The Myth Of The Maladjusted Bumpkin

A field report from an anonymous realtalker:

De-urbanization has to be a long-term goal of the Trump administration, or whichever “more Trump than Trump” Presidency follows Trump. A handful of megalopolis shitlib hideouts accelerates civil breakdown and regional alienation. I’m not saying do away with cities; I’m saying de-scale them, make them smaller, spread them out, and redistribute their talent and hothouse ideological insanity so that the damage the urban hives can do to America is muted. (Questions about if or how to redistribute the urban Diversity™ I leave as an exercise for the reader.)

Reintroduce connections between city, town and countryside that today are utterly severed, and you’ll reinvigorate the sense of shared values and mutual concern for countrymen that naturally evolves in healthy connected societies. As part of this project, de-diversification must accompany de-urbanization, which can be achieve by deportations, an immigration moratorium, and a later immigration policy that exemplifies the spirit of the 1924 Immigration and Naturalization Act.

As is the wont of their crabbed mental condition, shitlibs project their maladjusted social insularity and general cold-heartedness onto rural Americans, and with a vengeance, because the shitlib hates nothing more than his own self-deceiving smallness.

Read Full Post »

Is Feminism An Ideological Rationalization Of Sour Grapes?

Williamk offers a compelling explanation of the motivating psychology of once-attractive girls who self-mutilate in the name of feminism:

Because they dont want beta orbiters, or random hookups, they want alpha commitment. That’s out of reach for even some genuinely pretty girls, the supply of alpha guys is low.

So they say “well I don’t want that anyway” and chop away their appeal to prove they totally don’t want an alpha commitment. That way it’s “her choice”, and she can stave off enough cognitive dissonance to keep from offing her self.

Pretty much every one of these cases starts with alpha widowhood.

The sour grapes fable is about the fox who can’t pluck delicious grapes hanging out of reach, so the fox pretends that it never really wanted those grapes (“they’re probably sour anyhow”). It’s related to Pointy Elbow Syndrome which afflicts internet dwelling omega males. What Williamk (and myself, in various posts) is saying is that women who have taken up the banner of feminism and uglified themselves are like the fox in the fable, insisting those out-of-reach alpha males are probably losers and misogynists anyhow, and she never really wanted their love and commitment.

Where these feminists differ from the fox is in their willingness to self-abase and self-disfigure in order to convince themselves of their ego assuaging lie. The most effective lies start with self-deception. The fox merely stated his insincere disapproval of the juicy grapes before moving on to nibble on an edible within reach; feminists underscore their insincere disapproval of masculine alpha males by mutilating themselves in body, mind, and/or spirit, and then tacitly declaring that the lack of attention from a dwindling pool of sexy men is how they wanted it. See: Amanjaw Marcuntte, or any “mainstream” feminist mouthpiece.

Which is another way of saying, “How convenient!”.

Understanding this psychology of women who straddle the upper-lower and middle tiers of female SMV, we can predict that Feminist Idiocy will only get worse with the increase in gloryhole faced soyboys. Apropos, vfm#7634 writes,

“the supply of alpha guys is low.”

Women, being the reactive sex, turn femcunt as a reaction to men becoming soybois.

If there were more alphas, you’d think that the average beta would be worse off. Not true. More alphas mean many more attractive women around.

More soyboys => relatively fewer alphas => more bitter romantic losers among women who will find ego saving solace in the embrace of man-hating and femininity-discarding feminism. Every generation deserves the sexes it gets, and if men are weak suckup betasoys, then their women will be haranguing embittered fat feminist harpies. And the feedback loop travels in both directions: the more unfeminine bluehaired fat feminists, the more low T men there are who will abandon the masculine virtues and escape to vidja, pron, and David Fatrellian male feminist toady signaling.

When soyboys abound, plain janes get resentful. Spiteful. In this condition, these tingle-denied middling SMV women on the cusp of cuteness are liable to self-destruct in one final F YOU SOYS to the un-men in their midst. Only charismatic, dominant, entitled, masculine men (including strong fathers) have a hope of walking these women back from the pussyhat brink, but those men are MIA or busy courting hotter, more feminine women.

Piling on, HoneyBear adds,

A similar formulation… they [SMV-destroying feminists] are the female equivalent of MGTOW.

Many girls are probably as disgusted as redpilled men are about the desecration of the postmodern mating market. Their hearts want a prince for life. The self-mutilation is them recoiling in horror from the Jewish slaughterhouse of souls.

They don’t understand the cause and nature of the problem, so they fall prey to diabolical lies; they direct their hate at the wrong target, and lash out in the wrong way.

Aghast at the nature of the beast, men blame women and women blame men. There used to be a system that caged the beast, but somebody unchained it intentionally.

The Id Monster is loosed.

One tried and true method for women to follow if they want to improve their chance to land a winner man willing and eager to commit to them is to avoid accumulating too many cock notches (really, any number greater than one is a red flag), to resist mudsharking, and to give of themselves heart and vagina at a young prime fertility age to a worthy man.

This may mean cutting back on the number of years devoted to mimosa brunches, college degrees, and cat selfies, but it’s a small price to pay for lifelong happiness. You’d think.

I’ve written that the goal of feminism is

…to remove all constraints on female sexuality while maximally restricting male sexuality.

This goal serves a purpose, and it dovetails with the feminism-as-sour-grapes-rationalization argument, considering that female romantic losers (and mediocre women with a bigger hill to climb to capture a masculine man’s eye) would benefit from rearranging the world so that their every whim, preference, and desire are encouraged and celebrated, while men’s every whim, preference, and desire are circumscribed and shamed. This won’t get those women the alphas they want, but it will provide social cover for their bruised egos.

Similarly, feminism is an equalizing ideology; feminists (though they may not know it) cling to their mistaken beliefs because the point of the ideology isn’t truth, it’s to level the female playing field:

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

From early childhood onwards, girls compete using strategies that minimize the risk of retaliation and reduce the strength of other girls. Girls’ competitive strategies include avoiding direct interference with another girl’s goals, disguising competition, competing overtly only from a position of high status in the community, enforcing equality within the female community and socially excluding other girls.

***

So feminists’ promotion of anti slut-shaming and anti fat-shaming and anti ugly-shaming and anti single-mother-shaming etc, is really just an execution of women’s intra-sexual competitive strategies. It’s the bottom third of women versus the top two thirds. Or perhaps it’s the bottom quarter, as if I remember correctly only 20-25% of women identify as feminist.

With knowledge such as this, you can easily reframe any leftist/feminist argument about a war on women as instead a war by the bottom loser women against the top successful women.

It’s the SU’s (Sluts & Uglies) versus the HB’s.

The Sour Grapes and Intrasexual Egalitarianism theories of feminism may at first glance seem unrelated or even contradicting, but it makes sense when you realize the latter theory’s feminist equalizing push for uniformity in standards of female behavior and SMV that evades and eschews judgment (implicitly denying that men have, or should have, standards in female sexual and relationship worth) is a complement to the former theory’s function as cognitive dissonance relief for marginal chicks who lose out in a liberated sexual market. The former — Sour Grapes — is the backup hugbox for their egos when the latter — Female SMV Uniformity — fails sufficiently to convince the HSMV hot babes to relinquish their advantages or to convince society to celebrate every feminist bout of insanity as womanhood perfected.

As society fills up with more soyboys and turns away from enabling the side show circus act known as cunt’th wave feminism (thanks in part to the very special lessons this outpost of love lovingly administers), we can expect to see more borderline chicks, with juuuuust enough latent SMV to help them fantasize they have a shot to land an alpha male, embracing the uglification protocol of Sour Grapes Feminism.

A rapidly disintegrating and unregulated, atomized sexual market that becomes more primal by the day will drive many more disillusioned women on the losing side of the romantic life ledger into self-mutilation, and likewise beta men into self-castration.

In this reading, relations between the sexes have to get much worse before they get better. The Bluehair Apocuntlypse is the necessary nadir of the battle of the sexes, when fraternizing is limited to the few remaining slender feminine women and dominant, charming men, and the rest are mutually repulsed low T soyboys and tatted hair-chopped feminist scolds. That’s rock bottom, and when the West hits it our shared worldview will experience a massive paradigm shift back to accepting and elevating the wisdom of the ancients, when the sexes knew their roles, their weaknesses, and their strengths, and joyfully reveled in their inspiriting sexual polarity…

…instead of denying their polarity to stew angrily and spitefully in an androgynous passionless soulless slop of equalist anhedonia.

Read Full Post »

“Self-respecting”

baked georgia asyntactically commented,

a (good looking) female co-worker commented about how no self-respecting male won’t have a real relationship with one of those bikini girls from instagram, and that they’ll may die alone when their looks fade away.

I’ve almost cried tears of joy

Be careful in your admiration for a woman who uses the term “self-respecting” as an implicit tool of male behavior management, especially if her slut shaming target is her sexual competition.

Women use the term “self-respecting” in a passive-aggressive way whenever they’re commenting indirectly about male romantic preferences that they find objectionable and threatening (such as men’s compulsive willingness to not only fuck but fall in love with Instawhore bikini babes). You may think she’s a trad thot doing the Lord’s slut shaming work, but in reality she’s stud shaming you to ignore hotter women for a “real relationship” with women like herself.

It’s generally good policy to avoid committing to women who splash their gash all over social media, but don’t get bent out of shape about it. There’s nothing mutually incompatible between female beauty and female lovability, and men should allow some breathing room for women occasionally and with a prudent bow to modesty to “display their goods” (say, in a slinky cocktail dress to catch your eye at a black tie dinner event) because it’s a normal urge in women to physically advertise their sexual and, hence, marital worth.

When I hear “self-respecting”, I hear a schoolmarm finger wagging me for not sufficiently denying my natural male desire.

Read Full Post »

The “#110 And Counting” Girlfriend

Amy Schumer. Here she is bitching about (or humblebragging about) all of her horrible ex-boyfriends.

I’ll translate her porridge of puling for you:

IT’S ALWAYS THE BOYIM’S FAULT!

Keep telling yourself that, Amy, and when you get dumped (yet again) you won’t have to change a thing about yourself. Just keep rolling with your martyrdom complex until the Wailing Wall claims final victory over your delusions.

***

In related “total lack of self-reflection” news, there was a massive purge of NeverTrumpers from the cuckblog Red State. Trump should win a Nobel in Aesthetics for that.

***

Lisa Page’s gums (lol) writes,

So she lost her virginity while she was asleep…who was her date -Bill Cosby?
I mean how could she not wake up with a guy trying to move her fupa?

Fat amy schumer is like most fatties. Something’s always getting stuck in their folds so a penis could easily be mistaken for a half-eaten hot dog.

Read Full Post »

The Overblown (Yet Oddly Comforting) Threat Of The Gotcha Pregnancy

gkai tut tuts and finger wags,

Lost the ball here. I far far prefer a chick with abortion history, that one that [won’t] play the surprise pregnancy and chain you for life with child support, just after some recreative sex. The pro-life fundamentalist Christian here was disturbing, while I was a fan before, now it’s becoming unbearable….I guess my CH lurking days are soon aver….

gkai (probably azn) hates White Christians, news at 11. (Why ARE so many damned asians colonizing the West? Their own countries too crowded? NOT OUR PROBLEM)

To his point, the Gotcha Pregnancy looms large as a devastating life-changing menace in the male imagination, but it’s an overblown threat that I have noticed appeals to two kinds of men: lsmv omegas who have little chance of convincing any woman to have sex with them, let alone bear their children, and wealthy hsmv alphas who have real reason to fear a mistress or lover snagging them into a lifetime of indentured servitude.

The latter group of men have to be careful which women they choose for trysts, because the gotcha pregnancy risk isn’t overblown for them. This maybe explains why so many wealthy alphas turn to escort services for fun when they could get the chicks for free at the local bar: the pros are paid up front and have an incentive to keep their bodies in a forever pre-preggers state.

The former group, the omegas, have nothing to fear, but they are egoistically comforted by the idea that they are threatened by sexually rapacious women who want to steal their disfigured seed and their non-existent resources.

In reality, the gotcha pregnancy is a rare event if you are minimally selective in which women you choose to bang and romance. Avoid ghetto mamas, barely legal beaners, mentally unstable coke fiends, trailer trash, and women over the age of 35 laboring under the loud tick tock of their biological clocks, and you are pretty well secured from victimization by a gotcha pregnancy.

If you are a Chateau reader, odds are you have something on the ball and swim in a social circle and cultural milieu filled with sensible women who don’t think gotcha pregnancies are smart, forward-thinking life choices. The fact is that cheap contraceptives (for both men and women) have largely eliminated the Gotcha Pregnancy threat among middle class and higher Whites. If you’re fresh off the boat and only date in the clan, maybe it’s a problem for you, but Western White women have abandoned the Gotcha Pregnancy as a strategy because 1. it interferes with mimosa brunch time and 2. Western White men have abandoned the Shotgun Wedding amelioration plan.

I’m not saying the Gotcha Pregnancy is a myth. I’m saying it’s like HIV…if you’re not a member of one or more specific demographics particularly susceptible to Gotcha Pregnancy infection, you can sleep easy that your womanizing career won’t suddenly end with the rash decision of a high time orientation, impulsive skank scheming for a sugar daddy.

However, should you fall prey to the Gotcha Pregnancy — one of the most malicious evils a woman can deliberately perpetrate on a man — I suggest leaving the country on the red eye, and don’t look back until such time that the USA has instituted rationality and fairness to its sexual regulation laws and added a “Gotcha Child Support” clause to any Gotcha Pregnancy claim that requires the woman making the claim to foot the entirety of the child-raising bill. Reproductive rights shouldn’t be the sole province of women.

***

williamk adds,

The particular kind of man who tends to get oops’d is a low class situational alpha with steady money, aka guy who has a harem of low SES girls (who are usually kinda gross), and works on a military base or something (not being a hater, its just a heuristic).

the gotcha pregnancy recipe:

guy: some cash + game + low standards + low IQ
girl: skank + low IQ + beneath the margins of do-ability for CH commenters

Another reason (as if it was needed) why refined men of stealth and taste should have and maintain standards in the opposite sex. Less risk of used condom scooping.

Read Full Post »

Anti-Male Sex Assault Research Is Discredited

From (of all places) Real Clear Politics, an essay on David Lisak and the lies about campus rape he pushed onto an eagerly believing academia and equally gullible legal system, to the detriment of American men everywhere.

Discredited Sex Assault Research Infects U.S. Legal System […]

The example discussed here began with a small study by an associate professor at a commuter college in Massachusetts. The 12-page paper describing the study barely created a stir when it was published in 2002. Within a few years, however, the paper’s principal author, David Lisak, a University of Massachusetts-Boston psychologist, began making dramatic statements that extrapolated far beyond the study’s conclusions. He created, virtually out of whole cloth, a theory that “undetected” serial rapists are responsible for 90 percent of assaults on college campuses, that they premeditate and plan their attacks, and that they are likely to have committed multiple acts of violence.

When speaking on campuses, to the military, and to law enforcement, Lisak started showing a highly disturbing video that he claimed was based on the transcript of an actual interview with a campus rapist to whom Lisak gave the name “Frank.” The authenticity of the video has been seriously questioned, raising grave doubts about Lisak’s contention that it illustrates the typical campus perpetrator—in his view, an unrepentant sociopath who cannot be reached or educated.

A news search for mentions of Lisak finds only a single one prior to 2009, in which he revealingly opined in an urban policy magazine about the Duke lacrosse rape hoax. He was interviewed again by CBS News in November 2009 about non-stranger rapes. He increasingly became the draw at conferences on sexual assault and his calendar filled with campus presentations. The media began to fawn over him […]

As his celebrity grew, the gap between documented facts and his status as an expert became almost inconsequential.

Criticism did eventually catch up to David Lisak. His serial predator model of campus rape has been compellingly debunked by scholarly researchers and well-regarded publications, including investigative articles and a book. His claims regarding the psychology of campus perpetrators were revealed to be based on nonexistent interviews. […]

His assertions, allegedly supported by a study he co-authored in 2010, that false accusations of sexual assault are exceedingly rare, have been shown to violate basic math by counting as true cases that didn’t qualify as sexual assault, had insufficient evidence to make a determination, or were referred for prosecution but about which the outcome was unknown.

As for Lisak’s vague statements about having interviewed “hundreds” of serial rapists (occasionally styled as “thousands” when others talk about him), in truth no evidence exists that Lisak has interviewed any “undetected rapists,” serial or otherwise, since his dissertation research 30 years ago.

Feminism, of the femcunt or mangina variety, causes real pain and extracts real tribute from innocent men. It’s essentially blackmail of men, a ransom on normal healthy masculinity. Feministism is a blight on the country and should be taken seriously as a wicked ideology which destroys lives, communities, and whole nations.

Unfortunately, our “elites” and our institutions in which we have placed our trust lap up the lies of feminism and beg for more of that man-hating vitriol:

Yet all of these devastating exposés have barely dented Lisak’s popularity. […]

Were the damage wrought by David Lisak’s popularity confined to his college-circuit road show, there might be some hope that his toxic influence would be worn down by the critical thinking ostensibly prized by the academy.

Instead, that has not happened. The list of invited presentations, workshops, and media appearances in which he has hawked his unsubstantiated theories runs an additional 40 pages on his curriculum vitae. Among the most worrisome aspects of Lisak’s presentations and workshops is how they appear to be gaining influence among professionals close to the investigation and adjudication of sexual assault. His debunked serial predator theory and wildly extrapolated statistics on the false-accusation rate form the core of the training materials he has developed—and in some cases sold to law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, and the military.

Read on, it gets worse. The System is utterly and totally rigged against men.

Most troubling of all, Lisak’s material is being codified in law enforcement policies, legal precedents, and judicial guidelines at the local, state, and federal levels.

The Sexual Offense Bench Guide for judges in the state of Washington, for example, draws liberally from Lisak’s 2008 publication “Understanding the Predatory Nature of Sexual Violence.” His claims have been similarly incorporated into New Mexico’s Sexual Assault Bench Book, the Tribal Court Judges Bench Book on sexual assault, the Missoula County Attorney’s Office Policy and Procedure Manual, the Pennsylvania Crimes of Sexual Violence Benchbook, New York State’s Judicial Symposium, Wisconsin’s Prosecutor’s Sexual Assault Reference Book, and the Judge Advocate General Corps Criminal Law Desk Book.

The relationship between prosecutors, judges and the juries who will ultimately arrive at verdicts in criminal trials is further tainted by recommendations that prosecutors and judges incorporate into the jury selection process: namely, Lisak’s claim that false accusations are rare and his unsupported theory about serial offenses.

JAG guidelines for prosecutors, for example, advise that “myths” about the frequency of false reports be challenged “directly, in voir dire and in argument.” Prospective jurors whose information does not align with the (inaccurate) information provided in guidelines influenced by Lisak could then be dismissed and/or a seated jury could be told of the supposedly “true” facts.

Ignoramous snarkmouths mock anti-feminism as “male whining”, but flesh and blood innocent men are being chewed up and their livelihoods destroyed by this lying spiteful institutionalized femcuntery that has polluted our legal system:

A judge in Montana, for example, denied a request to have a case dismissed on the grounds of a Missoula police department requiring officers to presume the guilt of the accused when investigating sexual assault. The judge stated that she based her ruling on Lisak’s (baseless, and thus misleading) testimony about the low rate of false reports. When such decisions are made, when presumptions of guilt are part of the training of judges and prosecutors, or reflected in jury instructions, innocent defendants are put in harm’s way.

No institution is immune from the feminist gelding project. The media are bullhorns for every crackpot man-hating feminist or mangina claim that lands in their Faceborg feeds:

Even those ostensibly in the business of impartial news coverage have been tainted by their own guidelines, as when the media have been fed the same misinformation, masquerading as insight. Their contribution to the problem is further amplified when they are further advised not to use the phrase “rape allegation” because “allegation is not a neutral term and strongly implies doubt,” and they fail to see that the alternative suggested—“reported rape”—implies an act that has, indeed, happened, distinguished only by the fact that it is on record.

The authors of this piece ask:

Where does that leave those for whom accuracy, integrity, and truth matter?

Crushed underneath the jackboot of the Anti-White Male Narrative enforcers.

This is not an easy assignment, but the use of good lawyering to dismantle bad “research” can be powerful, and good courtroom theater as well. When faced with a Lisakian claim that “only 6 percent of rape allegations are false,” the defense attorney can ask what percent, then, are true? David Lisak himself would have great trouble answering that question without being exposed as a statistical manipulator, because his writings have never even addressed it. Rather, he has used misleading language to imply that almost all rape accusations have been proven true. Indeed, a good defense lawyer could fairly ask: “Isn’t it a fact, Mr. Lisak, that the number of rape accusations that have been proven false may well be larger than the number that have been proven true?”

Reminder that false rape accusations may be as high as 40-50% of total rape cases.

Women lie. Women especially lie about matters concerning sex. Shitlibs and tradcons need to deal with this fact of womanhood, and stop pretending belief in the Princess Proposition.

Lisak’s claims are wrong and the experts who tout them are vulnerable when asked direct questions. The discrediting of Lisak must become part of the court record, in case after case, before the far more difficult task of correcting the effects of his bogus claims on criminal justice policies can be accomplished.

The Truth won’t be denied forever. It will out, one way or another. And helping the Truth out will be the re-introduction of lots of Based White Gentile Men into the legal profession. More White Gentile shitlord lawyers will put these laywercunts and their greasy society-subverting (((accomplices))) under the microscope, their biases and agenda revealed for the world to mock, their malfeasance exposed, and themselves along with their standing army of Fake Social Scientists punished with extreme prejudice.

The focus here has been on one particular—and particularly problematic—conveyer of misinformation. David Lisak’s high profile and willingness to depart from even his own published papers in service of an agenda makes him the embodiment of the attack on due process. But Lisak is not alone. He has recently been joined by other “experts” straying even further afield from verifiable data and often in direct contradiction of known science.

The Fuggeraut feels no guilt. The Hate Machine feels no empathy. Fuggernaut and the Hate Machine will only stop when they are stopped by a more powerful force wielding a more powerful weapon: The truth.

The difficulty of fighting the toxic distribution of misrepresentation and statistical sleight-of-hand is partially a function of high-profile purveyors and enablers.

sand-sophists

The codification of myths in law enforcement procedures; in the training of prosecutors and judges; and in policy at the town, county, state, and federal levels all but guarantees insidious and continuous regeneration.

There is a great deal of ruin in a nation, and there is a great deal of effort required to repair a ruined nation.

The roadmap such myths provide is wrong but concrete, offering up sociopathic villains in place of a continuum of offenders, permission to presume guilt in the absence of evidence, and a philosophy that accusers not only don’t lie but are never mistaken.

A lot of this man-hating false rape fabulism witch hunting is motivated by an ego-preserving shitlib urge to avoid confronting the elephant in the room: the massively disproportionate rate of black-on-white rape. The Lying Lisaks of the world give white feminists and their mangina lickspittles an excuse to avert their eyes and level their redirected rage against the object of their desire and envy: White Gentile Men.

Read Full Post »

The Fake Bravado Of The Gross Skank

A gross skank brags about cheating on every man she’s been with, and pretends it’s her preferred career path. It’s a classic case of sweet lemons rationalization (the inverse of sour grapes rationalization). She can’t get a quality man to commit to her, so she lovelessly fucks around with losers or fly by night cads who have no problem pumping and dumping a sloppy slut for a no muss no fuss easy lay, and then claims it’s the perfect lifestyle for her and anyone who will listen. Those LSMV lemons are really sweet! she swears through jizz-stained tears.

When I talk about my future with my friends, it always includes marriage and children. But I’ve also cheated on every person I’ve ever been with.

No man worth marrying is gonna wife up and have kids with a slattern. What man could trust such a bargain bin cum receptacle? Why would any man with something on the ball give a Proud Slut and an incorrigible cheater the blessing of birthing his champions? He’ll always wonder if the kids are his. The lowest of loser males might consider it, but that’s because they have no other options except incel, and the skank will be reminded daily of her low value as a woman by loserboy’s presence in her life.

People don’t refrain from cheating because they’re happy with their partners, they refrain from cheating because they’re afraid of being caught.

That’s not the whole story. Fear of being caught rarely stops a cheater from turning thought into action. The primary reasons monogamous people don’t cheat are because 1. they can’t (un-tradeable undesirability) and 2. they actually love their lover. Oh, and guilt. Most people feel guilt about cheating on their lovers or spouses. People who putatively don’t feel guilt, like Gross Skank, are sociopaths missing a part of their humanity.

Fear of being caught factors prominently into the decision for older married men who have money and holdings they could lose in divorce court, or for stay-at-home moms married to alpha males who aren’t apt to “forgive and support” a wife caught cheating.

But Gross Skank has never been in love (sad!) so it’s easy for her to cheat on the street curs sniffing around her putrid pussy, and then act as if spreading her diseased jizz trap for these hard-up losers (how much you wanna bet most aren’t white?) is some sort of achievement, (it’s not an achievement for women….getting a man with options to stick around, now that’s an achievement).

It’s easier to get away with than you think

Only if the males she fucks are beta noobs who have little experience with women and can’t identify the warning signs of a slut. Or they don’t give a shit about her character.

If you’re worried about them seeing you on Tinder, don’t be. Ask them why they were on it in the first place.

That non sequitur won’t allay their suspicions.

And if a friend sees you? Say your account is old.

She must have very gullible friends if they believe her unconvincing bullshit.

There’s no easier way to get bored of someone than by dating them.

And nobody wants to date someone who doesn’t have their own life. Seriously dating someone is similar to moving in — you can’t just un-move in with someone you’re seeing. You’re either going to spend the rest of your lives together, or you’re going to split. Those are literally the only two options. With decades of time ahead of you, why rush into pushing other people out?

I hope (and assume) you know this by now, but guys want whoever is least interested in them. Once you’re dating, it’s impossible to keep playing hard to get unless you actively work towards making yourself unavailable.

Psychological projection — thinking that others feel the same way one feels — is everywhere in this age of bruised, fragile egos. And women are particularly prone to this cognitive bias, because as a rule women are more solipsistic than are men. When a woman is rejected by a man — rejection for a woman is romantic, not sexual — she is brutally soul-seared by the experience; to protect her ego from imploding to a hamster singularity, she rationalizes the rejection as her failure to be insufficiently man-like, rather than insufficiently woman-like which would be a much harsher indictment on her worth as a woman.

Men don’t want whoever is least interested in them. Men want beautiful women who are attentive, feminine, and loving toward them. Women, otoh, *do* desire challenging men who give ambiguous signals of interest for them and who “have their own life”. A herpes incubator like Gross Skank who can’t get what she wants from high value men — marriage and kids — subverts the reality of differing male and female desires to avoid confronting the obvious cause of her woes: her revolt against ideal femininity.

Not all girls think men are attracted to the same traits that they are attracted to, but most do. And slutty low value girls are the worst afflicted by this psychological deflector shield. The slut who thinks men want what she wants can justify to herself why men don’t stick around after porking her without harming her self-conception as a desirable woman.

In the end, you’re going to date a lot of people and you’re going to marry almost none of them.

Almost? Sluttery is the triumph of self-delusion over experience.

But how many of your friends and interests are you going to shelve while placing them first, only to realize you’re boring and impossible to date afterwards? You have nothing of your own because everything you had was shared.

Telling. She defines herself by the number of cocks she hoovers. And if she isn’t hoovering random cocks and cheating on “boyfriends”, she’s “boring”. This is a woman so empty inside she needs gallons of cum to spackle a veneer on her paint-stripped soul.

Someone should remind her that most emotionally healthy women manage to have their own personalities while being faithfully committed to a man.

Guys don’t want you to sleep with other people because it’s the only thing they have that we don’t.

That’s not it. Men don’t want their gfs or wives to sleep with other men because it’s disgusting and she could get knocked up, cuckolding him.

And once you rise above that, they realize they’ve lost their grip on that leash they thought was so tight.

So very revealing. This is unfiltered man-spite. She’s trying to lash out at men because she’s been burned so many times by them in her quest to find the love that has eluded her for her whole life.

I didn’t love any of the people I cheated with, and I never went on to date them in the future.

The palimpsestic lament of the unloveable lovelorn.

But ultimately, they taught me more about myself than any of the guys I called my boyfriend.

Obviously, these “boyfriends” were nothing of the sort, and her naming designation was an exercise in ego assuaging conceit to avoid calling them what they really were: dildo-shaped opioids.

And as far as the “boyfriends” are concerned, they’ve all slid into my DMs since. Checkmate.

I put “boyfriends” in sneer quotes above to highlight Gross Skank’s essential dishonesty, but here she is one line later putting “boyfriends” in sneer quotes herself, so if she comes by here to wake up on the table and witness her own vivisection she should find herself in complete agreement with what I wrote about her. Checkmate.

Executive summary: Butthurt Caroline Phinney pens the Fake Braggahocio of a lonely hearts club cunt.

***

A reader writes: “the whole article reads like a foolish attempt to project the image that she’s super in demand, which she’s obviously not if you look at her nose. Literally ruined any hope of marriage.”

Yeah, it’s all another version of LOOKATME by a road-worn disposable cumdump. I’m sure all the “boyfriends” she cheated on have shed copious cockodile tears over losing such a prize.

As with all matters issuing from the Degenerate Freak Mafia, their underlying motivation is revealed with a quick glance at their physical form.

Here’s Gross Skank at her absolute best, caked with makeup and saturation lighting:

And here she is the morning after (which explains why her pumpings are always followed by dumpings):

Yeesh. This is all publicly accessible, readers. She wants the world to see this, so who am I to deny her the audience she craves?

Finally, the full body physiognomy:

Manjaw.
Manhips.
Manwaist.

Physiognomy — or more generally, anthroposcopy — is realer than ever.

High T, Low E boy-shaped hole fucknchuck aggrocunt sex piston slurping wine slag from the bottle wants you to know she cheats on every man she’s been with and will continue to do so, men really like it despite not a one of them sticking around to show their appreciation, and by the way she dreams of marriage and kids one day, a dream which eludes her, but that’s totally unrelated to her decision to shill for skank glorification.

PS Related: Research shows American women are becoming less feminine since the 1970s.

Read Full Post »