A Generation Hexed chick bemoans the loss of chivalry, and claims modern day chivalry and feminism can coexist:
Living in Manhattan during college and after college would make even the most chivalry-loving women have to get her hands dirty. Unless you’re wealthy and can afford to take cabs everywhere (or do FreshDirect all the time), you carry your groceries home and up your stairs. And you probably live in a sixth-floor walkup! You jump over your own puddles and hail your own cabs. When some weirdo on the subway whips out his penis in front of you, you have to be the one to raise a holy hell. Hulk Hogan is not going to lug your new couch up the stairs, nor is Superman going to show up and defend your honor. Sometimes I would make a joke to my friends that “New York City is where chivalry goes to die.” […]
I cherished the day-to-day feeling that [my boyfriend] cared about me and that he was putting an effort into treating me nicely, beyond just having the basic manners of not chewing with his mouth open or interrupting someone when they were speaking. Just like I have a hard time reconciling my feminist beliefs with my desire to be with a more dominant, alpha male, I also have a hard time reconciling my feminist beliefs with my enjoyment of chivalry. I am now figuring out that the two are not mutually exclusive.
Chivalry and feminism are in fact mutually exclusive. Chivalry involves a tacit quid pro quo; men are chivalrous to women they deem are worthy of the chivalrous sacrifice. Throughout Western history, (Western only, as chivalry was a knighthood concept invented by Europeans during the Middle Ages), men have considered worthy women to be those who are relatively chaste, pure of reputation, monogamously loyal and delicate of manners. Does that describe the typical modern American feminist? Of course not. To ask the question is to laugh at the absurdity of asking it.
When a man holds open a door for a woman, or carries her heavy bags, he is doing so under the guise of an implicit pact between himself and all of womenkind. He assumes her relative weakness, modesty and submissiveness, and she assumes his strength and leadership. There is an unspoken agreement that both sides will hold up their end of the bargain. Implicit, too, in chivalry is a subconscious awareness that women are reproductively more valuable than men. Without a man’s confidence in these assumptions, the rationale for chivalry, and the desire to grant it, dissipate like the memories of so many one night stands.
Feminism is, at its core, an ideology of will to power scaffolded by lies. It has little to do with equality. It’s goal is the power aggrandizement of women at the expense of men (as it has to be since power is zero sum), and by whatever means necessary. That’s it. As long as feminism remains a force in modern society, and sabotages the minds of significant numbers of yummies (Young urban minxes), chivalry is DOA. The two ideologies not only have nothing in common, they are conspicuously antagonistic.
The free flow of information has also helped to kill off chivalry. Thanks to subversive retreats like this blog, women’s true nature is revealed in all its grit and gristle. No man in his right mind would open doors for women he now knows will divorce a beta and strip him of his dignity for a fling with an asshole who gives her Skittles as a birthday gift. Nor would he carry bags for women he now suspects, justifiably, are regular riders of the quasi-anonymous cock carousel. He’ll think twice about holding a cab for a random girl who might be one of those chicks who divulges personal details about her love life on a website called The Frisky. The simple, galling fact that women are sexually enticed by negs is enough to convince normally kind and generous men that pulling out chairs for them is a fool’s errand.
That’s another thing men have learned — when chivalry isn’t buying you a rude lack of acknowledgement from some ravaged city slut, it’s actively making you seem more beta. Men are asking “What’s in it for me?”, and increasingly the answer is “Not much”. And if you think a dearth of chivalrous behavior will open the door for shit-lapping white knighters to swoop chicks like Sir Lancelot, you’ve got the wrong idea. Modern women don’t instinctually reward chivalrous men with their sex, let alone a phony expression of asexual gratitude. The last chivalrous man on earth is still going home alone to pull his pud. But he’ll pull it ever so politely.
Women, if you lament the loss of chivalry, look in the mirror. You have only yourselves to blame.
PS: The fembot of the article linked to above had a suspiciously drama-filled breakup with her supposedly chivalrous boyfriend. Scientists are baffled.
‘I am now figuring out that the two are not mutually exclusive.’
translation: i want my cake and eat it too
LikeLike
“Feminism is, at its core, an ideology of will to power scaffolded by lies. It has little to do with equality. It’s goal is the power aggrandizement of women at the expense of men (as it has to be since power is zero sum), and by whatever means necessary.”M
Eloquent.
LikeLike
Too true.. too True
LikeLike
They are consistent in that both systems want men to act as servants.
Why any man would bother is a bigger question since it negatively impacts his life with regards to women.
Lancelot swooped chicks because he was the best at killing people which is a turn on for women, not because he was so completely beta in his behavior.
Even T.H. White had Lancelot treat Guinevere like shit before their affair starts
LikeLike
Chivalry was originally used for men to seduce women when the man had much greater status than the girl. It’s useful when the women already has the frame, “my status is slow low, how could this strong, powerful man take an interest in me.” It’s chivalrous when a rich baron holds a door open for a poor chambermaid. It’s a way for him to lower his value in her eyes enough for her to belong and feel accepted. It’s a DLV (display of lower value).
The average western guy will fail miserably unless he is trying to seduce a girl of obviously lower value, like a fat single mother with no self-esteem. But even if you’re that guy, why do you want to seduce girls of such low value? Get some game and seduce chicks worth putting your dick in.
Men don’t care about status per se: if a girl is hot enough he’ll pursue her regardless of status. In modern times, though, very few women have such low status… due to feminism. So, our host has it precisely right: feminism eliminates the need to practice chivalry.
The very worst thing a guy can do when interacting with a girl whose status is very similar is to lower his status. Guys, don’t ever do this unless you’ve established very high status and it’s OBVIOUS the girl feels she isn’t good enough for you. It’s a very rare case. In most cases, DHV (display higher value) is the name of the game.
LikeLike
This comment is the mark of a guy who really gets laid a lot because most normal men remember every one.
LikeLike
I suspect “white knighting” is actually a huge turnon for women, but *only* if the guy is actually a knight, i.e. a stone cold professional killer trained for years in melee combat, who also happens to be rich and powerful. “White guying” doesn’t have the same effect and even the sound of the phrase should indicate why.
LikeLike
PS: The fembot of the article linked to above had a suspiciously drama-filled breakup with her supposedly chivalrous boyfriend
You read the wrong article. All you need to know about this woman’s attitude towards chivalry is in her previous one–the breakup article. I won’t spoil the surprise but she spends the majority of her emotional energy detailing how her herb’s roomate had the wrong kind of women in his bed.
She doesn’t want chivalry. She wants to be in that roughneck’s bed. And the screeching of her hamster wheel makes it hard to hear.
LikeLike
feminism is Orwells steel boot grinding in mans face–forever. (But NOT a high-heel that freaky S&M faggots can get off on. Nope;picture a big fat ugly screechy jowly masculine pig of a woman grinding her combat boots in yer puss. Not so sexy now!) I’ll never forget a talk show,one of those rare ‘kiss-womens-ass’ talk shows,might’ve been that uber-puss Donahue,where in the midst of some hi-temper arguing,an old,ugly,monstrous thing of a “woman” stood up with the mike in her face and growled:”You must respect women! You must respect women!!” The audience cheered this bit of wisdom. Of course! Yes! Thats obvious-something we can ALL agree on! But in fact respecting women is the LAST THING WE SHOULD DO! They have to earn it–and how few do these days!
LikeLike
sticky this one, it’s a gem
LikeLike
I relish the look on girls’ faces when the door just closes after I’ve gone through. “Oh, were you expecting me to hold that?”
Rule 32: enjoy the little things.
LikeLike
the tradition of opening doors for women came about centuries ago when it was fairly commonplace for assassins to be laying in wait in the homes of aristocrats. thusly, opening the door and allowing the woman to enter first springs the trap, giving the man time to ready his defenses or flee.
it was never about the woman’s value, it was about survival.
LikeLike
The ‘gain’ of feminism at the expense of femine qualities.
All is not lost in other places in the world. Believe you me, many foreign girls still know how to be a feminine woman.
Look elsewhere my brothers. expand your gaze beyond the comfortable horizon of your local pub and find some foreign poon.
Some American girls have lost the ability to be women in an attempt to be men (feminism).
Yummie New York City women represent the worst of the worst. Rarely will you find elsewhere a breed of fembot so self absorbed with her own reality.
Asia. is. the answer.
asssumeattraction.com
LikeLike
Chivalry was for the benefit of the parents of the girl, to secure their permission to press one’s suit, not the girl herself.
Now that the parents have largely bowed out, it is superfluous. If they do happen to be involved, that’s when the alpha turns on the chivalry as necessary to achieve his ends.
LikeLike
That chivalry was directed specifically towards chaste women (if such a claim is not purely apocryphal) does not require that such be true in the future.
Chivalry is entirely compatible with alpha; it’s an extremely effective form of vulnerability game, if you’re skilled enough to pull it off without seeming like you’re doing it because you’re begging for pussy. As you always say, women love contrast, and a man who’s generally dominant can send hamsters spinning by opening a few doors.
For some men with motives more pure than most guests of the chateau, it’s a pretty effective way to get women attracted to you, if, again, you can do it without seeming like it’s a ploy to get laid.
LikeLike
You-go-wild-girrl-wave femischism is on the way out. No one likes the women it produces, especially the women themselves.
LikeLike
Very good article ! Enjoyed reading ! I love Chivalry in a man. You are so right in saying: Women, if you lament the loss of chivalry, look in the mirror. You have only yourselves to blame. As women we set our own goals and standards for how we want to treated.
LikeLike
And since feminists haven’t kept up their end of the bargain, I advise them to shut up. Seriously, if you’re not going to reward men for being chivalrous, at least have the courtesy to not denigrate them.
LikeLike
@itsme
Makes plenty sense so I’m just gonna take your word for it.
LikeLike
For some reason this chivalry talk reminds me of how Titus Pullo killed his new chick and dumped her in a river after she admitted to killing his earlier girlfriend.
LikeLike
Excellent. I’ve blogged about this before.
I am occasionally polite (e.g. holding the door for her). But just as often, I am not.
Chivalry is treating her a certain way because she’s a woman rather than because she’s a human being. It’s just as likely to go to her head and make her lose attraction for you as it is to make her feel “like a lady.”
In general, it usually benefits you more to break social convention than to follow it. Being overly polite and courteous is a slippery slope into nice guy zone.
Eric
LikeLike
I laugh my damn ass off when I hear women bitch about the lack of chivalry. I remember going to my Junior-year high school homecoming with a friend (we were both the only couple in our circle of friends who didn’t have dates so naturally we were paired together for the night). I held the car door open like the 16 year old conditioned beta that I was and she actually YELLED at me, “I can open my own door!”.
Cut to a year ago and I’m working the front desk at a hotel on Mother’s day. A group of middle aged women check out and I wish them a happy Mother’s day on their way out. I remember thinking to myself as I said it “I bet I’ll get a smarmy comment for this”. Sure shit…one turns around with that that cunty grin and says “Oh what? Do you say that because I look old?”.
Today, I only say nice things to the women who have earned it.
LikeLike
Good as always.
I’m starting to rethink my position on chivalry and feminism in one way though.
Feminists themselves mostly don’t enjoy chivalry. Feminists hate it because they believe that it bifurcates the genders and reinforces socially constructed gender roles.
The problem is that average work-a-cock-a-day Janes cherry pick certain aspects of the feminist scaffolding.
For instance, the average entitled Western woman wants chivalry and autonomy. They chose the autonomy part of the feminist equation while still wanting a piece of the chivalry.
The problem is that feminists rarely take on the grab,grab,grab mentality of the average woman and instead lambaste men for the things they aren’t doing right. Nowadays, feminists like to harp on Nice Guys – a term they’ve trademarked to imply guys who do nice things for women expecting something in return. Like that’s a bad thing.
LikeLike
I think I would prefer more freedom and less chivalry when I’m young and when I’m older want respect and more chivalry.
LikeLike
I always laugh at the complaining pleas for a return to chivalry from women. However this girl is less concerned with chivalry than reconciling the male double standard for herself.
Feminization for the past 60 years has built in the perfect Catch 22 social convention for anything masculine; The expectation to assume the responsibilities of being a higher-order man (or chivalrous) while at the same time denigrating masculinity. What ever aspect of maleness that serves the feminine purpose is a man’s masculine responsibility, yet any aspect that disagrees with feminine primacy is labeled Patriarchy and oppressive.
Essentially this convention keeps beta males in a perpetual state of chasing their own tails. Over the course of a lifetime they’re conditioned to believe that they’re cursed with masculinity (Patriarchy) yet are still responsible to ‘Man Up’ when it suits a feminine imperative. So it’s therefore unsurprising to see that half the men in western society believe women dominate the world (male powerlessness) while at the same time women complain of a lingering Patriarchy (female powerlessness) or at least sentiments of it. This is the Catch 22 writ large. The guy who does in fact Man Up is a chauvinist, misogynist, patriarch, but he still needs to man up when it’s convenient to meet the needs of a female imperative (such as hauling groceries up 6 stories).
The short version is that, as in most other things in life, women want their cake and to eat it to. Whatever serves the feminine purpose is the “responsiblely correct” thing to live up to for men, but that which doesn’t is shamed and quashed socially.
LikeLike
Heh…note from the breakup article, her chivalrous boyfriend told her to beat it and to get her things or he would throw them out in the street.
He may have been chivalrous, but he wasn’t a complete beta schlub. Looks to me like he got sick of her feminist-drivel and her desire to dictate how the house should be decorated, or her bitching about how he and his roommate would watch football on sundays.
What’s hilarious is her total lack of self-awareness about her behavior in making him sick of her…but all of the details she offers makes it plainly obvious. She got dumped for being a shrill, nagging, empowered and equal bitch.
A classic case of the eternal solipsism of the feminist mind.
LikeLike
Yummie New York City women represent the worst of the worst. Rarely will you find elsewhere a breed of fembot so self absorbed with her own reality.
yes, but the flip side is that nyc is a wonderful playground for asshole game. it’s almost too easy.
LikeLike
Once dated a feminazi who would get mad at displays of minor chivalry. When I tried to hold doors from her, she would actually stop until I let the door go and walked in—even if a line formed behind her. A self-centered feminist bitch to the core.
Then she would get angry if I didn’t offer to help move large things because, “You’re a man, you’re stronger.”
LikeLike
itsme, too true. Once I discovered asshole game, NY became my oyster.
LikeLike
Also, Itsme, that anecdote about assassins is hilarious, and rather obviously wrong. Centuries ago, if you were rich enough that someone was trying to kill you, you had SERVANTS. Not to mention guards. The idea that assassins were just lyin’ in wait in people’s houses is itself pretty absurd, but the idea that their response to this would be to have their wives enter first is even more so, when anyone worth having killed would have had a household staff.
Just livin’ up to my name.
[Editor: True.]
LikeLike
this is what happens to her later
http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-girl-talk-i-am-going-on-a-sex-dating-drinking-sabbatical/
LikeLike
Every time I hear the word “chivalry” I picture some dorky, too clean cut Disney prince engaging in exaggerated gestures of kindness.
LikeLike
The breakup story is well worth a read – hilarious!
Mr Chivalry kicked her out Like a Boss, and didn’t move in with his parents ‘while they worked things out’ like she suggested. Women love stealing domiciles. It’s the uglier side of their nesting instinct.
I enjoy being chivalrous, but only with the women who merit it (and never beyond “I’ll buy the first round.”) Like FactCheck said, it can be an effective version of Vulnerability Game in the right contexts – a mix of Beta Provider with implicit Alpha Dominance. “I’m holding back my natural impatience to hold open this door for you, my lovely, weak-willed woman – with a sly and knowing grin, of course.”
Not something you start with a woman ten minutes after picking her up in a bar, of course. That’s nothing but: “Can I please buy you a drink to earn sex with you?”
LikeLike
Another timely post so i’ll just chalk it up as another coincidence. Not!!
I had intended to inquire of you fine folks your opinions in regard to the proper procedure in gaming a prospect that i opened yesterday at a mate’s office. Allow me not to bore ya’ll with details of the precise negs and aloof confident behavior resulting in the ideal responses (cheshire grin/head toss back cackling/jaw drops) predicted by this forum. My said mate texted me today stating he “clown her” for been the only receptionist that has never been given flowers so i should send her some.
I cringe at the thought of such a supplicant beta move after an irreverant alpha display but factors such as having parents from a patriachal country, her sheer femininty and eagerness in knowing what the fuck i’m on about brought me to conclude what would “Skittles man” and “Bring da movies” do. Picture those cats calling up a florist and making the arrangement. Besides, i’m armed with The Chateau’s revered vast halls on the subject and an insightful quote by a certain Mr. Emerson
” Don’t be too timid and squeamish about your actions. All life is an experiment. The more experiments you make the better.”
Cheers.
LikeLike
Biggest white knight douchebag of all time???
Bruno Mars – “Grenade”
I’d catch a grenade for ya (yeah, yeah, yeah)
Throw my hand on a blade for ya (yeah, yeah, yeah )
I’d jump in front of a train for ya(yeah, yeah, yeah )
You know I’d do anything for ya(yeah, yeah, yeah) Oh, oh,
I would go through all this pain,
Take a bullet straight through my brain,
Yes, I would die for you baby
LikeLike
The author’s personal profile is beyond parody.
“Interests: books, gender studies, yoga, fashion, beauty, burlesque, panda bears, Marc Chagall, photography, chocolate mousse
favorite websites: gawker, jezebel, fashionista, nytimes, slate, salon, feministing, bbc, guardian, times of london, guest of a guest, jcruel,
Favorite TV Shows: Skins, Mad Men, Hotel Babylon, Gossip Girl, Project Runway…
Favorite Quotes: “You don’t have to love me. You don’t even have to like me. But you WILL respect me.” — Kelis”
LikeLike
funny blog
http://westernwomensuck.blogspot.com/
LikeLike
that girl has issues
http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-girl-talk-i-wanted-to-be-dominated/
LikeLike
What’s hilarious is her total lack of self-awareness about her behavior in making him sick of her…but all of the details she offers makes it plainly obvious.
I was also struck by the fact that they moved in together after THREE MONTHS and her saying she would do that again. But next time, she’ll have a “serious conversation” with the guy first, as if that’ll prevent this from happening again.
LikeLike
this line in the article pretty much sums the writer up:
For the first time in my life, I genuinely liked how chivalry made me feel: valued as someone worthy of his extra-special attention, taken care of, to an extent, and even a little bit “ladylike,” whatever that means.
LikeLike
@factcheck
Also, Itsme, that anecdote about assassins is hilarious, and rather obviously wrong. Centuries ago, if you were rich enough that someone was trying to kill you, you had SERVANTS. Not to mention guards. The idea that assassins were just lyin’ in wait in people’s houses is itself pretty absurd, but the idea that their response to this would be to have their wives enter first is even more so, when anyone worth having killed would have had a household staff.
yes, but the salient point is that the woman who shit tests you with ‘why don’t you ever hold the door for me?’ won’t know that.
