Jul 312011
 

For a while now I have been meaning to talk about the “beta orbiters” in the manosphere who should know better, but Ferdinand sort of beat me to it:

Actually scratch that – ALL of the women in the alt-right/manosphere (except for Bhetti and Aoefe) get way too much attention. If you have a pair of breasts and say all the right things, you’ll have a coterie of sackless beta orbiters hanging on your every word.

I would add Laura Grace Robbins (and Hestia if she was still blogging) to the list of women in the manosphere along with Bhetti and Aoefe who don’t get as much attention as they should, but otherwise I agree with this.  It’s pathetic the way men who should know better end up being beta orbiters to women.  These men believe that they aren’t beta orbiters because of game or some other reason, but all that means is that they haven’t really internalized game.

Consider David Alexander.  He’s a beta orbiter at Traditional Catholicism Christianity, but he knows he is one.  Think of how pathetic he acts.  If a man is a beta orbiter to a woman in the manosphere, then he is just like David Alexander.  For example, Obsidian is a beta orbiter of Susan Walsh (which is why Susan Walsh’s blog is the only blog in the manosphere that Obsidian hasn’t been banned from or otherwise forced out of) so this means that Obsidian is Susan Walsh’s David Alexander.

Beyond that I’m not going to name any names since the purpose of this post isn’t to humiliate anyone but to get men who are beta orbiting without knowing they are thinking about what they’re doing.  Are you a beta orbiter to a woman in the manosphere?  Just like beta orbiters in real life, beta orbiters in the manosphere don’t get anything out of being a beta orbiter.  If you’re a beta orbiter of some woman in the manosphere, then why are you doing that?  Now is a good time to stop.

Jul 082011
 

A commenter, who was revealed to be a member of the Illuminati a few days ago, decided to reveal the existence of the Voluminati:

There is even a special subdivision of the Illuminati for the obese members of the organization. It is called the ‘Voluminati’. Black guys like Obsidian and David Alexander like to date the Voluminati chicks.

This had me laughing so hard.  What makes it funnier is that we all know obese chicks are the only chicks Obsidian can date.  David Alexander could date Voluminati chicks but he thinks he’s too much of a “sub-human male”, and he’s too busy ass kissing women like Alte to do that.

 

Feb 072011
 

There’s a lot of ideas I have that I have trouble getting out of my mind and on to the blog (or anyplace else spoken or written).  One of the great things about The Spearhead is that other guys have the same ideas I do but can communicate them better when I can’t (and vice versa). One such case was from a comment codebuster wrote about women being locked into their own subjectivity, their own frame of reference more so then men are:

One of the problems with women’s opinions is that they are much more inclined to be locked into “their own level” (subjectivity) than men are. They have difficulty stepping beyond their own personal frames of reference, to try to see the world as others see it. So where I write to an audience of men, I anticipate that the men will mentally scan through the different ways that a word or an idea can be interpreted. For example, what do I mean when I say that “sexy” cannot be applied to men in the same way that it is applied to women? It should not require an Einstein to work this out. But it does takes a woman to come back with “Waddaya mean? I find men sexy.”

As another example. Arrogance. How many contexts can this word be applied in? In how many ways can it be interpreted? What are the subtle ways in which men assert their confidence? Of course we should expect a woman to pipe in with “no, I don’t find arrogance hot at all”, entirely missing the finer naunces that I am including within my definition.

Within the breadth of the context of arrogance as I define it, I have in mind some European men who carry themselves with a refined, urbane arrogance that is neither boorish nor overbearing. Arrogance is perhaps too strong a word, on its own, in some contexts, and something subtler is needed to describe “confidence with an edge”. But I can trust men to pick up on the subtleties. And I can rely on a woman to have to explain it to her.

Same with Game. Women will typically come with their prepackaged preconceptions of what it means, automatically presuming strange hats, whacky fashion statements, dizzy nightclubs, and cheezy one-liners. It is less likely to occur to them that there might be other interpretations of Game, interpretations that address the subtleties that are important in understanding and interpreting the behaviors of men and women. Game is not always about PUAs trying to score.

And as for how women relate to men, again, same subjective generalisations relying on anecdote. “But I don’t feel this way about men, and I don’t relate to men that way.” We know, the NAWALT argument. Resolutely, they will fail to factor in the fact that over the past 50 years, feminism has embarked on an agenda to castrate the souls of men and boys. Men today are different to what men were like before feminism.

All these relate to nuances that cannot be included in an article without making it even longer than it already is, and a thousandfold more tedious to labor through. Still, trust a woman to have to have it all explained to her, dotting all your “i”s and crossing all your “t”s.

This is something I have been thinking about but haven’t been able to properly write/speak about but after reading this comment at The Spearhead, I can now.

How many times have you written something (or said something) and a woman reading (or listening) to it goes off on some hissy fit interpreting what you wrote (or said) in some completely bizarre manner.  Anyone familiar with me knows that I have had that happen to me plenty.  Think about the things I have written that men had no trouble making sense of but caused women to start screaming.  Part of the reason is that women are locked into their subjective frame of reference so much more than men are so they have no understanding about what is being discussed.  And most likely they never will.  Like the comment points out it may be possible to explain whatever you’re writing about in such a way that women will get it but you will need to be more verbose than Proust and spend hundreds of hours on a single blog post.  That’s time none of us have.

Knowing this what should we do?  Don’t bother trying to write something to fit women’s subjective frame of reference.  It’s a waste of time that you don’t have.  Don’t get bothered by BS like, “you have a small dick”, “you’re not a real man”, “you aren’t a patriarch”, etc.  No matter what you say, if it isn’t supplicating to women, some women will attack you.  You can ignore it, make fun of it, point out its stupidity, point out the hypocrisy of the women attacking you or whatever you like but don’t let it get to you.  Trying to correct women with facts and logic is pointless because women are so locked into their subjectivity that they believe you lack facts and logic.

Your only other options for dealing with how women are locked into their own subjectivity is never speaking up about anything or being like David Alexander.  Do you really want to pick either of those options?

Dec 062010
 

There’s some excellent material in the hater category today.  (And thanks to the person who emailed this to me since I wouldn’t have seen it otherwise.)   This is some of the best hater material ever.

There’s this woman who goes by Escapist, and her blog is here.  If you are unable to figure out what she’s trying to say, you are by far not the only person with this problem.  She also has this alternate account and blog called Sexy Pterodactyl.  Don’t ask me to explain that either.  She posted this at HookingUpSmart, Susan Walsh’s blog (full comment included for context):

Aunt Enid (aka Susan Walsh), I have a question for you? If you care about girls having good dating experiences, why do you specifically (and tacitcly) support stuff like the following? Perhaps its that women are inherently worthless/class enemies once they’re past say age 27?

——

Surely the manosphere (MRA PUAs, or even the “nice happily-married ones like Dalrock”) is not about belligerence, just justice/righting wrongs? Au contraire. Consider this post and the associated comments at Dalrock……
http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2010/11/18/men-stop-tricking-women-into-loveless-marriages/
…celebrating guys that put up a nice front (including via Internet dating, and including showing marriage interest), but are actually purposely “using”/taking up the time of the women they are dating (they target women in their late 20s and 30s) – as revenge for the crime of said women (not necessarily even the specific women in question, but their age group) not dating them when they were younger.

Consider also the nice nerdy “Pro-Male Anti-Feminist Tech” blogger whose attitude towards his girlfriend Sabrina is basically that of a serial killer observing a specimen for how best to prey. He’s trying to figure out how/when to dump her to avoid having to be nice at holidays, meet her family and such – but to still get Sexytime/a threesome (not so much for enjoyment, but because that way he “wins”) and the associated ego-feed goodies in the meantime. Aunt Enid (ahem, Susan Walsh of Hooking Up Smart) and the like duly submissive-helpmeet-squadron him in his comments section.

Serial killer?  At least she’s admitting that serial killers are popular with women and not like this guy.  What is the serial killer argument she’s using?  It’s just like this woman who commented her a while ago how I was being “controlling” with Sabrina but if/when Sabrina tries to do the same thing it’s a “feminist relationship”. Women prey on men all the time but when a man just has a real backbone that’s “preying on women”.

I don’t think Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl really read my blog.  Where is this “submissive helpmeet squadron” in my comments section?  Provide some links, or it doesn’t exist.  How am I avoiding meeting Sabrina’s family when I have already done that?  And what’s wrong with threesomes?  If they weren’t enjoyable why would anyone do them?

While the “serial killer” bit is new, none of what Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl says is new.  I have been accused of “preying on women” before which is a common enough use of anti-male shaming language that I gave it its own color, Code Magenta. I have been accused of sexual depravity, of being a sexual deviant and sexually degrading women in a filthy way, treating women like cum dumpsters, having a large dick and using it to hurt women, etc.  You see elements of all that in what Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl says.  It should surprise no one that the same silly arguments/shaming language are coming up over and over again.  A year and a half ago they would have just used code purple shaming language of how I’m just pissed I can’t get laid.  Since they can’t use that anymore, I get this.  No matter what I do outside of chopping off my balls or becoming like David Alexander I will always get one form of shaming language or another from women like Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl.  If one form of shaming language stops working, they just move on to another one.

The only things that Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl missed were calling me a reptile alien in charge of the Illuminati and a global depopulation agenda and having a small dick.  Maybe she did but I couldn’t find it anywhere in the gibberish that is her blog.

Also, let’s not forget why I can’t (or won’t) do a standard progression of relationship to engagement to marriage with a woman.  It’s because of the corrupt anti-male divorce system.  Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl won’t admit that exists so I get attacked for being like a “serial killer”.

Susan Walsh had a response to this:

2. PMAFT
He and I have never been on speaking terms, and I banned him from this blog a long time ago. I do not read his blog, so I’m not sure why you claim I’ve commented there. I actually went over and read the posts you mention, and I’ll go on record as saying that he disgusts me. I do not support him or his tactics, either blatantly or tacitly.
.
Or are you calling me out because Ferdinand links to me and links to him at the same time? Do you really believe that I am responsible for the company Ferdinand keeps?

I disgust Susan Walsh?  That means I must be doing something right.  This is also an example of code beige shaming language, the charge of some sort of non-specific “shameful behavior”.

What tactics am I using?  Ones to avoid entrapment.  That’s it.  Why do I only stay with women so long?  Because I’m avoiding marriage or more accurately, I’m avoiding the corrupt anti-male divorce system.  I am also doing things to avoid being entrapped in the anti-male child support system (with an “oops” pregnancy), etc.  This is what really drives haters like these two.  I’m successfully avoiding women getting their claws into me and my bank accounts.  They can’t stand a man that is free, and I am free.  This is not the first time I have been attacked for this.  It’s happened before because like with the rest of this it’s nothing new.

Ferdinand, you need to work a lot harder at generating some haters.  It’s pretty bad when you have to rely on your association with someone for generating haters.

The last thing I have to say about this is knowing that Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl is so mortified at the prospect of having a threesome makes me want to have a threesome with Sabrina and her best friend even more.  I’m sure that last sentence will drive Escapist/Sexy Pterodactyl even more crazy if that’s possible.

Nov 222010
 

Over at Dalrock’s the issue of the man being head of the marriage came up and David Alexander pointed out that all this means is that the wife can play the blame game and claim victim status forever.  The responses to David Alexander treated this all as a problem with his thinking, as if the problem was completely in David Alexander’s head.  While DA does have his own unique issues this is not a case of that.  DA did not generate this idea on his own.  It’s widespread and here is a good example of that from Douglas Wilson, the pastor of Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho:

When a couple comes for marriage counseling, my operating assumption is always that the man is completely responsible for the all the problems. Some may be inclined to react to this, but it is important to note that responsibility is not the same thing as guilt. If a woman has been unfaithful to her husband, of course she bears the guilt of her adultery. But at the same time, he is responsible for it.

… Husbands are responsible for their wives. They are the head of their wives as Christ is the head of the church. Taking a covenant oath to become a husband involves assuming responsibility for that home. This means that men, whether through tyranny or abdication, are responsible for any problems in the home.

You would expect a feminist to say men are at fault for everything.  This is not a feminist saying that.  It’s a Christian pastor.  However, that (and the fact that its biblically and theologically unsound) is beside the point.  The theology of male headship in marriage is used as an excuse to blame husbands for everything that goes wrong in a marriage regardless of what wives do.  This shows how this is an idea that David Alexander did not come up with on his own.  It’s widespread in the Christian church and elsewhere so its no surprise DA would have picked up on it.

Men can’t solve the problems caused by feminism and other forms of female supremacism by just thinking differently.  There are a wide variety of forces arrayed against men.  This Christian pastor is just one small example.  The guns of the state are the other end of the scale.

I have not been convinced that the attempt at feminizing men has been all that successful.  What instead has happened is that men are trying to navigate a minefield created by female supremacism so that they don’t lose their jobs, their assets, their freedom (i.e. go to prison), or their lives.  What gets called the feminization of men for the most part is really a gun pointed at men’s heads.  If a gun is pointed at your head, you will act differently.  Take away the gun and most men will reassert their masculinity in a week.  (Maybe not that fast but very quickly.)

Most people who talk about how men lack masculinity or are failing to lead (whether its marriages or in general) aren’t interested in actual masculinity or male leadership.  They are just interested in something they can control and authentic masculinity and male leadership isn’t it.  However their faux complaining about it creates shaming language they attempt to use to control men.  This is what Douglas Wilson does.

You can change your thinking all you wish.  You may need to do so.  Chances are this is not your problem.  More importantly this will not make Douglas Wilson or the gun the feminist state has pointed at your head go away because they exist outside of your own head.

Mar 212010
 

Since this is coming from David Alexander it doesn’t necessarily have much meaning, but he says (about me), “You are an alpha, not an idiotic anti-social dysfunctional sub-human male that’s clumsy and bumbling and incapable of making a basic decision.”  I decided to start a poll about it.

Am I an alpha?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

If you want to answer something other than yes or no, write a comment.

Mar 132010
 

I watched that Jersey Shore series on MTV and had a lot of fun watching the disaster of the group of “guidos” and “guidettes”.  As you know I picked up this chick recently, and so far so good.  As you would expect I finding out things about her.  (Since I should have a fake name for her like my previous women, let’s use Sabrina.)  Sabrina is from Staten Island, NY.  While Staten Island technically isn’t New Jersey, it might as well be.  Three of the guidos and guidettes on the Jersey Shore were from Staten Island.  Sabrina is definitely not a guidette.  Her skin isn’t orange, and she doesn’t do fake everything like a guidette.  (BTW, that crying sound you hear as you read this is David Alexander crying because Sabrina isn’t a guidette.)  Plus, Sabrina has moved away from the New York City-New Jersey area and lives here in the DC area, and I met her at a museum, a place where no guidette would be caught dead in.  Most importantly she doesn’t have any bizarre nicknames (like “The Situation”) and doesn’t call herself the “Kim Kardashian of Staten Island” or any other celebrity of Staten Island.

I think this is an example of God’s interesting sense of humor.  I spent time ragging on things from that part of the world, talking about how I should wear a hazmat suit if I go to the Jersey Shore (which is still a good idea IMO), but now I am involved with a chick from there.

Dec 272009
 

I have been busy for a few days so I haven’t had a chance to respond to this comment from Susan Walsh.

I called you a dick because you called me a shitty mother.

I don’t know if you are a shitty mother in general.  I will assume you are not without evidence to the contrary.  However, you are a shitty mother when it comes to teaching your son about male-female interaction.  Nearly all mothers are shitty when it comes to telling their sons about the reality of women (and that includes my mother too) so you are hardly unique.

This is really just one aspect of the problem of female solipsism.

I also noticed you avoided talking about your comment about how I’m only capable of relating to women as “cum dumpsters”.  If I only relate to women as “cum dumpsters” as you say, Susan, then I was only able to do anything with women by relating to them only as “cum dumpsters”.

ED is a real problem among young men and it is growing.

Then quit whining when men take this problem seriously and go see a doctor about it.

As I stated on my blog, when one watches a lot of porn, those arousal patterns become entrenched in the brain. When men or women then find themselves in regular, normal, non-porn scenarios, they find that arousal eludes them.

I’m not sure what “a lot” of porn is, but if this is the case why didn’t I have this problem when I lost my virginity recently?  I don’t know if I watched “a lot” of porn or not.  Regardless, I wasn’t doing any “porn scenarios” with either woman I was with.

Besides what is the definition of “porn” here?  A quick search of the internet can find all different types of porn, many of which have some type of normal looking (i.e. not David Alexander bait) women.

Men aged 18-25 represent the fastest-growing group being prescribed Viagra

Is this because they actually need viagra or because because we’re pill happy in the US?  Given that this is the same age group with the biggest problem of heavy drinking and binge drinking it stands to reason that is a bigger part of the problem rather that “real ED”.  It’s not even like they have to stop drinking, but it’s easier to push a pill.

The reason I stated that men should stop wasting doctor’s time is that they are frequently loathe to admit how much porn they watch

It rarely matters so its irrelevant.  Besides what are these guys supposed to do if they aren’t getting laid?  They’re horny, and they need to do something about it.  Porn ends up being the answer unless they discover game.

Hurling the “shaming language” accusation won’t cut it

There’s a reason the catalog of anti-male shaming tactics exists. It’s because we hear the same things over and over again from women on these issues.  Susan, you almost could have copied and pasted some of the things you said from that list.

I’m also not sure why you keep denigrating my education – I never sought to use my degree in any other way than to explain on my own blog that I refer to my business background in the way I solve relationship problems. It’s you in the Game community who keep calling attention to my Wharton MBA. In insisting that I earned it only through affirmative action, what do you hope to accomplish? Why would you even say that? How do you know?

First, you brought up your degree and made a claim that it’s relevant.  Thus it brings up the question if you actually earned your degree.  Since affirmative action means lower standards for women and non-Asian minorities (as well as kicking out a deserving applicant using the guns of the state), this is a real question.  At the time you attended Wharton there were hardly any women going after MBAs but an affirmative action program which means they were desperate for women.  Thus any woman could have gotten in and gotten an MBA from them.  I have no idea what your transcript was at Wharton, but anyone who could have benefited from affirmative action is suspect of having not met the actual standard of earning whatever they claimed to earn.  Because of affirmative action, there is a good chance you never actually met the standard to earn a Wharton MBA particularly given the gender ratio of the Wharton MBA program at the time you attended.  Thus your MBA is suspect at best and any talk about your “business background” is also suspect at best since you may have benefited from affirmative action there as well.

I do want men to be healthy. I want them to be fit for relationships, because that is what my own readers are looking for.

And here it comes.  An anon covered this as well.  If you look up female supremacism in the dictionary, this excerpt will be there as an example.  Here we have a primary example of how women believe that men are supposed to be slaves for women.  Susan is saying that men are only supposed to be healthy because women want it.

I’m much harder on the women than the men

Given that so heavily skewed pro-female now, you would have to be about ten thousand times harder on women than you are now for that to be meaningful.

What is the real female problem with porn?  MarkyMark has already pointed that out: It exposes the slut lifestyle.  Many women are afraid about the truth about women getting out whether its due to porn or game or something else.  After understanding the truth about women, men will start going their own way (whether its using game to get laid occasionally, ghosting, etc. does not matter) and not be under the thumb of a woman.

All this talk about the problems supposedly caused by porn remind me of all the people who talk about the problems supposedly caused by video games.  When it comes to video games, it was all shown to be bunk, and it will be the same with porn.  What both of these have in common is that men (and boys in the case of video games) enjoy them.  This is nothing more than another attack on a predominantly male activity.  It’s also safe to say that there is some fear of male sexuality on the part of women here.

Another thing going on is that women are afraid of the competition from porn.  Of course, in the future with virtual reality sex and later sex bots, this “problem” will only get worse for women.  That’s what happens in an economic bubble when women keep raising the price of sex and offering less and less.

Translate »