The Science Of Mean Girls

Another telling indication of the cramped mental universe of white knights and dyke-wave feminists is their studied ignorance of the existence of intrasexual female competition. Women, in their way, can be harsh toward what they perceive to be their sexual market competition. It’s not always female conformism and gogrrl #MeToo mutual ego stroking. We go to SCIENCE on the scene for evidence of lengua a lengua calumny among the fairer sex:

Why fertile women hate a pretty face

Everyone loves a pretty face – except those women who might see it as a threat. With eyes on the competition, women of childbearing age rate other attractive women consistently lower than women who have entered menopause, according to a new study.

“It’s almost as if they’re putting down other attractive women,” says Benedict Jones, a psychologist at Aberdeen University, UK, who led the study of 97 middle-aged women.

[…]

No matter their menopausal status, women favoured masculine-looking men. Yet when rating other women, women still able to have children rated feminine faces as slightly less attractive than menopausal women.

Competition between fertile women seems like the best explanation, Jones says. “It’s quite well established that as women go through menopause they shift from a mating-oriented mindset to more family-oriented mindset,” he says.

me-OW! Women don’t fight with fists (unless they’re ghetto queens); they fight with gossip, innuendo, and slander. And they’re very good at it, coming as naturally to them as it does to the soystaff at Vox.com.

The question I ask myself is what evolutionary benefit, exactly, do these catty fertile women receive from under-rating pretty women? It’s not as if a woman’s spitefully harsh rating of her feminine competition will change men’s minds about what they find attractive. Men judge women through their own male eyes, not through other women’s eyes.

My guess is that women undermine pretty women to avoid slipping into a long-term depressive state themselves that will hurt their chances to attract quality men. Looks are 99% of a woman’s skill set, but after controlling for looks men will prefer the company of a happy woman over a despondent woman. Happy women think they HAVE A CHANCE. Sad women don’t bother trying to flirt with men, and so men figure they aren’t interested in being solicited. Maybe these nasty woman games give women just enough of an edge to out-shine other women of similar SMV. (There’s no way in this reality a LSMV woman outshines a HSMV woman. As in any war, the worst fighting is between close cousins.)

Another theory I have is that cattiness demoralizes the female competition if they are informed of the gossip campaign against them. Demoralized women might cede the mating field to other women of equivalent SMV, and men won’t meet women who don’t make themselves available for meeting.

Read Full Post »

Sweet Sixteen

Taylor Swift, Lady and the Trump aryan ür-goddess and connoisseur of bad boys, at sixteen:

As reader chris wrote, Prime Marriage Material.

As Nature intended.

Read Full Post »

Leftism: It’s A Woman Thing

Supporting Lott’s research that found female suffrage immediately shifted American politics to the Left and enlarged the State, a recent study likewise concluded that female enfranchisement accelerated the same Leftward lurch well into the late 20th-early 21st Century, and it continues moving the country to the Left today (tradcon white knights hit hardest). Furthermore, the female compulsion to vote into existence larger and more intrusive government crosses party identification lines.

Regardless of their party identification, women are more supportive of an activist government. https://t.co/57c3C09mPW pic.twitter.com/grGN2w0D8u

— Rolf Degen (@DegenRolf) December 12, 2017

If America collapses from debt overhang and mass nonWhite colonization, sad to say you can lay the blame primarily on women. The feminization of institutions and decision-making bodies in Western nations will be their undoing.

Thot Patrol isn’t just an edgy meme, it’s a survival tactic.

Read Full Post »

The Permanently Married Woman

The unmarried woman is a temporary and fleeting state of adult womanhood, as noted pithily by Gabber @brutuslaurentius:

There is no such thing as an unmarried woman. She marries a husband, her Johns, or the state. For the well being of civilization it is best she marry a husband.

The Fundamental Premise ensures that a woman will be cared for as long as she has a stash of viable eggs (or the youthful promise of eggs on the way), and the largesse she receives will be out of proportion to her non-reproductive contribution to society. This is because the sexual market is the one market to rule them all. Most societies throughout history have organized themselves around the pampering and coddling of their prime fertility womenfolk, and this natural impulse extends to providing lush safety nets even for old women who have no further reproductive use.

In short, men are expendable, women are perishable. On a societal scale, that means men must strike out on their own without much help from the State, women, or other men, and women must secure the blessings of maximal beta provisioning before they have hit the Wall.

Practically, no woman remains unmarried for long. She’ll get her resources from a husband or husband-substitute, i.e. the State, and this explains why women broadly (heh) vote for bigger government and more welfare…..they’re covering all their bases. But as it is the wont of the solipsistic sex to ignore feedback loops, what women fail to comprehend is that their continual striving to enlarge the scope of the State necessarily restricts the scope of individual beta provider men who must compete with government largesse and wage-gutting foreign colonizers for the hearts of women. As beta males lose their competitive edge, they drop out of the marriage market, forcing more women to hitch their fates to the State. A negative reinforcement cycle is established that ends with the Africanization of Euro-White nations.

Women, a word of advice: you can have Big Daddy State or you can have dependable, devoted provider husbands, but you can’t have both. In time, antagonistic provisioners of female safety and security will come to blows, given that they mutually undermine the ability of each to satisfy women. A big lavish government cheapens the contributions of beta males, lowering their SMV, while a society organized for the benefit of a large, high-earning, beta male middle class reduces the necessity of government intervention to protect women from lifelong penury.

Read Full Post »

Single White Women And Open Borders

Go to this link and watch the video (I can’t hotlink it here on WordPress as there is not yet an option to link up PewTube videos).

It recaps much of what I’ve previously written at this blog about the sexual nature of women, but otherwise does a good job tying those Crimson Pill truths to the currently operative hyper-virtue signaling political culture that exists among single White women and how White men have to figure out a way to stop their reckless, callow women from driving Western Civ over a cliff.

From the vid:

“The only way we are going to make White Nationalism appeal to women, is if… White Nationalism is identified with the type of masculinity that women are interested in.”

A reader says this deserves concise guidelines. That’s a tall order for what I intended to be a short blog post, but I’ll offer a few suggestions anyhow:

• First, I wouldn’t announce yourself as a White Nationalist. It’s like calling yourself a womanizer when trying to pick up a girl. Emotional baggage, justified or not, is associated with the term. Some things are best left implied. (I’m saying this in the context of winning over single White women in the era of Jewish Interest Media…there is such a thing as too much try-hard self-seriousness in the realm of dissident revolution.)
• Never grovel or apologize for your beliefs. A refusal to cuck gets you an audition with women. The second you backpedal on your bold statements when you catch flak for them, her vaj turtles.
• Humor and mockery are a deadly combination on the female hindbrain. If violence is the physical manifestation of assertive masculinity, then ZFG mockery is its psychological equivalent. Mocking feeble shitlib manginas and bitterbitch shitlib cunts with flair and cavalier abandon — to the point that one may accuse you of skirting the line between the thrill of the hunt and sadism — is fertilizer for flowering furrows.
• State control. Amused mastery. In practice, what this means is that no matter how much women object, you stay firm in mind, message, and member. And when attacking enemies of your race and nation, you don’t get flustered or dangerously unstable; you lob your rhetorical artillery mit precision.
• Openly defy shitlibs in your midst. When a single White woman who may be on the fence between Woke and Turncoat bears witness to you saying “that’s so gay” while laughing in some punchable manlet’s face when he utters a vapid lib platitude, she won’t be able to contain the splooge cresting in her womb fjord.

There’s more, but for now this should get aspiring pro-White men in the right FRAME of mind to find, meet, attract, and close wayward single White women.

Read Full Post »

What Happens When An Ethnocentric Leech Attaches To A Humanitarian Host?

Answer: The host is liquefied and consumed at leisure.

The Evolutionary Dominance of Ethnocentric Cooperation

Recent agent-based computer simulations suggest that ethnocentrism, often thought to rely on complex social cognition and learning, may have arisen through biological evolution. From a random start, ethnocentric strategies dominate other possible strategies (selfish, traitorous, and humanitarian) based on cooperation or non-cooperation with in-group and out-group agents. Here we show that ethnocentrism eventually overcomes its closest competitor, humanitarianism, by exploiting humanitarian cooperation across group boundaries as world population saturates. Selfish and traitorous strategies are self-limiting because such agents do not cooperate with agents sharing the same genes. Traitorous strategies fare even worse than selfish ones because traitors are exploited by ethnocentrics across group boundaries in the same manner as humanitarians are, via unreciprocated cooperation. By tracking evolution across time, we find individual differences between evolving worlds in terms of early humanitarian competition with ethnocentrism, including early stages of humanitarian dominance. Our evidence indicates that such variation, in terms of differences between humanitarian and ethnocentric agents, is normally distributed and due to early, rather than later, stochastic differences in immigrant strategies.

Every virtue signaling White shitlib should read this research paper and absorb the lessons therein. You can have your harmless virtue signals, or you can have open borders, but you can’t have both, because the rest of the ethnocentric world doesn’t share your moral universalism and will, if permitted to live in close proximity to universalists, ruthlessly capitalize on the latter’s gullibility, trust, and knee-jerk cooperativeness, reconfiguring their virtue signaling into virtual suicide.

If, while perusing the abstract above, you were reminded of a certain ethnocentric tribe exploiting a universalist majority, you aren’t meshugana.

Read Full Post »

The Pathologization Of Male Sexuality

I’m having as big a laugh as any crimson-blooded American man over the latest sexual assault accusation against ür-shitlib feminist tribal hypocrite Al Franken, but it’s a good time to step back from the charade and examine this strange new moral panic overtaking the land as part of a larger marxist and feminist agenda to stigmatize normal male sexuality.

Pat Boyle worries about the same trend, in a comment over at Sailer’s,

I see this morning that Al Franken is the latest celebrity male to be accused of harassing some woman sometime. I hate all this because my views put me so outside the mainstream of contemporary politics but more importantly the mainstream of the community of iSteve readers.

I suspect that all this moralizing and tut-tuting about men harassing women will read like Victorian posturing’s in just a few years. Women want to be harassed. Indeed they are designed by nature to be harassed. My experience is that women demand to be harassed. Feminism will surely turn on its heel and come to be outraged that men are no longer harassing them as is their right.

Why are women happy and when are women most happy. Probably on their honeymoon and the first few months of marriage. This is when women get the most sex. Normal heterosexual women want to have sexual relations with a man every couple days. Most women for most of their adult lives probably are partially starved for sex.

How do women get what little sex they can manage? Unfortunately for them they are largely at the mercy of the energies of the men around them. They are also tightly bound by a network of prohibitions and customs that keep them from exercising the initiative. They must wait often for some man to make an approach. Not all men find it comfortable to do this. There is some risk of rejection and humiliation. Others are clumsy.

I never cheated on either of my wives but in those periods when I was single I worked diligently at accosting females. There was a time when I dated over a hundred different women strangers in a single year. This has become easy with the rise of the Internet. I was never accused of harassing any of them but I was often rejected – sometimes loudly and in public. So what? Girls dress up so as to become the object of men’s lust. Then they feign indifference. That’s just how the game is set up. Since women are generally small, weak and unarmed, all a man risks by being sexually aggressive is a few unkind words.

In those periods when I was most active I thought of myself as providing a public service. Women like to be vigorously pursued. If they are ignored they pout.

Some women are now thinking of the current jihad against grab-ass as some kind of moral crusade. They haven’t counted the costs. If as seems likely, men become more reluctant to flirt or even just make naughty comments to women, the sum total of human happiness will be diminished. Men will hesitate and women will go home and cry in their empty bed.

Women by nature are loathe to hit on men, so they must rely on men aggressively pursuing them to have any shot at love and marriage. If men stop busting a move, both men and women lose out.

Daniel Chieh follows up,

As Slavoj Žižek kinda trolled, the “new rules” are like an ashtray with a “No Smoking” sign above it. Its all madness, the glorious result of a combination of pursuing fantastical ideas of equality to their natural limit plus absolute atomization of the individual.

Enjoy the Current Year spectacle of leftoids getting id-raped by the very man-hating beast they released from the abyss, but don’t forget that the end game is not good for anyone: this beast won’t stop devouring until Equalism is dead as an ideology and virtue signaling passes from the stage as the flare of madness it has always been.

Read Full Post »