to sleep with someone else.”

“If you don’t sleep with me, I’m going to tell everyone you are a prude.”

In those cases it’s more obvious that nobody should be sleeping with them because they’re immature.

If Mommy won’t let me have the toy, I’m gonna smash it.

Attractive.

If they don’t respect your No, they don’t respect you or your body. Leave immediately. Run, don’t walk.

Logically, they shouldn’t respect a Yes either, if they doubt your ability to consent. Think about it.

What’s the subtextual thought process here?

You’re not allowed to say No to me.

ding ding crazy

run

whatsjwsimagine

Blackmail doesn’t apply to any agreement, including written contracts.

“If you really loved me, you would have sex with me.”

That isn’t love, that’s prostitution. A prostitute pays for things with sex.

“I wouldn’t have taken you out to dinner if I knew you were just leading me on. If you didn’t want to sleep with me, you shouldn’t have been flirting with me either.”

Again, (tends to be) male entitlement. Neither sex is owed sex.
That’s a non sequitur. If they didn’t want a date, they shouldn’t have asked for a date. That’s the real logic.

Don’t then complain that you thought (lie) it meant ‘something else’, like a ONS assuming it’s now a relationship. But that’s female entitlement, so they’d probably agree if the example isn’t close to home.

It is very easy for someone to try to ply you with alcohol as foreplay to a sexual encounter — because they know that if they can “relax” you enough, you may drop your resistance due to your impaired judgment, and agree to have sex. If your partner knows that you don’t want to have sex, and you find them repeatedly topping off your glass

that would be the point to tell them to go fuck themselves

If you find yourself saying yes to sex as a means to avoid harm, then there is no excuse for your partner’s behavior; please consider talking to someone and getting help.

The police, because sex is not a form of appeasement.

No seriously, many date rapists use these tactics because it gives them more plausible deniability in court later.
I once heard of a serial rapist who’d lure women to alleys threatening to hurt them while a friend played lookout then he forced them to say they wanted him before raping them. Eventually he got caught. Eventually.

The ‘game’ of getting the woman to agree is part of the sexual thrill, because they can take that choice away from her too.

A No doesn’t change into a Yes. That’s called nagging. The coercion thing isn’t widely known although rape by fraud is old as the hills, so the rapist also assumes they’re covered as long as she says the ‘Magic Word’ (until they’re in front of a judge).

There isn’t a magic word that makes rape OK. That’s kinda the point of rape, taking, as in taking away.

Date rapists are harder to catch because the women involved believe it was their fault and he isn’t like that with others (he is). So yes, report it. Others might not get away and you can do everything right and still get raped if they drug you (that’s why date rape is yes, actually, very real, and anyone who tries to argue otherwise is flagging as one of them).

Rapists fear healthy personal boundaries.

Update: I’ll throw this here.

http://www.cracked.com/blog/how-men-are-trained-to-think-sexual-assault-no-big-deal/

Stalking isn’t romantic.
Harassment isn’t brave.
People don’t owe other people anything.
There are no excuses for shitty behaviour.

I cba to go into this one.

Short version – women are not men and don’t have male libido, even porn stars aren’t really into it/you.

It’s stupid to assume all women are coy like some 19th century Austen novel and further, coyness is lying. Coy women don’t sleep with you. It is exclusive from sluttiness. Sluttiness is anti-coy. But I guess that wouldn’t make porn as fun to watch.

There’s no such thing as playing hard to get. You’re either hard to get or easy.

Imagine if we flipped it and said everything men do, they do for female attention and approval. Good career? Wants to attract a good woman. Nice car? He can’t appreciate cars for themselves, it must be to get women. Nice body? He doesn’t care for his health, it’s all about us. It’s incredibly narcissistic and spoiled to assume the choices of others have ANYTHING to do with you.

It’s also sexist to assume that clothing choices based on temperature e.g. male shirtlessness, female mini-skirts, or other practicality, have anything to do with their moral character.

Adult men have no excuse to think as stupidly as teenage boys.
They want an excuse for their actions, they want someone else to blame.

comment

I don’t have anything much to add to this except to say that I do really appreciate the article. It is frustrating to deal with guys who simply refuse to accept ‘no’ as an answer, because there is no way to ‘really’ refuse once ‘no’ is off the table. Short of fleeing the scene, what the f**k can you say?

That’s the point. It’s a trap.
They think if they can rationalize it, it isn’t rape and you’re the ‘crazy’ one.

Ahh, gaslighting again. Notice how this often crops up with the shit of the species? Because obviously, it can never be sociopath/borderline/plain jerk’s fault. You know, the consequences of his actions. Like a man. You push him away, kick him, bite, scream or punch him? You’re a crazy bitch! But him initiating physical action goes unmentioned. It ‘doesn’t count’ as assault, in his mind, because his consent to your body over-rides your human rights. They never mention what they did just before and claim not to see anything wrong – but they don’t mention it unless forced. This is why they rarely harass women in the company of other men – they know it’s wrong and fear punishment for the crime. This is why they usually stop hassling a girl if she says ‘I have a boyfriend’ (women have to lie to be left alone, minding their own business alone, in public. In the West). They’re cowards trying to exert control over others, women are simply the sex less physically equipped to defend ourselves.

They think No means Yes and Get Lost means Take Me I’m Yours – a Disney cartoon figured this out.

They don’t really think that, they’re pushing their luck and the boundaries of the law.

No means No because that’s literally the line. That’s the legal line we shouldn’t have to reach when there are other forms of rejection men are willfully blind to. It’s been proven men assume sexual interest where there is none. It’s a defect in their programming. However, ignoring many indicators to the contrary (emotional intelligence) isn’t an excuse. Women are people, first and foremost, and respect should be given when asking anyone for anything, since you are in the position of desire and need them to oblige you.

The whole tone of that article is a theme I call Poor Men, via Women.

Wtf.

How enlightened, feminist guy.

You’ve gone from acting like a black guy (where all this ‘sexual culture’ comes from) to just a plain misogynist, who can’t understand that women aren’t billboards for male attention. via People is terribly dehumanizing as a message.

It isn’t about you.
It isn’t about you.
It isn’t about you.

Assumptions make a what?

The feminists do the opposite, like Emma Watson signalling Poor Women, via Men. Still wrong, still sexism. You don’t self-actualize or seek attention/sympathy via the opposite sex. Or any other people, really. Your business is yours, not every stranger who piques your fancy.

OT

We seem to have a form of sexual politics like consensus reality. There’s no such thing as consensus morality. Let’s assume coercion doesn’t apply for a moment. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Two people can agree to something, doesn’t make it less wrong. Evil can be mutually agreed. So no, getting a Yes doesn’t get you off the hook for what you choose to do with your own body.

Update: Rape gangs are illegal because it’s organised sexual coercion of women (not just minors).  It’s organised crime, it just happens to be rape than common theft.

Which brings me onto a valid point.

Playing the Eve Teasing line “it’s her fault for being too attractive”, I don’t get to rob a bank and go “but, your Honour, it’s their fault for having too much money!”
You’re responsible for your own impulse control, you monsters. Impulse control is heavily tied to IQ, Westerners have no excuse. Rapists are the sexual Marxists of the world, willing to steal what they can’t earn. You are not allowed to reject a Marxist’s claim to your income, the fruit of your body.
Do regular white women have to be like children in Sweden and wear wristbands saying “please don’t rape me”? You’d ignore those too. Almost like you don’t consider the target group as people, like the rape gangs.
Erotic capital is not a choice, men have it too, expression of sensuality is cultural, social, not necessarily sexual (the culture says we need to look somewhat sexy to conform! and too many things are labelled sexy when they aren’t) and what one person does e.g. tight clothing, is not a super-secret, erotomanic code for burning desire to random observer. It isn’t about you. If a woman wants a man, in this culture, she can ask him out. He doesn’t need to “chase” her, he isn’t a lion about to eat a gazelle. To compare their fun to murder really shows their character, dunnit?