LikeLike
Actually, Chivalry started out as a movement by Catholic clergy to get Knights to become less thuggish and stop killing people long enough to build a growing society and population. It was a great civilizing influence in the West actually and generally a very good thing given the mores of the day. It became this movement of kindness towards women and the weak over time but women in turn had very specific functions in society as well and had to act within their constraints in order to receive the benefits of chivalry. Peasant women could never benefit from it. They were YRMs, young rural minxes and no doubt kept the knights from getting too sappy as a safety valve. Chivalry would have never been a movement of consequence without badass, professional killers practicing it. Knights liked little else more than fighting and killing.
LikeLike
Read that domination article by the same chick. Umm…anyone want to take a stab at helping her figure out this stuff:
LikeLike
@INTP,
I can’t change the radio station fast enough when that insipid Bruno Mars song comes on.
Usually I’ll put on some Kanye or early Jay-Z from my iPod as an immediate audio antidote to the beta bullshit emanating from the stereo speakers.
LikeLike
The ability to be chivalrous in order to get laid is part of the Game. Sometimes it keeps women guessing because you can portray yourself as mysterious and aloof, while doing these little things.
Both men and women put up false personas to get what they want and if politeness helps some guys score, so be it (as long as they don’t keep it up too long and appear like giant wussbags).
LikeLike
itsme,
What woman in her right mind would enter a house ahead of her husband if she thought it was a dangerous situation?
LikeLike
From the breakups story:
So it’s fine for her to take back her Christmas gift to him, but not for him to demand back his gift to her? And no reciprocal last minute change of heart on her part about those copper pots, she sees no problem with that???
Typical one way “equity” of entitled American feminist girls. Just damn typical.
Oh and her big complaint is that she had to move when he broke up with her. Even though they both moved into a spare bedroom of a good friend of her bf’s. American women. Of course she should be the one to have to move out. It’s the guy’s friend’s place for chrissakes.
LikeLike
I don’t think it’s said enough — your metaphors & similes are so appropriate and well executed they might be half the reason i come here
LikeLike
I am very fortunate to have not had this problem with men. They have always been respectful towards me, even here in the big cities of the United States.
LikeLike
“Feminism is, at its core, an ideology of will to power scaffolded by lies. It has little to do with equality. It’s goal is the power aggrandizement of women at the expense of men (as it has to be since power is zero sum), and by whatever means necessary.”
Power is not zero sum. By working together, two guys can do far more work than they could individually.
The problem is that Feminism does not want to work with men.
LikeLike
one time, i was traveling with this girl, and we were just leaving a hostel, i had lost my v card the night before (to a different girl) so i was super happy, and in the moment i forgot myself and opened the door for her. she made a face of complete disgust for a second, then went through. never open doors for chicks.
LikeLike
This, friends, is how you do it:
His texting threats are weak, but everything else (aside from moving in with the harpy in the first place) makes me want to buy him a beer. I hope he’s found enlightenment, and will waste no more time on such women.
[Editor: I wonder what she did? Usually, guys don’t react so harshly to gf’s unless she did something particularly noxious, like, oh, fuck the roommate.]
LikeLike
John–
At first blush this will seem to most who aren’t commenting regulars at this site as obvious misogyny. Or close to it. Maybe it isn’t necessarily disliking or hating women, but it seems far from the opposite.
Yet do women respect men as a gender these days? Hell no. Most young feminism indoctrinated (media, schools, often homes) American women reflexively denigrate men in general, except those who have proven themselves.
Why should men respect women who haven’t shown themselves worthy of respect, particularly when the behavior of so many is being less and less respectable.
This message that men should respect women is really telling men to pedestalize them and defer to women. What rubbish.
LikeLike
In all seriousness, at some point you should compile all (or many) of your entries over the years into some kind of indexed, point-counterpoint hardcover tome. Then guys, whenever in need of an eloquent, pithy response to a selected feminist theory talking point, could simply consult the tome. I know I personally would pay a fair penny to be able to access a topical, easily accessed cool blast of sanity on demand. I bet others would, too.
LikeLike
and the first comment on the article:
“I really appreciate chivalry. I am also rasing my sons to be chivalrous.”
less drama for the momma
“I think that it’s unfortunate that so many women don’t like it.”
might lead to big drama for the momma.
“I don’t think that there is really anything sexist about it,”
liike the sky is red…at least sometimes.
“It’s the little things that make me smile. ”
like my husband’s penis.
LikeLike
if you’re on a date and a woman you open the door for (should you choose to do so) gives you a look or comment that is anything but appreciative, at the next door, open it for yourself and walk through, then close the door shut behind you.
she will either be pissed, or her vag will tingle. either way, you win.
LikeLike
LibraryDeskGraffiti
I relish the look on girls’ faces when the door just closes after I’ve gone through. “Oh, were you expecting me to hold that?”
Rule 32: enjoy the little things.
——————
And Rule 18: Don’t be a hero.
While short and not involving too much flowery prose, I think this is one of the best and most enlightening posts of CH so far.
Today it makes me laugh how my ex (who turned out to be a cheating whore) used to be uptight about chivalry and me opening or not opening doors for her and etc. The id monster truly holds dominion over all.
LikeLike
As usual, the article is right on the money.
LikeLike
Even without venturing an opinion on whether or not feminism and chivalry are compatible, notice how her opening paragraph could only be written by someone schooled in victimhood. She evinces no factual situation in which chivalry would even be relevant to her. Jumping over puddles? Like this is something women didn’t do for themselves in 1966? I’ve got news for her, even then, strangers didn’t carry groceries up stairs for women unless they thought it would lead to something. And besides, chivalry is very much alive. Here it’s called White Knighting. All I have to do to make some larger male thrust his chest in my face is tell a woman she doesn’t know what she’s talking about. And how about the police? If this witch thinks she’s got no special favors coming, dead, all she has to do is a simple empirical experiment: call the cops and tell ’em a man spoke disrepectfully to her. I guarantee they’ll at least ID the guy (a 4th amendment violation).
LikeLike
There’s no such thing as chivalry anymore. It died out centuries ago.
What we have today is manners.
Which is nothing fancy — just the lubricant so random encounters between strangers in public places go more smoothly. You hold doors for people. You offer your seat to someone who looks like he needs it more than you. You do them a small favor, they do you one in return.
This chivalry stuff you’re describing is how beta losers games girls.
LikeLike
What’s really depressing is seeing the feminization of little boys in todays society. At an early age they are taught that the essential qualities of their maleness are bad and should be shunned. This has been going on for a long time, but it is so much worse now than when I grew up 20 years ago.
LikeLike
This falls into girls desiring the want, rather than the actual. It’s bull that girls beleive chivalry doesn’t exist, she probably has 1000’s of doors open for everyday. Just not from the guys she wants.
betas still do this white knighting all the time, but she won’t awvknowledge them.
LikeLike
On the door opening thing, and similar situations such as pulling a chair out, an easy way to be chivalrous without risking coming across as pathetic to a woman you’re on good terms with is to tell them to hurry up as you’re waiting.
A simple “come on…” or “I haven’t got all day” can go a long way.
LikeLike
I appreciated the pun.
Now just learn the distinction between “born of” and “borne of” and yer all good. I’m not usually an editing freak, but you’ve made that mistake a couple of times now.
—
I’m sorry you’ve been so screwed by life that you actually relish such things.
The spirit of the post is on point, but … really? Doors? Relish? Dear god, it must suck to walk around with that kind of bitterness inside you. I’ve had that level of bitterness from other things; believe me, life is better once it dissipates.
I hold doors for lots of women. I hold doors for men, too.
I have held probably thousands, if not tens of thousands, of doors in my life (and had an equal number held for me) and have never, once, had a woman get shrill with me for doing so. What planet are these dispatches from, again?
LikeLike
[…] February 4, 2011 by PlasticMakesPerfect Leave a Comment A Generation Hexed chick bemoans the loss of chivalry, and claims modern day chivalry and feminism can coexist: Living in Manhattan during college and after college would make even the most chivalry-loving women have to get her hands dirty. Unless you’re wealthy and can afford to take cabs everywhere (or do FreshDirect all the time), you carry your groceries home and up your stairs. And you probably live in a sixth-floor walkup! You jump over you … Read More […]
LikeLike
I could barf at all the times I was “chivalrous” in my younger days.
And NO, chivalry was NEVER meant to be a way to attract females.
Oh yes, it´s always been sold this way.
But in fact it´s nothing but a subconscious expression of THE SUBSERVIENCE you are being brainwashed into.
Holding the door waiting that someone else steps through is always a mark of subservience.
Step through the fucking thing first and then turn around and hold it open. THAT´S polite.
LikeLike
@itsme,
i dont know whether it’s historically valid, but i just laughed so hard that i snorted.
LikeLike
“women are reproductively more valuable than men”
On a tribal level, they’re not.
A group of men with few or no women can always go steal another group’s women. A group of women with few or no men gets stolen and split up among other men. The rape of the Sabine women didn’t come out of nowhere.
Men define the tribe and its existence.
Women are more valuable only if the total human population is very small, and that hasn’t been the case for a long time.
LikeLike
“Chivalry and feminism are in fact mutually exclusive”
I agree. Feminists who expects chivalrous behaviors are retards.
LikeLike
Also, from that second article
“So when he suddenly and unexpectedly broke up with me right after New Year’s Day and suggested that I move out, I thought, What, you want me to move out?””
She goes on. It’s hilarious. I think he’s getting over his chivalry.
LikeLike
“Hulk Hogan is not going to lug your new couch up the stairs,”
She lives in New York and she can afford a new couch?
How big is her trust fund and does he have Daddy issues? (Hey, I’m an old guy, just askin’.)
LikeLike
My theory is that boys raised exclusively by women overvalue what women say, boys are more literal (girls value emotional- or revolutionary-truth), the woman is an authority figure, and this ruins them for future life in many ways.
You cannot make a woman happy by doing what she says with her words. In fact listening and acting on the words of a woman is the best way to drive women away and achieve beta or omega status. Women are so out of touch with their real self that nearly all women deny this so they create and dump betas.
Women are absolutely convinced that they want a man that does what she says but they don’t value a man in direct proportion to his cooperation with her.
LikeLike
Southern man deserves a case of JD for saving his roommate’s life.
LikeLike
I’m a fan of chivalry – from both men and women. It’s called kindness, and NYC is a city that admittedly could do with more of it.
I want doors opened for me – not opened so I can pass, but held open so I can catch them. And yes, I do the same for everyone, men and women alike, who follow me. I want men I date to help me move things, but not to move them for me — just as my female friends would help, and just as I’d help them.
Men and women certainly aren’t physically equal in strength, and, yes, I value men who help me when I’m struggling with luggage or heavy doors because I’m wearing heels. That’s the small, petty trade modern gender roles demand: we (women) wear heels and impractical dresses, keep our BMI under 20, and groom our nails; you (men) help us lift things now and then.
That’s not chivalry by the classical Western standard. Chivalry is protecting women — from fights, from poverty, from the cruelties of life. And the modern woman — who is statistically likely to be saddled with childrearing burdens from irresponsible men who have abandoned her, who is paid less in the workforce, who is expected to work and take on more household responsibilities — is certainly protected from none of these. True chivalry died long ago, and that’s fine; equality is both a higher and lower standard that women accept.
But kindness to strangers shouldn’t be a gendered matter. Hold open doors — behind you. Help everyone struggling with luggage with their luggage, no matter their gender, age, or attractiveness. That makes you a good, kind person, and yes, it makes you more alpha — because your kindness isn’t directed toward a woman in appeal for sexual favors (a “beta” trait), it’s a sign that you can afford to be kind.
LikeLike
Thanking her for making you dinner is the only chivalry women deserve. And only if the food is good.
LikeLike
Skittles… the gift that keeps on giving.
LikeLike
This girl, who’s kind of pretty, believes that she can land an old-school alpha husband, after writing on a high volume website about her love of rough sex?
An infinite capacity for self-delusion.
As for chivalrous gestures, I spare them for old or middle-aged ladies, or ugly ones. They nearly always smile, and it surprises pretty women when I leave Granny or Big Bertha out, then barge past the cupcake.
LikeLike
Actually, chivalry was a system for treating you boss’s wife and daughters (and his boss’s, etc.). Even in 19th century England, men were expected to hold the door open for their social superiors. (It still is a good way to deal with your bosses women, making them like you will help you with the boss, screwing them won’t).
LikeLike
She also seems to like attached men, and rode the carousel three times in one weekend, with 3 different fellows, while carrying on a quasi-affair with a fourth.
And wrote about it. Her parents must be proud
LikeLike
“I wonder what she did? Usually, guys don’t react so harshly to gf’s unless she did something particularly noxious, like, oh, fuck the roommate.”
I’m guessing something like this happened. The graph where she talks about the roommate is a real giveaway:
“I’ll always be grateful for a lot of things our roommate did for me…for the many, many great conversations we had with each other. But at the end of the day, we were really different people and living in such close quarters was hard for me. The roommate is ex-military and Southern, loves football, shoot-‘em-up movies and bourbon, and had a rotating cast of not-always-stellar women in his bed. We butted heads constantly about my feminist opinions. And even though our roommate taught me a lot—”
sure he did. lots of “great conversations” i’m sure.
Still, maybe not. How could a woman who’s a such a narcissist tell-all *not* spill the beans about such a hookup? After all, this is a woman who details, in length, about how she got spanked and slapped around by a guy who was cheating on his GF at the time with her…
LikeLike
She didn’t get shtupped by the roommate. Her fellow would hardly have stayed in the house with either of them if that had been the reason.
Perhaps he discovered her cunt had more traffic than O’Hare International
LikeLike
It has occured to me that the arrival of the Internet is the single worst thing that has ever happened to the Woman Racket. I mean, this chick goes on and on in one post after another, without a trace of self-awareness, basically giving away what goes on inside a feral chick-brain. Which, all things considered, does not inspire male investment beyond a welcomed moment of ball-draining.
I used to think that drugs and alcohol were the best can-openers for chick inner realities. They are a good start. But give a chick a keyboard with a send button to the interwebs and they cannot help but destroy every bit of the pedestal their gender once sat on.
LikeLike
The Bruno Mars song is darwinism in action.
LikeLike
I think she did the Room-mate.
LikeLike
@ Rum, my favorite example of all this is Duke slut Karen Owens’ “fuck list” going viral.
LikeLike
@ritmo rioplatense
“I hold doors for lots of women. I hold doors for men, too.
I have held probably thousands, if not tens of thousands, of doors in my life (and had an equal number held for me) and have never, once, had a woman get shrill with me for doing so. What planet are these dispatches from, again?”
That’s my experience too, as it probably is for most other people. How uptight does one have to be to interpret an act of common courtesy as a sign of weakness?
LikeLike
Lara
itsme,
What woman in her right mind would enter a house ahead of her husband if she thought it was a dangerous situation?
agreed Laura not unless she didn’t think much of husband as a man. The number one job of a husband is to protect his wife and children.
LikeLike
Know what I think? I think we should bring back finishing school and make these bitches go through it.
By law.
Then you might see some chivalry brought back…
DC
LikeLike
“The simple, galling fact that women are sexually enticed by negs is enough to convince normally kind and generous men that pulling out chairs for them is a fool’s errand.”
But thats the whole point! Chivalry is a gentle way to diminish a woman’s sexual attraction towards a man.
Lancelot’s conundrum: the queen wants him. If he indulges her, he betrays the king – but if he rudely rebuffs her, she becomes an enemy. The solution: act very “beta”, and her attraction will fade.
[Editor: This interpretation is a bit of a stretch, but taking it at face value how often is a modern man going to encounter this situation? The problem today for most men isn’t threat from a betrayed king lopping off your head, but an indifferent woman rebuffing your advances.]
I Victorian times, wives would venture forth into the world and find themselves surrounded on all sides by chivalry. When they got home, their husbands were unquestioned heads of the household. Thus, each woman subconsciously though of her own husband as the world’s one and only “alpha” male. Sexual morality, and thus Western civilization, was possible.
So by all means, be chivalrous to your mother, sisters, old widows, other mens wives, little girls, and your best friend’s girlfriend.
In the presence of maidens you are interested in courting, on the other hand, go ahead and be a little arrogant, mischevious, teasing etc.
But those of you who act “alpha” 24/7, know this: you are the male equivalent of the woman in a tight miniskirt with fishnet stockings.
LikeLike
This article is a good start, but also a missed opportunity, because I think it leaves out two really important understandings.
First, chivalry is inseparable from the Christian conception of virtue. People barely remember what “virtue” means any more; they think it’s about not having overly fun sex and not being mean to illegal immigrants. But these are materialist values, and virtue was about placing otherworldly goals above worldly ones: humility, chastity, and (non-sexual) love above power, respect, and everything else feminists want. These otherworldly goals aren’t even on the radar screen of modern seculars, leaving chivalry without a foundation. Bottom line: chivalry is a man’s duty to guide and lead a woman in maintaining her virtue.
Second, chivalry in its original form reinforced the sexual dynamic, rather than undermined it, because the chivalrous man enforced the society’s expectations for the woman’s virtue and expected her obedience. He wasn’t just being nice to her; he was acting as a proxy for a demanding God who sets limits on her behavior. The man’s protection of the woman is in service of her maintaining her virtue. You correctly point out that modern chivalry is interpreted as beta behavior and sabotages sexual polarity, but you didn’t mention how the more coercive form of chivalry supports sexual polarity.
LikeLike
If I only knew how to be a PUA
Created by:
The man behind the Green door productions
—
I could masturbate away the hours, conferrin’ in the showers
Consultin’ with my peen.
Or some skank I could be strokin’ while
my thoughts were busy pokin’
some other hooker on a train.
I’d undress every ho with my ‘magination,
In need of a pump at my station.
With all the thoughts of undressin’
And the dresses I’d be messin’
If I only knew how to be a PUA.
Oh, I could tell you why every woman I can’t score is a whore.
I could think of girls I never murdered or raped before.
And then I’d sit, and stalk some more.
I would not be just a nothin’ my head all full of stuffin’
My heart all full of pain.
I would fuck and be skanky, I could play hanky-panky,
If Ionly knew how to be a PUA…
—————
Cue scene with Dorothy the Hooker:
Dipshit: Your pimp is a PUA?
Dorothy: Uh huh.
Dipshit: Do you think if I went with you, this PUA would give me a brain to score poon?
Dorothy: I couldn’t say. But, even if he didn’t, you’d be no worse off than you are now!
Dipshit: Yes, that’s true.
Dorothy: But, maybe you’d better not, I’ve got a married woman mad at me and you might get into trouble.
Dipshit: Married woman?! Hmph! I’m not afraid of a married women. I’m not afraid of anything! Well, eh, except for scoring some infected snatch.
Dorothy: I don’t blame you for that.
Dipshit: But, I’d shove my face in a whole box full infected snatch for a chance of scoring some poon. Look, I won’t be any trouble because I don’t eat poon and I won’t try to manage things because I can’t think. Won’t you take me with you?
Dorothy: Why, of course I will!
Dipshit: Hooray! We’re off to see a PUA!
Dorothy: You’re not starting off very well!
Dipshit: [after premature ejaculation] I’ll try! Really I will!
Dorothy: Eww my dress!
-End scene-
LikeLike
Yes. Good article. Well put. Why is this shit so damn hard for women to understand? Too much pink unicorns and Arbor Mist no doubt.
LikeLike
whiskey said: “I think she did the Room-mate.”
If it was just a hook-up where she didn’t sleep in the bed with him afterward or just blew him, then it “didn’t count” because she didn’t “sleep with” him (you know, no intimacy and feelings, just gettin’ rocks off0 and it’s not sex if it’s oral.
LikeLike
I once had a mistaken sense of chivalry. I used to romanticize a lot of white knighting behavior and fully expected it to work. This attitude began its slow death once I left high school, read tucker max, and experienced college; however, CH was the one who pulled the plug. Luckily for those of us who like getting laid, the girls of my generation (22 and younger) don’t even *pretend* to expect chivalry like this older femcunt does, thanks to the equalist indoctrination they are smothered in from day 1. In fact, as noted by many already, most chivalrous acts with the chicks my age will almost automatically DLV you massively and get you tossed into the friend zone faster than the crocodile-like snapping shut of her vagina.
LikeLike
greenlander’s right on the money:
A right mix of alpha and beta – aloof and laconically non-caring yet chivalrous at times – basically unpredictability – that works for me. Or as someone said:
Treat the princesses like shit and the less confident girls like princesses.
[Editor: Right. This is the only way chivalry — or a facsimilie of chivalry — helps a man get laid. He has to be either a.) perceptibly higher value than the girl he is wooing, or b.) already dating her or otherwise attractive to her. The typcial man, that is, 90% of men, would actually harm their chances with women by being chivalrous.
Or, to put it more plainly: there has never been a man who got laid by being deferential to a woman.]
LikeLike
We need to distinguish between holding doors for people and opening doors for them. There’s a big difference.
LikeLike
lzozozlozlzolllozzolzo
“We need to distinguish between holding doors for people and opening doors for them. There’s a big difference.”
We need to distinguish between lotsa cockas in da butthople for people and lotas cockas in da ginahole lzozllzlzo. There’s a big difference.
LikeLike
My guess is that it was a mix of him getting sick of her shit, so he started getting that other woman ready to replace her, and something happening with the roommate that made him get rid of her like a boss.
LikeLike
Excellent additional discussions on this topic here:
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2010/12/30/chivalry-on-the-titanic/
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/01/03/chivalry-only-comes-from-a-position-of-strength/
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2011/01/06/we-are-all-chivalrous-now/
LikeLike
[Editor: I wonder what she did? Usually, guys don’t react so harshly to gf’s unless she did something particularly noxious, like, oh, fuck the roommate.]
Easy – it is considered slander per se in some jurisdictions to imply, even on the basis of a good faith belief, that a woman is unchaste.
LikeLike
ritmo,
I don’t give a shit if he makes a spelling mistake. He has something to say and says it well.
You, OTOH, use cringeworthy cant like “yer” and have nothing to say.
So fuck off.
LikeLike
The tragedy is women wants best of the world. A women does not want to shed the notion that she is equal and at the same time she expects that men act chivalry. The paradox will continue as long as women do not accept the correct notion i.e. they are inferior/substandard then men.
LikeLike
Tooheys: “…and something happening with the roommate that made him get rid of her like a boss.”
If so, whatever it was didn’t violate the “bro code” so he didn’t his ass kicked-out too. “Dude, your girl wanted me to pull a triple-penetration with her and two other guys in your bed while you were gone, but I told her no ’cause I wouldn’t do that to you– just thought you should know.”
LikeLike
That chick is cute in the “holy shit, you’re not a pre-pubecent boy?” way.
LikeLike
Chivalry is dead, by Tom Lekis. You readers should listen to him
LikeLike
Johnny Caustic,
That’s true. Our predecessors knew and understood women a lot better than we do. They crave authority. That’s why so many modern women are miserable: By trying to act like feminists, they’re repressing their true desire to be protected, and dominated
LikeLike
@ Rum
Woman with blogs like those don’t think their past or recent actions will negatively impact their dating lives.
If some man happens to make a big deal out of it , they’ll just be dismissed as less of a man.
I just continue to laugh at these woman who believe that their word is law.
LikeLike
This door opening drama between men and women seems pretty weird to me. Where I come from, if people are going through the same door that needs opening, the one who’s closer to the door will open it and hold it for those coming immediately behind (the distance at which it is not impolite to let the door close behind you while someone is making their way to it is judged on an instinctive level). Holding the door is usually done with a specific neutral smile that’s reserved for encounters with strangers. The one(s) entering after the door opener murmur an equally neutral thank you, not too enthusiastic, not too indifferent. There are some exceptions to the rule of first at door, open door – if a younger person can gracefully get to the door before an older one, they may open it for them. The same favor can be done to someone who is walking in front of you to the door but is carrying something proportional. Gender plays little to no part in the door opening etiquette and any alteration happens fueled by common sense.
Come to think of it, I bet some would find it weird that there IS a door opening etiquette. And now I’ve freaked myself out by having actually written it down. Well! For posterity.
LikeLike
How about defusing any angry reaction by giving a quick smile and saying “It’s alright, nothing sexist; I don’t find you at all attractive”?
That should smooth any ruffled feathers on the ugly hen
LikeLike
A smiling glance from a pretty lady is a sexual payoff. If women want to go around handing out small sexual payoffs, such as dressing in an attractive way and having a flirty feminine demeanor, and if they show appreciation for manly gestures, then it is fair recompense for chilvarous actions. They don’t even have to single or non-slutty – they just have to behave like respectful ladies who know how to give as well as take.
Men would be happy with that.
Girls who have any question in their minds about sexual equality and gender neutrality will not want to give an inch, and so should not get an inch.
LikeLike
Chivalry is dead because WOMEN killed it with their hypergamy.
Just tonight, my “wife” who I had been told had a BF, but, of course denied it repeatedly with a straight face…
I caught ’em together lol tonight.
If you are a woman who reads this blog THIS behavior is why you are getting treated the way you do.
Chivalry is dead, indeed.
You know in looking at it the shock wasn’t so much that my wife cheated but the fact that ALL women I’ve been around do this.
All I can do is steal a page from GBFM and say:
lolzlolz
LikeLike
Holding the door for the person behind you so it doesn’t slam in their face is common courtesy and everyone should do it. Holding the door and allowing a woman you don’t know to sail in ahead of you is too chivalrous in my opinion. The exceptions to that would be if she is elderly, has a baby stroller or is carrying something heavy. In those cases I would hold the door for her also.
LikeLike
“I think I would prefer more freedom and less chivalry when I’m young and when I’m older want respect and more chivalry.”
In sum, you want to go on a cock binge for a few decades, and then want acts respect and kindness after you’ve demonstrated that you don’t merit them?
[Editor: Basically that’s what she’s saying. Or: she wants validation after she has hit the wall that she still has market value left.]
LikeLike
http://guestofaguest.com/directory/jessica-wakeman/35602/
The chivalry vs feminism thing is obviously a theoretical exercise for this girl. I can’t imagine she gets a lot of male attention. She’s a 5 even when dressed up.
LikeLike
If you are going to hold the door for a woman at least do it right. Barely get out of her way so she is forced to brush us against you as she goes through and unabashedly eye her up and down. I don’t get that much anymore, but I would like it.
LikeLike
xsplat at 7:28am
and
Lara at 8:02am
All that needs to be said on the subject. (Though I’m sure it won’t be)
LikeLike
Carrying groceries home ? this isn’t gender neutral, men have to do the same thing.
Jumping over Puddles ? if the puddle is so large that you can’t simply step over it, walk around it.
Hail a cab ? try harder next time.
LikeLike
Porn as Mindcontrol…
Orwell predicted Big Brother will control the masses thru:
-Cheap beer: eg, drugs
-National lottery: stock markets, bubbles
-Pornography: Porn
http://nymag.com/news/features/70976/
On a positive note the Telescreen is two sided: Egypt
LikeLike
As far as my second comment goes I would say, in general, it isn’t a good idea to do this, I know a woman who filed a complaint with a furniture company over this. You might be able to get away with it if you are really good looking and cool, though.
LikeLike
I enjoy the protection of men and appreciates their strength that they demonstrate through their initiatives. This does not lessen my strength as a woman or independence, for I am ALLOWING him to treat me in this manner. I love being a woman! Having a petite frame helps men around feel a sense of comfort in being chivalrous and in turn they allow me to be the woman I am.
LikeLike
Here is proof against Chivalry and Feminism.
I believe that deep down all women are like this. This show, ironically debuting on a TV network started by Oprah will, can help cure betas of their pedestalization complex.
I will preemptively strike all the forth coming verbal diarrhea from all the femtards out there.
I must be a 5′ 2″ virgin with awful hygiene who spends all his time playing WoW, and the only vagina I have ever seen are in albino midget amputee porn.
Man, you femtards should try not to be so predictable and learn some new material, it can get stale some times. If not for us then do it so your fellow femtards can have quick laugh, then go back to secretly hating you for being wittier than them.
Also, the only reason women were ever good at cooking or cleaning was because men taught them how to do it first, andwomen suck at both science and math. Any women who doesn’t merely proves the exception to the rule by being unfeminine, and there aren’t enough nootropics out there to change this.
Here is a link so you can feel less stupid.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootropic
See, I saved you time, I have a heart.
Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to eat a 500g steak with a side of bread and beer (eating vegetables is gay).
Then, I’m going to try the Apocalypse Opener on a bunch of hot, strange women, not because I am primarily interested in fucking them per se, but because I want to see how they react.
LikeLike
Growing up in a family filled with men with the exception of my grandma and mom, I am grateful for the protection, love, care, and the many chivalrous ways that have been showered to me. My grandpa was the most chivalrous man I have ever known. My grandma was soft and feminine and they were a match from heaven. I see and internalize. This is my template. I think I’ve found it! hehehe!!
LikeLike
Whackjob
Actually this is most definitely factually and historically wrong. Chivalry began as an idealist military ethos ethos among rough but apex warrior knights in Europe in the Middle Ages. It may have begun in Spain, and yeah there are moorish influences. It was about honor and duty as well as courtly manners and love. It’s morphed to be associated with the later, aka “being a gentleman”
The courtly love and manners side of chivalry were only extended to ladies, of equal or often higher social status – by virtue of their fathers or husbands status.
By themselves though women unquestionably had lower status then. So there is that element of truth to Greenlander’s supposition. What Tyrone said is also partly true. I don’t know if the Church really invented or shaped all aspects of chivalry but it certainly encouraged it’s spread, again as a civilizing force in the European upper classes.
LikeLike
what
Chivalry is good, balancing, and tends to attract women to the men practicing it, when it’s conducted within a strong patriarchal cultural and other frame.
Chivalry is unwarranted and undeserved, feels emasculating in many circumstances and tends not to attract women to the men practicing it when it’s conducted within a strong feminist frame, such as among 20 something girls in the big cities in post feminist America these days.
Some gestures can work for purposes of attracting a hot girl to want a relationship when the girl already considers you alpha and edgie. It tends to dull the edge but builds attraction in the current American zeitgeist. It won’t tend to help you get into a hot girls pants quickly. The right kinds can be a good type of beta move in relationship game in other words.
The kinds of chivalry I’m talking about working in this way are helping your girl with her heavy suitcase etc. Not gestures like opening the car door for her, which is just pointless supplication to a gender that no longer feels any general superiority of males or males who are “gentlemen” in our society – in fact usually the opposite.
LikeLike
*builds comfort I meant, rather than edgie attraction.
LikeLike
what–
Of course girls who aren’t thinking ideologically want males to continue to do the kinds of chivalry that actually constitute a service to then, as opposed to a formal gesture (like opening doors or seating her).
But the question is, whats in it for him especially when done for randoms?
The answer when she isn’t already big attracted to him is generally: nothing. In fact it’s a negative. Makes him feel like a “good boy” and even lapdog and supplicating to her — in our unfortunate post feminist culture.
LikeLike
Doug1,
What’s in it for him?
For the guy I’m with:
I would like to think that my demonstrative ways of loving him and taking care of him would be my appreciation of him for taking care of me. Being there for him emotionally and placing him first and other exciting ways ( I won’t say hehe!!) will be my reciprocality.
Random chivalry:
To receive with appreciation. A thank you and an appreciative smile would be nice. Allowing men to be men and simply being a woman.
LikeLike
@Doug1
“Not gestures like opening the car door for her, which is just pointless supplication to a gender that no longer feels any general superiority of males or males who are “gentlemen” in our society – in fact usually the opposite.”
The bigger picture is that it is so sad. Whether it is chivalry or other acts of kindness. We, as a society have loss our ability to appreciate each other. No one has to open any doors for anyone, but if they do….show your appreciation, appreciate each other. Entitlement—taken to the extreme is so damaging.
LikeLike
the only time i’ll open a door to let a woman go through first is if she is coming out of a store with her arms full and i’m going in at the same time. but i’d do that if it were a man, as that’s just common courtesy.
from the perspective of body language, allowing someone to go through a door before you is a gesture of dominance, not deference. think of it like a shephard corralling his sheep. if you ever see footage of world leaders at summits, pay attention to how they enter and exit rooms. the most powerful leaders wait to be the last ones in/out. sometimes the very last two will practically fight over who will be the last through the door.
LikeLike
Feminine behavior is the female analogue of alpha behavior (as the term is used on this blog). It is the set of behaviors that appeal to men’s sexual natures. Women who are acting feminine are therefore flirting, which is a mild sexual favor. Women who refuse to act feminine are refusing to flirt.
Being chivalrous also is a form of flirting. One way flirting is a rip off.
LikeLike
Holding the door open is a signal of hospitality, which signals that you are the host – you own the room. Especially so when you are heading in to a meeting.
LikeLike
@lara
As far as my second comment goes I would say, in general, it isn’t a good idea to do this, I know a woman who filed a complaint with a furniture company over this.
i do it, but not when i’m working. that’s just a stupid thing for someone to do if they value their job. at work, be professional.
LikeLike
I don’t think a man holding a door open for a woman is ever a sign of submissiveness, it just might be a little more kindness than a lot of women deserve. I agree with xsplat’s criteria for doing it.
LikeLike
itmse,
Good observation about the alpha male being the last to leave or enter a room. So I guess it all depends on the situation.
LikeLike
Great article, really hammers home the nuances of modern urban relationships.
LikeLike
I can manage to be chivalrous without coming off as a needy beta.
I walk in first, swing the door open and hold it while she makes it halfway through. She says “Thank you” while I face forward again and keep walking.
I do it on natural instinct, rather than doing it for her. The same goes for buying her a drink. If I just feel good about her company (because she’s been nice to me), I’ll get her a drink and not make a big deal of it. I’m not kissing her ass, I’m just doing it on my own terms with no sense of care what the outcome is.
It’s worked for me most of the time. The girls naturally respond to it well and try to keep my attention at bay.
Besides that, I’ll never want to do so much chivalrous crap for a girl – I’m worried it’ll set the frame up that I have to practically carry her ass for the rest of the time we’re together. And having to deal with a ‘baby’ who can’t find her own independence is too much of a burden for me.
LikeLike
“Feminine behavior is the female analogue of alpha behavior (as the term is used on this blog). It is the set of behaviors that appeal to men’s sexual natures. Women who are acting feminine are therefore flirting, which is a mild sexual favor. Women who refuse to act feminine are refusing to flirt.”
Absolutely xsplat. I’ve notice I dig a chic way more if she acts feminine. A chic that thinks burping and farting openly like a man loses a lot of value in my eyes. I dated a girl from Massachusetts who did that and it got very annoying, very fast.
LikeLike
Girls are usually shocked when I open a door for them, especially in DC. I’m sort of from the south where it is expected and doesn’t really help you in your game, but not opening a door for a girl where I’m from will definitely not get you laid in most cases. In DC, however, girls are usually impressed when you open a door for them. I don’t think having such manners diminishes one’s alphaness, perhaps it even enhances it. Manners display an appearance of maturity, which gives you a leg up on the d-bags and guys who think they are still in a college fraternity.
LikeLike
I don’t expect women to be anything other than women. Your job, as a man, is to be of such higher value that you can laugh off her useless fretting and worrying. The thought of you being in someone else’s life instead of hers is so soul crushing that she isn’t gonna be worried about a door or a bag of Skittles or whatever. If you can’t be that kinda guy to her, why bother? I have had girls that wanted to date me but I knew I didn’t have that kind of hand with them. And you know what? I didn’t date them.
If it ain’t easy, I don’t need it. Call it the Guns and Roses Doctrine.
LikeLike
El Brando-
That is exactly right. It makes you seem mature and can even set you apart from the d-bags. Couldn’t agree more.
LikeLike
Maybe he finally read her blog and found out that she had been calling him “Mr. Jessica”?
Whatever it was, I doubt she fucked the roomie, as (a.) she would have written about it and (b.) there would have been ex-/roomie conflict.
LikeLike
Alphacat @ 5:12
Fucking right.
About a decade ago Leykis’ radio show drove the wedge that began to separate my bullshit propaganda SWPL worldview in half to expose me to uncensored reality. Everything began to make a hell of a lot more sense afterwards, even though abandoning the pleasant illusion was sometimes painful.
Just listen to the way he handles callers, especially the hostile ones, and you can learn a lot about subtle verbal judo, beating this shit out of an opponent with facts and logic, and how to rile stupid people into a frenzy just through using the right intonation, timing and word choices.
His lessons on business, sex, booze, money, women, race, politics, wine, and life in general were a major revelation and are still useful to me today.
LikeLike
So it’s agreed. If the girl is sending out signals and you hold open the door for her and receive her beaming smile, it’s a fair exchange of sexual energy all around.
LikeLike
“http://guestofaguest.com/directory/jessica-wakeman/35602/
The chivalry vs feminism thing is obviously a theoretical exercise for this girl. I can’t imagine she gets a lot of male attention. She’s a 5 even when dressed up.”
5 is pretty generous, and given that she’s a femtard, I would say 3.
LikeLike
@itsme
“from the perspective of body language, allowing someone to go through a door before you is a gesture of dominance, not deference. think of it like a shephard corralling his sheep. if you ever see footage of world leaders at summits, pay attention to how they enter and exit rooms. the most powerful leaders wait to be the last ones in/out. sometimes the very last two will practically fight over who will be the last through the door.
”
Good point and often quite funny to watch.
LikeLike
Also, holding the door keeps knives out of one’s back.
LikeLike
In Japan the warriors had bushido… the way of the warrior. It was a battlefield/dueling code of behavior.
In Europe the warriors had chivalry… the way of the horse rider. By definition exclusively apex warriors at the the time.
The term is FRENCH not Spanish. French Normans conquered England and for many generations the language at Court was FRENCH. All laws were proclaimed in French and then translated for the commoners. William the Bastard became William the Conqueror without learning any English to speak of.
The link back to the Normandy Coast was so strong it lasted for many centuries, right through to Henry VIII.
The essence of both bushido and chivalry centered on the rights and privileges of class and rank on the battlefield. More specifically: knights were to concentrate on knights; high ranking knights were to concentrate on only high ranking knights; royals on royals – etc.
That is why in both societies battle dress always included signature ‘coats of arms’ , rally flags and such. It was a point of honor to be seen fighting valiantly against a proper ranked opponent.
A critical part of chivalrous practice was to capture royals — NEVER to kill them. Only a royal peer ( one’s own Prince ) had the right and the authority to kill an opposing royal. So you can see that chivalry was ‘state supported’, too.
Hence, the chronic captures, ransoms and swaps that dominated Western warfare centuries ago.
——–
Honors due royals extended to their queens and families. This is how chivalry leaked out into the peacetime Court. Soon enough the manners became known a ‘courtly behavior.’
At court the only true alpha was the king and Henry VIII is the ultimate alpha ever recorded. He remade the fabric of his society to accommodate his desires. Gengis Khan did not. He just amalgamated the Mongols.
So at court the Dukes and Earls had to affect beta and gamma behavior, else die. This crossed over into chasing the babes, too.
This is the true source of the mythic ‘beta behavior woos high born hottie.’
No alpha illustrates this better than the 17th Earl of Oxford — aka Shakespeare. ( Forget that idiot on Avon. )
He murdered a house cook (with a spear?) at the age of 7. ( Cold food?) Later came to duel constantly in the streets. ( Hence Romeo & Juliet is really about himself. ) These duels so infuriated the Queen that she laid down the law on the Earl. ( Again, exactly like the Prince in R &J. )
He was getting into these fights of ‘honor’ over his wise-ass wit. His tongue was so sharp and witty that the babes wanted him and the competition wanted him dead.
In his writing the Earl is constantly running Beta dialog — and Alpha dialog. The approach scene in R & J is a classic for all time. That’s the standard of courtly avowal gentlemen wished they could spout.
A really wealthy player would have professionals crank out poetry. Queen Elizabeth had the Earl, himself, on retainer and thus Shakespeare crafted love sonnets written from a queen’s point of view to her countless lovers. ( The Queen fucked more men than most pornlets — she was sterile — and her father had long established the Royal privilege.
The impact of Shakespeare on the wooing art has been long.
But when you check out his own track record — that’s not how he got the babes. He insulted and challenged the competition and very often killed them. Naturally the chicks thought that the 17th Earl of Oxford — raised in the Queen’s own household — was the next best thing to the Prince of Wales.
Courtly behavior, chivalry and the days of Shakespeare are completely dead. You’ll have to buy a ticket if you want to see them again.
LikeLike
Twenty said: “Whatever it was, I doubt she fucked the roomie, as (a.) she would have written about it and (b.) there would have been ex-/roomie conflict.”
Made the roomie an offer so skanky he had to tell Mr. Jessica before he married her just on G.P. “Bro, she’s a no-good ‘ho.”
LikeLike
Response to simple courtesy early in the first encounter is a front line male shit test
If she accepts it graciously she is potential LTR material and her feminity can be further explored.
Any push back and the amount of time spent on her is solely in proortion to her attractiveness
Significant pushback also offers an immediate, tho nanosecond long opening, for armegeddon game. On the best night of my life i pulled twice with two different women 8 hours apart using night game. Your assessment of her maculinity can help gauge her potential for a quick bedding and give you confidence to go for it
Fyi i am fat, not buff in anyway with facial features of a five on a good day, but i do have ” irrational self confidence”
LikeLike
@blert
Awesome post. I could read stuff like that all day.
Just curious, what were some of the ways that Henry changed the fabric of society to suit his needs?
I was also under the impression that Khan did more than just unite the tribes. Didn’t he also radically changed the structure of Mongol society (nepotism into meritocracy)?
LikeLike
A girl that asks “hey, wheres your girlfriend?”, is most of the times interest or she is telling me to go away?
LikeLike
Chivalry and feminism may be incompatible, but the irony is that chivalry birthed feminism. Feminism is the most recent in the long march of pro-female movements in Western history that began with … that’s right, chivalry.
If you notice, feminism really only exists in Western countries, and extreme feminism exists only in Anglo-Saxon culture, which also happened to be by far the most chivalric culture emerging from the Middle Ages.
Feminism is pretty much a dead letter in the Slavic countries of Eastern Europe, where chivalry never existed.
Feminism is quite strong in France, where chivalry was strong.
Feminism is less ingrained in Central Europe — Germany, Switzerland, Austria — and in Southern Europe — Spain, Italy, Greece. In all of these countries, chivalry was never a major part of the culture.
LikeLike
I think the guy found out his chick, the chick he was actually shacked up with, was all the while referencing him as a ———————- quote, ——————-“Mr. Jessica.”
She’s lucky she didn’t get belted right in the kisser.
For she surely deserved it.
LikeLike
The average face of women across the world.
LikeLike
From the same website:
http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-dear-wendy-how-many-sex-partners-is-too-many/
Note the question from the woman in a 7 month relationship with her bf, who secretly flies across the country for “closure” with a previous boyfriend (ostensibly on advice from a “psychologist”), then when she gets found out and dropped by the current bf, is complaining about the bf snooping on her life.
LikeLike
She got some good advice too.
http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-girl-talk-how-i-got-into-a-fight-with-a-priest/?eref=RSS
And ignored it. The priest sounds like he understands game.
LikeLike
AFC–
It’s a shittest. It might also be probing for actual info, in a shittest way.
LikeLike
Anyone see this? It’s Jessica Wakeman’s account of how she was “used” by her 37-year-old boss when she was a 22-year-old intern.
The boss didn’t introduce her to his friends and pretended she was a “complete stranger” when other workers were around.
This is one attention-whoring drama queen. Of course, Wakeman self-identifies as a feminist.
http://gawker.com/5367324/how-not-to-bone-your-interns
LikeLike
Dan
“Just curious, what were some of the ways that Henry changed the fabric of society to suit his needs?
Henry VIII kicked the Catholic Church out of England and took over all of its property. He dumped the Pope. He made himself head of the Church of England.
The wealth, political and diplomatic effect was drastic.
Henry VIII established in a practical sense the British Royal Navy. It went from a trivial number of so-so vessels to the head of the class. It declined greatly until it was refitted by Queen Elizabeth.
In 1588 the Spanish screwed up and lost naval supremacy.
All of these events were triggered by Henry’s need for a male heir. He was haunted by the specter of a fresh civil war upon his death.
The combination of Royal Navy and Anglican Church spread English political seed all over the world — to include North America.
Even Khan didn’t pull that off.
LikeLike
thule222–
From the article written by the woman Chateau’s referencing that you link just above:
No, it’s the priest who could send her a letter saying “I told you so.” The live together bf dumped her and told her to move out 4 months after the Frisky blog post from her I’m quoting.
LikeLike
@blert
Thanks for the reply. Very interesting stuff. Can you recommend any readings on Henry? I started on his wikipedia page today.
LikeLike
—-
And there will be a letter from me that says: “I told you so.”
No, it’s the priest who could send her a letter saying “I told you so.”
—–
Exactly, I can’t tell if this is too funny or too sad.
If someone has the time, it would be interesting to post the “I told you so” in conjunction with the dumping on her wall. Wonder how she would react ?
LikeLike
Dan
Google ‘Tudors’ under U-Tube.
The first seasons are free over the internet.
Tragically, they show lying, treason, treachery, vainglory, sex, nudity, power lust, etc.
In short, Court life in the 16th Century.
LikeLike
Henry VIII reached the very logical conclusion that the big money was across the water.
Further, that Spain actually had pretty lousy ships and shipwrights. This was due to too much Mediterranean thinking. More than you might imagine Madrid was concerned about fighting the muslim Ottoman fleet. Because of the calm water the Ottomans built awfully high ‘floating castles’ that depended upon oarsmen and some sail.
Yet to cross the Atlantic it was necessary to have drastically lower centimetric height. ( Else flip over in a storm. )
Britain had the right trees ( oak ) and access to Nordic pitch ( at a low, low price ) and eventually developed by far the most sea worthy ships of her day.
In 1588 the Spanish had no idea of what they were up against. They never sailed that far north to begin with.
Too late they discovered that they could not beat to the windward in those seas. Hence they floated the long way round England — not so much sailing as rafting.
Finally they met their doom off of Ireland in a horrific gale. Debris from that calamity are still found in those waters!
From that time on, England simply stole gold and silver from the Spanish Main just as Spain stole it from enslaved natives.
Spanish Holland broke free of Spain — with a big assist from England during this time. That campaign, IIRC, destroyed the Spanish domination on land.
Being the 16th Century most of the events were stretched out over many years. At the end the entire world order had flipped.
LikeLike
Chic says,
agreed Laura not unless she didn’t think much of husband as a man. The number one job of a husband is to protect his wife and children.
First of all, there are no more husbands in modern america, there are partners. For if one asserts there are husbands, there must needs be it’s binary opposite, wives. There are no wives in modern america, for this connotes helpmeet. Hence the hyphenated last name.
Sorry Chic, you’re a great gal, and young. But you cannot have your cake and eat it, too. Wives and helpmeets merit protection. Partners merit none. Nada. What they get is game. Aloof and laconic negs.
I’d protect someone helpless. One cannot protect someone already empowered. Protect, defend, guard -you can go ahead and shit-can those terms.
Your statement redacted: The number one job of a husband is to game his wife and children. If you want protection you must surrender all the hard-fought bennies of the feminist revolution: no more cock-carousel, no more hyphenated last name, no on-site daycare, no sexual harassment lawsuits, no yoga, manicures and pedicures, no dildos or vibrators, no birth control pill, no on-demand, taxpayer funded late term abortions, and on and on and on.
LikeLike
This keeps getting better. This woman (wakeman) has a spanking fetish:
http://www.thefrisky.com/post/246-first-time-for-everything-spanking/
At this point, it’s just sad. I don’t she had a very healthy childhood.
LikeLike
—quote from above link–
I finally feel comfortable choosing to be submissive in a relationship with a man in the bedroom, as long as he is choosing to behave in a dominant way and he respects me outside of the bedroom
———–
That’s the most cogent definition of feminism in a nutshell…it’s ok to be a slut as long as the *choice* is mine.
LikeLike
That’s the most cogent definition of feminism in a nutshell…it’s ok to be a slut as long as the *choice* is mine.
“Choice” is merely rationalizing the rationalization hampster itself. It’s like choosing to breathe, or choosing to have blood circulate thru the body.
LikeLike
There is just no denying that women dig assholes, that’s really what the core of this article speaks to. Women want to earn and lust for the man of higher status and bigger balls. Opening doors and kissing their ass does not allow them to do that. They want to worry, analyze, worry, analyze, worry, analyze. And when you’re licking their asses by opening doors and paying their way it doesnt’ allow them to do this.
The bottom line is women dig assholes. No question about it.
LikeLike
“Feminism is less ingrained in Central Europe — Germany, Switzerland, Austria — and in Southern Europe — Spain, Italy, Greece. In all of these countries, chivalry was never a major part of the culture.”
Wat? Spain was “the cradle of chivalry”. I take it you’ve never read Don Quixote.
LikeLike
BTW, I believe what blew up her relationship were her postings on the internet. She can’t close either hole.
I very much doubt that her ex comprehended just how open this dingbat was.
More generally, females will tell their peers in the most vivid manner blow by blow accounts of their bedtime entertainments.
The male mind simply cannot comprehend just how porny these testimonials get. They make Penthouse Letters as tame as a 3rd grade primer.
—–
She also has raving narcissism. How else to explain the constant “look at me” postings?
—–
She surely overshot her mark. She actually thinks/thought that a high grade alpha was obtainable.
But her feminist faith made that quite impossible. Any man of wealth is going to absolutely shun any bitch with a minor in ball busting/ gender studies. She’s a pre-packaged bankruptcy!
LikeLike
This is a wise post and women with modern dating woes should look into this idea. I’ve always heard women complain that they can’t find good men but they never ask themselves what they bring to the table. As women we can bring out the “good” in a man (protectiveness, leadership, masculinity) by just being true to ourselves as women. That means no nagging (or rarely if at all), staying attractive, fit, and appealing and being in touch with who we are as women. Being pleasant and sweet, caring… not overdoing it or being fake but being the most pleasant, feminine versions of ourselves. We’re women, we’re blessed w/ certain qualities so why even try to compete w/ men? Don’t try to be a man and you’ll see him become a better one everyday. Women need to fall back and allow the man to lead, then they’ll see the “chivalry” they want.
LikeLike
This is, without exaggeration, the best post that has been written on this ‘blog. Period. Unnecessarily crude language aside, it shows just how much civilization our society has lost by allowing the cultural-Marxist ideology of feminism to become dominant.
The modern predicament is indeed 90% women’s fault. But it is also men’s, for allowing the toxic ideology of feminism to take root. Say what you will about WWI, but if the outcome had been different, and if the Old Order hadn’t fallen, then the West might not have been so culturally emasculated, and men might still be men — the kind that would never have allowed feminism to gain any ground in the first place.
LikeLike
Brilliant.
LikeLike
Thule222
Her fight with the priest is a hoot: She gets good (and uncannily accurate) advice, takes it as a mortal insult, and finishes it with:
“Father D., 20-some-odd years from now, you will be getting an envelope from me. It will have a photo of me and the man I love, as many children as we are blessed with, and as many cats we can own without attracting the attention of the Health Department. And there will be a letter from me that says: “I told you so””
Fucking hilarious, given her future.
LikeLike
A truly great post.
That said, this Jessica is a sad example of the damage that the feminist movement has inflicted on American women. Her promiscuity and her jaw-dropping idiocy in writing about it on the Internet means she isn’t going to get a quality husband – unless he’s Amish
There’s a lot of lost souls like her- beyond the salvation that a loving traditional marriage and family would bring. And no. Betas and White Knights, they’re not worth saving either
LikeLike
“from the perspective of body language, allowing someone to go through a door before you is a gesture of dominance, not deference. think of it like a shephard corralling his sheep. if you ever see footage of world leaders at summits, pay attention to how they enter and exit rooms. the most powerful leaders wait to be the last ones in/out.”
Exactly. Very smart comment.
I tend to hold doors open for people all the time, for reason of courtesy, especially if anyone is holding things. But sometimes men get a bit uncomfortable. I think men get a bit uncomfortable with a petite woman holding the door open for them because being chivalrous is a dominant position.
Chivalry is the symbolic dominant position in society — holding open doors, opening and closing a car door for someone, walking on the outside of the sidewalk near the street — that’s something that a dominant person does for someone in the submissive position. The objects of chivalry are de-facto submissive.
LikeLike
Dreamer-
If western women were to subscribe to half of what you said, blogs like this wouldn’t even exist.
Relationships aren’t about “equality”, they are about the sexes coming together to compliment each others strengths and weaknesses. I have pretty much written off American women for anything but a quick pump and dump due to the fact that I refuse to compromise my masculinity to a a woman who refuses to embrace her feminine nature.
These female bloggers who struggle to reconcile their feminist beliefs with their innate desires provide us with a window into the true nature of everything that is wrong with gender relations in our society.
LikeLike
A site that frisky links to has this gem of a question:
“Ask E. Jean: Where Can I Find a Man That Isn’t Already Surrounded by Women?”
“But it’s like we’re wearing man repellent! We watch guys approach girls far less attractive than we are, and it’s so frustrating.”
http://www.elle.com/Life-Love/Ask-E.-Jean/Ask-E.-Jean-Where-Can-I-Find-a-Man-That-Isn-t-Already-Surrounded-by-Women
The beta wept.
LikeLike
[…] Prefer Laconic Men“, “Cheap and Easy Ways to Raise Your Value to a Girl“, “Chivalry and Feminism are Incompatible”Mike – “The Riddle of Will”Max – “Contrarian“, […]
LikeLike
Nailed it.
LikeLike
This post was very climactic.
It’s true, unfortunately, there isn’t much retribution for being nice. And anyone who has observational skills know assholes finish first. It’s just a sucky thing, and more people need to understand how to adapt to it. People could question it all they want in hopes to pull the old ways into the modern day, but that’s like raking waves on an ocean.
I still believe that chivalry is good. I don’t think it’s the route of all evil and we’re all stabbing ourselves in the face by using it. My friends always thought I was an asshole, I was also funny and charming, but asshole’ish none the less. But everyday when I gave my friends a ride, I would always open the passenger door first, as if on accident. It really raises a dimension to the person.
Jerks just do finish first, that’s just the way things are. No matter how many beta men try, they won’t start a revolution.
LikeLike
Jonathan Manor
Ya, no kidding. I was a huge jerk today. King Kong on Mount Everest jerk. Yesterday I sent my live in girlfriend out from my apartment to go spend the day in my other abode with my ex-girlfriend/personal-assistant and her helper, in order that I could spend the day and evening with my other main girl, who was having her graduation ceremony (where she received an award for being the top student in her major, and top ten in her graduating class). She was so distraught at being apart from me that night and thinking of me with my other girl that she barely slept. I sauntered in late in the afternoon and quickly became the life of the party, playing ping pong with a few of the other guests there. Then proceeded to seduce the both of them and have a threesome. My ex was freaking out with guilt because her boyfriend has only been out of town for one day, and here she was, unable to stop herself. She was perplexed and amazed at what she was doing, while she was doing it.
And while my 2nd girl was visiting my apartment, she saw my live ins feminine paraphenalia strewn conscpicuously everywhere.
So, ya, major King Kong asshole make the girls all cry game, and had sex with all three of them today, and they are all fucking nuts crazy about me – and don’t know why and can’t stop. Slaves, all of them.
LikeLike
But I should also mention that I not only love the two of them, I’m in love with them. I’ll easily tear up with affection thinking of em, and the sex is heartfelt well past the point of mere lust – I love these girls like nuts.
LikeLike
There’s not much in chivalry for men. There is nothing in it for men. If you do it stop now.
All feminist bloggers have daddy issues.
LikeLike
Feminists want to make it a crime for men to discuss women’s bodies. This is related to chivalry.
LikeLike
@Dreamer
I concur. If more women (and men too) still thought this way we’d be making progress.
But of course they don’t say, there ya go.
Enter Game and PUA’s.
DC
LikeLike
I save chivalry for girlfriends or relationships. It helps maintain a strong dominant-submissive dynamic between a girlfriend and I.
But a girl I’m just dating or fucking, no way.
LikeLike
“Chivalry is protecting women — from fights, from poverty, from the cruelties of life. And the modern woman — who is statistically likely to be saddled with childrearing burdens from irresponsible men who have abandoned her, who is paid less in the workforce, who is expected to work and take on more household responsibilities — is certainly protected from none of these. True chivalry died long ago, and that’s fine; equality is both a higher and lower standard that women accept.”
Yeah, I’ve heard that irresponsible abandonment through your wife divorcing you is a common way of losing your home, half your shit, most of your wages for the foreseeable future and, of course, all contact with your kids (even the ones that actually are yours, if you hanker for the outdated concept of biological fatherhood). Why can’t men just be more responsible?
Men! Don’t you just hate the unchivalrous bastards? Come to think of it, “bastard” is such a judgmental term, wouldn’t you say?
LikeLike
“I don’t think a man holding a door open for a woman is ever a sign of submissiveness, it just might be a little more kindness than a lot of women deserve.”
Right, the greatest problem in society today is women deserving so much, yet not getting it.
LikeLike
Seems like the character of “Cindy” in Blue Valetine shares a lot with Jessica Wakeman. They are both some fucked up whores!
LikeLike
Glengary–
Heh. Well done.
LikeLike
@blert
Thanks a ton for the info.
LikeLike
BTW, Henry VIII established the Church of England in order to divorce his wife for some hot young trim, only to get rid of her via beheading.
How fucking alpha is that?
LikeLike
Have only read a bit of that feminist’s blog but she seems as though she is providing a perfect case-study for the CH world-view.
It may be more valuable to study her rather than unplug her from the matrix(not that she is capable of being unplugged, wants to be unplugged or is mentally capable of handling the matrix)
But then again, we have not really learned anything new from her. We have only gained further evidence of CH-ism.
Another women trying to be a man.
Men trying to act like women, women trying to act like men, and everyone is fucking miserable.
But it the pendulum primed to swing back? Or will the next generation dig us even deeper?
LikeLike
But it the pendulum primed to swing back? Or will the next generation dig us even deeper?
mother nature always eventually finds an equilibrium. but it may not be one we like, if we’re even still around.
LikeLike
But it the pendulum primed to swing back? Or will the next generation dig us even deeper?
Anecdotally, the next generation will dig us even deeper. Just ran into a dude at lunch two days ago who doesn’t think that a girl with a high number means anything. She just “enjoys” sex was his delusion. And he was actually offended that I suggested otherwise.
Never said the typical words such as “sexist” or misogynist to rebut my experience and knowledge, but I could tell from his programmed reaction that he was falling back on his feminist, “govment” training.
LikeLike
Evil
There are genes that determine moral outlooks towards this – how icky you feel it is for a girl to be a slut or how much you feel the madona and whore split and how important purity is to you. Some people lack the genes that give us these emotions regarding sexual purity.
I’ve mentioned this a good 100 times on this blog, but I think that no matter how many times I mention it, or link to the studies, people will never get it. It’s all a big morality play to the people who prefer purity. They can’t handle the frame of reference that their sexual mate strategy is simply a genetic programming that is not universal.
LikeLike
@xsplat
“There are genes that determine moral outlooks towards this – how icky you feel it is for a girl to be a slut or how much you feel the madona and whore split and how important purity is to you. Some people lack the genes that give us these emotions regarding sexual purity.”
Could you link me to a study demonstrating genes determining moral outlooks on slutting around? Would like to learn more.
LikeLike
Xsplat
It’s not overly complicated. The more partners a woman has the more likely she is to be fucked up. Case in point… Jessica Wakeman
LikeLike
Dan, if the subject interests you, please do the work and get back to us with a set of good links. I’ve put some on my blog a few times, but am lazy to dig them up. Google for “genetic basis for morality”. I recall a new york times piece and an edge.org piece that had some interesting summaries. Google xsplat to find my blog. Bob Altmeyer is also a good source on the midset that goes along with with the purity gene, although his research is not about genetic studies, but rather psychological profiles. I mention him on my blog a few times, but google him directly to find his online book.
LikeLike
Evil, some people have a deep seated feeling of disgust at the thought of promiscuity in a woman. Some don’t. This deep seated difference in attitude has nothing to do with seeing reality clearly or not, nor is it about cultural training. It’s genetic. There is a genetic basis to the moral value of purity.
LikeLike
If you don’t believe that Jessica Wakeman is fucked up than that’s on you. Once again it’s real simple. The more partners a woman has the more likely she is to be a “Cindy” or a real life Jessica. Girls whom most guys view as fucked up.
LikeLike
Xsplat. There is a reason feminists hate the word “slut” and it has absolutely nothing to do with genetics.
LikeLike
Evil, I have no idea who Jessica Wakeman is, and I don’t care. I’m neither agreeing or disagreeing about high sex partner women being fucked up. My conception is that they will come with predispositions that lead them to certain advantages and certain problems, and are not suited for all temperaments.
You seem to be unable to hear my point.
LikeLike
Rationalization Hamster makes Wiktionary…
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/rationalization_hamster
LikeLike
Xplat.
Dude, It’s the bitch that this whole post is about. And you better care cuz not knowing taints your credibility.
LikeLike
Hey, selfish feminist bitchez whinin’ about chivarly and “Where are all the good men?”… as Tom Hanks said in Savin’ Ryan’s Privates, “Earn this!”
LikeLike
Evil, are you capable of having the point of view that there is a genetic predisposition to looking unfavorably on slutty behavior, and that your friend may not have that genetic predisposition?
A yes or no will suffice.
LikeLike
@EvilAlpha: Yes, because god forbid women enjoy sex without wanting to settle down. I’m 24 and very, very busy, with a long way to go before I think about getting married. Should I remain celibate in the mean time? Would you, as a man? I doubt it, very much.
LikeLike
Evil, some people have a deep seated feeling of disgust at the thought of promiscuity in a woman. Some don’t. This deep seated difference in attitude has nothing to do with seeing reality clearly or not, nor is it about cultural training. It’s genetic. There is a genetic basis to the moral value of purity.
CH posted a graph of how the number of sex partners of a woman coincides with relationship length. Yup, there is a correlation. However the purity guys don’t FEEL a sliding scale, where 3 partners is not a huge deal less of a risk than 20, they feel a justification for their innate preference for low sex count women, and that high sex count women are not just a riskier bet, but a worse bet. A bad bet.
LikeLike
We can’t wait for you to dress us up for Halloween, Human Mommy!!
LikeLike
Spot on, Dreamer.
LikeLike
Most sane men don’t want to be with a women who slept with many men. There’s no on and off switch for such low class women. The odds are that she’ll continue her promiscuous behvior even when in a long-term relationship.
Now, those PC betas who just shrug their shoulders regarding sluttish women are mouthing the learned party-line, or maybe they just like easy pumps & dumps and that’s why they don’t mind.
Women who don’t respect themselves and have no morals are just sperm receptacles to be screwed quickly and as quickly abandoned to their wretchedness.
LikeLike
Men and women are different.
“Body count” means different things to each gender and they are not equal in their meaning.
A high body count for a chick is NEVER a good thing and no amount of feminist rationalization will change that.
LikeLike
This focus on a womans notch count is somewhat out of focus, imho. It is not that is does not matter; it does.
But one should keep in mind that it matters a whole lot more when a chick is in the 4-7 range SMG. They are the type to most likely to become deluded as to their real value because they can get some casually dispensed alpha sperm, from time to time. It does indeed ruin them for realistic LTRs.
But what about an actual living, breathing 9-10 who knows the score? The kind who intelligently eats right, works out systematically, and knows exactly why she is doing it?
The cold, hard, mf-ing truth of the matter is that this type can play as much as she wants and plenty of the best men will be on tap for her until her late 30s.
She knows it because it is true.
LikeLike
Madelon
*chic noir walks across the room to introduce herself to madelon*
How are you? I guess you’re new here. Well never fear, the guys here can be tuff and mean spirited if you’re one with a soft heart but pay them no attention.
Have you been introduced the other ladies of the chateau?
*chic noir stops a passing waiter and passes a class of vin blanc to Madelon*
LikeLike
@madelon
Yes, because god forbid women enjoy sex without wanting to settle down. I’m 24 and very, very busy, with a long way to go
so what is your goal exactly? 2000 men / 100 trillion sperm, whichever comes first?
before I think about getting married.
but by then, no quality man would want to marry you. some would even say that your expiration date is already up.
if you get off the cock carousel now and devote your time into learning how to be a woman a quality man would want to marry, you might have a chance. maybe.
otherwise, start stocking up on the cat litter now.
LikeLike
Something that has troubled me is the idea of women slutting it up in one location then moving to another where her skank reputation is unknown.
In her new city, she will play her feminine and coy charms on men, making them think she is relatively pure and chaste.
What defense can be mounted against these roving whores?
LikeLike
Dan, not a god darn thing. There are some things you must learn to live with son. That’s why it’s a good idea to have any partner tested before you do the do.
LikeLike
Dan. Let me help.
If new arrival is not so good looking and kinda chunky she was without doubt a non-discriminating skank-whore in her former circumstances. Go ahead and fuck her it seems right, but she will forget your name in the morning. Unless she is your designated stalker unto death. Ha. Ha. With no laughing.
Is she a 9-10? Most likely she figured out in her mid teens what were the actual, real life implications of being a 9-10 in these days of Satyricon. If your are gifted in the right ways and have a little luck you shall tap her as well. Then say a prayer of thanks to your favorite Diety of Fuck. Then move to hook up again, It might turn out like a Romance Novel. Then of course it might not.
LikeLike
Dan, all American women are whores until proven otherwise. That should be your first assumption. I counsel staying away from them – except for fast pumps and dumps. They will cheat on you, steal your kids and half of all you possess, all with judicial system’s approval. American women are greedy, lying, cheating, materialistic, double-talking, superficial, narcissistic, thieving, and cruel.
LikeLike
Dan…
Moving far away from her parents and family means she loses 5 rank points.
Back in the day the signature of a ‘girl in trouble’ was an out-of-town stay for half a year.
Quality women simply do not go to a far land. That’s a man’s gambit.
The first independent women to reach the gold fields were whores, every last one of them. Hence, the term ‘Angels Camp.’ The meaning being entirely ironical: Whore Camp, they were.
LikeLike
“Don’t know much about chivalry………”
Note to the unwise, chivalry/courtly love were basically ways for lower status men to bag higher status women. Thus Lancelot and Guinevere–the height of courtly love was to seduce a married woman. The woman is domina the man servus. This mirrored the hierarchical system of feudalism. The idea that the targets of chivalry were “chaste” etc etc, is utter nonsense historically.
[Editor: The direct “targets” of chivalry may not have been chaste, but the general zeitgeist during those times when chivalry became the established norm was an implicit assumption that most women would strive for chasteness. Not what we have today, and so chivalry is a waste of a man’s energy.]
LikeLike
The call of the ‘ho: “I want to get married… someday!” (by which time, no decent man will touch her with a stick and the skank-bangers will double-bag it w/ the condoms so the don’t catch anything incurable).
LikeLike
Rum, I think that a subset of men won’t have the mental capability to hold anything but a negative view towards female promiscuity. That this is a workable strategy for some women will be denied. For them, promiscuity is bad, full stop.
LikeLike
Another moral trait is the belief in justice and authority. Bob Altmeyer classifies a big chunk of humans as having a personality profile that he terms “The Authoritarians”, which is also the title of his well researched, interesting and very readable book. This belief in Justice can easily cloud a persons mental framework of how things work, because they now have a belief in Moral Ablsolutes, that exist independently of any observer or of any interest group. Things are wrong, absolutely, and retribution is right. Such people have a difficult time holding the view that some bad actions have good consequences, and no retribution ever comes. Ever. They invent an afterlife where retribution will finally come.
Yes, for many women, cock hopping is an excellent sexual strategy, that holds the highest possible payoff in all aspects of everything that really matters to them.
LikeLike
Editor
The not making the connections between a woman’s chasteness and chivalry. Or is it that you see chaste women as more valuable, and therefore worth the expense of chivalrous actions?
LikeLike
xsplat said: “Yes, for many women, cock hopping is an excellent sexual strategy, that holds the highest possible payoff in all aspects of everything that really matters to them.”
You said it. Of course, that doesn’t say much for those women.
LikeLike
TheI’m> not making the connection…Dan
I think men understimate women’s ability to look after their own interests. It’s always cat lady cat lady whenever talking about youthful promiscuity. In real life, not the one where retribution falls like a karmic thunderbolt from a sky god, women do get married late in life. And then the do divorce their husbands and clean him out, and then they do live alone just fine. Women seem to have an easier time being alone than men – the retribution of being alone may very well be worth it to them.
Certainly this is what they are choosing, and pointing out a potential future lifestyle of cats for friends is not a real life deterrent.
Women know what they are doing, and are taking risks that they view as appropriate, and more often than not, the risks were calculated to good effect. Very rarely does youthful promiscuity hold any negative consequence for girls.
LikeLike
Xsplat,
While I’ve read the research you are discussing and find it intuitively appealing, it is still new enough that you should be cautious about arguing that it is some confirmed “truth”.
I’d argue that the Madonna/whore complex is an evolutionarily necessary device for the male model of procreation.
Alpha/Beta procreation strategies are not mutually exclusive.
Naturally men will fuck “whores/ loose women” at the drop of a hat. Few men (except the most abject beta types) would then attempt to domesticate such women. Why?
Simple, it is an inherent part of a rational (and therefore evolutionarily selected for) male mating strategy. Dump loads whenever an attractive possibility arises but save the investment of resources only in women that you can be sure of paternity.
Those men that lack the ability to differentiate between which type of mating strategy is appropriate for a specific situation will find themselves cuckolded and will imperil successful transmission of their genes (ultimately the name of the game).
LikeLike
It says they are smart enough to buck any social convention or social shaming in order to look after their own best interests. Which is what we expect of alpha men, and in fact what we should expect from any sane and intelligent human.
Self interest is the best lens to use when forming theories of social interaction. Stop with the moralizing already – it clouds your vision.
LikeLike
You oversimplify the various sexual strategies. Some men can indeed domesticate a whore, for as long as pleases him.
Also, some men can’t, and it is these men especially who need to be cautious in choosing a woman with little promiscuous inclinations.
It’s been shown that the cads tend to fuck the sluts. The most promiscuous men are not fucking all the chaste girls, they are fucking the most promiscuous girls. And yes, in real life, most of those promiscuous girls do marry.
I’ve never argued that lifetime monogamy is not a riskier bet with a promiscuous girl. I’ve only ever argued that some men have sexual strategies for which pair bonding with a promiscuous girl provides the best bet to achieve what they personally want to achieve. Some men don’t want lifetime monogamy. Two or five or ten or twenty years suits them just fine. Cads like to marry too, but cads don’t necessarily hold lifetime monogamy as a strong value. The cads fuck the sluts, and they can suit each other not just for short term flings, but can suit each other for pair bonding.
Also, look to the chart that the blog authors posted showing the a graph of lifetime sex partners and average length of marriage. As I recall the differences were a matter of degree, not an on off switch. Not even a large degree, between 3 and 20 partners. A moderate degree of risk difference, for divorce. And the chart does not correct for variables such as pair bonding between slut women with non-cad men – a pairing which I’d assume would be weaker than slut women with cad men.
LikeLike
In fact, the chart the authors posted proves my point beyond argument. Some men do tame sluts, and tame them for life.
LikeLike
But it is precisely the guys who find it most difficult to tame sluts who will not want to admit that sluts can be tamed, and will instead view all sluts as a poor risk. The least able to tame view the greatest risk.
LikeLike
“[Editor: The direct “targets” of chivalry may not have been chaste, but the general zeitgeist during those times when chivalry became the established norm was an implicit assumption that most women would strive for chasteness. Not what we have today, and so chivalry is a waste of a man’s energy.]”
hmm – Early modern is a completely different ball of twine then 19th century. Chasteness was much more imp. in the 19th century for marraige prospects, ect, then in the 16th -late 18th Atlantic western world. The merry widow, esp. a woman with property, was considered an ideal marraige prospect before the 19th century. It’s not until about 1820 and later that chastity becomes idealized in the west. Look at Pres. Andrew Jackson’s wife. She wasn’t even divorced before she remarried Jackson.
LikeLike
tsk. tsk. President Jackson. Is dueling chivalrous?
“Personal Life: While lodging with the Widow Donelson during his early days in Nashville, Jackson met the widow’s married daughter, Rachel Donelson Robards, who had fled from her husband, Lewis Robards, following a bitter quarrel. Robards soon accused Jackson of seducing his wife and Jackson challenged him to a duel. When Robards declined, Jackson threatened to cut off his ears with a hunting knife unless the accusations stopped. For a while peace was restored and Rachel returned to her husband, but before long she was trying to escape from Robards once again. Jackson proved willing to escort Rachel on a dangerous trip down the Mississippi River toward Natchez. When he returned to Nashville, he heard by word of mouth that Robards had sued his wife for divorce. With typical impulsiveness, he returned to Natchez and married Rachel on the spot in August, 1791. Unfortunately, the Jacksons soon learned that reports of Robard’s divorce had been inaccurate, and Rachel was in the embarrassing position of being married to Robards and Jackson at the same time. Robards lost little time in charging that his wife was living “in open adultery with another man.” This astounding news spread quickly throughout the territory, and Jackson’s political career was in peril. As soon as Robards secured an official divorce, Jackson and Rachel were married for a second time on Jan. 17, 1794, and Jackson set about to silence gossip by challenging to a duel anyone who would dare to impugn his wife’s honor. He became involved in dozens of dueling situations in this manner; twice he was seriously wounded, and in 1806 he actually killed a man.”
LikeLike
Bounder says, “Few men (except the most abject beta types) would then attempt to domesticate such women.”
Most western men fit that category. I’d go as far as to say the vast majority.
Very few have escaped the programming early enough in life for it to have any real effect on their sexual orientation. The vast majority, given the opportunity, will tell themselves a million lies to justify spending all they have and all they don’t have in an attempt to domesticate a whore, some who aren’t even hot but just fit the Hollywood template.
So selectively sleeping around is an excellent strategy for a hot or template conforming girl. It’s even a passable strategy for passable women. The only ones it really doesn’t work well for are older or otherwise ugly women.
Even for us uglies though, were numbers aren’t good, easier terms are. Shag the guy silly, wait for the inevitable attempt to trade up, weather the breakup, then wait. In time, 90% crawl back because life teaches them that there aren’t many women nowadays loyal and nurturing enough to put up with their crap without getting paid to. By crap I mean the state of not being rich or stunningly socially dominant yet expecting to be treated as if we don’t notice that.
Just as very few men are particularly wise in selection, very few women today are either. Both have lost their way, and if one is fortunate enough to encounter, much less attract, one who hasn’t, they are very fortunate. Men are quicker to figure this out than women, so where a high “body count” for a girl is indeed a problem, it’s one of those problems like fat.
Women who aren’t virgins manage to find husbands nowadays with good consistency. So do women who are fat and men who are girlier than ther grandfathers were.
The past is gone. It is best to look on the age we find ourselves in honestly, and make the best of it.
A woman making the best of it accepts that she’s competing with Hollywood and porn, and wages her affairs accordingly. Only in a very patriarchal society are chastity and strong character considered attractive traits independent of a hot body.
So chastity is a thing for high status women who don’t mix with the riff raff, and are looking forward to practically arranged marriages. For everyone else, putting out or manipulating guys into thinking one will, is where the payoff is.
LikeLike
I should clarify that I am not attempting to justify jumping on the cock carousel and riding until raw. What I’m saying is that guys today are happier to actually marry a stone cold whore who is a 7+ than to be seen on a date with a virgin of lesser beauty. They will do it if they feel they have no other choice, but feel slighted or cursed and less of men compared to the guy with the 9 on his arm, whether or not said 9 has a wart on her cervix the size of a baseball.
Since most women don’t have the fetish for independent thinkers that I do, most should and do get used to the idea that since they cannot compare, they must compete, and for most guys a bird in hand…
LikeLike
xsplat said: “Self interest is the best lens to use when forming theories of social interaction. Stop with the moralizing already – it clouds your vision.”
But as Bounder said right before: “Naturally men will fuck “whores/ loose women” at the drop of a hat. … Dump loads whenever an attractive possibility arises but save the investment of resources only in women that you can be sure of paternity.”
Sloppy forty-thirds? No f*ckin’ thank you.
LikeLike
This chick’s linked post reveals the inherent scheming and weakness of women. First she wants him to move out, presumably so she can become the next in the line of “rotating cast of not-always-stellar women in [the best friend’s] bed.” Secondly, she bemoans the fact that she must move in with her parents and wouldn’t have been able to do this without them. A man would have just moved on and dealt with it; most likely without daddy and mommy’s help.
It also illustrates the ridiculous notion that it is the man who should move out at the end of the relationship. Men, stay in your fucking homes until they cuff you and throw you out!
LikeLike
While I’m one of the biggest proponents of teaching western men not to be chivalrous in politics of speech (or dating 26 year old single mothers out of a need to be a hero), I agree with Sonnet and others that there is an unwritten code about keeping the door open for strangers that has nothing to do with the gender of those behind you. It’s problematic when you know the people you let in ahead of you will stand ahead of you on some line (such as a post office), however.
For standing on a bus, I see it as a demonstration of lower value if I remain seated while anyone significantly older is standing (although I will not embarrass an older man by standing for him) and I see it as an acceptance of feminism as a norm if I let regular and attractive women stand who haven’t specifically shown me they are unworthy feminist types. I stand up on buses to support the patriarchy but I would be the first to organize jail time for future GOP senators who renew the VAWA (Violence Against Women Act).
When this post came in on my mobile, I asked my girlfriend about it and she went on about the numbers of “lower class men” who’d let her stand with bags in her arms. No, she wasn’t secretly lusting for them. She felt visceral disgust for such men. Then again, my girlfriend doesn’t speak English and has no concept of feminism.
I did get a phone number on a NYC subway once after a woman observed me being chivalrous with an old lady.
I always make the point of offering my seat to the oldest woman possible. This has gotten appreciative glances from their granddaughters and daughters or young women present. If I have to stand and give my place to an attractive woman, I’ve found little return on the investment in most of my experience. It’s not a great opener because the woman is no longer at eye level (relatively speaking) if she takes my seat. Then again, she is also not at eye level if I remain seated while she stands with bags in her hands.
Also: Most cultures (languages) still have men calling women “girls” up to the point where they are no longer sexually attractive, after which they become “women”. Only fembot cultures such as anglos and Germans have tried to force men to call women “women” starting when the girls turn 18. This was done to protect older women from the shameful moment when male strangers call them “woman” in public.
In such cultures, I will call older women strangers “girls” (as in “Excuse me girl, would you like a seat”) to give them a compliment and I will call sexy young women strangers “women” to neg them (excuse me woman, would you like this seat”). A foreign male can get away with this without it seeming too obvious (20 something women in these societies are very sensitive about not wanting to be called a “woman” instead of a “girl” because that would mark the moment that they’ve hit the wall).
One needs to look at minor things like standing on a bus or opening a door from the opener logistics POV. How are you going to get a conversation going from standing for someone on a bus? Is the person you are being chivalrous to the target or is the target someone who sees you being kind to someone else without the expectation of something in return?
As I noted above, the best situation is to stand for a woman’s mother or grandmother, which puts the man more at eye level (relatively speaking).
If I were to remember standing for a young woman who was then rude to me as I tried to game her from a standing position after she took my seat, then I would not stand for her again.
But, there are so many attractive women where I live that I would completely forget who had ever been rude to me before. Rude women tend to erase themselves from my brain leaving me to sometimes try to open them again (or open a door for them again when they no longer deserve that).
LikeLike
I’m surprised to see no comments where a guy used standing for a woman on a bus or opening a door as an opener that resulted in a phone number or other type of close.
Does anyone have such an experience? Does anyone have a clear-cut example of the small act of chivalry hurting an open?
LikeLike
Non-fembot = natural, fembot = synthesized.
Alpha = natural, metrosexual = synthesized.
Peaches straight off the tree taste way better than when canned.
LikeLike
Jerry,
If a man lets me go through a door ahead of him into a place where there is a waiting line (like the post office as you said), I’ll always tell him to go first since he really was before me. They usually seem fine with that.
LikeLike
Used correctly in a sort of overly sarcastic way chivalry can be effective in certain social groups. In higher income/education groups, opening a door with a huge smirk or pulling out a chair in an almost demeaning way can really work wonders. Turning chivarly into a subtle neg is pretty awesome.
LikeLike
@ Madelon
@EvilAlpha: Yes, because god forbid women enjoy sex without wanting to settle down. I’m 24 and very, very busy, with a long way to go before I think about getting married. Should I remain celibate in the mean time? Would you, as a man? I doubt it, very much.
Ahhh. Rationalization as only a big city skank can.
A few things.
1. You ain’t very busy. Very busy girls don’t have the time to read through and snipe comments on blogs… especially on game blogs.
2. You don’t like sex, you like “sluttiness”. Very busy girls who actually like sex find a FWB and bang him for the duration until she’s graduated, moved cities. etc. Men after all are extremely low maintenance and if you want sex all a girl need to do is give his ass a schedule. You however prefer drunken weekend hookups and think that anything less than a new dick a week is “settling down”.
3. You’re not a man. You’re a thrill seeking attention whore.
LikeLike
@Lara
And that’s a major opener for PUAs right there. Come to think of it, I have started friendships/relationships by opening a door for someone who then stood on line with me for food or at the post office or train station. It makes the real open that happens next easier. It isn’t a bad thing for a stranger to have an initial reputation as a gentleman who did the woman a minor favor.
Similarly, if the third woman out of 8 going through a door is hot and I know that I will not get to stand next to her if I keep the door open for the other 5, I will find a way to hand the door to the 4th woman so I get to be next to the hot woman on the line.
Common Sense 101 says that you shouldn’t sacrifice yourself if you know it has diminishing returns such as when a hottie is heading for the elevators and you won’t be on time to catch the same ride if you keep holding the door for others.
LikeLike
Did a woman really write that above somewhere?
This is a huge mistake for a woman to say and extremely correct for a man to say. Of all the areas where equality simply does not exist, it’s the way one gender starts to lose its looks rapidly after age 24.
The man this woman could land now is not nearly as high quality as she could have landed 6 years ago.
At age 24, the slightest hint of a woman flaking will cause an alpha to lose interest in her permanently. As each year passes, there’s less and less wiggle room in terms of the kind and affectionate behavior she needs to show to win a decent man’s affections for the long run.
LikeLike
[…] post the other day “Feminism and Chivalry are Mutually Exclusive” triggered a new thought for me on the subject. It has caused me to rethink my position on […]
LikeLike
@Jerry
“Similarly, if the third woman out of 8 going through a door is hot and I know that I will not get to stand next to her if I keep the door open for the other 5, I will find a way to hand the door to the 4th woman so I get to be next to the hot woman on the line.”
While I don’t think you need to hold the door and let 8 women in ahead of you, this move strikes me as beta. You’re better off being a little nicer to the less attractive women and a little less nice to the really attractive one. They will all like you better for it.
LikeLike
OT:
An utterly pathetic article at HP.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lee-block/child-support-myths-and-l_b_817395.html#s235116&title=Myth_1_The
LikeLike
@Lara
Often there is a group of 8 women of all shapes and sizes who will want to go through a heavy doorway. In this part of the world, it could cause a woman severe head trauma to let it shut in her face (in Europe the doors can be massive). I’ve found I’ve done this mostly because women in this part of the world (Eastern Europe) expect men to hold the door for them (with many having earned it) and I wouldn’t want to cause injury by not doing so.
I don’t live within 200 miles of a feminist.
So, no, there is no semblance of beta/alpha in a man getting stuck doing this for a few seconds because he doesn’t believe in feminism and is old school. He should make sure that he hands the door over to someone fairly quickly of course and especially if a hottie went through in the first second and he needs to stop holding the door so he can go open her before she’s in an elevator or too far ahead on a line.
It’s great to write a post condemning chivalry (because the mindset that women really are more important than men is at the heart of anti-male laws) but even tacitly agreeing with VAWA, income based child support, the criminalization of mail order brides, the criminalization of men sleeping with their employees and interns, the criminalization of “johns” who “exploit women”, alimony, “fighting for a woman’s honor” when she doesn’t deserve it…these are examples of chivalry far, far more egregious than keeping doors open for women who might face head trauma if the man just let it go.
LikeLike
I realize that American architecture can be flimsy and doors can weigh next to nothing.
LikeLike
Jerry,
I hold the door for people all the time, it’s a nice gesture. I don’t really do it so much for men, unless they are carrying something big and heavy or holding a baby, because I don’t think they like it.
LikeLike
hold the door open and let them go through first is what I mean
LikeLike
@Lara
Don’t think we’d like it? I think we’d die of shock if it ever happened (if a woman held a door open for a man without him carrying something awkward or heavy).
Most women will let a heavy door slam in the face of a male stranger coming behind her.
So you’re probably a much appreciated addition to the human race.
LikeLike
“Something that has troubled me is the idea of women slutting it up in one location then moving to another where her skank reputation is unknown.
In her new city, she will play her feminine and coy charms on men, making them think she is relatively pure and chaste.
What defense can be mounted against these roving whores?”
All whores think they can conceal their whorishness when they are ready to snag a provider beta. It’s kind of like how all women think they are a lot smarter and cleverer than they actually are.
To an astute player, there is no way a whore can hide from her past. The signs are written all over her behavior and attitude. If you can’t recognize it, you’ll be destroyed by women until you figure it out. Women are far too intrinsically emotionally sensitive to be able to hide their years on the carousel. The only way they can mask their mental scars from years of being pumped and dumped by bad boys is to harden up and become an emotional haggard, cold, distant cunt.
LikeLike
WHY WOMEN SUFFER WITHOUT CHIVALRY
Though never noted in our newspapers, news magazines, or reported on the evening telecasts, scientists have conducted a number of studies that quantify courage. In June, 2003 a “courage test” was held in Berkeley, California at the “Twentieth Annual International Conference of the Association for the Study of Dreams,” directed by Raymond Rainville. His psychologists selected a total of 1,500 matched men and women who were prompted, through stimulation, to undergo three different sets of threatening dreams. There was some difference in the imagery used, women being presented threats in the following order: a one armed male figure in pursuit, a one armed male figure capturing and imprisoning her, and a one armed male figure confining and inflicting injury upon her.
The dream characters presented the men were as follows: an armed male figure in pursuit, an armed male figure holding him in confinement, an armed male figure confining and inflicting injury upon him. It should be noted that no attempt was made to present the men with one armed female assailants.
The overwhelming number of female dream responses to the three threats were as follows: escape, placation, submission. The overwhelming number of male dream responses to the three threats were as follows: attack, ambush, confront. The Association concluded the reason for these vastly different responses was a much lower flight threshold among women than men; and that men, rather than fleeing their pursuers, were much more inclined to fight back.
A review of three other “courage studies” also revealed that men responded to threats much more aggressively than women. All four courage tests help to explain why in 1996 Ronald C. Johnson, in assembling his “Attributes of Carnegie Medalists Performing Acts of Heroism, and of the Recipients of the these Acts,” found that over a seven year period 40 men had perished attempting to rescue persons completely unknown to them, while only a single woman gave her life in so doing.
LikeLike
@Dan
Something that has troubled me is the idea of women slutting it up in one location then moving to another where her skank reputation is unknown.
In her new city, she will play her feminine and coy charms on men, making them think she is relatively pure and chaste.
What defense can be mounted against these roving whores
Dan,
Fret not. In the digital age, a girl with a past is still a girl with a past… regardless of where she ran too. Discreet whore is an oxymoron. Case in point.
http://celebglitz.com/38823/Celebrity-Gossip/picture_4923_krystal-ball-racy-photos-virginia-candidate-krystal-ball-in-photo-scandal.aspx
LikeLike
@dan
what the others said, and also don’t forget that since women crave the attention and approval of others and thus cannot shut the fuck up about themselves, it’s easy enough thanks to the miracle of the interweb to discover who they really are/’were’. think blogs, social networking sites, etc.
LikeLike
Guys, guys, quick! I need some ideas for Valentine’s day! It’s only a week away!>!>!
LikeLike
Lara:
“What woman in her right mind would enter a house ahead of her husband if she thought it was a dangerous situation?”
_______________________________________________
You are somehow assuming that women are of higher value than men.
WRONG.
You have been programmed permanently with feminism. You think you have escaped it. Think again.
It is soaked into every FIBER of your being, whether you realize it or not.
Men have HIGHER value than women. Men PRODUCE. Women whine. And drink coffee.
Why do you think dowries exist in so many cultures? The message is, “Please take this liability off our hands!! Here, we’ll PAY you to do it!!
Actions speak louder than words, babe.
LikeLike
For a girlfriend or a wife?
LikeLike
@Paul on child support,
about myth one, my ex gets the equivalent of 21k per year pre-tax. About myth 2, from day one she’s made 0 effort to send the kids to see me.
LikeLike
@Lara, it was a joke. I’d sooner go to porn site for child-rearing advice.
LikeLike
Oh okay. I’ve never been into Valentine’s Day much, but it is nice to do a little something.
LikeLike
I need some ideas for Valentine’s day!
ask yourself, ‘what would henry viii do?’
LikeLike
A challenge to the readership: one half of you deliver skittles for v-day gifts, and the other half a dozen roses, then come back here to compare who had the hottest sex.
LikeLike
“Men have HIGHER value than women. Men PRODUCE. Women whine. And drink coffee.”
Yeah – this only makes sense after industrialization.
Women PRODUCE children. Literally – they grow them, men don’t. Try running a farm without a bunch of kids. Your old age would be catastrophic without kids to take care of you in the pre-industrial world.
In almost all of past history, without kids you would be absolutely screwed. Until the 20th century — now you don’t have to have your own children because other people’s kids will pay for your social security and medicare.
LikeLike
Coincidentally, I just had dinner with a young woman scholar who considers herself an expert on European history. She actually confirmed that, as far as she knew, the tradition of women entering prehistoric caves first was because they were more expendable.
She explained that the men were most needed to bring in the hunt and defend the very existence of the tribe short term (which, like today’s quarterly earnings reports, was what counted most at the time).
Then again, she may have said all that so I’d marry her and keep opening doors for her. Smart girl there. 😉
Also, different cultures have opposite traditions on this score. I think I remember that, in Germany, the man always goes in first precisely because he’d be the first to perish if there was bad news waiting inside.
LikeLike
That cave story is just that: a story.
I can see that memories need to be refreshed.
Dogs ALWAYS took the point.
The Westerns have it wrong. A man never rode a horse solo. He’d always have his dog(s) and at least one pack animal — usually another horse.
If you think about it it makes sense. You can’t carry enough food for man and beast without a pack horse. Dogs provide hearing and smelling talent critical to survival.
—-
It is a myth that ancient man lived in caves. First, they are too rare to solve the housing issue. Further, most caves have terrible floors.
—-
So, as usual, chick history is wrong. ( And feminist, too. )
Folks Feminism was promoted by Moscow as just another agitprop scam to destroy the West. KGB defectors flat out admit it.
Their method used cut-outs to fund every crack-pot feminist. Moscow’s official sponsorship was thus hidden.
We are still witnessing the corruption of the West by agitprop and dis-information operations. That’s why the Muslim Brotherhood is being portrayed as almost middle-class by al-Reuters.
The MB — launched in 1928 — didn’t get rolling until Hitler funded it in 1933. Yes, he used cut-outs. The MB went from being an anti-woman party to an anti-democracy, anti-Jewish party.
An underground organization famed for assassinating Sadat riven with Hitlerism and jihadism is being promoted by the Left as the solution to Mubarak!
While current, this is exactly the kind of insanity that put Feminism on legs.
Not one of the early ‘leading lights’ of Feminism was anything other than a lesbo-skank dating failure.
Not too surprisingly their ideology still pulls for skanks. It permits their limbic logic to rationalize high self-value for low value unfeminine, short-shelf-life women.
——-
ANY woman who’s studied/pursued journalism, gender studies or any ‘ethnic’ alternate history at college is pure pump and dump meat.
No XX can recover from that kind of programming. Moscow killed her. But that was the idea from the get go.
For those who want to here it from the defectors mouth:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2307456730142665916#
LikeLike
“To destroy” sounds as though the destruction hasn’t yet happened.
Take a look at the Speaker of the House for the last Congressional term. Examine our decade of girl Sec’y of States…and the diplomatic success they’ve had with Egypt, North Korea and Iran.
You LIVE in a country where The Roommate is the #1 movie upon its release.
Best plan on rebuilding – because The Destruction has already happened long ago. Pretending men still control power is a pipe dream best relinquished.
LikeLike
@hmm
[blockquote]
“Men have HIGHER value than women. Men PRODUCE. Women whine. And drink coffee.”
Yeah – this only makes sense after industrialization.
[/blockquote]
Quite right. The comparison was easy to make when the British empire could be compared to her colonies. In Britain, a widow with children was rather hopeless only good for a depiction in a Charles Dickens novel. In the Americas, a widow with 6 children was a big source of wealth in the agrarian society it was.
The old fairy tales do tell the story. We hate young middling and lower class men and old women. The enemy in Disney is an old woman and her henchmen of pigs, eels, flying monkeys etc. The good is high status men and fertile women in a patriarchal society . That is what nature values. It is interesting to see evil has a reverse hierarchy being repulsively matriarchal.
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRlj3I-4HygVJgPo_miHHaLlpTBiHwE4dp0tKIMpECayZMJxUsc
http://t0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcT0mIJtO-7Dw9XrN2FJZHHiOoR_XD6vhVEMThpGYLTPHru2B5JsjQ
Ironically I view feminism as patriarchal in nature since what it is really doing is hammering the lower classes of males. Alpha males and fertile females are cleaning up. Bill Clinton for example was immune. Older women are saved by “democracy”(the senior vote matters and they are mostly women). Democracy is a great solution for one of the naturally despised classes since older woman can defend themselves politically. Its quite poor for the pig men and flying monkeys. Western feminism is in many was more primal that beta organized patriarchies.
So again, fertile women are higher value than typical males, but don’t assume that women are higher value after they age. Its simply masked by a majority politic, not a natural force. .
LikeLike
xsplat–
Maybe genes play some role in individuals but certainly culture and beliefs transmitted by the corner of culture the individual has been influence by play a bigger role. Our whole society was far more shifted in the female purity is important before marriage a couple of generations ago. Far, far more.
As well Xsplat you’re in a situation of not caring very much how long your relationships last, and you’ve got two and 1/2 going one at once these days, according to what you say. You’re not really invested heavily in your relationships. YOu don’t have kids with your women and aren’t planning to soon. The cost to you of one of them leaving you would be very low. Due to your money security, white foreigner high status and good game, hot young replacements are easy to find. Replacements are easy to find for alphas in the US too, but conducting multiple relationships for very long takes mondo alpha game and status, not just a good slug of it. And the law and courts make divorces here often horrendous for men, who always loose their kids.
LikeLike
“Mr Chivalry kicked her out Like a Boss, and didn’t move in with his parents ‘while they worked things out’ like she suggested. Women love stealing domiciles. It’s the uglier side of their nesting instinct.”
I think the obviously uglier side of their instincts is their hypergamous impulses and their abitity to mask their naked self interest in a cloak of earnest committment to “work things out”.
From that article it seemed clear to me that a) the bitch did something pretty bad for an otherwise nice guy to act so forcefully, when most guys don’t firmly show their girls the door (while holding it open for them;) despite a laundry list of shitty behaviour.
And b) the really shitty thing that leapt off the page and punched me in the gut is that she suggested he “move in with his parents while they worked things out”. Naked self interest dressed in noble attire – clearly she has designs on the flatmate. No wonder he throws her out – he either finds signs that his more alpha friend has shagged her, or more likely since he chooses to stay, his flatmate comes to him with evidence of her affections. At first our beta doesn’t believe his friend, but then the girl suggests that to “help their relationship (which she has been sabotaging)” he move away and leave her alone with his attractive friend.
Wow.
Conniving enough to break through even a betas delusions.
The following forcefullness of her expulsion, and especially the fact that the most forcefull moves come via text, suggest to me that beta is being coached by the alpha flatmate about how to kick her arse to the curb. The “i’ll throw your shit on the street” line has clearly been coached and the “take my christmas present and I’ll take back yours bitch” which he later recants (because he actually didn’t really mean it – his flatmate who told him to say it did) sounds like further coaching to me.
LikeLike
@blert, how do you know that Soviet “defector” is not now engaged in disinformation?
LikeLike
@chi-town, the enemy in Disney is the parents. They are always killed.
LikeLike
@matt-el, wow, good read. You should call her out on her site!
LikeLike
Jerry —
If a woman is going through a door and I’m close behind, she’ll hold it for me, oh, 90% of the time.
I live in a large coastal American city.
[Editor: Funnily, I just walked out of a restaurant where a couple of mid-20s women let the door slam in an older gentleman’s face. Your 90% is off. I’d say 30% of women hold the door for men.]
Sounds like you’ve been watching too many movies, friend.
This is exactly the sort of thing that a movie would use to build a character’s reputation quickly — since movies are short, and therefore don’t allow for the gradual building-up of characters over time — but that would practically never happen in real life.
What planet are you people from, where this Hollywood crap happens in real life? I swear.
LikeLike
It was also far harder for a sexually active girl to stay un-pregnant a couple of generations ago. Far, far more.
The problem is, you’re trying to bet a fifty-year-old point spread on today’s game.
It’s sort of cute, actually. In the same way it’s cute when my cousin plays video fútbol with the throwback teams, like playing as the ’86 Argie squad with Maradona and Ruggeri against today’s World Cup teams — except you’re actually laying odds on these games.
If you want an American analogy, you’re trying to put DiMaggio or even Ruth into a game with Sosa, McGwire, and Bonds. They wouldn’t be able to hang. Not hardly.
LikeLike
Editor
OK, well, our experiences will have to agree to disagree, then.
I’ll allow the exception if you live in New York, because New Yorkers are sons-a-bitches down to the last one. And DC I haven’t spent much time in.
But Boston, LA, San Francisco, Miami… yeah, I don’t get a lot of doors slammed in my face.
Maybe I’m just Extra Awesome McSweetness and the ladies are spreading the doors wide as a proxy for their own legs… or maybe your own neighborhood is just asshole central.
LikeLike
Yes, Doug, I agree that the culture was different before. But we know that we’ve always disagreed on why. You think it was different because it was different, and I think it was different because there was no birth control, among other technological factors.
My point about how individuals attach importance to female promiscuity based upon their genetics remains. For some people, they are born not caring much. And my point about how to read the charts of how promiscuity affects relationship stability remains – it’s not as big a deal as many emotionally feel that it is.
LikeLike
And Doug, you are correct that my lifestyle leads me to not invest heavily in one lifetime monogamous mate. My point is that choices such as mine are often not mere happenstance or culturally informed, but innate predilections. Look to twin studies to see how remarkably we are programmed by our innate personalities.
My other point which you missed is that I believe that cads are better able to tame sluts. So not only are people with cad predilections less invested in lifetime monogamy, they are better able to achieve it with sluts. And, they innately care less about purity. They fuck around a lot, and are good at it, invest less in lifetime monogamy, and are better at social manipulation in order to do things such as keep a girl while keeping others on the side, or keep a slut entranced.
I’m not saying that sluts don’t have a higher risk. I’m saying that some people innately value these risks in ways different from conservatives with the purity gene. There is a different risk/benefit analysis, based on genetic predilection.
LikeLike
For instance I’d prefer to pair bond with a girl with some risks of cheating on me who also comes like a fountain and helps to arrange threesomes, than with a low libido girl with conservative tendencies who would be disgusted at the idea of threesomes and feel dirty at the idea of her man seeing another girl.
LikeLike
xsplat,
It takes discipline and strong sense of self worth not to sleep around. Those are good qualities for a woman to have. Promiscuous women seem weak to me.
LikeLike
Lara, you’d be a better choice for the type of man who prefers that type of choice.
LikeLike
In summary, some guys with less interest in a girls sexual history may not be ignorant nor naive nor stupid nor beta, they may simply innately have different priorities and be born with a different sexual strategy programmed into their emotions.
Rationalization is not just for women – we men come up with the “reasons” we do what we do also. The frustrating thing about social conservatives is that they have an inability to see a plurality of perspectives, and believe in a monotheistic right way. Even when faced with plurality, they deny it. Those cads are just wrong. Those guys that bond with sluts are doing it wrong.
LikeLike
And of course I agree that a social conservative bonding with a slut is a bad idea. My point is that bonding with sluts is for cads, for whom the risk is less and also matters less.
LikeLike
Schmoe…
Our own spies as well as Bezmenov came to know that Moscow put a contract out on him.
When they finally figured out that he’d fled to Canada an attempt was made to liquidate him.
He was so paranoid — being a traitor — that he spotted them.
He then fled again. BTW, he’s dead now. The archives confirm his tale all the way down the line.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
BTW, the FIRST suspicion of our guys is that they’re being fed a double agent. It takes months before the spooks give a turncoat any credence.
And, yes, when the Reds lost an agent they always went into panic mode — to the point that their competition knew something was amiss.
BTW, he escaped by dressing as a Western hippie. He walked right by KGB operatives he knew and slipped control.
LikeLike
My friend just forwarded this link to me and I think you will enjoy/appreciate it:
“Skinny Chicks Who Got Fat – pics”
http://www.mixedmartialarts.com/mma.cfm?go=forum_framed.posts&forum=2&thread=1699769&page=1&pc=791
LikeLike
Lara said: “xsplat, It takes discipline and strong sense of self worth not to sleep around. Those are good qualities for a woman to have. Promiscuous women seem weak to me.”
She’s right. Had a ‘ho I was interested intry to warn me off with that she wasn’t “a worthwhile person” like she deserved to only get pumped-and-dumped even though that clearly hurt her.
LikeLike
They are mutually exclusive, no doubt. But I’d say that chivalry treats women as if they’re incapable children, whereas feminism treats them as capable adults.
Feminism is much better for men. No longer is the woman seen as more ‘valuable’ than we. I’ll gladly be the first one off the next Titanic, thank you. Damn the women and children.
LikeLike
Yes, it can take discipline. Or it can take a low libido and little interest in sex.
Some people steadfastly refuse to see any correlation between positive qualities and sexual promiscuity. Others refuse to admit that trade offs are involved when choosing someone to pair bond with – and see promiscuity as a deal breaker – not to be traded for anything.
Yes, it’s possible to have a girl with high libido who has a low partner count, and who can remain bonded. But there are at the same time correlations with predispositions and character traits, and those whose characters lean towards promiscuity have some valuable traits that those whose characters lead towards chastity do not.
Some men weigh all these variables in reasonable ways that are at odds with how social conservatives do it. Their choice is smart, towards getting what they need.
If your wife is chaste, but keeps you on a tight leash and doesn’t put out much, you didn’t win any jackpot. If she helps you arrange threesomes and doesn’t bother you for your affairs and fucks you 7 ways before breakfast, you’ll likely get some tradeoffs you’ll have to pay for.
LikeLike
xsplat
I find that most men with an attitude this rigid toward female sociosexuality (aka sluttyness) are, curiously enough, precisely those men whom the sluts won’t fuck.
Hmm. sour grapes anyone?
It’s rather tempting for these people to bite the hand that isn’t feeding them, especially when it’s feeding several other people around them.
Just real talk, that’s all.
Also, I can’t remember who it was, but one poster observed, once upon a time, that partner count is suspiciously absent from the host’s otherwise exhaustively detailed SMV calculator, and for a reason.
LikeLike
It’s possible to agree with Xsplat 95% of the time and still seek out virgins. I won’t have actual intercourse with someone who’s been with more than 3 guys before. Lots of virgins are into hand jobs, etc, and are happy to meet guys who don’t pressure them for more than that (but who are brave enough to directly ask them for at least that – most men are pussies who wouldn’t dare ask).
Where the social cons are intensely screwed up is that they are not just against premarital sex, they are against asking for hand jobs.
LikeLike
I suppose, then, that you have magic cross-cultural powers of divination that will enable you to see past the calculated lies of women who not only don’t even speak your primary language, but who grew up in a culture whose subtexts and subcommunications are entirely foreign to you.
Or you just believe whatever these girls tell you.
Which is it?
Me love you long time!
Lots of “virgins” are into fucking, too, before they decide that they’re going to be “virgins” again.
Insert Oscar Levant quote about Doris Day here.
LikeLike
Jerry, no intercourse with slutty ones and hand jobs only with virginal ones ? Reading between the lines, we see you never get laid ?
LikeLike
I can remember Doris Day before she was a virgin.
Oscar Levant
LikeLike
Virgins (or those with almost no experience) are recognizable. You can smell them. Literally. It’s not just the lack of nicotine coming out of their pores and clothes.
And being a college freshman and frightened of men helps identify them.
Elvis Presley wouldn’t sleep with any groupie over 21 or who had dirty fingernails. He wasn’t seeking virgins necessarily, but he was trying to hedge his bets so he wouldn’t catch any diseases.
The concept of Americans being easily fooled in a foreign culture and language is a valid one, but that description wouldn’t fit for either Xsplat nor myself. Some expats learn the score in various countries quickly.
No, if a man is OK with sluts, that’s fine.
But the “norm” on this blog is for men to “prefer” virgins.
Like Xsplat said, it’s probably genetic whether we do or not.
LikeLike
Once again regarding the 24 year old American woman who apparently posted above that she “has all the time in the world”…no, in most countries 24 is over the hill as it would be in the west if there wasn’t a huge propaganda machine propping up an artificial value for older women.
Two years ago a 20 year old was convinced by her mother to stop dating me, but to concentrate on her studies, etc. She saw things from a position of strength.
Last night, at 22, she told me this was a mistake and that I could marry her if I’d like. She saw things from a position of weakness.
Feminism’s worst aspect is the way it falsely tells women that they have all the time in the world like men generally do. They put gum in the gears of the biological alarm clock so it doesn’t ring on time.
There can be no equality on this point. It’s biology.
LikeLike
I originally had revulsion for the sexual strategy of preferring virgins. I couldn’t understand it, and thought it an aberration. A sign of a weak character. I railed on about how betas were too weak to compete in the sexual marketplace, and so had instead to rely on heavy mate guarding using social rules and other men to agree to enforce strict mate guarding. It has taken me quite some time to get over my revulsion at this competing sexual strategy, and see it more clearly. As Heinlein described, to Grok something fully is a state of acceptance and love and appreciation. Well, I may not yet grok the social conservative strategy, but I’m a step away from being repulsed by it, which seems to be a step closer to seeing it more clearly.
LikeLike
@Xsplat
I wouldn’t say there’s any correlation between a social conservative strategy and wanting virgins.
If anything, I’d say social conservatives don’t WANT virgins.
Look at the way the White Knighters try so hard to agree with their fat wives about raising the age of consent in more and more US states. They’d make it 21 if they could (and they’ve effectively done that in some American towns where men over 21 are not allowed in non-alcoholic bars where the 18-20 women are).
Look at the way they see college girls in the frame of “they are my daughter’s age”.
I was just on the phone with a religious conservative male who gave off really bad vibes about the idea that a man his age would ever date a woman under 40 (he’s 55).
These guys often seem to want to be heroes for recycled divorced women. In my mind, a social conservative male over 45 is someone who, if his wife of 25 years dies, would try very hard to get into a marriage bed with a woman who had been drilled thousands of times by another mans she lost or divorced (or many other men in cases where a woman was born-again or lied about a colorful past).
Look at the “Brady Bunch”. The father could have waited a year or two and had Marcia at 18 instead of her mom. But, no, social conservatives would be averse to that.
It wasn’t feminism that created The Brady Bunch idea that a man should sacrifice himself like that guy did.
LikeLike
@Xsplat
Longer comment stuck in moderation about how social cons are most likely NOT to want virgins, and it’s not social conservatism to just want someone fresh with no HPV. It would be interesting to see your strategies for avoiding STDs. You know I’m politically active against a social conservative candidate getting the 2012 GOP nomination.
LikeLike
Social conservative White Knighters are more likely than any other men to agree with the older women that “men should date women their own age”.
QED: Social conservative males end up digging virgins the least (at least for themselves). They might only get one when they, themselves, are under 25.
LikeLike
Jerry
Ah, so you can smell it. I see…
OK, champ, so, how do you determine which women “have slept with no more than 3 men”? With a Y-shaped stick?
I await the next stroke of brilliance.
The promiscuity of Eastern Euro college chicks is legendary. And “frightened of men” is a hallmark of … wait for it … feminism
Oh snap.
Yes, this blog is an accurate reflection of the real world, isn’t it?
This blog is also populated with people who think that hot upper-class women destroy their chances of getting married by fucking a few guys. As if.
LikeLike
Some of you “guys” are in the company of feminists with those feelings you have about sluts. Simple fact. Sluts are fucked up. They are good for orgies, ATM, and rough sex because they are damaged girls, but they are not good at raising children or stability.
Men are fully aware of this which is why we are reluctant to “take them home to momma”. Quite simply most understand slut traits.. and act accordingly. Pimps understand this… and act accordingly. Tiger Woods understands this.. and acted accordingly.. But still feminists and a few of their like minded brethren need to be dragged by the hair, kicking and screaming to a truth that is so fucking obvious.
LikeLike
@ritmo rioplatense
“I find that most men with an attitude this rigid toward female sociosexuality (aka sluttyness) are, curiously enough, precisely those men whom the sluts won’t fuck.”
Well duh. The alphas who fuck numerous sluts use a different reproduction strategy than the provider beta does. For an alpha, a slut is just another opportunity to spread his seed far and wide. For a beta, if the slut has decided to settle down (and later clean out the man she settled for) it’s disaster from a reproductive (not to mention a financial and emotional) standpoint.
Which is why xplats contention that the betas preference for inexperienced females is genetic makes a lot of sense: beta providers who don’t care about their wives sexual past wind up raising the children of some random alpha rather than his own children. Those betas don’t pass on their genes while betas who do care about their wives sexual history are more likely to do so.
LikeLike
They are good for orgies, ATM, and rough sex because they are damaged girls, but they are not good at raising children or stability.
if you marry a girl because she’ll be good at “stability,” then you have no right to complain when (a) the sex sucks and/or is nonexistent and (b) she leaves you for some badboy alpha.
LikeLike
I thought the opposite was legendary, that they tended to be traditionalist more. The reality is that it’s 50:50 like in any US mid-western subculture.
I had wished this was true. Feminism just harnesses a natural state to commit evil by exacerbating it.
I think the Chateau has written extensively about how men can sense, via smell or otherwise, whether or not a woman had been with more than “a few” men. The German novel “Das Parfum” is very much about this (they made a great film of this five years ago).
It is.
The operative word there is “a few”. There’s nothing wrong with “a few”. And there’s nothing wrong with a woman lying on this subject if she can get away with it.
Men can’t get away with coming across as promiscuous either, although there is much more wiggle room.
LikeLike
So I take it you don’t like rough sex in your relationships, then? What sort of sex would you plan to have with your wife (while, presumably, you close your eyes and think about the sluts)?
This stuff is on sliding scales, you know; it’s not binary. Yeah, you probably wouldn’t want to marry the town bike — but you also wouldn’t want to marry the town prude, either.
It’s a question of balance. The tradeoffs are different as you slide further up the scale, but there will always be tradeoffs.
Your binary worldview suggests that, like the “social cons” excoriated by so many here, you have little experience with real people.
LikeLike
J
Heh.
Well, since you steadfastly refuse to say which country you live in, it’s hard to nail it down more precisely — but, yessirree, the whole former Communist bloc is renowned for the, er, high sociosexuality of its women.
The sluttyness is especially epic in the Slavic countries — it’s no coincidence that Hungary, the nations of the former Czechoslovakia, and the nations of the former Yugoslavia are ground zero for producing adult stars — but it’s a well-known characteristic of the whole bloc.
Look, I know you like this blog, but the whole “appeal to authority” thing is getting old. Riff on the topic at hand if you must, but for christ’s sake get your own leg to stand on.
LikeLike
I may not have been clear here.
The blog author’s posts are pretty insightful, especially regarding the machinations of women (although they are sometimes laughably untrue outside the narrow swpl demographic slice). But what I’m getting at is that the aggregate views of the commenters here are laughably out of touch with the Big Bad Real World (BBRW) on many things.
For one, in the BBRW you can’t smell the number of partners a woman has had. And, in the BBRW, women are much better liars than men, but especially when they’ve got the advantage of living on their home turf, which is alien to you — you’re a mark if you think they can’t outwit you from A to Z (or from A to whatever accented characters come after Z in the local alphabet).
Although, I suppose, everybody wins here — you think you’re getting a virgin (heh), and she gets more dollar signs than BASIC in exchange for a hand job. All good all around.
I’m glad you feel this way — really, I am. You just shunted a 100-car cognitive dissonance train right off the tracks there, champ.
LikeLike
@Sister
No, I wrote that traditional marriage material virgin types don’t go all the way all that fast. But that’s whom a guy most wants to sleep with if he’s patient but persistent.
In the end, of course, looks and smell are most important for most men. I can’t help it if those who win on those two counts tend not to be the used-up night club girls.
LikeLike
@The, ahem, “Good Wife”
if you marry a girl because she’ll be good at “stability,” then you have no right to complain when (a) the sex sucks and/or is nonexistent and (b) she leaves you for some badboy alpha.
Ahhh. The slut apologist’s favorite scare tactic. Which always goes something like this… low count girls (especially virgins) are asexual/bad at sex and if you marry one of them rather than one of us sluts you will be doomed to a lifetime of bad pussy.
Well guess what. That’s a fucking self serving lie. Maybe if you had learned to suck cock practicing on a banana, rather than drunk and on a bunch of strangers you wouldn’t be so desperate to overcompensate.
Sucking 1 dick 1000 times, rather than 1000 dicks 1 time is the same amount of practice. Women who will be “good wives” live the former, while the rest of you binge fuck and pretend later that it doesn’t matter.
Oh look. Another unsexy “non slut”…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adriana_Lima
LikeLike
@Shrimp Po Boy
“Skinny Chicks Who Got Fat – pics”
A tour defat. An excellent depiction of street fighting and house to house urban warfare that no war room BMI data can replace.
Please be warned. The graphic depictions of these atrocities are not for the faint of heart.
LikeLike
College Girl–
No, the irresponsible slut chose to sleep with a man who wasn’t committed to her. What’s more she did it without birth control, all the methods of which will allow the user to have children when they wish to and which don’t greatly reduce pleasure from the sex act, are within the sole control and knowledge of the woman. Further SHE chose to keep the child rather than giving it up for adoption, aborting it, or using Plan B after the sex act, none of which choices were available to him. She shouldn’t be able to get any forced child support=also stealth alimony from him, or from the state and the taxes of men either.
Women who don’t have children are actually paid a little more in the workplace these days. But regardless, society should not be equalizing results, only working for equality before the law. Before the law women are a lot more equal than men.
LikeLike
“I find that most men with an attitude this rigid toward female sociosexuality (aka sluttyness) are, curiously enough, precisely those men whom the sluts won’t fuck.”
Or they’re knowledgeable about the epidemiology of STDs, and how sluts acting as vectors have managed to keep alive a number of diseases that should have gone the way of smallpox decades ago. Of course, in the average cad’s rush to pat himself on the back for taking advantage of the average woman’s irrational biochemical urges, he will rarely take note of his own role in placing burdens on a society already near the edge.
I’m sure someone else will be along to clean up after the little boys and girls soon enough though /sarc
LikeLike
Chivalry was a code devised by the early French court for reining in alpha males because they were raping and destroying everything. The Japanese had Bushido without the romantic pretenses. Arabs and Chinese never had this, hence their cultures seem crude and misogynistic.
In the story the knight in shining armor rides up on his white horse and kisses the lady on the hand. He’s an alpha. Chivalry isn’t for betas, it is for aristocratics who can arm themselves with expensive armor and otherwise do whatever they want.
If you can pull yourself off as upper class/alpha then do your beta shit under the guise of chivalry and it can work wonders on a girl who reads victorian literature /romantic idealistic. Otherwise, no.
LikeLike
Xsplat–
What rubbish. Of course I don’t think culture was different before the mid sixties “just because”. There are lots of factors.
I think the biggest ones were that reliable birth control became widely available and cheap, and feminism and other PC progressivism increased replaced religion as the moral compass for most young dating age Americans.
LikeLike
@ritmo rioplatense
LMAO. I wish you were smart… or could listen… or argued like a man rather than a girl / foreigner.
You’re not really man enough to be able to appeal to the sexuality of a non slut, so you think that men who don’t have long term relationships with sluts are missing out on the “good sex “that only sluts can supposedly provide.
Your limitation blinds you to the truth that low count women are far, far less likely to be prudish than high count women are likely to be damaged. In other words sluts are a far riskier marriage choice than non sluts.
If a man is seeking both a good fuck and a good mother to his children he should go as low as he can on her partner count. If he is just looking for easy sex or sex of a “certain” kind then he should go seek the sluttiest girl he can find. Of course you don’t think it’s that easy to tell a slut, but it really is.
LikeLike
And the modern woman — who is statistically likely to be saddled with childrearing burdens from irresponsible men who have abandoned her,
having a child is the WOMAN’S decision. if a guy knocks you up, he legally has NO SAY in what YOU do.
your body, your choice. isn’t that what you modern women wanted??
LikeLike
What I’ve chosen to pair bond with is the first type of girl except with a low risk of her cheating on me.
Some sluts can be tamed. And yeah, alphas or cads are much better at taming sluts. Most can be at least for a few years. Some relatively good girls can also be taken and lead into sluttery – in the sense of hyersexuality.
You’re reading me completely wrong if you think I have some moral thing about sexual purity in girls. I don’t. Certain kinds of sluts can make great fuck buddies and also to have a couple of casual concurrent relationships with for awhile. Done both.
I just think numbers of sex partners and sexual past then to both a predictor and a causal factor in how deeply and for how long a girl with pair bond, i.e. remain in love, with a man. For a man wanting children especially, this is a very important factor – if he intends to live in the same household with his children as they’re growing up, under American and Anglosphere divorce laws.
Now if all her past sex partners were terrible at sex, tiny dicked betas who she serviced as a whore for a year or two to keep herself and her parents and siblings from starving, and you’ve utterly swept her off her feet with charming rollercoaster dominance, giving her the first shattering orgasms of her life and causing her to feel overwhelming adoring love for you – then yeah her number of prior sex partners might not matter so much.
I just think your advice as a white guy in the Philippines who doesn’t want kids anytime soon, isn’t very applicable to most readers here, including the alphas.
His advice to most men including most alphas I think is solid. Don’t fall in love and have a LTR with a real slut. And definitely don’t marry one and have kids with her, even with a prenup mimicing living together in the event of a divorce.
LikeLike
Got a legal newsletter today that featured an American woman asking what she can do about the fact that “my ex-husband outrageously took my name off as the benefactor of his pensions, etc, if he should die and put in the name of our child. The divorce was last March. How can I sue him to reverse this move?”
I couldn’t believe what I was reading.
Once again this blog shadows real life: tonight I met again with the young woman who’s reconsidered me (after we dated a few years ago). At dinner she grabbed my arm and said “I have something important to tell you, I’m still a virgin”. She was not kidding. I had to listen to 40 minutes about “purity,” about the guys who tried and failed to bed her and how we were going to go to church together every Sunday. I then said “You better be OK with at least giving me a massage at my place Friday night.” She looked shocked. Then she said “Of course. That doesn’t violate my principles.”
The things I go through to be with “marriage material”…
Wait til she meets my girlfriend.
LikeLike
yeah…
… but online muzzlims don’t count
LikeLike
uhh i don’t have to overcompensate. as indicated by my handle, i’m actually married. to a very, very alpha guy who wouldn’t have taken a second look at me had i not slept with him basically right away. sorry, but it’s true.
in this day and age, alphas are not looking for marriage. why would they be? i know someone is going to come out and list all of these “super-alphas” who are married or are getting married–guess what. not alphas. but let’s not get into that argument right now. my point is that no girl is going to “trick” an alpha into marriage without turning a trick or two herself. as for betas, and omegas, and every other letter of the greek alphabet…well maybe.
as for the whole pair-bonding thing, i think you guys underestimate the value of good sex. and uh, how it works to keep people together. i guess it depends on what you value in the relationship.
LikeLike
good stuff
LikeLike
@the good wife
If you are making a point against those who would not sleep with the virgin or low count woman themselves, I completely agree with you and I know you’ll find no argument from the Chateau. Your husband certainly expected you to sleep with HIM and liked you for it.
It takes a strange sort of male to put virgins on a pedestal where he himself would not feel worthy of being their first.
The point is that a man with options doesn’t need to ever be sloppy 4ths or 5ths, or at least not 9ths or 10ths.
One would not learn game here and then disrespect the women he seduced as a result. He would only disrespect the idea that a woman indiscriminately slept with many males previously because she couldn’t wait for him to show up.
LikeLike
I’ve rarely seen anyone on this blog advocate the Dorian Gray move where he seduces the actress and is then repulsed by her because she allowed herself to be seduced (and then she commits suicide). That would be mentally sick on the part of the man.
An exception would be the Karen O situation where she drunkenly slept with an athlete and forgot her earrings at his place and he said he would leave them outside. I’ve seen some guys applaud that guy. I wouldn’t, but I see their point.
LikeLike
Rachel Donelson Robards to Andrew Jackson: “Let’s you and him fight.”
LikeLike
Jerry–
Really?
That’s nuts. Sluts can be tons of fun and give great sex, some of them. Some kinds of sluts make great fuck buddies.
A large majority of the girls I have had sex with have been sluts. Only two or three of the girls I have had real LTRs with as opposed to non exclusive multiple girls things with though have been.
My first gf was a big one I learned, after or maybe midway into my falling for her at my 17, her 16. She broke my heart.
LikeLike
She wasn’t my first bang, which came at 14. Well my first two did on that island summer community. Ok there was a 2.5:1 male:female ratio due to all the mother’s helper’s and teenage guys doing summer jobs. And I was real tall and smart and full of testosterone.
LikeLike
*I mean a 2.5:1 female to male ration there.
LikeLike
… and yet here I am, so desperate to prove myself (to a crowd of anonymous internet nerds, no less) that I’m pounding out irrelevant details that no one asked for, just to make myself seem like I was a stud forty years ago.
Don’t you have better things to do, at age fiftysomething?
LikeLike
jerry
i was not making this point. here’s my point in very basic terms.
alpha guys want sex.
alpha guys will not fall for girls who will not put out, because they will not stick around for long enough to do so. period.
thus, women who want to bag an alpha guy should put out.
if a woman puts out pretty soon, it doesn’t mean you’re an alpha.
it means she’s slutty.
if you think that you’re the exception, you’re not. so in other words, all of those virgins or near-virgins you’ve had sex with? were almost 100% not virgins or near-virgins. that’s my point.
you can’t tell if a woman is a virgin or a slut. it’s not in their “smell.” what’s in their smell are pheromones and other hormones that indicate her sexual compatibility with you. and no, you’re not only sexually compatible with “chaste” women — nice try.
it’s the occam’s razor explanation, everyone.
is she a “good girl” who’s super sexual and slutty “just for you”…yeah, it’s not just you. unless you have been following her every move for her entire life, no, you don’t know that she’s a good girl. so yeah, you need to get over it. otherwise it’s always going to be an issue. this is not an “excuse”–sure, it’s fine to have an “ideal” woman who’s chaste and pure, but realistically you will never know.
this isn’t anything new, either. 2,000 years ago a woman gave birth to a child and claimed to be a virgin. today a good 1/3 of the world still believes that. i’m not even trying to deny christianity’s core story–i’m simply saying that people have always gone to extreme lengths to protect their interests. if mary could lie and get away with it (or even tell the truth and still get away with what seems like a big lie), then is your lovely lady any different?
LikeLike
I’ve been baffled by the lack of comprehension of my post by the slut defenders.
My hypothesis is simply this: The vast majority of men exhibit both alpha and beta mating strategies.
The individual and his social environment will determine exactly which strategy is expressed and in what situation.
However, so called “mating defense” strategies decried by xplat are expressed in both normal alphas and betas.
Henry the VIII was fucking a different pussy constantly. That didn’t stop him from chopping off the head of his second wife for spurious “adultery” charges.
If you have any inclination to have children, mate defense strategies are vital to insure your genes are the ones actually passed on.
I’d argue that the murderous rage most men feel when they find a significant other el flagrante delicto is something evolutionarily adapted for.
Men who murdered cheating spouses didn’t invest resources in mates that cheated. Therefore, the replacement mate was more likely to be loyal and carry their genes.
It’s selfish genes all the way down. I’ll fuck a slut, but I doubt highly that I could be convinced to commit to one.
If hedonism is your ONLY goal in life, have at it hoss.
LikeLike
If you are making a point against those who would not sleep with the virgin or low count woman themselves, I completely agree with you and I know you’ll find no argument from the Chateau. Your husband certainly expected you to sleep with HIM and liked you for it.
if a “virgin” sleeps with you before marriage, one of two things is happening:
a) you are so alpha that you have convinced her to sleep with you, when she wouldn’t sleep with anyone else
b) she’s lying
guess what it is, 99.99999999999999999999999, hell let’s just say 100% of the time?
b.
LikeLike
99.99999999999% of the female posters here are fucking useless.
No one cares.
If your husband is a “SUPER-ALPHA BEST FUCK FULFILLS ALL YOUR NEEDS TELEPATHICALLY STUD”, why are you hanging out on a dating/lifestyle advice blog for SINGLE men?
Consider that.
Also, it’s pretty god damn obvious when you are having sex with a virgin.
LikeLike
honestly, this board is just really funny.
LikeLike
i’ll note that poking jerry is especially fun, because he responds to everything
LikeLike
@the good wife
No I don’t. 😉
Most virgins give it up before marriage. So it’s illogical to say that there’s no such thing as a virgin who would sleep with a guy before marriage. 😉
It’s often a young woman 18-22 with very high standards (often a bookworm with a high IQ). They are often caught up in a religion, but hopefully ready to grow out of that. Blood proves the fact of virginity (not always), but that “fact” really doesn’t matter. Low count is just correlated with high quality.
LikeLike
uhh i don’t have to overcompensate.
LMAO. Says the slut who keeps overmentioning her marital status and hangs out on game blogs spewing pro slut propaganda at 2am in the morning. Damn feminists and their “pretty woman” fantasies.
LikeLike
Jerry, on the earring thing: I had a friend who kept a bowl of them. When girls came back for lost earrings, he handed it to them. “Might be in here”.
LikeLike
Duxbury and Firepower: ah yes, the serf fantasy that aristocrats can just do as they please without limits. Keep dreaming while you dig those taters.
LikeLike
Why are these cunts here anyway? Go find your own blog, sluts. Leave us alone.
LikeLike
LOL. AlphaMale just chimed in on that article (I wonder how long that will last):
AlphaMale
wrote on February 10, 2011 @ 9:52 AM
haha. Sounds like ‘Mr Jessica’ dodged a serious bullet when he kicked your spoiled arse out.
Note to you fellas – don’t date feminists because you will invariably get driven so nuts you have to get rid of them.
LikeLike
Zachary #30,053,933
You’re too fucking stupid to even realize when somebody is on your side.
Even when they write it more eloquently than you.
stfu while Grown Men converse.
Come back after 11th Grade.
LikeLike
TGW is just the latest attention whore who can’t resist the urge to eavesdrop on men’s conversations in order to butt in and prove to the guys how exceptional she is. This blog has attracted a lot of those women over the years, who would be amusing if they weren’t so boringly predictable.
Any married woman who hangs around a place like this to show off is addicted to her own fantasies of being a latent man eater, and thinks everyone else will be as intrigued with her as she is of herself. It’s cute, but not worth engaging with.
LikeLike
Tom Likus 2.0, and now with google.
Feminnism is not an ideology of will to power scaffolded by lies. It has little to do with equality. It’s goal is the power aggrandizement of women at the expense of men (as it has to be since power is zero sum), and by whatever means necessary.”
Like any ism there are shallow representations and very sophisticated ones worth considering. Feminism at its most basic is the recognition that patriarchy, a male dominated society, has stuck with us from our animal days even though our SELF -AWARENESS and AGENCY has increased dramatically. Sure men and women still behave like animals most of the time but even that has many more diverse manifestations that can be listed hear. Ant that is not to mention the diverse situations and interaction that result from being able to take matters into our own hands on many different levels. U sound like a determinist trying to work with what u can see beneath your nose but no further. Im sure many will exemplify the dynamic u describe but many will not.
“we drive into the future as if only using the rear view mirror”-mcluhan
LikeLike
Chivalry is being a gentlemen,showing his carisma and character. I like chivalry in a man, shows me he is not into comformity of the world difinition for what a man should or should not be. He its proud to be a gentleman and knows how to treat awoman.
LikeLike
Chivallary is benevolent sexism.
The feminutties hate it, for they know exactly what it is and what of its consequences.
The other 97% women love it. Like a drug addict loves the fix. Even though they resent the dealer.
Hence, using chivallry is a phenomenal way to give a big fark-you-very-much to the femminasties while keeping the other 97% exactly where they’re used to being.
Try holding a door open for wimminz with a huge condascending smirk on your face. Rolls your eyes for effect.
Then, run forrest, run.
LikeLike
How is this chivalry is dead or alive crap gonna help me get low or no money down poon, without the bill down the road?
LikeLike
Borneconi recently had a good piece about the promotional poster for “Tangled” the disney movie. the poster exemplifies this modern clash of feminism and chivalry
http://thepinchpoint.com/?p=85
LikeLike