The return of dignity

A New Generation of Prigs, Prudes, and Squares

At the same time, young adults are having their first sexual experience later, and having less sex in general. While in 1988, 60% of boys had had sex by the time they were 19, in 2010 that number was 42%, and overall, the number of sexually active 9th graders has dropped by almost half since the 1990s.

In iGen, professor of psychology Jean M. Twenge reports that “In fact, more young adults are not having sex at all”:

More than twice as many iGen’ers and late Millennials (those born in the 1990s) in their early twenties (16%) had not had sex at all since age 18 compared to GenX’ers at the same age (6%). A more sophisticated statistical analysis that included all adults and controlled for age and time period confirmed twice as many ‘adult virgins’ among those born in the 1990s than among those born in the 1960s. . . .

You don’t see the women complaining about it, wise enough to know you can’t shame a person for being clean and virtuous.

“Virgin pride” would mess with the postmodernists. That’d be funny.

Even with age controlled, GenX’ers born in the 1970s report having an average of 10.05 sexual partners in their lifetimes, whereas Millennials and iGen’ers born in the 1990s report having sex with 5.29 partners. So Millennials and iGen’ers, the generations known for quick, casual sex, are actually having sex with fewer people—five fewer, on average.

MSM…. lied to us?

For profit???

[There are also fewer white people in the younger generations, so fewer options for white people.]

The phenomenon of this “sex recession” has been found not only in the United States, but in other developed countries as well.

Oh, how terrible, right?

“Demographic transition”, period of high-K coming.

It’s almost like the MGTOW rhetoric of wicked Lilith women/Never Marry is controlled ops to justify SJW controls on expression!

Odds are, their mother is sluttier than the thot they hate.

So Millenials’ and iGen’ers’ frugal, stable, “wholesome,” ways have wrought laudatory behaviors. As the sociologist David Finkelhor argued in an op-ed for The Washington Post, the younger generations are “showing virtues their elders lacked . . . We may look back on today’s youth as relatively virtuous, as the ones who turned the tide on impulsivity and indulgence.”

….and we may look back on you as evil and treasonous?

Anecdotally, she notes, young people seem to be feeling more inhibited about their naked bodies in general, and are even much more likely to change behind closed doors at the gym than older folks. We are surrounded by sex, yet our age feels strangely unsexy; we can explore sex without taboo, but don’t know how to be sensual.

Almost like someone’s trying to use porn as culture to suppress the urge to start a family.

50s women used to wear dresses because they were women, they didn’t want to ‘bone’ you.

Women have the same motive now to be feminine but porn-addled idiots reading into it, ruin it. There is no bait nor hook, our vag is not a Venus Flytrap. But if a Muslim rapes us, we get punished with a lecture about wearing a skirt as surely as if we were in Yemen. Is this The First World? The West is culturally dead by attire. Ghetto/rap/porn culture killed it. The 60s viewed mini-skirts as just …skirts, girlish even! Our crime is being white, the motive – evil, obviously. That’s why women are voting right-wing.

Like, you want girls to wear pearl necklaces, stop making the same dead joke. It isn’t funny. Porn culture puts women off. Don’t speak to normal women explicitly. It’s a rule of etiquette women are taught but no longer men. The same way gross-out female comedians piss you off, that’s the pearl necklace joke. No coincidence it’s conservative clothing they try to trigger disgust with. Like men as ‘hipsters’ for not being on display for gays.

At least in the 80s, men wore suits to clubs, women full dresses (I own some).

As Julian further observes, the fact that young people are having less sex may bespeak not only a decline in physical intimacy, but in the kind of emotional intimacy that leads to relationships of every kind.

Yeah looking at this hurts.

Love has become taboo.

“Where are the real men?” Where are the ‘good’ men? Dead, mostly

This has applications for men but it’s mostly women I’m reaching here. Quick n dirty explanation.

The most common complaint from redpill women is about the lack of real men. Even in movies, they’re rare. Now, SMV-wise, women have more to complain about in this century than men, because women aren’t the leading sex in general, we rely on men to lead the way and we support them in this. If they can’t lead, they won’t lead and everyone is aimless. I believe this is the other reason real women can’t stand whining MGTOWers – they still don’t get it, they still don’t step up to the plate (even exclusively, selfishly for themselves) and expect women to act like Mommy with the apron strings and do his bloody laundry or something. To a woman, a man is either a lover or a son. We have a natural disgust, visceral disgust, for men who act like boys. Evobio could fill in the blanks on that one. Genetic fitness, parental investment and just being straight up pathetic etc.

Let’s get this out of the way: age group. Let’s assume young for sperm quality but adults. Immediately, a minority of men in an aging population. Basic education, more still. Can support themselves, getting slimmer. Not damaged/perverts/crazy, tiny group. Of this group, some will be gay, others will be already married or unavailable.

No! Some of you say reading this, There are more men than ever before!

And you’re right. It’s all about demographics. 

I am at one with the Miranda.

Go to any major city and it seems like there are more men than women. This is accurate. The crybabies are responding to a simple fact: the sexual marketplace is elastic. We know this from social disasters like easy contraception and abortion (about a quarter of UK deaths recently). The average woman has a bigger bargaining chip for what She Wants, than the average man. We can get jobs. We don’t need male support to have a basic living. This is new. So when you walk up to Ms Average, she probably isn’t being arrogant, she simply knows her value (which you hate) and your chip isn’t high value enough (because another man’s IS). You’re competing with the Invisible Man, who is at least her social equal. Women are social beings. She’s looking for a net contributor to her life. It’s the socio-sexual hierarchy. You need to be worth the effort, since women give up more (youth, fertility, beauty) by choosing to swim in the SMV. PUAs try to lie about their value which is no long term strategy and means you have to keep leaving like a con artist skipping town. Pretend you’re Miss Average. Let’s assume you’re a 5, nice, basic education, support yourself. Middle of the road on everything. When a man approaches you, why is he doing it? He doesn’t move in your social circle. Why not? He’s lower class. He’s even lower on the scale than you. This is literally the only way he can meet women. How should you respond? (Pity leads to clingers and stalkers). What if he’s fake, cocky and half-sneering at you, clearly thinking you’re beneath him, despite how you’re average, know you are, and he is no oil painting himself to need to be doing this?

Oh God I made eye contact with the social fuckwit losers.

This response.
It’s trying to avoid the mantrum of insults when you reject the fucker.

Note: mantrum = male tantrum, usually when you say no to anything he wants. It’s entitled, it’s like a little boy (see above disgust) and it’s inappropriate behaviour for an adult. Boundaries are normal and healthy and nobody owes you anything.

The demographics skew toward Asian men (globally and in cities like London), so white men are at a premium and have automatically higher value. Genophilia and human nature means the white women want white men. Nobody should be more pissed off about multiculturalism than the manosphere, specifically the EU ‘refugee’ migrant Crisis. Let’s ignore the violent possibilities. You see all those military age men? Millions of them? Which women do you think they’re gonna go after? What will happen to the SMV of Europe now, where all the white women at?

sex with actual women mgtow infight

Pro: Our value will skyrocket. Con: As will rape rates.

There are lots of socio-sexual issues of our time, I’m not downplaying that. One of them is delusions of grandeur from men raised on supermodels and porn who actually think they have a chance playing pro out of their league (forever, on a consistent basis, despite the rarity of those women IRL for similar reasons to marriageable men above). Yes, there are leagues. In Europe, we call those classes. It isn’t based on money or your passport, stop embarrassing yourselves bragging about being American or something like it’s exotic.

How many beautiful women are there in your country? How rare are they? How rare are you? The difference is the odds you have of getting one.

Women are suddenly responding to market demands in our favour for the first time ever. However, intersexual competition is ferocious, because the worthiest men are like 0.0001% or another ridiculous number. It’s like chasing a unicorn (at least men don’t have it as bad because they’re the sex that can make offers, imagine if you had to wait for that model to ask you out).

However, most women don’t want SMV. We want MMV. You don’t wanna be that dumb bitch who wasted her best decade ‘waiting’ for her ‘boyfriend’ to propose, she bought a lemon, it’s a sunk cost. It used to be that MMV skewed male (see video Economics of Sex), because men were rare, thanks to all those pesky things called wars culling the populations. Wars used to be eugenic. Let’s take a closer look.

Prior to World War, there were no exemptions. If you were young, you didn’t stay home. They threw you out there. Sink or swim. Then exemptions crept in with rich cowards, liars and people faking injuries. I heard that the bravest men who ever lived died on the battlefield, blown to bits by grenades or gored on barbwire and this is true, we’ve all heard the stories, their family got the accolades and Victoria crosses to prove it. What does that mean genetically? What happened to their line? What happened to the line of the men who stayed home while the others cats were away, surrounded by lonely wives? I’m guessing a lot of cuckoldry for the brave men who did make it home. It’s like the people who ask Where did the British Empire go? The men who made it died protecting it. When they died, nobody wanted to fight anymore by default, so it failed. It just stopped.

It’s faster for me to quote myself for a moment;

He’s right that the quality of men dropped before the quality of women. I feel the manosphere forgets there is another half to the equation. Post-WW, the few surviving men lived it up. Then the Sexual Revolution just happened on by shortly thereafter because women felt left out and wanted some of the attention. Men lost their motivation because sex is practically all they want from women and…. yup, that’s pretty much it.

Men gave up first. They gave up on the white picket fence for a few easy lays. They made their bed. They ruined women (and themselves) for marriage. They continue to ruin women’s MMV. If you contribute to the problems caused by sleeping around, by sleeping around, you don’t get to complain about the karmic consequences that affect you later. You ate the cake. Cake is gone.

The manosphere mocks women for saying “Where have all the good men gone“? Answer: They’re Peter Pans at home playing video games and watching porn, the Lost Boys, which hardly reflects well on men as they think it does, while all the time most of their discussions feature “Where have all the good women gone“? without a trace of self-awareness.

Either Husband Material doesn’t exist (statistically unlikely) like a unicorn or he does exist, he’s incredibly rare but he expects his social equal at minimum. In socioeconomic terms, the assortative mating of Upper Class to Upper Class.

These whiners who acknowledge their value in their troubles never have a high value. They can’t swim in those waters. Can you imagine them at a formal dinner? For an hour? They’d probably get drunk and ask how much the host makes. They have no class. They think James Bond is made by the cut of his suit or his bloody watch. You could put James Bond in sackcloth and he’d work it into social graces (with men too). How many of these losers could, while going on about insane confidence? How popular are they with other men?

What women are bemoaning is the number of decent men on their social level. They know the competition is too fierce for the few clustered around the top that remain. They pine for the Olden Days when there were a larger pool of decent men, likelier for them to snag one, who actually made an effort and men for whom their private life was not also their public life. They had class.

It’s all about class.

You watch a romcom and look at the most popular. What is their class level? By apartment? By income? By lifestyle (not debt)? They’re always beautiful people (high SMV already), youngish (fertile), educated (not stupid), who are well-travelled and well-spoken. It screams good taste. It’s lifestyle porn. The romance is just the plot. How many of those films would succeed if the guy was a dropout doing drugs and playing video games? Do you think she’d be swooning to a swell of orchestral music then? Really? 

Likely, he’s already hit the Wall. Bitching about the drop-off in attention – to younger men. What have they got? Hustle? Women value class over experience. Especially when that experience is self-destructive binge-drinking and game marathons. Who wants to marry that? Can you imagine them as a patriarch? 

The Disney Princesses don’t marry the manservant, do they? The clownish side kick, does he get respect? All these manboys are discussing their Princess, which is sweet in a clueless way, failing to realize that even if she exists, even if they met her, she would be well within her rights to reject him, because he ain’t no Prince Charming. 

Hell, he can’t even manage the charming part.

p.s. Charming is a trait that applies to all. If you are a man who cannot charm your fellow man, you cannot be charming. It’s grace, it’s etiquette and breeding. It has nothing to do with being nice or a pushover. Their social prowess alone is intimidating.