Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Feminist Idiocy’ Category

Feminists bitch and moan and lie about a mythical “rape culture” that permeates America, but if you look at the numbers instead of wallowing in poopytalk it becomes clear that, in parts of the West at any rate, a far better case can be made that we live in a Cuckoldry Culture rather than a rape culture.

Britain has a fairly accessible data set on national rape and cuckoldry statistics, so we’ll examine the UK as a proxy for the larger Anglosphere.

(For those new to the Chateau and unfamiliar with some of our terms of enshivment, “cuck” is the colloquial term for men, usually married beta males, who unwittingly raise the bastard spawn of women who have cheated on them and gotten pregnant by another man, usually a jerkboy alpha male. The term is so descriptively brutalist that it was ported to the political arena as a hard-hitting insult — cuckservative — aimed at Republican pundits, pols, and voters who surrender to leftoid race equalism premises in order to curry favor with the gatekeepers of polite discourse. Rhetorically, cuckservatives sell out their children’s and their nation’s future, and their ancestors’ pasts, on the altar of liberal dogma, in practice “raising another man’s ideology”. And they do so oblivious to the humiliations they visit upon themselves.)

New research has shown that the cuckoldry rate in Britain is 2% — 1 in 50 British fathers are unknowingly (or without prior consent) raising the offspring of another man.

Researchers at Leuven University in Belgium said that they decided to conduct the first ever in-depth study after being surprised and intrigued to learn that the issue has received little serious scientific consideration, despite being a concern felt by many men.

That’s because, contrary to dumb feminist assertions about “the patriarchaaaaaahh”, women are treated as the more valuable sex in most societies, particularly in Western societies. This instinctual social, economic, cultural, and legal favoritism toward women is a psychological phenomenon which stems from the fact that, biologically, eggs are more expensive than sperm.

2% sounds like a blessedly low number, but if you take into account the absolute meta-extinction level event that cuckoldry represents to a man’s genetic and personal interests, 1 out of 50 is a rate that should give most men a little pause, and some men a lot of pause.

It’s an especially damning statistic when we compare that 2% cuckoldry rate to the UK rape rate for women.

The 2006–07 British Crime Survey reports that 1 in every 200 women suffered from rape in that period.

A 1-in-200 rape rate for UK women is 0.5%, or four times smaller than the cuckoldry rate for UK men.

Cuckoldry Culture is four times more likely than rape culture to be the operative paradigm.

But you won’t ever hear TheCunt or feminists or their Hivemind manlet lickspittles honestly broaching this ugly truth.

And note as well that the physical violation of rape last minutes, with recurrent bouts of psychological distress, but the physical and emotional violations of cuckoldry can last eighteen years, uninterrupted.

So maybe it’s time to discuss “the matriarchy” and “the cuckistocracy”, and how these social constructions amount to a “War on Men”.

PS Sparing a moment to pontificate abstractly, it might be somewhat eugenic in the long long term to permit, or at least to ignore, a low level of cuckoldry in an advanced White society. Unfortunately, while this may have been the case in the distant past, today it seems women will “cheat down” just as often with layabout badboys as they will “cheat up” with corner office kahunas, obviating any overall eugenic effect from cuckolding their wimpy beta hubbies.

PPS And let’s not forget that however eugenic a sexual market transaction (and any attendant social stigmas or sanctions), there are individual men who get caught on the wrong side of the sexual market equation and suffer immensely.

PPPS A real rape culture is emerging in Sweden, but the blame for that rests squarely on all the swarthy migrants GoodWhite Swedes have allowed into their country. Lying, cuntfaced feminists don’t have much to say about that, unless they have an opening provided by the leftoid media to (erroneously) blame White men.

Read Full Post »

Stamping the imprimatur of SCIENCE! on what we already knew, this study found that cats and childlessness go together like a horse and carriage.

Quantifying the Search Behaviour of Different Demographics Using Google Correlate.

Vast records of our everyday interests and concerns are being generated by our frequent interactions with the Internet. Here, we investigate how the searches of Google users vary across U.S. states with different birth rates and infant mortality rates. We find that users in states with higher birth rates search for more information about pregnancy, while those in states with lower birth rates search for more information about cats. Similarly, we find that users in states with higher infant mortality rates search for more information about credit, loans and diseases. Our results provide evidence that Internet search data could offer new insight into the concerns of different demographics.

Wait for it……..

😂😂😂

Small useless pets like indoor cats are child substitutes. There’s no flim-flamming away that obvious conclusion under a fog of try-hard White Knight rhetoric. The cat provides the single in the city cock carouseler the outlet for her maternal nurturing instinct (however weak) that a real child of her own can’t, because she hasn’t gotten pregnant in the fifteen years she’s been on the Pill.

There’s been chatter among the alt-cognoscenti about parasites and assorted pathogens secretly being involved in most of humanity’s weird behavioral outliers. News come daily of discoveries that viruses have the creepy ability to alter our personalities. Maybe T gondii, the cat-transmitted pathogen, infects the cat owners’ minds and suppresses their desire to settle down with a dutiful beta male who will help them raise a brood. It might even compel cat ladies to pop womb-charring Pills and seek fleeting hookups with undependable cads. Cat food for thought…

Read Full Post »

Recall the CH axiom about any social “””science””” coming out of a feminism-drenched university: If there’s a women’s studies department, the good bet is that the social science department is similarly corrupted, and any feminist-friendly findings are likely to be tainted and worthless. Leftist saturation of academia has become so bad that social expectation bias and self-serving bogus science rubber-stamping the equalist narrative are more the norm than the exception.

On that premise, here’s Greg Cochran sticking the shiv in the hide of yet another crappy feminist study that defies credulity.

I just noticed an new article in PNAS – research by Daphna Joel a behavioral neuroscientist at Tel Aviv University. Using MRI, she concludes that the brains of men and women aren’t really different. She suggests that the notion that men and women behave differently may be a myth.

She is, of course, utterly full of shit. It’s fountaining out of every pore: her hair will never go gray. We know of many sex differences in the brain – not just volume, not just the fraction of gray matter vs white matter, not just big differences in the incidences of neuropsychiatric disorders like autism and anorexia nervosa. In a few cases (like CAH, or androgen sensitivity, or maybe Turner’s syndrome) we know something about the developmental mechanisms involved. We see analogous differences in animal models: and no, it’s not culture. […]

…similarity in gross anatomy does not ensure similar behavioral tendencies. If I compared the brain of a pit bull with that of a similar-sized border collie, I doubt if I could see the behavioral differences in the size of the amygdala or whatever. Those behavioral differences exist, they’re innate, they have a physical/genetic basis – but at the moment I couldn’t tell you what brain differences to look for. Could be differences in the distribution of neurotransmitter receptors, or differences in axon length, or dendrite connectivity – lots of things, including many that wouldn’t show up on MRI.

Anyone who’s lived a day in his life can’t help but notice men and women are on average different in some powerfully fundamental ways. Desire, sexual proclivity, communication, hobbies, occupational preferences, bathroom habits… the list of REAL WORLD sex differences goes on for miles.

Yet we are supposed to believe a raging lunatic feminist burnishing a conveniently pro-equalist study while steeped in the toxins of a feminist milieu? Yeah, no.

Read Full Post »

From a long thread at MPC about the “red pill”, the assertion in this post raised an eyebrow:

One of the major problems with the Manosphere (that betrays the fact that it’s really just a vehicle for misogynists to try and get laid)

What did I tell you about tradcons sounding just like feminists in their shared compulsion to pathologize male sexuality? So now men with a working libido are “misogynist” according to the tradcon worldview.

is that they demonize female promiscuity while glorifying male promiscuity.

I don’t read red pill sites (except on rare occasions when readers send a link to one they regard as worthy of my attention). Speaking on behalf of the Chateau lordship, there is no “demonization” of female sexuality here. The telling of ugly truths about female nature is not the same as railing against female sexual nature and hoping it goes away or can be turned into something more benign to an equalist view of the sexes. (A glib “is, not ought” should suffice here.)

Now, it is true that, in a vacuum, female promiscuity is far worse than male promiscuity.

“In a vacuum”. How sophistic. Since when has the sexual market ever operated “in a vacuum”? Never. And yet, for reasons explained here ad nauseam (although apparently not nauseam enough), female promiscuity is more corrosive than male promiscuity to relationship and family stability and, scaled up, to societal stability. Yes, sluts really are more dangerous to social health than are cads.

However, male promiscuity REQUIRES either female promiscuity or homosexuality in order to occur.

This is the assertion that roused an eyebrow. (Ignore the homo slur, which is typical MPCspeak when faced with the task of explaining vigorous and unapologetic male heterosexuality.) Superficially, it sounds credible. After all, it takes two to tango. More cads must necessarily mean more sluts to complete the pairings.

Except, it doesn’t work that way. Betraying a deep ignorance (or willful dissembling) about the nature of the sexual market and the psychosexual differences between the sexes, this MPC poaster fails to grasp the reality of female hypergamy and male desire for variety, and how those intrinsic dispositions can affect the arithmetic of romantic pairings.

The top 20% of women strongly prefer to be with the top 10% of men. The top 10% of men will spread their seed among the top 30% of women (and often more widely than that), only strongly preferring the top 10% of women when they are serious about commitment and settling down.

The hypergamy-polygyny nexus results in a shaky equilibrium where a small percentage of cads are having sex with a larger percentage of women. But these cads jump from woman to woman, or they keep multiple women as sexual outlets in a de facto harem, meeting up with each one on an irregular basis, (hence the common complaint among woman dating jerkboys that the jerks they love are never around).

What this means in practice is that one promiscuous man will date ten less promiscuous women, since each of his lovers is likely to be with only him and not sharing him with other men in a multiple concurrent sexual relationship arrangement. (Women are more averse than men are to fucking multiple lovers concurrently.)

Conclusion: yes, male promiscuity can coexist with female chastity. Or a reasonable 2016 facsimile of female chastity.

Up to a point.

Eventually, if there are enough cads (cf., Africa) then sluts will have to increase in number to keep up with the changing ratio of fevered flings to lukewarm LTRs. A society in which 90% of men were promiscuous cads would require a boost in the numbers of promiscuous sluts to bring balance to the sexual force. Or one VERY slutty woman to service all those men.

Read Full Post »

If you look hard, there are outposts where Shitlords and Realtalkers feel free to speak unassailable truths. One reader passed along this quote from an Israeli politician who was offering an explanation for Europe’s open borders madness and supine welcoming of their rapefugee replacements.

Israeli politician agrees with your observations on the women of Europe + Migrants.

“Western Europe is kneeling and inviting the noble Muslim savage to rape it,” wrote the maverick politician on his Facebook page. “What is the meaning of this phenomenon? Were there only German women at that train station in Cologne? Where were the men?”

The Muslims who leave their home countries seek Germany, Sweden and Finland not just for financial reasons, he speculated. “There is something much deeper at play here. Western Europe is actually the most secular place in the world. Most of humanity believes in God – the US, too, is mostly populated by believers. Western Europe is an island of atheism; the situation there is reversed.

“This is a culture that has removed God from its consciousness. It took God out of the game and locked Him up in museums,” Feiglin theorized. “The pressure of the Allahu Akbar culture bursts naturally into the irreligious vacuum – it is a matter of physics, really. Of intercontinental maleness and femaleness.”

“Generations of denial of God have engendered a craving for authority and meaning,” the philosopher-politician explained. “The police does not attempt to prevent the rape just as it did not attempt to prevent Kristallnacht, because in truth, it is desired. The battered woman syndrome, the subconscious, the political correctness of Merkel and those who invite in the immigrants, actually desire it. […]

“The circle closes with crazy speed,” Feiglin observed. “Women’s liberation disappears. The State will not protect you – get used to it. Your Godless religion has evaporated. Find yourself a man – a Muslim one, of course – to protect you. There is no other masculinity.

“The battered woman syndrome” is just another way of politely saying “generic female sexual nature”, because all women, to lesser or greater degree, desire their submission to a powerful and dominant alpha male. And the dominant alpha male needn’t be manifest through the individual man; the strict orthodoxies of patriarchal religions like Islam also fill the role of authority that people, but particularly women, deeply and profoundly crave, beyond even conscious apprehension.

This is an important topic, because it befuddles not just equalist leftoids (who were never going to be un-befuddled) but also race-aware white knights who despite their willingness to grapple with many ugly truths that frighten mass media and the culture gatekeepers, nonetheless exhibit a strong allergy to thinking clearly when the subject is (White) women and their peculiar habits of mind. (These alt-white knights also co-opt a rhetorical crutch preferred by the shitlibs they hate: glib and snarky ad hominem against those who do speak truthfully about female nature.)

Men invade, women invite. The essential sex distinction is the male disposition to conquer and acquire power and the female disposition to accede and acquire the charity of the powerful. All real world evidence points to these diverging male and female essences. It would be funny if it weren’t dead serious that every single global crisis contradicts the feminist (and lickspittle manlet) worldview.

Today, a Swedish woman was stabbed to death by a Muslim refugee. Add her body to the running count of White female victims of rapefugee runaway entitlement. It has been three weeks since the Cologne mass sexual assaults on German women at the hands (and groins) of Middle Eastern men. It has been two months since the Paris attacks when Muslims killed hundreds of White Frenchmen and -women.

Dwell on recent history. Now consider this: two days ago, a German poll revealed glaring sex differences in male and female support for various German political parties. “Frauen” are women. The “AfD” is the anti-immigration party.

frauen

I don’t think you’ll see anything more shocking than this snapshot of the German female id. It calls to mind that Plath pith, “Every woman adores a fascist”. What’ll it take to convince White women that it’s in their best interest to shut the borders to hordes of nonWhite orcs?

“Best interest”? Maybe that’s the problem. Women’s best interest isn’t necessarily aligned with their men’s best interest. That Israeli politician quoted above is onto something dark and ominous when he accuses the West of assuming the role of intercontinental femaleness — the psychological condition responsible for civilizational ennui and exhaustion and prostrate submission to invading foreigners. Western men have become their women — gelded freaks who dress in mini-skirts to “support” victims of the Cologne sex attacks — and into that masculinity void unapologetically patriarchal Muslim migrants rush to provide that “other masculinity” which animates the hindbrains, and the ginewaves, of so many young fertile WHITE women.

Because who is going to protect these White women? White men in mini-skirts? It is to laugh. And though many women will claim otherwise to reporters holding microphones and even to themselves when uncomfortably alone with their thoughts, their actions expose a different motivation.

I call this sex-disparate phenomenon “The Feminine Mistake”. It was a mistake to hand to women inordinate power – at 51% of the population, women hold the levers in democratic societies – over public policy and the nation’s constitution. Women are who they are; they can’t help themselves when they vote for equalist leftoid nation-destroyers.

If the White West is to save itself from its worst instincts and sentiments, it’s going to take something that most cucks, manginas, and male feminists are loath, or scared, to do: tell women to step aside, because they are royally fucking up the place.

Read Full Post »

Jonathan Haidt wrote about disgust occupying a dimension of human morality. He found, (unsurprisingly if you’ve trawled the internet for five minutes), that leftoids have a higher disgust threshold than non-leftoids. (That is, they can more happily tolerate disgusting things in their lives.)

I bring this up because a world in which disgust is abandoned as a moral consideration starts quickly filling up with people like the demon mom this post will introduce to you. A society recklessly surrendering even the pretense of monitoring culture health for signs of encroaching trends that elicit the disgust reflex is a society that will in short order be overrun by disgusting people and the disgusting things they do.

Every year, I give presentations about my health classes to the parents of my students. And inevitably, every year, someone will express relief at the idea that I’ll be talking to their kids about sex so that they’ll be spared the awkwardness of doing so themselves.

Numbnuts Class Hivemind Indoctrination incoming!

This reminds me: leftoids always attack. They never relent in their desire to strip the good from the world and replace it with their island of misfit degenerates. The only effective counterattack is to not play the game by their rules. Go on the attack and put THEM in the defensive crouch. Abide YOUR frame, not theirs.

At this point, I almost expect that. After all, for a lot of people, talking about sex with their kids is awkward. As my friend May said of having such conversations with her three- and eight-year-olds, “Their dad and I are nervous about it in general, so I know we’re putting it off.”

You know, there’s a good reason Nature designed it so that talking about sex with your three-year-old feels awkward: because it IS awkward and you shouldn’t be doing it.

Plus, a lot of parents didn’t talk about sex with adults when they were growing up, and so don’t have a model of how to do so.

Amazing the human race managed to survive this long without sex-ed classes for toddlers.

But talking openly to your kids is one of the best ways to raise them with a positive view of sexuality

When a shitlib feminist uses the word “positive” with regards to sex, she means “as often as humanly possible, with a black man, involving depraved acts and rectally-inserted objects, but only after verbal consent is established incrementally on the minute, every minute.”

– and to challenge the conventional and damaging messages so many are getting on the subject.

Like how not to spend the day with a vibrating buttplug slipping dangerously close to irretrievability?

For example, do you want your kids to have accurate information about how their bodies work and to feel good in their skin?

Buffalo Bill here reminding you that it’s possible to feel good in another person’s skin.

Whatever your wishes, having a sense of them will go a long way in helping your children navigate these waters in a manner that feels true to your family.

Female poopytalk. Thank you, women’s studies degree programs! (mo’ money for dem…)

Yet separating sex from reproduction can be hard to do. That’s because then you need to talk about desire, and pleasure, and as I did recently with my nine-year-old,

😯

things like oral sex. (“Eeeew,” she groaned after I gave a basic description, “That is so gross. What if someone didn’t wipe!?”)

Smart kid. Dumb parent. Mix the two: child abuse.

But kids find a lot of things kind of gross and aren’t traumatized.

Like steaming dog shit. So the answer is to shove buckets of steaming dog shit in kids’ faces, naturally.

And explaining that many people have sex not to have babies, but because it feels nice and can forge intimacy and connection, isn’t actually all that hard to say.

Grooming your White child for that sweet, sweet 0.7 below-replacement fertility rate.

2. Start Conversations About Consent Early

Feminist cunt mom is about to unload some Holy Matriarchy injunctions on her kid.

When addressing consent with young kids, you can teach them that they need to get permission to touch others by asking peers and siblings things like “Can I hug you?” or “Can I hold your hand?”

Or, “How to turn your emotionally healthy child into a creepy, psychologically unstable, socially clumsy spergatron.”

Children should also have their physical boundaries respected by adults.

But not their psychological boundaries.

Adults often think it is perfectly fine to continue to tickle or wrestle a child who is asking them to stop. But it isn’t – and it teaches kids that they don’t really have control over their bodies.

This psychobitch sounds like a lot of fun to be around.

Kids should also be allowed to change their minds. They shouldn’t, for instance, be taught that keeping a promise is always the most moral thing to do.

Shitlibs train their sprog early in the art of traitorous status whoring.

With older kids, explain that consent for sex can be withdrawn at any time. […] Plus, kids and teens should know that you can stop a sexual interaction at any time, even if both people are naked and fooling around. Even in the middle of a sex act.

Nothing says “this is completely natural and loving” like teaching your daughter to demand consent after every thrust into her vagina, and your son to be ready to stop right up to, and including, the point of imminent ejaculation. Just another feminist whackjob demonstrating a clear lack of understanding and empathy for physical and emotional differences between the sexes (and between children and adults).

It also has to be clear that consent shouldn’t be wheedled or coerced, and that there are circumstances under which consent cannot freely be given – like if you’re asleep, passed out, incapacitated by drugs or alcohol, or under age.

And consent can’t be freely acknowledged when drunk, either. Game set match, feminist shrike.

it’s understood that teens who want to drive, or take calculus, or play violin should be given the space to learn how to do so before we expect any mastery of the subject.

But when it comes to sex, we deny children the ability to develop their skills, and then blame them when things don’t go well.

Feminist brainwashing agent thinks sex is like calculus, even though field mice manage it without a propaganda blitz instructing them in the act.

And while there are ways for kids to practice sex, many teens are forced to do so in secret. This can be the result of parents’ rules. But it also happens because things like looking at porn or sexting are illegal for minors.

And while such laws are ostensibly designed to protect children, particularly when it comes to sexting, they can do more harm than good.

“ostensibly”. This is what a disgust threshold set to infinity looks like.

For a lot of American parents, the idea of allowing a teen to have a sleepover with a boyfriend or girlfriend, let alone with a casual hook up, seems either like excessive permissiveness, or actual negligence or harm.

For a lot of American parents, insane feminist nonsense hasn’t yet polluted their ability to think clearly.

I know that was something my parents worried about when the issue came up for me as a teen. Ultimately, they let me stay over at my boyfriend’s, but they also made it clear that they were only doing so because they wanted to know where I was.

Her feeble parents wanted to be sure she was slutting it up at a known address instead of behind the 7-11.

We all knew that they were pretty unhappy with the whole situation, and as a result, my return home the mornings after a sleepover were uncomfortable for everyone.

😆😆 Fucking skank did the walk of shame back to her parents’ house! Why wait until college to experience that shame from peers? She got an early start on her career in whole hog sluttery. Later, in college, shaming glances would bounce right off her.

But in reality, permitting sleepovers with a partner can be one of the healthiest ways to keep teens safe since they are getting to learn about having sex in the security of their own homes

Dads love it when their daughters learn about having sex under their roofs. As long as it’s safe and secure, her orgasmic moans traveling up to Dad’s bedroom can only be the sound of a father raising his daughter right.

Sexuality is not an amorphous entity that lives separately from our children and which we need to protect them from unilaterally. Rather, it’s a part of who they are and something they’ll benefit from nurturing and developing.

Sexuality doesn’t need nurturing and developing. It pretty much happens on its own. But what fun is that when you can be in the running for demon mom of the year and encourage your daughter to take a cock up her ass while dad tries to drown out the sex noises with the Beats headphones you bought him for Kwanzaa?

But many of us live in environments where any openness about kids and sex is seen as potentially harmful. And as a result, the attempt to raise sexually healthy kids can seem like an uphill battle.

Maybe that’s nature’s way of telling you not to do it, you dumb bitch.

But even if you were raised in a household where the topic was utterly taboo, it’s never too late to send more positive messages about sex to your own kids – even if doing so seem a bit unnatural at the start.

Author: Ellen Friedrichs.

Read Full Post »

The above photo was Twatted by @MaryNumair. It was re-twatted 6,000 times and Liked 13,300 times. Mary Mary CuntFermenting attention whored,

Hey I just single handedly broke up a planned parenthood protest by chanting the words “yeast infections”

That’s great. What an accomplishment. This skankopath looks like she draws a little blood with those choppers while giving blowjobs.

Anyhow, moved by the momentousness of this breaking international news, an eager feminist beaver scouting for one of those hard-hitting stories that media oligarcunts love reached out to our intrepid crusader and future Miss Cat Lady.

@MaryNumair well, this is fabulous. I’m a writer for Slate and would love to hear the full story. christina.cauterucci@slate.com if yr down!

Naturally, Mary is too modest to broadcast the details of her personal hygiene through the media megaphone.

cool! I’ll say hi tonight

American journalism: A phony journalist working for a phony media website spends all day scrolling through Twatter feeds to find a feminist-congenial non-story about a slut seeking internet fame for her smelly vagina, which she and her crack team of Slate manlets and bluehairs will later fluff up into a 20,000 word essay on the evils of the patriarchy.

If there was ever a time journalism was a respected field in America, that time has receded so far into the past it is no longer remembered by those who are tasked with transmitting its purpose and its ethical code to future generations.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,537 other followers

%d bloggers like this: