Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Beta Or Gay?

It used to be easy to tell beta males apart from gay males. Betas had their issues with women — social awkwardness, anxiety, inexperience at the art of courtship — but you never mistook their deficiencies for latent homosexuality. Through the sperg haze of their betatude, it was still clear these were guys who were attracted to women and loved to be around pretty girls, (maybe loved them too much, leading to a lack of state control in the company of beautiful babies).

But that was then. This is now:

The onesie party is bad enough, but that ball-crunching leg cross by the guy in the white jammies… jeeeeeezus. I wonder if he looks at his own penis through a system of mirrors, lest he faint from direct sight of it?

Generation Self-Castration. A low T epidemic is sweeping the white West. Pretty soon we’ll be talking about survivalist holdouts with abnormally high T levels in the 5-10 ng/dl range.

So…. these three males: Beta or gay?

The woman-thing appears to be a pear-shaped Lena Dunham clone. All this gaybeta/betagay excitement will not rouse her hamster even a little bit from its slumber, nor will an effervescent tingle circumnavigate her arid tomb chute this night.

CH is feeling slutty and hypergamously empowered, hence the reason for this batch of themed posts. We’ll be back to practical pickup advice on the morrow. *tips fedora to adoring concubines*

A reader passes along a sly study which found some discomfiting facts about the mate pairing choices of male and female doctors.

DESIGN: Cross-sectional survey.
SETTING: Two medical schools in Ohio.
PARTICIPANTS: A random sample of physicians from the classes of 1980 to 1990.

RESULTS: Of 2000 eligible physicians, 1208 responded (752 men and 456 women). Twenty-two percent of male physicians and 44% of female physicians were married to physicians (P < 0.001). Men and women in dual-doctor families differed (P < 0.001) from other married physicians in key aspects of their professional and family lives: They earned less money, less often felt that their career took precedence over their spouse’s career, and more often played a major role in child-rearing. These differences were greater for female physicians than for male physicians. Men and women in dual-doctor families were similar to other physicians in the frequency with which they achieved career goals and goals for their children and with which they felt conflict between professional and family roles. Marriage to another physician had distinct benefits (P < 0.001) for both men and women, including more frequent enjoyment from shared work interests and higher family incomes.

***

Case study of hypergamy regarding “high status women” i.e. doctors:

22% percent of male physicians and 44% of female physicians were married to other physicians

How do those numbers add up?

How indeed. 😏

Part of the reason for the sex disparity in physician-to-physician (P2P) marriage is the demographics of these two medical schools. If male medical students roughly outnumber female medical students two-to-one, then a necessarily higher percentage of the female student pool will be married to their male peers, assuming all the P2P marriages are within-school.

That’s a big assumption, of course. Most likely, many of these P2P marriages drew from the larger physician mating pool outside of the medical school context. Therefore, something else must be going on to fully account for the P2P sex disparity.

Female hypergamy is the most obvious “something else”. Women HATE HATE HATE marrying down, where by “marrying down” we mean marriage to a man with a combination of social, physical, personality, occupational, and economic statuses that in total lower his MMV below the woman’s achievable spouse acquisition threshold. Given two equally attractive men, (attractive along multiple dimensions of measurement), separated by only one difference — their job title, say — most women would choose the man with the higher status title.

This is a highly abstract thought experiment, to be sure, but it does help illustrate how intolerable the idea of, as Rollo puts it, an “unoptimized hypergamous desire” is to women. Unlike men, for whom as a sex there is very little psychological consternation when contemplating marrying an HB8 nurse versus marrying an HB8 doctor (usually the nurse wins this mental exercise and almost as often wins the real world exercise), women have a real aversion to failing to absolutely maximize the return on their sexual value. Women’s visceral aversion to marrying down expresses as a distraught emotional state, which itself is a property of their Bartholin’s-drenched genes impelling them (usually) to be supremely cautious about choosing which men will have the honor of monopolizing their limited collection of rapidly-spoiling eggs.

Sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive, as it were. 😎

If Female Hypergamy, MD is at play in the P2P marriage statistics, then the numbers found in the linked study make sense. More female doctors refuse to marry non-doctor men (“doctor” being one of, if not the, highest status general occupations), and instead hold out to marry (likely beta male) doctors. If men are not as hypergamous as women, (and given men are predominately interested in youth and beauty), then we would see relatively fewer male doctors obsessively pursing marriage with female doctors to the exclusion of all other kinds of women who meet similar physical attractiveness thresholds.

Which, again, is what the numbers allude.

Female hypergamy can be both a force for good and a recipe for decrepitude. Think of it this way: when women place high demands on their potential suitors, men are motivated, under normal patriarchally-delineated and tribally-coherent circumstances, to step up and appease the reproductively more valuable sex. Female hypergamy, in this instance, can assist in civilizing an organic nation. But the civilizing assist rests in large part on the nature of the women’s demands. Do women demand accomplished, peaceable, wise men, or tattooed, impulsive roughnecks? The answer isn’t so obvious, and can change depending on environmental or biological cues, the most palpable cue being women’s ovulation cycle.

Where female hypergamy can fail a civilization is when it spins out of control, driving high social status women possessing a more civilized suite of genes to become terribly assiduous about reserving their genes for men of equal or greater genetic blessing. This failure manifests in two ways: One, by reducing the fertility of aging, high IQ spinster candidates. Two, by restricting the Clarkian genetic mobility to a small sliver of inbred, credentialist, suckup overachievers.

If female doctors refuse to breed with any man who isn’t a doctor, then their civilization-compatible genes get shunted into a narrow, shrinking demographic slice. In this scenario, female hypergamy fails to further civilizational progress, and can even reverse it by unwittingly creating massive chasms in intra-ethnic economic, social, and reproductive inequalities.

The real mean trick the devil played on women when he crafted their souls was his refusal to reconcile female hypergamy with female beauty. Ugly women with high social status want the same high social status men that pretty women want. Her intrinsic hypergamy becomes the ugly overachiever woman’s worst enemy.

But the ugly women have no chance, an intractable problem which is compounded by the ability and willingness of many unattractive, masculinized SMRT women to conceal under mounds of self-delusion and ego-sparing bromides, aka Feminism.

In stark contrast, high IQ and high social status male doctors, who aren’t nearly as maritally hypergamous as their female peers, spread their civilization-compatible genes more widely. There are plenty of youthful, pretty girls at most IQ ranges, after all. There then follows a “trickle down” effect in doubleplusgood genes, as higher status men knock up sexy but not quite as feminist tankgrrl striver-ish secretaries and nurses. If anything, most men with options prefer somewhat lower social status wives, as they generally present fewer headaches on the way to romantic and familial bliss. (Sexual polarity is the best preventive medicine against marital discord.)

Female Hypergamy is both Brahma the Creator and SHIVa the Destroyer. Women’s leashed sexuality births empires; women’s unleashed sexuality desiccates civilizations. We are well past the birthing stage of America and well into the barren womb stage.

I have mentioned before that the cultural, if not consequently procreative, shift in female romantic preference for badboys may be a subconscious reaction to a native society getting overrun with weak, effete males intent on bending over and taking it up the pooper by unapologetically self-serving, outgroup marauders. If I’m right, then the trend toward intensified assortative mating within the credentialist classes, as noted by Charles Murray of “Coming Apart” fame, may get short-circuited by a silent, but extremely powerful, resistance in the form of a shift in female hypergamous mate preference for less conformist (and hence less credentialed), less obediently beta, sexier jerkboys.

Highly speculative, I admit, but my instant-feedback field observations tell me something like this is happening in geographic beta male cuckspots. Picking up the dinner tab, waiting months for sex, and signaling dependability just don’t buy as much lovestruck pussy as it used to. Sending a half-assed birthday cat emoji, on the other hand, pays poon dividends.

In secular, sex egalitarian, established civilizations like the West, the great anti-feminist truth may be that Male Hypergamy — the desire of men for ever prettier and younger women, and the ability of HMMV men to fulfill that desire — will be the heart matter force that saves the advanced cultures from navel-gazing themselves into oblivion.

Rollo comments, concerning the de-stigmatization of polyamory subject,

Making Up for Missing Out:

On a social scale it seem like the next deductive next step – blend a justifiable Eat Pray Love narrative with the more visceral (yet unignorable) sexuality of 50 Shades and women will readily consume it. I expect there will be the same hamster spinnings of NAWALT and most women respect their marriage vows, but it still wont wash with the overwhelming ‘guilty pleasure’ popularity that 50 Shades exposed on a large scale.

Writers like Rinaldi and E.L. James have tapped into the Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks anxiety rooted in women’s primal insecurity inherent in doubting their optimization of Hypergamy. If appealing to visceral sex sells products to men, appealing to the inherent ‘you-only-live-once’ insecurity of feminine Hypergamy sells to women – and women being the primary consumers in western society, sell it does.

EatPrayGetPumpedAndDumped plus 50 Shades is the event horizon of civilizational decadence and decline. Once that Boobicon is crossed, it’s a rapid swirl down the toilet bowl. Give women the run of the place and the Swirl is the inevitable result.

I believe the Roman Empire in its waning years was also marked by sexual libertinism, especially of their women. Weimar Germany, too, before its rebirth under a patriarchal epoch which unfortunately insufficiently and belatedly weeded out the psychopaths who are otherwise so crucial to the early stages of revolution, welcomed the indignities of wanton women pursuing the alpha fux/beta bux (sometimes not even bothering with the beta bux) lifestyle.

A telling societal signal of imminent collapse is the glorification and commercialization of the worst instincts of women, and the denigration of the best instincts of men. Our women become like men, and our men like women, until an androgynous slop characterizes an empire wheezing its last.

For a small but portentous example of this radical change, just read the title of the latest attention whore du jour’s memoir: “The Wild Oats Project”. Sowing one’s wild oats used to be the prerogative of men, or at least the excusable offense of men, and this was widely understood by men and women. Now the modern aggrocunt and her mewling manlet sidekick want to assume the wild oats mantle for aging hags and urban brunchettes, while denying the same fun to men whose testes haven’t yet climbed north to hibernate.

The cultural message is unmistakable: The clit is the new cock. But this message is wrapped in a fairy tale with a very dark ending. Women can no more play the man’s game than men can play the woman’s game. Not for long, at any rate, and not without a gnawing unhappiness that corrodes the soul.

A couple weeks ago, CH wrote:

Mark my words, a massive elite push to legitimize and maybe even codify polyamory is next on the agenda.

A day ago, a mainstream Hivemind megaphone had an article about some old skank who slept with a bunch of losers while her cucked beta husband — although bless him he managed to prevent this feminist crone from reproducing — meekly acquiesced to his wife’s spiritual eatpraycumguzzle journey. Oh, and the raging narcissist wrote a book about it all.

Get ready for “The Wild Oats Project.” And not just the book. Get ready for “The Wild Oats Project” phenomenon — the debates, the think pieces, the imitators and probably the movie. Get ready for orgasmic meditation and the Three Rules. Get ready for “My Clitoris Deals Solely in Truth” T-shirts.

The reader who forwarded the article noted, “Are you psychic? Right on queue the mainstream media shows up with a trial balloon for polyamory.”

Psychic? Only a little. Mostly, leftoids are just really easy to read.

Yep, open marriages full of wonder and free of hostility or jealousy will be the newest old frontier the replicant Leftoid Industries will attempt to normalize as authentically human. After that’s accomplished (bet on it), gay pederasty is next.

Legal and social sanction of polyamory is not the same as widespread embrace of the sex at dawn lifestyle. That hoped-for popular embrace of polyamory by the left-behinds of society may never come, if current arrangements are indicative of future compositions. FACT: Most open polyamorists are hideously ugly. Polyamory is not the free choice of physically and psychologically attractive people. FACT: The typical nasty three-way in a willingly conjoined open relationship is one leather-faced high T cougar whose labia could survive the chemical bath of deep sea volcanic vents, one wretched, low T omega male “primary” whose job it is to sniff the cuckcum in his wanton whore’s granny panties and masturbate, and one slightly higher T (or, more accurately, lower E) beta male who couldn’t afford an internet connection for better quality virtual vagina.

Ad revenue for major Hivemind media organs has been dropping like a stone. I guess they’ve decided to say “fuck it” to serious journalism and let loose with the technicolor ejaculate of their gnarled ids.

UGH VAPING HIPSTERS

The streets are getting overrun with hipsters puffing limp-wristedly on electronic, cigar-shaped vaporizers. Now the unmuscled, orally-fixated white hipster signals his approach with a little blue LED light and a swirl of nicotine/weed steam emanating from his smelly beard. Are there that many former hipster smokers trying to quit, or is the vape pen just another SWPL attempt to ape actual coolness in an age of anti-racism schoolmarms and sexually ambiguous male feminists? “Vape bars” aren’t far behind.

I recently bought a foot-long vape pipe. I don’t intend to smoke it. I’ll just have it worked into an illustrious pendant worn as a mating cue to passing ladies. Vape rape. 😎

Helicopter Parents

One reason why helicopter parenting is on the rise may have to do with the general post-industrial trend toward smaller families (fewer children, and fewer parents in each home). If you only have one kid, you’ll be more careful about shielding your kid from uncertainties and dangers. If there’s only one parent to guide that kid through the thickets of life, it’ll be easier to simply keep the kid away from unscheduled adventures that could mean more stress for the single mom.

Agnostic writes a lot about helicopter parenting, so I wonder if he’s already touched on the role of small families in driving the obsessive-compulsive parenting trend. Big families used to mean you could let one or two buggers slip through the cracks without freaking out about the possibility of total loss of your genetic heritage.

COTW winner is artistoftheslightlyshadydeal, who writes about the devolution of marriage:

“some experts say boundary-challenging gay relationships represent an evolution in marriage — one that might point the way for the survival of the institution.”

To survive as only a plaything of the legal profession.

It will also encourage women to scheme of ways to rework the marriage contract when they feel like to get 50 shades of dick on the side and bail out of their responsibilities in the partnership.

“I married him, but I never agreed to the reverse cowgirl or to be monogamous”

“I married him but I never agreed to wash the stains out of his children’s underwear”

Marriage will evolve all right, into a dicey proposition at best unless you have money to pay for the right contract to protect yourself from evolution or change you do not want.

Pre-nuptial agreements almost become mandatory to record promises made at the beginning. But it’s a band aid on gaping wound. As soon as marriages have porous boundaries then you may as well each just retain lawyers and start a limited liability company.

“50 shades of dick” lol

I’ve used this analogy before, and I’ll use it again, because I think it’s pertinent: A wife getting fat is reneging on her end of the marital deal just as assuredly as a husband lounging on the sofa all the time doing nothing is reneging on his. Both of them have turned their backs on what the other spouse desires from them.

Gay marriage has cracked open the door to the legalistic flim-flam divorce sham machine that much wider. This commenter is correct. Enlarging the purview of marriage to include all sorts of “arrangements” and “agreements” and “evolutions” and “fluid expectations” will essentially turn the institution into a loveless business partnership, and all that requires. May as well jump to the next step and avoid the wait: Contractual, time-limited marriages that can be renewed every few years based on client satisfaction.

******

COTW runner-up is Ras al Ghul, who spells out the final solution for the institution of marriage.

The real social danger, is what they’re [ed: gay marriage advocates] pushing, acceptance of open marriage.

Getting the betas to accept their women sleeping around (because they’re beta they’re not going to have the opportunity the women have).

The problem, and its a very real on is that the only incentive left for beta men to get married is the illusion that they are locking the girl down.

You take that illusion away and what possible reason do they have to get married and work hard?

None. Your married, hard working married slave boys are your revenue generators for your tax base and economy, Dalrock has that delineated out clearly. Single men, single women and married women have a small percentage of individuals that make a high income.

Married men are more likely to make more, work more.

They’ve erode marriage so far, I’m sure they think this won’t matter, but in the places where gay marriage is legalized the marriage rate drops faster for this very reason.

There will always be men that think they’re special snowflakes and that they’re relationship will be different, but that number of fools is already getting smaller.

Social acceptance and legal codification of open marriage will be the killing shiv twist in the black heart of the West. There will be no turning back from that paradigm shift. Hello, Afrimerica.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,215 other followers

%d bloggers like this: