Saturday, February 19, 2011

Where Have All The Good Men Gone: Why Conservative Women Don't Get It

Older conservative women just don't get it. While writers like Kay Hymowitz may generally be culturally conservative, they are at their hearts, feminists. Their model of what is right with the world is (young women) and what is wrong with the world is (young men). Hymowitz's latest book, an excerpt featured in the Wall Street Journal blames an epidemic of slackerdom among young men, mostly due to the failure to "man up" for the dearth of marriage and children all across the West.

Updated!




[Update: over at the comments on Roissy's post on Emotional Pornography is the link to a post at Huffington Post, of all places. Called, Why You're Not Married by TV Writer (Mad Men, United States of Tara) Tracy McMillan. The reasons include: You're a Bitch, You're Shallow, You're a Slut, You're a Liar, You're Selfish, You're Not Good Enough. As one person responding noted, a man writing that would have been crucified. There are some folks, even liberal ones, who understand the driver of late marriage, few kids, mostly single motherhood.]

What Hymowitz cannot understand (and because she's an older conservative woman, is constitutionally incapable of understanding no matter how many times it is explained to her, no more than a cat could understand calculus) is that it is the condition of women, not men, that caused the great drop in fertility, the great increase in single-motherhood, and the great delay in marriage and adulthood by most men. Simply put, women for the first time ever, can widely choose sexy men instead of responsible ones. And they choose SEXY EVERY TIME just about. Leaving really, zero incentive for men to "man up" as she puts it. There are other factors at play, including a re-jiggering of the economy to put most jobs done by men by outsourced or H1-B visa holder cheaper replacements, the growth of female-dominated (and White male unfriendly) government, fashion, advertising, media, and corporate jobs. But the heart of the reason most White men in their twenties remain slackers is that women choose sexy men over responsible men. And only a very few men (usually less than 10% of the population) can be sexy.

Hymowitz approvingly quotes author/comedienne Julie Klausner, author of "I Don't Care About Your Band: What I Learned from Indie Rockers, Trust Funders, Pornographers, Felons, Faux-Sensitive Hipsters and Other Guys I've Dated" on how there are just not that many good men around:

"We are sick of hooking up with guys," writes the comedian Julie Klausner, author of a touchingly funny 2010 book, "I Don't Care About Your Band: What I Learned from Indie Rockers, Trust Funders, Pornographers, Felons, Faux-Sensitive Hipsters and Other Guys I've Dated." What Ms. Klausner means by "guys" is males who are not boys or men but something in between. "Guys talk about 'Star Wars' like it's not a movie made for people half their age; a guy's idea of a perfect night is a hang around the PlayStation with his bandmates, or a trip to Vegas with his college friends.... They are more like the kids we babysat than the dads who drove us home." One female reviewer of Ms. Kausner's book wrote, "I had to stop several times while reading and think: Wait, did I date this same guy?"


Here is my prior take on this, from 2010.

Historically, leading men, at least in comedy, have featured either the feckless or the boorish: the Fred Flintstones and Bullwinkles and then useless beta males. In my book, I say date guys like Rowlf and Fozzi and not Kermit. Let me think about it.

It's the teenage boys I'm worried about. They're not going to college in numbers. They're going to be angry -- depending on who's coming back from the war. There are charities for girls and I'm all for that, but ultimately, the real problem is the epidemic of inferior men - which is basically what my book is about.


Klausner is no great beauty. Not even heavy photoshopping on her book cover can make her look like a great beauty. She's promiscuous, making her a poor choice for a man with options. And she prefers, like all women, the top few men. Who will bed her but never marry her. After all, she was the one having sex in bathroom stalls, alleyways, and other tawdry, semi-public places with felons, indie rockers, and trustafarians. She could have married an accountant. But that would be BORING and not SEXY. Now a woman aging rapidly out of her attractiveness, she's not even a good mate choice for an accountant. Who could probably do better with straight out porn and X-boxes than a woman with proven poor judgment and a spectacularly bad sexual past. Yes, men DO make judgments about a woman's likely sexual past, which is generally well revealed in casual interaction. A woman with many partners is a poor long-term girlfriend much less potential wife and mother. Promiscuous men and women tend to remain so, behavior does not radically change with a wedding ceremony. [See Charlie Sheen.]

Klausner's complaint is the same as Hymowitz's. The universe of men from which they have to choose from does not consist of men like George Clooney (or Charlie Sheen). Instead, its mostly boring accountants, real estate salesman, and other desk jockeys. Not a bit of sexy danger, dominance, and excitement among them. They don't look like Josh Duhamel (never mind that the women don't look like Fergie or Katherine Heigl either), and frankly bore women who have had exciting, sexy, dominant, bad-boy bed partners. And now want those men to marry them.

Well, they won't. Those men can have any woman they want, and they might want to slum it around a bit (see Sheen, Tiger Woods, John Edwards, and so on). But they end up marrying women like Giselle Bundchen (Tom Brady's wife), or Elin Nordgren (Tiger Wood's ex wife) or Denise Richards (Charlie Sheen's ex wife) or Catherine Zeta-Jones (Michael Douglas's wife). They don't marry ordinary women of ordinary attractiveness.

For women to be really, really happy, the solution is to be born very, very beautiful. More beautiful than 99% of all women. Be a Swedish supermodel, or a Brazilian, or a German one. Or a beautiful Hollywood actress, or as near to it as you can be born. Otherwise, a woman of ordinary beauty should not fool herself. Tiger Woods or Charlie Sheen or George Clooney might sleep with an IHOP waitress. But they won't marry her.

Women want the men other women want. Its preselection. Here's the CW promo for "Hellcats" showing it in action:



Preselection is why a wedding ring is a useful pick-up prop in bars. It is why women in college compete over the top top 10%-20% of men and ignore the rest.

Jayne Dallas, a senior studying advertising who was seated across the table, grumbled that the population of male undergraduates was even smaller when you looked at it as a dating pool. “Out of that 40 percent, there are maybe 20 percent that we would consider, and out of those 20, 10 have girlfriends, so all the girls are fighting over that other 10 percent,” she said.
...
Indeed, there are a fair number of Mr. Lonelyhearts on campus. “Even though there’s this huge imbalance between the sexes, it still doesn’t change the fact of guys sitting around, bemoaning their single status,” said Patrick Hooper, a Georgia senior. “It’s the same as high school, but the women are even more enchanting and beautiful.”


Now, this situation, where women can choose sexy men over reliable men, has at its roots the highly mobile, atomized society of post-War Western society. Which in turn has little penalty for women riding the carousel of hot, sexy and dominant men in their late teens and twenties and into their thirties. Add into this the lowering of men's standards of living (men had a higher standard of living in the 1970's, when the average man of thirty could afford a house on his own) and the deliberate erasure of most of male-oriented jobs and the relative power differential (women despise men their equals in status and power, and find only more powerful men than themselves sexy) makes things even worse for men.


Throw in the destruction of in particular, the White male production and knowledge jobs, from skilled craftsmen in factories and production lines, to engineers, and manufacturing and engineering were either outsourced overseas or insourced via H1-B visas (Microsoft went from mostly nerdy White guys in the 1980's through mid 1990's to majority non-White, and non-US citizen, via the H1-B Visa employment programs), and the situation gets even worse. More men drop off the sexy list, because they don't make more money, than their equivalent average Jane, and don't throw around more social and cultural power either. Those are the original Microsoft Employees above right. You'd be hard pressed to find their like (absent hair styles) at any Microsoft office today. As Steve Sailer notes, you find White male employment at Silicon Valley declining. And as he also notes, the Valley itself does not employ many people compared to old industrial companies. Facebook has about 3,000 employees. That's not even a shift at a GM factory. Women and Blacks and Asians are complaining in various media outlets that their share of employment at Valley companies has not increased, yet they have no issue with the decline of White male employment.

In addition, the growth of government, non-profit, and related health/education/welfare jobs, has meant in effect a female-gay-non-White ghetto, where males fear to tread. Education is notorious for being male-unfriendly, as is health care, non-profits (places for trustafarians to hang out acting "respectable") and so on. Take a look at your local DMV. You won't find too many (straight) White males. Same with your public library. That pattern generally holds as well with most corporate jobs (as parodied in "the Office") and particularly finance, HR, and the like. The growth in media, advertising, and so on has created a gay-female ghetto, almost exclusively.

The dynamic is that White men and women are in competition for the same limited amount of jobs in the White-collar, middle class work environment. For most White women, most White men are the "enemy" and an open alliance with gays, non-Whites, and other women to drive them out has emerged. You'll find this characteristic of most educational institutions, non-profits/NGO's, and particularly government. Wise Latinas and the like are accounted better than the average White guy. To be White and a male is generally, to be a loser. Unless you are a dominant, sexy, obnoxious A-hole.

Which leads directly to the role that men play in their twenties that Hymowitz finds so annoying. Embrace responsibility for … what exactly? The women around them are too busy sleeping with felons, trustafarians, indie-rockers, and hipsters to even notice them. Indeed, about 80-90% of all men are sexually invisible to their female counterparts. As Roissy recently posted, women indulge in stuff even worse, "emotional porn" that plays to their hypergamous desire to snag (for themselves, exclusively) that dominant Alpha A-hole they dream of. Edward Cullen from Twilight, Dr. McDreamy-McSteamy, Charlie Sheen, the various rich guys on Gossip Girl, the Black professional Athletes of the Kardashian clan (there is apparently 112 Kardashian sisters and cousins, all entwined with Black professional athletes of some fame), all play to destructive fantasies by ordinary women.

No man the average Jane can possibly marry will be as immortal and powerful and devoted as Edward Cullen. None will be McDreamy or McSteamy (or even a Doctor). They won't be rich heirs to fortunes in NYC, or Black pro athletes. Oh sure, sex will be on offer. But not marriage, and even there, the most beautiful women get cheated on by the Alpha A-holes they marry. Because, well they can cheat. That's the consequence of the skewed female marketplace.

Hymowitz proposes to shout real loud at slacker men, to get married. Because "its all their fault" that women are sleeping with trustafarians and felons, or choosing artificial insemination and single motherhood. She can't understand, literally, that the men only respond to those who do the choosing: WOMEN.

To change this state of affairs, it is therefore necessary to change women's behavior. First, male dominated jobs must be brought back: eliminate outsourcing, insourcing, H1-Bs, remove Affirmative Action, and demand companies instead prefer White men for hiring. Push status and social and cultural power to engineering, production, and the like. Not awesomely fabulous designer shoes or awesomely fabulous media jobs.

Second, women need penalties to change their preference for sexy men over responsible ones. That means a stable, relatively non-mobile and deeply connected (not atomized) society where female friends, relatives, moms, and so on harshly criticize and penalize "slutty" behavior such as sleeping with felons, trustafarians, indie rockers, etc. Men are not going to line up to propose to women like Julie Klausner, so it is absolutely essential that society (and most societies have done so) put limits on the unfettered and unlimited female sexual expression. [Joe Average Beta Male is about as desirable to women as a cold bowl of oatmeal, so that in and of itself limits his expression outside of prostitution or porn.]

Third, women must face penalties for staying on the sex partner carousel too long, and benefits for getting off it with early marriage. Society must consider grad school and other things a woman does to further her career something done AFTER marriage and child-care, with women facing no penalty for marrying relatively young (age 22-25) and having kids in their twenties, going back to school in their mid thirties or so. Meanwhile, women need to be socialized to the effect that, if they delay marrying too long, all they'll get is the losers as other women picked off all the good guys. Again this needs a tight social network of other women constantly re-inforcing this message and using ostracism/pressure to penalize those who flout it.

This can be done but is very unlikely to be done. Because it would take away the ability of women to have sex with sexy bad boy men in their twenties. Which they are trading off the possibilities of husbands and good fathers, more or less. Even women who understood clearly (and most remain in denial about their loss of attractiveness due to age and bed partners) the costs of sexy bad boy men in their twenties, would almost invariably choose sexy, 90 times out of 100, instead of responsible. Women have their own money, their own earnings. Face no social pressure. Don't face unplanned pregnancies. Why wouldn't they choose sexy bad boys?

This is why Conservative Women like Hymowitz are useless when it comes to social issues. They either live in 1955 (where a considerable number of conservative men also live) or reflexively side with women because, dammit, those bad boys are just so sexy! We live in a society optimized to give the most women sexual access to the top 10% of men, the sexy bad boy dominant Alpha A-holes (women love). That optimization is deliberate (by well, women and the sexy bad boys) and for the now, irreversible. Women are not going to stop having sex in alleys with felons (like Klausner, read her book) unless forced by social structures to do so. They'll fight every step of the way demand access to the top sexiest men, and then support from Beta Males after a decade or more of Klausner like escapades. The Duke F-List powerpoint is a flashing red arrow to women's preferences. The young women in question who exclusively had sex with athletes and rated them in powerpoints is unlikely to find Joe in Accounting much of a catch. Even though her appearance is utterly average.

So we are thus, for the foreseeable future, resigned to single motherhood and the ills that follow. But women would not have it any other way, it is just too sexy!

The one "bright spot" is that a huge shock, nuclear attack by Iran or AQ, cyber sabotage taking down infrastructure, massive oil shocks due to a widespread Arab revolt, all promise to create massive instability and financial destruction. In which women would spell Beta Males (who are willing to fight, and can do so effectively) P-R-O-T-E-C-T-I-O-N. Think the LA Riots. Or any third world disturbance. Of course X-box playing guys are probably limited in their usefulness in fighting, but one looks for silver linings where ever one can.

86 comments:

Kavinika said...

I really liked this post. I agree that women are a great deal to blame for this dynamic. When I teach I stress that sometimes it's good for women to date bad men so that they learn the value of a good one. Sadly, I think few of them really get it. It's so much easier to blame the other sex than to take responsibilities for one's choices.

Jeff Burton said...

Last paragraph LOL! I'll make sure to tell my sons to all pray for some apocalyptic nightmare. That'll improve their matrimonial chances.

TheUnpaidBill said...

You make me very glad that my children won't be growing up anywhere near the coast. There are still parts of the country that realize that character trumps "sexy" when it counts.

Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...

Same here, Unpaid Bill.

The women-being-idiots-about-total-jerks thing is something I can see on TV and say "Wow, that's a stupid plot point; what woman with an IQ above room temp and a lack of serious mental issues would do THAT?" Not something I have to correct for in my life or that of my friends.

Novaseeker said...

Location does matter to a significant degree. The coastal blue cities are the epicenters of what Whiskey is describing, but they are also the environment that Hymowitz is talking about (in her case, it's Manhattan, whereas in W's case it's LA). But in these places it's really terrible, and W describes the situation quite well, I think.

occultrick said...

Hymowitz is neither conservative nor feminist: she's a Cultural Marxist. Her only guiding principle is to ask: "Does it serve Cultural Marxism?" She attacks anything that looks like it threatens and fawns on anything that looks useful. Beyond that, she has no brain functions.

Elizabeth Smith said...

Whiskey you are wrong. You are mixing up fiscal conservative/libertarian/neoconservative (who are mostly social liberals) with traditional conservative.

Kay Hymowitz is a libertarian hello. The WSJ (Wall Street Journal) is a libertarian cesspool. Most of the commenters are fiscal conservatives but pretty liberal on everything else and always on the defense of individualism and freedom (besides equality in a few cases).

Elizabeth Smith said...

Whiskey doesn't seem to get it that
Kay Hymowitz is a libertarian chick that is bemoaning how liberal dudes annoy her and are of low value. That she's regretted what she has done in life (which is campgaing for liberal/libertarian ideals) and only now can see the mess she participated in.

Foxfier, formerly Sailorette said...

Good point, ES. I know I'm getting really sick of libertarians being called conservatives, just so they can turn around and smack those who are conservative fiscally AND socially in the nose.

Most of the loud "conservatives" I can think of are actually libertarian, which would explain Whiskey's observation.

Naturalized said...

It would be interesting to explore the future, where things continue to develop the way that they are developing now, even possibly at an accelerated pace. I think it is more than 30% likely that instead of a backslash against feminization of society, it would actually would accelerate. Latino immigrants would actually mitigate it somewhat, since these ideas are not as popular in Latin America, but eventually it could even spread to the immigrant groups. What do you think?

james said...

What do white men have? It's in their genes. Look around. They can have the most beautiful children, the most intelligent and creative children. It's in your ballsack boyo! Negligent dumb sluts forget this at their own peril.

The Kardasians and their like can have their long-shanked bad boys but their children will be mildly retarded and vicious.

Marrying young and wisely can save a woman from a world of pain.

Anonymous said...

Hopefully, those bitches get old and lonely in their declining years. Commit suicide, you fucking cunts!

Anonymous said...

Whiskey, how about this idea?

95% of female graduates aren't allowed on the career ladder until they are 30 years old.

This will encourage intelligent women to get married younger and have families younger, whilst enabling more men to get a job and a higher status than their potential partner.

There would be exceptions made for exceptionally high-performing females who would be allowed to work in their twenties and given free childcare.

This would require a change in the US Constitution because you couldn't allow them to vote it down again, but it would be worth it.

Women get the opportunity of a career but they are also reminded of their responsibilities to society.

Amrein-Marie said...

Guys, you are too funny. Don't you like beautiful girls too?
What you show is what you get. You want beautiful white girls? Then, first, start to think about your commercial attractiveness. You are the product AND the trader! Just do what you have to do and learn our to sell yourself.
Try it! Make mistakes! Suffer... ! And enjoy life when it works.
As any traders, don't forget to study the competition.

Samson said...

t

Samson said...

Very telling (and saddening) Microsoft photo. 20 to 30 years ago the future seemed bright for white nerds. Now? Uncertainty. 'All is vanity and a chasing after wind.'

Jeff Burton: Not an apocalypse, just a return to reasonably harsh conditions.

Ping Jockey said...

So what does this tell me (a White man who is, though educated, an 'average Joe Beta')?

That women despise me and hate me for what I was born.
That women would happily and cheerfully celebrate my death.
That women view my only real purpose in life is to 'protect' them (aka, 'cannon fodder').

And Western women seriously wonder why men are becoming less enamoured of them, and want less and less to do with them?

Thank God I never married or had children. In this modern world, a society can't survive when it denigrates, demeans. demotivates, and exterminates it's producers and innovators. This short-sighted, sick society won't last, not on the road that it is on...and it deserves it.

Atlas is due to shrug.

Anonymous said...

And oddly enough, none of these issues exist in the much mocked Chassidic community. Hmmm.

War Blogger said...

Where have all the good men gone?
Well, maybe they realized they were getting bad deals all over the place and chose to opt out of the game?

Why should an average Joe invest years into a relationship with a woman, support her whereever he can and be her prototypical white knight, if all she does is dump him the very moment a possible Alpha catch walks around the corner?

Maybe Average Beta Joe has come to the conclusion that his emotional and financial health is better served with watching porn and spending quality time with his buddies than with wasting it on the fickle desires of some slut?

Hell, spending some good time after work with some buddies, watching a movie or playing X-Box and drinking a couple cold ones is becoming increasingly common even in my age group. And women only have themselves to blame for that change. You want a relationship, ladies? Then learn that giving is part of the deal.

DR said...

"That pattern generally holds as well with most corporate jobs (as parodied in "the Office") and particularly finance, HR, and the like. The growth in media, advertising, and so on has created a gay-female ghetto, almost exclusively."

Finance is unfriendly to males? Have you ever been on a typical investment bank or hedge fund trading floor? It is the most male-dominated, testosterone laden, female unfriendly environment I have ever seen.

Moreover the number of non-Asian minorities in actual "big-swinging-d***" positions at these firms is next to nil. Finance pretty much embodies the world you want: high male status and power, ability for young people to make a lot of money relative to those older and tenured on the career ladder, high meritocracy relative to PC affirmative action, large financial and status rewards to high-intelligence, otherwise beta males.


Anyway, thought the rest was spot pretty spot on, but wanted to correct what I thought was a minor error. Good post.

Anonymous said...

I was reading Psychology Today and they had an aritcle about reading other people. There was one about men and woman and it said that after a guy has been talking to a woman for a while and he thinks she likes him and he asks her out and she turns him down, HE SHOULD APOLOGIZE TO HER,even though she was leading him on. That's how wacko this world is.

stillcode said...

Where have all the good men gone?

This good man went overseas and found a good woman.

Whiskey said...

I should have been clear, Corporate Finance is mostly female dominated. Not at the upper echelons (most CFOs are male) but certainly in the middle management. That was certainly my experience.

Wikipedia lists Hymowitz as married with kids, and a frequent contributor to City Journal (I've read a number of her pieces). She's known for promoting Marriage (her book Marriage and Caste, 2006) as a means for upward mobility. It is my understanding she is an older woman in her fifties/sixties.

Oddly enough, she argued the reverse in Marriage and Caste at City Journal, where she noted White middle/upper class women got married before kids, as a means to advance children, while lower class White women had kids and rarely married. She did not come out and say Upper Class White women traded better outcomes for sexy, and lower class White women traded sexy for better outcomes, but she came close.

Then she shied away.

EuroCanadian News said...

Young women under 25 should get paid to have and raise kids, like it's a job. Genetic or similar screening of both parents would be mandatory.

Make it a collective eugenics project for the whole community.

That way there is a payoff for everyone involved.

Anonymous said...

quote:
"Third, women must face penalties for staying on the sex partner carousel too long, and benefits for getting off it with early marriage."

I am not an old man but I'm definitely not young. I have a certain amount of net worth / savings added to my name thanks to a combination of: thrift, (not having to care for a wife / family), and age. As I get older my net worth will naturally go up even higher. It's amazing how much money you can save up as a single man, I'm on my way to joinging the upper middle class. I find that as I get older I'm less interested in marriage.

If I were to go back to my 20's and if there was a women who was willing to stick it out with me thick and thin helping me to: work for my money, save for it, and plan for it then yeah I would be happy to share my money as any responsible husband should.
but...
Getting back to now, Why should I put 50% of my net worth on the table for another woman who never lifted a finger to earn it? I would not give that to even the most beautiful woman on the planet.

There is a penalty for women who wait too long (although not as high as in the old days) but it's still there. Men who lived financially responsible lives (such as myself) aren't going to be interested in them. The only men who will be available are the ones in their 30's and 40's who have zero net worth.

I agree with feminists there is indeed a shortage of good men available.
but...
There is also a shortage of good women available so both sides get what they deserve.
I'm happy with what I have.

Lorne said...

I appreciated one of Whiskey's lines, which I've often used myself:
'Conservatives still think it is 1955.'

Jay Fink said...

I agree with those who say it's not so bad in red states. I am a nice beta who is invisible to women in my large West coast urban area. When I used to try to pick up on them they would be extremely bitchy towards me because I project no dominance. I have spent time in dark red states such as Oklahoma and Arkansas and the women were not only much more friendly, they were flirting with me. They seemed to appreciate my good qualities. I'm getting deep into middle age now so it's too late but if I could do my life over again I would have relocated to that region of the country.

Anonymous said...

You should widen your perspective. Learn Spanish and go to Havana for example. In the end it is not so bad to be a white male.

CrisisEraDynamo said...

@ Jay Fink

I'm glad you found some good women in the red states, but the rot is nationwide, since the feminazi divorce laws apply everywhere. Like I said, I'm happy for you, but ultimately it's just another case of Not All Women Are Like That (NAWALT.)

Anonymous said...

"I appreciated one of Whiskey's lines, which I've often used myself:
'Conservatives still think it is 1955.'"

Actually no. Liberals believe that "Conservatives live in the past and want to turn back the clock." Most of them are actually aware how liberal society is today.

Jay Fink - Concentrate on conservative neighborhoods (note: not libertarian) instead of red states. Most states are are actually purple. It's the neighborhoods that vary. Avoid counties filled with liberal chicks and fiscally conservative/libertarian women who are way too crazy about money.

Anonymous said...

Most conservatives are actually aware how liberal society is today. And most reactionaries reject everything from the liberal laws in the 1950's all the way back to the enlightement.

Whiskey said...

I would say most conservatives do not really understand the baseline ethnic/racial, sexual attitude-behavior, and other radical changes in society today. I had an argument with a friend, an older social conservative who is fiscally liberal (Catholic), who denied with his own eyes the fact that UCI (which he and I had visited many times) was mostly Asian. I had to point out UCI's demo stats on the Web for him to believe his own eyes. About matters relating to female behavior, he is even more clueless. This is typical -- Conservatives take attitudes formed in early adolescence/adulthood and various demographic makeup and take it as immutable. The idea of radical change never enters their heads.

"Reactionary" is merely childish name-calling (like "racist" shouted by Columbia students at a Purple Heart Iraq Vet, an amputee, struggling to speak at a meeting). Burkean conservatives cite the examples of history that a few proven, tried and true means of ordering:

*Sex
*Family Formation
*Education
*Control of Violence
*Cooperation

Are proven to be superior to all others. The burden is on liberals to prove conclusively that single motherhood, radical sexual libertinism, racial replacement/colonialism, is superior to proven Anglo-European means handed down by trial and error through the Centuries. Our preferred means of ordering society at the base (family, sex, children, reproduction) put men on the moon, beat Hitler and Tojo, and ended entrenched, global-resource supplying chattel slavery. Liberals offer an endless Woodstock or Cairo as a model. A track record of proven failure.

kurt9 said...

I have always considered self-responsibility and self-reliance to be the ONLY definition of adulthood. I do not accept the notion that adulthood is conditional upon the entrance into any kind of relationship with other people. Interpersonal relations of any kind are purely instrumental and are OPTIONAL.

It is in this area that the social conservatives like Kay Hymowitz and Laura Wood to be way off base.

However, there is another point that shows the lack of imagination of all parties in this debate. Its possible that some do not get married and have kids because they want to retire, independently wealthy at age of 40 and live in, say, South East Asia for the rest of their lives. For most of us, the "white picket fence" option represents 30 years of wage/debt slavery. Some of us might not be into this at all.

MnMark said...

First, it is pointless to talk about how "we" should make this or that sort of social change - e.g. "To change this state of affairs, it is therefore necessary to change women's behavior." What, you think you're going to pass a bunch of laws that are the equivalent of shariah law? Get real. Before you get excited about these great ideas you have for social change, could you name one or two instances in history when a few people ranting together about how "things oughta change" actually succeeded in changing society in the way you're proposing? I've been hearing this kind of impotent "we ought to make people do A, B and C" crap my whole life and it's empty talk.

Civilizations just evolve the way they are going to evolve, based on the realities of human nature, changes in the environment, and changes in technology, among other things. I think there's a lot to generational theory, that these things go in big grand cycles.

Second, for the beta guys out there bemoaning how they can't find a decent woman: presumably there are as many ugly and low-status women out there as there are beta men. Are you 3s and 4s and 5s willing to look at the women who are in that range, or have you warped your expectations with all the porn where you focus your fantasies on women who are 9s and 10s? There's a hell of a lot of lonely fat, homely women who would be happy to consider you. Are you willing to look past their looks and personalities to the real person inside in the same way you want those beautiful women to see you?

kurt9 said...

Another point that conservatives like Kay Hymowitz fail to consider:

The slacker life style is a rational choice in a no-growth economy.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey,

I think your posters are ignoring the fact that the US offers a number of subcultures, and each subculture has a different system.

Yes, on the coasts of the US young females may all aggressively compete to serve the needs of a small number of alphas. But the rules are different in other parts of the US.

For example, I know young men that converted to Mormonism in order to "return to the 1950's" in terms of family values. I am grossly oversimplifying, but the Mormon system essentially matches male 9's to female 9's and they marry in their 20's
The mormon system also successfully matches male 5's to females 5's and they too marry in their 20's

Mormonism solves most of the problems discussed in this thread.

For beta males who want to marry females with the same status that they have, I fail to see any reason not to immediately convert to Mormonism. If someone has a reason please post it here.

Now, a totally separate issue is the beta male 5's who wish to marry female 9's. That group of males is beyond help, and indeed Mormonism and traditional cultures really won't help them.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey, your blog is written from a male perspective, so the assumption here is that more males are seeking a "traditional" lifestyle than there are females seeking that traditional lifestyle.

However, my understanding of the history of Mormonism is that many more females converted to Mormonism over the years than males, since Mormonism was one of the few groups that a woman could join in the entire United States that guaranteed her a hard working responsible husband.


I guess the usual lament I read in the HBD blog o sphere reads something like this

"... I am a male beta 6. I see all the female 6s competing for the attention of the male alpha 9s. I am therefore unhappy and want society to be changed...."

whiskey, If 100 males in the HBD blog o sphere post this, I personally assume that those 100 males fall in to one of the three following categories

(a) males that want society changed so that somehow beta 6's can get attention from female 9's
(obviously that is silly. The beta 6s that post here will never get attention from female 9s no matter how socity is rearranged. These male posters are laughable and are hiding the truth of what they want)

(b) males that want society changed so that male beta 6's can have sex with female 6s without getting married (this is not quite so silly a thing for the beta 6s to want, but still pretty silly. if all the beta 6 males are offering is commitment free sex there is no logical reason for the female 6s to provide it when the female 6s would rather provide to the male alpha 9's. Putting it another way, if a female 6 has the chance to ride a male 6 or a male 9, it is only logical for the female 6 to ignore the male 6 and jump on the male 9. )

(c) male beta 6s that want society changed so that they can marry young female 6s BEFORE those female 6's ride the carousel. (obviously i think these male beta 6s are indeed reasonable in what they request and that we on this blog should try to offer them practical advice)

my point is that the males who post here who are in the (a) and (b) category are really quite silly and not worthy of consideration.

Males in the (c) category are very interesting to me. I think they can solve their problems by converting to mormonism or some other traditional group or culture within the US or abroard. Really there are many ways for them to solve their problem. I would like to hear more from the readers here of practical ways for the males in category (c) to solve their problems.

Simon Grey said...

Really, at the end of the day, good men always go where they're wanted.

Anonymous said...

kurt9 said...
"The slacker life style is a rational choice in a no-growth economy."

Why be a slacker when you can instead work hard, but keep the money to yourself? You only live one life. Isn't it better to live a life of accomplishments then none at all?

kurt9 said...

Why be a slacker when you can instead work hard, but keep the money to yourself? You only live one life. Isn't it better to live a life of accomplishments then none at all?

I agree. However, this is often not an option for many people in a no-growth economy.

dave in boca said...

"Women want the men other women want."
The obvious end-game of this is polygamy of one sort or another, and in the late-night clubbing, that means serial one-night stands.

The other night my U of Miami daughter, who dates a well-known football star, met LeBron James' girl friend. I didn't know he had one particular one, and my daughter said that 'Katie" told her LeBron was stuck on a childhood sweetheart---i.e., the mother of his child?

The spectacle of the cougar becomes plausible as the cosmeticians and scalpel wielders become able to combine botox & deft surgery to keep a sixty-year old looking thirty-five.

And what's the incentive to have kids after forty? Boca has a lot of these female adventurers and they all blame men for whatever current condition they're unhappy about. Or as Jay Leno once noted about an island of women-only, "But who would they blame?"

Social Conservative said...

I'm really tired of hearing libertarians talk rot about social conservatives wanting some kind of sharia or other government intervention so we can have a girlfriend.

NO! What we want is for government to stop subsidising alpha chasing sluts with our tax dollers. How insane is it for an unmarried pregnant woman getting paid maternity leave from some public sector job when there's an army of unemployed men out there kicking their heels! Women can only survive in the workforce in such numbers because of huge government intervention.

And yes, I do believe the 50s can return, it's the natural result of prosperity minus cultural marxism, feminism, big government and all the rest of that poison.

As to why beta 4s or 3s can't marry female 3s? Porn is obviously more attractive than a hideous creation of the nanny state. I don't believe anyone is a 3 but by choice. No woman that isn't overweight and takes care of herself can be a 3, same for guys.

Without their wealth destroying jobs in the public sector, women would have to take better care of themselves in order to attract a decent beta provider.

Whiskey said...

Anon -- It is my understanding that the Mormon Church has more men than women. So a mass conversion of Men to Mormonism only takes the competition for a few women by many men into a religious grouping.

Moreover, Mormonism is a movement that tends to match couples in HS and early College. It will do a man in his mid twenties or later no good at all (he can merely help out young families with various duties I suppose).

This is not a panacea for matching people up WISELY at earlier ages before women have had lots of sexy with sexy Alphas and men have become bitter betas. A woman who is a 6 after all, to a male six, is far more desirable at age 20 (with little past baggage of many lovers) than she is at 35 with perhaps 40 or more lovers. Indeed the female six has now dropped down to a three, while the male 6 can possibly INCREASE in value if he has earnings/status/power.

The problem is a social one -- single motherhood and uninvested single men. Defacto polygamy. Which is great for women -- they get the sexiness they crave, but creates by definition a whole class of men wanting to overturn the system (and create their own harems of young women). Poverty, violence, and other dysfunctions are characteristic of such systems.

sestamibi said...

@MnMark--
"Are you 3s and 4s and 5s willing to look at the women who are in that range, or have you warped your expectations with all the porn where you focus your fantasies on women who are 9s and 10s? There's a hell of a lot of lonely fat, homely women who would be happy to consider you. Are you willing to look past their looks and personalities to the real person inside in the same way you want those beautiful women to see you?"

Gawd, what a pile of white-knighting horseshit? Did you even read Whiskey's post two above yours?

You don't get it, do you? 3's and 4's and below these days have exactly the same sense of entitlement that their far more attractive sisters have. I know because I found out the hard way.

If you want to (or have to) bottom-feed, you have to establish right from the start your higher SMV. If they don't get that they're lucky to have you, then move on.

Anonymous said...

Whiskey,
first of all, let me thank you for opening this thread. This topic has brought together all branches of the paleo-o-sphere.

I look at various blogs and it is a real coming together. The exterminationist anti semites are singing the exact same tune as the most aggressive philo semites. So thank you for finding some common ground that can bring together the paleo - o -sphere

Let me summarize here,
The traditionalists are looking for a society in which male 5s can marry a female 5 that is either a virgin or close to it.

Let's assume that in that same society male 9s can marry female 9s that are virginal or close to virginal.

As Laura Wood illustrates, the dream of the female paleos is nearly the same as the dream of the male paleos. Female paleos also want a world in which near virginal females marry males that are equal to them in terms of attractiveness.

We all know that in many parts of the USA (but not all parts of the USA) the mormon churches offer just such a society. Now, Whiskey you made the point that Mormonism may only be a solution for younger men, not for older men. I would be interested in hearing from Mormons as to whether that is true.



My question is, what other socities in the US offer this. Are there certain evangelical churches in the US that offer this?

Let's put it another way, if a young man attends an evangelical christian college, will he find virginal females at his level who will marry him? I am thinking Oral Roberts U, places like that.

Whiskey, we all know that the prevalent zeitgeist of our society is towards hypergamy. But i am asking you to spend more time on the exceptions to the rule.

Whiskey, sometimes you tend towards defeatism. Why not talk about sub cultures where paleo values are already dominant today

Anonymous said...

"Meanwhile, women need to be socialized to the effect that, if they delay marrying too long, all they'll get is the losers as other women picked off all the good guys. Again this needs a tight social network of other women constantly re-inforcing this message and using ostracism/pressure to penalize those who flout it."

Well, this is one woman who has no desire to become some kind of neighborhood scold or busybody! How arrogant would I have to be to assume I know the hearts and minds of others and should ostracize or berate them for being single? This would be equally as offensive as Kay Hymowitz' book. We actually used to have that system in place - old maids/spinsters anyone? Get married to the first boy you meet and have babies, that's it for you, young woman! No thanks; it's great to have more options than our grandmothers/mothers had.

Encouraging loveless marriages between young kids who don't even know who they are or want they want in life does not serve anyone and it certainly doesn't build happy families.

Anonymous said...

Well, this is one woman who has no desire to become some kind of neighborhood scold or busybody! How arrogant would I have to be to assume I know the hearts and minds of others and should ostracize or berate them for being single? This would be equally as offensive as Kay Hymowitz' book. We actually used to have that system in place - old maids/spinsters anyone? Get married to the first boy you meet and have babies, that's it for you, young woman! No thanks; it's great to have more options than our grandmothers/mothers had. Encouraging loveless marriages between young kids who don't even know who they are or want they want in life does not serve anyone and it certainly doesn't build happy families.

*Applause*

man2 said...

Anon: "it's great to have more options than our grandmothers/mothers had."

What a nice compliment to pay to your grandfather/father. Let me guess they were both violent alcoholics, just like the majority of men.

I guess like goldilocks women have to sleep with as many men as possible until they find one thats just right.

Jesus Christ Supercop said...

MnMark: "Could you name one or two instances in history when a few people ranting together about how "things oughta change" actually succeeded in changing society in the way you're proposing? [...] Civilizations just evolve the way they are going to evolve, based on the realities of human nature, changes in the environment, and changes in technology, among other things."

Yes, of course. For example, Communism was a result of inevitable and natural "evolution" and had nothing to do with somebody devising the idea of Communism and then others putting it into practise.

"Second, for the beta guys out there bemoaning how they can't find a decent woman: presumably there are as many ugly and low-status women out there as there are beta men."

Once again "betas" are considered the bottom of the barrel, the lowest of the low, for no apparent reason. As a man who is necessarily a "beta" by virtue of not being a womanizing psychopath and all-around asshole, I can't decide who hates me more: PUAs or feminists (not that there is much difference between the two).

rebelliousvanilla said...

anonymous, I'd like to point out that if you don't want that, don't whine about being pumped and dumped. And that old model was far better for anything than the current group of overgrown men, stupid sluts and single mothers. They made far better families. :)

And yes, I suppose it's great to be a guy now too. You pump and dump sluts and play video games, instead of working your ass off. The problem most men have right now actually is working too much instead of doing interesting things.

Rollory said...

"it's great to have more options than our grandmothers/mothers had."

For women in their 20s, maybe. The ever-increasing number of 35+ women lamenting how they can't find a good man and can't figure out why not, might disagree with you. "options" is the feminist battle cry, and it is a thing of the moment, not of the long term. Options are no use when you aren't ever pushed to actually pick one.

As for my grandmothers and the one great-grandmother I was lucky enough to know well, they were small-town farmer girls and always gave every indication of being extremely satisfied with what they got out of that in marital terms.

Rollory said...

As for mormonism, I put a lot of thought into that and rejected it, because
1) the golden plates and the angel Moroni - it's just nonsense, a religion should hew to the truth, not depend on people advocating something clearly false
2) required tithing. I've no problem with something similar on a voluntary basis for a community that I feel is valuable to me and of which I am a valued part. But as a newcomer, they have absolutely no claim on my income, and I instinctively resent the suggestion.

Anonymous said...

Rollery,
Mormonism (and the similar strict Christian sects that do tend to pair up young people at young ages for marriage) work because they are very costly.

Members of our church are expected to tithe (no bills but it's known who gives and who doesn't), help in some area of the church (at least monthly), help with several large events, and attend at least one service a week.

In the dating game, church is very useful signal that women (and men) can use to signal less open things (I'll suppport you/I haven't slept around), because the signal is large investments of time and money that are rendered near worthless if you get caught. Sluts are still welcome in church, but they'll never be marriage material (and the women of the church enforce that very well).

That's why the denominations with growth generally make very high demands on adherents.

Anonymous said...

"It's great to have more options than our grandmothers/mothers had."

There is a truism that states: "Having infinite choices is virtually the same as having no choices."

http://www.fourhourworkweek.com/blog/2010/06/09/choice-effect-why-are-you-single/

kurt9 said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
kurt9 said...

What no one is mentioning here is that some of us may reject the very concept of living life according to some externally defined set of milestones. I've always considered my life to be my own. This means that I pursue whatever objectives that I choose for myself, not live by the dictates of others. What some of you (both pro and con in this debate) can't seem to wrap your heads around is the fact that maybe some of us choose not to get married and have kids because we have other, more interesting objectives we want instead, regardless of whether women are good or bad.

Another thing to consider is that the marriage/kids thing really is 30 years of wage/debt slavery even if the marriage is stable and everything is fine. Some of us may choose to avoid this option for no other reason than the fact that it is easier to save for international life style retirement if one remains single, enjoy what hobbies and outdoor sports you do like, and live a frugal life style.

People like Hymowitz, Wood, and others can't seem to grasp this concept at all.

For example, I like international travel. Travel is my passion. I would not sacrifice my number one passion for anything else.

Anonymous said...

Professor Woland says:

If you want to change women’s behavior, the simplest way is to control how resources are distributed (i.e. choke off the money supply). And by control resources, I mean both personal and public.

It is not possible or desirable to discriminate against womenby denying them full access to jobs, education, or personal freedoms such as abortion, travel, etc. Not only would most of us find that immoral but it is not feasible either. What is possible however is to stop subsidizing and rewarding women for their bad behavior.

The way to choke off personal money is by ending alimony, and enacting shared parenting laws. Not only are women loath to marry but they are quick to divorce (and or separate if never married) from those marriages they enter into. I have read that something close to 75% of current divorces are initiated by women, quite often for the most selfish of reasons. They are clearly emboldened by the fact that they know they will end up with custody of the children the vast majority of the time and that they will be at least as well off as before they tied the knot. While I am not as eager to stop child support, it will be neutralized by the fact that women will be forced to work after separation because they will no longer have the children to hide behind due to equal custody laws. In other words, it is harder to get child support if you have a job and the dad stays at home with the kids 50% of the time. Marriage is something that will only benefit women while they are married!

In the public arena there are other changes that must be made. Start by eliminating welfare and public assistance. If you want families to matter then make it a family matter. This will force single moms to avail themselves on those they are closest to (hopefully a spouse). This is where the real moral and social pressure comes into play. Mothers, Fathers, Siblings and friends will now be competing for resources with the wayward single mommies. Rather than simply moralizing, there will be real consequences for adding a bastard to the brood. Furthermore, the fathers will not be allowed off the hook. Make mandatory paternity matching backed up with mandatory DNA testing. Whatever child support that is to be collected needs to be collected from the biological parents not the stand in schmuck. This means that the cost of siring a child can never be ducked or abrogated and men who serial impregnate women will be impoverished thereby diminishing their value to future potential mates. An Alpha that owes $10,000 a month in child support will reduce him to a financial Beta. Another form of ending public giveaways will be in the employment arena. While there can be no discrimination against women there also cannot be discrimination in favor of them. End AA, maternity leave, and legal favoritism. If they want money, they need to earn it the same way men do now or they need to marry it and stay married to it.

Anonymous said...

Kurt9: Yes, spot on!

Some of us women feel the same way; we do not particularly want to marry; we definitely do not want children. Don't assume we're all weeping over "no good men" to be found out there. Nor should it be assumed we're all riding that damned carousel; there's a whole other world of activities besides hooking up.

Anon@9:17

CrisisEraDynamo said...

@ kurt9

I appreciate your sentiment, but we live in society, not isolation. Few of us have the ability to just "drop out" of it, and society is precisely what's giving you your toys and joys.

The current breakdown happened because everyone was busy doing their own thing -- even if it poisoned the well for others. Instead of paying for it themselves, they demanded that the government subsidize their appalling behavior to shield themselves from the consequences.

While I certainly enjoy the freedom to live my life the way I want, it is unrealistic to think that "dropping out" would fix anything without damaging others. Extreme selfishness isn't a good thing.

man2 said...

Yeah Kurt, thats awesome for you and I'm seeing more and more of that attitude, but in the words of Jerry Seinfeld, "we're trying to have a civilisation here".

Tell me who in this brave new world will fight to defend it when the day comes when it needs defending? Answer, NO ONE. Compare France 1914 and France 1940 to see what I mean.

Got to hand it to the Soviets, they really did gut and destroy everything that made the west what it was. God, Country, Family, all destroyed in the space of 80 years.

Anonymous said...

CrisisEraDynamo said...

"@ kurt9
I appreciate your sentiment, but we live in society, not isolation. Few of us have the ability to just "drop out" of it, and society is precisely what's giving you your toys and joys."

I'm with kurt9 on this one. His passion is international travel while mine is financial speculation. The 2 may seem as different as apples and oranges. But from the perspective of a woman it's the same thing....."sorry honey *points finger at woman* we're BOTH not spending our money on you!"
(rightfully so)

I'm not saying 100% of men should choose to remain single for life. But it's not going to kill society in the long run if 20% of the men choose to "drop out". Sure it's going to throw a serious monkey wrench into the marriage market but maybe that's what we need.

History has shown, great change only comes about through a crisis.

CrisisEraDynamo said...

@ Anonymous

I agree. Shaking up the marriage market is a good thing, and one shouldn't live one's life based on what women as a group would think of him.

Anonymous said...

Great blog post. Keep up the good work!

Rollory said...

kurt, I can wrap my head around it just fine. I just dismiss it as being of any relevance to me. There will always be people who choose your path. They are a dead end, of no import once they are gone. I am not concerned with that. I am concerned with seeing to it that there will be more people like me. That goal, and your choice, have nothing to do with each other.

Anonymous said...

OMG ROISSYSYSYS!!!!!

TIME FOR YOUR WHERE HAVE ALL THE GOOD MEN GONE CARTOON!! LZOZLZLZLZOZOZ

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704409004576146321725889448.html?mod=WSJ_hp_mostpop_read

Where Have The Good Men Gone?
Kay S. Hymowitz argues that too many men in their 20s are living in a new kind of extended adolescence.

LZOZOZLZOZOZLZOZOZL!! ZLzoZLOzlozlozlzlozzlolz !!! lZOZLZZOZOZLZOZOZLZL!!!!

zozlzlzllles! go all the femtards who are stoo stoopid and take lotsa cocka in all tehir orifices na dthen go “where idd lal the good men go?” when they hit 40 lzozlzlz google that roissy cartoone “where did all teh good men go? ms paint roissy cartoon” lzozlzlzl

http://roissy.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/2.jpg?w=500&h=375

http://roissy.wordpress.com/2010/05/11/ms-paint-windows-to-the-soul/

LOZLZOZLOZL!!!

Anonymous said...

where did all th egood men go? zlzolozlzlz

lozzoozlzlzzlozlzl

but dontya know dontya know
that the fed made teh pua community a go
by deosuling womenz assocking all into a ho
so now the frat tucker max boys say yo bro
a secrive butthexer is a firend while man of honor is a foe
with gread pride sodom and shcuster does glow
finaicncing secruetecve taers of asscoking on booktours 2 go
as neocons repeat lies bout buthexers height to feed da flow
as the bernake debt doeth does grow and grow and grow
wiring fiat dollarz to feminists training them 2 ho
giving their pussy away 4 free in college and blow
legislating gainst good men in divorce court layin them low
and if you are against life and rights they label you pro
welcome to teh bernake femlit tucker max show
creationg fiat money out of thin air for john doe
lending it to him to make the price of his home grow
then deflating the bubble forcloising on the home, joe
as by inflating deflating fiat debt their pockets grow
as they convert fiat debt into physical property/blow
financing tuckermax rhymiwthgoldmansax 2 buthhexda ho
i’d like 2 welcome y’all 2 da emberanke neocon show butthexing the world with fiat debt bringin it low
as they take down america with debt the world in tow
teahcing sexualizing young women to anal and blow
desouling them by assocking them in datuckermax show
making women loyal to fiat debt larry curly moe
as they wage preempitive war on 50,000,000 unborn pro
choice they call the murders putting fetuthes on death row
killingthe innocentsending soldiers 2 die in far-off woe
wiring fiat cash to butthexers servingdabernakeshow
killing god ritalining kids makinggirlsda da ho
deconstrucing manhood, casting butthexers as da hero
lozlzozlzlzozlzlzozzlzlzozo yo yo yo

http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2010/06/04/how-the-federal-reserve-system-created-the-pua-community-lzozlzlzloozlzllzll-they-do-no-wan-t-the-men-to-read-mises-or-hayek-or-jefferson-or-the-us-constitution-lzozlzlzlz-they-want-to-keep-the-men/

how the federal reserve system created the PUA community lzozlzlzloozlzllzll!! they DO NO wan t the men to read mises or hayek or jefferson or the us constitution lzozlzlzlz they want to keep the men in the fiat masters’ cave — the fiat butthex matrix — “gaming” and fighting over the table scraps of all the desoulaed, haggaard, std-ridden, vicious, gold-digging, cold, defeminized, prozac-addled womenz the fiat masters buttthexed and deosuled in college during teh primae nocate ceremeonies, instead of manning up and fighting for their dvine irght to something far greater — an honorable, virtuous wife. lzozllzllzllzozzlz

Anonymous said...

omg you should check out tucker max’s book which the neocons promote tucker max in the pages of tehir weekly standard as he butthexes womenz and tapes it without their consent lzozlzlzlzlzlzlzl. and womenz at major publishing houses like simon and schuster wire him fiat cash and give him big book deals while neocons womens dutifully repeat their butthexing lord and matser’s lies in teh weekly standard as he lies about his height and they print those lies lzozlzlzlllzz

anything backed by a fiat currency soon turns into its opposite.

for isntance, today’s chucrch backed by fiat generally attracts satan-serving womenz who roll in when they hit 32 and then demand that all the betas in the pews pay for their bastard satan spawn chirldren zlzozlzlzll and they write atlantic monthly articles about how there are no good men left in the hookup culture lzozllzlzlz you know my famous cartoon roissy drew with the chick with cocks in her mount and in her anus and udes gizzin on her looking out of the cartoon at we the viewer, with her hand wrapped around the giant cock (could be mine! lozlzzl) next to her mouth, asking us all doe eyed, “why are there no good men left?” as three oteh rmen splooge on her tattoos and tramp stamps lzozlzllzllzlzlzlz omge lzozlzl

note how the rpeublicans, backed by a fiat currency, turn into neocons promoting butthexers and liars and douchebags and war and teh welfare states

note how the democrats, backed by a fiat currncy, turn into corporate-bailing out, war-mongering fiat monsters lzozlzlzl turn into neocons promoting butthexers and liars and douchebags and war and teh welfare states

note how women backed by a fiat currency turn into soulless welth-transferring beatses instead of goddesses and motehrs

note how men, backed a fiat currency, turn into button-mkashing, ritaln adderoll drugged up dumbed down fanboyz mashing buttons in tehir single mom’s basements lzozlzllz

note how teh univeristy, backed by a fiat currency, turns into a soulless cesspool whose cheif aim is 2 destory the great books and knoweldge and the moral sense and civility and truth and beauty lzolzlzlzlz, all to transfer wealth and pjhysical property up to those who create naught but debt as the debt trickles on down enslaving all lzozlzllz

and who wins?

ben bernanke and goldman sachs and tcucker max

yo yo yo give me a beat

ben bernanke and goldman sax
and neconon butthexing tucker max
sending our young alphas 2 die in foreign wars
to spread golmdman sax/tucker max butthhex on foreign shores
destoryed the family in teh usa
took womenz outta the homes
killed fetuses & civilians dead ’tis a great day
as they create war in the homes war in the world
debuaching deconstructing destabalizing
ujntil every act of god and great men is unfuled
lozlzlzozlz zlzozlzllz lzozlzlzl lzozlzlzing
as they create nothing but fiat debt
and train women to convert fiat debt into physical wealth,
to transfer it up from honest men, you bet,
blaming the betas for the chicx sore anaus health.
as tehir infinite debt trickes down
tehir debt trickles down enslaving us all
while upon my grammar, charlotte allen does frown
tsk tsk tsk “that’s not how you spell butthex at all!”
as tyhey finance and reward tucker max 2 tape anal in secret
without the girl’s consent
as for vampires and werewolves they tell girl s2 get wet
telling them vanmpires butthexers are heaven sent
as they bail out al the butthexing bankers pumping adn dumping the common man
as they wire fiat cash to the butthexing tucker maxes pumping and dumping chix
as they wire fiat cash to train women to transfer welth to their hands
as they bankrupt the world with porn and war and anus seeking dicks

lzozo

Anonymous said...

http://roissy.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/2.jpg?w=500&h=375
lzozlzlz

rachelnico said...

As an average looking and very ambitious woman, this post only makes me feel depressed as to what is to happen in my future, career and relationship wise :S

Anonymous said...

I'ts funny to have all these women complain about not enough good (read:sexy) men out there when there is most certainly as few sexy women as well--this maybe 10% of the women out there when they are in their 20's, but in the 40's 50's demo its more like 1%

Women really do, in a societal generality, get the men they deserve.

Anonymous said...

I think most women do "get it" even it they will never utter it. Or as my mom would say, "she would not say the word shit, even when she has a mouth full of it."

It is more likely that women need a cover story for their bad behavior. It has been said that women make better liars than men because they have a tendency to dissemble and beat around the truth whereas men will simply make something up. My wife is a phychiatrist. She vastly hated doing alcohol and drug rehab counsling with women more than men. Many women will simply avoid the truth under any circumstances whereas the most stubborn man will enentually fess up.

sestamibi said...

@EuroCanadian News--

The "carrot" of generous tax subsidies, paid parental leave, day care, etc. etc. has never been sufficient to induce cunt to produce enough white children so that the race doesn't go extinct.

Only the "stick" of patriarchy, and specifically Islam, can do this, although it sometimes appears that even Islam is losing its punch.

Rollory said...

Islam would be the destruction of 90% of what is worth preserving in whites and European civilization. I'd sooner anoint the Japanese, dysfunctional birthrates and all, as standard-bearers of the future, than give in to Islam.

Islam has been the relentless enemy for one and a half thousand years, this dysfunction of the last century or so doesn't suddenly change all that.

Rollory said...

(I thought I posted this already. Was it deleted for some reason?)

Islam would be the destruction of 90% of what is worth preserving in whites and European civilization. I'd sooner anoint the Japanese, dysfunctional birthrates and all, as standard-bearers of the future, than give in to Islam.

Islam has been the relentless enemy for one and a half thousand years, this dysfunction of the last century or so doesn't suddenly change all that.

Rollory said...

Islam would be the destruction of 90% of what is worth preserving in
whites and European civilization. I'd sooner anoint the Japanese,
dysfunctional birthrates and all, as standard-bearers of the future,
than give in to Islam.

Islam has been the relentless enemy for one and a half thousand years,
this dysfunction of the last century or so doesn't suddenly change all
that.

Anonymous said...

Could this have been done without the white supremacy? Stuff like "and demand companies instead prefer White men for hiring" is no better than the feminists demanding that women be picked.

I can understand feeling upset over the clear attempt at demographically killing off white people, but don't be like this.

Herb said...

Second, for the beta guys out there bemoaning how they can't find a decent woman: presumably there are as many ugly and low-status women out there as there are beta men. Are you 3s and 4s and 5s willing to look at the women who are in that range, or have you warped your expectations with all the porn where you focus your fantasies on women who are 9s and 10s? There's a hell of a lot of lonely fat, homely women who would be happy to consider you. Are you willing to look past their looks and personalities to the real person inside in the same way you want those beautiful women to see you?

Lots of us are...

I was...

Then in her early 30s she lost all the weight, got mad at me if I thought it made her sexy and mad at me if I didn't, and decided she settled for a 5 and could compete for 9-10s now and left.

That said, men at 20 seem less interested in 5s then they do at 30 and are even more willing at 40 while women seem to get more attached to the 9-10s as they age.

Still haven't figured that one out.

Anonymous said...

I enjoyed the majority of this post. I don't disagree that women set themselves up in a way for this dynamic. As a young, conservative woman, I avoid the "sexy" type of man at all costs. I'm currently in my third straight relationship where I chose seemingly smart over sexy thinking that would net a fiscally responsbile partner - wrong again. Are there any financially competent, sane, educated men out there? I know, that was so cliche. It's just exhausting trying to teach a 35 year old man that he should probably cancel his pricey porn subscription if he wants to get out of debt. Especially when I'm ten years younger.

maxidus sex shop said...

Oh my god, there is a great deal of helpful data above!

Anonymous said...

that is certainly a very good question, especially the way women have changed over the years. and not for the good either.

Anonymous said...

it should be more like where did all the good women go to nowadays for us serious straight men looking to meet a good one?

Anonymous said...

Hi ho.

kapish chandra said...

Good men have taken to the online dating thing in a big way, so if you are a single woman looking for a partner it will be in your best interest to take a look at the 100% free dating sites in world like MeetOutside, where there are men of all professions, careers, interests and yes the physical aspect as well, so there is no point in saying anything before trying out the online way of life.

Blogger said...

Searching for the Ultimate Dating Website? Create an account and find your perfect match.

yuyu gustia said...

The science of a life can only be obtained by living it.

Jenis Alergi yang Bisa Membahayakan Nyawa Manusia .

Eka kurniawati said...

Never underestimate what you have, because it may be that you have a very cooled by others.

Pertolongan Pertama Yang Dilakukan Saat Patah Tulang.