• Home
  • Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List
  • Shit Cuckservatives Say
  • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Alpha Assessment Submissions
  • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
  • Dating Market Value Test For Men
  • Dating Market Value Test For Women
  • About

Chateau Heartiste

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Confirming Dates Like A Boss
Tease Girls Right Away »

Feminists Loathe Male Desire

June 4, 2014 by CH

The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

CH wrote the above not long ago to describe the purpose, in practice if not specifically elucidated in theory, of feminism. But what is the emotional impetus that motivates feminists? For that, we must dig deeper. Come out and plaaay, little id.

One, feminism is a hissy fit ugly women menstruate all over pretty women.

According to Benenson, a common way women deal with the threat represented by a remarkably powerful or beautiful woman is by insisting on standards of equality, uniformity, and sharing for all the women in the group and making these attributes the normative requirements of proper femininity.

Two, feminism is the revealed hatred that sexually undesirable women have for male sexuality. Feminists loathe male desire. They loathe it because it represents everything female sexuality is not — free, idealistic, romantic, reckless, unencumbered, insistent, bold, cheerful — and because the active and intrusive and JUDGMENTAL nature of male sexuality throws the physical desirability of women into stark relief. When a man ignores you to hit on your friend, that is as stone cold a judgment of your sexual worth as can be found in the state of nature. When a man can’t get a boner for a woman, well, that’s an event horizon rejection.

Evidence for feminist loathing of male desire comes distilled in this news story about a post-Lolita who was asked to change out of her Daisy Dukes because she was violating the school dress code. The Hivemind, as per usual, lined up behind (heh) the slutty attention whore to, essentially, denounce boys for having sex drives which compel them to furtively glance at barely concealed booty and get distracted from their schoolwork.

As commenter PA writes,

High school girl protests slutty clothes uniform code. Says that boys should be instructed to not look to them sexually instead. Adults, including major media, validate girl’s queef.

The more I see of modern West in its ugly and moronic totality, the more life behind the Iron Curtain in the seventies looked like paradise in comparison.

A healthy, rational, and sane society that was at peace with itself would understand that men and women have different biologically based sex drives, and that it would be cruel to subject boys, or girls, to social disruptions and insults that unnecessarily and extravagantly torment them and pull them away from their learning. (CH PSA: Bring back single sex schooling.)

But we don’t live in a sane country anymore. This sort of boy-bashing is not just ugly…. as Dalrymple said, it’s humiliating. If you aren’t on your knees in prostration kissing the feet of equalist priestesses, you just aren’t submitting hard enough.

To compound the problem, the nature of men’s sexuality is such that it’s easier for leftoid propagandists to humiliate them. Men rely on visual cues for sexual stimulation. It’s thus a simple matter to chastise men for their “leering objectification” and “contribution to rape culture” when they understandably gawk at scantily clad temptresses, and to then demand from men the Danegeld of self-abnegation. Call it the Danegelding.

But demanding the same humiliating abnegation from women, should our Hivemind queen bitches ever contemplate it, proves much more daunting. Women are sexually stimulated by a constellation of male attributes, many of which are invisible to the naked eye — male personality, humor, wealth, popularity, skill, etc — so isolating and condemning “female sexual privilege” or female “contribution to hypergamy culture” is a conveniently impossible trick to pull off. Where to aim? At doe-eyed girls doing the homework of dreamy jerkboys?

A sex equivalent scenario would be hard to piece together. Perhaps air drop a rock star into a high school classroom and tell the girls on threat of expulsion to refrain from gawking at him or giggling uncontrollably when he smiles? Crisis and observation, a wag might call it. Or, what’s good for the goose…

Look around and you can’t help but notice it’s feminist metaphorical guns at boys’ heads and groins, now and forever. And their firepower increases by the day.

The modern West deserves nothing less than exhaustion and death. Suffrage was a fucking huge mistake.

 

Share this:

  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Culture, Current Events, Feminist Idiocy, Goodbye America, Misandry, The Id Monster, Ugly Truths | 372 Comments

372 Responses

  1. on June 4, 2014 at 8:53 am VRW

    I think it’s obvious that we can no longer handle boys and girls at the same school. sorry, you ruined it for everyone, split ’em up

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:06 am Stabby

      Wouldn’t separation of the sexes just create a scenario where both male and female schools can indoctrinate freely with no pressure to at least SEEM like they aren’t pumping Frankfurt lies into the fertile minds of the youth?

      In male schools the blue pill will be the drug of choice. In female schools the Darkness would run rampant.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:33 am Arbiter

        Wouldn’t separation of the sexes just create a scenario where both male and female schools can indoctrinate freely

        No, it would be an undeniable admission that men and women are different, and that separation of different groups is good. Which is why the leftists will never allow it, no matter how positive the effects would be.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:26 pm Trimegistus

        And that would be different from the current gulag system how?

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 4:24 pm Cui Pertinebit

        The feminists once complained that girls needed a safe, female-only educational space. They got it, and it was instantly proven that when you separate the sexes, the girls’ academic performance drops a little bit, and the males’ academic performance skyrockets. Such a clear display of male superiority, when men are cut loose from the dead weight of pandering to women, was heresy. It was more important to feminists, I guess, that girls not have a “safe space,” than that men be seen to have an innately greater capacity for competition, performance and intellect.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:44 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      lzozolzlozo

      Perhaps air drop da GBFM into a high school classroom and tell the girls on threat of expulsion to refrain from gawking at him or giggling uncontrollably when he quotes Homer? Crisis and observation, a wag might call it. Or, what’s good for the goose…

      zlzozozlzl

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 10:43 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      Riddle me this batmanz lzozo.

      Suppose you work at UCLA in Los Angeles.

      If you compliment a woman on her shoes or looks, you could be fired for sexual harrassment.

      All the while, over in the valley, if you refuse to stick your cockas in her bungholzizozzl for da anamletehext secnee alnalsex butehxt xscene porno, you could be fired for failure to perform your work duties.

      Now the question is, who profits off of both Political Correctness/Feminist welath transfer, and porn?

      lzoollzolzolzlzoz

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:06 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM)

      hey hearretgeistteez! !heratieytettzz!!!

      der was so much demandz for da gbfmz lostas cockasz dat scheduling become a nightmares veritabel nightmwarezsz and so da gbfm had to rie hirez a perosnal assistantz for my lostas cockasz:

      http://www.talentgurus.net/services.html?gclid=CjkKEQjwh7ucBRD9yY_fyZe398gBEiQAAoy4JNEqQaI47nKhy8M8cRe_nAdVpJ10mUhsG_tt25U1E5Hw_wcB

      will let you know how it goeez!!

      someonez suggested going through chinaz but den dat might get confusingz as my personal assiatsnt will have da same name of my lostas cockasz “long dong duck wong” as da laided like to call himz zlozlzz

      lzozolzlzozoz

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:06 pm Zombie Shane

      > “If you aren’t on your knees in prostration kissing the feet of equalist priestesses, you just aren’t submitting hard enough.”

      This is the key – this “War on Boys” is Psychological Warfare by The Frankfurt School and its allies [the sodomites, the churchian unitardians, the jesuits, etc].

      The Frankfurt School knows that woman [by and large] are malleable creatures who will always do precisely as they are told.

      It is only the little boys who can grow up to be the warriors who might possibly fight to defeat and destroy The Frankfurt School.

      So The Frankfurt School launches a multipronged assault on the Little Boys of the West – with pharmaceutical poisons [Adderall, SSRIs, every manner of tranquilizers], with cultural poisons [Disney Channels, Nickelodeon Channels, movies, etc], and with institutional poisoning [high school boys must have their sex drives HUMILIATED out of their “ids”].

      The single most important aspect of Psychological Warfare is the DEMORALIZATION of the enemy, as a prelude to DESTROYING the enemy.

      And depriving pubescent boys of their sex drives is the most base, rank, vulgar possible demoralization of them.

      All so that the Little Boys of the West will never grow up to be the Warriors who will overthrow the Orcs of The Frankfurt School:

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 3:57 pm Zombie Shane

      Verbal or Written Permission Could be Required For College Sex
      http://www.laweekly.com/informer/2014/06/04/verbal-or-written-permission-could-be-required-for-college-sex

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:28 pm Matthew

        Enter the “consent tattoo”.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:33 pm Canadian Friend

        They will demand written consent and then they will complain men are not romantic

        women are dumb

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:05 pm Libertardian

        I realize that lounging poolside is a better life than scrabbling for survival after the collapse, but my god it’s hard not to yearn for the bloody expurgation of this wholesale hysteria.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:05 pm Modern Primitive

        “Lack of protest or resistance does not mean consent, nor does silence mean consent.”

        Oh baby you look so hot when you sign that consent form.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:38 pm Skunk

        True alphas would not require consent as it would be assumed.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:23 pm little spoon

        Don’t fear written permission. It doesn’t kill the moment. Think of the crazy shit you could put into a contract.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 4:22 pm Jim Anee-Jones

      Nailed it CH. Feminists love to be all slutty and sex positive yet cannot handle when men are not just being sex positive (game) but sex normative (normal healthy sexual desire)… they call it objectifying, (looking at women) rape culture (flirting agressively) and misogyny (wanting nsa sex)

      i read somewhere recently that A NUDE MALE STATUE had to be removed from a college campus somewhere because patriarchy something something, rape culture something something. A NUDE MALE STATUE

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 6:09 pm Zombie Shane

      Labour MP: Women Will Have to Breed if Immigration is Curbed
      http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/06/04/Labour-MP-Women-Will-Have-to-Breed-if-Immigration-is-Curbed

      …Stella Creasy, the Labour & Co-operative MP for Walthamstow, said that Britain either needs immigration or a massive baby boom in order to support the growing number of pensioners, or else “our ability to sustain our economy” will collapse. She added that this would leave the NHS in crisis…

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 1:43 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

        1)The purpose of a country isn’t to give old farts decades long vacations before they die(of course, only after we spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on each of them so that they can live a year longer)
        2)Immigration doesn’t do anything for making the UK retirement system solvent. Immigrants would have to pay in more taxes than they cost and not be eligible for benefits themselves. If only the first would happen, you’d just kick the can down the road, but it’s not even the case.
        3)Productivity gains and retirement benefit cuts both influence the viability of the system
        4)Who cares what a Labour MP says?

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 5:03 am Zombie Shane

        Stella Creasy: Labour’s rising star who’s taking on Wonga
        http://www.theguardian.com/theobserver/2012/nov/25/stella-creasy-labour-wonga

        Unmarried, she has a long-term partner she jokingly refers to as a “hab” (husband and boyfriend)…

        ***************

        ‘The misogynist abuse MPs receive is shocking – you should see the tweets I get’
        http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/the-misogynist-abuse-mps-receive-is-shocking–you-should-see-the-tweets-i-get-8116915.html

        Creasy does want children one day (she is unmarried but mentions a “HAB” — a husband and boyfriend) and strongly believes Parliament still needs to become more parent-friendly.

        Another thing she feels is hindering female advancement in public life is misogynistic abuse online. “The amount of abuse politicians get that is gendered is massively unacceptable. You should see some of the emails and tweets I get sent … offensive stuff about what people would do to me. And I know I’m not alone in this”…

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 9:35 am CarpeOro

        I’m sure the other members of the Labour party shadow government are in agreement with her. Especially the 2nd generation Pakis looking forward to getting rid of the English in England.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 12:39 pm Zombie Shane

        Fuck. LIFO’ed again.

        Bottom Line: Your children are supposed to abandon the Queen’s English and learn Pashtun instead because Stella Creasy is too God-damned solipsistic to be bothered with birthing White English babies herself.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 2:00 pm John South

        Why do we need “pensioners”.

        What is the historical basis for “retirement”?

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:04 pm Zombie Shane

      Topless feminist stabs wax Putin in France
      http://www.thelocal.fr/20140605/femen-stab-beat-putin-wax-statute-in-france

      LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 4:40 pm Zombie Shane

      LOL’ed.

      Now THIS is how to deal with Frankfurt-School-inspired femcunt insanity:

      Madonna labelled ‘Granny Gaga’ by Front National after she calls them ‘fascists’
      Madonna has been mocked as “Granny Gaga” by France’s Front National, after she tweeted her disapproval of the party and describing them as “fascists”
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/madonna/10874388/Madonna-labelled-Granny-Gaga-by-Front-National-after-she-calls-them-fascists.html

      “GRANNY GAGA”.

      LOL’ed.

      LikeLike


      • on June 8, 2014 at 6:36 am Greg Eliot

        More like Granny KaKa

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 5:54 pm Zombie Shane

      WHEREIN DIVORCE RAPE COULDN’T HAVE HAPPENED TO A NICER BETA:

      Michael Moore, Wife Tangle Over Divorce Dollars
      http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3164253/posts

      LOL’ed!

      LikeLike


    • on June 6, 2014 at 5:58 am Zombie Shane

      YO, ORCAS – YOUR WHALE BLUBBER AGES YOU PREMATURELY!

      FASTING REJUVENATES YOU!!!

      Fasting for three days can regenerate entire immune system, study finds
      A person’s entire immune system can be rejuvenated by fasting for as little as three days as it triggers the body to start producing new white blood cells, a study suggests
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/10878625/Fasting-for-three-days-can-regenerate-entire-immune-system-study-finds.html

      “…Scientists found that prolonged fasting also reduced the enzyme PKA, which is linked to ageing and a hormone which increases cancer risk and tumour growth…”

      LikeLike


      • on June 6, 2014 at 9:15 am Canadian Friend

        Thanks Zomb for that article

        There is information I can use in there

        LikeLike


  2. on June 4, 2014 at 8:55 am Wolfie

    I would say “loathe” is a very mild, polite way to put it. They hate it like cold hates heat. You might have seen this but if not, you might want to be sure nothing punchable is nearby before you read it.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 3:07 pm Dunderhead

      Yeah typical. This also reminds me of a story I read awhile back of a bunch of fat, ugly moms in Spokane Washington that were trying to get the city council to ban “R-rated” coffee shops where female baristas were showing too much skin (wearing bikinis, pasties, G-strings, what have you.)

      What was so funny about it is that it was so fucking transparent. The video of the news story showed these fat moms with their chafing thighs waddling around neighborhoods to collect signatures on petitions and saying that it was all about protecting the innocent sensibilities of the kids. Total bullshit! It was about the threat that these little scantily clad 21 year old strumpets represented to the portly hausfraus.

      http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/moms-gather-signatures-r-rated-baristas-cover-article-1.1594325

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:23 pm DirkJohanson

        On a similar vein, take a look at the women who rail against “sex slavery” – while at the same time, vibrating to “50 Shades of Grey” – and clients of hookers; most are wearing what I call the “Facebook burkha”, which is to say, they don’t use a current photograph of themselves on Facebook – because they are old or otherwise disgusting.

        LikeLike


  3. on June 4, 2014 at 8:56 am Days of Broken Arrows

    “Instead of shaming girls for their bodies, teach boys that girls are not sexual objects.” — Lindsey Stocker, the high school girl in the story below (see link).

    “Stop shaming women for not flushing the toilet! Instead, teach men not to smell the shit!” — Days of Broken Arrows.

    http://clashdaily.com/2014/06/quit-shaming-girls-teacher-orders-girl-stop-wearing-shorts-launches-viral-protest/

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:12 am The Burninator

      teach boys that girls are not sexual objects

      So teach boys yet another lie? Brilliant.

      “Yes son, women are not meant for sex. You were born because mother breathed rarefied air that contained trace amounts of kyrptonium, which as science has proven, causes spontaneous pregnancy. Sex never entered the picture because clearly she is not a being who is built for sex or who in any way displays any sexuality. Nope. And an object? Why, the very nerve, and object indeed! Objects are physical entities that exist at a singular point in the universe, there is no way that your mother is that! The temerity of suggesting as such, why, I’m getting the vapors even contemplating it!”

      Hint to feminists: Women are sex objects. Men are sex objects. All sexually reproducing animals are sex objects in a sense. It’s our primary drive in life, the creation of and perpetuation of the species. If you can’t handle it, remove yourself from the chain of life in protest.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:21 am leeminh0

        I would love to be a sexual object to men 😦 as a bisexual young man of 22 years, but in the small Mexican town I live in there is no obvious LGTB men

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:30 am The Burninator

        I suggest a strategy of Surprise Buttsex on unsuspecting strangers in your town. Yes, you’ll get the shit kicked out of you, brutally and repeatedly, but really, isn’t that a fair price to pay for finally finding your Dream Date(tm)?

        Is there a reason, short of boring trolling, that you continue to throw around that you’re a faggot on threads? Just curious. Our Irish poster manages to make many insightful comments without hardly ever mentioning that he’s gay. Maybe you should look into that kind of posting style.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:56 am Greg Eliot

        If thine eye offends thee, pluck it out.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:36 am leeminh0

        because is a catharsis for me, and that’s it 🙂 insightful comments? most of you are way older than me and have had more experience of life, I lack some wisdom of older people, I am a young person into pop culture and those kind of things

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:36 am Steve Johnson

        “Is there a reason, short of boring trolling, that you continue to throw around that you’re a faggot on threads? ”

        Because he’s a mentally ill faggot who hates himself because he knows he’ll never be normal so he’s driven to disrupt and shit upon any space for normal men.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:40 am Arbiter

        Poor LemmingHo needs constant attention drawn to his perversion, yet another sign of how homosexuals are freaks. Their homosexuality is their “child”, but it doesn’t exist if it isn’t pushed in people’s faces at all times.

        Most of them also have serious mental problems that lead them to join the homosexual subculture in the first place, where they get insta-friendship and easy sex despite being failures, and where they can feel like they are “chosen” because the media constantly praise that group. People with mental problems usually hate normal people, and they especially hate those who live in stable and happy families since they can never be part of those. So they try to use their homosexuality to defile society, to make everything ugly and always cause conflict, much like shitting in the road – which some of them would pick up and eat. Freaks.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:10 pm Zombie Shane

        And you guys doubted me when I tried to warn you how persistent and patient this Evil is.

        Just waiting and plotting and biding its time to be the first to slide itself into your tight little virgin backside.

        Imagine what it would be like if, say, Leming Ho were a coworker, and you had to deal with his advances every single motherfucking day that you went to work.

        From now until the end of time.

        Because guesss what? He and his ilk are a “protected class” – you can’t fire them anymore because The Frankfurt School says you can’t.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:20 pm Modern Primitive

        “Imagine what it would be like if, say, Leming Ho were a coworker, and you had to deal with his advances every single motherfucking day that you went to work.”

        My ego gets a massive boost when gay men hit on me.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 5:10 am Zombie Shane

        > “My ego gets a massive boost when gay men hit on me.”

        Well then I should have an ego the size of Jupiter or Saturn or URANUS!!!

        Motherfucker.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 9:47 am CarpeOro

        I have yet to see anything insightful from LMH. He has regularly demonstrated a lack of understanding of, men, women, and pretty much everything that thinks it is in between.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 3:00 pm Zombie Shane

        > “anything insightful from LMH”

        The insight you should take away from this is their fanatical PERSISTENCE.

        They are like YKW in that regard – they will NOT stop until they get what they want.

        Psycho-analyzing a fag or a YKW is like psycho-analyzing “The Terminator”:

        LikeLike


      • on June 6, 2014 at 5:15 pm leeminh0

        @ all of you: Die, besides I did a lot of insightful comments in m older blog, I did post a link to it in this new blog I have

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:03 pm Joey

      The leveling that they are attempting here – trying to get men to treat hideous women as if they were beautiful inside and out, and trying to treat men as a neutered and passion-free version of women, is nothing more than Feminism giving Antonio Gramsci a blowjob in the women’s restroom of life’s restaurant.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 10:08 pm Libertardian

      In other news, 34yo teacher fucks 16yo thuglet, then claims victim status

      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2648124/Utah-high-school-teacher-34-accused-having-sex-16-year-old-student-claims-SHE-victim-teen-boy-wore-defenses.html

      “She repeatedly refused and declined his advances until he ultimately broke down her resistance,’ defense lawyer Edward Brass claimed, according to the Salt Lake Tribune.”

      Five minutes of alpha…

      “The teen was allegedly able to accurately describe the layout of Altice’s home to detectives as well as tattoos on her body.”

      Doh!

      “Altice is the fourth Utah teacher currently facing charges of sexually abusing children.”

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 5:25 am Zombie Shane

        > “She repeatedly refused and declined his advances until he ultimately broke down her resistance”

        I’m sorry, but we have got to suck it up and face the facts and accept the horrifying reality that ONLY THE HORNIEST OF THE HORNY SLUT WHORES want to be paid to be in the presence of teenaged boys and the pubescent male sex drive.

        Any woman with a brain larger than a walnut knows damned well what she’s getting into when she signs up for that job.

        I have an old friend who’s huge into secondary school edumakashun [at really elite and pricey “Christian” academies] and when he was in the classroom teaching girls that age, he said that routinely they we are all propositioning him in the most obscene and explicit fashions imaginable.

        If he had the self-discipline to resist all of those advances over the years, then he’s a better man than I.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 5:34 am Zombie Shane

        > “ONLY THE HORNIEST OF THE HORNY SLUT WHORES”

        You know, I’m sitting here thinking about the whole question of natalism, and what needs to happen to get some progeny out of a chick, and how horrible it would be to go up to the altar and become hitched to some frigidly cold bulldyke feminazi ice queen, and, truth be told, I have a little bit of a weakness for the ultra horny DTF slut whores.

        Just so long as they’re faithful and they don’t cuckold you.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:22 am CarpeOro

        Just further proof that women desire to be bereft of all consequences for their actions. As an adult, my response is if you want the responsibilities of a child, you have the rights of a child. That doesn’t include voting, ownership of property without a guardians over-site, the right to any kind of vehicle operator license, or living on their own (have to be under adult supervision at all times). If a man claimed a Lolita broke down his resistance over time, his lawyer would probably bail on him then. This woman? The lawyer thought it might work.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:29 am Greg Eliot

        Geez, are men these days SO bereft of testicular fortitude and charm that this relatively hot gal needs to go with teenagers?

        Alas, Babylon!

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:47 am Canadian Friend

        Even though she is too young to be called a cougar this trend/ fad of older women having sex with much younger men is basically the same idea behind cougar/cubs relationships and it is becoming an epidemic…kind of like women getting tattoos has become

        It does not make much sense but because everyone else is doing it well… everyone is doing it.

        Women are dumb(er than men )

        LikeLike


  4. on June 4, 2014 at 8:59 am Stabby

    Great post.

    “They loathe it because it represents everything female sexuality is not — free, idealistic, romantic, reckless, unencumbered, insistent, bold, cheerful…”

    Without simply using antonyms, can you list 8 adjectives describing the female sexuality?

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:06 am CH

      sensual, profound, dangerous, sublime, receptive, passionate, holistic, formidable.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:02 pm Amy

        I’m curious, why do you say male sexuality is idealistic and romantic as compared to female sexuality?

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 6:48 pm herb

        “women squeeze men who sell themselves as squeezable men. golddiggers and their marks are meant for each other.

        In other words, myself and other “marks” should have been aware that your woman is “deceptive about her deep desires, deceptive about her actions, deceptive about her past, deceptive about her present, deceptive about her intentions, deceptive about the sisterhood, deceptive about her to herself and, finally, deceptive about being deceptive heh”“deceptive about her deep desires, deceptive about her actions, deceptive about her past, deceptive about her present, deceptive about her intentions, deceptive about the sisterhood, deceptive about her to herself and, finally, deceptive about being deceptive heh” even for those that didn’t own gold?

        Some of us got suckered through the kids.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 6:48 am Zombie Shane

        > “Some of us got suckered through the kids.”

        Your own kids?

        Or kids she had had from a previous relationship?

        If the latter, then did you subsequently get any kids of your own out of the deal?

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:23 am caRIOca

      deceptive, deceptive, deceptive, …, deceptive

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:38 am SatyrWolf

        This guy wins

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:39 am Knowbody

        Female sexuality is not deceptive

        The darkness is perhaps but no, female sexuality is not a “let’s see what I can squeeze this guy for” characteristic

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:43 am CH

        women squeeze men who sell themselves as squeezable men. golddiggers and their marks are meant for each other.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:42 am Knowbody

        It can seem that way…with no game. Game teaches you not to be made a fool…..it’s 9/10 a man’s own undoing. IE lack of game, beta moves, oneitis, etc.

        If you still think all girls are out to trick men and your own failures are the fault of deceptive women with no personal blame yourself then you need to re-take the red pill and start at page 1. of Chateau.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:51 am dlpt

        Deception is a trait of female attraction, not female rejection. Obviously, it isn’t the only possible one, that’s a caricature. Aren’t you being mean?

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:52 am Greg Eliot

        There’s a reason the phrase “designing woman” entered the parlance… and it has nothing to do with fashion or home decor.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:46 am dlpt

        Wasn’t that about Prada?

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 3:21 pm caRIOca

        deceptive about her deep desires, deceptive about her actions, deceptive about her past, deceptive about her present, deceptive about her intentions, deceptive about the sisterhood, deceptive about her to herself and, finally, deceptive about being deceptive heh

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 3:51 pm dark econ

        “deceptive about her deep desires, deceptive about her actions, deceptive about her past, deceptive about her present, deceptive about her intentions, deceptive about the sisterhood, deceptive about her to herself and, finally, deceptive about being deceptive heh”

        the fact that we know this gives us the advantage. they have no secrets. their playbook is totally exposed.

        use this knowledge to get what you want from them while giving as little as possible.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:02 pm ballocaust

        female sexuality is not a “let’s see what I can squeeze this guy for” characteristic

        this fucking guy, because the market definitely says that pussy is given out altruistically

        good genes or good bank, one of the two

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:17 pm Heywood Jablome

      Calculating, calculating, calculating, calculating, calculating, calculating, calculating, calculating.

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 4:53 pm Knowbody

        That’s more like it. ^^^

        good genes or good bank? Beta excuse bro. Hit the weights….cut your bullshit out of the diet. Prep meals on sunday, no fucking junk. You’ll be fucking amazed what being moderately swole with sub 15% BF will do for you in the game.

        You guys are projecting the way YOU think as if that’s how a woman thinks….at that specific moment in time her decision is 100% true to her, remember the rationalization hamster, just keep making that motherfucker spinning constantly. When these c unts nuke their family…it’s mostly a. her environment convincing her to mixed in with b. some beta shlubsband who thinks he just has to bring home some cash to keep his family together, neglecting the GAME shit CH preaches in here. That’s the same as your bitch gaining 75 pounds. Think on that. A pedestalizing fucking beta male is the equiv to a 210lb 5’5″ fat fucking fat tits land whale.

        LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 4:50 pm Cui Pertinebit

      Healthy female sexuality: inviting, welcoming, surrendering, life-giving, cleaving, trusting, sensual, dependent (in a positive way).

      Unhealthy female sexuality: dissipated, insecure, validation-seeking, detached/frozen (even in the midst of voracity), defiled, barren, suspicious, jealous.

      LikeLike


  5. on June 4, 2014 at 9:05 am nerdfiles

    First rule: Always show bulge.

    If women can assert power through clothing, so can we.

    They certainly get distracted by it. But hey, guess what: my erection doesn’t mean I want to bone *you*. Deal with it. If you see more bulge; assume your dud’s did their job, but do not expect pursuit unless there’s warrant. But they’re all feminist lurkers, so bulgeon them ’til Kingdom Come.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:15 am nerdfiles

      Women derive power simply from knowing they’ve passively installed points toward their Shadow Sexual Market Value: SMV defined purely as an operation within a set of norms. So they become arbiters of sexual transaction at the cost of boy’s later puberty, and it becomes their science experiment (which of course spills out in confidence about boyhood desire as it becomes male desire) wherein “anthropology” becomes an avenue through which beliefs about male predictability are re-enforced by the sexual politics of adolescence.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:47 am nerdfiles

      More succinctly. Always show bulge. Gives women options, equalizes slut-shaming, normalizes power dynamics, and it’s sexually non-intrusive.

      When does a skirt become a sexual catalyst? Well, at her whim, but she’s still the agent here: she gets the privilege to know she aroused you by doing something passive. The male, of course, has no passive, non-work-involved means of expressing satisfaction. He either must pick up or miss out; that’s the narrative. So yes, game may be the wisdom that exists to sharpen one’s inner prick, but this is active, requires energy. It is important that we all keep our wits about us; but the idea that hetero-women get to play this game for free with feminists defending and spinning all that fine-line behavior?

      The only response to this problem is: Always show bulge.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:12 pm gunslingergregi

        you saying woman aren’t turned on by a man’s body cause they are

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:13 pm gunslingergregi

        why ya think guys got to wear suits so they don’t show off the pipes in wife beaters

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:41 pm dark econ

        “you saying woman aren’t turned on by a man’s body”

        lots of “women” these days are more turned on by the thought of saving $1.50 on a bottle of shower gel or getting another handbag at a “luxury” sample sale than by a man or his body.

        dopamine releases in a woman’s brain are being hijacked by sophisticated neuromarketers and screwed with by hormones in birth control, food, municipal water supplies of course by the ssris.

        most chicks these days are empty shells and should be used/treated as such.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:45 pm Greg Eliot

        lots of “women” these days are more turned on by the thought of saving $1.50 on a bottle of shower gel or getting another handbag at a “luxury” sample sale than by a man or his body.

        Harsh, but not without merit…

        I recall hearing the results of a poll many a year ago, where women were asked if they’d prefer great sex for a year or $10K.

        A sobering 92% said they’d rather have the money.

        (Yeah, yeah, all y’all PUAs… I know… the pollster wasn’t alpha enough… LOZOZLZOZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZL)

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:06 pm Scray

        Wow a woman -said- she preferred X to a man or his body? Well holy shit, stop everything. I don’t understand how when a woman says ‘I don’t like jerks,’ we say ‘hahahah don’t listen to her, watch how she behaves!’ But for shit like this we treat what they say as indicative of what they feel. Give me a break.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 6:19 pm Imperial Leather

        Women are taught to express their female sexuality and Female Sexual Power (FSP)

        Most men have been taught to NOT express their sexuality or Male Sexual Power (MSP) but to defer to FSP

        Charisma or learned charisma could be thought of as Men expressing their MSP, which in relation to FSP as per almost every other category is more Dominant, Powerful, Exciting etc

        Beta males are trying to express their MSP through a FSP lens which is a turn off

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:35 pm gunslingergregi

        (Yeah, yeah, all y’all PUAs… I know… the pollster wasn’t alpha enough…
        ””””””””””

        my bitch former ho handed me 700 dollars cause of mahhhh dick
        he he he

        8 percent of em prob had mahhh dick

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:39 pm gunslingergregi

        dark econ

        “you saying woman aren’t turned on by a man’s body”

        lots of “women” these days are more turned on by the thought of saving $1.50 on a bottle of shower gel or getting another handbag at a “luxury” sample sale than by a man or his body.
        ””””””””””””””””””””

        lots really ya think maybe lesbos
        but wait I just had a lesbo next door turn straight to get at a man and his body
        cause she jealous of what my bitch has and sure as fuck can’t get me that’s what I think anyway but she is with a dude now

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:45 pm gunslingergregi

        my bitch trying to hand me serious money cause I make her feel special
        and she in love and she want to contribute

        but back when I was rock diesel I spent no money on ho’s and yea they wanted my body
        I’ve had bitches beg cry scream to get my body and that’s now

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:49 pm gunslingergregi

        here is the thing when ya get a bitch make dam sure she loves loves loves you fucking her
        they are out there
        this will blow up your head to where it should be and make you realize bitches will kill for the right dick

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 7:51 am Zombie Shane

        > “dopamine releases in a woman’s brain are being hijacked by sophisticated neuromarketers and screwed with by hormones in birth control, food, municipal water supplies of course by the ssris.”

        This is some serious, serious shit which is a shadowy semi-taboo topic of conversation in the realm of the greater objective analysis of the nihilism of modernity.

        My suspicion is that those of us who are sober have no earthly idea what life is like for the portion of our population which is constantly high on [and/or addicted to] one pharmaceutical and/or another [and another and another and another…].

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 9:52 am gunslingergregi

        and ya got to be carefull when playing with the devil on that shit too zombie cause I have heard a lot of stories bout a non drug user hanging with the drug user and it might take years but eventually the non drug user becomes a user
        and you are right we sober folks can’t comprehend what it is like prob why hanging around it we try to comprehend what the person we know is going through thinking we tough enough not to become addicted too but to know what all the fuss is about maybe

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:12 am gunslingergregi

        and the first thing the chicks in jail talked about getting when getting out was some dick lol
        then ok some drugs
        but yea my chick was only one saying she was gonna get out and her man was gonna break the pussy
        I will admit that I have certain special power but really if ya ever listened to a dude jackhammer a bitch then ya know how to do it just keep it up for hours something gonna break lol
        let the raw power out full throttle

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:16 am gunslingergregi

        I guess pretty good pickup spot would be right outside the jail when these horny chicks walk out lol might get one with nobody waitin
        she said one bitch walked out said any dick will do he he he

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:20 am gunslingergregi

        so maybe some irony
        the chicks in jail love dick
        the chicks going to college don’t?
        maybe ya getting with the wrong chicks
        if you smart college guys meeting chicks who you think don’t place importance on sex yea kind of interesting

        LikeLike


  6. on June 4, 2014 at 9:06 am Canadian Friend

    Women tell us they are more than a sexual object, that they are more than just tits and ass but in the same breath they demand the right to walk around with as much of their tits and ass hanging out.

    A huge contradiction…

    Only an irrational mind wants one thing and its opposite and is so irrational that they are not even aware of how little sense they are making.

    The more they say and do such things, the more they show the world they are way too irrational to be treated as equal.

    Feminism was like taking the diapers off a toddler; It did not free the toddler nor the parents from anything oppressive, all that shit that is now everywhere only makes it more obvious why we used to keep the toddler’s butt in a diaper. Because that is what is best for everyone.

    Women are dumb.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:17 am nerdfiles

      It’s actually not a contradiction per se, and not seeing that is part of the problem.

      No one wins.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:44 am Canadian Friend

        It’s not a contradiction to do the opposite of what you say?

        wow…

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:53 am nerdfiles

        “Hypocrisy” is not synonymous with “contradiction”. First off, beliefs involve opaque contexts. Gosh. Now this is getting pedantic. I honestly don’t care, but it’s important to understand that “contradiction” is jargon, not street language.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:28 am Canadian Friend

        Saying ; ” I do not want other people to listen to my private conversations but I am going to say them in a microphone connected to a 10,000 watts public address system ” is a similar contradiction to women not wanting us to look at what they shove in our face or them telling us they are more than tits and ass while their tits and ass are hanging out.

        That it is done out of hypocrisy or out of dumbness does not change the fact that saying one thing and doing the opposite is inconsistent, incoherent, illogical.

        a contradiction.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:51 am nerdfiles

        It lessens the power of individual words and the clarity of thought to throw the whole kitchen sink of almost-the-same meanings.

        Systems are inconsistent. Propositions are contradictory. Ideas and concepts are incoherent. Arguments are illogical.

        The point here is that someone can totally be rational while maintaining contradictory beliefs, but it is beliefs and their contradictions which define irrationality, namely in that two beliefs might entail incompatible outcomes. Believing taxes are good and at the same timing believing they are not is a contradictory belief, but paying them doesn’t make you irrational. All the same, being a hypocrite or doing things not in your best interest are not the defining properties of the things these jargons pick out.

        If you want to make comments on psychology, do thar, but there’s no need to pad and decorate the commentary with the machinery of the Purest Science (logic).

        Hypocrisy is a good word. Why can’t you be satisfied with it?

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:04 pm Canadian Friend

        First you find me guilty of using “jargon” ( Dictionary.com ; language that is characterized by uncommon or pretentious vocabulary and convoluted syntax and is often vague in meaning ) instead of using street language…simply for having used the very common word “contradiction”

        then you come up with a comment that is full of exactly that type of jargon. Not a word but a full comment.

        now THAT is a contradiction

        how amusing

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:47 pm Greg Eliot

        Avaunt, thou cunning linguists, and leave the jargon to this interlocutor.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:42 pm nerdfiles

        Not really. My comment was expository, tracking the additional jargons you threw out which were similarly misplaced.

        Just because something isn’t self-evident does make it a contradiction. A contradiction is P&~P; it’s not P&(S says)Q. It isn’t P&(S says)~P.

        “Hypocrisy” is the word you’re looking for; it fits. The point here is that someone can be hypocritical and rational; so not only is “contradiction” too jargon-y, it actually doesn’t tell the right story. That’s why I mentioned that its use here does more harm than good.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:05 pm Canadian Friend

        First,

        of course one can be hypocritical and rational but women are not rational creatures, they are hormonal and emotional, and even if what motivates them is hypocrisy, they are still doing things in an irrational way so no the word I should use is not hypocrisy as I am not talking about their hypocrisy but about how irrational everything they say and do is.

        second,

        there you go again using words that qualify as “jargon” while saying it is me who is doing it!
        “Expository” qualifies as jargon far more than “contradiction” does. Contradiction is a very common word, even uneducated people use it, even kids in the fifth grade use it, while “expository” is rare and only used by educated artsy intellectuals.

        Third,

        are you a female?… because you are behaving exactly like many of my exes; they were always accusing me of silly stuff. Not only had I not done any of whatever they were accusing me of, but they were blind and deaf to their own actions as it was them who had done what they were accusing me of.

        An example; she ( one of the many I had ) would interrupt me dozens of time during an evening with friends, I would calmly politely resume talking, then in the car on the way home she would accuse me of having interrupted her all evening.

        You are doing exactly this now by using more sophisticated words than I am, while accusing me of being the one using words that are too sophisticated.

        My first language is French and my English is mostly self taught, I am barely capable of using sophisticated words and of making convoluted explanations or of using jargon in the sense you mean.

        I did not even know jargon could mean that until did a Google search, I only knew of its most common meaning; technical terminology of a group or activity

        Contradiction is a common word that people in the street understand while expository is not.

        You use sophisticated jargon while I use common words ( I only used more sophisticated words such as coherent after your weird accusations ) yet you accuse me of doing what you are doing.

        Why can’t you see that?

        This is getting weirder and weirder ( which is probably not even a word )

        I am trying to remain civil but your weird accusations are a bit annoying. You have a distorted perception of reality. Is this too “jargonny” ? or not expository enough?

        PS; I typed this long comment while an ex was talking my ear off on the phone. On the up side it was a nice distraction from her boring repetitive stories.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:34 pm Canadian Friend

        I am too “jargonny” but this shit ,

        A contradiction is P&~P; it’s not P&(S says)Q. It isn’t P&(S says)~P.

        is for the common man

        yeah right

        ((( rolling eyes so much it hurts )))

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 4:46 am ho

        “then you come up with a comment that is full of exactly that type of jargon. Not a word but a full comment.

        now THAT is a contradiction”

        Not its not you amateur.

        Also, he didn’t misuse the jargon, which you did. THAT is what he accused you of.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 7:53 am Canadian Friend

        Contradiction is a sophisticated word or “jargon” only to pre-school toddlers, to people living in mud huts and to retards.

        Which are you ho?

        Or did I also misuse the word retard as well?

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 4:52 am ho

        “are you a female?… because you are behaving exactly like many of my exes;”

        ……

        You claim that women are irrational and then you claim that a woman might be capable of such harisplitting? Have you ever seen a woman? Their eyes would glaze over during such a discussion.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 8:13 am Zombie Shane

        Two points here:

        1) Logic dude needs to add a metric shit ton more parentheses to his pseudo-logical horseshit, or else offer us a quick tutorial on precedence of symbols.

        2) Logic dude is almost certainly YKW.

        Judging from what I’ve seen so far, I wouldn’t waste a lot of time engaging him in conversation.

        So far, it just looks like standard, doctrinaire Frankfurt School gibberish.

        LikeLike


      • on June 8, 2014 at 11:08 am ryan vann

        Shut up, faggot.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:30 am Hugh G. Rection

      And it’s not like the attractive ones are completely oblivious to it, but of course it’s hard for a feminist to grasp. They realize pretty fast that their cooch gives them a lot of power over men. Being regarded as a sex object is actually an advantage, at least in a society that frowns upon rape (or as we call it, “civilized society”).

      It’s another astonishing piece of self serving dishonesty to say that men and women have equal sex drives and then to demonize men for the fact that this is simply not true, thus “proving” that men are inferior. Nobody buys that shit.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 3:38 pm Glengarry

      Women should consider what remains for them if we stop treating them like sex objects. Would we for instance be receptive to being loudly hectored by weak, selfish, whiny, treacherous, kind of dumb men?

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 8:17 pm Ronin

      There was a chick at my uni who pulled the same shit.

      She would frequenly walk around in a skin-tight black catsuit.

      Women are dumb.

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 8:17 am Zombie Shane

        > “She would frequenly walk around in a skin-tight black catsuit.”

        Which would describe just about 100% of the jewesses who ever walked the face of the earth.

        By and large, you guys are describing JEWISH hypocrisy here.

        The difference with the Jews is that they understand that it is all just so much propaganda and disinformation and above-the-law elitist arrogance which is only meant to fool the Shkotzim into submission [preparatory to the final destruction and annihilation of the Shkotzim].

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:56 pm ABS

        Yea, like these two hotties: https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10203342119327691&set=p.10203342119327691&type=1&theater

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:50 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

      Showing tits and ass and being more than a sexual object aren’t mutually exclusive. Apparently, iPhones should stop being more than a phone because they’re marketing themselves as a phone and they can’t have all the other apps.

      LikeLike


      • on June 10, 2014 at 11:00 am Canadian Friend

        So basically you agree with feminists.

        Good to know.

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 8:09 am Zombie Shane

      > “Women tell us they are more than a sexual object, that they are more than just tits and ass but in the same breath they demand the right to walk around with as much of their tits and ass hanging out.”

      In fairness, I don’t think that most women [certainly not most women who had been raised in a classical cultural environment] would have said something so absurd.

      What you are describing is the PROPAGANDA which The Frankfurt School has been shoving down our women’s throats for the last century or more.

      I can pretty much guarantee you that Amish girls – who are raised in an atmosphere devoid of 24×7 Frankfurt School cultural poisoning – would never say something so ludicrous.

      It’s why they dress so modestly.

      LikeLike


  7. on June 4, 2014 at 9:08 am Edward Waverley

    CH, this is the cartoon representation of the boy who stared at the barely concealed booty:

    http://i.imgur.com/SP6sRC4.png?2

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:05 pm haunted trilobite

      Brilliant find

      LikeLike


  8. on June 4, 2014 at 9:13 am Edward Waverley

    CH said, “Men rely on visual cues for sexual stimulation. It’s thus a simple matter to chastise men for their “leering objectification” and “contribution to rape culture” when they understandably gawk at scantily clad temptresses, and to then demand from men the Danegeld of self-abnegation.”

    Laurence Auster said, “The way many women dress today, with half their breasts exposed, is an expression of total disrespect for men. Men are left with three possible responses. To grab the woman, which is illegal; to ogle the woman, which is socially unacceptable; or to affect not to notice the woman at all, which is emasculating. A culture that normalizes such female behavior—i.e. not only not noticing or objecting to it, but prohibiting any objection to it—is extremely sick.”
    ~ Laurence Auster, “A Theory of Viagra”

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:14 am CH

      well written. RIP Auster.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:22 am nerdfiles

      No! Show bulge!

      It’s totally justifiable by the same model of reasoning as the “fatty positive body image”; and its just as much free speech as publicly defined nipples. Any number of causes. Women get what they immediate want: validation of their sexual force immediately.

      Everything open to view helps everyone explore their options. Rape culture dissolved. Next?

      LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 5:00 pm Cui Pertinebit

        You do know that the feminist response will be that showing bulge is the most aggressive promotion of rape culture possible. That’s some “reign of the phallus” type stuff, there.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:24 am The Burninator

      to ogle the woman, which is socially unacceptable

      Sounds to me like a conversation on re-defining what is socially acceptable is long overdue for men. We’re letting feminists and manginas define what is acceptable culturally, so the best strategy in my mind is to laugh at their notions of acceptability in polite society and start intentionally acting as men traditionally have acted. Wolf whistling needs to come back in vogue.

      Anecdotal proof – women bitch and complain about men in central/South America and Italy openly admiring them without shame. The fems snort and sniff and get all anglo-entitlementy, yet always seem to go back to those destinations for vacation.

      “Well ok, they were all macho pigs in La Paz, but I’ll bet that won’t be the case in Teguchigalpa when I go there next month!”

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:26 am Hugh G. Rection

        Anecdotal proof – women bitch and complain about men in central/South America and Italy openly admiring them without shame.

        That’s not bitching, that’s bragging.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:25 pm The Burninator

        Yeah, I know, just highlighting their wiley ways.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:49 pm thwack

        If you got your tits hangin out, Im lookin; aint no shame in my game; then again girls give me a pass cause Im part cannibal.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 8:12 pm Eeyore

        I ogled a chick’s boobs today. We were flirting so it was copacetic, yet there was a moment when I heard an inner voice saying “Don’t be rude, Eeyore.” I wanted to break contact, but damn, they were just so big and jiggly and she kept leaning into me. Those boobs were set to stun.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:41 am dlpt

      Show disapproval.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 3:01 pm dark econ

        “Show disapproval.”

        by negging her and taking away any power she thinks inappropriately flaunting her body gives her.

        “you’re showing a lot of…. ankle. people might get the wrong idea.”

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:22 pm dlpt

        Was expecting absolutes, have to give it around -5.

        What’s needed is some perspective.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:47 am zmbiklr

      I have to disagree with the last option of Auster.

      Women do this to attract certain male attention and are indignant when it attracts the attention of those less worthy. They are selling their bodies and playing hard to get at the same time. With ever increasing pop culture female warfare (Miley Cyrus’ antics), I figure women feel the pressure to stand out and push the edge more than ever, especially the extraverted ones. I’d guess it correlates well with peak fertility.

      If you are in their target class, ignoring their goods can actually drive them wild, especially if you appear to be enjoying yourself. I was always naturally aloof, and can recall all sorts of incidents where women would practically thrust themselves into view from leaning their cleavage right in front of my eyes, blocking the view of my work to slamming their tray of cafeteria food in the spot in front of me and sitting down after many hovering passes to attract my eyes. My natural response of direct eye contact and “Need something?” when I could no longer ignore them seemed to instantly transform them into submissive little pets who would have sex within days if not hours. As I was quite shy when younger, I got more sexual relationships that way than anything else, without any work at all. Women always want something they think they can’t have, and aloofness generates that. Enforcing the notion that they have to attract your attention from the get-go pays numerous dividends throughout your relationship as we all know.

      Thinking back, about 90% of my most fulfilling relationships were produced that way, including both of my current women. I don’t get the “hit on lots of women, it’s a percentage game” advice – seems like such a waste of time from more productive pursuits. Gawking at them is actually beta even though it’s a natural effect of having testosterone, because it’s catering to their terms. I’d guess most guys hit on the girls playing up the slut look, so they are really just one of the crowd. You’re reduced to peacocking – trying to be the cock with the brightest feathers. Either you dance like a monkey for sex – or they do. Trying to get your attention and pleasing you to keep you is a much more natural state for a woman to be in. She wants to respect you. When she does is when you act on your most primitive animal urges and go primal on her. If you’re a dancing monkey, eventually she won’t,when you don’t dance better than some other monkey.

      It certainly may speak ill of societies that have a bunch of sluts and attention whores walking around, but it certainly indicates to me women as a group are more insecure than ever about attracting a worthy mate. Respect for men is at a new low because most are dancing monkeys.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:19 pm haunted trilobite

        Interesting but probably not universally applicable

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:28 pm haunted trilobite

        Sorry, didn’t mean to seem dismissive. Just voicing an opinion, as it seems like such an approach might lend itself to wallflowerism, if applied without an appropriate abundance mentality.Thanks for the well-written advice which certainly merits consideration.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:31 pm Hugh G. Rection

        seems like such a waste of time from more productive pursuits.

        I agree. I’d rather continue my work on cold fusion instead of going out gaming women, only interrupted by the 10s knocking at my door for a bang.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:33 pm Hugh G. Rection

        I think this can be succinctly summed up as: Instead of “Just being yourself” just be like me. Thanks for playing.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:38 pm Greg Eliot

        Respect for men is at a new low because most are dancing monkeys.

        COTW, right there.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:41 pm Greg Eliot

        I agree. I’d rather continue my work on cold fusion instead of going out gaming women, only interrupted by the 10s knocking at my door for a bang.

        Most droll…

        Alas, I only have the 7s and 8s knocking, since they found out my pursuits in astrophysics were merely a hobby.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 3:44 pm dark econ

        “They are selling their bodies and playing hard to get at the same time.”

        love it. makes it that much more fun to break them.

        “women would practically thrust themselves into view from leaning their cleavage right in front of my eyes”

        funny how they always turn to the cleavage. such silly simple predictable little creatures. what makes game fun is that guys have an almost endless toolbox for attraction (that can be learned/practiced/supplemented and isn’t dependent on youth) whereas women have tits, ass, lips and hair, all with a ticking clock.

        ” I don’t get the “hit on lots of women, it’s a percentage game” advice – seems like such a waste of time from more productive pursuits.”

        for sure. more like, “focus on yourself/have tight internal game and put yourself in a position to cross paths with lots of women and let them make the case for why you should take time out of your day to fuck them.” still a percentage game, but with us as the prize.

        “Gawking at them is actually beta even though it’s a natural effect of having testosterone, because it’s catering to their terms.”

        I make it a point not to look (treat it like a game, who can not look the most, like seeing not who can get the most numbers but the most rejections kind of thing). of course they’re all a bit different, but none of them has anything I haven’t seen before. “Just don’t look” and their power disappears like a fart in the wind. sometimes they will even turn to look at you (confirmed by a subtle sunglasses-hidden glance in the rear view mirror) if you don’t look. their game is eggshell thin.

        “Trying to get your attention and pleasing you to keep you is a much more natural state for a woman to be in.”

        this. play percentage game to find the ones that want to serve you then choose the best from that preselected pool. you can’t fail and you will find that the more she complies the worse you treat her (because you have nothing invested) and the whole thing builds on itself with you gaining unshakable confidence and her struggling to satisfy your whims. how can you not be the prize when she’s the one who chased? then more women are drawn to you and on and on it goes.

        “it certainly indicates to me women as a group are more insecure than ever about attracting a worthy mate.”

        they are more isolated than ever as well. tech is a quick fix and bad replacement for genuine interaction. the “sisterhood” is a farce. they hate each other. the more attractive she is the more she’ll be envied and loathed by her associates. this makes for easy pickings. aim as high as you can. no woman is out of reach.

        “Respect for men is at a new low because most are dancing monkeys.”

        respect for men is at an all time low because women are born into convenience/luxury and have no idea how much energy/ingenuity/genius it took to get to this state that they absolutely take for granted. when the supply chain is disrupted/broken you’ll see respect for men rush back like an avalanche.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:44 pm Hugh G. Rection

        Alas, I only have the 7s and 8s knocking, since they found out my pursuits in astrophysics were merely a hobby.

        After all you have done for white people this is the thanks you get?

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:32 am Greg Eliot

        My pursuits have helped all of humanity… but I prefer the company of my own kind. 😉

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:49 am cryo

        Yeah, but if you’re not likely to run into attractive women through the course of your day, you have to perform some kind of dance. Even just going out to a bar, if you just stand around and act aloof, you may preserve dignity but women aren’t going to throw themselves at you.
        If you come across as a dancing monkey than something is wrong with your game. Men can be assertive and proactive while remaining detached and aloof. It’s a fine line to walk but with practice it comes easier.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:24 am zmbiklr

        trilobite:

        I had another reply, but it apparently got eaten. I didn’t divulge why I was mostly aloof: CH’s Commandment III is the golden one and captures the gist of my experience. There are no truer words. Never be a wallflower about your mission. Never subordinate your mission to the pursuit of pussy. Chase your dreams and pussy will follow. I’m nothing particularly special in looks, height, etc. I have a wife who was a cheerleader in high school and still fits her uniform – she never denies sex and will never stray or rape me in divorce court. She keeps the home tidy. She tolerates my younger mistresses. My current mistress is hit on by guys at a company I work with all the time. I know these guys and they wouldn’t believe I’m fucking her. She buys me diving trips in Belize because she’s a “feminist” and has a job, and likes to please me. I didn’t pay her much attention until she flat out asked “Will you sleep with me?” She was well aware I was married. She’s a feminist who “doesn’t need men.” Now reread Commandment III again-every word.

        Prior to the 60s and 70s feminism, men were measured by what they accomplished. It’s hard to say without living it, but my perception is most didn’t spend much time chasing pussy and dancing like a monkey for it. I’m proud to say I have my own business, am known as an expert and have constructed big projects all over the place with other men (and some women). Things that may outlast civilization. It’s dangerous (I have known three men killed) and richly rewarding as a man and a nerd – I am an engineer.

        No man will have below average success with women when he follows Commandment III vigorously, and any man can do it. Don’t pedestalize pussy or the pursuit of it. Putting “buns in the oven” of willing females will not save western civilization, nor will “manning up and marrying these sluts,” nor will a bunch of guys negging and slaying pussy at clubs. A nation of men pursuing their dreams and living life on their terms despite all the obstacles will, fathering children as an afterthought – but think long and hard on who you want to be the mother of your children. Women will follow those men. It’s been this way throughout recorded history. Men actually have it better now than the 60s, since women are capable and like to pay for shit, and men who aren’t emasculated and don’t grovel over pussy nor obsess with it’s conquest, nor treat it as some kind of prize have virtually no competition now. Women cost nothing these days – deflation is good. Game is great, but it’s a tool, not a destination….and don’t try too hard at it, because you really don’t have to if you’re vigorously pursuing your mission. Women just sniff you out, honest, and it’s not for the money. I find game most useful for efficiently keeping them in line after you attract them.

        I have to chuckle at some posters here, though, as I can generally tell who has spent any significant time with women and who hasn’t. The more time you spend, the less you pedestalize it and obsess over them.

        [CH: wanting to have sex with women — even a lot of women — is not “obsessing” over them. it’s an expression of the natural, normal and healthy male libido. now, writing poems to barely interested women in the faint hope it will squeeze sex out of them is an example of obsessing over them.]

        Women are just a fucking pain in the ass. I think one of the best kept secrets in the manospere is “be careful what you wish for.” I don’t care how alpha you are, you can’t alpha logic into a woman’s brain or keep them from making really stupid decisions. You can’t alpha out the incessant babbling of their mouths unless you get physical alpha. I swear women have turned me into a fucking sadist over the years. My wife perturbed me so badly I spanked her on a public street. I could be in jail, but she went home whimpering, I squeezed the feeling back into my swollen hand – things miraculously changed for the better after that. Sometimes I fuck her just to shut her up for a few hours. A nubile, fucking gorgeous young mistress and former stripper (I miss her, but she was neurotic and drew me so far into narcissism by worshipping me I felt numb and had to let her go) didn’t believe I could spank *her* that way because no “bad boys” could. I did so until she begged for mercy right before I first fucked her. My current mistress loves her nipples squeezed damn near as hard as I can squeeze them. The look on her face is priceless. “I’ve already told you: the only way to a woman’s heart is along the path of torment. I know none other as sure.” Marquis De Sade ~c. 1800. Another well-kept secret in the “manosphere.” Of course, you have to tread carefully into this territory, but it’s quite richly rewarding if not mind altering. My current feminist mistress calls me a chauvinist, but she still voluntarily sucks my cock on the highway to the thumbs-up approval of FedEx drivers – heh. She’s obsessed with being better than the neurotic mistress – go figure.

        I got laid less in high school / early college than other guys, I’m sure – I was more of a wallflower. If you’d told me how my life would unfold as outlined above, I would have looked at you like you were an alien – except the mission part – I believed strongly in that. You may not believe it any more than I would have, or you may see the light. I look back now on that time and wonder why I ever thought you have to jump through any hoop or act a certain way to attract women like they are some kind of prize. Don’t dance like a monkey for them – you may get laid more in the short run, so long as you entertain her better than other monkeys, but ultimately they do not want it, and you’re not being true to yourself. Long-run game is more rewarding.

        [Poon Commandment III is often misunderstood by MGTOW types. It states:

        III. You shall make your mission, not your woman, your priority

        Forget all those romantic cliches of the leading man proclaiming his undying love for the woman who completes him. Despite whatever protestations to the contrary, women do not want to be “The One” or the center of a man’s existence. They in fact want to subordinate themselves to a worthy man’s life purpose, to help him achieve that purpose with their feminine support, and to follow the path he lays out. You must respect a woman’s integrity and not lie to her that she is “your everything”. She is not your everything, and if she is, she will soon not be anymore.

        the phrasing is intentional. the meaning would change substantially if “not women” had substituted for “not your woman”. PCIII means that venerating a specific woman is likely to drive her away in disgust. women do love men who have passions that, in a sense, exclude women. but one can, and indeed one should, make “women” a priority, if one desires sex with them. the chase is fun and exciting, and the love of many women is an incomparable pleasure. the well-rounded player loves both the chase of women and the chase of his own glory and accomplishment.]

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:48 pm corvinus

      to ogle the woman, which is socially unacceptable; or to affect not to notice the woman at all, which is emasculating.

      There’s an alpha way to go between Scylla and Charybdis here.

      It’s only socially unacceptable if you make it blatantly obvious you’re doing it, and you do it for much longer than a second or so; or if the woman isn’t interested, in which case she’d be reticent about showing you her goods in the first place. A brief look is fine; being Spookyfish isn’t.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:26 pm The Burninator

        Quite right. Gawking looks odd no matter where you do it. An open and unhidden up-and-down with a somewhat indifferent nod of appreciation, as if you were examining a new model car on the sales floor, however never disappoints.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:31 pm Greg Eliot

        It’s like the sun, George… you don’t stare at it… you take a quick glance and then look away!

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:51 pm The Burninator

        I really don’t see obvious being that bad, as long as it’s measured and not staring for a long time. Think a Steve McQueen or Sean Connery aloofness and indifference with a dispassionate up-and-down and maybe the slight hint of a smile (or not, your call) and direct eye contact for just a moment as you turn away to something more important (for example, ordering a Scotch). Quick glimpse on the sly and quickly looking away seems so…dunno…high school-ish or like you fear her judgement. Fuck that. Ogling her like a stalker is bad, considering her dispassionately like a fine bottle of wine that you may or may not buy for dinner that evening seems to draw them in to you. This is assuming her head isn’t glued to her iZombie device of course.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 3:54 pm ballocaust

        Pollice Verso

        survey the presentation and then look past with amusement as you contemplate thumbs up / down

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:35 pm Matthew

        I try for the Patrick McGoohan. Subtle hint of amused disdain.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:50 pm haunted trilobite

        If there was ever a man to instil the merits of the look of disdain to young impressionable boys it was Jack Napier https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39pTkWqej-E

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:59 pm haunted trilobite

        to should read *in

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:57 pm gunslingergregi

        ye burn I hear ya
        got all the ho’s trained no looking at phones in my house all about me baby

        I mean ya see couples at a resteraunt and they both just looking in their phone

        allright girl said time to put comp away guess i’ll listen on that one

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 7:38 pm Johnycomelately

      Fourth option is to indignantly judge them as sluts and unworthy of your attention.

      LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:54 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

      OMG, it’s socially unacceptable!!! The horror men must face! Please, if a man has a ballsack, he better disregard what’s socially acceptable insofar as he can get away with it.

      LikeLike


    • on June 6, 2014 at 11:19 am James K

      Laurence Auster said, “The way many women dress today, with half their breasts exposed, is an expression of total disrespect for men. Men are left with three possible responses. To grab the woman, which is illegal; to ogle the woman, which is socially unacceptable; or to affect not to notice the woman at all, which is emasculating. A culture that normalizes such female behavior—i.e. not only not noticing or objecting to it, but prohibiting any objection to it—is extremely sick.”

      The cocktail dress, with half the breasts exposed, is intended to attract alpha men, and sift them from the betas. It is the ultimate test of a man’s outcome-independence and cocky indifference.

      LikeLike


  9. on June 4, 2014 at 9:19 am Glaucon

    One thing I don’t understand, and maybe somebody can help me with, is why feminists would defend the wearing of revealing and provocative clothing.

    If feminism seeks to level the playing field between attractive and unattractive women, shouldn’t feminists seek to impose conservative dress codes and customs?

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:26 am The Burninator

      Because by promoting pretty girls dressing like sluts, then shaming men, the effect is much more profound. They get to emasculate men to the point where no recognition of attractiveness is permitted. Which, if you think about it, provides the same censoring effect that modest dress for all achieves.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:13 am Moses

        Another effect is that this allows women to easily filter alphas from betas. She finds the man checking out her Daisy Dukes attractive? No problem, she’ll encourage it by bending over.

        She finds said man a beta loser? No problem, she calls the cops/publicly shames him/gets him fired.

        Win-win, from a fem perspective.

        Reminds me of this video: http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f76_1323277426&comments=1

        How to avoid sexual harrassment charges for asking a woman out? Simple — “Be Handsome.”

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:21 am nerdfiles

        “Be handsome. Be attractive. Don’t be unattractive.”

        Brilliant.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:56 am having a bad day

        even better than banning dressing like a slut…a hot girl’s body is still hot underneath modest clothes. this way, hot girls lose that competitive advantage, too…win-win for feminism (ugly girls)…

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:15 pm Simon Corso

        “better than banning dressing like a slut…a hot girl’s body is still hot underneath modest clothes. this way, hot girls lose that competitive advantage, too…win-win for feminism (ugly girls)…”

        Not true .

        Put a woman in a heavy , full length, winter coat and I can tell you if she has nice body from 80 yards away.

        I bet you can too.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:18 pm zmbiklr

      Feminists are really just reflecting the fact that women loathe Betas. Betas do not get to touch or even look at the goods without opening their wallets and women should be free to do sexual mating moves in public to attract alphas. The “patriarchy” simply means lesser women are forced to be subservient to some beta schlub, and they don’t like it. Ugly feminists hold out the hope that an alpha, perhaps a much older one will potentially fuck them if sexual morality is loose enough. They have no hope when sexual morality is more restrictive of alpha’s dalliances.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:27 pm Amy

      Feminists know the real source of female power is sexual, but they despise it and refuse to accept it. If they argued women should walk around in burkas, they’d be admitting the strength of that sexual power, and they’ll never do that. So instead they argue that women should be able to walk around however they want without fuss, because men will simply become desensitized and start to evaluate women as people instead of sex objects.

      LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 5:08 pm Cui Pertinebit

      Don’t you get it?

      Feminists defend anything and everything women want to do, unless the women are decent traditionalists, and insist that women of the right tribe have the right to dictate the proper response to their behaviour on a case-by-case basis, which is always subject to review. Period.

      LikeLike


  10. on June 4, 2014 at 9:26 am Anonymous

    I say ogle away. Socially unacceptable. HA

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 10:00 am Greg Eliot

      If wanting to see tits and ass is a crime… (pause for effect)… then I, your Honor, am guilty!

      (raucous applause from the jury box, loud gavel blows attempting to restore order in the court)

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:40 am Canadian Friend

        It is only a crime if she is not attracted to you.

        is what feminists are saying but are hoping we will not notice.

        Just like buying her flowers and paying her a non-sexual compliment on her hair is sexual harassement if she does not find you attractive but is “Oh My God SOOOO romantic!!!” if she is attracted to you.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 5:29 pm haunted trilobite

        sounds like a load of Hollywood hooey!

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 1:13 pm CarpeOro

        http://www.everyjoe.com/2013/11/10/girls/bouncing-boobs-slow-motion-iphone-video/#1

        Your welcome.

        LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 9:21 pm Mike

      Exactly, the whole thing is just a shit test to try to get you not to look. Stare at that shit if you want and don’t feel bad for it.

      LikeLike


  11. on June 4, 2014 at 9:32 am SC

    I am against sex segregated schools. If society segregates boys and girls, what is to stop them from segregating different races? Religions? Hair colour? Height/weight? Handedness? It would create a dangerous precedent.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:34 am CH

      there’s already de facto racial segregation. and have you been to a school cafeteria lately? kids self-segregate by clique. it’s human nature.

      ps slippery slope logic has its uses, but can also be abused.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:38 am Hugh G. Rection

        There is a lot of similarity to prisons, and I’d say school these days must pretty much feel like prison, only with an additional mental dimension.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:36 am Hugh G. Rection

      That’s the funny thing, this should be something the feminists love because they always say any woman going to college (and by extension school I guess) has a 1/4 chance of getting raped. Of course the question why they still go there in droves is left unanswered.

      Satire can’t keep up with these idiots.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 10:01 am Greg Eliot

      If society segregates boys and girls, what is to stop them from segregating different races?

      You say that as if it’s a bad thing?

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:23 am nerdfiles

        Because then China would stamp all the Europeans out?

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:45 am Canadian Friend

        My God! what is next?

        bars for gay men only, bars for lesbians only?

        Dating sites for blacks only? or for Muslims only?

        Restaurants that only serve vegetarian meals?

        nooooooo!!!

        that can not happen ever !!! the world would be a horrible place!!!

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:25 am Laguna Beach Fogey

        China can’t even stamp out its own Muslim separatists.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:00 pm Arbiter

        China can’t even stamp out its own Muslim separatists.

        They could do that easily, but then the West would isolate them, stop trading with them, and their economy would come crashing down.

        By the way, this is one of those issues where a Christian Good/Evil division of the world once again fails to show us the reality, which is about survival, not good/evil. Of course the Uighurs, Tibetans and other peoples want independence. Even those peoples who are low-IQ inferiors who got pretty much everything from the Han, who in turn got it from Whites. And of course the Han Chinese want their land. So it has been for hundreds of thousands of years. The land will always be ruled by nationalism – your own or someone else’s.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:53 am jamzw

      “I am against sex segregated schools.” You cannot leave the reservation of democratic equality while you are still captivated by their thinking. Sex segregated schools are a very good thing. No matter. Government schools are a very bad thing. Complete freedom of association means only that you may choose, not that you must accept. Defending the imposition of gender integrated schools is prime leftoid theory.

      LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:58 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

      OMG, the evvvviiiils of not having integration mandated on us by the benevolent rulers of our societies. Dude, fuck off. You can move into the ghetto and live in a diverse setting if you want. Nobody will stop you. Just like every single white liberal fruitcake like you can do it today.

      LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:34 pm CarpeOro

      I’ll go you one better – public schools are well with in the definition of child abuse.
      Neglect: people unrelated to the children spend more time with them then parents – check
      child abuse: greater percentage chance of being exposed to perverts than the family – check
      Minimal male interaction: boys can’t learn to be men, girls have no curb put on their whims by male discipline – check
      Lord of the Flies: do you need any explanation? – check
      bullying: wonder where all the school shooting come from still? – check

      You say “but I can’t afford not to have my wife work”, “home schooled kids don’t get socialized”, “I’m not smart enough to teach them”. Hey, I get it. You enjoy the sewer pit society has become and want your children to enjoy the same benefits. After all, those designer clothes look so good, your kids need to try out drugs, have sex (with teachers in a number of cases. Male or female. You flip the coin), learn all the words not in the dictionary, along with Goodthink. After all, being average makes you smarter than the average teacher (less than 100 IQ), so they are obviously better suite to be your child’s guardians. Makes perfect sense.

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 1:35 pm CarpeOro

        Oh, forgot to mention all the wonderful PRESCRIPTION drugs the schools will advise you to pump into your kids. Good times, good times.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 6:14 pm Canadian Friend

        Read an article last year about those drugs they give to kids in school.

        It is mostly prescribed to boys, and what it does is it kind of turns off what is male about them, like wanting to run around, throw balls, play “cowboy and Indian” and roughhouse etc.

        Don’t forget these days most of the staff in school is made up of females

        in other words those drugs are one more weapon in the feminist arsenal to get rid of masculinity.

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 9:30 pm Mike

        Agreed

        LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 5:10 pm Cui Pertinebit

      I am for freedom of association. People should be allowed to engage in their routine activities with whomever they prefer. Schools used to be segregated in several ways, and the world was a better place for it.

      LikeLike


    • on June 9, 2014 at 9:31 am eyeslevel

      Our current tyranny outlaws freedom of association.

      LikeLike


  12. on June 4, 2014 at 9:34 am Hugh G. Rection

    Something a guy who called himself “The Danimal” wrote on the usenet, ages ago.

    “Sex object” is a significantly higher status than “human being.” Most people who recognize you as a “sex object” will treat you with vastly more respect, care, and consideration than will most people who see you merely as a human being. The same goes for “success object.”

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 3:00 pm Rum

      The Danimal was epic. If I did not know better, I would almost suspect he was a contributor to CH.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:47 pm Hugh G. Rection

        I don’t know about that, but the theory about a sexual market place that works a lot like the free market is something CH either got from him or they arrived at the same conclusion independently.

        LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 5:18 pm corvinus

      And a “sex symbol” is higher status than a mere “sex object”.

      LikeLike


  13. on June 4, 2014 at 9:38 am Arbiter

    A sex equivalent scenario would be hard to piece together. Perhaps air drop a rock star into a high school classroom and tell the girls on threat of expulsion to refrain from gawking at him or giggling uncontrollably when he smiles?

    Indeed. Where is the condemnation of women screaming at male rock stars? Where is the condemnation of women shouting so loudly at a Beatles concert that the band couldn’t play? Where is the condemnation of women actually fainting from desire? Where is the condemnation of women throwing their panties on the stage? Imagine what would happen if men threw their underwear at women.

    When women show their desire it is considered funny and charming. When men show desire they are attacked.

    As CH says, a healthy and sane society would understand the different biological sex drives, which cause men to be quickly stimulated by the visual. This instinct comes from the fact that men who were more easily aroused would have slightly more children, and over thousands of generations that spreads to the whole population. Evolutionary psychology is easy to understand, but forbidden.

    Speaking of that particular story, the woman being asked not to wear Daisy Dukes, the media leftists take a picture of a note taped to a door (always acting like the megaphones for whatever leftist attacks Whites or the Right, no matter if it is only a single leftist at a school).

    The note says, “Don’t humiliate (?) her for wearing shorts. It’s hot outside. Instead of shaming girls for their bodies, teach boys that girls are not sexual objects.”

    1. She was not “humiliated”, she was asked.
    2. “It’s hot outside.” She could easily have worn a long skirt, so that argument is nonsense.
    3. She was not “shamed”.
    4. “teach boys that girls are not sexual objects”. What man thought she was an “object”? Typical feminist strawman argument.
    5. If all men, everywhere, are aroused by a half-naked sexy body, then it is obviously a strong instinct coming from evolution. Not a matter of “teaching”. This is just an excuse for installing permanent programs aimed at attacking men, humiliating men, and taking men’s money, by giving tax money to women’s start-ups, feminist organizations, and by Affirmative Discrimination.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 10:03 am Greg Eliot

      When women show their desire it is considered funny and charming. When men show desire they are attacked.

      Well, let’s face it… it’s the ol’ Man Bites Dog = News… Dog Bites Man = Meh.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:25 pm Arbiter

        Which reminds me of this video:

        Man abuses woman in park, people react. Woman abuses the same man, people just walk by.

        The video starts at 3.15, where you even see an Indian/Arab woman passing by smiling and waving her fists in the air when she sees the man being abused.

        Another woman says, “I was thinking that he probably deserved it.”

        Even a cop ignores them. At 5.28 he answers the question, if it had been a woman who had been abused, then what? “Without a doubt, I would have stepped in.”

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:34 pm Greg Eliot

        It’s the cross men have to bear… carry it with a smirk and a wink, especially during any mention of “double standards”. 😉

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:59 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

      If I was one of her classmates, I’d come to school wearing a Speedo the next day and ask her not to shame me because it’s hot outside. lol

      LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 9:31 pm Mike

      She could have worn shorts that were a reasonable length and not ‘short shorts’. Women wear short shorts because they want men to look at them. Nothing wrong with that but don’t complain when we do.

      LikeLike


  14. on June 4, 2014 at 9:45 am YIH

    (CH PSA: Bring back single sex schooling.)
    Yup. Been saying that for 10 years now. After 3rd grade, separate boys and girls. The whole point of school is education, and once the hormones start to kick in both sexes become a distraction to each other.
    But of course, even suggesting that is enough to get the crazies wailing like the banshees they are

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:33 pm dark econ

      “After 3rd grade, separate boys and girls.”

      no way. no fucking way. fresh t and a is the only thing that made the libtard prison bearable. watching the titties start to pop in grade 4/5 was magical. being around crazy new period pussy 5 days a week is how guys learn cycle game. field testing in close quarters with tight time constraints, gaming nerdy chicks who come back hot after a summer, fooling around in the back of the bus on school trips, touching eighth grade pussy lips, discovering the secret curvy hot bodies underneath the baggy clothing… no guy should have to give that up.

      “The whole point of school is education”

      yeah, about how to make it in this world. that means how to deal with people. most guys aren’t using their calculus on a daily basis but they are using the skills they learned in dealing with the fairer sex.

      think of something else.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:47 pm Greg Eliot

        I’m guessing you haven’t taken the Hippocratic Oath at this juncture?

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:05 pm dark econ

        “I’m guessing you haven’t taken the Hippocratic Oath at this juncture?”

        when i was 12 i was talking with friends in class about being a gyno when i grew up. fat old saggy math teacher overheard and was offened, tried to discipline me but found i wasn’t breaking any rules.

        you couldn’t pay me enough to spend my day looking at/probing the smelly cunts of these overweight dried up feminists.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 2:01 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

        You can make an equally good rationale for legalizing rape. I liked fooling around with girls = it must be mandated.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 2:37 pm John South

        This is how to create a good society, not how you get your tingles

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:48 pm CarpeOro

      “The whole point of public schooling is indoctrination.”

      Fixed it for you.

      LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 5:21 pm Cui Pertinebit

      They should be separated far sooner than that. The female brain is more inclined to busy-work and the mere regurgitation of facts, and is remarkably uninquisitive, as a rule, and ill-suited to theorizing and abstract thought processes. The schools are almost all taught by women, and with half the students being girls, it means that the most excellent qualities of the male brain are being under-nourished and unchallenged from earliest childhood, as a feminized system panders to the low-performance nature of female students. Males should be unshackled from the dead weight of female students.

      LikeLike


  15. on June 4, 2014 at 9:45 am Lara

    The girl, in the video, comes across as androgynous and boyish. This may be why she wants to be treated like one of the boys. Even her arguing with the teachers, on principle, is more typical male than female behavior.

    LikeLike


  16. on June 4, 2014 at 9:57 am elmer

    Not every girl has a great rack though petite breasts are to die for.

    However, any young girl can have a nice pair of legs if she puts any effort into staying fit.

    The current fashion for short pants is to show off those lovely legs. Therfor this phenomenon is really about intra-gynal competition.

    Around 1970 the “hot pants” craze was in full swing. It was awesome. Coupled with the “braless look” made for some good times back in the day.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:30 pm Arbiter

      The fashion is for yoga pants to show off legs and ass.

      It messes up women’s heads. On one hand they are tempted to do like everyone else, as shown to them by the media. And there is a reward in men’s attention, which they crave since they have always survived through men.

      On the other hand their minds are not made for giving away sex to all men. Their instinct is all about holding back sex and give it only to one mate in exchange for him providing. Giving men strong visual gratification is like giving away free sex. It messes with their minds. It makes them feel sick after a while.

      Then they are taught to rationalize it by hating men.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:01 pm Greg Eliot

        A profound observation… well-done.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:58 pm Tilikum

        in the 60’s spot on. now its a free for all.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:50 pm Johnycomelately

        I guess that’s why the hotter the woman and the skimpier the attire the more sourpuss the facial expression. The cognitive dissonance frown.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 8:03 pm Ronin

        Agree with Greg. That is a clever insight.

        @JCL: Love how the models never smile, even when they’re doing an in-store somewhere in NYC.

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 2:52 pm Arbiter

        I guess that’s why the hotter the woman and the skimpier the attire the more sourpuss the facial expression

        Contradiction, thy name is woman.

        We could make a test and write in a forum:

        “Dresses sexy to get attention.
        Gets angry when sexual attention is paid.”

        How many would think we were talking about men?

        A woman dressing sexy imagines she will be getting attention from the most desirable men. And from betas who will sigh in worship, but not make a fuss. But inevitably, she will get leering looks up close and personal from men she doesn’t want anything to do with. Well, what did you expect?

        “How can you blame the victim!” The kind of men I’m thinking of, I don’t like them either. But it’s like dealing with sharks. I’m not “blaming the victim” by telling you it is foolish to bloody the water where there are sharks.

        LikeLike


  17. on June 4, 2014 at 9:57 am askjoe

    Men…adults…shouldn’t be taking these feminist utterances seriously. As in literally laughing in the face of girls who spout gender norm nonsense. It’s not an academic field of study, at best it’s some form of rote memorization.
    I saw on the news the little print out she posted at the school. It was a jumble of conclusory statements.
    Girls are not sex objects
    Men should do this
    I shouldn’t do have to do that.
    Too bad the West lost the cultural confidence to reply properly…remember Mitterand slapping his hysterical secretary?

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:42 pm Charlie Don't Surf

      These feminist utterances are going to become a deafening clamor over the next two years – as the left lines up behind Hillary Clinton.

      All the pay-equality, female objectification and other feminist nonsense will command more and more media coverage until everyone in America is properly conditioned to see gender norms as a national crisis – the wave of hysteria will crest just as our pant-suited savior to take the oath of office.

      Then, in her first act as President, Hillary will outlaw the Y chromosome.

      Femnazis are coming to kick in your door and confiscate your testicles.

      LikeLike


  18. on June 4, 2014 at 9:57 am Dr. Giggles

    “a common way women deal with the threat represented by a remarkably powerful or beautiful woman is by insisting on standards of equality, uniformity, and sharing for all the women in the group and making these attributes the normative requirements of proper femininity.”

    This explains how and why the above-average Katie JM Baker got involved (coerced) with Jizzabel.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 10:17 am Moses

      This is exactly why small, weak nations love the UN and are always trying to use it to restrict the US.

      Observe:

      “a common way weaker nations deal with the threat represented by a remarkably powerful nation is by insisting on standards of equality, uniformity, and respect for all nations and making these attributes the normative requirements of proper international relations.”

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:10 am Canadian Friend

        Exactly

        I have been saying since 2008 ( not saying I was the only one or the first but back then I could count on one hand the people who were saying this stuff ) that this is also why Obama is always doing stuff to reduce the power, the greatness of the USA, he feels it is unfair that this nation created by dead white men ( that happens to be the group that mistreated his people in previous centuries ) is so much better than all the others.

        He returned Churchill’s bust to England – that was the starting gun if you like – and then proceeded to slowly make the USA a weaker nation, a ” more equal” player to be fair to the other players ( and as revenge for his people )

        Of course people who get their news from the main stream media have no idea what I am talking about and think I am out of my mind or that I am raycissss.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:39 pm Arbiter

        that this is also why Obama is always doing stuff to reduce the power, the greatness of the USA

        So you have been listening to lying neocon rags. Meanwhile Obama tripled the drone bombings in Afghanistan and Pakistan, murdering thousands of civilians. He has even murdered American citizens abroad: Anwar al-Awlaki was murdered without a trial with a missile fired at him in Yemen. Then his teenage son was murdered the same way two weeks later when he had come to look for his father – the son was killed by a missile fired at the coffee shop he was sitting in. Also killing everyone else in the coffee shop.

        “reduce the power”? Bullshit.

        Obama also sent riot gear and teargas to the police in Egypt to strike down the demonstrations in the Arab Spring, while in public pretending to “support democracy”. Later he gave the green light to the socialist parties and the military to overthrow the elected government, because that is what his Israeli masters want – a military dictatorship that keeps starving the Palestinians by keeping the border closed.

        Obama approves of the economic warfare being waged against Iran, which is America’s natural ally in the Middle East, being populated by Persians instead of Arabs. Obama targets Iran because of the filth in the Israeli lobby, who he never opposes except in tiny details – upon which neocons, who are also Zionists, scream that he is “reducing the power!”.

        Obama promised to pull out the occupation from Iraq within half a year of taking office. He lied. He promised to release the innocents imprisoned in Guantanamo without any evidence, any suspicions against them, and without any trials. He lied.

        Obama is a tool of the Israeli lobby and their racial brethren in the media boardrooms. He uses the U.S. military and economy to attack Israel’s targets, the few Middle Eastern countries that dare oppose the systematic taking of the last 22 percent of Palestinian land. He is the product of the Zionist David Axelrod and his friend, Zionist Rahm Emanuel, who in 2008 ensured that Obama got more campaign money from the big, Zionist-run banks like Goldman Sachs than ANY other candidate, left or right.

        He is a Zionist tool just like Mitt Romney, George Bush, Bill Clinton and George Bush the elder. All of these are anti-American. Using American lives and money to boost America’s enemies, and attack those who should be America’s friends.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 2:02 am Pijama Wearing Ninja

        Actually, the UN is more like America’s lobby group everywhere in the world. The UN does the standard of equality and uniformity thing because it’s how you have an empire while pretending you don’t. Must keep those client states deluded.

        LikeLike


  19. on June 4, 2014 at 9:58 am Lara

    The girl, in the video, is very boyish in demeanor and voice. This may be why she wishes to be treated like one of the boys. Her arguing, on the principle of the dress code, is definitely more typical male behavior, than female behavior.

    LikeLike


  20. on June 4, 2014 at 10:07 am PA

    For all the immodesty, you’ll never see a girl today exposing her nipples. Those are well guarded, at least by the loose standards of Seventies bralessness, seethrough, or peekaboo tops.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:11 am whorefinder

      Stop jerking off to your mom’s photos, son.

      Mother rape!

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:22 am Laguna Beach Fogey

      70s tube tops and short shorts.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:40 pm elmer

        Halter Tops, often no more than a bandanna.

        LikeLike


  21. on June 4, 2014 at 10:12 am PA

    An old Army joke:

    A young private on a military base ogles two female officers walking by, a colonel and a lieutenant. The colonel promptly approaches the offending private and gives him a stern toungue-lashing about sexual harassment and proper enlisted-officer protocol.

    The private sheepishly says “but ma’am, I wasn’t looking at you. I was checking out the lieutenant.”

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:12 am whorefinder

      That would be the soviet army, comrade! Sieg Heil, Mein Obama!

      Obama rape!

      LikeLike


  22. on June 4, 2014 at 10:38 am Mr. Odessa

    Glad you wrote this article. What’s funny is that a chick on my Facebook page posted the story on her profile and says that women should not be treated as “sex objects”. This comes from a chick who has a husband she hates, in love with a bad boy and claims she’d give it all up for the alpha stud, yet even lies to him about her bedroom antics she purposely does behind his back. Women are full of shit.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:35 pm The Burninator

      She is a physical object in the universe. This is a fact. There is no getting around this fact.

      Her primary role by design of evolution and nature (or if you’re so inclined, God) is to procreate and help perpetuate her DNA. All other roles, values and functions are secondary to this task and are in most ways directly related to supporting the primary task, according to Nature. Even our higher brained recreational activities indirectly serve this interest insofar as they relieve stress and allow us to continue parenting without succumbing to the very real urge to strangle our progeny from time to time. This applies to all living sexually reproducing species.

      Ergo, she is a sex object in a very literal sense. As are we.

      And thank heavens above for that fact, because if men didn’t see women as sex objects then why in the world would we tolerate them? If women stopped being seen as sex objects by men, I wouldn’t see a lithe, supple, beautiful and charming woman, I’d instead see a physically weaker, mentally ‘special’ dwarf with severe impulse control issues. Screw that.

      LikeLike


      • on June 10, 2014 at 10:22 am Mr. Odessa

        Right. And sometimes the pussy is not worth it. I agree if women weren’t sex objects, then please believe they’d be on the same level as dogs, who occasionally bites the hand that feeds them. Then again, dogs are a man’s best friend whether we view women as objects of desire or not.

        LikeLike


  23. on June 4, 2014 at 10:40 am Mark Minter

    I started on this Signaling Theory idea as part of this series on Depression as an artifact of social competition. Depression allows the loser to signal to the victor that he will no longer be a threat, both in his posture and in his actions. The culmination of a series of defeats, failures, and loses leads to clinical mood disorders such as depression. And the mechanisms in the body of men that create these signals, both of success and victory, or loss and defeat is testosterone in the case of success or cortisol in the case of loss. And it signals to potential mates that the male has or doesn’t have “fitness”, meaning “Good Genes”, and according to Hamilton, that he has an inferior immune system because the traits of testosterone are “Costly Signals” and detract from resources provided to the immune system to fight off parasites. So the successful male has both the traits that lead to success and a superior immune system.

    Or he is psychopatic because the psychopathic traits are induced by high testosterone both during adolescence and during adult life. So it sort of explains why Dark Triad traits are successful with women.

    But I bumped into the work of Simon Shepard, and actually bought his 500 page book called The Triumph of Ambiguity. And I have to say that all of you should buy this guys book and reward him for the contribution he has made to the body of knowledge. It ain’t cheap but it is worth it.

    It is a rigorous work on Signals. Sexual Signals. He did the research in 90s and public the thing in 2002, with a second edition in 2013. Literally, he predates Game by 10 years. So what you could consider it to be is a book about Day Game yet scientifically applied in the “British and Scientific Tradition.”

    He went out into the streets of Amsterdam with various “experiments”. In the first, he made a series of dates, and got flaked on in the manner that is most commonly observed today. The girl agreed and then never showed. In the second he went to a public location and sat there. If he received signals to approach, he ignored them. He wanted to see if women would ever take the initiative. He states in the book that in 1992, he was a good looking guy and he could gauge that by responses he got from women and the quality of those that signaled him. But it was universal that women will not approach. They would start to, be almost up to him, yet veer off at the last minute. And it came to him, that sitting alone was what he called the Last Ditch Strategy of Women. Only desperate women will do it.

    In subsequent experiments he went with a stated approach statement like he wanted to test if the direct approach worked, some polite version of “Want to fuck.” (One out of 40 said yes to him. He actually spoke of seeing a South American guy with a sign that said “Big Dick for sale, 5 Guilders”. The guy said he got a “taker” on his offer. He fucked the woman yet she walked off without paying the 5). Other experiments checked to see if women equated an offer for coffee to be the same as an offer for Sex.

    But a good chunk of the work was on Sexual signals emitted by women. He has probably the longest list of them I have ever seen and I include them in the second posting on Signals. Many of these you know: Eye Contact, Hair Flips, Duck Face, Body Pouts.

    And he lists Dress as one of the signals. And studies have shown that ovulating women dress and act more provocatively during ovulation.

    He says the key reason women use signals, which he states are somewhat less direct and less Honest compared to other norms and forms in communication is that WOMEN INTEND FOR THEM TO BE AMBIGUOUS. They can deny that they emitted the signal.

    And the intent of this ambiguity is to raise the neurosis in men and to increase the costs of sex, thereby raising her value and the collective value of women. A man receives the signal and he rationally or intuitively interprets it. He then has two responses possible to the signal, approach or flee. He can not use inaction to the resolve the neurosis he feels. The sheer fact the woman is there and she has signals has increased tension in him. He can used some rational to disqualify the woman. Either she doesn’t rate an approach or he believes the approach is a wasted of time for him or could lead to rejection. If he approaches then his tension increases because the likelihood of success is not high and he could have either misread the signal or the woman will deny that she sent it.

    And one of the attributes of the psychopathic personality is low neurosis and impulsiveness such that when he recognizes a signal he bulls his way into a approach. And Simon states that “Women Cannot Tolerate Naked Masculinity From Men.” And therefore to state the obvious, as a man, that you wish to fuck her is grounds for immediate failure. So men have to be dishonest in dealing with women. And the more power the woman has then the more dishonest he has to be. And the man who succeeds very well in this area is the psychopathic once again. Then couple that with biological signals of high testosterone and low cortisol, muscles, arrogance, confrontation.

    And you see why that Dark Triad, certain sort of fellow does so well with women.

    When you look down the list of signals that Simon has given us, you see much of the stuff that Feminists screech about, like dress, like “place and time”, like eye contact on the street. If for nothing else, you should check Minterville tomorrow just to read this list.

    And I would claim that a lot of what feminists wish to do is to create a greater and almost institutional ambiguity about these signals. And it is just one big fucking shit test used to further weed out those men that lack the fortitude to punch through. When she says Dress is not a signal, what she is saying is “Probably not to you if you believe that Dress is not a signal, you fucking pussy.” But the man who sees it as a signal punches through and acts on it exactly for what it is.

    And Simon states that wide use of Signals is a sign of a Feminized society as opposed to the more direct forms used in a more masculine society. And he states that the use of Signals by females leads to less sex which enhances the power of women, and reduces the number of relationships. He stated that (in the 90s, and what we see even more today) that men he had not seen for a while would immediately divulge to him that ‘They had a girlfriend” almost as a form of status, that getting one was so difficult because of the ambiguity of signaling, that having one lead some men to boast when they were in one. In effect women became Status Symbols complete with pedestalzing by men.

    So I would say that Simon has given us this gift of this idea of Signals. He states that they have been reinforced in evolution in that the man that can interpret signals is successful with women and passes on his genes. And the women that use signals will be successful in targeting males to attract mates. He states that some males read signals intuitively and this is important in that speed in which he responds to the signal is a factor to the women. They like men that can read the signals and have the balls to act on the signal. And the delay tends to insult them or point out that you just might be a pussy. And he further states that it is better to intuitively react to signals that rationally. But I am sure that to be ignorant of them is most detrimental.

    I think it important that men understand that these signals such as Dress are Signals, in and of themselves, and other behaviors from women are also signals such that when Feminists Shrike about shit like dress and blaming the victim that men can say Shut The Fuck Up. A Signal is a Signal. Don’t emit it falsely and Stop manipulating men with it.

    The knowledge of these Signals work for you in both a personal and a social way.

    LikeLike


  24. on June 4, 2014 at 11:11 am whorefinder

    Note how PA supports a return to 70s-era Sovietism.

    And you all think he’s on freedom’s side?

    Liar rape!

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:43 am Concern troll

      You need a break. A few months, at least.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 11:45 am whorefinder

        Don’t be fooled by PA’s ostensible pro-male, pro-white exterior.

        All he is is a rotten leftist inside.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:39 pm Matthew

        whorefinder, you’re losing credibility with at least one of your fans.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:22 pm A Random Guy

      Why don’t you two get a room already?

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:25 pm whorefinder

        Because he’s already nobbing Piggy’s 2-incher.

        LikeLike


  25. on June 4, 2014 at 11:25 am Opus

    Great piece; and it has been getting worse these last twenty years. The problem is less the women (bad though they are) than the Manginas and White Knights who seek to defend the indefensible.

    Having been on the receiving end of false allegations my response these days is not to let them pass without giving the woman a tongue lashing. The worm turns and men can override their natural inclinations in relation to women – look at the Homo-sexuals.

    LikeLike


  26. on June 4, 2014 at 11:26 am chi-town

    One assumption that needs to be challenged is the superficial nature of men’s sexuality. When people buy a car isn’t its safety and road worthiness important. Or is it all about how it makes you feel? Is human morphology important? Does it matter if we find upright posture , and opposing thumbs attractive, or can we just abandon all such concern for sexual selection of viability and grow flippers in the desert with an immune system good for shit?

    What I find so vile about these people are that they simply fit nowhere into any consistent philosophy. Patriarchal religions that were socially formed are rejected as myth , which leaves nothing but evolution, natural selection where many things were not left to our feeble brains. Life will always have to consider viable forms of life hot, and nonviable forms not.

    In the end there is nothing to worry about, but I would just assume not taking the pointless detour. The more men who are convinced that viability doesn’t matter the more the noose will tighten as the next generation must become more selective on what human morphology is fir to survive.

    LikeLike


  27. on June 4, 2014 at 11:27 am Brian

    Judging by the facial piercing, the hair, and the clothes, she’s clearly trailer trash and most likely psychologically damaged as well. Of course she’s upset she can’t look more slutty. How else will she attract male attention when she doesn’t have beauty or quality working for her.

    LikeLike


  28. on June 4, 2014 at 11:33 am willam001@gmail.com

    So, I guess you can now add JF Sargent at Cracked to the list of haterading male feminists like Scalzi and Schwyzer then, eh?

    –His recent article is called, “5 Uncomfortable Truths Behind the Men’s Rights Movement”

    His bullet-points are:
    #5. They Prey on the Insecure (With Misdirection)
    #4. They Hate Women Because It Justifies Their Suffering
    #3. Their Enemy is Everyone
    #2. They Have No Sense of Consequence
    #1. They Don’t Have a Real Position (and They Don’t Care)

    -Each with exactly the lack of understanding, highlight+hyperbole of negatives, and same-brush-tarring of the entire group you might imagine.

    [spoiler alert: he says we’re all Elliott Rogers. -Convenient, non?]

    Sad… So, then I guess he’ll be popping in at the Chateau after he gets divorced, then? 😛

    .
    Check out JF’s majestically-toolboxian article over here: http://www.cracked.com/blog/5-uncomfortable-truths-behind-mens-rights-movement/

    Sargent, you are so blue-pill-lib-fem, baby and you don’t even know it.

    lulz.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:40 am Canadian Friend

      He should be tarred and feathered (at minimum) for betraying us with the lies he posted.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:57 am whorefinder

      I stopped reading Cracked when, during the run up to either the 2008 or 2012 election, they made a video comparing everyone running against the Democrats to Heath Ledger’s Joker from the The Dark Knight: murderous, evil, etc.

      I would advise every other manospherian to do the same. They’re the Chuck Rudd of internet humor websites.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:40 pm ar10308

      JF Sargent needs to be Google-bombed. It seems he consulted White Supremacists for that article.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:00 pm Hugh G. Rection

      Until he went off the rails, Rodgers was exactly how those people wanted him. He knew his place.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:37 pm JohnDSee

      Why did I ever write comments at cracked? I once made a comment about sex first, then date. The only person who agreed with me was a chic. The ‘men’ seem to buy into the hollywood version of things. Pining, pedestalizing then maybe dates, then maybe sex. The ‘men’ even disagreed with the chic who agreed with me.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:42 pm elmer

      My son Hermann used to enjoy Cracked until it went buns up.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:57 pm dlpc

        Wise.

        LikeLike


  29. on June 4, 2014 at 11:39 am Dr. Giggles

    “men and women have different biologically based sex drives, and that it would be cruel to subject boys, or girls, to social disruptions and insults that unnecessarily and extravagantly torment them and pull them away from their learning. (CH PSA: Bring back single sex schooling.)”

    Beyond the sexual distractions that females bring to the classroom, coeducational schooling has profoundly men’s lifetime mating habits. By putting him into a classroom with females of the same age, he becomes accustomed to dating and settling down with a woman his age, not younger women who are better suited for him.

    The red pill has taught us that men and women are different. Women get a head start in adulthood. They develop ten years ahead of us in body and mind. A woman hits her heyday at 20, a man at 30. So why would you at 30, commit to a 30 year old woman who has a psychological edge over you? Who isn’t as hot, young and tight as her little sister who just got out of college? Because you’ve known her since kindergarten.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:56 pm chi-town

      Thats hits the spot. If there is any one passive social institution warping our society it is this one. Coed education is at the core of Western society’s rot.

      I took a two year hiatus between my 2nd and 3rd year in college. I got a little life experience and earned some cash. When I went to a 4 year college as a 22 year old Jr, I was 2-4 years older. In my off campus apartment, matching wine with my meal , it was just one example that I was a functional adult. Night and day from high school.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:53 pm dark econ

      “the sexual distractions that females bring to the classroom”

      i wholeheartedly welcomed every single distraction. you think i wouldn’t have been thinking about pussy if they weren’t there next to me? at least this way i had the chance to get some relief.

      “So why would you at 30, commit to a 30 year old woman who has a psychological edge over you?”

      we wouldn’t. committing in the current environment is a huge mistake, especially if she’s over 20. marrying a post carousel 30 year old you’ve known since kindergarten is about as beta as it gets and any guy that does this deserves every moment of misery coming his way.

      and i have never met a woman that had a psychological edge over me. they are children. they are base. they are simple. i can’t think of a single woman in history that contributed a significant, life-changing idea/invention/process. they are followers. they are sheep. they are here for our amusement.

      LikeLike


  30. on June 4, 2014 at 11:40 am PA

    A good way to understand Whorefinder is that he’s part of the Jewish shock jock tradition. He is entertaining when he gores the things we also dislike.

    The other part of whorefinder is that he’s a neo on monkey. Quite recently, he said that Americans regrettably aren’t patriotic enough to bleed in pointless foreign wars. He also said that white girls should mix with Asians.

    Earlier on a now-closed blog, he vehemently commented in support of big banks and corporations and is an open borders enthusiast. He viciously (and lamely) attacked a brilliant paleocon commenter K. for supporting pro-white populism.

    Wrorefinder is a Goldman Sachs schill who happens to hate blacks.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:52 am whorefinder

      A good way to understand Whorefinder
      —Pass the popcorn! Leftist attempt at disinformation to hide his cover!

      he’s part of the Jewish shock jock tradition.
      –Note the typical leftist reaction when their plans go awry: blame the Jews and accuse non-Jews (like myself)of being Jewish. Nazis, Soviets, and now American lefties like PA.

      he said that Americans regrettably aren’t patriotic enough to bleed in pointless foreign wars.
      —Apparently being in favor of blowing AL-Queda training camps to the moon is a bad thing. For PA, we should let those terrorists live and breathe and blow up more of our soil. You know…like the good feminist he is.

      He also said that white girls should mix with Asians
      —I’m all for human mating. Its when humans mate with subhumans—i.e. blacks, the ones PA worships—that things are bad.

      Earlier on a now-closed blog, he vehemently commented in support of big banks and corporations and is an open borders enthusiast.
      —lol. Note how PA offers no evidence of this? How did I ever worship “big banks” and “open borders”, son? lol. Just like all leftists do—when confronted with their own failures, they always blame conspiracies.

      PA is simply an Alinskyite trying to cover his poor little-dicked tracks quickly , just as his master, Piggy, told him to.

      Reverse rape!

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:51 pm Arbiter

        Sorry whorefinder, you lose right away by using the propaganda word “Nazi” for Nazists.

        And you think al-Qaeda want to “blow up more of our soil”? Who still believes that today? How idiotic. Usama bin Laden REPEATEDLY said that he did not view Americans as enemies. He fought back against the Washington establishment that was killing Arabs, Israel’s targets.

        Half a million Iraqi children died from malnutrition due to America’s starvation sanctions. Even baby formula was banned. Zionist Madeleine Albright said it was “worth it” in an MSNBC interview that was scrubbed from their website. bin Ladin opposed President Hussein, but the killing of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis through starvation sanctions, and through weekly bombings of Iraq’s infrastructure for TWELVE YEARS finally led Usama bin Ladin to take up arms.

        I applaud him for that. He knew he was going to die, and he fought anyway. Something the idiots who cheered when he was killed don’t understand. “Durr, durr, ‘we’ got him, durr! That showed him, huh! We da best!” Yes, after a decade of using half the world’s military spending on searching through two countries, “we” finally “got him”. As if that would not be something he knew would happen, and had accepted. Morons.

        If you support using the U.S. military as Israel’s tool, spending American lives and money to attack the few M.E. countries that dare oppose Israel’s systematic taking of the last 22 percent of Palestinian land, then you support America’s enemies. Israel has always been the enemy of Whites and Christians. A country where Christians are forbidden from marrying Jews. And where the plus sign is forbidden in math class because it looks like the cross – instead they use a decapitated plus sign, as if cutting off Christ’s head. Israel hates Christians and hates anti-immigration movements in the West.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:07 pm PA

      Lame and transparent.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:18 pm whorefinder

        Yes, yes you are.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:08 pm PA

      PS: immigration loving neocon monkey.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:20 pm whorefinder

        lol. poor wittle Squealer: always trying to deflect from his own true evil. Note how PA is so cock-less, he won’t even reply to my posts, but instead tries to hide his responses from me, too afraid that I will see them.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:30 pm PA

        Lol funny neocon monkey, it’s palpable how much cred you lost since you started shit with me.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:41 pm whorefinder

        lol. oh yes, everyone’s listening to Piggy’s Squealer now. The mouthpiece of the duplicitous Chuck Rudd is claiming credibility, that’s a gas.

        Remember, lefty: just because you repeat it doesn’t make it true. The Big Lie doesn’t change facts, boy.

        Nice job trying to hide again, btw.

        PA rape!

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 12:48 pm PA

        Aw my sides. Just about nobody here knows or gives a shot about this “Piggy.” Those who know him tend to have a high regard of him. Also, hardly anybody here knows or cares about this PA you’re shitting your shorts over.

        However, you’ve been amusing here with some if your trademark humor. Tis a shame you’re now exposed as a neocon monkey.

        Tell us again how much you love immigration, Goldman Sachs mailroom boy.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 2:44 pm whorefinder

        lol! Look at PA again hiding his retorts, so afraid is he of exposure.

        Those who know him tend to have a high regard of him.
        —lmao. oh yes, a duplicitious, say-anything-for-fame-and-success whore. Such high regard!

        knows or cares about this PA
        –Note the leftist speaking in the third person; they’ve even dehumanized themselves.

        you’re now exposed as a neocon .
        –ROFL. Note also the leftist Big Lie in action; Piggy’s nob-hobber still thinks if he keeps repeating an untruth, it makes it true. Obama told him so.

        Tell us again how much you love immigration
        –a lie.

        uh-oh, PA….I hear Piggy calling…time for his rush hour bj….go to it, lttle man.

        Lefty rape!

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:40 pm Matthew

        One of these commenters is not like the other.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:16 pm Greg Eliot

      Anyone who advocates White/Asian mating should be ashamed and blush orange.

      LikeLike


  31. on June 4, 2014 at 12:24 pm anon

    “A sex equivalent scenario would be hard to piece together.”

    Au contraire mon fraire.
    It would be easy. Equivalence doesn’t mean exactness.
    Female “sexual distraction” has never been easier. Anything that shows off a suggestion of male anatomy is suspect, and considered too suggestive. I’ll bet the return of the codpiece would send them into seizure-like convulsions. If boys even wore visible cups in their trou it would suffice.

    Even a fake but realistic statue of a man walking in his sleep and wearing tidy whities near a college campus is considered rapey and aggressive:

    http://www.boston.com/yourcampus/news/wellesley/2014/02/realistic_statue_of_man_in_his_underwear_at_wellesley_college_sparks_controversy.html

    LikeLike


  32. on June 4, 2014 at 12:27 pm Reservoir Tip

    Visited home the other week. Met up with a girl from Tinder while I was in town. Mentioned her in a recent thread. She’s a substitute teacher.

    Amazing what a girl will do after a taste of alpha behavior. Woman’s wanting to drive all the way to the state I live in just to suck my dick, and it wasn’t even my idea.

    I didn’t pay for a damn thing while I was in town, either. She drove 30 minutes to pick me up two times, paid for different meals, and I had my way with her. Even had other girls approaching me trying to talk to me when I was out with her.

    Wowowowowowowwww

    LikeLike


  33. on June 4, 2014 at 12:36 pm Dersu Uzala

    Let’s do the experiment in reverse. Let the boys (and male professors) go naked under a coat so to show their manhood whenever they like (in front of females).

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:49 pm Greg Eliot

      “So, you exposed yourself in front of ALL those people?!!!”

      “Only enough to win, my dear… only enough to win.”

      LikeLike


  34. on June 4, 2014 at 12:37 pm titanic

    Have Justin Beiber read “50 Shades of Grey” over the school intercom all day long.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:45 pm whorefinder

      It’s not a lesbian love story.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 3:33 pm Canadian Friend

        If it was a lesbian love story both women would take turn degrading each other, and there would be some domestic violence.

        LikeLike


  35. on June 4, 2014 at 12:37 pm Dersu Uzala

    Isolating boys from girls is not natural. What is needed is more traditional values at the top and to return to standard sexual roles.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 12:48 pm The Burninator

      Odd how boys only schools flourished for centuries, and how boys went to the fields with their fathers to learn their trades, all without women present. That is *totally* not natural, in the sense that it is absolutely natural and part of our history for thousands of years.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:40 pm Canadian Friend

        What was natural for thousands of years was that the teenage boys would go with the men to learn about hunting, fishing, how to build things from a boat, a shelter to a weapon, or even learn to fight , learn combat ,
        and teenage girls would stay at the cave/camp/village with the women to learn how to gather fruits, or small wood for the fire, learn to prepare meals, learn to repair clothes, learn how to care for young children/babies, and earn about the fact one day they will be pregnant for 9 months and what giving birth is etc

        This is what is natural and has been for thousands and thousands of years.

        And despite all the social re-engineering will remain natural for thousands of years

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 1:47 pm Dersu Uzala

        I speak from my experience after going to a male only school first, then to an almost male only high school, and finally to an STEM field . The few women there were treated as princesses and not the ogres they were. I think that part of my lack of skills regarding women when I was young was because of my male only education.
        And has beens perfectly natural to be sorrounded by females since the first sexuated species that inhabited the Earth.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 4:21 pm corvinus

        DU:

        Yeah, I understand.

        Also, British single-sex boarding schools were notorious for buggery since they never saw girls.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:27 pm gunslingergregi

        Also, British single-sex boarding schools were notorious for buggery since they never saw girls.”””””’

        that’s not why

        I was in Iraq 5 fucking years no pussy except on vacation
        didn’t turn gay
        if your fucking a dude its because you are gay
        didn’t hear about any gay shit going on either
        its not cause they never saw girls its cause they were gay

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 10:00 pm Canadian Friend

        5 years in Iraq, that is why I don’t criticize your messy typing.

        To be clear; I am not being sarcastic, I have a lot of respect for anyone who spent years in such a hell hole risking their life so that other people can sleep at night.

        LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:46 pm corvinus

        I feel bad for any man who had to spend time in those hellholes. At least you could bang the girls in Vietnam.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 9:57 am gunslingergregi

        well I’m glad I did it cause it was one of things I definitely wanted to do in my lifetime without having a massive regret when I am old saying I wish I would of went to war
        but yea it definitely gives me props where I am now
        it wasn’t an accident all those woman came by on memorial day
        it is also one of the reason my chick loves me

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:02 am gunslingergregi

        helps to make me worthy in her eyes of giving me her all since I was willing to give my all

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:26 am Greg Eliot

        Also, British single-sex boarding schools were notorious for buggery since they never saw girls.

        Well, Britain always was based upon a kind of fagdom.

        I think the poster is off-kilter in attributing his girl-shyness to a segregated education.

        If anything, far more boys nowadays are girl-shy and socially awkward, and the past two or three generations have been absolutely inundated with the female form and mentality throughout society and (especially) in the media.

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 3:10 pm Arbiter

        5 years in Iraq, that is why I don’t criticize your messy typing.

        To be clear; I am not being sarcastic, I have a lot of respect for anyone who spent years in such a hell hole risking their life so that other people can sleep at night.

        You CAN’T be serious. Iraq had a secular, anti-Islamist government. Usama bin Ladin was an enemy of President Hussein. Hussein wanted nothing more than to continue being America’s ally, but the Israeli lobby targeted him when he gave money to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers.

        These families usually know nothing of what their sons are up to, they don’t want to lose their sons. But the Izzies who occupy them then give them an hour to leave, and then bulldoze their homes. Destroy everything they have. If they live in an apartment building, all homes are lost. People are ruined.

        President Hussein gave them money, and for that Israel targeted him. That is the reason why Iraq was invaded. And you claim that it was invaded so that Americans “can sleep at night”! Incredible.

        No doubt you were one of those who thought Iraq was behind 9/11. Completely without any evidence – simply because the neocons in the media and in the GOP made it sound that way. And their puppet Bush obeyed them. The vast majority of dupes who supported the illegal invasion of Iraq did so because they thought Iraq was behind 9/11. That’s the reason for the support.

        That, and the lie that Iraq would have nuclear weapons. (Which isn’t a reason to invade them anyway. Talk about chutzpah, when the hate state Israel has illegal nukes, built for American money and with technology stolen from the U.S.) Do you know of any nuclear weapons in Iraq? The UN inspectors said there weren’t any, and the neocons targeted them, calling them pinkos and appeasers. I suppose you believed the neocons then too.

        As the Downing Street Memo showed, the UK-US governments had decided to invade Iraq FIRST, and THEN came up with false excuses for the invasion.

        HALF A MILLION Iraqi children were killed by starvation sanctions that even banned Iraq from importing baby formula. For TWELVE YEARS Iraq’s infrastructure was bombed on average once a week by the U.S. and the UK. Bridges and roads destroyed. Power plants destroyed, so children and the old died from lack of air conditioning in the blistering summer heat. Water refineries were bombed so people died from dirty water.

        And then came the invasion. And more than half a million more people died as a result of the total destruction of Iraq, and the unleashing of a sectarian civil war that Hussein had kept at bay.

        More than a million people killed because of the neocons, and because of people like you who let them get away with it. And you talk about making sure “people can sleep at night”.

        Oh yes, those brave soldiers. Who murdered people for fun. Who planted weapons on innocent civilians they killed. Who got blowjobs for one dollar a pop from nine year old girls in Baghdad, girls who were starving because of the invasion. Blowjobs in the middle of bars, in broad daylight. I’d want to kill them all if I was an Iraqi.

        Canadian, you shout shut up until you have learned more than propaganda. And if you do know these things and you are just lying, then I hope you get what’s coming to you.

        LikeLike


      • on June 9, 2014 at 9:15 am Canadian Friend

        Arbiter,

        First,

        Why the hell are you at war with me???

        I am not your enemy. We agree on almost everything.

        Calm the fuck down.

        Second,

        I am not saying I have respect for the reasons behind the Iraq war ( that is a separate issue entirely ), I am saying I have respect for men brave enough to go to the front lines and risk their lives for other people, just as firemen went into the twin towers on 9/11.

        Even if it turned out that the CIA had placed bombs in the twin towers and that Bush is the most evil vilain in the history of mankind for killing 3000 of his own people, the firemen who ran into that building did not know that, they were simply doing what real men, good men, courageous men do; they risked their lives to save other people’s life.

        Same thing with soldiers such as GunslingerGreggi, they had no idea if their leaders were lying to them or not, they were simply doing their duty. They still are courageous men that went trough hell.

        Third,

        was is this??? ” I hope you get what is coming to you”

        Why are you wishing I get harmed in some way?

        What have I done to you that you are foaming at mouth with rage ???

        What the fuck is that???

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 10:58 pm gunslingergregi

        arbiter they weren’t killed for fun dude
        but men still want to go to war to see what it is like
        maybe it is brainwashing I read a shitload of war stories
        it crushes my soul to think about what happened
        but reality is everyone knows can’t fuck with us on shit

        I heard war really cause sadam wanted to denominate oil in euros instead of dollars

        and we knew they had weapons of mass destruction chemical weapons cause we sold them to them

        its bullshit we live in a world that shit like that can happen where human suffering on that scale exists
        but the world ain’t perfect and shoe on other foot if someone could invade us and take our shit you better believe millions of us would die

        good thing is we heading towards perfect war or perfect peace
        lets see if the ones running the shit can make life bearable and interesting without needing to have the reminder of war during peace

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 11:15 pm gunslingergregi

        then I hope you get what’s coming to you””””””””””’

        its possible the Iraqi’s have my name address and parents names
        the us threw its contractors under bus too and there are contractors in Iraqi jails probably right now

        when your country at war what do ya do?
        do ya second guess it and wonder if they doing right thing or do ya go?
        do ya go and see it is fucked up and know troops got to be there
        so ya try to take care of them as best ya fucking can
        cause they your bros and you would want someone trying to take care of you
        so at some point you realize you are never gonna go home and its cool cause ya still feel like fuck it i’ll die doing what i’m fucking good at which is taking care of people In the most fucked up situations and you know that you have this fucking influence over people that calms them and keeps people at their best
        lifes a bitch sometimes
        did the best I could like I always try to do in a fucked up situation

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 11:26 pm gunslingergregi

        and when Iraq invaded Kuwait they raped the shit out of the woman eyewitness account of Pilipino chick I talked to

        and didn’t they use the chemical weapons on iran and the kurds

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 11:32 pm gunslingergregi

        Who got blowjobs for one dollar a pop from nine year old girls in Baghdad, girls who were starving because of the invasion. Blowjobs in the middle of bars, in broad daylight.””””””””

        did you see that shit
        where is that coming from

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:54 pm Greg Eliot

      Isolating boys from girls is not natural. What is needed is more traditional values at the top and to return to standard sexual roles.

      Dude! Keeping the sexes separated (for the most part) until courtship and marriage is the condition under which said TRADITIONAL VALUES and STANDARD SEXUAL ROLES flourished.

      You blame your shyness and awkwardness around girls on your highly segregated background? Bushwa… there are more nerdy and socially-awkward boys running around in these modern times than ever, and they’re bombarded in life and especially in the media by the female form and mentality.

      Try again on the analysis, Sigmund.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:57 pm Hugh G. Rection

      Not everything that’s “natural” is good.

      LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 3:17 pm Arbiter

        And it’s not necessarily “natural” to put girls and boys in the same classroom. And separating them does NOT mean “isolating” them. Boys and girls can go to the same school but have different classrooms. They also see each other all the time in activities after school. They are not “isolated” just because they spend the learning hours of the week in different rooms.

        In fact, I think their interactions would be improved by not sitting in the same classrooms. They would not connect each other to the daily grind. They would connect each other to the fun free time.

        LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 9:42 pm Mike

      Government schooling just needs to be abolished, and if not abolished outright at least have it’s power minimized by things like the voucher movement. Markets aren’t perfect but they lead to better outcomes than government.

      LikeLike


  36. on June 4, 2014 at 1:04 pm lifeuniverse42

    What’s interesting with the girl is the list of slut tell she have. On a photo she seem to have a tattoo on the inside of the leg near the ankle; body piercing and blowing stuff out of proportion. From what I understand she is around 16. Pretty young for tattoo and body piercing. She must had parental consent for everything.
    Starting a media campaign because her short are to short. Attention whore big time, beware the false rape charge if your not doing her well enough.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 1:45 pm Canadian Friend

      Probably living with her single cougar mother…who also has tattoos and piercings…

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:52 pm dlpt

        She quite possibly has two functioning parents. Nothing subversive about this.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 3:56 pm Greg Eliot

        She quite possibly has two functioning parents.

        Yeah, and if a carpenter can get resurrected, ANYTHING’S possible.

        16 years old with piercings and tattoos? Two parents in the home?

        You giving odds, Monsieur Contrarian?

        LikeLike


  37. on June 4, 2014 at 1:09 pm Mel Gibson

    This slideshow was titled “Must see: Hilarious wedding photos.” Full of beta males, borderline omegas or faggots, entitled women, fat women, and various oddities. Hilarious indeed.

    http://www.accessatlanta.com/gallery/entertainment/hilarious-wedding-photos/g9mj/?icmp=ajc_internallink_textlink_lunchbites#2683589

    Recommended pics with a quick thought on each:

    5 – pedestal
    8 – solid troll job
    17 – already self-castrated; his dick & balls is in a small jar on her work desk
    20 – kill the omegas
    44 – kill the betas
    50 – lol
    52 – who deadlifts more weight?
    54
    74 – wtf
    78
    86 – fat bitch can’t even fit into her wedding dress
    99 – literally carrying a bitch to the altar (she probably fucked one of the models the previous night)
    103 – so much beta
    129 – notice the only bridesmaid not smiling is the Lena Dunham-looking one at right
    144 – finally, a man goes Sean Connery on a ho
    151 – American Woman, stay away from me
    153 – the only fucking alpha
    161 – emasculation

    LikeLike


  38. on June 4, 2014 at 1:09 pm gunslingergregi

    oh yea the preggers blond chick popped out her kid looks just like me he he he

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 11:58 pm Hugh G. Rection

      I guess congratulations are in order.

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:59 am gunslingergregi

        yea I don’t know she was telling people it was mine before but nobody really believed she was pregnant didn’t show for long time but yea apparently she was lol she did have plenty of my cum to play with but I didn’t fuck her
        guess in three years if he blond with blue eyes might know if she used a turkey baster he he he

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:09 am gunslingergregi

        and what the fuck is wrong with doctors in us do they intentionally leave scars on hot bitches or what we supposed to be so techno advanced but we got to scar nice looking bitches for life its fucked up
        her belly was hot came up yesterday showed me a fucked up ass scar

        indo my wife has no scar from the operation it cost 7 grand for the operation

        we are not better than anybody

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:13 am gunslingergregi

        7k including vip room and almost two weeks in hospital them changing bandages like clockwork and washing the wound and such and doctor checking on her
        its fucking sad in us

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:20 am gunslingergregi

        can we please just take the best of best for doctors who are supreme professionals and take pride in what they do and kick anyone who isn’t the fuck out
        not a race thing cause the docs who took care my wife were indonesian

        LikeLike


  39. on June 4, 2014 at 1:17 pm Gro Haila

    It’s all about the money

    gelding the serfs as to be more productive

    see bull/ox

    LikeLike


  40. on June 4, 2014 at 2:06 pm Wisdom Dispenser

    “”… girls bodies … are … sexual objects.”

    That is how every 14-18 year old with a pulse who has ever lived will read that sign that that young lady put up in her schools.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 4:22 pm corvinus

      Are you kidding? Any male with a functioning sex drive thinks that anyway.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 9:45 pm dlpt

        Nuh uh.

        LikeLike


  41. on June 4, 2014 at 2:11 pm sfer

    I would be upset if boys got busted for looking at girls in high school. I don’t think that is going on though.

    LikeLike


  42. on June 4, 2014 at 2:17 pm gunslingergregi

    fuck my girl comes back and now I have already become pussyfied enough that wordppress is eating my posts let me dump this bitch he he he

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 2:18 pm gunslingergregi

      although we are on track to spend same amount loot this week I spent when she was gone so that is a plus

      LikeLike


  43. on June 4, 2014 at 2:27 pm gunslingergregi

    everyone knows that you just have to workout right and be in nice shape and bitches want you right?
    all this other shit is shortcuts to not have to give a fuck right?
    so I can be all fucked up and still get bitches

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 3:19 pm gunslingergregi

      well that and avoid divorce industrial complex

      LikeLike


  44. on June 4, 2014 at 2:59 pm thrust

    here’s something i saw at a supplement store:

    “celebrating the strength & beauty of women everywhere”

    then

    “dedicated to helping men everywhere live healthier”

    LikeLike


    • on June 7, 2014 at 3:19 pm Arbiter

      Very telling.

      LikeLike


  45. on June 4, 2014 at 3:08 pm tspark156

    Of course feminists hate male desire because they have never been the objects of it, and obviously they hate feminine beauty because they are ugly.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 8:33 pm Ronin

      Yes.

      When you look into The Abyss, it looks back into you.

      Even when the ‘you’ in question is a fug.

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 12:08 pm tspark156

        Sound and profound

        LikeLike


  46. on June 4, 2014 at 3:45 pm Brendan

    Rush Limbaugh: “The feminist movement was created to allow ugly women access to the mainstream of society.”

    Yep.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 4:06 pm corvinus

      Feminism is a depraved version of “Lysistrata”.

      LikeLike


  47. on June 4, 2014 at 4:25 pm thrust

    http://elitedaily.com/humor/kid-exchange-hilarious-texts-girl-take-hint-photo/618012/

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 4:42 pm Hair Slicked Back With Swag So Fresh

      Haha, this muthafucka’s name is Kane! Time to get a new “Rosebud”, homie.

      LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:51 pm Tilikum

      outstanding

      LikeLike


  48. on June 4, 2014 at 4:33 pm Hosswire

    As usual, the feminists invert the commonsense, efficient, minimal-effort solution to a perceived problem.

    Boys distracted by a hot young chick putting her flesh on display? No, don’t try to change the ONE person. Try to change the many, the whole SOCIETY.

    Just like trying to reduce rapes by taking on the vast, nebulous “rape culture” instead of telling individual women how to best avoid getting raped (basically, don’t get shit-face drunk).

    If I were cynical I would think that they aren’t really trying to solve the problem at all, but only trying to score points against men.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 5:09 pm corvinus

      Boys distracted by a hot young chick putting her flesh on display? No, don’t try to change the ONE person. Try to change the many, the whole SOCIETY.

      Specifically, the feminist solution is to neuter all the boys.

      LikeLike


      • on June 4, 2014 at 7:29 pm mittja

        Yeah, feminists, true to their calling, are now attacking the one thing that men like about women. It will fun watching their reaction when they finally have alienated the sexes from each other and find out how truly helpless women are without men.

        LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:43 pm dlpt

      That’s just being ambitious. It’s good game.

      LikeLike


  49. on June 4, 2014 at 4:43 pm Libertardian

    From the tweeted link “I kill white people like you”:

    “Investigators noted that Williams told the other passenger, K. Colleen Coult, 50, that she would follow her upon reaching Houston and find out where she lived. The comments created fear in Coult for her safety, the affidavit notes.”

    Liberals would appreciate it if you would surrender your guns so you can be helpless to defend yourself and your family from people like this.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 6:30 pm corvinus

      Liberals aren’t supposed to be afraid of gangbangers, since that’s racist, so they transfer their fear onto guns.

      LikeLike


  50. on June 4, 2014 at 4:46 pm Troubadour

    This kind of stuff is the very heart of my core problem right here. I’m so thoroughly trained not to gawk, not to stare, not to express desire; to keep all of this carefully guarded and hidden. I was raised by my impressively ugly feminist mother to be a eunuch in the harem of life, and I have extremely serious problems communicating any of my desire with a girl. This extended into my marriage bed where it was nearly 20 years before I could actually vocalize what I wanted my wife to do instead of just being quiet and hoping she would figure it out through osmosis.

    I’m really a kinky pervert who is down for almost anything, but I get red-faced and extremely embarrassed talking about any of it face to face with a girl, even if she is my own fucking wife! People think I’m some kind of goody goody who might have done well to join a monastery, when I’m really a guy who thinks Hugh Heffner and Larry Flint and Max Hardcore are heroes.

    This crippling difficulty with communication is the difference between me collecting my due as a guy who naturally exhibits many of the traits that are attractive to girls, and having to settle for being a fatty fucker to avoid celibacy. It’s much deeper than fear of rejection; it’s fear of persecution, fear of retribution, and on some level, fear of my angry, ugly mother beating me and mocking me for having a penis.

    I’ve been working on myself for two years now, and I’m so very tired of the difficult struggle. I’ve come so far, and yet I’m still so far away from being able to go up to one of the cute chicks in yoga pants literally standing across the street from my front door. I just can’t do it. It’s the baby elephant thing, and the trainer who beat the shit out of me when I had a chain around my ankle was a vicious evil harpy. I know there is no chain. I know it is my responsibility to get past this, and the blame for my present circumstances lies at no feet other than my own.

    When I think about all of this, I feel a lot better about being the lamest guy out here in game world, the guy who got one number in a year.

    I finally have a date with that girl. Sometimes persistence pays off.

    LikeLike


  51. on June 4, 2014 at 6:08 pm Angry Gamer

    This should be the start of another post on CH 🙂

    http://elitedaily.com/humor/kid-exchange-hilarious-texts-girl-take-hint-photo/618012/

    LikeLike


  52. on June 4, 2014 at 7:26 pm Retrenched

    There are no creepy acts.

    There are only creepy actors.

    LikeLike


    • on June 4, 2014 at 9:52 pm Canadian Friend

      I see what you did there

      It is fun to use liberal logic on them

      liberals say that there are no bad people, only bad circumstances

      then using their liberal logic on them,

      There are no whites oppressing blacks, there are only bad circumstances

      There is no patriarchy oppressing women, there are only bad circumstances

      There are no rapists, only bad circumstances

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 12:18 am Retrenched

        And gender is a social construct… just like anti-harassment laws.

        LikeLike


  53. on June 4, 2014 at 9:33 pm Will

    I’m in a situation that is bringing to light a few of CH’s concepts (or at least you need the concepts to dissect the situation).

    I recently had a thing with an 8.5 (gets a shit ton of attention from guys when she goes out) college girl and a mayyybe 6.5 just-graduated college girl.

    The 8.5 does not initiate as much hanging out or fucking as I would like. I am the one who says when/where we will hang and I initiate that texting usually.

    The roughly 6.5 literally just texted me “wanna get drinks tomorrow or Friday?”. After I fucked her once. She is way more direct and initiative of hanging.

    I’d been fucking the other hotter one for longer though.

    Also, assuming I’m lower value (smv) than the hotter girl–I can flip the script and see what it’s like being in a way higher smv shoes.

    I think that instinctively I like the fact that it’s a challenge to get her or that she makes me take that leap. The way lower smv girl I don’t have much attraction for simply b/c she isn’t hot, so when she texts me “wanna get drinks” I actually get the opposite of “butterflies” and get kinda sad like “”no I don’t want to hurt your feelings though…but no””.

    The thing that fucks me up the most is this:

    If you want to have a stable/honest wife then she should be the one wanting you more, right? Consequently, that’ll put you in the control seat. But she should then be the one initiating texts like this “wanna get drinks now?” girl.

    Is it just me or do super high smv girls NOT initiate like this “wanna get drinks now” low smv girl. I might not have high enough smv in my life yet to experience consistent initiative with a super high smv girl (8 or higher), but for the people I know and myself this has never happened.

    Moreover, sometimes I think “oh this cute girl is actually just actively ‘playing hard to get’ by holding back from texting me or whatever b//c she doesn’t want to come across as too needy for example”. With this example I would think the cute girl is getting a mouthful in the ear from her girlfriends: “don’t do it. don’t text him. Make him chase you…etc etc”

    But that’s fuckin stupid b/c if she really liked you wouldn’t she eventually say fuck it and text you?

    This brings to light a question:

    A) Is basing a girl’s degree of initiating (whether it be text, hanging out, etc.) a solid way for gauging the amount of desire she has for you???

    LikeLike


  54. on June 4, 2014 at 11:35 pm Backdoor Man

    Nice reference to The Warriors. FWIW, it’s not “come out and play,” but rather “come out TO play.”

    http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=aRM2YcGpmxg&feature=kp

    LikeLike


  55. on June 4, 2014 at 11:58 pm Sid

    Are you saying that girls are more attractive, objectively speaking, than boys?

    That American girls have better, more symmetrical faces than American boys?

    Because that seems to be what you are implying.

    Girls are distracted by attractive faces and if they are not being distracted in the class room that means there are not a sufficient number of attractive American boy faces.

    Of course one could argue that girls have secondary sex characteristics that are more noticeable than that of boys. Boys would have to go topless in order for there chests and shoulders to be exposed sufficiently to surmise whether or not they were drool worthy, I guess?

    LikeLike


  56. on June 5, 2014 at 12:04 am corvinus

    OT: Right-wing Greek politician goes Chris Brown on femcunts, on national TV:

    LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 1:38 am APL

      That! was all Greek to me.

      LikeLike


  57. on June 5, 2014 at 12:45 am ray

    “Look around and you can’t help but notice it’s feminist metaphorical guns at boys’ heads and groins, now and forever. And their firepower increases by the day.”

    Yep. It’s shameful. And as you suggest, this pervasive and codified hatefest is a clear indictment of the U.S. and its agendas.

    V good article. Wow do boys in the west, and esp in America, need men to show the truth of what’s been going on for decades, and to defend them from the vast and powerful interests arrayed against males here. Because your president, vice president, senators etc would support this ‘victimized’ girl, and enforce punishments on boys for looking at her. Our national leaders were elected TWICE and by lotsa Fine Citizens too, thinking largely alike.

    Little LuLu parades her SlutSuit to a public school full of adolescent boys, then cries Rape Culture when one of the evil males does what she has intended, and looks at her. Couldn’t be a better metaphor for the pretend-innocence and passive/aggressive violence that drives feminism.

    I hope this article inspires other men likewise to discard lesser pursuits, and passionately defend the boys of America from the legion enemies of masculinity and fatherhood, in this nation and worldwide. Cheers.

    LikeLike


  58. on June 5, 2014 at 12:49 am L. Jon Hubbard

    Greg Eliot: “Avaunt, thou cunning linguists, and leave the jargon to this interlocutor.”

    If you’re going to try to affect pedantry using Biblical English, at least get the pronouns right. The Middle English second person plural for the nominative case (also used for the vocative as you intended it there) is “ye”.

    LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 5:53 am thwack

      Eliot takes the standing 8 count

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:41 am Greg Eliot

        Standing 8? From so light a jab?

        I don’t think so…

        And if that’s the case, you and the canvas must have a symbiotic relationship by now, given the number of haymakers you’ve absorbed at my hands.

        If you’re going to try to be a ringside judge, a bit more objectivity might be in order.

        LikeLike


      • on June 6, 2014 at 9:21 am L. Jon Hubbard

        Gotta agree with you there, Greg. Being an honourable man, I object to the call myself and demand a referee who doesn’t let his personal animus against my opponent influence his decisions even when they’re in my favour.

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 9:48 am Stilicho

      Hahaha!! I love it !! Eliot is not only an ass, he’s an ignorant ass.

      How lonely he must feel without Matt King!

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:45 am Greg Eliot

        Listen to yourself, twerp… laughing so heartily over so fine a point of my archaic hyperbole reeks of try-too-hard.

        And then wake up to yourself in re this odd fixation over Matt King.

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 10:54 am Canadian Friend

        Greg,

        You did not use the word ye,

        and I used the word contradiction,

        This was enough to get people to attack us.

        Do you feel like I do?

        …superior?

        LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 11:13 am Greg Eliot

        I try not to feel superior, since that gives thwack grist for his spiel mill…

        But I do feel privileged… LLZOZOZLZLZOZOLZZOZLZOZLZOZLZ.

        LikeLike


      • on June 6, 2014 at 11:20 am L. Jon Hubbard

        No attack intended from my part, just a little friendly needling.

        LikeLike


      • on June 6, 2014 at 11:44 am L. Jon Hubbard

        Greg, this is not aimed at you but you got me going when you sarcastically mentioned being privileged. In order to really be privileged, you would need three things: 1. a sovereign, contract or custom in law to grant the privileges 2. things that you are allowed to do that all or virtually all members of non-privileged classes are not allowed to do and/or things that you are free not to do that members of the non-privileged classes must do 3. sanctions or reprimands that members of non-privileged classes receive should they try to do what you have privilege to do.

        White privilege is a misnomer. What the fuzzy-wuzzies are really complaining about is aggregate White advantages, which disappear when you equalise IQ scores.

        There is nothing that a White guy in a trailer park in Arkansas or a bedsit in Slough is allowed to do that Obama or Noemie Harris are not allowed to do, just because they’re Black.

        LikeLike


      • on June 7, 2014 at 12:11 pm Greg Eliot

        I couldn’t resist the barb at the concept of white privilege… hence my LOZOZOZLZLZOZOLZOZLZOZL homage to the venerable GBFM.

        LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 10:36 am Greg Eliot

      One can always discern one’s status by the amount of glee one’s enemies take in even the most picayune of missteps.

      Ye fairies!

      LLZOZOZLZOZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZOZLZL

      LikeLike


    • on June 8, 2014 at 5:08 am L. Jon Hubbard

      I know, Greg, you were taking the piss, it’s just that the concept is wrong at so basic a level (so well as cargo cultish) and I never see anyone argue against it based on the plain meanings of the word “privilege” and the phrase “privileged class”. All arguments against it seem to grant wholesale many fallacious assumptions of the myth’s advocates.

      LikeLike


      • on June 8, 2014 at 6:25 am Greg Eliot

        You picked the right analogy there… cargo cult, indeed.

        The concept of white privilege is SO ridiculous that it merits little reply beyond mockery and disdain.

        The fact that it has been given any legs at all shows how negrified and feminized are so-called institutions of learning have become.

        Indeed, said institutions are now little more than PsyOps think tanks, the proverbial Enemy In Our Midst.

        If the Bard were alive today, he’d have written:

        “First thing we do is kill all the non-STEM professors.”

        LikeLike


      • on June 8, 2014 at 6:26 am Greg Eliot

        Aw, hell… our.

        LikeLike


      • on June 9, 2014 at 1:41 am L. Jon Hubbard

        Ridicule away but it’s quite easy to demolish with semantics at the same time. Ask them what you may do that Oprah Winfrey may not do, who granted your privileges over Oprah and what sanctions Oprah would receive should get uppity and try to do what she doesn’t have the privilege to do.

        LikeLike


  59. on June 5, 2014 at 1:42 am Retrenched

    Related…

    Zenpriest #34 — When Desiring Women is Outlawed, Only Outlaws Will Desire Women

    LikeLike


  60. on June 5, 2014 at 1:48 am Retrenched

    And some wisdom from Devlin…

    The geniuses of establishment conservatism may need a gentle reminder that the human race is not perpetuated through sexual abstinence. They might do better to ponder how many families have not formed and how many children have not been born due to overzealous attempts to protect young women from men who might have made good husbands and fathers…

    Young men today are in an impossible situation. If they seek a mate they are predators; if they
    find one they are date rapists; if they want to avoid the whole ordeal they are immature and irresponsible for not committing. We have gone from a situation where it seemed everything was permitted to one where nothing is permitted…

    The latest word from college campuses is that women have begun to complain men are not asking them out. That’s right: Men at their hormonal peak are going to class side by side with nubile young women who now outnumber them, and are simply ignoring or shunning them. Some report being repeatedly asked “Are you gay?” by frustrated coeds. This is what happens when women complain for forty years about being used as sex objects: Eventually, men stop using them as sex objects.

    LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 5:45 am Wilson

      And of course the crazy bitches will never figure it, will just keep on shit-testing and nagging men infinitely as reality repeatedly bitch-slaps them

      LikeLike


      • on June 5, 2014 at 6:51 am 55 degrees

        Reality hits harder for women than men. But women don’t pay any attention to it, until the fist comes down, and they’re swimming in cats.

        The last 2 sentences explain what comes next: “This is what happens when women complain for forty years about being used as sex objects: Eventually, men stop using them as sex objects.”

        Some men go MGTOW, some men go off-grid, some men go all out(banging till the end), but the end will come. Sad part is, that women don’t SEE the end.

        LikeLike


  61. on June 5, 2014 at 3:02 am Feminists Loathe Male Desire | Truth and contra...

    […] The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality. CH wrote the above not long ago to describe the purpose, in practice if not specifically elucidated in theory, of feminism.  […]

    LikeLike


  62. on June 5, 2014 at 6:21 am Pavel Nesterov

    Probably you have seen this already, but anyway:

    “It’s better not to argue with women,” Putin said. “But Ms. Clinton has never been too graceful in her statements. Still, we always met afterwards and had cordial conversations at various international events. I think even in this case we could reach an agreement. When people push boundaries too far, it’s not because they are strong but because they are weak. But maybe weakness is not the worst quality for a woman.”

    LikeLike


  63. on June 5, 2014 at 6:35 am 55 degrees

    People even believe that the general response to hurricanes is “sexist”. Hurricanes are one of the greatest forces of nature, but it’s ALL about the sexism!!

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/wp/2014/06/02/female-named-hurricanes-kill-more-than-male-because-people-dont-respect-them-study-finds/

    LikeLike


  64. on June 5, 2014 at 6:38 am PA

    Indubitably, Putin reads CH. See this reframe after Hillary calls him Hitler:

    “It’s better not to argue with women. But Ms. Clinton has never been too subtle in her statements,” said Putin. “When people push boundaries too far, it’s not because they are strong, but because they are weak. But maybe weakness is not the worst quality for a woman.”

    Can’t post link at the moment. See finance.yahoo for article.

    LikeLike


  65. on June 5, 2014 at 6:45 am The Hitter

    Suffrage was a fucking huge mistake.

    Bwaaaaahahahahahaha…. True…

    LikeLike


    • on June 5, 2014 at 9:36 am S.Plissken

      “The womens suffrage movement is only the small edge of the wedge, if we allow women to vote it will mean the loss of social structure and the rise of every liberal cause under the sun. Women are well represented by their fathers, brothers and husbands.”
      -Winston Churchill

      LikeLike


  66. on June 5, 2014 at 9:10 am Steve H

    CH: wanted to pass this along.

    http://reason.com/blog/2014/06/04/occidental-expels-student-for-rape-under

    LikeLike


  67. on June 5, 2014 at 11:57 pm J.j. Cintia

    You have to realize that women are not rational creatures. Their lack of judgment is the reason they claim people should be non-judgmental. The Feminist Movement is just a subsidiary of the Marxist Movement otherwise known as the new world order. Its literally the oldest trick in the book: divide and conquer. Its failure lies in the fact that it ignores the natural narcissistic tendencies prevalent in all women. Haven’t you noticed the titles of womens’ magazines? Me, Us, etc. The Feminists missed the boat by putting lesbians at the forefront. Lesbians don’t dress like women, they don’t act like women and they have completely different priorities from women. Their hatred of men is bad, but their hatred of motherhood is bizarre. Even lifelong Feminists are shocked and appalled when they marry and have a baby, that the Sisterhood of Gynosupremacy ostracizes them. Little girls don’t want to grow up to be men, they dream about being a princess with a handsome prince that rescues them and carries them back to his palace. The Feminist schtick worked for a while during the Upside Down Looney Toon Baby Boomer Generation, but after that women lost interest. Most women want to be mothers and get married, and the Feminists lost them when they went Full Retard with crap like Man-Hating and now with the even crazier Heteronormative that denies basic biological reality. If you make the mistake of watching the Dinosaur Media on the various alphabet soup networks, then you’ll get the false impression that they’re winning, but let me tell you the clocks and calendars of these Dinosaurs are still set in the 1960’s with the Free Love Love Bead generation of Yippees. This is unsurprising since that was the peak of their power and its all been downhill since. Don’t think that because Democrats get elected to office that there is any real support for the Left. As Stalin famously quipped, “It matters not who the people vote for, but who counts the votes!” Without massive voter fraud, the Historic First Non-White President would probably be asking, “Do you want fries with that?” about now. Feminism exists now only on college campuses and media fairy tales. You can waste your money to see old hags pretending to be young girls who want it all, because anything you can do, she can do better. Its a broken record stuck on stupid…

    LikeLike


  68. on June 6, 2014 at 5:09 am thwack

    What is up with white women getting stabby these days?

    June Cleaver never acted this way with the Beaver?

    http://www.thelocal.fr/20140605/femen-stab-beat-putin-wax-statute-in-france

    LikeLike


    • on June 6, 2014 at 1:06 pm chi-town

      I don’t know…seems to be coming back round full circle back to watching cleavage and then a beaver to me.

      LikeLike


    • on June 8, 2014 at 6:32 am Greg Eliot

      A process of osmosis is occurring… after hanging around with n166ers too long and listening to too much of their ooga-booga bullshit, they take on the characteristics of the jungle.

      And you will have noted, of course, that this was France.

      LikeLike


  69. on June 6, 2014 at 11:31 am James K

    The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

    The other cynical view of feminism is that its one and only goal is to allow women to escape from their boring husbands. The maximum restrictions on male sexuality do not apply to the men that feminists want to fuck.

    LikeLike


  70. on June 7, 2014 at 9:12 pm Mike Schonewolf (@TheLoneMaverick)

    Issues like “street harassment”are all about feminists unleashing female sexuality while severely restricting the sexuality of males. That I whole-heartedly agree on. I think the core of feminist theory especially when it comes to sexual issues, and slut-positive feminism is to abnegate male sexuality because they view it as a threat, because they’re unattractive, and are afraid of being judged in the sexual marketplace.

    LikeLike


  71. on June 7, 2014 at 9:52 pm Mike

    Why is this even taken seriously? How about just an across the board rule of no super high cut short wearing for anyone, male or female. Okay it was hot, boo hoo, wear normal length shorts. Personally I like to look at women’s legs (including teenagers, OMG rape) so I disagree w/the rule.

    LikeLike


  72. on June 9, 2014 at 10:00 pm Ziel des Feminismus: Möglichst freie weibliche Sexualität, möglichst eingeschränkte männliche Sexualität? | Alles Evolution

    […] Heartiste stellt eine gewohnt kontrovers formulierte Theorie auf: […]

    LikeLike


  73. on June 10, 2014 at 3:07 pm Alif Male

    From “Dumb Witness” Agatha Christie, (1937) Chapter 2

    ============================================================
    “But this feeling of hers for Rex Donaldson was different, it went deeper. She felt instinctively that here there would be no passing on…. Her need of him was simple and profound. Everything about him fascinated her. His calmness and detachment, so different from her own hectic, grasping life, the clear, logical coldness of his scientific mind, and something else, imperfectly understood, a secret force in the man masked by his unassuming slightly pedantic manner, but which she nevertheless felt and sensed instinctively.

    In Rex Donaldson there was genius – and the fact that his profession was the main preoccupation of his life and that she was only a part – though a necessary part -of existence to him only heightened his attraction for her. She found herself for the first time in her selfish pleasure-loving life content to take second place. The prospect fascinated her. For Rex she would do anything – anything!”
    ============================================================

    A crime-writer’s outline sketch of one character written 77 years ago tells more truth about women than the last thousand editions of Cosmopolitan and the entire output of Jezebel put together.

    LikeLike



Comments are closed.

  • Copyright © 2018. Chateau Heartiste. All rights reserved. Comments are a lunchroom food fight and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Chateau Heartiste proprietors or contributors.
  • Visit the Goodbye, America photojournal website.

    Then cleanse your visual palate with a visit to the Welcome Back, America photojournal website.

  • Pages

    • About
    • Alpha Assessment Submissions
    • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
    • Dating Market Value Test For Men
    • Dating Market Value Test For Women
    • Diversity + Proximity = War: The Reference List
    • Shit Cuckservatives Say
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Twitter Updates

    Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

  • Recent Comments

    Jay in DC on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Agent X on Oy, There It Is
    jOHN MOSBY on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    cortesar on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Lichthof on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Davy Holmes on Sweden, The Cuck Corner Stool…
    Lichthof on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    jOHN MOSBY on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    cortesar on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
    Alex the Goon on Battlebrows As Portent Of Soci…
  • Top Posts

    • Battlebrows As Portent Of Sociopath America
    • Women's Sports Will Be Killed Off By Invasive Trannies
    • Red Tsunami?
    • Oy, There It Is
    • Shitlib Logic Trap!
    • Globohomo's Next Target: "Sexual Racism"
    • How To Get A Girl To Send Nudes Of Herself
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
    • The NPC Song: "Feel"
    • There's Something [Very Special] About That Migrant Caravan Truck
  • Categories

  • Game

    • 60 Years of Challenge
    • Alpha Game
    • Cajun
    • Krauser PUA
    • Rational Male
    • Roosh V
    • Tenmagnet
    • Treatise of Love
  • MAGA MEN

    • Alternative Right
    • AmRen
    • Anonymous Conservative
    • Audacious Epigone
    • Dusk in Autumn
    • Education Realist
    • Evo and Proud
    • Gene Expression
    • Hail To You
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • Lion of the Blogosphere
    • My Posting Career
    • OneSTDV
    • PA World and Times
    • Page For Men
    • Parapundit
    • Rogue Health and Fitness
    • Steve Sailer
    • The Anti-Gnostic
    • The Kakistocracy
    • The Red Pill Review
    • The Spearhead
    • Unqualified Reservations
    • Vox Popoli
    • West Hunter
    • Whiskey's Place
  • Syllogism and Synthesis

    • Alias Clio
    • Arts & Letters Daily
    • Deconstructing Leftism
    • Elysium Revisited
    • Feminine Beauty
    • hbd chick
    • Human Biological Diversity
    • Library of Hate
    • Overcoming Bias
    • Stuff White People Like

WPThemes.


loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
Privacy & Cookies: This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this website, you agree to their use.
To find out more, including how to control cookies, see here: Cookie Policy
%d bloggers like this: