Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Culture’ Category

A while back in the blogosphere there was discussion about the ethics of cloning oneself. I’d imagine raising a clone of yourself would be like Groundhog Day, where you can predict your clone-child’s flaws and tailor a parenting style that would minimize their defects. Let’s say a clone-son would be shy. The father could then set about getting the clone-son accustomed to socially mingling with large groups of people at an early age. Or he could introduce the kid to liquor in grammar school. If you are a woman with a clone-daughter and you know she’s going to take after your big nose, you can start saving up money now for the rhinoplasty she’ll have just before the cruel junior high school years.

Maybe a more intriguing question is what other people we would want cloned. Thought experiment: if you had the power to clone an infinite number of times one person from the following list of people, who would you choose?

  1. Isaac Newton
  2. Gandhi
  3. Muhammad Ali
  4. Genghis Khan
  5. Bach
  6. Michelangelo
  7. Sergey Brin
  8. Kurt Cobain
  9. Margaret Thatcher
  10. Melissa Theuriau

An army of Newtons would probably be best for the world in a materialist sense, but there’s no doubt who I would have cloned into a vast standing army of pleasurebots. Is there a better reflection of our values than who we would choose to clone besides ourselves?

Read Full Post »

Commenter Jcut wrote:

I almost vomited watching this video today:

http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/eve_ensler_embrace_your_inner_girl.html

Let us all be aware our sinister enemies who lurk about, skulking in the distance.

Are feminist calls to embrace our inner girl just a giant, society-wide shit test to brand the betas with a big red B so they can be more easily identified, and thus sexually ostracized? Because any man who takes up the call to “embrace his inner girl” will disqualify himself as a sexual interest to not only normal, healthy women, but to feminists as well.

Speaking of ultimate shit tests, here’s one I had the pleasure of receiving recently:

“Could you do me a favor and hold my drink for me while I call my friend?”

The worst shit tests are never the obvious ones; they are sneaky like thieves in the night, pickpocketing your balls without you even realizing it. Beware the “could you do me a favor” expression. It is designed to entrap even the most vigilant men. It will require an absolutely rock solid belief in your value as a high quality man to resist the temptation to answer the siren call of “do me a favor”. After all, a man would have to be a low down dirty scoundrel to not do a favor for a girl, right?

Now that she’s breached your defenses by asking for a favor, she can land the killing blow to your balls with the beta bait request. I don’t care how sweetly she asks or how harmless you think your accommodation, DO NOT EVER hold a girl’s drink for her on the first night you meet her. The act of holding her drink so she can make a call/go to the bathroom/rifle through her purse for lipstick, no matter the innocent intentions behind the asking of it, will register in her hindbrain as the humiliating posture of a beta chump. She may consciously respect your chivalry, but underneath, her id is playing word association by scratching your name next to a picture of a tiny, limp dick on the walls of her nerve center.

Remember, the worst/best shit tests are those that FOOL THE GIRL herself. If she doesn’t even know what she’s doing, how will *you* know when she’s weighing your stones? The “hold my drink” shit test frequently falls into this category of “subliminal but deadly”. She may honestly need you to hold her drink. But you still shouldn’t do it.

So how to respond to the SBD shit test? I’ve found that edgy humor works well.

“Whoa, it’s usually a good idea to wait until the second date before asking a guy to be your personal assistant.”

A cool girl will laugh at this and find a place to put down her drink, or forget about calling her friend to focus on talking with you. An uncool girl will make a face, or double down on asking you to hold her drink. Don’t break. Hold your ground. Capitulating to a shit test is bad enough; capitulating to a shit test you had called out is worse.

Luckily, most girls know better than to ask a man who isn’t a boyfriend to hold a drink. And of those girls who don’t know better, and who give you grief for not cooperating, well… why would you want to be with a conceited bitch like that?

Read Full Post »

Welmer over at The Spearhead put up a short post with accompanying video illustrating in very graphic terms (the best kind of terms) what happens when you couple the feminism-abetted cultural perception of women as vulnerable creatures with women’s opportunistic leveraging of that favorable perception, and reinforce the resulting bitches’ brew with the sledgehammer of the state. The video Welmer helpfully embedded is one of the better metaphors of the informal alliance between runaway state power and the victimization industrial complex that gives the benefit of the doubt in nearly all cases to designated aggrieved groups. What could more aptly clarify this female-PC apparatchik-state alliance than a video of cops planting evidence on a bungling loser as they hogtie him while the appreciative ex-wife oversees the proceedings nearby?

Now no doubt whenever you hear of domestic-related arrests of shady characters like Carlos Ferrel (wanted on a domestic assault warrant unrelated to the action in the video), nine times out of ten the dude is a hellraiser guilty of something. But that doesn’t give the cops the right to abuse the public’s partiality toward them by planting evidence on an unsavory suspect. It starts with a wink and a nod, (almost literally in this video, as the cop doing the planting looks like he smiles at the camera before stuffing Ferrel’s pocket with pot), and ends with a boot and a smashed face. Possibly one day yours.

Nor should our partiality toward the law influence our sympathies so that we always kneejerk align with the supposedly victimized woman. Remember, ten times out of ten in a domestic fracas, the ex-wife or ex-girlfriend chose the asshole perp to be her lover. These women know what they’re getting into. And when they no longer find their badboys useful, they’ll scream victimization, true or not. And the fuzzy-brained white knighters will stampede on cue, their sad, floppy dicks held betwixt index finger and thumb, smooshed into mini-mouthed frowns, pleading for crumbs of pussy gratitude.

You think the ex-wife, when she discovers after watching this video that her ex-husband was railroaded by the cops, will rise up of her own will in his defense? Maybe if he slapped her around a little

When the state teams up with women, it is game over for the common man. There’s only one way to win at this rigged game…

Don’t play it.

Earthdate: 04.18.2010
Sex life: euphoric
Love life: transcendent
Mood: self-satisfied
Status: still unmarried

PS Isn’t it long overdue that pot should be legal? Just make it illegal for under 21s to buy it like we do with alcohol, throw in a few government sponsored ad campaigns warning against the dangers of toking and driving, and let the adults have some fucking kick back time with a relatively harmless drug. I’ll bet any present or future drug czar good money that ten years after pot is legalized there will continue to be the same proportion of alcohol and cigarette related deaths to pot related deaths as there are today. Personally, I’d legalize crack and meth, too, then eradicate the welfare safety net and let the hardcore addicts and their drug addled spawn die mutated in the streets. In a couple of generations you’d have a healthier, stronger society. Sure, the interim would be a ghastly horror, but it’s not like you really give a shit now. Why aren’t you giving a shit now?

Rhetorical.

PPS Television and its visual communications offshoots have been the greatest anti-eugenic force in human history. Discuss.

Read Full Post »

South Park explains why.

So I understand Wankroulette is the latest insipid fad. Yes, I truly am missing out on the best of our culture, and then some.

Read Full Post »

What are the implications of imbalanced sex ratios? What happens when there are more men than women, or vice versa? In the matter of a surplus of men (i.e. a sexual market favoring women), we in the US may already be experiencing that on an enormous (heh) scale. I wrote about this misunderstood catastrophe in my groundbreaking post “Obesity to blame for game” (with illustrations!):

Game has been refined, taught and embraced by men in direct proportion to the shrinking pool of attractive thin girls. As the reduced supply of skinny chicks have seen their sexual market value skyrocket, they have adjusted by pricing their pussies out of reach for the average guy. In return, men have sought solutions to this new challenge in the rapidly advancing science of seduction. Where simple courtship worked in the past, it is no longer effective against the deep bunker defenses of the in-demand slender woman.

There are other reasons for the rise of game, but obesity plays a whale (heh) of a role. A fattening female population means we have a de facto male surplus. Some men will settle for fatties, (some men screw sheep), but most will prefer to stick it out competing for years in the dating market and avoiding marriage until they either drop out or get what they want — a thinner chick.

I also speculated what a female surplus would do to courtship dynamics. On many major college campuses, women outnumber men 3 to 2. I called this a poon nirvana for the typical college male and predicted how the excess chicks would alter the hothouse campus atmosphere:

  • Women acting sluttier.
  • Fat women ostracized more than ever.
  • Betas taunted by a flesh machine churning out display product they cannot buy.
  • Alphas living like harem kings.
  • Alphas in general acting more caddish. More drinking, fighting, fornicating, and video gaming.
  • Betas in general withdrawing more from social life to seek the sympathetic embrace of their computers or like-minded losers in love.
  • Dating replaced by fucking (“hooking up” in the current nomenclature).
  • Blowjobs and anal sex increasingly accepted as virginity-sparing sex substitutes.
  • Later marriages.
  • And finally, a tired rationalization hamster punching in overtime. The female mind has never been so besotted with challenges to her anti-slut barricade!
  • Since there are, generally, fewer fat chicks at college age than later ages, the national obesity calamity would not significantly counterbalance the absolute skewed sex ratio favoring college attending men.

    There was an excellent discussion of sex ratio over at the “Evo and Proud” blog. Especially read the comments, where Peter Frost and Jason Malloy argued opposite sides, Malloy taking the position that, somewhat counterintuitively, a population of excess males means more well-behaved males, since women in control of the dating market are better able to fulfill their goal of finding a productive and reliable Dad to help raise children. Men under such constraints are therefore likely to rein in their latent caddishness and emphasize their daddishness to appeal to the limited number of available, choosy women. Malloy presents some evidence for his case.

    I wasn’t convinced, though, because I thought Malloy’s premise was faulty. Do women instinctively prefer the Dad to the Cad, and if so, do alpha males and beta males pursue the same sexual strategy in a dating market with a dearth of women? What happens in societies that are structured to the benefit of women? That is, what do women actually choose when they can have their cake and eat it too? Peter Frost articulated my doubts in a comment at Dennis Mangan’s blog:

    Jason [Malloy] ignored, however, the authors’ warning that female scarcity is socially beneficial only if there are limits on women’s sexual freedom:

    “Remember that the background conditions under which imbalanced sex ratios have had their effect have been relatively constant from the time of classical Greece until the advent of the twentieth century. Earlier we called attention to the importance of the fact that structural power—economic, political, and legal—has invariably been in male hands. This condition has prevailed in every high and low sex ratio society that we have examined in detail. What this means is that sex ratio imbalances might well have radically different effects in a society where women had appreciable structural power.” (Guttentag & Secord, 1983, p. 233)

    “… Young single women are not confined to the home and have much experience with the opposite sex. They make their own decisions about male friends or the choice of a husband. Either party to a marriage can now get a divorce if they want one. These changes that free young single people to choose their own mates and loosen the marriage bond favor the gender that is in short supply. In a word, structural constraints that have in the past neutralized dyadic power, particularly that of women, have disappeared.” (Guttentag & Secord, 1983, p. 239)

    Does the current USA strike you as a society imposing limits on women’s sexual freedom? It is to laugh. Just the opposite is happening in Western cultures. If any gender’s sexual and marital prerogative is being straitjacketed, it is American men’s, specifically American betas.

    What about China, where the male surplus has ballooned, prompting a slew of opinion articles warning of Chinese territorial ambitions and saber rattling to release the building pressure of millions of unsexed and unloved men? China is more patriarchal than the US, but in the big cities it looks to be changing, the urban culture quickly beginning to reflect the worst (best?) of the West.

    A sex ratio favoring women might have very different effects in Afghanistan than in the US. In cultures where women have little incentive to slut it up, delay marriage, or pop out bastard spawn confident that the government will act as uber beta provider, they may well become more chaste, and pickier about choosing reliable Dad types. But in cultures of free-wheeling sexuality, easy availability of contraceptives and abortion, female economic empowerment, anti-male divorce laws, and disappearance of anti-slut social shaming mechanisms, women may very well respond to a favorable sex ratio by opening their legs for every alpha male to shower five minutes of attention on them, prefering to share the choicest cock with other women rather than monopolizing the ground beef cock of the squabbling male masses.

    I’d like to get away from the macrocosm abstractions for a minute and ground the argument over sex ratio in something we have all experienced in real life. I have been in bars where there were way more men than women. There’s nothing more dispiriting to the inveterate player than walking into a roomful of Bob Evans. I can tell you exactly what happens in those situations.

    • Women’s egos explode. 5s think they’re 7s, 2s think they’re 5s, fat chicks think you desire them. You want to see an American girl’s entitlement complex break the sound barrier? Put her in a bar in a typical big city with other overeducated, chubby girls and surround with twice as many horny men. Add liquor and mix vigorously. Mystery likely had the inspiration for the neg when he was navigating a similar sad scene.
    • Men become irritable. Is a sausage fest a breeding ground for well-behaved Dads? Good lord, no. What usually happens is this: A small number of very smart men quickly assess the futility of the situation and bail for greener pastures. The rest drink to excess, gathering the courage to approach the one or two hot chicks in the room, only to discover that bitch shields are set at maximum deflection. Then the men become agitated, and oftentimes there is pushing and shoving, leading to fights. That’s when the women bail, because the atmosphere has gotten toxic. A few men remain behind for garbage hour, hoping to scrounge a scrap of snatch.

    I’m agnostic on the issue of sex ratio and its impact on the overall mating market. I think there are other variables that are more important in determining how men and women behave in the most crucial market of all. Nonetheless, with a rising male-skewed China and a declining feminist USA, sex ratio may have profound effects on who next will grab the mantle of hyperpower.

    Read Full Post »

    Was Leo DiCaprio’s best role Arnie in the movie ‘What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?’, where he played an annoying teenage tard who liked to climb tall objects? I believe that was his high water mark. Which I find kind of funny.

    Read Full Post »

    Zeets sounded like a teenager who just discovered his parents’ 1980s era VHS porn stash.

    “Dude, the women are coming out of the woodwork. I’m getting more than nibbles now. The fish are hooking themselves as soon as I drop the line in the water!”

    Zeets has been blowing up the internet dating niche for the past couple of months. Multiple dates per week, and women were reaching out to him, texting him constantly about times to meet and what he’s doing for the weekend. And all this in DC. It’s as if the heavens parted and pussy shone down on his head like a beam of light.

    “Why do you think that is? What’s changed this winter?”

    Zeets stroked his goatee like a young Zeus. “Well, I can tell you what I think is going on. Most of these women I’m seeing are unemployed. That’s a big change from just a year ago when they all had exciting and wonderful nonprofit jobs. Now all those precious nonprofits have dried up. Suddenly these women are out of work living in an expensive city. A lot of them don’t have two pennies to rub together because of grad school loans.”

    “And that’s where a guy with a steady paycheck can step in and clean up.”

    Zeets jabbed a finger of exclamation. “Exactly. You take a guy like me, who knows his way around women, and who has a job and steady income, and it’s like putting a bulls-eye on my cock. Women are gunning for it. They’re not so ridiculously picky anymore.”

    This conversation got me thinking about economic trends and how they impact the dating market. In most of the country, men are filling the unemployed ranks, not women. But DC seems to be an outlier. Women here are feeling the sting of the recession just as much, if not more so, than men. Accordingly, out of work DC women are adjusting their self-worth downward, and in the process becoming less spastically picky about what they require in a man.

    It’s no secret that DC women are full of themselves. 4s think they’re 7s, 7s think they’re 9s, and cunty lawyers waving their big vocabularies and multiple degrees think they’re supermodels. I’ve discussed many reasons why women would be prone to overestimating their looks. Now you can add unemployment to the list of factors that influence how a woman perceives her mating value.

    Women, and a lot of men, are stricken by a psychological disease known as projection. What women find attractive in a man is what they think men find attractive in them. All else equal, women generally prefer men with a steady income to unemployed men. And so they mistakenly assume men prefer to date women with a job and income. But men and women don’t neatly mirror each other that way. If the woman is good-looking enough, most men won’t give a shit if she’s out of work. They’ll be thinking of the lay, only the lay, and nothing but the lay. In fact, many men will go out of their way to date unemployed women, because they justifiably think they can date up a point or two when their designation as a job holder grants them a relative boost in status.

    Maxim #31: Any change in the relative status between men and women introduces new instabilities into the mating market.

    Women, however, almost always assign too much importance to their own employment status and too little importance to their looks or weight when subconsciously calculating how desirable they are to men. This phenomenon explains why DC, filled as it is with hard-charging alpha globocorporate cunts, is plagued by haughty 4s who think they can play a 7’s game. It also explains why women, now that the jobs are disappearing, are beginning to lower their expectations in the mating market based on a distorted self-evaluation of their sexual worth. Soon DC will resemble the less economically illustrious parts of the country, where a 4 is properly reminded she is a 4 every morning she wakes up and looks sadly in the mirror.

    As long as women continue to believe their job status matters to men, regions where the recession has impacted heavily female occupations are going to be boomtowns for men looking for a chance to play out of their league. That 8 you thought was too hot for you? Well, now that she’s out of work, she just might give your beta provider ass the time of day.

    Read Full Post »

    « Newer Posts - Older Posts »

    %d bloggers like this: