Five-star commenter chris marshals ¡SCIENCE! to support the theory that feminists are masculine women who use the ideology of feminism to rearrange normal society into a twisted slutscape that serves the interests of less attractive women who fail at extracting commitment from high value men. Quoting him in full:
******
Here’s a theory for you:
Feminists are a phenotypic morph.
Feminism is political-ideological weaponization by that phenotypic morph.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymorphism_(biology)
Polymorphism in biology occurs when two or more clearly different phenotypes exist in the same population of a species—in other words, the occurrence of more than one form or morph. In order to be classified as such, morphs must occupy the same habitat at the same time and belong to a panmictic population (one with random mating).
http://rsbl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/11/2/20140977
“Stay or stray? Evidence for alternative mating strategy phenotypes in both men and women”
This study shows there are two distinct phenotypes within human populations. Promiscuous people and non-promiscuous people. Promiscuous = low digit ratio=higher testosterone=short-term mating strategy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25250010
“Feminist activist women are masculinized in terms of digit-ratio and social dominance: a possible explanation for the feminist paradox.”
This study shows that feminists are masculinised in terms of digit ratios=low digit ratios=higher testosterone.
This explains why feminism is about changing society from long-term to short term mating. It explains why they defend women being sluts. It explains why they defend women cuckolding. It explains why they defend and agitate for women to pursue careers and achieve self-provisioning sufficiency. And it explains why they try to change the culture to support these values and necessarily oppose their anti/inverse values.
Thus, there is no right-wing war on women. There is a right wing war on the short-term mating or feminist or matriarchal morph.
Likewise there is a left-wing war on the long-term mating or anti-feminist or patriarchal morph.
And here’s the catch: most women are in the long-term mating / anti-feminist / patriarchal morph.
In other words. feminism is anti-(the majority of)-women.
******
A powerful shiv to the bloated gut of feminism is to remind normal, attractive women of the gross, ugly, and deranged feminist women (and their effete male lackeys) who purport to speak for all women. Women are nothing if not herd followers, and if it’s made clear to the Normal Majority of women that feminists are unbangable fugs no worthwhile man would touch with a manlet’s micropeen, then the herd will change course and leave the losers in its dust.
CH is doing its sadistically fun part of getting that message out to the masses.
Chris’s theory jibes closely with CH’s theory of feminism:
The goal of feminism is to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.
Masculinized feminism-congenial women want an unnatural order instituted that grants them the shame-free sexual freedom inherent to men while simultaneously restricting any expression of the natural sexual impulses of men themselves. Feminists want to be able to call all the sexual market shots, take no heat for misfires, and publicly excoriate anyone who fires back. This is the dictionary definition of insanity.
National Review, in a rare moment of ballsiness, also corroborates the chris/CH theory of feminism:
Feminism has become something very different from what it understands itself to be, and indeed from what its adversaries understand it to be. It is not a juggernaut of defiant liberationists successfully playing offense. It is instead a terribly deformed but profoundly felt protective reaction to the sexual revolution itself. In a world where fewer women can rely on men, some will themselves take on the protective coloration of exaggerated male characteristics — blustering, cursing, belligerence, defiance, and also, as needed, promiscuity.
Allow me to reword the conclusion of this NR statement for endarkening clarification:
“In a world where fewer ugly, unfeminine, financially self-sufficient women can or need to rely on provider beta males, some will themselves take on the protective coloration of exaggerated male characteristics — blustering, cursing, belligerence, defiance, and also, as needed, promiscuity that leaves them feeling gross and unloved the next morning after Jack has slipped out the back.”
The view is coming into focus now.
Loudmouthed feminists are more often than not:
ugly,
out of shape chunksters,
unfeminine androgynes,
older, Wall-victim spinsters,
spiteful, LSMV misfits…
who simultaneously loathe and envy the natural freedom and energy of male sexual desire. Because feminists are losers in the sexual marketplace, (and because they know it), they seek to tear down the organic, biomechanically-grounded social and sexual orders and replace them with bizarre androgynous dystopias that help them feel better about themselves. Their justified feelings of low self-worth cause them to lash out at men in the aggregate, (and particularly at lower value beta males), and at prettier, feminine women who by their mere existence daily remind feminists of their pitiful ranking in the hierarchy of female romantic worth.
When losers stop knowing their place, and begin insisting their betters are no such thing, and worse when the losers have acquired the power and means to punish their betters, you get what we have today: A failure to propagate; to propagate as a race and to propagate as a successful civilization.
This jibes with what I have always believed about Feminists based on my own empirical observations.
LikeLike
I am starting to believe they are just a pack of mentally ill and psychologically deformed misfits. They sound appealing because they say things that sometimes sound good, but when you scratch the surface the madness and hate leaks out.
LikeLike
That is how I have seen them for years now.
LikeLike
Feminism tends to attract women who disdain or just aren’t very good at traditional female strategies for getting what they want: some combination of lesbian, crazy, unattractive, autistic/socially retarded, and lacking in impulse control.
Let’s not kid ourselves, though: there are a not inconsiderable number of feminists who are pretty and/or genuinely feminine. But they’re all bat shit crazy.
LikeLike
Feminism, and indeed all leftism, is based on the envy of men and the wish to destroy them, as all enviers wish to do the envied.
LikeLike
[…] Theory: Feminists Are Masculinized Phenotypic Morphs […]
LikeLike
I’m a feminist because … it’s the only defense mechanism I can think of to dull the pain of knowing that thousands of years worth of female sacrifice passing on my blood line will be be bequeathed to a cat.
LikeLike
Heh. As if the cat gives a shit. If you happen to drop into a coma or die, the cat will eat your eyes out if it runs out of Friskies. Oh no, Mr. Snuggles!
LikeLike
I’m pretty sure newmlyaloof was being sarcastic, as far as I know he’s not female
and the point was not about the cat, but about how sad it is that a woman ends up living with cats instead of how it is supposed to be; with a husband and children.
LikeLike
Sarcasm – I’m not down with that ..
Every woman should just get married and see what happens.
LikeLike
No, as an wrinkled widow, helping and teaching the great-grandchildren the Good Way.
LikeLike
It’s a common theory, but it doesn’t account for the “adventuress”-style hot chick who uses feminism/SJWism to attention-whore.
[CH: most “adventuresses”, aka sluts, are in the 4-7 looks range. it’s a myth that 8s and above play the field like men. 8s and above DATE the field until they lock down that one HSMV alpha male into an LTR. now if by “adventuress” you mean the classic femme fatale, then yeah, there do exist very hot chicks who loosely throw their sex around as part of a game to play one man off another. but they are a small minority of all women.]
LikeLike
Most women will use feminism -at least part of the time – if it is advantageous to them.
Women are opportunists as much – if not more – than men are.
LikeLike
No more bolded editor comments?
LikeLike
Yeah, I noticed that, too.
[CH: Fortune – and poosy – favors the bold.]
LikeLike
CH great non sequitor
LikeLike
[…] Theory: Feminists Are Masculinized Phenotypic Morphs […]
LikeLike
When you feel you can’t win in the system, you try to destroy the system.
LikeLike
Aren’t the majority of women in western societies today, including (especially?) the attractive ones, feminists compared to two generations ago, if you consider that unrestricted female hypergamy/birth control a core feminist ideal?
Why would women who aren’t wanted be so committed open to birth control? It doesn’t make sense.
It’s more likely that feminism is an attack on female irrelevance. The world is overpopulated, which means that women’s greatest contribution to the world, child-bearing, is a liability, not an fn miracle. (In some places they still throw female newborns in the trash).
Greater resource scarcity means a greater need for the gender that’s better equipped to be swordmen and engineers. Hence the pandemic identity crisis that women as group have.
LikeLike
They’re not feminists in that they don’t subscribe to the ideology – they’ll say something anodyne like “women deserve all the opportunities that men have and are equals” and then proceed to date/marry only men who are more successful than they. Birth control (and abortion) serve the Female Imperative and individual women’s mating strategy which is why they are embraced so widely. Once birth control became readily available, it began an arms race of sorts insofar as looser women were unleashed to compete with all others. In other words, birth control is a tool that the overwhelming majority of women employ to navigate in a world disfigured by feminists.
LikeLike
> Women may be just as dependent as before on men, but now they punish us legally and politically for less than valid reasons so my inclination to help most of them is greatly diminished.
We have a winner. In so many of these discussions I see such abstract discussions, when the legal threat of violence is precisely designed to control men.
Apex Alpha males run the show, and use betas as tools to enforce their will and defend their harems. A neo-Feudal surveillance police-state is not a male utopia, it is a female one. Female service the big bad alpha, and the betas are serfs.
“Alpha”, as related to sexual success, is meaningless when decoupled from the ability to exercise power. Non-apex males have never been stuck in such a powerless position. We are at the whims of a brutal police state, as any man who has had a run in with the law knows all too well.
Alphas and females win, betas lose. Alpha is not your ability to get laid, it is your ability to exercise power.
LikeLike
Men are the ones made less relevant by the industrial, social, and, now, digital revolutions. Women can do everything we can do in the workplace thanks to technology (arguably not as well, but that’s another topic). They are allowed to do everything we do in the social sphere thanks to the safety of a large, advanced, democratic society. On top of that, they are perhaps better suited for the RT-based economy in which many white-collar business must operate nowadays, because of their more-sophisticated social antennae. Men’s superior strength, toughness, and ability to focus. . . worthless.
LikeLike
Come the collapse, the original order will return with a vengeance.
LikeLike
If women are better equipped to work in today’s information-based economy, then why don’t these businesses simply hire more women?
Why is diversity such a got topic in silicon valley? If businesses could become more profitable and more competitive simply by hiring more women don’t you think they might have noticed by now?
LikeLike
I guess you haven’t noticed women don’t actually do anything productive outside of making a home. they can’t build one, supply energy to one, defend one, repair one, or feed one.
LikeLike
If you look no deeper than the surface, then maybe what you say is true.
But all it takes is a flat tyre outside of network range on a cold and wet night and all that ‘equality’ falls away in a nano-second.
A flat tyre. That’s all.
Don’t be fooled by the current narrative. Women are just as dependent on men as they ever were. It’s one step removed via the state but they cannot deny their innate vulnerability.
And IMO it will soon become very apparent. The agricultural revolution and industrial revolution reduced the need for male muscle. The technical / internet-of-everything / machine learning revolution is doing the same thing to huge swathes of those ’empowered’ women’s jobs as well.
We are on the cusp of a female spinster unemployment epidemic.
LikeLike
The whole information “economy” is fed by the expansion of networks, newly created through the web. At the bottom, supporting the entire structure, is the same economy that has been there since the beginning: the conversion of natural resources into energy and usable products.
So when the information “economy” reaches saturation, and there simply isn’t enough demand for Angry Birds and Twitter (coming soon), guess what’s going to happen to all those fluff jobs created for the gender who’s greatest workplace skill is the ability to talk and have meetings? They’ll evaporate.
What will be left are those same jobs in those bread-and-butter sectors holding the structure together. Nothing new here.
LikeLike
@SuperFucker!: The Silicon-Valley example is an exception because, as you say, the expansion of Web-based platforms for feminine expression is undergirded by a bunch of male engineers down in the boiler room of the Internet writing code and building T3 lines. This is true of women’s relative (historically speaking) freedom from the threat of male violence, as well. It’s made possible by the 99% (in the West, anyway) of men who would never hurt a woman, many of whom are the cops who show up and do what no social-justice crusade could ever do: physically neutralize a threat to a specific woman. Of course most of the lawyers who wrote the laws that protect women and the judges who enforce those laws are also men. Without the acquiescence of most men to the current social order, women would be our slaves. I was describing the way things are now, on the surface, not how they were, could be, would be, or are beneath the surface.
LikeLike
@Cadders – “Don’t be fooled by the current narrative. Women are just as dependent on men as they ever were. It’s one step removed via the state but they cannot deny their innate vulnerability.”
So true…. Eeeeeeeeek SPIDER!
LikeLike
like Liz Warren saying “you didn’t build that”
squaw please! you never built a thing.
LikeLike
@SuperFucker et al, you are so right. One of the major make-work jobs for women in IT, “project manager,” is being made redundant as we speak by something called Agile programming (short version, small team of engineers, working directly with customers, performance milestones reached and logged in to the system, only one “manager” for the entire fucking venture, no role for drama queens.)
I’ve actually known some very good female developers over the years. A lot of the people behind ebooks back in the day were women who’d been doing electronic documents… we’re talking into the ’70s. They were competent, and funny. But they were, A, actually interested in sitting at computers to solve problems, and, B, to a chick, had always had this one highly-motivated person giving them individualized instruction whom they desperately wanted to please. Let’s call him “dad.” This dad person wouldn’t necessarily teach programming, often they’d play chess together once a week, or some other way of doing logic and probability. No amount of “women in tech” programs can replace him.
Now, the women-in-tech-trained project managers also exist. Who do you think was behind healthcare.gov?
LikeLike
Women may be just as dependent as before on men, but now they punish us legally and politically for less than valid reasons so my inclination to help most of them is greatly diminished.
LikeLike
Yeah, why any woman would want to be equal to a man and deal with:
1. soul sucking commute
2.stuck in a prison cell (aka cubicle) all day.
3. stuck sitting in a chair all day ruining our health
4. pushing paper
5. Dealing with stupid office politics.
All that so they can say they are equal. Fuck. you get 50% of a man’s salary just by marrying him, having kids, and staying home (you can still start a business on the side and be your own boss at home). Why put up with all that shit for a measly 20% extra (tired line about women making 70% of what a man makes)?
LikeLike
Shielded from these horrific women by my Catholic family, Catholic upbringing, and Catholic schools, I literally never laid eyes on a feminist until my early twenties.
When it finally happened, I remember thinking, “What IS this strange creature…? It seems like it *used to* be a woman, until it defaced its own skin and mangled its hair and got pissed-off about something that it can’t explain.”
LikeLike
And despite this, you still went full libtard…
(shakin’ mah haid)
LikeLike
And despite this, you still went full libtard…
(shakin’ mah haid)
My thought exactly.
LikeLike
nah… here’s what he really wanted to write, but was too scared:
“Shielded from these horrific women by my homosexual upbringing, and Catholic priests, I literally never laid eyes on a woman until my early twenties.
When it finally happened, I remember thinking, “What IS this strange creature…? “
LikeLike
Post-Vatican II Pink “Catholicism” sure turns out the Ted Kennedy clones, that’s fer sure…
Or Joe “Butt Buddy” Biden clones, rather…
LikeLike
I knew the trolls would come out. And compared to you, corvinus, Genghis Khan was a mattress-carrying equalist.
Doesn’t matter though. My Thursday night girl is coming over with a bottle of wine. You won’t believe that, but it’s the truth.
LikeLike
Quit attempting to prove yourself. Fuck, man. Get a life.
LikeLike
That was specifically for you, Phil, after the hilarious fiction you wrote about me on an earlier thread. You a novelist?
LikeLike
Thursday night girl.
Heh, heh… the good little Catholic boy has delineated cooze for each day of the week?
Looks like that alleged upbringing didn’t stick.
So much for Proverbs 22:6
zlzlzlzozlzozlzozlzolzolzolz
LikeLike
And just for the record, let’s keep the terminology straight.
Calling someone out on their idiocy, braggadocio, and other (yes, here’s that word) inanities isn’t trolling.
Gentlemen! Accuracy of expression, above all. lzlzozlzozlzozlzozlzolzozloz
LikeLike
Teenage Girl Within… I’m getting under your skin.
LikeLike
The range of ad hominem attacks is confusing my poor wittle bwain. Am I libtard? Or a womanizer, and therefore a bad Catholic? Or a flip-flopping teenage girl? Or a fudge-packing homosexual?
Doesn’t matter. None of you assholes are worth a bucket of warm spit. Reminds me of:
“Come to bed, honey.”
“I can’t yet. Someone on the Internet is wrong.”
lollzlolzollzz
LikeLike
Why should it be confusing when you get a well-deserved ragging?
It’s what guys do when one of the crowd shows their ass too much.
Then again, if you never were accepted as “one of the guys” from school days to the present, it would make sense that this is all confusing to you.
You fairy.
LikeLike
“Shielded from these horrific women by my Catholic family, Catholic upbringing, and Catholic schools, I literally never laid eyes on a feminist until my early twenties.
When it finally happened, I remember thinking, “What IS this strange creature…? It seems like it *used to* be a woman, until it defaced its own skin and mangled its hair and got pissed-off about something that it can’t explain.”
I don’t care what anyone says, there are some positive attributes to Catholicism. And I am not Catholic, yet.
LikeLike
You should also consider the Orthodox version. They make you suffer for the faith a little more with really long mass but the churches in Russia and Ukraine are beautiful and the liturgy is truest to the original. Easter Mass at the Saint Michael’s Cathedral in Kiev was one of the most moving experiences I’ve had in a church.
LikeLike
Carlos danger- Thanks. I am coming to that realization. It seems Russian Orthodox Christianity and Catholicism hold true to the origins.
LikeLike
You’re welcome.
LikeLike
Can somebody PhotoShop a suicide bomb vest onto a picture of this venomous ball-cutting street agitator?
I think her name is Chanty Binks. Make her the personification of feminism and the herd of unthinking girls will flee.
LikeLike
She needs a man punch delivered to the face. I bet one of those, within the time it takes to cock a fist back, to the time of its sublime impact, could erase 15 years of women’s studies propaganda much the same way, as Matt King observed, a single orgasm delivered by a confident man can accomplish the same.
LikeLike
The goal isn’t to convert Big Red. The goal is to use her to convert the herd.
LikeLike
You could argue, since they act like men, that they are closeted trans-men, and as such the norm against hitting women shouldn’t apply to them, as they aren’t really women, they are actually men (closeted trans-men).
LikeLike
She’s begging for it.
LikeLike
All feminists are secretly looking for the HSV man who will dominate them despite all their efforts to the contrary. They are angry because such men don’t think it`s worth the trouble. This is a central reason why feminism is a big shit test.
LikeLike
jesus,what a horrible cunt,couldn’t watch more than a few minutes of that harridan…
LikeLike
That’s why I want to make her the face of feminism.
LikeLike
Damn lady. Take this cause and shove it.
LikeLike
[…] This Heartiste post is maybe the only thing I’ve ever read savaging feminists, after which I kind of feel like taking the writer aside, and saying in a whisper, “Maybe that was a little too cruel.” […]
LikeLike
OT: Re: the man who lost his testosterone – modern day Siddharta Gautama?
LikeLike
I gotta disagree with the Chateau on this one. I cannot understand men who attack the Holy Quaternity / Four P’s (Prostitution, Pill, Porn, Promiscuity). I guess I’m r-selected. If you desire infinite sexual variety, which you should if you claim to be a man, you cannot then desire to guard a single one of your “mates”–ever. You got what you wanted. Who are you to deny any other man the same pleasure? What about the children? Fuck ’em! CH himself is on record expressing the thought that they suck all the joy out of life. Also, if you give a damn about society, or romanticize the past, you might be a white knight. Just saying.
What I’m hearing from feminists (maybe just women, in general) lately is that men need to settle down. There are too many single women out there without a man to care for them and their spawn. That’s not progressive or radical; it’s reactionary. As far as women have come, they still have one shackle from which they’ve yet to extricate themselves (it’s coming soon, though, and then it’s all over): childbirth. All of their contemporary efforts aim at lightening this burden, possibly by shifting it onto us with the help of the law or shame. Do not succumb, men! Luxuriate in your freedom from this dread, biological buzzkill! The worst of times for society could be the best of times for your dick.
LikeLike
There are conservatives and then there are white knights and these two need not overlap, although I would certainly say most conservatives if not all question a society that supports widespread promiscuity. I think the Left believes conservatism is about restricting pleasure irrationally and that things like marriage and monogamy, which restrict sex, are outdated concepts which sounds to me a lot like John Lennon. You are kind of implying you agree with conservatives when you say the worst of times for society are best for your dick. I think thats the trade off. But whilst many conservatives do hold a romantic view of the past, a good many can see why marriage might be attractive, or might have been in the past. So basically I don’t think you should write off all conservatives as being white knights, there are some harsh truths one must swallow to be a true conservative I think.
LikeLike
John Lennon was such a chump. He was a complete doormat for that creature Yoko Ono. His first wife was a hard 9. On top of it, he was a crappy father to his son Julian too. What good did his search for pleasure do him there?
LikeLike
Having done both, living together is by no means the same as marriage. When you live with someone, there is always this sense that you can walk out at any time and it colors your decisions and attitude. When you get married, there is a 72 hour period or so when you’re a bit stunned and dazed and worrying “What the fuck have I just done.” It’s a feeling not unlike when you first join the Army. If you have a good wife, it passes and you live happily. Living together is no substitute for raising children compared to marriage. The legal bonds create a stronger sense of commitment and responsibility. Marriage and family are the bedrock of a strong and healthy society.
LikeLike
Why would any guy settle for a woman with a destroyed vagina? If you can find a femihitler with an undamaged vagina then sure, knock her up and she will change her ways. Their own maternal instincts will put her at odds with her government school installed philosophy. Guess what wins? Nature. heh
LikeLike
“If you can find a femihitler with an undamaged vagina then sure, knock her up and she will change her ways. Their own maternal instincts will put her at odds with her government school installed philosophy. Guess what wins? Nature. heh”
if only it were that easy. unfortunately it doesn’t usually work that way. as we all know, these women tend to be terrible mothers who, even with an alpha mate, brainwash their children with the same atheist, feminist, delusional philosophies as their own. people should not breed with these women.
LikeLike
Good comment Ohiomega! There are way to many monogamous white knight tradcon prudes who pretend to be redpill when they’re simply blue pill reactionaries. (I’m a fellow Ohioan by the way.)
LikeLike
The criticism I have of your Holy Quaternity / Four P’s (Prostitution, Pill, Porn, Promiscuity) is that it is destructive in the long run and ruinous to a well functioning society.
LikeLike
Prostitution was legal throughout most of the world before 1890! Yet civilization did fine during that long period. I likewise think tradcons have exaggerated the effect of porn. Porn has largely been around behind close doors as far back as the dawn of civilization. I was just reading a piece that suggested that 70% of men had seen prostitutes at least once during the Victorian Era, that hardly sounds like men who were practicing hard monogamy as opposed to a sort of hypocritical pair bounding (soft monogamy). Likewise if you check the historical record their were always women who became mistresses to noblemen and clergymen and thus were promiscuous (to say nothing of those who worked as prostitutes).
Further there was enough promuscuity going around pre-Modern Europe where promiscuous women slept with their male counterparts that the orphanages were always full with out of wedlock children. To some degree, porn, promiscuity, and prostitution have been always with us and yet civilization did fine. As for the pill, it has prevented the creation of the out of wedlock children one used to see in earlier ages. Fear about low legitimate white births because of a decline of men agreeing to the sexually oppressive and financially parasitic system of monogamous marriage I think will disipate after the arrival of the artificial womb later this century . Then we will not see civilization end, we will see civilization start anew increasing removed from the centrality of the family of earlier eras.
LikeLike
Ed, I agree with you. Prostitution was legal in most of the US until the early fifties. I think it should still be legal too. I have no problem with soft monogamy. It’s a question of degree and how much it is encouraged and what the resultant damage to the baseline culture is as a result. St. Augustine talks of this in his Confessions. The situation you describe had a strong central culture and the lapses from that were tolerated as a safety valve. But people always understood the value of preserving and maintaining the baseline culture as paramount. We no longer have a strong baseline culture. We encourage unbridled debauchery nowadays. Sex before wedlock has been pretty common for most of history. They used to call the kids who were born of such unions seven month babies since the parents usually married.
LikeLike
[…] This Heartiste post is maybe the only thing I’ve ever read savaging feminists, after which I kind of feel like taking the writer aside, and saying in a whisper, “Maybe that was a little too cruel.” […]
LikeLike
in a world where fewer women can rely on men
It almost sounds as if the white-knighting tradcon pussies at NR are blaming men.
LikeLike
Yeah I wish they had had the guts to mention women can not rely on men as much today as in the past because women wanted it that way.
LikeLike
Leftoid always there, the differences today which is they are in the power. Leftoids can be promiscuous but they are predominant infertile. I think leftoidism is part of human evolution. Higher the brain complexity, higher the probability to have errors.
LikeLike
This was known by Rush Limbaugh 28 years ago as Undeniable Truth of Life #24…”Feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream.”
LikeLike
NR published a fairly comprehensive essay on the subject in the early 90s by W. Tucker titled “Monogamy and its discontents.” There was once a copy readable online but I can’t find it just now.
LikeLike
William Tucker on ‘Monogamy and its discontents’ http://www.snappingturtle.net/jmc/tmblog/archives/005331.html
LikeLike
>>>There was once a copy readable online but I can’t find it just now.
the FCC is working fast
LikeLike
Hmmmmmmm…. said focus needs another tweak on the coarse adjustment knob.
Alas, for lack of a shoe, a horse was lost! llzozlzozlzozlzozlzozlzolzolzolzol
LikeLike
Feminists hate men but look just like them. Only uglier and hairier, except on scalp!!!
LikeLike
Speaking of feminists, which US reader will join me on Hillary’s campaign if jeb bush is nominated?
LikeLike
Haha, real funny. Jeb needs the Republican base (which is strongly anti-immigration) to get reelected, Hillary can do whatever she wants. Jeb is a lot more limited in his amnesty potential than Hillary.
LikeLike
I predict Walker will get the nomination and Bush will go down in flames.
LikeLike
Nietzsche said as much with his ‘master morality’ and ‘slave morality’.
LikeLike
I’m wondering if the peak of shrieking, man-hating feminism has crested.
I’m a middle aged guy who dates a lot of 35-42 year old women. (I’m 54).
I almost always find a way on the first time we meet, or on our first date, to ask if the woman is a feminist.
Invariably they vigorously deny being a feminist, most adding something to the effect that they like a man to be a man.
And they do. They like me to plan the evening, make reservations, make the first move, physically escalate, and in general to be a man and be in charge.
These are women who are pretty chill, like to have fun, enjoy being girls, and who like to have sex with the right guy at the right time and not feel guilty or apologetic about it. Not sluts….but women who enjoy being pretty and feminine and wearing skirts and jewelry, and who want me to be a guy who makes things happen.
I’ve been out with one woman who identified herself as a feminist. Most unhappy, joyless and asexual thing I’ve ever seen. I cut the date short with no apology or explanation. I’m certain she was reassured by her spinster sisters that I couldn’t handle a “strong woman” or some other horseshit.
My thesis is that a lot of smart secure women are completely turned off by the harsh, radical, men-devaluing flamethrower tactics of radical feminism.
By the way, I had a first date with a 37 yr old blonde for Valentine’s day.
She texted in early afternoon “what’s the agenda tonight?”
I replied” I’m picking you up at 700pm. We’re going to XXXXX for dinner, then we are going downtown for a drink or two, then we are going to XXXX to shoot some pool and see my friend’s band, and then you are spending the night with me”.
Her repy was “LOL! I laughing because you’re telling me what to do….and I like it. We’ll see how things go”.
She spent the night.
LikeLiked by 1 person
A creature that gestates inside a living host and has concentrated menstrual fluid for blood.
LikeLike
Feminists say “fuck” a lot.
LikeLike
yep.
so proud of how vulgar and inane they are too.
ever see those facebook pages called Classy Intelligent and Well-Educated Women Who Say F*CK A Lot? one of them is a group with over 3,000 people. another has well over 400,000 likes. there’s even one called Men Who Love Intelligent, Classy, Well Educated Women who say F*ck a lot. 778 members in that group. morons.
but guess how many likes the page called “Intelligent, classy, well educated women who DON’T say F*ck a lot” has…97. yep. people are disgusting.
LikeLike
That is a cue for me, when a woman swears. That is when I know to go for the pink.
LikeLike
I think intelligent, classy, well educated women who DON’T say F*ck a lot aren’t going to join a group that has F*ck in the name, don’t you think?
LikeLike
What’s “facebook”?
LikeLike
MySpace for YT.
LikeLike
@SFG
“I think intelligent, classy, well educated women who DON’T say F*ck a lot aren’t going to join a group that has F*ck in the name, don’t you think?”
good point
LikeLike
“so proud of how vulgar and inane they are too.”
yeah, it’s ridiculous. they all say that sarcasm and swearing are signs of intellect now just so they can justify being vulgar and lacking the ability to hold a decent conversation or be witty or humorous. then they say that people who are offended by their sarcasm and profanity spewing are just too dumb to get it or too sensitive.
i don’t see how this is going to turn around. the next generation of women is being taught that behavior like this is preferable to sweet, feminine charm from the minute they are born.
LikeLike
[…] Source: Heartiste […]
LikeLike
If they truly want to fight the evil patriarchy they should go and join the YPJ and fight ISIS in the middle east.
LikeLike
Man lies about his appearance on dating site. Woman invites said strange man over to her house – with her child home no less – to reanact 50 Shades of Grey scene. She doesn’t open her eyes until mid-coitus. Realizes he’s a different man. Man is arrested and charged. Appears in Australian court and is sentenced.
You couldn’t make this stuff up.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2967945/Sexually-frustrated-Indian-man-lied-dating-site-muscular-blond-named-Jamie-trick-woman-sex-making-close-eyes-avoids-jail.html
LikeLike
Everything clears up when you expand past two genders. The two-party gender system doesn’t fit the entire population cleanly, so the tension/confusion.
1. Male, 2. Female, 3. Feminine Male, 4. Masculine Female.
Finds words for the 3rd and 4th options that stick (something like the Hindi “hijra”), and we can all go back to our regularly scheduled preprogramming.
LikeLike
The Hyena morph?
LikeLike
Some Native American groups actually had this, I think.
I’m actually all for it–I’ve got no problems with weirdos, I’ve got problems with weirdos trying to tell everyone else we have to think they’re normal.
LikeLike
QFT
LikeLike
Most primitive tribes are matriarchal in structure and have women sleeping with whichever brave struck her fancy and raising their children in common. That is why they remain primitive. Engels used the Iroquois Long House example in discussing Communism for instance.
LikeLike
CH, I don’t understand this post. Feminine girls are much easier to fuck than ug feminist girls.
Feminine girls respond to your alpha dominance with feminine submissiveness, and allow nature to take over. Ugly feminist girls on the other hand are awkward and asexual as fuck. It would probably take 5 dates to fuck one if you’re lucky, but why are you even trying?
If anything, feminism does everything it can to reject and discourage the (alpha) short term mating strategy. But feminine girls don’t buy into it and fuck you anyway, albeit on the down low.
LikeLike
You date a feminist when you have no choice. Attractive men go for attractive women, as it has been since the dawn of time (I’m sure the healthiest male chimps get the healthiest female chimps).
But if you’re a less attractive (no game, etc.) guy, particularly a nerd, it’s either feminists or fatties (or, if you are really low in SMV, fat feminists, of whom there are many).
LikeLike
Addendum: you occasionally see feminists, at least online, say they like nerds or like nerdy things, because those are the only guys they’re able to get. Of course, they still secretly hate them, because they’re women, after all.
I learned this a bit too late, but it’s fun to respond to “are you a feminist” with “No, but I’m glad you can cover your own check,” and ask for yours and then walk out.
LikeLike
“Addendum: you occasionally see feminists, at least online, say they like nerds or like nerdy things, because those are the only guys they’re able to get. Of course, they still secretly hate them, because they’re women, after all.”
this is true. there are exceptions of course but most of the girls who claim to be gamers, larpers, and nerd lovers are just attention whoring and they do it because guys fall for it. sad to see when guys buy into it because without fail, as soon as the girl locks the poor schmuck down, she shows her true colors and starts making his life a living hell.
LikeLike
Roosh is mentioned at American Renaissance but not for the “right” reasons…
Here is the last line of the article,
“… Mr. Valizadeh may not like it, but those “eruptions of race in the manosphere” are only the beginning….”
… … …
Does White Identity Mean White Supremacy?
A pickup artist gets it wrong.
http://www.amren.com/news/2015/02/does-white-identity-mean-white-supremacy/
LikeLike
As I’ve said many times before :
‘Feminism was invented for the sole purpose of driving a wedge between (white) Western man and (white) Western woman, in order to undermine and destroy (white) Western civilization.‘
At least thats my take on it
LikeLike
2 points
1) The bio-architecture of genes, nutrition, & environment tasked to creating a face, with all the different parts coming together harmoniously, is actually a pretty difficult process. At least one evolutionary-biologist has called it a genetic fitness indicator.
2) Fat is not inert. The more fat you have, the greater quantity of hormones it kicks out. Our bodies were built for Famine, not Plenty. Excess hormones of all the different types fat-cells kick out will fuck you up.
So, it is entirely-possible that ugly feminists have something genetically-awry, which they then let get hormonally-awry.
And most people who get fat stay fat.
Even ancient statues of women, Venus of Willendorf excepted, were classically-beautiful in the face.
Hilarious that the libs think just because modern media gives some genetic system-error a megaphone we should actually listen to them.
Why would anyone take a fuckin’ Platypus seriously?
LikeLike
Equalism died for me at college. I got heat because I was more equalist than the fem-agitators. Which meant calling them out on bulshit, questioning why they held certain views, criticising weak behaviour, being blunt in my appraisals, being honest. Treated and dismissed them like men I would weigh up. Was accused of misogyny and it was confided in me that I just terrified them and made them feel stupid and hopeless.
Then I changed tack. Stopped listening to what they were saying, smiled for no reason, kept bullshit convo going which required no intellectual investment, took false positions, was never honest, never outwardly questioned motives despite seeing them, lied my way into beds, didn’t take any points seriously. Reaponse? “OMG WHAT A CATCH HEY DOES HE LIKE ME”.
Meh.
LikeLike
This is COTW material, because the irony is, when you DO treat women like equals (e.g., like they have the reasoning power and responsibility/accountability of men), they’ll hate you for it…
… and never even realize the irony themselves.
LikeLike
My view is different. From the moment a little girl is told that boys are physically stronger she wants to have power over boys. Thereafter little girls learn to manipulate boys in ways not involving muscle power. They want power over men. Feminism is just a logical continuation of that.
You see it all the time in the annoying bloody games that women play with men. Any man that is blind to it or weak and gives in is soon discarded. The Bad Boy is attractive because he is stronger than other men to a power-hungry woman’s eye; he’s a challenge that they can fine-tune their feminine whiles on.
As soon as a man gives a woman the power in a relationship, he’s screwed.
LikeLike
Looking back at the many relationships I’ve had with women, the one common-denominator that stands out above any other is…. They were all (to one degree or another) attention whores!
In my experience, all women have a deep and uncontrolable craving for male attention.
Of course, for pretty women this craving is easy to satisfy. Unattractive women, on the otherhand, are forced to use more inventive methods in order to satiate their need for Male Attention,
Often, the only way an unattractive woman can get male attention, is by causing pain. (A bit like the boy pulling the pigtails of the hot girl who sits in frount of him in class).
Unattractive women have learned that attacking men with hate filled retoric, is one sure way of getting their attention. It’s really just their way of saying…. “you will notice me, one way or another. Even if I have to stick pins in your eyes”.
Feminism, is just attention whoring for ugly fat chicks on a grand scale.
Women must sometimes be secretly suprised that societiy has gone along with so much of their idiotic nonesense.
And when feminism evenually and inevetably blows up in their faces, the first thing they will do is turn around and say to men they’ve been attacking…. “wtf! We were only joking. Come and save us”.
LikeLike
The resentment/envy angle can’t be overlooked.
As far back as the seventies, Wilmot Robertson in his prescient The Dispossessed Majority theorized that the reason so many yentas lead the feminist big name rogue’s gallery is because of the whole Orthodox “separate section of the temple, away from the men”, “unclean for X days each month”, sex through a sheet types of rules that are hammered into them from the cradle has to leave some psychological scars…
… above and beyond the usual suspect proclivity for the proverbial outsider’s envy of and noodgery against his/her hosts.
Makes sense, along the lines of what was mentioned by a poster earlier in this thread, about women being, if nothing else, programmed for attention whoring… even if it means inflicting pain.
Imagine how that phenomenon can be inflamed to white-hot intensity when their own men, in their reverence of ‘Tradition!’, codify them into such second-class and distant corners.
LikeLike
Greg,
Menstrual segregation was common among ancient tribes from the Amazon, to the Levant, to Papua. A more cogent explanation I read somewhere: a bunch of menstruating women – can’t forget how they tend to synchronize – in the village is just gross. No supernatural reason needed.
The Aztecs, to name just one, had religious segregation. This too makes practical sense: Could you keep up the pretense of godliness around women? for how long? would it be the same activity at all?
My point is, to suggest that such rules created a type of female who just had to visit her rage upon others, is not only absurd, but a social constructionist position.
Not to discount resentment as such – which of course goes back to Nietzsche, even with specific reference to the Tribe.
LikeLike
Nobody said it created the mentality… just that it added fuel to the fire, more or less already burning from the start.
I’m sure it would be just as unpleasant living amongst Aztecs. :duckface:
Add in that “the next boy could be the Messiah” stuff, and the pampering that goes therewith, and you’ve got (as we see through the past century especially) is a recipe for heinous harpyism.
LikeLike
And it’s telling that you mention nothing about the other points mentioned, e.g., the segregation at the temple at ALL times, not just during menses.
LikeLike
[…] Five-star commenter chris marshals ¡SCIENCE! […]
LikeLike
This entire blog is written by a sexual loser, crying about the fact that he’s such a sexual loser (Waaahh, mean women don’t want him! Those picky women are bad cuz they won’t date “nice guys”). The primary audience for this blog are sexual losers who’ve utterly failed to compete in the sexual marketplace, pantytwisted with bitter outrage because women find them unappealing. The irony kills me.
LikeLike
What are you wearing, toots?
LikeLike
Has there been any discussion of feeders / stuffing yet?
If not, search for those terms + tumblr or on YouTube, and feast your eyes, mates …
LikeLike