Feeds:
Posts
Comments

The newest thought-stopping libfag incantation to join classics such as “It’s [the current year]”, “I can’t even”, and “right side of history”, is “That’s not who we are”. You can hear our esteemed pleaders like president Gay Mulatto, TheCunt, and Paul “I can’t put my ankles any farther behind my ears” Ryan saying it, especially in response to Donald J. Trump’s eminently sensible accusation in the AIDS-soaked wake of the Orlando gay nightclub shooting that Muslim immigration to America presents a dire threat to citizens.

(It really does. A Muslim in America is 5,000% more likely to commit an act of terror than a non-Muslim American. As one alt-right shiv-wielder on Twatter wrote to preempt the predictable shitlib response: “Oddly enough, I don’t find the position that we have an ample supply of idiots and bad guys here a compelling reason to import more.”)

What does “that’s not who we are” really mean? As with all shitlibboleths, there’s nothing of substance underneath the faggy pomp. Pin down a lib on this empty slogan and he’ll twist in the wind whistling through his empty skull trying to come up with a coherent explanation. Are we all self-hating Whites? Are we all avatars of altruistic love eager to permit the resettlement of 7 billion foreigners into our neighborhoods and homes? Are we all similarly disposed to redirect our rational fear of Muslim terrorism onto law-abiding White men who aren’t sufficiently prostrate to the reigning equalist narrative?

The reality is that when shitlibs with an affinity for Islam and the Other, and a kneejerk resentment of Whites, (like the Gay Mulatto), say “that’s not who we are”, what they mean, more precisely, is “that’s not who the degenerate freak mafia are”. And that would be true. The degenerate freak mafia, of which the spiteful half-breed Obama is a proud member, are not friends of common sense, not given to honest appraisal of reality, not advocates of pattern recognition, not guarantors of a livable nation for their posterity, not satisfied with a personal quiet ethics that substitutes for a public virtue signaling, not psychologically capable of race realism, and not visceral defenders of what is true and beautiful.

That is not who they are, and the sooner Americans know this about them, the quicker they will be cast out to the prolapsed wastelands where they can be who they are all by themselves….until they get sick and tired of their own company and stop being who they are in a bathtub of warm water.

Commenter maldek regurgitates a shopworn belief among a certain set of manospherians concerning the ability of LSMV women to get sex.

Women at 58 – even much worse looking and overweight women – CAN get dates easily.

No they can’t. More on this below.

They can get as much sex as they want easily. Quantity is not a problem.

Yes it is. More on this below.

The problem is, the quality of mate. Dates are from younger guys who can get laid in their own age group or younger so they date older. Or from guys their own age or older who are in one way or the other SMV rejects and have no other options.

Man with options with an SMV of 7 or higher can and prefer to date younger pussy. This hurts the old hotty even more than it hurts the overweight ex-housewife, because she is used to male attention of the 8+ area and now has to decide between low quality flesh and high quality plastic inside of her lady parts. More often than not, its the later.

Look, you don’t need SCIENCE! to tell you that fat, ugly, and old chicks have trouble getting laid. If you enjoy a halfway-respectable social life, you’ll notice time and again that the unattractive girls show up to parties and events alone, and leave alone, no man to escort them home for post-party boffing. It happens so often no one really blinks an eye, because it’s expected. If you DO need SCIENCE!, please consult the CH archives for studies clearly finding that fat chicks have sex less often than slender babes.

In the real world, fatties, fuglies, oldies and, less frequently, super hot sexpot ingenues with a case of BPD, are the ones who never seem to have a boyfriend when they meet up with their social groups. The sexpots are BF-less for a different reason: they play the field so much they’ve forgotten how to identify a quality man worth slowing down for and stashing the crazy in the crawl space.

The SMV hierarchy of “ease of getting laid” looks like this (note that ease of getting laid does not necessarily imply fulfillment of sex opportunities), in descending order of ease:

Alpha females (HB 8s, 9s and 10s)
Super Alpha males
Beta females
Alpha males
Beta males
Omega females
Omega males

Fat, ugly and old women are essentially omega females in the sexual market, and that’s reflected in the fact they have as much, perhaps more, trouble getting laid as do garden variety beta males. In line with what we know about biomechanics and sex differences in reproductive goals, Omega Females are the instant sexual access equivalent of Beta Males. They don’t get sex offers, direct or indirect, as often as prettier girls, and when they do get laid it’s usually with flings who aren’t their first choice and who don’t even feign a promise of commitment to a longer term agreement.

Omega males have it the worst, and can often go years without so much as a whiff of womb flower.

(Note the curiosity that beta females — 4s, 5s, and 6s — have an easier time getting laid than regular alpha males. The cheapness of sperm guarantees that even alpha males have to put a little legwork in to find a willing buyer.)

So while it is true that in general women can get sex easier than can men, in the particulars we see that this truth varies by the sexual marketability of the woman in question, just as it does for men. What we can say with certainty that applies to all men and women is that the curve for women’s “ease of getting laid” is shifted to the rawdog right of the same curve for men. But there are still plenty of women on the left side of their sex-getting curve who languish as insols for uncomfortable lengths of time.

There’s another psychological dynamic that puts the lie to the “ugly girls can get laid whenever they want” mantra. Women simply don’t emotionally or mentally process their ability to get laid the same way men do for themselves. If a fat chick can slum it with a piss-stained bum, that’s no comfort to her ego. Even if she has an easier time getting hobo dick than a similarly LSMV man has getting fatty furrow, that reality won’t resonate with a positive assessment of her self-conception.

Succinctly, women don’t count loser men as validation of their sexual desirability, (just as they don’t count vacation sex or anal sex as points toward their lifetime partner count). A bum willing to fuck a fat chick just won’t register in her brain as evidence that she can get laid whenever she wants. For women, the only men that register as proof positive of their feminine allure are quality men with options who have willingly chosen them over others, instead of having been chosen because the woman was desperate.

Some manosphere types (and a lot of bitterbitch feminists) forget this because, just like feminists, they frequently dupe themselves into projecting their male sensibilities onto women. That never works. Notch count, and the ability to inflate it, has a different meaning for men and women. However, their wrongness on this subject does spring from a premise with a small kernel of truth: ultimately, sex-getting comparisons between men and women are inherently flawed, because women are, barring exceptions, the receiving sex, and men are the achieving sex. Women wait to receive the sex of a bold sex-getting man emotionally judged worthy of their reception, while men are moved to action to achieve the sex of a beautiful sex-receiving woman penilely judged worthy of their injection.

Because of this intractable psychological and behavioral difference between the sexes, it’s difficult to say with precision that this man and that woman have equal capabilities to easily get laid. The man may have a shy personality or religious feeling that limits his easy sex opportunities, and the woman may be surrounded by timid men who incidentally limit her easy sex opportunities. For this reason, the evidence that fat chicks can’t get laid easily is even more damning than at first blush, given that they have to betray their native womanhood and allow emotional distress into their lives when they chase after men to get the sex they aren’t getting by waiting around passively for a man to approach them unsolicited.

In the big picture, though, the Thirsty Beta Male = Thirsty Omega Female formulation is a useful shorthand. Refer to this post the next time some butthurt blowhard goes on at length about how women have it so great because even the ugly ones can get sex on demand.

It’s been said by others, but it’s worth reiterating here. Open borders are an impossibility. If you remove one border, two more, smaller, borders will be created in its place. It’s like the titular creatures from Gremlins. Spill water on one, and five more mogwai spawn.

The logic is inescapable. A big border protects a lot of smaller entities within the territory it rings. Abolish the big border, and small borders will organically arise to protect the smaller entities that were once protected as a whole behind one big umbrella border. Abolish the small replacement borders, and still smaller borders will be formed to protect the integrity of the multiplying units of partitioned entities and territories.

For real life examples of this phenomenon in action, see any gated community, school with metal detectors, or bulletproof glass-enclosed 7-Eleven check-out counter. If you remove the national border, the citizens will respond to their unwelcome vulnerability by erecting borders around that to which they can still control entry.

Open borders libertardians like Cheap Chalupas either are too stupid to understand this or, more likely, are too disingenuous to bother understanding. Perhaps for them, ensconced in the swaddle of their own leafy, 95% White, high trust suburban borders, the recursively multiplying, mitotically dividing, expanding universe of atomized borders and supporting Surveillance State machinery necessary in a Diversitopia are a feature instead of a bug. If that’s how they think, then here’s to hoping their cushioned principles are put to the test the best possible way: with swift and unremitting exposure to the reality of the borderless world they champion.

There are developments in the Orlando muslim fanatic mass shooting that won’t surprise Chateau guests. Omar Mateen’s second wife, Noor Zahi Salman (American as apple pie), knew about his plans to shoot up the Pulse anal playground, excuse me, nightclub, and declined to tell authorities. She basically covered for Omar, and could be charged as an accessory to murder.

The lessons are as old as time. Muslims, especially from the Middle East and Central Asia, are extremely inbred and clannish. When one muslim goes on a killing spree for allah, you can bet that his immediate and extended family silently acquiesced and probably even supported his violent intentions. This is a sort of tribal wagon-circling and abetting you won’t find too often among Whites of Northwest European descent. It’s confirmation of Donald J. Trumpening’s sensible position that the families of jihadis should be targeted for kebab removal.

The second lesson is ripped straight from the pages of the CH Philosophes. Chicks dig jerks, especially cute chicks in the prime of their fertility who could have non-jerks if they desired them. The allure of the alpha male — note I did not say admirable man — over women is unmissable. Even a brown, ISIS-pledging son of weirdo immigrants with a possible history of downlow sexcapades can cast a spell over women who should know better. Is anyone who’s lived a day in his life among the fairer sex shocked that Noor Salman would swooningly swim in the wake of her psychopath husband’s plans to reach his 72 goats? History is replete with female accomplices of alpha male killers whose charms could not be resisted.

Lest it go under-reported, Omar’s first wife is a true hottie, and he has kids from multiple women. ALPHA. And if you don’t like it, don’t blame the messenger. Blame the massengil.

Meanwhile, a beta male has six white roses instead of twelve red roses delivered to his wife on their anniversary, and she nags him for the oversight and closes her legs for six months.

Rabbit Holocaust

Men from aggressive, foreign tribes, full of passion and conviction, have begun targeting the culture and lifestyle centers of their post-tribal enemy, as opposed to government and military sites. They have identified the softest underbelly and are eviscerating it with a vengeance. This means liberals — r-selected rabbits — will bear the brunt of violent Diversity. We are careening into the rabbit holocaust, when everything liberals believe and hold dear will be under mortal threat, and they will die or scatter to the protection of their warrens.

This may be a needed cleansing. After all, it’s rabbit ideology that got us to where we are: besieged by malcontents and barbarians, and making high-minded rationalizations for welcoming ever more of them to lay waste to the rabbit-optimized Elysium fields of grass that is always fresh and green.

Grass needs watering and tending to keep out pests. Rabbits forget that. All they know is that the grass is there, let’s eat, and why not invite others to join in the feast. Well the grass is retreating, and the rabbits are being gunned down. This won’t change things; common sense and a preservation instinct are missing in the rabbit genes. Millions more Americans — even shitlib Americans — could die at the hands of Diversity and the Effete Elite would not surrender their open borders globalist race-mongrelizing agenda. The solution will be, as always, a forceful taking of power by the K-selected wolves, to save the rabbits from themselves.

Shitlord Of The Week

I’ve had to upgrade the Shitlord of the Month series to Shitlord of the Week, because they’re starting to crop up in the news more frequently. This is a positive sign that a Shitlord Rebellion is a-brewing. When we hit Shitlord of the Day, the Gallows will be heavy with the swinging bodies of traitors and the Wall will gleam from Brownsville to Imperial Beach.

SOTW is owned by this huh-White man, whose shitlib-eating grin could launch a thousand brown triggerings.

supremeshitlord

Nothing drives the anti-White left and mud hordes insane like mockery. AMUSED MASTERY, in the Game parlance. Trump has it in droves, and that’s why he’s steamrolling the nation on a shoestring budget and a skeleton crew.

PA (his blog here) delivers a swift uppercut to the triple chin of America’s gender blender equalists.

The difference between man and woman: the lion fights to the death for his cubs. The lioness goes into heat when an interloper kills her cubs.

The analogy that PA draws explains why women are more amenable than men to voting for politicians who will open the borders to mass quantities of alien races. It’s just a simple fact of sex differences that women come pre-installed with a submission algorithm that executes with a supine ferocity at the exact moment a stronger, more self-confident tribe of men overruns their own men wracked with doubt and enfeeblement.

Islam (president Gay Mulatto’s preferred religion of affinity) is the ultraviolent tribe currently laying waste to the West’s shibboleths, if not the West’s lands, but give it time…if enough shibboleths fall, the spiritually impoverished people of the West will cede their lands with barely a fight (and more likely than not with an excuse for why ceding territory is a moral imperative). And if the estrogenized transom is any indication, too many women are rushing to defend Muslim interlopers from whitemalepatriarchychristianbigotsgunlovingredneckbiblebeltthumpers. Western women are figuratively, and in some cases literally, going into heat for the marauding morlocks.

Does this mean women are innately treacherous? As a political question, maybe. But I would say as a judgment on their character, no, women are who they are: by nature maximizers of their reproductive fitness, and that means to save their valuable eggs they’ll submit to the men with the most passion for conquest. They know not what they do, iow, except how to survive in a world only superficially moved beyond its primal energies.

The answer to the Woman Question, as PA alludes, is for the men of the West to deny the interloper lions access to their lionesses. Accomplish that, and their women won’t feel compulsions to shift allegiance.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,588 other followers

%d bloggers like this: