The type of man who deserves to be alone

Should I explain this?

I shouldn’t have to explain this. I’m not going to. It’s too easy and he’s too thick.

If you don’t read it, it’s the sexual version of this:


If you can see what’s wrong with this picture in his ‘story’, congratulations, you’re more mature than he is. That is a male, but not a man.

It causes me to wonder how many of these people we immediately label as narcissists are in fact male borderlines, because they don’t have an identity, they follow the social trends with no opinion of their own, following what others say they ‘should’ be doing, complete with other people’s deadlines, and this is indicated by how they want to switch it up, play dress up and try on all of them. As if it’s a choice, what person you are.

Also: good women don’t wait around for a boy to figure out what a catch they are, they Next him before they waste their youth and take the next bus that comes along. A better bus, a bus with a future. Good women are scarce resources, especially in this century, and he expects the MMP to be a place where he has the power….?

Idiot isn't as much a person as a process of doing things wrong

MMP and SMP are complete opposites. 

These people will end up on the shelf like the feminist trying to ‘Have it All’ and they deserve to be. Anyone who treats people like toys and puts them down, leaves them and expects they can come back in at a later date and pick them up again is in for a life-ruining surprise. The worst thing isn’t never finding the One, it’s rejecting them because you didn’t know what you had. Move too early, end up with the wrong person, move too late, end up rejected and alone.

The dating pool shrinks past 30, also when most people hit the Wall pretty firmly. Their potential is either actualized or wasted at this point and that’s why marriages were arranged with slightly older men, because they have to prove their role as providers before a woman buys in. But expecting you’ll have your shit together by (age) is stupid, it’s excusable as a teen because you have no life experience but I keep seeing this from people in their 20s. Most people die before that happens and it’s very rare with the best planning and behaviour. Making and limiting your important life decisions based on fantasies is retarded.

I’ll make a bet. He takes advice from Roosh and co.

aka He takes life advice from somebody with a shit romantic or non-existent marital life.
Do these people take diet advice from fatties?

Oddly, he’s demonstrating hypergamy, thinking he can infinitely trade up like a video game and eventually marry the Best Woman if he holds out long enough. Nope, the good people get snapped up sharpish. This is what I like to call The Illusion of Scarcity. It isn’t about how many men/women there are, it’s about the quality for the thing you want (marriage). Not to mention, he has an anxious-avoidant attachment style to a woman who is clearly indifferent, so even if he got married, he’d get divorced, I’d bet good money.

As for his own SMV, I’ll leave this here.

Link: Sluts, Game and stupid decisions

There is no enjoying the decline in this area.
The hedonic treadmill is burning them out, until they’re empty husks of people incapable of love. (The manosphere ignores weakened pair bonding ability occurs in men too).

The problems are twofold. The problem with the women is obvious – if you’re cheap, you’re treated as cheap.

The problem with the men is barely discussed – immaturity. Those are not men. They act like teenage boys, complete with video games and lad culture. Part of the low fertility rate is refusing to settle for these manboys, they can’t even take care of themselves, let alone others or lead a family.

Game won’t work forever, it’s emerged in response to extreme r-type decline in the sexual marketplace. What will these boys do? Curl up and die, in all probability, so conditioned to do the easy thing over the right thing.

Darwin wins.

Which laws kept marriages intact?

It is easy to say the modern legal system is unfair, unjust and the various issues with it are causing the social breakdown we know too well. Here are some of the laws which kept the sexes in line, and marriage thereafter. Their loss has caused recognisable problems.

To avoid players or lying cads promising marriage to good women

To prevent gossip by competition, especially where truthful

To prevent bitter rivals (possibly male) or spinsters dissolving a union once made

To promote emotional intimacy and the ‘dependency paradox’ vital for a permanent relationship

The spouse should become the centre but not the whole Universe. Family business and home matters don’t leak to outsiders who twist the knife while things are down (natural ups and downs) and never let a good time go without passive-aggression.

Includes land law in

For an obligation of honesty going into marriage – “freely offered” – they know what they’re getting into

Prenuptial agreements should be legally binding I really don’t see the point otherwise. It misrepresents the litigant as not a gold-digger and then they can turn around and say “it doesn’t count, I didn’t mean it”?

This is widely applicable from many parties and SJWs do this for monstering, bring it back with criminal libel

Most vital of all, this ensures sexual fidelity in BOTH parties as agreed in their vows, reduces cuckoldry to nil and guarantees financial support between parties (not paid out to mistresses or bastard children).

The tort of criminal conversation seeks damages for the act of sexual intercourse outside marriage, between the spouse and a third party. Each act of adultery can give rise to a separate claim for criminal conversation.

This values the commitment. Dollar value. Bring it back.

It’s a matter of time until the feminists bring back

for men who lie to get sex (like, all 99.999% of them).

Protection from adultery is the crucial means of safeguarding marriage for future generations. Without this, what is the point? Nobody forces you to make a commitment in this century, the choice should have legal weight on both sides. The K-types care about marriage and must protect their mating strategy from predatory r-types, either as their spouse or the cheating third party. Marriage must be inoculated from the ravishes of the sexual marketplace.


If a man could have a sexbot, why would he want a woman?

Blatantly obvious question to a person with common sense.

Men primarily desire sex, women primarily desire emotional comfort.

You can see women awakening to this discrepancy in their reaction to male sex toys. Oh, theirs are “empowering” but men’s are “gross”….

no what I don't believe it can't be true disbelief pushing daisies

Futurists are sci-fi psychics. If they ever had any prognostic powers, they’d be designing and inventing what they foresaw. It’s highly pop-culture-based guesswork, they slavishly follow trends.

Men on the whole do not desire a woman for reproduction until a certain age or unless they’re broody by character (rather rare and commendable) – they want the appearance of it, the sex act itself, like women want the appearance of a high-quality Alpha (and rarely consider genetic fitness). Evolution is deceptive. It tells us we want A because it is the means to acquire B. Evopsych studies the divide between what we want as an organism and how our mind tricks us into getting it against our better judgement.

The brain is an organ dedicated to self-deception.

Look no further than optical illusions for demonstrations.

Women presume their true value to men (fecundity) compels their desire. In some men, perhaps this is true. On the whole, men are driven by the same superficial concerns as women – the mating markets are designed to make snap judgements so as not to lose opportunity (all those studies about how quickly we assess mate potential, it isn’t the conscious mind doing it in split seconds, is it?)