RSS
The New York Times alerts us to the Sinister North Dakota Housewife Menace:
The Housewives of White Supremacy
By Annie KellyMs. Kelly is a Ph.D. student researching the impact of digital cultures on anti-feminism and the far right.
June 1, 2018
In a podcast interview posted last spring, Nicole Jorgenson, a singer and former schoolteacher in North Dakota, explains to her host that she has never been happier since marrying and having children. And yet between cute pastoral anecdotes of growing her own vegetables and making banana bread, it soon becomes clear that Ms. Jorgenson is advocating something sinister — not just a return to agrarian motherhood.
She lived in Germany temporarily, she says, but left just before “an influx of refugees took over the country.” She just had a child and thinks the new baby is beautiful — but maybe not quite in the same way all mothers do: “I always wanted children that looked like me,” she says, “blond-haired, blue-eyed babies, but I kind of had to say it under my breath.” …
But running alongside what could be mistaken for a peculiar style of mommy-vlogging is a virulent strain of white nationalism. One such advocate who calls herself “Wife With a Purpose” made international headlines last year when she issued something she titled “the white baby challenge.” Citing falling white birthrates in the West, she urged her followers to procreate. “I’ve made six!” she wrote. “Match or beat me!” Wife With a Purpose might be the most prominent and certainly most openly white supremacist of the women who call themselves tradwives, but she is not an anomaly: These accounts veer dizzyingly from Cosmo-style tips on pleasing your husband to racist musings about “ghetto music” to, on some occasions, calls to reassert their vision of the white race. …
The alt-right is abhorrent; it is racist and hate-filled. …
Tradwives may seem like a lunatic fringe at present, but they may not stay one for long.
It would seem that Ms. Kelly is attacking women who could very well be alt-right feminists.
Her research topic as named implies there exists anti-feminism in digital cultures of the right, like say here, but she is attacking women more virulently than any man here!
Rosie the Riveter should counterpunch.
Maybe the worst example of whites (or my fellow whites) urging more kids to keep your tribe dominant was Jews in Israel urging Jews to out breed Muslims. It is almost like the Nazi party is in charge of Israel. I would love to see the NYT articles denouncing this type of spremacism
Yeah, if enough of them have six kids, they will not be “fringe” for long.
One “tradwife” with 6 kids = 4 liberal white women with 1.5 kids each (I’m probably being generous here).
But honestly speaking, most racialist white women are pretty bourgeois in their own lives, and more than three kids is rare for them. Many of them, actually, are outwardly leftist and hide their racialism behind renaissance faires, environmentalist politics, locavorism and such. This is particularly pronounced among white millennials, who seem to have internalized a sort of racial taqiyya.
However, white women who do have lots of kids are overwhelmingly conservative, which does not bode well for the future of white liberalism. White liberal fertility has fallen off a cliff since about 1980, probably due to the relatively recent (post-Kennedy) association of democrats with feminism. If white women had decided the election in 1960, Nixon would have won, strange as that may seem to people today.
Rather ironic coming from someone who devotes her life to attacking people just for wanting the continued existence of their group.
The horror!
Rosie the Riveter should counterpunch.
There is more power in the womb than a rivet gun.
We didn’t start this war of demography but we’ll finish it.
That’s ultimately what they fear the most.
I was recently reading an article about Germany in the Economist. The magazine was discussing how more German women are leaving the home for the workplace, the marriage rate is falling, homosexual unions are increasing, and immigrants are diversifying the country. The article praised the culture changes in German society.
A pro-natalist, pro-WN movement is contrary to everything they wish for the Gentile Western nations. You can bet people like this woman are keeping them up at night.
On a completely unrelated note……….
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/21/nyregion/21yitta.html
To tell you the truth, Buzz, I don’t have any counterpunch for these deranged anti-Whites. How do you argue with someone who asserts that it is evil for White women to want to see their race go on existing in the future?
Seriously, what can I say? Of course, there’s the old standby: You wouldn’t say that about women of any other race. That certainly is a line of argument that works for fence-sitting Whites, but true die-hard anti-Whites (like Noel Ignatiev) see it as self-evident common sense that…
https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/speaker/annie-kelly/
“Annie Kelly is a PhD student in the department of American Studies and the department of Film, Television and Media, researching the impact of digital cultures on anti-feminism and the far right in the United States. She has previously focused on social media, online protest and civil rights. PhD student, University of East Anglia” [Student/Staff Directory]
Don’t overlook her interpretation of their husbands and “alt-right” men: The Alt-Right: Reactionary Rehabilitation for White Masculinity
https://www.questia.com/magazine/1P4-1937775393/the-alt-right-reactionary-rehabilitation-for-white
OMG! A woman wants her baby to look like her! Dat’s raaacccissttt!
Unless she’s black, or Asian, or Jewish, or whatever. Then it’s fine.
It’s only racist when White ppl want their children to resemble them.
/sarcasm
These people are parodies of themselves.
Neglected to attach the key political concept of Ms. Kelly’s essay https://www.questia.com/magazine/1P4-1937775393/the-alt-right-reactionary-rehabilitation-for-white
Here’s Andrew Sullivan in New York magazine about this topic (and “The End of Liberal Demoracy” – no less…):
“Elsewhere, the strongman model is proliferating: Putin in Russia has dropped all pretense of democracy; Xi is now the first president of China for life; Erdogan in Turkey is still not done enlarging his powers; Netanyahu will be Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, governing on the basis of ethno-nationalism, suspicious of his own deep state, including the Mossad, and cementing a Jewish state from the river to the sea.
And in the U.S., of course, the omens are not good right now. Trump himself is resurgent in the polls — his disapproval-approval gap was -20 points last December; it’s -11 points almost six months later.”
And so forth and so on…
What would you love more? That the NYT denounces Israel or that the NYT learns from Israel?
Yeah, SWPL.
Beware though: given the toxic nature of the society in which they’re going to be raised, a certain percentage–perhaps a large percentage–of those kids will grow up to reject what their parents taught. Just ask the ‘quiver full’ Christian mothers of the 90s what happened to their kids.
Is that a real quote from Ignatiev? Gimme a link!
Here is a New York Times op-ed urging that Israel should abandon its pro-natalist policies:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/23/opinion/israels-looming-demographic-crisis.html
Not quite what you asked for, but ultimately the same thing. “My out-group should have fewer babies” is not exactly a new exhortation.
Racism and hate are universal. Are we really to believe that only right-wing whites can be racist and hateful? Future generations (or historians of our extinct society) will marvel that we tolerated this type of anti-white nonsense from our most prestigious newspaper.
It’s funny that this Annie Kelly claims that the Alt-Right is full of incels. “You’re sexually unattractive” is one of feminists’ favorite go-to arguments.
Isn’t the nation-state largely a product of modernity?
Also, the idea that the alt-right is “the natural conclusion of neo-conservative logics” is astoundingly stupid.
Use sinners instead of altright and serving the devil instead of ideological and you might find, that this text by Ms. Kelly is an example for something new: A secular puritanism.
I’m not even mad. That’s impressive. Although I imagine there is some pretty major inbreeding going on there. One would think that a “reputable” organization with “high-standards” like the NYT would at least ask how many of her descendants are married to other descendants of hers. But maybe they did ask but omitted the answer due to its transgression of American taboos against inbreeding. “Can’t have the goyim realizing we’re inbred and clannish!”
I mean, don’t get me wrong: marrying your close-but-not-too-close kin is probably ideal from a genetic standpoint, but it’s certainly a shocking idea to most current year Americans, and it can lead to high incidences of genetic disorders if it’s sufficiently widespread among a population. “First-generation” inbreds are probably much less at risk for genetic disorders than the products of multigenerational inbreeding are.
Anyway, I am interested in intra-Hebrew tensions and conflicts. I imagine the average Hebrew “progressive” with 1.3 kids finds the extreme Hasidim to be alien and deplorable. But I’m far from an expert on this topic.
It seems to me to be the logical conclusion once you compare how Germany did versus how Iraq did, after each was invaded.
Ms Kelly is just a woman with no purpose in life.
That PhD-program she is attending is nothing more than adult-kindergarten.
If she is at least in a STEM program, than I would excuse her.
I suspect that she has no man in her life, who could be classified as an “alpha man” (looks, strenght, wealth, social standing). Or her father was not there for her or is a “weak” man.
Hard times create stong men & women. Strong men & women create good times. Good times create weak men & women, who waste away the most promising years on useless PhDs.
East Anglia is where a lot of the Puritans in New England came from.
From Annie’s lips to God’s ears!
That Jews stop advocating/tolerating one thing in themselves, and the opposite in Whites. That “right-leaning” Jews stop lecturing right-leaning Whites about anything, until they’ve got that issue sorted out.
You can feel the bitterness radiate through her article.
Annie is a miserable (most likely ugly) woman who no man would want to marry, and she’s trying to drag down the pretty and pleasant girls who are winning at life.
Bye Felicia!
And shouldn’t they (flee their white oppressors and leave)?
https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2002/09/abolish-the-white-race.html
There are ugly men, too. Wouldn’t they want to marry her?
Here is a photo of Miss Kelly, our little social justice snowflake. I will leave the aesthetic commentary to others, but with so much hatred including self-hatred she is no doubt less than a delight to be around. Give me the blonde North Dakota mother any day, regardless of what she looks like.
https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/speaker/annie-kelly/
Well obviously alt-right thinking has been shaped (and verified) by the failures of neoconservatism, but that’s clearly not what she meant.
If having babies and being excited about it is now “hate-filled”, then words have no meaning anymore. “If hating you is wrong, I don’t wanna be right!” (not the best song really, so I’m not embedding it)
The earth is vastly overpopulated by humans. Trying to set off some demographic arms race in which whites try to outbreed everyone else is suicide. We need to remove hostile groups from our countries and reduce the birthrates of Africans, all as humanely as possible.
For what earthly purpose, exactly?!
.
.
.
.
.
On the lighter side:
“I just want to tell you, I love your son very much.”
” May I ask why?”
Actually, if I had to guess at her underlying motivation, I would say she is trying to provoke a response. She’s a PhD student and tenure track jobs are hard to come by for white women in the humanities. If she can get some attention and paint herself as a poor oppressed victim, it may help quite a bit when she’s on the job market.
As a man, I cannot pretend to know what drives a women to do or be who she is. However, I believe that Ms. Annie Kelly also cannot know what all women want either. As a stay-at-home Dad, I do have firsthand experience with not only raising children, but also knowing the work and dedication that so-called “tradwives” put into raising their families. These women not only are responsible for molding the hearts and minds of our next generation, but also play significant roles in their communities. As members of school committees and selectman boards, they steer their town politics and community values. That experience and knowledge puts them in the position to become leaders at the local, state, and even national level, much more so than some corporate director working 80 hour weeks and whose children are raised by nannies.
These tenured idiots have learned nothing from Trump’s win. Notice how “fantasizing” is here sneer du jour. Good.
https://www.amazon.com/Trump-Meme-James-J-OMeara-ebook/dp/B01NBLFMIR/ref=sr_1_1?s=digital-text&ie=UTF8&qid=1527945382&sr=1-1&keywords=trump+art+meme&dpID=51BxDUmUzAL&preST=_SY445_QL70_&dpSrc=srch
https://www.amazon.com/Dark-Star-Rising-Magick-Power-ebook/dp/B075C8BQS5/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1527945342&sr=8-1&keywords=dark+star+rising+magick+and+power+in+the+age+of+trump
The qualifier is in how he defines “white race”. He is obviously an abject prick and a provocateur but, if you find and replace each time he uses that term with his full explanatory definition, it becomes pretty clear that his sentence’s real meaning is uncontroversial.
(Many uncontroversial things are often pretty terrible.)
The first question therefore is whether one believes it is more likely that he writes in such a way to obscure his intentions or to get headlines. I think it’s the latter.
The next question is why isn’t he hounded out of his job regardless? Posing with eliminationist rhetoric is not exactly adding to the wellspring of human happiness nor peace
In other words, she reads The Daily Stormer and calls it “dissertation research.”
Of course. Doesn’t every normal white mom want her kids to look line Stanley Ann Dunham’s son?
At some point the genetic pressures from this type of breeding overwhelms the social-conditioning program designed to destroy us. Not to mention the inevitable(?) backlash that is hopefully taking place in Gen Z.
I want off this ride.
Isn’t the nation-state largely a product of modernity?
No, not THIS YEAR’S modernity. Didn’t you get the memo?
white women who do have lots of kids are overwhelmingly conservative, which does not bode well for the future of white liberalism
Leftism has a solution to that: mass non-white immigration and indoctrination through popular culture and the educational system.
Bizarre.
Gee, I guess she thinks traditional political discourse is fully grounded in reality.
A case here of an opponent making a fool of themselves, so just get out of their way.
I can’t imagine a reasonable person plowing through that turgid prose to learn something new. It is just signalling to other True Believers.
Ahh, but there’s the catch. Little Annie doesn’t want the ugly, or possibly even normal men. She wants the masculine, forthright, self-confident men that the Norwegian blondes up in North Dakota attract so easily.
Deep down, it’s always Steve’s rule of female journalism.
Hey Steve, you know half your readership spends their entire lives lusting after single-eyefolds. This article was a bad business decision…
I met an elderly man at a coffee shop, a few months ago, who claimed he had spent his early-twenties in Israel helping the Sephardim (Jews not from Europe) who were then targeted and systematically diminished in political and social power by the Ashkenazim. The major enemy of the Sephardim, he claimed, was the Israeli government because it was run by German WWII refugees who weren’t fond of their co-religionists from the Near East. They were easy to distinguish by appearance, but also by habits such as food and family structure.
I asked this man about the ultra religious, those guys in Jerusalem who look like throwbacks to 18th century Eastern Europe, and he said that most of Israel is secular(!) and “seculars” detest the “religious.” That’s what he called them — the “religious.” Apparently, the religious have reproduced like rabbits, each family having 4-10 kids and crammed in a small area of Jerusalem, which they can’t get out of unless they go to new settlements. If I understood him correctly, the new settlements are something like a population relief valve that pushes Jews into more dangerous, but open, areas, something that the government desires.
Oh, and he said there were lots of infighting among the religious because each group is competitive with other groups, perhaps because they harken from different areas of Eastern Europe. They can be identified by their funny hats. Each hat is distinctive, he said.
I asked him if there were other groups. He said that the seculars pretty much had Tel Aviv, the religious had that section of Jerusalem and the settlements, the Sephardim had the lousy parts of cities and towns, and the “normal religious” had the rest. He couldn’t defined “normal religious” except by referencing what we’d think of here, in America, as bland Protestants from the 1950s.
I asked him about Bibi. Where did he fit in all of this? He’s a secular, he said, a perfect fit for the government. He said the religious hate him.
I enjoyed this long, fascinating conversation — I won’t bore you with any more of it — with an 80+ year old man, sitting alone, sipping coffee; he was one of the most articulate, thoughtful and, yes, intelligent people I’ve met in years.
I don’t know if the Salier Law of Female Journalist Sex Appeal is at work here, but you guys decide…
https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/speaker/annie-kelly/
Ha! He’s a big hero on the Left. He is the one handing out candy bars to the eager, clutching hands.
???
It’s just the usual thing. He accuses “white people” of engaging in competition and exploitation while suggesting that other groups don’t; and if such competition and exploitation were stopped and rolled back, it would be rainbows and skittles for all. Total bullshit.
Picture of Ms. Kelly here:
https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/speaker/annie-kelly/
Exactly! And it’s why I’ve been referring to myself for decades as a “refugee from Detroit.”
In white (nominally & formerly) nations, the only oppression is of the native population. “White flight” is absolutely no different from anyone fleeing a war ravaged hell of constant assault, robbery, rape, and murder.
That’s about as natural as reproduction itself, to think like that. It’s not just looks either. It’s so amazing when the kids take after you, when you know there is no way it is from example (sometimes). It’s not always good, but it’s always something to be proud of and awed by.
I saw my boy get mad at a doorknob one time when he was little and stood up and hit his head on it. I think he was about 1 1/2 and he’d never seen me get mad at a physical object. He shook the door back and forth, and had a look that meant exactly “you piece of shit doorknob!”, but he couldn’t talk then, of course. It’s exactly what I’d have done at 25 years old. I was so happy and amazed to see this.
This writer, Mizz gradual-student Kelly, is not at all interested in Mother Nature, but Mother Nature may sometime be interested in her.
No.
The NYT article says:
It is unfortunate that the author does not note that this interpretation of the effect of 1960s feminism is supported by Senator Elizabeth Warren, in her book The Two-Income Trap.
Actually it was discovered that women were not very good at riveting. It takes a good deal of craft skill it seems to actually rivet properly. Housewives recruited to build the Liberty ships couldn’t learn fast enough. So Kaiser abandoned riveting and went to welded construction.
It was ‘Wanda the Welder’.
A common affliction of these urban strong independent women types: bitterness and resentment.
Like all leftist diseases, the feminist 3.0 infection relies on coveting and envy.
It is obvious they are not happy or content merely caressing their purple hair and admiring their latest tattoo in the mirror. No, they must destroy.
Unfortunately generations were steered away from their natural gifts, femininity, beauty, and truths about sex, marrriage, and children and now we have hoardes of angry and depressed women looking for ghosts under their beds while complaining that ‘real’ men aren’t offering them the dim sum life where they can pluck from tradition and prog delusions according to their whim (or insta-faceborg posturing needs).
The majority of these women spend years salting the earth with their garbage ideology and insta-gratification feelies chasing, but almost to a woman still demand to harvest ripe fruits from the trees and golden wheat from the fields when they decide they are “ready”.
When their swollen entitlement meets the fallow acreage trounced under their well-traveled feet, they are left with the only thing that leftism knows: destroy. Examples of the path not chosen or the beauty they have shed are natural targets of their envy. Leftist tolerance is a spectacle indeed.
Ah yes, the newest installment in the White Supremacy Extended Universe
Kelly does live in East Anglia, the source of most of the Puritan migration to New England in the 17th Century.
Most likely. But marriage is not what they value. Most women who actually value marriage more than say, a masters degree and corresponding debt – or “experience” or “finding myself” or leaning-in and “dating” all the different types of men she can, end up married to some average but probably decent guy that also happens to probably be her best match.
The ugly ones do have it hard, as their peak sexual value is always going to limit their options. But still, men wife-up ugly women all the time.
The difference is they dont tend to wife-up women who dont demonstrate that they value marriage or offer wifey things or otherwise spend their days attacking the various institutions and traditions that support marriage and family.
Women demonstrate what they value by what they choose when they are at the apex of their power to cultivate options.
Most of these women are also steeped in various delusions of their value as a WIFE. E.G. Projection based on equalist fantasy has them thinking their job at the NYT pumping leftist propaganda makes them sexy. Many of these women act as if they dare men to find them attractive.
Throw in the probability that these unattractive women are incapable of satisfaction with their natural male counterparts.
Self-asessment is a skill that is lacking. And most other people in her life are not helping her but instead puffing her up: you are stunning, never settle, you dserve the best. Social media does the rest.
What elder is going to counsel this generation of women to be modest and to value marriage more than their sexy tingles or ego feelies? Not happening.
Why marry when you can occasionally Tinder much more attractive men while continuing to reap what they actually value: prog status signaling, accolades of leftist credentialism, and self-aggrandizement aka the sacred female experience of the self.
Steves first law of female journalism is really just a ‘tell’ of a much deeper cultural affliction.
I bet Ms. Kelly has at least one cat.
I’d like to see research into the Cat Lady phenomenon as a model of failed femininity. Many white women, especially, have latched onto pets as substitutes for the children they refused or neglected to bear, even though dogs and cats live only about a dozen years on average. I know a single, childless female cryonicist in her 40′s who had both a dog and a cat cryopreserved because she considers these animals her “family” and her “children,” and she hopes to reunite with them some day in Future World.
I find that really sad, and not just for her, but for all the other white women who have failed to form natural relationships with husbands and the children they would have had with these men.
What do you consider “his full explanatory definition”? Looking around I see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noel_Ignatiev#%22New_Abolition%22_and_the_%22White_Race%22
Do you really think that description maps to “white”? It sounds more like a statement about any pre-eminent group in a culture.
Indeed.
My Mom sewed parachutes during the war. That’s where the silk went. She told me that she and other women would paint a thin line up the back of their legs to make it look like they were wearing stockings.
Things got better for her after she met my father, An Officer and a Gentleman, near the Navy base in Jacksonville and married him, immediately post war.
Yep, for more evidence of this kind of racism, see revealed preference in sperm donor selection.
” … Ms. Jorgenson is advocating something sinister … ”
Ms. Jorgenson: “I always wanted children that looked like me,” she says, “blond-haired, blue-eyed babies …”
The New York Times is advocating something sinister.
Agreed. The schools and colleges are completely owned by the left, as well as the mass media. In the UK most people, from teenagers to my 80 year old auntie, ‘just know’, for example, that Donald Trump is an idiot, just as anyone forty years back with an interest in politics ‘just knew’ that Reagan was a warmonger who’d start WW3.
We breed, but they convert. I like to think though that my kids will work it out as they get older.
I’m not sure what this signifies, but I’m pretty sure that for the last few years, there have been more whites who are anti-white than anti-white non-whites.
I realized this when my wife’s sister-in-law, a few months ago, dismissed some intellectual argument or the other as being invalid simply because it was made by a “white male”, with a distinct emphasis on the word “white.”
She is a highly credentialed fifty-something Washington DC policy type associated with one of the two or three top think tanks in that city. Twenty years ago, her type would have stressed the word “male.”
I, too, remember hearing that—from my mom and my aunt, her sister.
Because we – the people who are permitted to write for outlets like the New York Times – say it is.
What would the New York Times learn from Israel? That “we” (white gentiles) should have more children? The New York Times isn’t part of that “we”.
No, not the same thing at all. But nice try.
OT–it never ends.
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/local_coverage/2018/06/group_erase_faneuil_from_hall_s_name_because_he_was_a_slave_trader
How quickly your post drew the usual response from the usual people. They make pretty clear what you are not supposed to notice.
Are you serious, or are you just trying to get a ride out of me?
That is a non-sequitur. AndrewR is right. The statement is astoundingly stupid. Or at least ignorant.
There you have it. She lived in Germany. Case closed.
Sure, that’s why hasidic Jews marry amongst themselves – so that they can have little black babies.
He is trying to cover for people like Ignatiev
Lauren Southern is a beautiful young lady with guts and bravery who helped to bring publicity to the mass immigration invasion of Italy from Africa. This young lady, only 22 years old, was in a little boat on the Mediterranean with her identitarian pals up against a giant boat full of Third Worlders and Soros-sponsored White race traitors.
Marine Le Pen, more my speed and age, also brought publicity to the mass immigration invasion of Italy by going to Lampedusa Island, which is close to Africa. Marine Le Pen and Lauren Southern are two brave broads who have done good work to bring attention to the mass immigration invasion attack on Italy and other European Christian nations.
Both young Miss Southern and still peachy Marine Le Pen are hot broads worthy of amorous attention. Lauren Southern and Marine Le Pen have more guts and heart than a lot of White men who are nutless cowards.
The point is that WHITE WOMEN must be pandered to for votes and support to stop the mass immigration invasion of European Christian nations.
God Bless White Women
Hey, did anybody else notice that White broads such as Hillary Clinton who preach the glories of racial diversity seem to live in mostly White towns and mostly White sections of cities?
Materially, there is no question that they benefit immensely from living with white people. Yet it’s not obvious to me that living with whites is, on the whole, welfare enhancing as it apparently causes them considerable psychological success. To be sure, some of the distress is just a hustle, a way of guilt-tripping whites into giving them more stuff, but some of it is genuine. (Think Michelle Obama’s tremendous insecurity that Steve has extensively documented). I think it’s a flaw of human nature that makes it hard to forgo material benefit, even when you’re fundamentally less happy in some cases. It’s kind of like how it’s hard to walk away from a high-paying job even if you hate it. Living with whites is like that miserable high paying job (except for the working part).
“it becomes pretty clear that his sentence’s real meaning is uncontroversial.”
Uncontroversial within a modern Western academic setting, perhaps. Reality-denying fantasy anywhere else.
How do you know? I have seen no evidence of this. Only evidence to the contrary. With his little slip of the tongue, OP acknowledged the ugly truth about men’s lack of interest on ugly women.
And you know what really aggravates me?
In the idiot’s own words:
We do not hate you or anyone else for the color of her skin. What we hate is a system that confers privileges (and burdens) on people because of their color. It is not fair skin that makes people white; it is fair skin in a certain kind of society, one that attaches social importance to skin color. When we say we want to abolish the white race, we do not mean we want to exterminate people with fair skin. We mean that we want to do away with the social meaning of skin color, thereby abolishing the white race as a social category. Consider this parallel: To be against royalty does not mean wanting to kill the king. It means wanting to do away with crowns, thrones, titles, and the privileges attached to them. In our view, whiteness has a lot in common with royalty: they are both social formations that carry unearned advantages
Was it mythic?
Didn’t it?
Isn’t there a kernel of truth in that?
Having and raising children is a career, the most important one of all. The frustration stems from the fact they are under financial pressures to forgo having kids for working in a cubicle farm.
How does one residing in East Anglia even know North Dakota exists?
Certain posters here want to make casual sex as risk-free as possible for degenerate womanizers, which gives the lie to their purported concern for Average Joe who just wants a nice family, but can’t because all the girls are holding out for the 20%.
Of course, it’s totally OK for Jews to worry about birthrates…..:
https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/11/convincing-millennials-to-marry-a-nice-jewish-boy/281229/
Lol. Short and sweet! Straight to the point.
istevefan, it’s one of the perks of being “progressive.” It’s heads, I win. Tails, you lose. If your innovations improve, or at least don’t harm society, you are vindicated. If you make things worse, you just claim that anyone ho notices that fact is nostalgic for a better time that in fact never existed. Some people remember it, and know you are lying, but they’ll be dead soon, and in the meantime, you can just dismiss them as crotchety old fist-wavers who can’t cope with change.
This exactly, and Noel Ignatiev, discussed upthread, is well aware of what he is doing by “abolishing Whiteness.” No identity, no pride, no past, no babies, no future.
In other words, he wants to destroy White identity, the inevitable result of which is miscegenation, low birth rates and eventual extinction. Whether this eventuality is his conscious desire, or merely an obvious and inexorable result of his agenda, is no particular concern to me.
The distinction is female. John Derbyshire noted “the disappearing White man” in both US Army brochures and in advertising for “Adult Romantic Hotels” the latter of which featured Black men and White women.
I work in an industry focusing on female consumers. They respond at a higher rate and spend more when given ads showing female Black models. Believe me there is a lot of A/B testing and so on to craft messages the result in higher conversions to sales. This is particularly true for companies not named Nike or Apple. And yes almost all of our potential customers are White women, lower SES.
Anti-White rhetoric is directed by the anger and pique of White women, on a broad scale (no pun intended) with the quality of their men. A woman like Ms. Kelly is a face that launched … a single rubber ducky. BUT given the obesity epidemic I’ll assume more than a few Alpha males slumming it are in the romantic history of women like her in looks and background. None of them offered though to wife up women like that. Meanwhile the faults of beta males — dutifulness, cooperation, delayed gratification, lack of swaggering around, reduced violence on a personal level, higher average intelligence (correlating to reduced Testosterone) are all on display daily in a cubicle next to you.
Lack of real, existential wars, where White beta males are NEEDED (the military advantage of the West is beta males in combat, where dutifulness and cooperation make them a formidable opponent in sustained, not ambush, shock warfare think Iwo Jima or the Conquest of Mexico) make all of this worse and accounts for much of the worship, open and noxious, of Black men as the Master Race.
For the average CW viewer, the ideal male is Black, educated, taller, and “fighting racism” of White beta males or something. Yes of course Blonde, White babies are “abhorent” because they could look their beta male father.
This is why the Alt-Right is overwhelmingly White Men. Only now are our masters dimly perceiving that the Colors of Benetton Utopia live on the CW! leaves a lot of dudes out in the cold. Since our masters are deeply feminized expect more hectoring and shaming, the typical female solution to dissent, until there is a critical mass of Non-Whites for a “final solution” to the White Male Problem (i.e. we exist).
Simple math predicts that there is not enough money for Vibrants and single White women AND the elites at immavasion levels unless all the money/property is taken from the enemy (White men unconnected and lacking the power of say Bill Gates or Tim Cook) and given to the Vibrants for reparations for evil “racism mind rays” or something.
Most importantly: No babies.
Well stated.
Sorry, missed your reply. I do agree though!
https://wifewithapurpose.com/2018/06/02/annie-kelly-at-the-new-york-times-lied-about-traditional-moms-and-wife-with-a-purpose/
I’m surprised it has taken this long to go after Peter Faneuil. How much longer do you think they will let the statue of George Washington stand in the Boston Public Garden?
New York Times also takes on Britain. See the Speccy article for fun.
https://usa.spectator.co.uk/2018/06/whats-the-new-york-timess-problem-with-britain/
I agree, it’s terribly unhealthy for society in general. But if left to their own devices, women will – naturally – find themselves attracted to only the top 10-20% of men – even if they have to share the man with other women. Patriarchy is good and necessary for civilization, at least as far as we understand it over the last 1,000 years or so, to survive.
Of course. There’s a reason that “reproduce” is a synonym of “photocopy”.
It is beneficial to understand people with whom you disagree.
Ignatiev identifies what he perceives as a problem in America: the existence of a socio-economically privileged caste.
Given that said caste has historically correlated with white skin. He terms said caste the ‘white race’.
Note, that caste only correlated with white skin, which is something he admits in his ‘how the Irish became white’ thesis.
In typical provocateur fashion he then takes his new definition of ‘white’ and conflates it with the popular definition of ‘white’ in order, I assume, as the alternative is that he is really stupid, to impute an original sin on all people who fit the latter definition.
Hence you have his followers walking past white homeless people and hating them for their ‘privilege’.
By identifying the flaw in his argument, you defang him and it.
Now, he is left simply saying that some people are socio-economically privileged and that we do well to recognise it.
He cannot further state that it is unfair as they are not privileged by something self-evidently unfair like their skin colour but instead by individual and myriad reasons and each needs to be addressed on its own merits.
Were he to do this he would generally find that the source of most people’s socio-economic privilege is that either they are bright and hard-working or their parents were. He would then be stuck arguing to abolish bright and hard working people or parents doing the best for their kids. Neither position is an enviable one to hold!
How can “research” and zealotry against that which annoys you go hand in hand? Millions of conservative taxpayers who fund universities and send their children to college want to know.
Academics and elites on the east coast and in Europe care about flyover country in the US only because there are horrible things going on there.
The New York Times could learn how nationalism is mostly a good thing.
OT but here’s an excellent account of the NYT’s bias against Britain. I wonder if any Americans have noticed? It is as ignorant as it is extraordinary.
https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/06/whats-the-new-york-timess-problem-with-britain/
Not just ugly women, but any plain or reserved women.
In the real world, and not the echo-chamber of the internet, I see more hypergamy among men than women, at least in flyover country.
I was at a party with former high school classmates. Ages ranged between 25-30. There were far more attractive or plain women who were single, than there were men who were single. Women outnumbered men at the party, too. Many of the women had settled with overweight or lower-earning guys, too. Most of them want kids.
I see evidence that normal men have been so corrupted by porn that they are still chasing peppy sexy “cheerleader” types into their 30s. THEY are the ones who won’t settle. If they can’t get the types of women they are obsessed with, they retreat into their bedrooms and remain single, or get a desperate foreigner to marry them.
I went on Birthright and I learned loads. Especially how nationalism can benefit a country. It made me very envious and I have been a committed British nationalist ever since.
Sort of ‘why can’t we have what they have?’
The New York Times is not on my side. It does not represent me. It does not speak to me or for me. It is opposition media. I’m not waiting for it to come around to my way of thinking, nor do I ever expect it to, nor do I care if it ever does.
This needs to be a TV show, like Real Housewives of [XXX]. I might even watch.
I understand perfectly.
Solidarity for me;
Individualism for thee.
Networking for me;
Meritocracy for thee.
Identity for me;
Assimilation for thee.
It is beneficial to oppose people who hate you. Whether you understand them or not, is of secondary importance.
By the way, do you understand whatever gripes the Palestinians have? Do you make an effort to?
Noel Ignatiev is Jewish. Given that he described Israel as a “racial state, where rights are assigned on the basis of ascribed descent or the approval of the superior race” and likened it to Nazi Germany and the Southern United States before the civil rights movement, it would be hard to argue that your ditty describes him well.
What did you see and learn?
The Amazing Kreskin? Here on unz.com?
I thought you were dead?!?!
Anyone on television is your enemy and controlled opposition. Repeat this 100 times for now, and don’t worry about understanding it until later.
A woman with insecurities? What are the odds of that?
The Unzistas (in unison):
“Speak fa’ yo sef, Sunn.”
Now Stanley, the question is not “who did they want to marry at 19 while they were watching a David Lee Roth music video?”; the question is “who did they want to marry at 36, when they were fat, underachieving, and alone.”
And the answer is often times, “Yes.”
That’s even more than Mitt Romney.
Annie Kelly looks like a mousey biracial Asian. She is jealous of fertile, blond white women. Ignore.
Actually, you can marry 1st cousins for 3or 4 generations before you have too many problems. The Clinton Administration commissioned a study because so many just like us immigrants were bringing in the 1st cousin spouses.
This is a good piece to pair with the third episode of the first season of the unintentionally hilarious Hulu Handmaid, which shows three scenes of the actual takeover of the modern US by militant Christian fundamentalists, notably one where two chunky New Yorker subscribers end their jogging to fill a cafe with their sweaty odor, attempt to buy seven dollars worth of coffee (after jogging?), the card is declined because women are no longer legally allowed to shop for groceries (and banks are okay with losing hundreds of millions of dollars), the white chick asks the black chick if she has any money on her (and that goes exactly as horrible internet racists would expect), and the weirdly not-gay barista calls them names and tells them to get out.
I remember reading a comment in New York magazine to the effect that historically women used to give their husbands their youth and the husbands stuck around when the women were older out of loyalty, and that now women want to wait to get married when they’re older and men don’t want just the second part of that deal and so take a pass.
Yeah if I was getting shoes with holes in them until I was an adult and only eating my fill when the journalists came around so dad could quote Scripture when he wasn’t working as an assistant manager, I’d be bitter too for a little bit.
The three/four kids model seems more sustainable for developing solid citizens.
4 Bill P > particularly pronounced among white millennials, who seem to have internalized a sort of racial taqiyya.
i should re-vivify my “Vivaldi CD of the Month Club” business plan
Miz Kelly’s degree factory:
She bleaches her hair and applies makeup…but knows she isn’t pretty, poor gal.
https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/speaker/annie-kelly/
Imagine her conversation for a dinner date:
https://www.eurozine.com/the-alt-right-reactionary-rehabilitation-for-white-masculinity/
Now pause and think about how hard this gal is working to gild the doot of rejection. Related to Sailer’s First Law of Female Journalism.
There is a planet-sized massive of female anger, frustration, and grief being toted around (and inflicted on others). One of these days we’re going to have to man up and deal with it…and point to a better path…while making them think they thought of it themselves.
What about abolishing Jewishness?
Don’t just make White children. Teach them the Classics and gun safety!
I would be interested to know (though how could one actually know) the degree of malevolence felt by the writer – and by whoever commissioned her essay for the Times – towards these women and their ideals. She evidently doesn’t share those ideals, but she has at least studied them, and she has some sympathy for their economic motivation (but her “answer” is to blame “capitalism”). Both the author *and* the women she writes about, are bound to receive online harassment as a result of this article – the author from the right, the tradwives from the left.
All that would be true even if this had just been a blog post. But it’s a column in the Times, that may be read by millions (?). The Times editorial staff and process – whoever they are, whatever that involves – chose to elevate this topic. Why? Is it some conspiracy to smash the tradwife threat by siccing YouTube antifa against them? Or are they just titillating their readership with the latest report on the retrograde ideals of the reactionary white minority?
Who’s Sun? Is he Chinese?
Rosie’s First Law of iSteve Misogyny: Any unflattering view of women that any person can hold is held by some commenters on iSteve. It’s opposite is also held by some commenters on iSteve.
Women habitually overestimate their “SMV.”
Women are insecure.
You’re being pedantic. My answer carried more than enough weight to dismiss your ditty.
That’s probably worth a lot of time. Quite a bit of effort for a reply to a comment!
Except that sometimes they didn’t, so parents started advising their daughters not to depend on a man.
More from Mr. Ignatiev:
We already are thinking of it ourselves. Didn’t you read the article? Fair-minded people give credit where credit is due.
Yep, because they are traitors who put their own sexual desires over nationhood, then project their own disloyalty onto the very women they reject.
I propose an experiment: Post a (non-identifiable) picture of one of these attractive women between the ages of 25 and 30 and we’ll use it to make an experimental dating profile on Plenty of Fish. We can put right in the add that she is looking only to get married and there is no possibility of sex before marriage. I predict that the profile will be inundated with responses from single men who have jobs who are looking for a serious relationship that will lead to marriage.
Are you up for it?
His key caveat in that paragraph is “social construct”. This refers back to his definition that I picked apart above. If you don’t want to follow that chain of thought because you feel he is being disingenuous and hiding behind such caveats, fine.
Nonetheless, that caveat is there and if it is taken at face value it nullifies your criticism.
This blocks you from understanding him. Don’t get me wrong. He very much is your enemy. Mine too! He’s a charlatan peddling the worst type of priestly claptrap. But you’ll get nowhere if you think it is some sort of weird Jewish racial animus that motivates him as he’d simply name a bunch of non-Jews who’d say the same things and for the same reasons.
What’s the simplest explanation for why a person of words and low moral character would, through arcane sophistical argument, cast guilt and shame on people around them?
While I’ve never made up a reason to make someone feel guilty as I am not a sociopath I have occasionally over-egged a reason in order to get that individual to do what I want.
For example, if one suspects one’s caught a cold from an intimate partner, one may, when they are better, slightly exaggerate the one’s own symptoms while coyly mentioning that they are to blame as this gets you nursed back to health better.
If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.
Sun Tzu, The Art of War
This seems to me to be more likely the result of the fact that single men don’t go to events like that. Or: single men who aren’t able to sleep around all of the time don’t really go out at all.
The Japanese call them Otaku. This words greatly predates ‘incel’. They’ve essentially given up and checked out.
So either, as you assert, they’ve set their standards too high, failed and so have given up.
Or, as per Heartiste etc., women are hypergamous so the Otaku never had a chance – hence they were beaten into submission between the ages of 13 and 25 and have given up since.
Some Otaku, were they to re-emerge, may even find that, having matured, and/or benefiting from the inversion of the dating market, that when they hit 30 they are actually appreciated. Perhaps those fixated on unrealistic girls are also just protecting themselves from the fear of failure were they to go for a lady who was more available?
There’s no simple answers when it comes to sexual relations.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otaku
Neoconservatives spawned the alt-right? Only by being revolting Zionist cucks who combine far-left utopian ideology with a kind of muscular military adventurism. The alt-right was created in opposition to them.
Why is that?
You seem to have an obsession with the idea that “men won’t marry ugly women,” as you comment in it repeatedly in this and other threads.
Why is that, exactly…
…?
By “patriarchy”, you mean enforced monogamy?
Food science is interesting. I suppose that is a holdover from the time when Norwich had a number of world-leading food processing facilities, like the Coleman’s Mustard factory.
Everything else in that blurb is tragic though. From beginning their campus description with ‘safe’ to the various nonsense subjects offered, to the fact that over 20% of students are from elsewhere. Tbh, I feel sorry for them. They probably thought they’d be paying for something rigorous and enlightening and English.
Bit harsh to pick apart that lady’s looks though. She’s absolutely fine. She isn’t a perfect pin-up but she clearly takes care of herself and no honest man would regret waking up next to her. That is, until she opened her mouth and all of the total garbage she writes and teaches for a living came out. That’d probably persuade me to give up drinking and make healthier choices.
iSteve’s First Law of Dealing with Rosie’s Opinions:
Rosie, no one cares about your opinions.
Indeed. That is the question that should be asked of him. And also, what is he doing for the cause?
What’s the better path specifically?
The earth is vastly overpopulated by humans.
I don’t know about “vastly”, but overpopulated, likely. Generally agreed.
Trying to set off some demographic arms race in which whites try to outbreed everyone else is suicide.
We didn’t set off the demographic arms race. We had a set of white majority countries (along with non-white majority countries, which are still around), and relative peace between countries. The (((left))) decided that it would be a great idea if this situation was wrecked. So they implemented this plan. It involved mass immigration of non-whites, and controlling the propaganda organs of media, entertainment, education and government so that whites would be encouraged to lower birthrates, miscegenate, and not see anything wrong with white -> non-white wealth transfer. It involved a power structure that did its level best to prevent any public criticism of the situation, or a reassertion of political control.
It left no other option but a war of demographics by those it sought to dispossess and genocide. Remember, they wanted this situation and left us no other option!
We need to remove hostile groups from our countries
Yes. You won’t get that without a demographic majority, and you probably won’t get a demographic majority without success in a war of birthrates and the eventual genetic/cultural change that follows. After that is done, we can slow down, have a one child policy, whatever.
and reduce the birthrates of Africans, all as humanely as possible.
Historically SS African population was limited by death rate, and it wasn’t a humane process. I don’t think SSAs really gave a crap about humane concerns to be honest. It’s something that white people with their k selection Europomorphize and cry about. It’s Bono, Geldof, Sally Struthers et al leading that charge, not black people.
I am agnostic as to how SSA population limitation is done. And as far as removal of non-whites from white countries, I think it not need be more humane than how Algeria’s French population was removed, or the Eastern Germans were treated after WWII wound up, or for that matter how SSA’s whites are treated now. But as I said, I am agnostic on the methods as long as they work.
No comment.
I’m sure all the readers here know that Mr. Achmed E. Newman adheres strictly to the “If you can’t say anything nice … ” rule.
What WAS the 2nd part, anyway? Anyone? Anyone? Beuhler?
I don’t know; it’s really not my problem, but then I don’t want to hear “incels” crying about fictitious female Hypergamy.
Yes, there are definitely opportunities to acquire transferable skills as a SAHM, once your kids are a little older.
This is only the 34th HateHonkyGoys (HaHoGo) story I’ve read today – and I’m worried. It seems our mainstream media is really slacking off when it comes to anti-fascist vigilance usually served up in these portable HaHoGo struggle sessions, so I’m expecting Hitler. When our children come to us and ask what did we did in the time leading up to the HaHoGo Crisis, Just Repression, and Necessary Self-Defenestration, we’ll have to answer (assuming we’re still around after diving out a window), “Gee, I can only remember thinking about handball courts for the first time in a coon’s age.”
There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that women are shunning appropriate suitors. As I have said 1488 times now. It’s the other way around.
https://techcrunch.com/2009/11/18/okcupid-inbox-attractive/
A more likely explanation is that men below a certain threshold of attractiveness simply don’t register with women as sexual beings. In a sense, they are literally invisible.
When women accuse men of being picky and only going for the prettiest girls, what they really mean is that the men they perceive as being sexual beings, i.e. men in the top 10-20% of attractiveness, are very picky and go only for the prettiest girls. Men below that threshold simply don’t count.
The reality is that virtually any woman between the ages of 25 and 30 who is not obese can easily find a mate who is her looks-match and is a solid guy (has a job, car, a place, etc.). But women are hypergamous AND largely oblivious to their hypergamy.
Repeating this lie over and over again won’t make it true. See my response above to Screwtape. We’re not going to accept subjugation on false pretenses.
A) What if they aren’t motivated by ‘hate’? If you don’t understand them you’ll never know and you’ll look foolish.
B) I think I have a pretty good understanding of what motivates the Palestinians. I’ve hung out there and had a great time with them. I even briefly dated a girl from there, though in the UK.
Nonetheless, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not my business. I find people on both sides of the wall remarkably similar – loud, direct, arm-wavey, kind of rude, very warm. A lot of them are also physically indistinguishable, to me at least.
As for how I’d solve it. You won’t like my answer. I don’t like it either…
These sort of conflicts take on a logic of their own. This normally continues until one side wins and dictates terms. They rarely end in genuine compromise. The most humane and realistic result is when the term-dictator remembers not to leave their former enemy in ongoing humiliation- so no Treaty of Versailles. Otherwise the conflict will rise again. While its behooves the loser to recognise when they’ve lost, so no Jesse James gang.
I have noticed that about you, Mr. N. It’s very admirable. I follow a variation on this rule: Ifyou don’t have anything nice to say, don’t say anything at all, unless you are defending yourself against an attack.
East Anglia IS where the Puritans came from 1630-1640, settling the Massachusetts Bay Colony. There were 199 ocean crossings, losing only one ship, the Gabriel, in a storm on the shore of present day New Hampshire (the ship my ancestors were aboard). See David Hacket Fisher’s “Albion’s Seed.”
In case you hadn’t noticed, Rosie doesn’t care who does or does not care about Rosie’s opinions. Rosie will call out your bullshit either way.
I’m correcting your lies, liar.
I could care less about his motives. I care only about the harm he does.
I don’t get the impression that you think that ‘your side’, however you define it, has a surfeit of political influence.
In which case you end up sounding like the jilted girlfriend who sassily claims that she “don’t need no man”.
Or maybe I’m wrong and all of your political aims are about to be seen through and your platform is wildly popular and influential?
@27 year old nailed it.
The answer would be nothing, of course. They may criticize Israel, but they wage war on White nations.
Subjugation? Take a look at the female depression rate. Take a look at the below-replacement level reproduction. This isn’t theoretical – this is actually happening.
At least understand his argument at face value before dismissing it. Otherwise you just end up looking stupid.
His motives are less important, although understanding why the Romans marched forward so confidently (their justified belief in their superior infantry) allowed Hannibal to entice them along, envelop them and win perhaps the most famous military victory in history. It was utterly crushing.
Sweet picture, Buzz, thanks. They look happy.
I’d say Ms. Kelly is rather pretty, for a witch.
78 Charles Pewitt > Both young Miss Southern and still peachy Marine Le Pen are hot broads worthy of amorous attention
Hillary Clinton has done more shadchan’ing than Charles Pewitt has
What I meant is that the only big difference between the two is that one held that people are mostly fungible and the other doesn’t. The failure of Iraq proved that people aren’t mostly fungible, to anyone paying attention. That is why no-one identifies as a neo-conservative anymore. They “got mugged by reality” ha ha. Or they went into denial and escaped via the leftist loony-train.
Progressives don’t care. They have so many other points of difference with both sets of ideology. That’s why she feel happy saying what she said. She doesn’t see much difference.
It’s the miserable part that’s the deal-breaker. Annie appears to have no interest in motherhood, so what’s the point…
They are trying to do both. The Left is desperately stepping on every spark of resistance before it flares up and takes hold, and the Times makes their money posting articles that entertain and validate the inhabitants of their echo chamber.
On the optimistic side, based on my interactions with “normies” I am increasingly getting the impression that there may be too many sparks for them to smother.
I’m 99.999% sure there’s not a single country on earth where whites were once a majority but no longer are, unless you want to count Persia pre-Islamic invasion, which would be rather silly. I’m 100% sure that that’s true of the Anglo countries and the whole if Europe. We have “the [super]majority” now, and we are not doing anything with it.
152 Rosie > We’re not going to accept subjugation on false pretenses.
you lost that battle when fiancee-visas became legal
PS: did you complain when Elizabeth Gilbert married a desperate foreigner?
Terribly inapt analogy. The Crown as head of state is a legal/constitutional convention–a condition of the people and their government. Presumably, the people through their parliament can substantively change the terms and conditions thereof.
The idea of “white race” and abolishing it is to address an intangible, the socio-cultural meaning of which could hardly be agreed upon by any three random people. The author appears filled with envy.
The “rosy image of 1950s domestic bliss” shtick is getting pretty old–especially coming from someone who was probably born in the 1990s. That would be her grandparents era of domesticity, and of the women she writes about.
No one yearns for their grandparent’s era. This reads of the fantasizing Kelly accuses her subjects.
Exactly.
I’m confused. I was on a website where they cited surveys that claimed 90% of men thought 80% of all women were acceptable and attractive enough for a relationship, after matching for age and some other indicators, probably. Whereas only a minority of women, like 20%, thought most men acceptable enough. The jist of this was that it’s women’s fault people don’t get hitched, by being absurdly picky.
Or maybe they were just talking about brief encounters not vows.
Somebody is not being on the level here.
The University of East Anglia was also Ground Zero For Global Warming fraud.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climatic_Research_Unit_email_controversy
Meh, I’m a racist SAHM who did her part and had three white babies. I would’ve been game for four but my husband reluctantly agreed to three.
Yawn, yet another attack on stay at home mothers, especially Christian ones, just dressed up with an alt-right twist now. I dismiss articles by bitter feminists as jealously. They’ve essentially lost at life, no matter how many lame PhDs and high-end handbags they have. They’re deeply unhappy people. I don’t think there are any good looking feminists so the source of their bitterness is obvious. I feel for young men these days. Women have been catered to and puffed up so much (particularly by their parents!), with all the grrrl power bs and anti-male rhetoric, and men just don’t want to put up with it.
As for marriage and kids, I agree with Jorgenson – I’ve never been happier and more content than since I became a mom, and I had a well-paying 18 year career to contrast against. Marriage didn’t do that but motherhood did. I feel for my friends and relatives who don’t have kids. They won’t know the single greatest joy and purpose in life a human can experience. Like getting married, parenthood requires a leap of faith and I encounter lots of people these days who are too afraid (and too lazy) to make the leap.
Ugly and a castrating bitch? No, no guy wants that. I don’t think she’s ugly but she looks very smug and like she would be a major witch.
You don’t do any counter programming at home?
You are certainly right Rosie!
(Shifting gears; I did put woman in italics)
I think GW is his own case and is essentially untouchable. Who wants to pull down the Father of Our Country.
That said, it’s Boston, Jake.
“I call you Sun ‘cuz you MIINE not ‘cuz you shine…”
-Primo.
We have Steve read the Times and get back to us if he thinks something warrants discussion.
How much clout do the working-class Irish have in Boston these days?
I heard much of the city, especially Southie, have gentrified.
Hey if she really is Asian, all she needs to do is come here for a week and discover just how much WNs prefer her over blondes, that will clear up her jealousy REAL quick.
We should follow their example and then say “see, we are just emulating them”
Noone is disputing that ugly men are willing to marry attractive women. The problem is that half of men are below average, but very few are willing to admit this.
Indeed, the MGTOW/incels are liars. Although women say 80% of men are below average, they message them anyway. Men say your average woman is acceptably attractive, but then ignore them. I have explained this repeatedly. See the link I posted upthread.
I’m not saying there isn’t a problem. I’m disagreeing with you about the solution.
You can’t have White children without White women, and we won’t be slaves.
I would have if I had no known about it. A race traitor is a race traitor is a race traitor.
The modern left is generally anti-Israel, and this even includes some jews. Jews and other leftists (especially blacks) are seeing their interests diverge. “The Jews” as a wholly pro-Israel group is not a reality.
Women appear to rate men’s attractiveness far more harshly than men rate women’s attractiveness. In an analysis of OK Cupid survey data, women rated over 60% of men as having below average attractiveness and 0% of men as being in the most attractive category, with only 1 of 6 men having above average attractiveness and only 2% of men in the top 2 attractiveness categories. Men rated women on an almost bell shaped curve, with 60% being in the 3 middle / average categories and 21%% being in the top 2 categories.
Source article with graph:
https://blogs.sas.com/content/sastraining/2014/10/16/how-do-men-rate-women-on-dating-websites-part-2/
I already told you. I do understand it, and it’s outrageous.
The fact that you even think about finding a “looks-match” reveals the foul stench in your rotten soul. Women don’t think like that. Women get struck by Cupid’s arrow. Men go shopping, like at a meat market.
Uh oh…
Tillie has an ally. TWO broads brainwashed enough to think that white men should marry white women.
Gentlemen, you KNOW what you have to do…
Fascinating. Of course she’s actually using “neo-conservative” literally and not to mean Neocons who attended classes taught by Leo Strauss and pushed for destructive and unnecessary wars. The airheadedness of that: a PhD who doesn’t care about terms of art. Also, her redefinition of the “alt-right” is reasonable but it’s less of a definition and more of an observation of where they can easily be checked out, like claiming that the definition of “baseball” is something that happens in one of around thirty large, well-lit structures in major cities.
Really, I’m a White women and avoid products advertised with black models especially that insurance company black guy whose on TV a hundred times a day.
You’re the expert, not me. Are you sure it’s not the low cost of products with black models? If you want to see black black black models and celebrities check out allegedly high end Vogue Magazine.
Great comment. Truth.
Yep. Of all the conservative delusions the idea that they can outbreed liberals is the most pathetic. Conservatives need to wake up – liberals don’t need to have children because they’re going to get your children.
Sometimes it’s hard to resist the thought that conservatives are so overwhelmingly stupid that they really do deserve to lose.
My sister never married, is now well past child-bearing age. She always has 2 cats which she treats as children or boyfriends, depending on her mood. When one of them passes, she gets another. Always male. She wont’ get female cats.
They serve as surrogate children and alpha male companions.
I’ve concluded that spinster women love cats because cats are aloof, finicky and independent — just like the alpha man from whom women crave validation.
If only a cat could say “Bring da movies.”
That moment when you already know what the thesis conclusions are gonna be…
Rosie is obviously a troll, or sixteen. Women care about money. They’re going to pick the guy who has as decent an education and income as them, and hopefully better. They might go for the looks for fun but if they’re looking for long term, they’re picking the kind-looking orthodontist over the hotter but poor personal trainer.
Yes. Pattern noticed.
There is an inverse correlation between “preaching the glories of racial diversity” and the speaker living in a diverse neighborhood.
Dunno why it is. But it is.
The men who make all these broad statements about women don’t know any women except their mothers and possibly sisters although they hate them as much as they hate all women
They need to get laid instead of sitting in front of porn all day. But getting laid would actually involve talking to a women instead of watching actresses jump on the actor who walks into the frame.
You don’t sound like a sexually empowered woman.
Everyone knows that sexually empowered, strong and independent women have as much casual risk-free sex as possible with as many partners as possible. It’s what Slut Walks and “Sex in the City” are all about — strong, independent women are proud to be sluts! G-d bless them.
Womanizers give women what they want, liberating them from monogamous sexual servitude to boring beta males. They deserve our gratitude and admiration as we march together into a brave new progressive world.
No-fault divorce, community property and life-long alimony took care of that. Women today have a strong incentive to divorce — cash, prizes and custody of the children!
Any man getting married today without a rock-solid pre-nup is an idiot.
But even a great pre-nup can be shredded by a good divorce lawyer. Still, better to have one.
I’m confused….the woman in North Dakota was German and immigrated to the USA or she was American and living in Germany for some reason…..?
It’s funny how Cupid’s arrow never causes a woman to fall in love with a shorter, lower social-standing man who makes less money than her. It guess that’s just luck.
Spot on.
When is the NYT going to run an article titled “The Housewives of Jewish Supremacy” or would that be racist?
Ah, the end of liberal democracy… music to my ears
OK. I’m going to start counting how many times I have to explain this before it sinks in. It doesn’t matter that we think most of you are ugly. We message you anyway, so we’re not the problem. You are the problem.
https://techcrunch.com/2009/11/18/okcupid-inbox-attractive/
Rosie’s First Rule of iSteve Misogyny:
Women are calculating gold-diggers.
Women prefer useless thugs, the dumber the better.
I never said Cupid was an egalitarian, did I?
As a matter of fact, though, his arrow does hit women somewhat unpredictably. You all agree on who is hot. We do not. Again, you are the problem. Not us.
https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm
If they would shut off the computer for a couple of days or a couple of hours, maybe they would actually respond sexually to normal women who don’t look like porn stars.
Wasn’t Vivaldi himself a celibate teaching in a girls’ school?
With a ridiculously Christian-sounding name. “Christmas, the son of Loyola.”
University of East Anglia was also up to its neck in the Climategate “science” fakery including deleted data, fake “peer review,” etc.
https://www.skepticalscience.com/Climategate-CRU-emails-hacked.htm
On her vanity page, Mzz Kelly seems unsure whether she attends the “University of Anglia” or the “University of EAST Anglia.”
https://www.battleofideas.org.uk/speaker/annie-kelly/
Looking at her picture, one cannot help noticing that with her evident fascination with blonde hair, Mzz Kelly has chosen to dye her hair that abhorrent color. Of course, the change in hair color could be a side effect of some other potion or PHILTRE brewed by Mzz Kelly and her coven sisters.
Ms. Kelly, clearly, has not had enough sex (or any, perhaps just quality sex) in her early lifetime. She is so pathetic by trying to analyze other women’s (her contemporaries) libido. To each their own, was lost on her, I suppose.
It is sad, but as much as she makes fun of Incels, or Norwegians ( so funny – I knew she was a total idiot loser at that point) – she so much, does not deserve my sons (or ever having decent sex & someone caring about her) – she will never be good enough), she simply has not “been taken.” She has never lived that Gothic Novel experience….and, she is pissed off about it! – how dare those women act happily married! What a dumb ass.
How many welders ended up doing some dancing (and stripping) on the side?
No men get messages from women unless they’re in the top 10 percent of photo-attractiveness. Whereas even ugly women online will get messages from somebody. Online dating is no great shakes for men.
Score not snore!
It’s also a good example of the wretched rhetoric on display in the piece. It’s all assertion and virtue-signaling winking and nodding. There’s no argument for or proof of any claim she makes. Actually there’s barely a charge of any real wrongdoing, however reckoned. She merely labels women she dislikes and assumes their crimes are thus established.
These two propositions are not necessarily contradictory. A woman might marry the orthodontist for his money, then fool around with the personal trainer on the side.
The real Kreskin is still alive and kicking.
A) What if they aren’t motivated by ‘hate’?
They quite clearly are.
No, it means that I – realistically – realize that my side has little or no political influence. I also recognize that the New York Times, being essentially an enemy of my side, isn’t ever going to side with me. Some fools might think that they will, but I am under no such illusion.
Really!? Wow! I never would have guessed that in a million years.
You make a non sequitur. My white (foreign) wife is not a slave. She is, however, a feminine, submissive, pleasant, traditional homemaker. She is also happily nursing our child as I type.
There is no need for compromise or extremes on the matter. American white women who choose to be uppity harridans have no leverage with men who’ve the initiative to ignore them.
Any truer analogy would blow apart his argument. It would show where he goes wrong.
He might as well be claiming that people who read alot are historically privileged and therefore we need to abolish the social construct of reading. Not looking at words in books, he’d later caveat, but just the class signifiers that go along with such activity. Before going on to lecture anyone who reads about their historic guilt by association…
“Why Women File 80 Percent of Divorces”
“According to the National Center for Health Statistics, about 50 percent of marriages in the United States end in divorce, and about 80 percent of the divorces are initiated by women. That 50 percent is often quoted and it is probably on the high side, but it is illuminating that 80 percent of the divorces are filed by the wife.”
http://www.divorcesource.com/blog/why-women-file-80-percent-of-divorces/
To be fair, the post you link to states that men send a much higher ratio of their messages to the most attractive women, which is almost certainly true – why wouldn’t they – but then, rather dishonestly, jumps from that, to implying that men send fewer messages to less attractive women than women do to less attractive men.
This is not true. The ratios may be skewed but men send far more messages overall. Many men (most?) will literally never receive a single initiatory message.
The explanation here seems to be one of female hypergamy. It is an explanation which fits.
Alternatively, it can also be explained by social convention. On the supposedly feminist-style dating app Bumble, where women have to intiate contact and which I joined out of curiosity, I received stacks of messages and some of the worst ice-breakers ever.
I’d love to claim that as the result of female hypergamy but the rules of the platform clearly had changed female behaviour. The girls were inexperienced at initiating contact and were terrible at it.
Correct, Rosie and her ilk are liars. What they do is they focus on the (correct) point that men are primarily motivated by looks while women are primarily motivated by looks/money/status.
But relative valuing of different qualities is not the same thing as overall pickiness. Perhaps men care primarily about looks, but only men in the top 10-20% of attractiveness are picky about looks. The rest are happy if the girl is their looks-match and she’s not obese.
The claim on the table is that there exist attractive women between the ages of 25 and 30 who are unable to find men. This claim is complete BS as my experiment would demonstrate.
Nice attempt at strawmanning though.
I try not to spend much time reading or rebutting Rosie’s nonsense, but it’s worth pointing out that the graphs in this article plot the overall distribution of messages and not absolute numbers.
It’s true that — relatively speaking — men care more about looks than women, but that is independent of overall pickiness. The graphs don’t show the absolute numbers of messages being sent but I don’t need to look at the underlying data to be very confident that men are sending far far far more messages than women, both in terms of initial messages and replies.
It’s easy enough to verify this by doing an experiment with an experimental profile. The profile of an average-looking man on a dating site will get very few messages and a very low reply rate. The profile of an average-looking woman will get lots of messages and a much higher reply rate.
Thus, the fact that women put relatively less importance on looks will help a guy only if he is very desirable in terms of money or status. That’s hypergamy, folks.
Not only that, but men are far more likely to reply to an initial message sent by a woman than vice-versa.
But yeah, I basically agree with your analysis. Men are more interested in pretty girls than plain girls but they are still very much interested in plain girls. Women have broader criteria for attraction than men (they also care about money and social status) but they have little interest in men who are weak in terms of overall looks/money/status.
To put it another way, the graphs in Rosie’s article don’t say anything about overall pickiness. They just show the importance men and women place on looks relative to other qualities.
Lol, what’s actually being revealed is your utter lack of self-awareness. Either that or that you are trolling.
What about pit bulls?
Either scenario is not unlikely. North Dakota has two air force bases so there are/were a lot of foreign born wives of American servicemen. As well a lot of home grown NoDaks join the military and find themselves stationed in Germany. Some of them marry German women. It happens. It might just be that this NoDak woman is of German heritage and lived in Germany as part of her education or stayed w/German relatives. Again, a lot of German-Americans in North Dakota, although the line is becoming somewhat diluted w/each passing generation. I’m not just talking about miscegenation although there is plenty of that but just the fact that it’s damn hard to find a white American who is exclusively one ethnicity anymore. I have a niece who is French, Polish, Scottish, English, German, Norwegian and according to 23 and Me 8% Ashkenazi Jewish which was a bit of a shocker. We’re still madly beating the bushes to suss out that knotty blood line.
https://www.theguardian.com/books/2017/jun/07/eat-pray-love-author-elizabeth-gilbert-and-rayya-elias-celebrate-love-in-private-ceremony
And your sons will have to deal with White women who aren’t interested in submitting to them. There are only so many foreign White women to steal from theiren in other nations.
What would be illumimating is information about who is at fault for marital breakdown, which may or may not be the person who filed.
Where’s your data?
Put up or shut up?
I’m not sure it matters anyway. Sending messages en masse to beautiful women when you are a mediocrity yourself is not indicative of realistic expectations. A B+ student who sends out 100 college applications may or may not be acting rationally, depending on which colleges he chose to target.
Do women order spouses from a catalog when they don’t like what’s on offer at the local meat market?
Southie is on the road to Park Slopedom, but you can still get a beer and a beatdown in the ungentrified areas. The hard core micks stick like a tick to the homeland.
The mayor of Boston is a drunk named Walsh, the fire chief is named Finn, and the police commissioner is a refugee from the cover of a U2 album named Evans.
Minorities have begun getting elected citywide, but they fall into two groups: the ones who have something on the ball moving up after one term, like the former city councilor Ayanna Pressley (black woman) running for Congress, or the ones who end up in jail.
Probably a lot of those men believe the “Cupid’s Arrow” nonsense that is spewed by the likes of Rosie. Women are Wonderful and Don’t Care About Looks, right? Here’s what she said a few posts back:
And then she turns around and bashes men for messaging women who are not their looks-match.
_________
How can somebody simultaneously believe that (1) looks don’t matter very much to women; and (2) mediocre-looking men who message attractive women are being unrealistic?
I think the problem here is that most women are very much lacking in self-awareness. They care a great deal about looks (as well as money and status) and they are very hypergamous, but they are not consciously aware of it. The filtering is done at a subconscious level.
Here you are using the word “women” when what you really mean are “attractive women.”
It is you who are strawmanning. The claim was that decent-looking women can’t find husbands, not attractive women.
After mirroring her dating life on Sex and the City, a columnist expresses regret as she pushes 40.
https://nypost.com/2018/06/02/dating-columnist-reveals-how-sex-and-the-city-ruined-her-life/
How did I know someone would actually try this. You sound like an anti-White concocting a just-so story to justify their double standards.
The endless speculation with no data is truly pathetic and tiresome.
I’d like to think that, but I have found in general in life women are surprisingly lacking in self-awareness about what attracts them in men and just how influenced they are by the man’s physical appearance.
In general, women have a difficult time acknowledging or admitting to facts which they perceive put women in a negative light.
“They” are paid to look happy, Sayless, as “they” are the actor Richard Gere and the actress Debra Winger*.
Haha, Sayless, that’s not Mr. and Mrs. (to-be) Mohawk with little Buzz inside! I didn’t write this to give you a hard time, but it WAS funny. You are dating yourself – too young to know this movie from the early 1980′s, so how would you be expected to know those 2 in this scene from An Officer and a Gentleman.
The most famous line is the one Peak Stupidity has paraphrased to “You want sustainability; I want sustainability, my GrandMama wants sustainability!” (Supposed to be: “You want to fly jets, my Grandmama wants to fly jets!”)
* I always liked her for her voice, for some reason, very sexy to me.
Here is a quote from the post I was responding to:
It’s right there — the word “attractive.”
But anyway, you could do the same experiment with a “decent-looking woman” and get the same result.
In fact, lets do it: Post a non-identifiable picture of a “decent-looking woman” who is between the ages of 25 and 30 and I’ll set up an experimental profile on Plenty of Fish. I will make it clear in the profile that the woman is interested only in marriage and that only serious replies will be considered. I predict that the profile will get large number of responses from financially secure men.
Are you game?
Riveting on airplanes vs. riveting on ships are entirely different things, Pat. I’d think the strength factor would come in for ship riveting. Airplane riveting requires people to get into tight spaces (whole body, or at least arms) to buck the rivets from the back side. It’s all small stuff though, but maybe fatigue would be a factor to (as usual) women more than men. The ship rivets were much bigger pieces requiring much bigger tools.
It was unrelated to who welded them, I believe, but the Liberty ships had failures at these welds due to the lack of engineering knowledge regarding fracture mechanics, which resulted in deaths of US sailors.
You’re nuts. “Jews out breed Muslims.” Are you for real? Jews are both a religious and an ethnic minority in the Middle East. As for Nazis being in charge, it’s in the West Bank that you find restaurants named in honor of Hitler and pictures of him hanging up, not in Israel.
Nope, I mean all women. But especially women in their 20s.
But again, we can do an experiment. I can set up an experimental dating profile of a man who is weak in terms of looks/money/status. We’ll make him 30 years old, overweight, balding, and with a low-status job. We’ll have him send messages to 100 random women (some will be attractive, some won’t). I predict that he will get very very little interest, even from women who are also weak in terms of attractiveness.
Are you game?
Community property is common sense nthst follows from the natural partnership between men and women. Life-long alimony is an essential protection for women that is currently being eroded.
I would very much like to see the end of NFD, but that won’t happen because rich men like it. They don’t care how much it hurts everyone else.
Thanks.
Brutusale:
Glad to hear that my co-ethnics are still holding out in Boston. In NYC the political power of Irish-Americans is a long lost cause with the demise of Tammany Hall many years ago. The last of the Irish-American politicos is Representative Joe Crowley, a dunderhead of dunderheads!
193 Anon[257] > If you want to see black black black models and celebrities check out allegedly high end Vogue Magazine.
to a first approximation, “high end” product categories exist to produce added profit margin
to a first approximation, you can sell $300/metric-ton Bangladeshi-made garments to black people for $30,000/metric-ton, by spending $3/metric-ton on correct advertising placements
The most important portion of a garment’s “looks” and “presence” comes from the wearer having a thin body, and from the garment being properly patterned, cut, and sewn
You can learn everything you need to know with 100 hours of youtube viewing and 500 hours of practice-sewing on a $100 walmart sewing machine
Fat chicks don’t get jobs as models because of sexism. They don’t get jobs as models, because of cash registers.
206 Miro23 > When is the NYT going to run an article titled “The Housewives of Jewish Supremacy” or would that be racist?
never. Because all the money that could ever be made from fomenting an intra-jew civil war, has already been made, and spent
You really need proof that men send far more initiatory messages than women? That shows a severe lack of judgement. Are you 12?
College applications are a lot of work. Sending a message saying “hey, you like music, I like music too!” does not.
If it takes 5 seconds and women might be struck by “Cupid’s bow”, as you allege, they’d be crazy not to.
245 Rosie > The claim was that decent-looking women can’t find husbands, not attractive women.
take a decent-looking woman, add ten minutes of skilled make-up application; and take away 5 years of snacking.
Result: an attractive woman
For a VERY attractive woman, add two ounces of ethanol to the viewing male’s bloodstream
242 Rosie > Do women order spouses from a catalog when they don’t like what’s on offer at the local meat market?
Yes they do. Go read http://www.alaskamen.com
if the women are older, they fly to Jamaica (“Canadian secretary syndrome”) or Kenya (read the Nairobi newspapers, Rosie)
239 Rosie > There are only so many foreign White women to steal from theiren in other nations.
i’ll mention that to the Census bureaux of Ukraine and of Moldova
This proves my point. It took two women to do one weld. Jennifer Beal to look good on the set and some other woman to do the dancing and striping.
Gosh, I really hope so!
Correct.
Tell that to the thirsty white knight boomertards who insist on granting her the attention and validation she craves by engaging with her screechings as though they merit serious engagement.
Gee, it’s almost like I said from the beginning. “She” is a “female” corvinus at best, if not a “female” tiny duck.
Oh, I was being sarcastic about myself, hahaa, but thanks anyway, Rosie.
I pretty much follow your variation, speaking of which, 2 comments I made to you have been in moderation for over 1 business(?) day in response to this comment of yours. I know, you can’t wait, right? ;-}
Asian girls love White men:
My wife finds your idea I stole her from her original country hilarious. In addition to being risible, it is, of course, insulting; it objectifies her and paints her as some kind of prize or chattel – this from you, the resident she-woman man-hater around here.
To be clear, though, my son has every chance of marrying a beautiful Colombian like his mother (or Arentine, or Chilean, or Pole, or Sovakian, or Hungarian, Ukrainian, or Bulgarian, or any number of the other millions and millions of white women who are not harpies – even one of the few left in America, Australia, or Western Europe, etc. I never came across but who doubtless do exist. It’s the upside of globohomo nonsense, cheap air travel, etc.
The fundamental thing, though, in all your ranting and raving in this thread, is it’s made me realise you are just Tiny Duck, Version 2.0 – substituting sex for race, and I stand humbled and ashamed for having wasted time taking you seriously.
She’s all yours Troof……and frankly if you can keep her from wasting anymore of her time in continued pursuit of her “degree” you will have performed a valuable service for humanity Sport….err old chap…..sod…….umm…… Chief!
I think she’s just in a rhetorical corner, so to speak. Once you put the denominator into the equation, her entire theory falls apart. Because average men are very much interested in women of average attractiveness.
Yeah, I made a similar point elsewhere. Anyway, it’s not consistent to simultaneously believe that women care little about a man’s looks while at the same time believing that average men who pursue attractive women are being unrealistic. Not consistent with logic and reason anyway. But logic, reason, and consistency are Tools of the Patriarchy. Feminism is about women’s feelings.
The big dance scene where Jennifer Beal’s character wins admission to the dance academy was done by a man.
No one is stopping Ms Kelly from marrying a black African, if she wants to do that.
how_do_you_do_fellow_right-wingers.txt.
Take that, PhD students: do your research on the Romantic Poets, the Fall of Constantinople, or non-linear time, and you may struggle for years to be published or find a good job instead of adjuncting. Claim some women in North Dakota are trying to get their retroactive Mutterkreuz, and you’re in the NYT, and heaven knows where you’ll go next. (BTW, wearing makeup and heels to please your man is not a Nazi thing: “The German woman does not smoke, drink, or paint her face.” The BDM threw girls out for having their hair permed. Also BTW, people have made similar claims about the Catholic birthrate, though not recently.)
Or you can just get Rush Limbaugh to call you a ho, and you’ll have a job before you even finish law school, while all the people who worked on tort law or probate are still sending out resumes.
What we are talking about here is who is responsible for birth dearth. The men of the alt-Right have put women on trial for the destruction of Western civilization. Come to think of it, they haven’t actually done that. What they’ve done is convict us in absentia without due process and sentenced us to slavery and perpetual legal non-personhood. Sorry, but fuc* that. The burden of proof is in them.
Now, I don’t know who sends more initial messages, and it doesn’t particularly matter anyway. What matters is whether or not those contacts are realistic.
I don’t know why my other post ended up as a reply to you; it was supposed to be an independent comment.
Anyhow the East Anglian folk were Lollards even before the Reformation, and they’ve been causing trouble for centuries.
Are there any actual numbers on how political beliefs correlate with politics? At my college reunion I noticed that significant numbers of my liberal classmates have had 3 or more children. One white woman who is so liberal she has #fuck45 sewn on her jean jacket has 6 kids, her former room-mate, a moderate Dem from Connecticut has five. And those are the gentiles. Every Jewish family I know has a minimum of 3 kids, often more. My sense is that the upper 5% is simply outbreeding the America that can’t afford kids, or whose kids will die early deaths from opiates or serving in America’s wars.
I’m not talking about anything huge and dramatic. I’m just pointing out who sends more initiatory messages. Why the hysterics?
Because anything that puts women in a negative light Must be Wrong.
But anyway, it’s not really a matter of who is responsible for falling birth rates so much as what needs to be done to fix the problem. And the answer is clear — women need to be kept out of advanced education and careers.
There is plenty of research showing that educating and empowering women results in dramatically lower birth rates. Which makes complete sense — when women are pursuing education and careers, they aren’t making babies. Both within and between cultures, there is a clear and negative correlation between female education and fertility.
In fact, when the issue is overpopulation, the gynocracy will readily admit that feminism leads to lower birthrates. It’s just that when feminism has negative consequences that it becomes a problem. Because feminists will never ever admit that there are any significant negative consequences to putting their ideology into practice.
Mental illness is bad.
Thanks.
I remember, beginning in the early 90s, they tried to integrate the Southie projects (Old Colony, D Street, Mary Ellen McCormack). Are there any Irish left in them?
Yes. Patriarchy = high paternal investment.
Secure knowledge that your children are yours is a prerequisite for high paternal investment.
The mom not sleeping around is a prerequisite for secure knowledge that your children are yours.
Whoa, it looks like the Christian Fundamentalist Government left a big loophole there – the “strawwoman purchase”. If that were a guns the black chick were buying for the tubby white ones, they’d all be in the slammer, in the real world – you know, the one where we’re supposed to be abiding by the 2nd Amendment. That “weirdly not-gay”, ;-}, barista must have took to heart his BATF (“Buying Anything Though Female”) training, on the show I mean.
I don’t know why I brought your comment around to this, but that show does sound intentionally hilarious. I would say “why do you watch that crap?”, but I can see some kind of drinking game that would go pretty good with the show.
I did watch the original Handmaid’s Tale movie, and I think it is pretty unrealistic, even were it set in the Moslem world. Maybe, just maybe, I could suspend my disbelief if, next to the room in which Robert Duvall was having semi-non-consentual sex with the hottie star, there would be a bunch of non-selected Beta/Gamma/Omicron Moslem men in another room with a handful of goats. The Goatfuckers’ Tale, rated PG for expectoration-basesd language.
Sure, for a week and a half.
On the other hand…
https://www.indy100.com/article/conservatives-republicans-more-attractive-left-wing-lefties-hotter-rolfe-daus-peterson-carl-palmaer-8181196
https://www.indy100.com/article/right-wing-people-are-better-looking-than-those-on-the-left-study-claims-7521301
Hollywood is an aberration in so many ways.
(Ok, conservative doesn’t equate to alt-right, but they do overlap.)
Look up the etymology of “hysteria.”
Sure, women who won’t submit to their husbands demands and decisions. Still, you’re gonna want a man who is confident and the leader of the family, of course.
Yeah, that works! No, seriously, I’ve seen it work like that a number of times …
… but it was always in the movies. That’s why I don’t go to the movies anymore. I realized how many times I was being lied to after a while.
I think you’re looking more at the upper 2%. Yes, the rich have more kids. Their family money and connections give them a lifestyle that allows them to do so.
But most white liberals of childbearing age are not rich by any means. They may hope to be someday, and this gives them incentives to put off having kids until they make it. Many of them won’t make it, and among those that do many will have only one or two kids or none at all. Then there are the red state/county middle class types. These people are having the majority of white kids in the US today. This group includes better paid blue collar workers, so a number of them vote democrat, but fewer and fewer every year.
Finally there are the white proles. They have kids, and they have them early. They are, out of all whites, most likely to have mixed race/ethnicity kids. Some of these kids will identify as white and lean republican – largely the Hispanic ones – while others will not and will lean democrat. Still, most white proles have white kids.
So there are really four groups of whites as I see it, and this is how I’d arrange them in descending order based on total children per group:
1. Middle class
Reasonably fertile, politically leans conservative and republican but not monolithically so. This is rump America.
2. Proletariat
Mediocre fertility, but have kids early, so there’s stacking (e.g 38yo still-fertile grandmothers not uncommon). Politically inert, for the most part.
3. Liberals
Abysmal fertility, often childless, barely over half replacement rate. Politically strident, often to the point of hysteria, attempting with all their might to both emulate and displace elites, which lends a weird sort of dissonance to their positions.
4. Elites
Pretty good fertility, probably a bit over replacement rate, but nothing like Niger or Afghanistan. Politically isolationist. Reflexively take positions that oppose and or antagonize the majority of their co-ethnics, probably because they instinctively feel that there isn’t much space at the top. Neither truly liberal nor conservative, but rather focused with a laser-like intensity on pure self-interest. If Bernie were president and put a real socialist agenda on the agenda (which I doubt he would), they would hate him and attack him with just as much fervor as they do Trump.
Is that really true? A man? I feel a little defiled.
As a point of information, the Jewish fertility rate in Jerusalem has exceeded the Arab rate for some time now. In Israel as a whole, the Jewish fertility rate caught up with the Arab rate this year and is expected to surpass it next year.
(“Arab” isn’t quite the same thing as “Muslim” since there is a significant Christian Arab minority but looking at Jews versus Muslims doesn’t change things by much.)
Looking at the entire Middle East, the Israeli fertility rate exceeds that of Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey. And it’s closing in on Jordan and Egypt.
(Obviously it’s silly to claim that any country is like the Nazis for promoting natalist policies.)
If “Rosie” is a man parodying a feminist, I’ve got to give him credit for so beautifuly simulating the hysterical narcissism of the modern Western woman.
Remember that these people have a genocidal hatred of you and that is why they are so virulently opposed to such a silly joke as the ‘white baby challenge’
These are the same people that lost their minds over ‘It’s OK to be White’
Do not underestimate these people. They are racist bigoted and anti-white! This is why they endlessly cheer our replacement.
You know, Sabrina, I may need directions to my own laundry room, but I don’t get lost in an argument nearly as easily as you do. Let’s review.
You blame women for everything, including the decline of traditional marriage. You have no evidence whatsoever. The best you can do is poke holes in my argument that it is actually men who are at fault, forgetting that you in fact bear the burden of proving your own assertions.
I have never, ever bashed men for messaging women, even women who are out of their league. All I am saying is that in so doing they prove that they are every bit as hypergamous, or picky, as women. Message away, as far as I’m concerned; you might get lucky.
I’ll be happy to agree with you that women are not perfect, nor superior to men, and leave it at that, but that’s not good enough for you, because you want everyone else here to hate women as much as you do.
Women don’t care about looks the way you do. We either fall for a man, or we don’t. Obviously, we are more likely to fall for a man who is good-looking, but we do not shop around for a “looks-match” as you do. Moreover, we don’t assign grades or numbers to men, and we wouldn’t agree on the appropriate grade even if we did. Unlike you, I have actually provided evidence for my assertions.
The only kind of man worth submitting to is one that doesn’t insist on being submitted to. Fortunately, I have one of those.
Like Plato said, the only men fit to rule are the disinterested.
I completely disagree with this, as I have a higher opinion of men than you do. I believe they are perfectly capable of adopting children with their whole hearts. I have seen it myself.
That’s not to say I don’t value marital chastity. I do, but there is only so much certainty men are entitled to. Otherwise, your reasoning inevitably leads to the literal imprisonment of women in their own homes.
Herein lies the problem, Sabril. You want to force women into de facto prostitution without proving such is necessary for healthy birth rates. Moreover, you won’t even consider less radical proposals, which by the way might actually be palatable to the general population. This gives you away as a spiteful misogynist rather than a concerned man of the West. For my own part, I would prefer that women have children first, then a career, if they want one.
This is an interesting statement you make here, Sabril. Since I have admitted that feminism, in practice, has led to some unfortunate consequences, specifically inflationary pressures that end up forcing women into the workplace against their wishes. I have also proposed a solution to this problem: pro-breadwinner taxation that undermines DINK’s ability to bid up the price of housing to a level that is out of reach for single-earner families.
So I’ll assume you’ll acknowledge that I’m not a feminist, now?
BTW, autocorrect is changing your name to Sabrina. It’s not intentional.
I’m curious. We’re these women divorced and remarried?
That is what racial pride will do for you. The problem with your case against women is that it really is not possible to separate the effects of women’s opportunity from the effects of the massive racial demoralization White women have suffered these past fifty years.
That is true. The question is what precisely are they interested in the for.
Anecdote is not the singular of data.
Of women with college degrees, only 10% have more than 3 children and 2/3 have less than 3.
I think living under that deal above would make him quite crazy after a while. He could never come out and file for divorce based on being crazy though. Family Court would dismiss the claim of insanity based on a long-standing precedent* that states he must obviously be quite sane for wanting to get out of the situation you describe above.
* Pvt. Yossarian vs. US Army Air Corps, 1943
This strikes me as a red herring, even if true, for all sorts of reasons.
(1) Those stats don’t sound much worse than the numbers for the general population, especially if you control for race.
(2) I suspect that there is a temperamental factor that causes both the college degree and low fertility in times of economic certainty, namely provisioning anxiety and the ability to plan ahead.
(3) Even if higher education causes lower birth rates, it doesn’t necessarily follow that denying women educational opportunities is the appropriate remedy.
Jack, suppose you have a son. He takes up the guitar and starts slacking off on his chores because he is spending hours in practice. Would you take away the guitar, or try to find some other way to compel him to do his chores? As for me, I would only take away the guitar if I had exhausted all other possibilities and the matter was quite urgent.
Though it’s obviously to early to tell, it appears that this problem may be resolving on its own:
http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2015/05/07/family-size-among-mothers/
Unfortunately, I still haven’t found any data on family size by race and educational attainment.
Sure. A voluntary adoption where a man goes into it knowing the child is not his biological offspring. Not when he is tricked into believing the kid is his.
Certainty for me, not for thee.
Paternity testing. It’s quick, cheap and easy to do on the down low. One quick swipe inside the cheek. Takes seconds.
If a man doesn’t establish the child is not his biologically before the child’s 2nd birthday, in many states he’s on the hook financially until the kid turns 18. Why wouldn’t a man test his kids? It’s one thing to think you know, it’s entirely another to know scientifically beyond a doubt.
Otherwise, Paternity Fraud. It’s not a crime yet, but should be.
This is the “mind-reader illusion” tell for cognitive dissonance, i.e. a person hallucinating that she knows exactly what’s going on in another person’s mind over the anonymous interwebz.
It makes one look silly.
Please quote me where I have made such a claim. Failing that, please admit I said no such thing and apologize.
Also, please answer my question: How is it “unrealistic” for mediocre men to approach beautiful women if (as you claim) beautiful women don’t hold out for men at their level of attractiveness?
Now this is a remarkably ironic statement! If there is a “tell” for cognitive dissonance, how on Earth do you figure there are no “tells” for misogyny!?!
Look, Sabrina, sometimes people say things outright, and sometimes they say them implicitly. You are in no position to pick nits about intellectual honesty when you go around calling everyone who disagrees with you while being female a “feminist.”
It is unrealistic and stupid for mediocre men to approach beautiful women cold turkey, because you are expressing an interest in her based only on her appearance. Only good-looking guys can get away with that, probably because their attention is flattering. Life’s not fair. So sorry.
On the other hand, if you make like a normal, well-rounded human being and go out and get to know people, a category which does in fact include women, you might very well hit the jackpot if you have something else going for you, like well-rounded knowledge or a sense of humor. Unfortunately, the odds are against this as a matter of sheer numbers. You men are supposed to be better at math, aren’t you?
It may be cheap and quick, but it would almost certainly dive very costly in terms of trust in your relationship. If a man didn’t trust me as to paternity, I’d wonder why I’d trusted him enough to have his child to begin with.
As to the criminalization of “paternity fraud,” I have no great objection to that. I think extraction of sexual favors under false pretenses (promise of marriage) should be a crime. Of course, in both cases, it would be difficult to prove the crime, in the former case because of real concerns about children’s well-being, in the latter awe because there are ordinarily no witnesses to the transaction.
And sometimes they never say them at all.
Anyway, I don’t engage with people who insist on misrepresenting my position. Which you have done a couple times now without apology.
Goodbye.
That’s an interesting question. I think part of it is that it’s not only women who have “Women are Wonderful” bias. Men have it too. Men really want to believe that women — especially their wives — are decent people who would never do something like that.
In the past, it was a serious crime. The word “adultery” has the same root as “aldulterate” which means to infect or debase something by adding impure elements. i.e. to introduce the seed of another man into a married woman. In the past, “adultery” did not have the general meaning of spousal infidelity. It meant sexual relations between a married woman and a man who was not her husband. It meant that you were alduterating a man’s line. And it was a serious offense for the exact reason you raise.
Unfortunately, the gynocracy has watered down or decriminalized wrongdoing which is generally committed by women against men while at the same time ramping up the punishment for wrongs which are generally done by men against women. So in the present there is essentially zero negative consequences for a woman who engages in paternity fraud. Not only that, there are serious efforts underway to stop men from obtaining paternity tests.
Agreed. A chap called Matthew Goodwin managed to get a chair at Kent from his career as an academic left wing witchfinder – and now he’s made it, some of his stuff is occasionally worth reading.
What I can’t work out is – does the Annie Kelly who’s a PhD student at UEA (and appears to have a book deal with Lawrence and Wishart) have any relation to the Annie Kelly who writes for the Guardian on another enriching byproduct of globalisation and effective free movement – slavery and trafficking?
https://twitter.com/anniekelly?lang=en
Lol. Did you think you were doing me some sort of favor?
Given that Sabril is from Israel (the clue is in the name), perhaps his comments on how a country can have a bountiful birth rate might be listened to?
After all, I believe Israel is the only developed nation to maintain such a thing. Even the secular birth rate is very healthy.
LOLOLOLOL
An “Israeli” creating diversions by stirring up trouble between White men and women. Who’da thunk it?
I’m sure he has nothing but the best interests of White Americans at heart! Ah my achin’ sides.
BTW are Israeli women allowed to go to college?
To relate to a previous iSteve trope, here’s what the brother who ran against Mah-tee Walsh in the last mayoral election is doing:
https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2018/05/25/tito-jackson-marijuana/
Talk out of turn?
WE RIP OUT YOUR EYE.
Abduct, strip, and bind one of your teachers, and attempt to escape?
Aaaaaa little bit of foot-flogging.
Also talking out of turn is okay later.
Leave him alone! Troofie and Scarlet Boy are the final arbiters of feminine pulchritude at iSteve.
FWIW I am American. I do think Israel is an important counter-example to the demographic woes facing Western nations, but I doubt that Israel’s pro-natalist policies should get that full credit for Israel’s respectable birth rate.
I think the primary source of population growth among Jewish Israelis is the influence of religion. Orthodox Jews are raised from birth to appreciate traditional male/female roles as well as the value of early marriage and large families.
The projects there are starting to add a surprising number of “jungle” Asians. It makes sense, as Asian-dominated Quincy is right across the bay, Quincy itself being where the old Irish who made it moved to from Southie and Dorchester.
As I say, an Irish girl back in the day from Southie or Dot was looking for a guy to marry her and take her to Quincy or, if she were really lucky, Hingham!
As usual, what John Derbyshire calls the nation’s Newspaper of Record has the goods:
https://nypost.com/2015/08/22/meet-the-man-who-impersonated-jennifer-beals-in-flashdance/
He was 16 years’ old at the time. Nothing was tucked or taped.
https://nypost.com/2015/08/22/meet-the-man-who-impersonated-jennifer-beals-in-flashdance/
Joe Eszterhas said in his book that the role was up for grabs because the producers could not decide between two candidates, so the lesser members of the film crews around the studio (truckers ect) were shown clips of Beals and another actress being considered for the role doing their thing at a private showing ,with a view to determining which one they would prefer to “fuck”. Beals won. Obviously they shot her to look super sexy doing moves, and only strenuous acrobatics that required the stand in used him.
1. Why the scare quotes around ‘Israeli’?
2. He’s more moderate than most of the commenters on this subject.
3. You can be as irrational in your dislike of him as you want, but facts are facts. Israel has a bountiful birth rate. It is therefore worth paying attention to if your country’s meagre one upsets you.
4. Israeli women do indeed go to college. The ultra-Orthodox who have quiverfuls of kids do not. The latter fact is not a coincidence.
Oh Tyrian the Wise, tell me how prolific women must be in order to retain our right to higher education. Did you not say yourself that even secular birth rates in Israel are healthy? There you scored an own goal, yourself admitting that draconian exclusion of women from higher learning is not necessary for demographic health?
A rather sad commentary if true.
“….racist musings about ‘ghetto music’…..”
Kind of like what Wynton Marsalis has to say about ghetto music?
As I alluded to earlier, I think that Israel’s pro-natalist policies are a bit like China’s one-child policy in that both add to an existing trend which has a different cause. The real engine of Israel’s population growth is religious types. Who emphasize traditional gender roles and large families.
I agree — you can’t be in two places at once and a woman who is in university is not at home making babies. But it might not even be necessary to bar women from college; simply removing the artificial incentives which push women into college and professional careers might be enough to boost fertility rates quite a bit. And as an added bonus, with more men (and fewer women) in high status jobs, it would be easier for women to satisfy their instinct to marry up.
I don’t imagine this sort of thing will ever happen again. When they had the first Spiderman movie they had Tobey Maguire do the shots with his suit mask off, some stunt man was called in when the mask was on and then a lot of CGI graphics for all the superhero moves. As graphics get better will soon lose the ability to discern what is live photography and what is a drawing.
Fortunately, we don’t have to be in two places at once. We can go to college, and then have babies. Jordanian women have, on average, almost four children, with their first coming at near-geriatric 24.7 years.
Fair enough. You, good woman, are certainly beyond reproach. But not all women share your stellar, kind-hearted integrity.
It is fact that many men who trusted their wives were deceived and are victims of paternity fraud. They would have been well served to do a test, then retain a lawyer.
I view it the way I view business. Does the bank teller count the cash you give her before crediting your account with a deposit? Of course she does. Is it because she doesn’t “trust” you? Of course not. This is just business.
I don’t wear rose-colored glasses or believe in fairie tales. Humans are humans. Your mileage may vary.
People are learning from that though… anyone serious on the right now doing the trad thing is homeschooling, no TV, limited internet, no pozzed books in the house (aka “twaddle” in homeschooling circles).
When the socializing peer group is a bunch of like minded siblings and a classical homeschool mompeer group that reads Latin the outlook for successfully retaining a home culture changes A LOT. People now know better than dumping little ones in government school and hoping they can singlehandedly right the whole world for everyone else’s benefit.
At a sometimes subconscious level people have become more protective as the mainstream becomes increasingly poisonous.
Apologies, I wasn’t representing my own argument there. My thoughts on higher education are essentially limited to the fact that probably only about 10% of people make good candidates for undertaking it. It’s a waste of time for everybody else and has turned into a bizarre kindergarten for what should be adults.
We’ve got two things wrong. First, we’ve decided that everyone is the same (othwerwise they must be oppressed). Second, we’ve decided that higher education is the best thing ever and makes you a better person (and therefore require it for all sorts of jobs where it must certainly does not help.)
Nor m I referring to low-paid or low status roles either. Banking, teaching, nursing, being a commissioned officer, journalism, none of these used to require that you attended a university until really quite recently. Nevermind working in retail or being a barista or whatever. Now you have to do 3 or 4 years unpaid, or in fact where you pay, pretending to be a special snowflake, before you’re even considered for the role – that represents a huge real paycut!
Considering that Jordan’s population is a third non-citizen and that those non-citizens are refugees from neighbouring wars, it might not be the best example.
The total fertility rate of 3.19 was falling to below replacement level until the influx of mostly Sunni refugees fleeing secular governments like Assad’s happened.
The opposition to Assad is not known for their enlightened attitudes towards women.
You sound like the kind of guy who thinks Mexicans make better carpenters just because the do the job for less.
I would say 10% is a little on the low side, but still I agree in principle that only a minority is really cut out for it. OTOH, I am a believer in liberal education. I do think it makes you a better person to study the humanities, though not more useful, but only if you have the intellectual capacity to really benefit from it. Community colleges are wonderful for above-average youth who aren’t quite college material. For most of the former set of roles you listed, a very basic (and inexpensive) liberal arts curriculum at a community college should suffice.
I also think that a transitional experience between youth and adulthood is good and healthy in principle. For some it might be national service, or a trade apprenticeship, or even a stint as an au pair in a foreign country.
That may be true, I don’t know, but in any event the need for early marriage is ridiculously exaggerated by some. Even the Amish ordinarily marry in their early twenties, and manage 6 or 7 kids per couple. They are not even allowed to marry until after they are baptized at 18+.
http://amishamerica.com/when-do-amish-get-married/
It seems to me that anything before 25 would be considered early nowadays. I bet that’s not true for the Amish.
Sailer’s Law of Female Journalism.
As Whiskey says below:
Wake me up when the “Nazis” FINALLY start punching back. This is one pendulum whose return trip is well overdue.
It all boils down to this: Normal is the new Nazi.
And no rolling your eyes in the back, either; we all knew damn well this has been inevitable for years and years now. Yesteryear’s conservative alarmism is today’s like-it-or-not reality, with a quick pit-stop to swap out “Nazi” for “conservative” and adding a mandatory “supremacist” to the adjective “white”.
As for any deeply-felt concerns you might harbor, answer this question: are you white? Then your concerns are abhorrent, and racist, and as hate-filled as the cream filling in Satan’s Twinkies.
If in Europe, give Appenzell (east Switzerland, near St. Gallen) a try (every citizen has the right to take part in a public debate – then everybody cecides. You’re supposed to bring your weapon along for the gathering.
Do you have your own children paternity tested? How would you sell that to your wife?
23andMe?
I see she wrote (2010) “Committed: A Skeptic Makes Peace With Marriage”, and the commitment lasted all of six years!
Elizabeth Gilbert is 48, childless, and bears some resemblance (in her wiki picture) to that pharma ripoff girl.
I’m in a good mood today, so I’ll give you the benefit and assume you just haven’t seen my various posts pleading with iSteve dissenters to start coming up with concrete, constructive proposals as to how we can improve men’s lives.
As far as I know, it’s easy enough to to surreptitiously with a home testing kit.
Anyway, what’s interesting is the degree to which women freak out about men testing for paternity fraud. I think it’s because deep down they are aware that a lot of young wives cheat on their husbands.
In fact, I think it’s pretty likely that female infidelity is more common than male infidelity. The studies which say that male infidelity is more common are based on self-reporting.
Trump is no more another Reagan than Reagan was another Eisenhower or Eisenhower was another Calvin Coolidge.
In Chicago even with the ascendancy of Rahm Emmanuel and Toni Preckwinkle and the impending fall of Ed Burke and Mike Madigan, we Hibernians are very active at the state and national levels and behind the scenes.
I can only hope that her last sentence becomes the case. It probably won’t, but I can hope.
And when women cheat, they’re more likely to do so when they’re ovulating.
Well, not going to win any beauty pageants, but clocks aren’t in much danger of being stopped.
How did you get old enough to post here without twigging thst men are interested in baby factories and women are interested in status providers? Both are interested in good genes, as well, which is also pertinent.
No patriarchy, no civilization. It’s as simple as that.
Those below that level of attractiveness are considered creeps and perverts when they are noticed.
Don’t confuse Rosie with the facts. When Rosie encounters a fact inconsistent with her dogma, she simply labels it a lie, and the purveyor a liar.
It was Capt. Yossarian. But, otherwise, spot on.