The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersAudacious Epigone Blog
Sex and Marriage Go Together Like a Horse and Carriage
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

The sex recession among young adults today relative to the young adults of the past is a consequence of the decline in the institution of marriage. The following table shows, by the decade the question was asked, the percentages of married and unmarried people between the ages of 18-29 who reported not having had sex at all over the past year (N = 5,852):

NoSex Married Unmarried
1990s 0.6% 19.0%
2000s 0.3% 16.3%
2010s 1.2% 18.4%

Unmarried young adults haven’t become more prudish over the last few decades, there are just more of them now than there used to be. Why has sexual activity decreased in total among the young if the rates of sexual activity among married and unmarried young adults has remained static? Because marriage has declined.

From the same data, the percentages of these young adult respondents who were married at the time of their survey participation:

1990s — 31.6%
2000s — 24.7%
2010s — 18.8%

GSS variables used: SEXFREQ, MARITAL(1)(2-5), AGE(18-29), YEAR(1990-1999)(2000-2009)(2010-2018)

 
• Category: Culture/Society • Tags: GSS, Love and Marriage, Sex 
Hide 242 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. 216 says: • Website

    Gender breakdown?

    • Replies: @Father O'Hara
  2. “Dad was told by mother, ‘You can’t have one without the other!’”

    That’s an old song. And it was meant as a Victorian period piece at the time, describing a world sixty years before that.

    • Replies: @Nodwink
  3. Nodwink says:
    @Reg Cæsar

    It also describes the life of an oafish shoe salesman in late 1980s Chicago.

    • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @dvorak
  4. nebulafox says:

    I’ve never understood married couples who “don’t have time” for sex. There’s such a thing as quickies. If you can’t make the time for that, that signifies there are deeper problems.

    As far as the singles go, if you are underemployed and living at home or with tons of roommates, makes it trickier, doesn’t it? Love hotels exist in places like Japan or South Korea or Brazil to solve this social issue, but Japan seems to be having it even worse than the US does. There’s also plenty of psychological stuff that decreases libido. Increased neuroticism and whatnot.

    But there’s a deeper metaphysical issue here: it turns out absolute freedom isn’t as fun as people expected it to be. Polls now indicate that young people want the social bonds, but without the costs it takes to maintain them.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  5. Good. Less women are being raped.

    “All sex, even consensual sex between a married couple, is an act of violence perpetrated against a woman.”

    Catharine MacKinnon, special gender adviser to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court

    • Replies: @anonymous
  6. @nebulafox

    With further improvements in sex-robot technology, I think all bets* are off for the future of sex and marriage. Women will have to be a whole lot nicer.

    .

    * OK, A.E. may still want to put some money down.

  7. anonymous[160] • Disclaimer says:
    @Hippopotamusdrome

    Yes, ridiculous. And yet everytime the ICC makes a statement against Israel it will be hailed at this website as something worthy of authority.

  8. it’s a return to natural law and rule of the jungle. the top guys clean up, the bottom guys never have sex. that’s how it always way, for thousands of years. we’re mostly descended from the top dominant men, not from a broad population of men.

    one man one woman marriage is a social contract, an artificial way to break that cycle and offer the weaker men a chance to have sex and kids.

    now marriage is on it’s way out, with the predictable result. computer science, cell phones, and social media make it a more vicious version of the previous era, where women can see the top couple men in their area in just a few seconds, and then all go after them, while the bottom 40% of men are now totally ignored, which is probably up from the bottom 20% of men or so in the historical era.

    important consequence – crazy religions offer weak men a great alternative. join our religion, and we guarantee you will have sex, a wife, and kids. that’s part of the reason people go in for what is offered by islam, mormons, judaism, the amish, and so forth.

    computer scientists and psychologists should write some simulations of what the actual results are of this stuff, generation by generation.

  9. dvorak says:
    @Nodwink

    It also describes the life of an oafish shoe salesman in late 1980s Chicago.

    This is a calumny. Al Bundy was a respected community activist. He was also on the vanguard of volcel.

  10. Mark G. says:

    In addition to the decline of marriage, polling shows there has been a decline in men who have ever visited a prostitute. There has also been a decline in the number of strip clubs and a decline in the number of the type of clubs where men go to meet women. I’ve worked in an office setting for forty years and I’ve also noticed a decline in male flirting and sexual aggressiveness there. So it seems like there is an across the board decline in sexual interest in females among men. Only pornography use has held up but that use has become more secret and furtive over the years among younger males. It doesn’t involve showing an open sexual interest towards real live women. Without the increased ease of access to pornography via the internet even the use of that probably would have declined. The feminists may have succeeded a little too well in getting men not to see women as sex objects.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @c matt
  11. @prime noticer

    that’s how it always way, for thousands of years. we’re mostly descended from the top dominant men, not from a broad population of men.

    This is mostly bullshit. The real ideal for humanity is a kind of patriarchy, the one where the working man is able to get married just as much as the alpha male – by restraining their own passions in ADDITION to restraining their wives’ passions, all men are able to enjoy marriage, and society flourishes. That is why Europe was able to attain such a great peak of civilization for a time. But what you describe is not patriarchy so much as people’s stereotypical vision of Islam. I’d like to know if our actual Muslim friend – Talha – has anything to say about that.

    The other, and very important, part is that the average man was waaaaaaay more dominant than today’s average man. So being descended from the “broad population” is not as bad as it sounds.

    • Agree: WHAT
    • Replies: @WHAT
    , @216
    , @prime noticer
  12. Lot says:

    I find it very hard to believe that the share of unmarrieds in one-year droughts or who are virgins is under 20%.

    • Replies: @Wency
  13. WHAT says:
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    It`s just your bog standard cope mantra from the retarded right. Of course it ignores history.

  14. Gman says:

    AE: Do you still see a Biden nomination win? I’m having a hard time seeing it.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  15. 216 says: • Website
    @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    The other, and very important, part is that the average man was waaaaaaay more dominant than today’s average man.

    There’s a particular conservative strand known as “rugged individualism” that is at fault here.

    If every single male in the Dissident movements slimmed down to a proper body weight, developed increased physique, practiced good manners and toughened up psychologically; they still would be condemned by a society where liberalism is dominant.

    Men have to engage in “collective self defense”. And for many men that means recognizing the only winning move is not to play.

    The real ideal for humanity is a kind of patriarchy, the one where the working man is able to get married just as much as the alpha male

    Control of the Alpha is either done by the alpha themselves, or imposed by betas from below. Women have little power over alpha males.

    by restraining their own passions in ADDITION to restraining their wives’ passions,

    What the typical manospere denizen does not understand is that older Rosie-type women police the behavior of younger women in a traditional society. Betas have little power over females.

    The law and culture of Western society in the present day does not allow any husband to exercise “control” over their wife. Only within certain countercultures and immigrant subcultures is this possible where religious authorities have more customary power.

    Most important, as you suggest, is that beta men have to exercise self control. That means curbing their thirst, losing weight, minimizing expenses, asking community elders to act as matchmaker, and waiting until marriage. But as many men can only attract women of low value, their best option is often to stay unmarried.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @dfordoom
    , @Talha
  16. I for one think that single people not having relations — is a positive.

    That our society has devalued marriage a negative. I don’t think there’s any real solution now that even the mainstream churches have given way to modern views of relations.

    Though, I do wonder the impact of the growth in nondenominational organizations, whether mega congregations or not, I suspect that christian values remain in play, just not held by the reins of the mainstream organizations of faith and practice.

  17. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Women will have to be a whole lot nicer.

    If you’re an indication of what we have to lose from sexbots, I don’t think we’ll bother.

    I say let the woman-haters have their bots. So much the better for future generations.

    • LOL: iffen
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  18. Rosie says:
    @prime noticer

    while the bottom 40% of women are now totally ignored

    Fixed it for ya.

    The most attractive females are actually more likely to respond to messages from the least attractive males than the reverse. (Not that anybody cares about the facts.)

    Successful messages from “least attractive men” to “medium” women: ~25%
    Successful messages from “least attractive women” to “medium” men: <20%

    https://www.gwern.net/docs/psychology/okcupid/yourlooksandyourinbox.html

    • Replies: @216
    , @prime noticer
  19. Rosie says:
    @216

    What the typical manospere denizen does not understand is that older Rosie-type women police the behavior of younger women in a traditional society.

    Young women don’t need policing. Young horny men do. Why are we all pretending otherwise?

    • Replies: @216
    , @Twinkie
    , @WHAT
  20. @Gman

    Probably not. If I predict that, he’ll make a miraculous comeback, after all!

    There hasn’t been a South Carolina poll since Iowa, but the day of the caucuses one was released showing Biden up by 18 points. We’ll have to see if blacks abandon him or not.

    • Replies: @iffen
  21. 216 says: • Website
    @Rosie

    I hope our lurkers can learn why white knighting never works.

  22. 216 says: • Website
    @Rosie

    while the bottom 40% of women are now totally ignored

    I wonder what their BMI index is…

    This is “Men Bad/Women Good” at work here.

    The 80/20 rule has been hashed to death, but you are here indicating that because men prefer 60% verus the female 20%, that men are the problem because that number is not 100%.

  23. Rosie says:

    I hope our lurkers can learn why white knighting never works.

    Blah, blah, blah.

    Look, I’m willing to admit there are some ways in which men are superior to women.

    Namely, you’re better at inventing useful shit than we are.

    There are also things we’re better at, inter alia, controlling our sexual urges.

    Why is this controversial?

    Indeed, don’t you lot admit this yourself when you advise women about where they should or shouldn’t go while wearing X, Y, or Z.

    Said no mom to her son, ever:

    “Stay away from girls. All they want is sex!”

    The 80/20 rule has been hashed to death, but you are here indicating that because men prefer 60% verus the female 20%, that men are the problem because that number is not 100%.

    As I have explained some billions of times, there is no 80/20 rule.

    Women think most men are ugly, but since we don’t agree on who is not ugly, we’re not all competing for the same men. It is you who are all competing for the same women. Moreover, women are more generous than men when it comes to actual messaging, as documented in the link I posted above.

    Now, stop with this dishonesty. It is out of character for you, 216.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090626153511.htm

    • Replies: @216
    , @In-Praise-of-Higher
  24. @Rosie

    See, you wouldn’t hear comments like this from a sex-bot. That’s exactly what I’m talkin’ about.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  25. @Audacious Epigone

    Thank you, A.E. Someone put that on another thread (maybe a Fred Reed column?). It makes some great points.

  26. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    See, you wouldn’t hear comments like this from a sex-bot. That’s exactly what I’m talkin’ about.

    You’re right. Sexbots don’t have a sense of honor, so if you want someone who doesn’t mind being insulted, then yes, you’re better off with a robot.

  27. 216 says: • Website
    @Rosie

    There are also things we’re better at, inter alia, controlling our sexual urges.

    You cannot control what you do not have

    Indeed, don’t you lot admit this yourself when you advise women about where they should or shouldn’t go while wearing X, Y, or Z.

    I cannot speak for the audience, but I have never done this. I don’t give lifestyle advice to women, I defer that to older female relatives and mentors.

    Moreover, women are more generous than men when it comes to actual messaging, as documented in the link I posted above.

    As documented by millions of revealed preferences, the female-message-first Bumble app has not displaced the Tinder app. From a non-argumentative viewpoint, the absence of the “network effect” in dating apps has surprised me.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  28. Rosie says:
    @216

    You cannot control what you do not have

    You’re confused. You just think we don’t have them precisely because we’re better at controlling them than you.

    As documented by millions of revealed preferences, the female-message-first Bumble app has not displaced the Tinder app. From a non-argumentative viewpoint, the absence of the “network effect” in dating apps has surprised me.

    I’m not sure what you’re talking about here.

    • Replies: @216
  29. @Rosie

    Women have no sense of honor any more than sex bots do. The big difference is that I could have muted out the sex-bot by now.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  30. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Women have no sense of honor any more than sex bots do.

    But lemme guess, you don’t “hate women” amirite?

    I actually think we need a new term for misogyny, because I have come to understand from hanging out here that there is more than one type.

    There is the hostile-type and the contemptuous-type (like you).

    Your statement is ridiculous, of course. We do have a sense of honor. Hell hath no fury and all that. Of course, with men, its noble; with women, it’s base.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  31. 216 says: • Website
    @Rosie

    You’re confused. You just think we don’t have them precisely because we’re better at controlling them than you.

    https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1207/S15327957PSPR0503_5?journalCode=psra

    Across many different studies and measures, men have been shown to have more frequent and more intense sexual desires than women, as reflected in spontaneous thoughts about sex, frequency and variety of sexual fantasies, desired frequency of intercourse, desired number of partners, masturbation, liking for various sexual practices, willingness to forego sex, initiating versus refusing sex, making sacrifices for sex, and other measures. No contrary findings (indicating stronger sexual motivation among women) were found. Hence we conclude that the male sex drive is stronger than the female sex drive.

    The speculation was why there isn’t only one dating app.

    Search Engines: Google, Microsoft
    Phones: iOS, android
    Social network: Facebook
    Microblog: Twitter
    Photo: Instagram
    Resume: Linkedin

    Dating apps: Tinder, Bumble, OKC, Match, Hinge, eharmony, assorted niche sites

    The explanation is that it turns out they are all owned by the same company, Bumble excepted.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_Group

    The comment about Bumble was to cast skepticism on the claims that “women message more”. Regardless, messaging back doesn’t seem to be a reliable success indicator.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  32. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    With further improvements in sex-robot technology, I think all bets* are off for the future of sex and marriage. Women will have to be a whole lot nicer.

    I agree with you, but I think you’re seriously underestimating the extent to which women will go for sexbots as well. Look at vibrators. No woman in 1965 would have admitted to using a vibrator. Within 20 years it had become mainstream, respectable and incredibly common for women to use vibrators.

    If women adopted vibrators with such enthusiasm then my guess is that they’ll be even more enthusiastic about sexbots. After all for a woman a sexbot is just a much more sophisticated vibrator.

    Plus you can talk to your sexbot. You can have it programmed to tell you all the things you wish men would tell you.

    It’s possible that women will adopt this technology more enthusiastically than men will.

  33. dfordoom says: • Website
    @216

    If every single male in the Dissident movements slimmed down to a proper body weight, developed increased physique, practiced good manners and toughened up psychologically; they still would be condemned by a society where liberalism is dominant.

    If every single male in the Dissident movements slimmed down to a proper body weight, developed increased physique, practiced good manners and toughened up psychologically then there’s a much better chance that women would go out with them. Especially if those dissident men stopped whining all the time and dropped their silly violent fantasies about civil war and ethnic cleansing and stopped talking about how much they hate Jews, blacks and women.

    If women would go out with them most of those dissident men would suddenly lose all interest in the dissident right.

    • Replies: @216
  34. Twinkie says:
    @Mark G.

    Hasn’t online dating use gone up, including for men?

    • Replies: @Mark G.
  35. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    Young women don’t need policing. Young horny men do.

    Both do. But you consistently advocate social controls on men only, which is hypocrisy. But we’ve been to this dance before, haven’t we?

    • Thanks: 216
    • Replies: @Talha
    , @Truth
  36. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    Both do.

    Indeed. Any women that want to take on a job to be a stripper or pole dancer or in porn, etc., need the express legal sign-off from a male guardian (father, grandfather, older brother, etc.).

    That about ought to do it.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @iffen
    , @anon
    , @Truth
  37. 216 says: • Website
    @dfordoom

    Especially if those dissident men stopped whining all the time and dropped their silly violent fantasies about civil war and ethnic cleansing and stopped talking about how much they hate Jews, blacks and women.

    Bigotry is only a turn off to women when it comes from a conservative white male.

    That’s thanks to the culture industry.

    If women would go out with them most of those dissident men would suddenly lose all interest in the dissident right.

    Idk.

    AE and Steve are married. Karlin is unmarried, but not unattractive.

    And I don’t see where “male self-improvement” would create female self-improvement by osmosis.

    Involuntary celibacy is inevitable among many young and middle-aged men. In this respect, nothing will change if we get rid of feminism, atheism, and porn. We’ll just have a lot of nice, church-going celibates.

    P Frost

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/incel-epidemic/#comment-3273006

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  38. Rahan says:

    White western men gradually “refusing to play the game” with women, is, to me, very similar to the police “refusing to play the game” in places like Baltimore post BLM.

    Once it turns out the law and order system does not have the back of officers, but instead throws them under the bus in order to appease the mob, the officers in question stop being proactive on the mean dindu streets, and simply start functioning as “vehicles of temporary calm”.

    They slowly and noisily appear during a disturbance, to give everyone ample time to skedaddle, and only bother with the real psychos who prefer a confrontation. In other words, when the law and order in a given city or state goes beyond a certain boundary in weighing down the officers with constantly fluctuating restrictions and tripwires (plus constant psychological warfare in the sense “you’re all evil”), the officers give up and start pretending to do their job.

    Likewise with modern men. Once a certain boundary in weighing men down with constantly fluctuating restrictions and tripwires in the flirting and mating game is crossed (plus constant psychological warfare in the sense “you’re all evil”) + (and with the stakes being unpersoning, jail, and ostracism), the men also stop playing the game.

    Now, whether getting the police to stop policing and men to stop flirting is a side effect of astounding incompetence and self-righteous psychopathy, or is something more consciously directed–that’s a different question.

    But BlackLivesMatter and MeToo are just the more visible crescendos in both variables, IMO.

    • Replies: @216
    , @dfordoom
  39. 216 says: • Website
    @Rahan

    Now, whether getting the police to stop policing and men to stop flirting is a side effect of astounding incompetence and self-righteous psychopathy, or is something more consciously directed–that’s a different question.

    Male shyness isn’t a pathology. It’s an adaptation to a social environment that values monogamy and high paternal investment while stigmatizing sexual adventurism. Our war on male shyness reflects our perverse desire to create a society of Don Juans and single mothers.

    P. Frost

    https://www.unz.com/pfrost/young-male-and-single/

  40. Talha says:
    @216

    religious authorities have more customary power.

    I was talking over this with my wife (who studied psychology quite a bit for her masters in family therapy/counseling) and realized that (even though it is not spoken of much in the West – perhaps due to historic association with monasticism) religious/spiritual authority (in our tradition) is just as readily a valid path to establish an alpha-male in the dominance hierarchy as much as strength, intelligence, wealth, etc.

    But as many men can only attract women of low value, their best option is often to stay unmarried.

    No, their best option is to marry women that are at their level and try to avoid competing for women that are out of their league (and may not be good wife/mother material anyway*).

    Peace.

    *It is good if a woman feels that her husband is a boon to her and that she is in need of him and what he provides. Psychologically, men are after this too. Why try to marry a woman that feels she can easily do better (and will be ready to remind you of it)? I asked the Muslim men who follow me on Twitter if they were attracted to a female that self-identified as strongly independent or one that expressed that she needed a man – the result were approximately (with around 170 responding):
    13% – proudly independent
    58% – expresses need of a man
    29% – neither of the above

    Not scientific of course, but you get the drift. I plan on having a talk with my eldest son also about not worrying too much about women that are out of his league and stick to pursuing one more on his level (or even below) so that they will appreciate what he brings to the table.

    Related:
    “Getting a top job dramatically increases women’s chances of divorce, even in egalitarian countries. Why isn’t it the same for men?…But even in the most gender-equal countries, finding a partnership that lasts is trickier for high-flying women than men…
    ‘Promotion to a top job in politics increases the divorce rate of women but not for men, and women who become CEOs divorce faster than men who become CEOs’…”
    https://www.bbc.com/worklife/article/20200121-why-promoted-women-are-more-likely-to-divorce

    • Replies: @anon
    , @nebulafox
  41. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rahan

    Once it turns out the law and order system does not have the back of officers, but instead throws them under the bus in order to appease the mob

    Cops can gun people down in the street for looking sideways at them and they know that the chances of being called to account for their actions are very very small. The problem is that the law and order system backs cops to the hilt even when cops commit murder. That’s why people hate and fear the police.

    It has nothing to do with race. For cops it’s cops vs everybody else. Everybody else is fair game. If someone (whether that someone be white, black or brown) doesn’t grovel sufficiently they’re in danger of getting shot by the cops.

    Anyone who trusts or respects the police is a fool.

    As far as cops are concerned Cop Lives Matter and nobody else’s lives matter a damn.

    • Disagree: iffen
    • Replies: @Twinkie
  42. WHAT says:
    @Rosie

    “Young women without policing” invariably become whores and then cat food, lol.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  43. anon[409] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    ‘Promotion to a top job in politics increases the divorce rate of women but not for men, and women who become CEOs divorce faster than men who become CEOs’…”

    Why, it’s almost as though biology is a real thing, and women are not just men with boobs and a womb added! That the blank slate comes with some built-in writing on it after all!

    What a wacky idea! Everyone knows biology isn’t real.

    • Replies: @Talha
  44. @dfordoom

    Nah. Doesn’t the vibrator numb the clit? A male sex robot would ,make a woman feel like a loser. Just my opinion.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  45. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    Any women that want to take on a job to be a stripper or pole dancer or in porn, etc., need the express legal sign-off from a male guardian (father, grandfather, older brother, etc.).

    I am not a fan of Shariah law or any law that creates classes of people with different levels of privileges and power (among adults). Legally, young women shouldn’t be any less equal than young men.

    I prefer that such policing of young men and women in regards to sexual mores is done socially, not legally. To the extent that the string arm of the law is utilized in situations such as these, I’d rather that local zoning laws are used to make stripper, pole dancing, or porn establishments scarce, thereby limiting or eliminating opportunities for such work in the first place.

    • Replies: @Talha
  46. @dfordoom

    You’re missing a big piece of it, DforDoom. Women can use vibrators (not seen it myself). They can get sex-bots to tell them sweet nothings. What they can’t get is for sex-bots to pay for a meal. Maybe they can get ’em to fix the water line leak or remodel the kitchen, but then there are materials. They can’t get their sex-bot to pay the mortgage, buy them a new car, or buy them some piece of jewelry.

    Men build the world. If they don’t feel they need women for anything (per the Futurama clip), then the world will go to hell. In the meantime, women will have to fend for themselves. They’ve got Uncle Sugar with their backs right now, but Uncle Sugar has gone broke slowly, sometime soon to be quickly.

    When the SHTF, we’ll all know our roles better again. There is a great prepper book by a woman named Lionel, no less, that John Derbyshire recommended in one of his monthly “diaries”. It’s called The Mandibles, by Lionel Shriver, and Peak Stupidity liked it SO MUCH that there is a 6-post review – Introduction, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4, Part 5, and Conclusion.

    Sex-bots may be the EOTWAWKI for the world, just as much as the cashless Mark-o-the-Beast stuff and the financial SHTF coming to at least America. Hey, can I borrow your handle, DforDoom? ;-}

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @dfordoom
    , @Mark G.
  47. iffen says:
    @Talha

    We had pole dancing at the Super Bowl this year. What venue is next, the Lincoln Center?

    And another thing, there was a Dr. Pepper commercial that ran all season long during college football games that made cuckholding into a joke. I don’t get out all that much, but I didn’t see anyone taking issue with it.

    To paraphrase one of my favorite movie lines: “You want to take control, you better bring something more than a piece of paper.”

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    , @Talha
  48. @Rosie

    Hell hath no fury and all that.

    You’ve just gone ahead and proved my point again, Rosie. That’s about vindictiveness, not honor.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  49. iffen says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    We’ll have to see if blacks abandon him or not.

    South Carolina is very much like Alabama with which I am familiar. The black vote can be influenced by the distribution of “walking around” money. Biden, being a lifelong political opportunist, would know this. I have seen reports that somebody in Buttigieg’s campaign knows this. I assume the same for Steyer. It doesn’t get a lot coverage in the MSM because, well you know why.

  50. Twinkie says:
    @dfordoom

    Anyone who trusts or respects the police is a fool.

    I guess you are not going to call the cops when a group of men is about to invade your house. I think this kind of dumb posturing is unworthy of someone of your intelligence level.

    Cops can gun people down in the street for looking sideways at them and they know that the chances of being called to account for their actions are very very small.

    I think you ought to spend a couple of days doing a ride-along. When an LEO discharges his weapon, let alone shoot someone, he has to account for and justify every single round. The vast majority of cops never want to discharge their weapons, except maybe at the range. Forget about “gunning people down for looking sideways.”

    Some young, inexperienced cops may be hotheads and might be too quick to deploy force (usually Tasers these days, would’ve been PR-24 batons in the old days), but such types either settle down with experience or wash out eventually, because nobody wants to work with them. Cops want to go home after each shift without any harm to themselves or to others and have zero interest in being hounded by the higher-ups, IA, lawyers, DAs, and the media.

    There are exceptions, but the vast majority of people, including cops, get mental trauma for shooting someone, justified or not, and have to live with that for the rest of their lives whatever the legal findings. It’s not something they voluntarily inflict on themselves, certainly not for something as trivial as getting the wrong look.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  51. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    I’d rather that local zoning laws are used to make stripper, pole dancing, or porn establishments scarce

    Certainly another way to tackle the problem.

    Peace.

  52. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    That’s about vindictiveness, not honor.

    And you just proved my point. With women, it’s vindictiveness. With men, it’s “honor.”

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  53. Rosie says:
    @WHAT

    “Young women without policing” invariably become whores and then cat food, lol.

    So you say.

    I wasn’t much policed as a young woman, but here I am not being cat food.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  54. Talha says:
    @iffen

    We had pole dancing at the Super Bowl this year.

    Hmmm…I guess it was a good thing I had the boys play video games during halftime. The pornification of normative culture is not a pleasant thing to contemplate.

    “You want to take control, you better bring something more than a piece of paper.”

    That’s a good one.

    If it’s society you wish to control,
    First keep your daughters off the pole

    Peace.

  55. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    When the SHTF, we’ll all know our roles better again.

    What kind of sick, spiteful bastard salivates for civilizational catastrophe so he can lord it over others?

    If they don’t feel they need women for anything (per the Futurama clip), then the world will go to hell.

    The manosphere in a nutshell. Women are obligated to marry and have children. Men are free to pursue their own self-interest.

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  56. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    Yes, we are all glad you found a husband, but you seem very ill-tempered and unhappy for it.

    Also, don’t confuse good luck with good judgment/choice.

  57. Pericles says:
    @prime noticer

    it’s a return to natural law and rule of the jungle. the top guys clean up, the bottom guys never have sex. that’s how it always way, for thousands of years. we’re mostly descended from the top dominant men, not from a broad population of men.

    Still some way to go, actually. For instance, women in the west can dress to provoke passers-by without much risk, can still mostly roam about without requiring escort, etc. So the bottom guys for the most part haven’t returned to their various jungle means of operation yet. (Look at the muslims or perhaps Israelis for how to further devolve.)

  58. Rosie says:

    Both do. But you consistently advocate social controls on men only, which is hypocrisy. But we’ve been to this dance before, haven’t we?

    https://www.unz.com/anepigone/democrats-white-male-problem/?highlight=Criminalize#comment-3429744

    I don’t suppose I’ll get any sort of apology from you for misrepresenting my views.

  59. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Achmed E. Newman

    You’re missing a big piece of it, DforDoom. Women can use vibrators (not seen it myself). They can get sex-bots to tell them sweet nothings. What they can’t get is for sex-bots to pay for a meal. Maybe they can get ’em to fix the water line leak or remodel the kitchen, but then there are materials. They can’t get their sex-bot to pay the mortgage, buy them a new car, or buy them some piece of jewelry.

    You have to remember that sexbots aren’t going to appeal to men who can get fabulous hot girlfriends and they aren’t going to appeal to women who can get hunky rich husbands willing to shower them in money.

    But that leaves a very large number of men with very little realistic chance of getting hot girlfriends, and it leaves a vast number of women with no prospects of handsome rich husbands with bank accounts that never run dry. For those men, and those women, sexbots may appear to be the best available option, and a hell of a lot better than the alternatives. So it’s not impossible that a very significant proportion of both men and women might see sexbots as a pretty attractive proposition.

    You’ll never get a situation in which all, or even most, men and women will choose sexbots. But I could easily imagine a future in which maybe a quarter of both the male and female populations could be pretty tempted. Maybe even a third. Maybe even more. It depends on just how good, and just how cheap, sexbots will become.

    Vibrators don’t buy women fur coats or diamonds either but a hell of a lot of women use them.

    A sexbot, like a vibrator, will never dump a woman in favour of a younger hotter woman. They will never tell a woman she’s putting on weight. And they will never fail to perform when wanted. They’re absolutely faithful and dependable, like a dog. That’s a huge selling point.

    The sexbot market for both men and women could conceivably be enormous. How much loneliness and unhappiness and sexual and emotional frustration is there in the world? I’d say there’s enough to make sexbots a potential market with sales in the millions. We could have a society with a car in every garage and a sexbot in most bedrooms.

    The future may be a very very strange and disturbing place. Sexbots could change society as profoundly as movies, television and more recently social media have done. I don’t think most people are prepared to believe this is going to happen because they don’t want to believe it can happen.

  60. Rosie says:
    @216

    Across many different studies and measures, men have been shown to have more frequent and more intense sexual desires than women, as reflected in spontaneous thoughts about sex, frequency and variety of sexual fantasies, desired frequency of intercourse, desired number of partners, masturbation, liking for various sexual practices, willingness to forego sex, initiating versus refusing sex, making sacrifices for sex, and other measures. No contrary findings (indicating stronger sexual motivation among women) were found. Hence we conclude that the male sex drive is stronger than the female sex drive.

    IOW, WRS (What Rosie said.) It is men who need policing, not women.

    Whether you suppose this is because men have stronger sex drive, less self-control, or some combination thereof matters not. (I certainly don’t deny that men have stronger libido than women.)

    Why are we arguing about this?

    And note that I am not advocating for controls on men only. That is a silly non sequitur. The fact that I don’t think women particularly need them doesn’t mean I don’t think they should be on the books.

  61. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    Correspondence with you predictably degenerates into ad hominem. Sorry I bothered. Good luck with the husband.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  62. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Father O'Hara

    Nah. Doesn’t the vibrator numb the clit?

    I don’t know. Do you have any evidence for this?

    A male sex robot would ,make a woman feel like a loser. Just my opinion.

    Whereas living alone with only a cat for companionship makes them feel like winners?

    Spending hours looking at porn should make men feel like losers but millions of men still do it.

    What you’re overlooking is that a huge number of people, both male and female, ALREADY feel like losers in the game of life. They may not think they have much to lose. You’re not taking into account just how broken our society already is. To a very large number of people it offers only loneliness and despair. A sexbot might well make them feel a lot better than they feel now.

  63. Rosie says:
    @Twinkie

    Correspondence with you predictably degenerates into ad hominem. Sorry I bothered. Good luck with the husband.

    So I guess that’s a no, I’m not getting an apology for your blatant lying about my position.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  64. Mark G. says:
    @Twinkie

    “Hasn’t online dating use gone up, including for men?”

    There has been a decline in recent years in paid online dating sites. Whatever additional features they offer over unpaid sites, people are increasingly unwilling to pay for. I’m not up on all the latest technology so I can’t tell you where it’s happening but it does appear there is an increase in male and female interactions on the internet overall. This hasn’t translated into more people having sex. I also think fewer people are meeting in real life.

    There are a couple problems with online interactions. I think they generally benefit women more than men. Women often enjoy male attention without it leading to sex because the attention validates their attractiveness. Men have a limited interest in paying attention to women when it doesn’t lead to sex. This isn’t good or bad. This is just the way men and women are built. I asked an attractive girl I work with if she ever goes to clubs. She said she isn’t interested in the guys there but sometimes when she is down and depressed she goes because all the attention from the guys gives her an ego boost. A lot of the interactions women are having with men on the internet may be for this same purpose. I’ve also had several young women tell me they are reluctant to meet guys in real life for safety reasons. The internet offers a risk free environment for them to get attention.

    This decline in real life dating may be part of a larger trend of people not going out and doing things. There was a book titled “Bowling Alone” but a more accurate title would have been “Not Bowling At All”. People engage in fewer activities outside the home now than they used to. Before a relationship starts turning physical you have to actually be in the physical presence of someone so a decrease in being physically around other people will lead to a decrease in sexual relationships.

  65. nebulafox says:
    @dfordoom

    The majority of men didn’t get “hot” wives back in the day, nor did the majority of women get rich husbands. Somehow, most people got married and had OK lives. I think there’s a massive reluctance in 21st Century society to admit that one is average, or heaven forbid, below average, because that’s interpreted as your life being worthless.

    (OK, the obesity/immaturity epidemics don’t help matters, because that skews the quality of “average”. But on the positive side on an individual level, if not a societal one, that lowers the bar for being above average.)

  66. Rosie says:
    @nebulafox

    (OK, the obesity/immaturity epidemics don’t help matters, because that skews the quality of “average”. But on the positive side on an individual level, if not a societal one, that lowers the bar for being above average.)

    I get the impression that the beauty curve is more bimodal than it was in the past. There are many more beautiful girls, leading to a sense of entitlement among men, which I attribute to orthodontics and oth cosmetic procedures.

    Then they are frustrated because there are also many more heavy girls, whom they’re not about to settle for when they can access porn.

    • Agree: In-Praise-of-Higher
    • Replies: @Talha
  67. @Rosie

    No, silly, it’s not “there’s no fury like a man scorned”. You just quoted the expression correctly a minute ago. What gives? It’s vindictiveness – that’s what the expression is about. Vindictiveness is not honorable, but it is a material property of many women.

  68. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    (What Rosie said.) It is men who need policing, not women.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  69. @Rosie

    I’m not particularly looking forward to that all all. It’s in the numbers, Rosie. It’s best to be prepared, at least mentally*, if nothing else. I would have thought maybe 15 years back that eventually all the radical feminism and multiple other forms of radical stupidity would have been stopped by now, at least in their progressing into deeper and deeper stupidity. It hasn’t happened.

    I’d rather not it have to end only due to the financial stupidity, but I think it’s in the numbers now.

    Women are obligated to marry and have children. Men are free to pursue their own self-interest.

    That’s pretty much common sense. I guess common sense is not that common these days. Men’s self-interest results in the world going ’round, Rosie. Did you watch A.E.’s embedded Futurama video. It’s for fun, but it makes a damn good point.

    .

    * Read some of the Peak Stupidity review posts on The Mandibles that I linked to above. That book is written from the woman’s point of view, so is missing quite a bit, but Miss Shriver still does a great job describing the world (she writes of what she knows – city life) in a possible scenario that I think is one of the more likely ones. The economics discussions are made in the form of conversations among the characters, which is kind of hokey, rather than the narrator, but for any preppers and/or econ. buffs, you should get that book prontomundo!

    • Replies: @Rosie
  70. anon[240] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    Any women that want to take on a job to be a stripper or pole dancer or in porn, etc., need the express legal sign-off from a male guardian (father, grandfather, older brother, etc.).

    Or else…what?

    That about ought to do it.

    You’re leaving the details of enforcement as an exercise for the student?
    Lol.

    Rosie
    Young women don’t need policing. Young horny men do. Why are we all pretending otherwise?

    Lol @ you.
    Not everyone is retarded a feminist ideologue, a female chauvaunist like you. Alestair Crowley’s “do what you will” didn’t even work out well for him, it’s no way to have a civilization. But maybe Rosie is following Crowley’s cult? Bad for her if that’s the case.

    All humans need limits. All of us. No exceptions.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @nebulafox
  71. @nebulafox

    >The majority of men didn’t get “hot” wives back in the day

    Based on height/weight stats, yeah, they pretty much did. It’s not a perfect measure but it’s pretty close.

    • Disagree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Rosie
  72. Talha says:
    @anon

    Jordan Peterson had some pretty good insights gained from some of his “power female” clients and the reality that “you can have it all” is a pretty insipid platitude:

    Peace.

    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  73. Talha says:
    @nebulafox

    The majority of men didn’t get “hot” wives back in the day, nor did the majority of women get rich husbands. Somehow, most people got married and had OK lives.

    The unsupervised sexual meat market has changed the parameters of the game. It’s more and more “law of the jungle”, “lord of the flies” or whatever you want to call it. Throw the internet into it and apps where you can swipe for available strangers in a given vicinity for no-strings hook-ups and, well, you just cranked the dynamics up a notch.

    That Stephan Molyneux interview is very interesting about the economics behind this niche of the meat market:
    https://www.unz.com/video/stefanmolyneux_the-truth-about-web-cam-girls-tristan-tate-reveals-all/

    Peace.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  74. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    There are many more beautiful girls

    I might disagree here because, well, I’m not sure we are dealing with reality any more…take a look:

    Peace.

  75. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Men’s self-interest results in the world going ’round, Rosie.

    Lol you’re a joke.

    I’ve known for quite some time that the thrust of manosphere b.s. is that men’s interests are identical with the interests of society as a whole, but it’s nice to see it spelled out so plainly.

    In truth, there is no civilizational solvent more potent than male individualism (greed).

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  76. Rosie says:
    @Not my economy

    Based on height/weight stats, yeah, they pretty much did. It’s not a perfect measure but it’s pretty close.

    Having been there, I can tell you they were every bit as hypercompetitive for the prettiest girls then as they are now. So they certainly didn’t feel particularly fortunate at the time. I suspect it has to do with the fact that Male status is in part determined by the appearance of their girlfriend, and status is always relative.

  77. Mark G. says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    When anyone brings up the impending economic collapse there is always silence except for the sound of crickets chirping in the background. Would anyone like to comment on how we are going to maintain everything just as it is now with the federal debt at 23 trillion and another trillion being added on top of it every year? Anyone, anyone? Bueller?

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @Achmed E. Newman
  78. Rosie says:
    @Twinkie

    (What Rosie said.) It is men who need policing, not women.

    I know you struggle with logical reasoning, but it doesn’t follow from this that I don’t think there ought to be any controls. In any event, people (i.e. not you) consider the totality of a person’s statements on an issue.

  79. Talha says:
    @anon

    Or else…what?

    In these cases. the law should side with the father and fine or imprison those attempting to sign the girl up without his consent. Confiscation of property and shutdown of establishment is also fitting.

    You’re leaving the details of enforcement as an exercise for the student?

    Twinkie’s suggestion of zoning laws is fairly easily enforced and done so all the time.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @anon
  80. iffen says:
    @Mark G.

    going to maintain everything just as it is now with the federal debt at 23 trillion and another trillion being added on top of it every year? Anyone, anyone?

    The Chinese are very smart and rich and getting richer every year. They like us and will continue to lend us all the money that we need.

  81. @dfordoom

    The sexbot market for both men and women could conceivably be enormous. How much loneliness and unhappiness and sexual and emotional frustration is there in the world? I’d say there’s enough to make sexbots a potential market with sales in the millions. We could have a society with a car in every garage and a sexbot in most bedrooms.

    Mind boggling. A bot could solve all that. The loneliness, the unhappiness, the sexual and emotional frustration!
    If it takes as little as a pitiful bot to solve problems of this spiritual magnitude, what does that say about the sufferer? Bot says “you’re adorable!” as it screws you…and you believe it. Because if this was just a matter of rubbing tissue to satisfy electro-chemical impulse, why not do it yourself? Why a bot? Talk about solipsism and mental illness.

    Never imagined ‘virtual life’ could fill in for ‘a life.’ And yet it’s now here to stay. Likewise, can’t imagine ‘bot-based sex life’ filling in for ‘sex life.’ And yet, it will come to pass.

    Apparently, it works for many humans, if not most. But what if ‘most humans’ are nothing but a waste of matter with base instinct only and close to zero spiritual essence? Neither good, nor beautiful, not true. This type leaves nothing worthwhile behind anyway. May their ilk find the end of its line in sex bots, thus giving way to a better world.

    Higher-order humans could never content themselves with a bot-sex life just as much as they could never be at peace living mostly in the virtual world – a life of lies, ersatz sensations and manufactured identities. If inexorable circumstances prevent them from finding their match, they’d be more likely to turn to asceticism than descend to that level of indignity and dishonesty.

    So may Darwin work its magic in new ways. May future humans descend exclusively from alpha-males in all of their glorious forms and beautiful inside-and-out women. If Nietzche’s Uberman has a will to Power, his female equivalent has a will to him. Once the maze of social pretenses is stripped away, any woman of higher-order knows that sharing an alpha man with other women like her is an inherently nobler position than settling for an inferior man who stays faithful to her because he couldn’t do anything different anyway. What an egomaniacal path to the degradation of human condition!

    Higher-order men and women transcend ego. Quality over quantity. Imagine the possibilities. Imagine the Bliss. Give everyone else a sex bot that tells them how awesome they are despite reality-based feed-back. May they quit torturing themselves and others with their inadequacies as they quietly and pleasurably walk themselves off the gene pool.

    • Replies: @Justvisiting
  82. @John Burns, Gettysburg Partisan

    “But what you describe is not patriarchy so much as people’s stereotypical vision of Islam.”

    what i describe is how everything was, everywhere. the top guys had several wives, the bottom guys had no wives. it was exactly like this even in europe. shrug. the winner men had many kids, the loser men had no kids. that’s literally how it worked in europe for thousands of years. the Y chromosome and mDNA evidence to support it.

    that’s the natural, normal way for things to shake out for all humans of every kind. it has nothing to do with Islam or anything else. that some societies were able to force unnatural one man one woman marriage on the top men doesn’t change the fact that polygamy for the winner men is how humans are set up to operate. that’s how lots of primates are set up too.

    “The other, and very important, part is that the average man was waaaaaaay more dominant than today’s average man.”

    yes, because one man one woman marriage allows weak, sniveling men to make more weak, sniveling men, generation by generation, and there’s more of those than dominant, leading men, so eventually they come to predominate, and the population balance shifts to the wusses. hence the democrat voting base. life’s losers, trying to get back politically.

    it may create a temporary transition period of equality, then it goes over to wuss predominance.

    • Replies: @nebulafox
  83. Wency says:
    @Lot

    Yeah, this number seems awfully low when I think about it.

    I believe I had 4 separate 1-year droughts during that period of my life. And I feel like I’m not too far from the median — not super-attractive, but not a troll or totally without game. Had reasonably attractive girlfriends and married well. I know plenty of people who didn’t lose their virginity until their early 20s. I know a few who were still virgins at 30.

    So given that virgins exist, the stat would seem to suggest that among non-virgins, one-year droughts are almost unheard of. But I also distinctly remember sitting around at a bar with 5 of my pals in roughly 2010, none of us virgins, but all of us happened to be on a long dry spell at the same time. What are the odds?

    Now, I also know people who never had a 1-year drought. But that seems like a fairly small share of the population, not enough to compensate for all the people with much longer droughts.

    • Replies: @Lot
  84. @Rosie

    @ Rosie

    There are also things we’re better at, inter alia, controlling our sexual urges

    Absolutely hilarious. You must be unaware of the underhanded, passive-agressive ways in which women operate, sexually and otherwise. I am a woman, btw.

    Men, by nature of their anatomy and reproductive roles, must learn to calibrate sexual urges, else they all end up rapist pariahs. Women don’t need to do that, they can give in to their urges at will.
    When attractive, they ‘attack’ by putting out sexual vibes (that’s ‘acting on sexual urges’). Show me one attractive woman who fails to use her weapon in more or less subtle ways – at ALL times.

    When not attractive, women know this form of ‘attack’ wouldn’t be successful anyway, so they feign chastity and modesty, but discreetly resort to masturbation in private – something SO much easier to do for them than for men. How is this being ‘superior at controlling sexual urges?’

    If anything, women are much more consumed by sexuality than men are, as men’s interest is more volcanic but also more sporadic. Once satisfied, they move onto creative pursuits, until the interest builds up again. Women are always in a state of sexual potential. It’s their essence.

    • LOL: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @Rosie
  85. @Rosie

    “while the bottom 40% of women are now totally ignored”

    historical data is pretty solid here. something like 95% of women had kids. or that is, every woman who could get pregnant, did get pregnant, by some guy or another.

    women never go without getting pregnant unless they don’t want to. there’s always a guy ready, for any woman. and the ratio is not 1 to 1. hence the bottom x% of guys never having kids. because the more dominant guys can and did get several women pregnant.

    what you mean is that 40% of women can’t get Brad Pitt, because they all expect to get Brad Pitt. and they won’t settle for the accountant who does the taxes for the local dry cleaners. because, like i said, thanks to computer science, cell phones, laptops, and social media, all the women can check all the top men in the area at a click, and they all try to marry Orthopedic Surgeon Steve, and since only 1 of them can, that means 5 others settle for cats.

    a weird world, where human females prefer other species over undesirable human males. all thanks to artificial, one man one woman marriage. in a previous era, they could all take turns sleeping with Steve.

  86. anon[624] • Disclaimer says:
    @Talha

    Or else…what?

    In these cases. the law should side with the father and fine or imprison those attempting to sign the girl up without his consent. Confiscation of property and shutdown of establishment is also fitting.

    In what timeline do you expect this to actually happen in the US? Or Europe? Or any other country? Your fantasy may be satisfying to you, but it’s got no correlation to reality.

    You’re leaving the details of enforcement as an exercise for the student?

    Twinkie’s suggestion of zoning laws is fairly easily enforced and done so all the time.

    Portable goalposts so soon? That is disappointing.

    “Restricting strip clubs and porn vendors to a small area of town” and “prohibiting girls from working in strip clubs and porn without permission from nearest male relative” — these two concepts aren’t even close to the same thing.

    Pretending that they are the same, as you just did, is disingenuous at best. Disappointing.

    • Thanks: Talha
  87. Lot says:
    @Wency

    My experience and thinking exactly.

  88. Twinkie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    Men, by nature of their anatomy and reproductive roles, must learn to calibrate sexual urges, else they all end up rapist pariahs.

    Indeed! Humorously put and true.

    When not attractive, women know this form of ‘attack’ wouldn’t be successful anyway, so they feign chastity and modesty

    However, the inverse is not always true, i.e. not all chaste women are unattractive. Religion and family culture can strongly reinforce modesty in women, e.g. Mormons, trad Catholics, etc.

  89. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    I am a woman, btw.

    Sure you are.

    • LOL: iffen
  90. Rosie says:
    @prime noticer

    historical data is pretty solid here. something like 95% of women had kids. or that is, every woman who could get pregnant, did get pregnant, by some guy or another.

    I’m sure that’s still true, though, if we did that, we would just be attacked and hated for getting pregnant by men who can’t support children.

    what you mean is that 40% of women can’t get Brad Pitt, because they all expect to get Brad Pitt. and they won’t settle for the accountant who does the taxes for the local dry cleaners. because, like i said, thanks to computer science, cell phones, laptops, and social media, all the women can check all the top men in the area at a click, and they all try to marry Orthopedic Surgeon Steve, and since only 1 of them can, that means 5 others settle for cats.

    Lies. The majority of women are married by thirty, cohabiting with their future husband several years earlier.

  91. @Talha

    Thank you, Talha. I can see why people listen to Jordan Peterson. He is a truly interesting and entertaining speaker.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Anon
    , @anon
  92. @Rosie

    Dissing the Founder of our country. Well that’s the way to get on my good side …

    Your one quote was Mr. Washington’s remark about finding men to work on his Mr. Vernon estate – kind of like the talk you get from a foreman of a roofing company now. Here’s more from George Washington:

    “It is impossible to rightly govern the world without God and Bible.”

    “The propitious smiles of Heaven can never be expected on a nation that disregards the eternal rules of order and right which Heaven itself has ordained”

    “Make sure you are doing what God wants you to do—then do it with all your strength.”

    “What students would learn in American schools above all is the religion of Jesus Christ.” “It is the duty of all Nations to acknowledge the providence of Almighty God, to obey his will, to be grateful for his benefits, and humbly to implore his protection and favors.”

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @Rosie
  93. @Rosie

    Sure you are.

    I know! It sure must be hard to imagine in that solipsistic state.

    • Replies: @216
  94. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    Men, by nature of their anatomy and reproductive roles, must learn to calibrate sexual urges,

    This is what debaters call a “counterintuitive” argument, i.e. pilpul, absurd on it’s face.

    Men have stronger sexual urges, ergo they have more sexual self-control. I suppose it’s possible that this is true, but then it is also beside the point. The fact remains that social controls are primarily necessary for those with antisocial urges.

    Males are almost always overrepresented in any antisocial conduct involving poor impulse control, gambling, drug addiction, crime, etc.

    As per usual, when it comes to bashing women, feelings don’t matter. Point out any statistical disparity that favors women, and the misogynists bristle and try to weasel their way out of acknowledging the truth.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @nebulafox
    , @iffen
    , @216
  95. Twinkie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Dissing the Founder of our country. Well that’s the way to get on my good side …

    I’m sure cartoon frog Nazis* who fantasize about the day of the rope and an “ethnostate” and such consider him a “cuck.”

    *All five of them, three of who are here. 😉

  96. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    I suppose it’s possible that this is true, but then it is also beside the point.

    “I do not recognize your facts!”

  97. Anon[309] • Disclaimer says:
    @dfordoom

    You might be 1) bit too biased by your environment and 2) discounting Providence from the equation too soon.. there’s a saying: “to each sheep, its mate”.

    Take a look a this video, made by a poor phillipine 29 year old, living in a tiny apartment in Japan. Man’s yearning for love and beauty and meaning shine through.

  98. Twinkie says:
    @Rosie

    I don’t think you have children or homeschool, but I take your word for it for the sake of argument on this blog. Perhaps you should extend that courtesy to others (unless someone is obviously trolling).

    I think a lot of clear-eyed women would agree with some of what your interlocutor wrote.

    • Replies: @Anon
    , @Rosie
  99. nebulafox says:
    @Rosie

    Men are at the extremes of human nature, for better and for worse. You have more male geniuses and retards, more leaders and more psychopaths. The same drive that leads men to create whole new vistas of human knowledge is the same impulse that leads to mass slaughter. Testosterone is neither moral nor immoral, it is amoral. It is up to society to channel that toward good and away from evil. Short of biological engineering, this won’t change. I don’t think stating this is controversial with anybody except SJWs. Treating men like defective versions of women is not only unwise, it invariably breaks down outside the classroom or workplace, in even the most mundane human interactions. Just look at anybody who has tried and successfully pretended to be the other gender. The experiences are so different that it often leads to a mutual inability to quite grasp the others experience.

    (And yes, I do think men are at least aware of that in a way women aren’t. How can we not be? We have to be aware of that to even get a chance to talk to you successfully.)

    Also, let’s not pretend men are the only ones with entitlement issues in this game. Please refer to any online dating platform for proof of that. “Must be over 6 feet tall, make six figures, and have a graduate degree…” said by women who are more wide than tall themselves.

    • Agree: Twinkie
    • Replies: @Rosie
  100. Anon[945] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Mmm… yes to a point. He evidently cannot manage his own life so well, since he is prone to depression and now legal drug addiction. He’s been to rehab and apparently unable to get out. Poor fellow and poor family, cause the wife has cancer. You can google basics and here’s an interesting take:

    Can happen to anyone they say, but thing is, he gives advise to people about how to think and act, presumably in order to lead happy well adjusted lives.

  101. nebulafox says:
    @Talha

    And when you create such a scenario, people start behaving accordingly. And then people wonder why a generation of aspiring Don Juans (because that’s what is being incentivized) isn’t a great thing for society on the whole…

    Etiam si omnes is a wonderful, wonderful philosophy, but let’s be real, by definition it can’t be applied to the masses. That’s why things like positive social norms are supposed to exist.

    • Replies: @Talha
  102. @Mark G.

    I appreciate the Ben Stein reference, Mark (he was even talking about econ. too, haha, though erroneously with the Smoot-Hawley causing the Great Depression crap). Yeah, that’s $23,000,000,000,000, written that way to get a little more understanding, but the unfunded obligations of companies and governments are an near an order of magnitude more than that. See, they all count on 6-8% returns, which can’t be had.

    Why can’t the interest rates be let to go to free-market rates that would let pensions catch up? For one, the national budget would be busted, with over 35% of it going to interest alone, keeping in mind that that would be more than 35% of the intake, as intake is only 75% of the outlays. (Interest would take damn near 1/2 of all the US government receivables!) Secondly, the risky stock market would not be supported as the only way to get returns, were interest rates to be let to rise. It would take a swan dive, causing huge losses of many American’s former “wealth” (think 401k’s).

    As the Man of Constant Sorrow noted, “we’re in a tight spot, boys.”

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
  103. Anon[945] • Disclaimer says:
    @Twinkie

    I am a woman but don’t homeschool. Rosie’s interlocutor doesn’t sound like a woman to me either. Could be a radical feminazi, but I think it’s a guy. A bitter guy.

    And I don’t agree with complaining about the male attitude on the site either. I just skip the commenters I think are whiners.

  104. You guys think its at all weird that a commenter hangs around and just does nothing but pick man vs woman fights that nobody was trying to have in the first place?

    Anything about that seem suspicious to anybody?

    • LOL: Rosie
    • Replies: @anon
    , @Rosie
    , @iffen
  105. @prime noticer

    A weird world, where human females prefer other species over undesirable human males. all thanks to artificial, one man one woman marriage. in a previous era, they could all take turns sleeping with Steve.

    Why is it weird? It’s eugenic.

    Besides, Steve would not breed indiscriminately either. Chances are he would reject at least some of the cat ladies. Maybe not all, but some. Even Steve has a limit to the amount of sexual energy he can expand, and financial limitations too.

    Either way, it’s worth trying to Make Polygamy Great Again.

  106. Talha says:
    @nebulafox

    Spot on. Though some social norms that seem to be considered positive at this stage have also been skewed by the same meat market.

    Peace.

  107. anon[322] • Disclaimer says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Jordan Peterson is good at what he does, within limits. He talks a good line, which fools people who aren’t used to looking behind the curtain. Read his “rules” book with care and see how shallow a thinker he really is – be sure to clean up your room first, of course.

    He is a charlatan who has a nearly life-sized image of Lenin on the wall of his house.

  108. anon[322] • Disclaimer says:
    @Not My Economy

    Anything about that seem suspicious to anybody?

    Some regard her as merely a troll. Days and days go by with no appearance, then suddenly she’s commenting on various parts of Unz for several days in a row.

    Keep a little record for 28 to 35 days. See if there is any sort of pattern to her appearances. There could be a clue hidden in that data.

    • Replies: @216
  109. dfordoom says: • Website
    @prime noticer

    a weird world, where human females prefer other species over undesirable human males.

    Which is why I predict that women will go for sexbots in a big way. If you can’t have Brad Pitt you can have a sexbot that looks just like him, except the sexbot will always look like the young hot Brad Pitt. Your Brad Pitt sexbot will never develop a paunch or start losing his hair and he’ll always perform just the way you always dreamt that Brad Pitt would perform.

    Your Brad Pitt sexbot will tell you how hot and gorgeous you are. Much hotter than any other girls. Even if you’re fifty and overweight it will still tell you you’re gorgeous.

    And the BradBot will only want to do the things in bed that you like doing.

    Plus you can still have your cat as well. Your Brad Pitt sexbot will be programmed to love cats. He’ll also be programmed to do the washing up and mow the lawn when he’s told to do so.

    If women only want the top 1% of men sexbots will look like the top 1% of men. Except better.

  110. @In-Praise-of-Higher

    The “pitiful bot” is an artifact of the current technology and culture.

    With a little imagination it is possible to envision a holographic simulation (multiple senses) that would make the felt experience equal to or better than the real thing, particularly if it offered chemical “enhancements” to the experience.

    If cultural conditioning (advertising, education, etc.) convinced future folks that the simulation had more status than the real thing (the rich and cool people do it…) the sale would be complete for all but a handful of die-hard Luddites.

    (The SF movie “Total Recall” envisions this type of world–if you want to have some idea what it might look like…)

    • Agree: dfordoom
    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  111. nebulafox says:
    @Talha

    I actually agree with a lot of what you are saying… but a light must be shown toward the bottom third or so, who have reasons to opt out entirely. This here is where all the Williamson-style moralizing about manning up and putting a ring on that 300 pound single mother who is clearly reluctantly settling for you runs extremely hollow. Below a certain level on the dating market these days, the payoff just isn’t near worth the amount of effort that the low-status young man is still expected to put in. This must be put into the context of a bunch of other factors that make a toxic cocktail-economic, social, structural-but the reality stands out clearly.

    These bottom of the barrel guys have had a picture painted to them by society: everybody else except them is released from their social obligations, including long-held codes of conduct in the sexual realm, but as a result of their inability to participate in the jungle, *they* are still to keep to theirs more rigidly than ever. It’s not surprising a lot of these “omega” types note that and decide they aren’t having it. Why give a damn about a society that so visibly doesn’t give a damn about you? It might not be a laudatory decision, but it is a quite rational one. As is their subsequent dismissal of their critics as so many preening, trite hypocrites who’d been sneering at them all their lives and now magically expect them to do as they say for no discernible return.

    (Men are a lot simpler than women, including when it comes to marriage. They only demand two essential things: access to sex and a reliable level social status as a paterfamilias. That’s it. But the upshot is that they are a lot less compromising on what they do demand than women. Deny one or both, and men are unlikely to cooperate without nasty social mechanisms which will inevitably sow more resentment.)

    • Agree: 216
    • Thanks: Audacious Epigone
    • Replies: @Talha
  112. nebulafox says:
    @anon

    >All humans need limits. All of us. No exceptions.

    We’ve seen this movie before. Read Dostoevsky’s Demons for a good depiction of what happens when men start thinking they don’t need any.

    The trouble is that this time, it isn’t a small clique of intellectual wannabe terrorists.

  113. nebulafox says:
    @prime noticer

    Imitate apes, and we’ll eventually live like them.

    • Agree: Mark G.
  114. Rosie says:
    @Twinkie

    I think a lot of clear-eyed women would agree with some of what your interlocutor wrote.

    My interlocutor will fit in well around here. He or she uses the same armchair b.s. approach as so many others here, in the teeth of the evidence about male impulsivity. I have no respect for such people.

  115. Rosie says:
    @nebulafox

    Treating men like defective versions of women is not only unwise,

    In what way have I ever done that?

    • Replies: @iffen
  116. Rosie says:
    @Not My Economy

    You guys think its at all weird that a commenter hangs around and just does nothing but pick man vs woman fights that nobody was trying to have in the first place?

    Lol my achin’ sides! This takes the cake.

    Unz misogynists: It’s all these diabolical females’ fault.

    Rosie: No, it isn’t.

    Not My Economy: Why is this feminist troll always picking fights?

  117. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    Point out any statistical disparity that favors women, and the misogynists bristle and try to weasel their way out of acknowledging the truth.

    Yeah, ignore the fact that 99.9% of rapists are men, while 100% of enticing and manipulative sluts who deserved it are women.

    • LOL: Rosie
  118. iffen says:
    @Not My Economy

    She’s a woman, and as everyone knows women are more childlike than men. Haven’t you ever watched little kids popping soap bubbles floating through the air?

  119. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    In what way have I ever done that?

    This must be one of those oftens that you wrote about.

  120. 216 says: • Website
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    On one hand, its nice to see more than one woman commenting here.

    Otoh, your use of “solipsism” is a highly manosphere dependent term that is rarely encountered outside of it. So I do suspect you of being a poser, until such evidence amounts to the contrary.

  121. 216 says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Women are worse when it comes to obesity.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Twinkie
  122. 216 says: • Website
    @anon

    She openly identifies as a “White Nationstateist” and a “National Societalist”, the most extreme positions in the political marketplace that don’t breach the barrier of illegality (in this country).

    From the perspective of an intelligence agency, and several are probably browsing and commenting here; Rosie isn’t that useful unless you want to derail threads. But the Unz commenting system is rather antifragile.

    There was a poster from Canada on here that many accused of being a spy, and he quit posting.

    Days and days go by with no appearance

    She claims to have several children, six supposedly though others claimed this number was inflated from earlier posts (idk). It’s plausible that she only posts when her children are out of the home visting grandparents or something.

    *Note above, please don’t use the dirty words, if you know anything about how algorithms work. This applies beyond the site.

    • Replies: @iffen
  123. Rosie says:
    @Achmed E. Newman

    Your one quote was Mr. Washington’s remark about finding men to work on his Mr. Vernon estate – kind of like the talk you get from a foreman of a roofing company now. Here’s more from George Washington:

    He may have been a greedy, disloyal plutocrat, but he was a pious greedy, disloyal plutocrat!

    • LOL: iffen
  124. iffen says:
    @216

    Holy shit!

    Now you tell me!

    I am in such deep doo-doo.

  125. iffen says:
    @216

    Otoh, your use of “solipsism” is a highly manosphere dependent term

    Not to mention passive-agressive.

  126. Rosie says:
    @216

    Women are worse when it comes to obesity.

    The data are mixed. Women are more likely to be both at healthy weight and obese, with men more likely to fall into the overweight range.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  127. @216

    What kind of evidence do you need? I am a woman. Born non-feminist (started having my inklings around the age of six); later became consciously and rather ardently anti-feminist. The line of thinking Rose lays out here is what has brought women more existential misery than any other society in history.
    The word solipsism is all over the place these days. I gree it wasn’t so about 10 years ago or so – but the concept is very useful. Most moderns live in their heads.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @216
  128. @Justvisiting

    I have no doubts such a market can be created. I question the agents in it but rejoice at the thought of Darwin working its magic through it.
    It doesn’t take a Luddite to reject this model. You only need to be a human of minimal worth to know that you don’t blindly embrace a fake lifestyle just because ‘the rich and the cool do it.’

    It’s interesting though…because as I am typing this I admit I would have preferred not to have to type it but say it face-to-face to people in IRL conversations that take place in a physical space.
    It’s called having a life and a spine.
    But the “system” has forced humans to have neither of these in our times…and it’s spectacularly pathetic. We only get to do this with our nuclear families, in secret – IF at all.

    That being said, you’d think humans would draw the ‘proxy’ line at sex.
    It it a testimony to the insane overgrowth of our egos – completely out of control – if we can be counted on to prefer ‘making love’ with a holographic simulation of Brad Pitt over the real thing with a real human.

    Humanity is SO Brad-Pitt-ifully screwed!

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  129. Twinkie says:
    @216

    Women are worse when it comes to obesity.

    There is greater bifurcation among women in terms of obesity based on socio-economic class. AE posted data to that effect.

    In other words, being trim is a higher class marker these days, especially for women.

    • Agree: Audacious Epigone
  130. Talha says:
    @nebulafox

    Below a certain level on the dating market these days, the payoff just isn’t near worth the amount of effort that the low-status young man is still expected to put in.

    I can see that. Especially with divorce laws being as they are.

    These bottom of the barrel guys have had a picture painted to them by society: … *they* are still to keep to theirs more rigidly than ever.

    Though it must be said, some of them might be willing to participate with…creative, outside-the-box…solutions:

    (Is that woman an alpha female?! I don’t know. Will more bottom-barrel guys be willing to get into a relationship like this where their beta [or omega or whatever] status is not threatened and not threatening by other males, but they have a steady access to one [whether high or low status] female?! I don’t know, but the biological imperative is pretty incredible.)

    It might not be a laudatory decision, but it is a quite rational one.

    I agree. Since I’m fully participatory in a very real patriarchal (not our term, but it’ll do) community, one of the things you realize about it is how the patriarchy gets these lower-tier men married off. An example; I know a brother who is very short – like 5′ 2″ -, skinny, not good looking (and he still gets acne once in a while) and has a lazy eye. However, in his favor, he is a medical doctor and – and this may not be a big deal in other communities, but is in ours – is a spiritual tour de force. Despite being a doctor, there is no way he would have stood a chance in the sexual meat market (SMM) looking the way he does. But he got married off and has two kids. I’ve never seen what his wife looks like, but it is obvious she must be decent looking because he has a very pretty daughter who must have gotten those genes from the mom’s side. Maybe his wife wouldn’t have given him a second thought in the SMM, but her father was obviously able to convince her that he would make a good, reliable husband and bread winner (and they live in a wonderful home, the kind a doctor can provide). Now it must be stated, he did bring a couple of valuable items to the table (somebody who looked like him and was a gardener and not spiritually adept, probably wouldn’t have gotten anywhere), so the man has to at least bring something of value for the patriarchy to consider him; they’re not just going to hand over their daughters as a consolation prize.

    Men are a lot simpler than women, including when it comes to marriage. They only demand two essential things: access to sex and a reliable level social status as a paterfamilias.

    Basically. I was listening to a lecture on marriage where Shaykh Hamza Maqbul mentioned a reality TV show that he heard about on NPR. Basically the gist of it was that the wife has to try to get the husband some specific thing that she wants and if she can convince him to do it, she wins some money. So these wives try to be extra nice and endearing and whatever in order to get that money. Anyway, they interviewed the producer of this show, who was a female, and she basically summarized:
    “Ladies, it doesn’t take much to make a man happy; all you have to do is feed him and f*** him.”

    To which Shaykh Hamza added:
    “And I’ll go one step further, you don’t even have to feed him.”

    Deny one or both, and men are unlikely to cooperate without nasty social mechanisms which will inevitably sow more resentment.

    Basically.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @RSDB
  131. @Rosie

    “You’re right. Sexbots don’t have a sense of humor, ”

    Is this an admission?

    • Replies: @Rosie
  132. @216

    I’ve been married once for 15 years and have 2 daughters. It is my concern for the welfare of my children that has driven me to the dissident realm. I do not wish to see them used as tools of feminism or as fuck toys for 3rd world hordes. Pretty much the opposite of what dfordissonance (single and no kids, I presume) claims.

    • Replies: @Truth
  133. @Rosie

    “I don’t suppose I’ll get any sort of apology from you for misrepresenting my views.”

    LOL:

    AEN: When the SHTF, we’ll all know our roles better again.

    Rosie: What kind of sick, spiteful bastard salivates for civilizational catastrophe so he can lord it over others?

    Talk about misrepresenting someone’s views…

  134. Truth says:
    @Twinkie

    But we’ve been to this dance before, haven’t we?

    You and Rosie?

  135. c matt says:
    @Mark G.

    The feminists may have succeeded a little too well in getting men not to see women as sex objects.

    Have you seen average women lately? Who could blame young men. Even Victoria’s Secret has lowered its standards.

    • Replies: @Truth
  136. Truth says:
    @Talha

    need the express legal sign-off from a male guardian (father, grandfather, older brother, etc.).

    That about ought to do it.

    Might depend on how poor the family.

    • Replies: @Talha
  137. Talha says:
    @Truth

    Good point.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @216
  138. Truth says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    I do not wish to see them used as tools of feminism or as fuck toys for 3rd world hordes.

    But Rabbi Mordechai, say you had to choose one or the other…

  139. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    The line of thinking Rose lays out here is what has brought women more existential misery than any other society in history.

    How has my “line of thinking” brought women to existential misery?

    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  140. Truth says:
    @c matt

    Who could blame young men. Even Victoria’s Secret has lowered its standards.

    Actually Old Sport, they have always been lower than a gekko’s belly button…

  141. Rosie says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    “You’re right. Sexbots don’t have a sense of humor, ”

    Is this an admission?

    That’s not what I wrote.

    Talk about misrepresenting someone’s views…

    I am prepared to offer Achmed an apology if he will affirm that he would rather live on equal terms with women that she the destruction of the West. Otherwise, I must conclude that there has been no misrepresentation.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  142. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    “Ladies, it doesn’t take much to make a man happy; all you have to do is feed him and f*** him.”

    Is that true, though Talha, nebulafox has told us that men demand “status as paterfamilias.”

    If a genie offers you three wishes, can you wish for three more wishes?

    No, because that would be cheating. That’s kind of how I see this “paterfamilias” demand.

    I mean, is the right to call al the shots really so much to ask?

    Well, yes, it is.

    • Replies: @Talha
  143. dfordoom says: • Website
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    You only need to be a human of minimal worth to know that you don’t blindly embrace a fake lifestyle just because ‘the rich and the cool do it.’

    Obviously I agree, but our entire culture is based on the overwhelming desire of most people to do exactly what the rich and the famous and the cool do.

    Because most people really have nothing else to aspire to.

    And of course there’s the overwhelming desire of most people to do whatever seems to be popular, or at least to do whatever they’re told is popular.

    The idea that people will choose sexbots or holographic sex is incredibly depressing but I still expect it to happen.

    But it’s also depressing that people feel that their lives are so empty and meaningless that such options are likely to seem more attractive than the alternatives. And are sexbots/virtual sex any worse than hookup culture?

    People want to feel that their lives have meaning and purpose. They want to believe that but they don’t. I have no idea how we can change things so that they really can believe that their lives have meaning and purpose.

  144. @prime noticer

    In such a world, Steve would have to have bodyguards and a willingness to kill, because if he didn’t, he’d be killed himself. Sometimes bending the natural order to our collective will is worth it.

  145. anon[168] • Disclaimer says:

    For informational purposes only. Well, ok, relevant to dead-bedroom marriages, too.

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/machiavellians-gulling-the-rubes/201610/briffaults-law-women-rule

    Briffault continues with these three corollaries to his law:

    * Even though a woman has accrued past benefits from her relationship with a man, this is no guarantee of her continuing the relationship with him. (Translation: What have you done for me lately?)

    * If a woman promises a man to continue her relationship with him in the future in exchange for a benefit received from him today, her promise becomes null and void as soon as the benefit is rendered. (“I will gladly pay you Tuesday for a hamburger today.“)

    * A man’s promise of a future benefit has limited ability to secure a continuing relationship with a woman, and his promise carries weight with her only to the extent that the woman’s wait for the benefit is short and to the extent that she trusts him to keep his promise.

  146. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    I mean, is the right to call al the shots really so much to ask? Well, yes, it is.

    Well, I certainly believe that it is quite unreasonable for the husband to demand he makes all the decisions without any input from or consulting with the wife.

    Fortunately, I don’t think most men operate that way.

    However, I see no issues with – and find it quite reasonable – men asking to retain the final decision-making power once there has been a discussion with the wife and there is a divergence of opinion on how to proceed forward. Ultimately, a ship can only have one captain. And I think this is the dynamic most men refer to when using such terms.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  147. Talha says:
    @dfordoom

    And are sexbots/virtual sex any worse than hookup culture?

    It may be better actually; the person is removing themselves from the total equation and really only screwing themselves up and not another person. Akin to a drug addict on his own versus one that shares needles with friends.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @dfordoom
  148. 216 says: • Website
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    What kind of evidence do you need?

    Idk, it’s not as if it is something you can provide at the drop of a hat.

    Born non-feminist (started having my inklings around the age of six); later became consciously and rather ardently anti-feminist.

    A lot of us will be skeptical about this. There is an argument, which I have some difference with, that women claiming to be anti-feminist is itself a feminist act. To be entirely anti-feminist, one would presumably ignore politics and defer to ones male relatives. This hair-splitting aside, there’s also the more visible claim of attention seeking.

    In this arena, you aren’t going to be treated fairly, and there’s no escaping it.

    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  149. @Rosie

    This is a useless graph. What’s the definition of overweight? The US Marine Corps counted anyone who was outside of the weight range listed for their height as overweight. That included quite a few physically fit men who had a larger % of muscle mass. Any credible definition of overweight must include a reference to body fat %.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  150. 216 says: • Website
    @Talha

    I favor the “State Monopoly on Vice” arrangement.

  151. @Rosie

    “That’s not what I wrote.”

    No you didn’t; you didn’t get the joke either. 😉

    “Otherwise, I must conclude that there has been no misrepresentation.”

    You choose to conclude, there is no must.

  152. Talha says:
    @Talha

    Might even help prevent these kinds of tragedies:

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  153. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    Ultimately, a ship can only have one captain.

    I suppose that’s true, but then that just raises the question of what sort of Captain a God-fearing man ought to be. It seems to me that a husband ought to leave certain decisions to his wife.

    One of the outrages frequently noted around these parts lately is the “mancave,” as if a man who doesn’t insist on uglifying the whole house with tasteless bric a brac is some sort of pushover.

    You wanna know what really chaps my hide? Imma tell ya.

    I remember one of my kids once said to me:

    “Mommy, everybody does (pronounced dews) what you say. It’s not faiw.”

    Of course, I was delighted that my little one was contemplating justice. (The apple doesn’t fall from the tree.) I always get a kick out of this philosophical awakening at ~5.

    Anyway, I digress.

    I asked him if he would like to trade places and have all of the responsibilities I have, to wit:

    1. Maintaining some semblance of order in the house.
    2. Battling filth.
    3. Getting dinner on the table.
    4. Getting uniforms washed for the next ballgame.

    Etc, etc, etc…

    All this doesn’t just happen, and moms need authority commensurate with our responsibilities.

    I didn’t hear anymore about how it’s “not faiw” that “everybody dews what I say.”

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @dfordoom
  154. Rosie says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    This is a useless graph.

    Ok let’s see your evidence.

    Here’s another bit of data I’d like to see. Given that women gain weight during pregnancy and often struggle to get it off, a challenge men don’t have, how do nulliparous women compare with men in obesity statistics?

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  155. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    Especially with divorce laws being as they are.

    Tradcathism ftw, I guess.

    To which Shaykh Hamza added:
    “And I’ll go one step further, you don’t even have to feed him.”

    Someone begs to differ.

    Now if you must marry, take care she is old–
    A troop sergeant’s widow’s the nicest I’m told–
    For beauty won’t help if your vittles is cold
    An’ love ain’t enough for a soldier.

    • Replies: @Talha
  156. @Rosie

    How has my “line of thinking” brought women to existential misery?

    Your posts exude the feminist line of thinking.
    Feminism is a historical tantrum of massive proportions – a series of them.
    It has pushed its luck to the point where it has deprived women of their female essence as well as the only “cards” that actually worked for them.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  157. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    but then that just raises the question of what sort of Captain a God-fearing man ought to be.

    That’s the question that should be determined before one gets on the ship. Once you signed up to set sail (assuming there was no coercion involved), there should be an implicit understanding between captain and crew.

    It seems to me that a husband ought to leave certain decisions to his wife.

    Sure – and I think most men have no problems with this and frankly would go mad if they had to make every single decision when it comes to the family. In my family (for example), one of the things my wife handles is all of the issues with healthcare and only involves me when she wants advice on a decision or figuring out insurance or payment issues. I also don’t care what the house looks like, she can decorate it as she likes as long as it is within budget.

    insist on uglifying the whole house with tasteless bric a brac

    See above. My only concern with respect to these things is that I’m personally a minimalist (my wife isn’t) and an ascetic; if it can be reduced to a few rugs on the floor and cushions (like they have in North Africa), the Sufi in me is a very happy man*.

    All this doesn’t just happen, and moms need authority commensurate with our responsibilities.

    There you go.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    *

    Plus, a man has plenty of other things to be interested and investing in owning than furniture:

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Audacious Epigone
  158. Talha says:
    @RSDB

    Someone begs to differ.

    Sure, but there are plenty of men that can cover that ground themselves, and plenty more if by necessity; I cook twice a week myself (mostly Indo-Pak dishes) – usually marinating the meat before leaving for work so that it is ready to grill or fry or whatever when I get back home. And I’ve met a fair amount of men that could easily beat women in a cook-off. That being said, I wouldn’t share a bed with any of them, no matter how good their Bihari kababs are.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @RSDB
  159. RSDB says:
    @Talha

    That being said, I wouldn’t share a bed with any of them, no matter how good their Bihari kababs are.

    Sure, but perhaps you aren’t anticipating times

    When you’re wounded and left on Afghanistan’s plains,
    And the women come out to cut up what remains,
    Jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains
    An’ go to your Gawd like a soldier.

    when even your rifle sounds like a good companion:

    When ‘arf of your bullets fly wide in the ditch,
    Don’t call your Martini a cross-eyed old bitch;
    She’s human as you are — you treat her as sich,
    An’ she’ll fight for the young British soldier.

  160. Rosie says:
    @Talha

    See above. My only concern with respect to these things is that I’m personally a minimalist (my wife isn’t) and an ascetic; if it can be reduced to a few rugs on the floor and cushions (like they have in North Africa), the Sufi in me is a very happy man*.

    I actually quite agree with you about this, though I don’t think there’s anything particularly ascetic about west asian carpets. Sumptuous, more like. I’m partial to Tabriz rugs.

    • Replies: @Talha
  161. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    Your posts exude the feminist line of thinking.

    In other words, you know nothing whatsoever about me or my views. You’ve just pigeonholed me as a “feminist” (whatever that word means) and lashed out without bothering to try to understand anything before mouthing off.

    Just as I thought.

    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  162. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    I don’t think there’s anything particularly ascetic about west asian carpets

    Agreed. Rugs from the Persianate world are gorgeous and very intricate (my wife has bought a few in the past); which is why I mentioned North Africa, which is more along my minimalist tastes.

    In this vein:
    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
    , @Twinkie
  163. @216

    A lot of us will be skeptical about this.

    That’s very nice – they call it “healthy skepticism.”

    Women claiming to be anti-feminist is itself a feminist act. One would presumably ignore politics and defer to ones male relatives.

    I am not sure anti-feminism in a woman automatically involves an auto-lobotomy so one can rely exclusively on male relatives’ brains. After all, all men have NOT been created equal. Even the Declaration of Independence secretly knows that.

    Besides, how do you know I have not solidified my views by reading the works of great men?
    As an anti-feminist but also an elitist (much less palatable, I know), I can’t help but make use of my natural right to freedom of thought.
    In terms of deference, all that’s required is 1) a quality mate 2) only so much brains as are necessary to understand one’s cognitive limitations, in the vein of Dunning-Kruger. When a decent non-feminist woman is surrounded by men of quality, you don’t need to worry about her deferring. She will.

    One can choose not to actively participate in politics (which I agree is the choice of every genuinely non-feminist woman); but one can’t choose to completely “ignore” politics or pretend they don’t see or understand them. Wouldn’t that be manipulative and disingenuous?

    I have listened to feminists, I have listened to great male thinkers and I have examined reality beyond human projections and pretense. The great male thinkers’ arguments have won the favors with my faculties. Not something I can help, one way or another.

    there’s also the more visible claim of attention seeking.

    I do admit I am chatty. It is evident I am here to chat, just like you are – and this in itself, is a form of attention-seeking behavior. I do understand that as a woman, especially a declared non-feminist one, I stand out in this environment, which means I am more likely to be suspected of vanity than any other poster. I take responsibility for this.

    You aren’t going to be treated fairly, and there’s no escaping it.

    I’ll be fine, thank you. There IS plenty of ‘escaping it’ available.
    It’s called X-ing out of the site, as needed. 🙂

  164. Anonymous[262] • Disclaimer says:
    @216

    its nice to see more than one woman commenting here

    Oh, there is more than one woman commenting on Unz. Many were doing so years before “Rosie” showed up. I think the first time I commented on this website was in 2013, then I was too busy to bother with the internet for a couple of years, came back, left, came back…. Now I comment once in a while, but mostly I just read — and certainly not just this war between the sexes stuff, which is mildly interesting but pretty much the same-old, same-old that James Thurber (to name just one) wrote about way back when.
    I think what most women who read this site are interested in is pretty much what the men who read it are interested in: they have their favorite authors and subjects and like to know the opinions of others on them. Occasionally, they express themselves on these matters but don’t make reference to the fact they are female because it is irrelevant.
    That said, the degree and intensity of misogyny on the alt- dissident- edge-right is dismaying, to say the least, and doubtless limits its appeal to any wider audience. I do have sympathy with young men’s angst about their place in this devolving world, as I have two little boys myself and fear what the future may hold for them — a future I can neither prepare them for nor protect them from, because I don’t know what it’s going to be.
    I’ve wondered whether antifa is today’s Freikorps, or whether a real, deadly serious Freikorps will one day emerge from the ranks of the bitter, despairing and nihilistic late teen and early twenty-something males of the extreme right.

  165. @Rosie

    One more time: “Your posts exude feminist thinking.” I can only make judgements based on what I read here.

    Our definitions of “lashing out” appear to diverge quite a bit.

    Your very tone and reaction, rather typical, are strong pillars in my anti-feminist school of thought.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  166. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    One more time: “Your posts exude feminist thinking.” I can only make judgements based on what I read here.

    If you’d like to have a substantive policy discussion about issues concerning women’s lives or any other matter that doesn’t involve inane comments about what my posts do and do not “exude,” I’m down for that.

    In the meantime, maybe you should lurk more. You can access my extensive comment archive by clicking on my handle.

  167. @dfordoom

    Obviously I agree, but our entire culture is based on the overwhelming desire of most people to do exactly what the rich and the famous and the cool do.
    ….
    People want to feel that their lives have meaning and purpose. They want to believe that but they don’t. I have no idea how we can change things so that they really can believe that their lives have meaning and purpose.

    Then you have two options:

    1. Change your ‘rich and famous’ crop.

    2. Change your culture. Start by letting them eat cake and screw robots.
    It’s sad -but apparently eugenic.

  168. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    Rugs from the Persianate world are gorgeous and very intricate

    You don’t want to get me started on this topic. Too late!

    Persian rugs are not intrinsically ornate. Broadly, there are three kinds of West Asian rugs (we’ll leave out the Chinese for now – they have their own history of weaving): factory/city, village/town, and tribal.

    Urban factory rugs are usually quite ornate and feature a dizzying array of motifs (fish pattern, flowers, medallions, tree of life, etc.). Some of the finest rugs ever made are factory rugs and these feature very high quality wool (Kork wool and such), excellent workmanship, very high numbers of knots, good quality dyes (examples with natural dyes are prized, because they patina with age), and so on. They are often Ed signed and usually end up in rich Middle Eastern homes or in the London market. Some make it to New York. However, there are also many many more bazaar-quality rugs produced at urban factories. Well known production centers in Iran are Tabriz, Isfahan, Shiraz, Qom, Nain , etc.

    Tribal rugs are at the other end of the spectrum. They are usually made with coarser, but tougher wool, often feature simple, geometric patterns. Sometimes there is considerable abrash (non-uniformity in coloring). There is a devoted following among some collectors who view them as more authentic. Qashqai from the Zagros Mountains are probably the best known (Gabbeh being particularly popular for the modern-compatible and whimsical aesthetic in the West), but Turkmen (esp. Afsharis) and Baluchis also produce under-appreciated examples. (I am fond of Baluchi rugs with hybrid kilim-carpet construction.)

    My favorite rugs in the whole world, though, are Bijar rugs with the Herati pattern. Bijar are Kurdish village rugs – usually with traditional, but simple motifs (there are also some factory Bijar rugs, and they have their adherents). They are so strongly constructed that you cannot fold them without snapping the foundation (you roll them) – they are often called “iron rugs.”

    By the way, traditionally the Armenian diaspora dominated the rug trade in the West and served as the middlemen between Western shops and consumers and the producers and eaters in West Asia.

    • Replies: @Talha
  169. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    By the way, the picture you appended seems to show a kilim (no pile), not a pile rug-carpet.

  170. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    Wow – thanks for the insights! My level of knowledge of rugs isn’t that deep.

    Urban factory rugs are usually quite ornate and feature a dizzying array of motifs

    Yes, these are the ones I was broadly referring to.

    The ones I like more happen to be the tribal ones from North Africa; usually Berber or Tuareg.

    Tribal rugs are at the other end of the spectrum. They are usually made with coarser, but tougher wool, often feature simple, geometric patterns.

    Yes – exactly. Same with North African ones.

    By the way, traditionally the Armenian diaspora dominated the rug trade in the West

    Makes sense.

    By the way, the picture you appended seems to show a kilim (no pile)

    Thanks, did not know the exact term. I also like Tuareg reed mats with simply patterns.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  171. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Talha

    And are sexbots/virtual sex any worse than hookup culture?

    It may be better actually; the person is removing themselves from the total equation and really only screwing themselves up and not another person. Akin to a drug addict on his own versus one that shares needles with friends.

    Yes, that’s more or less my view as well.

    If sexbots/virtual sex kills off hookup culture then sexbots/virtual sex might be a net positive. Or at least the lesser of two evils.

  172. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Ultimately, a ship can only have one captain.

    I suppose that’s true, but then that just raises the question of what sort of Captain a God-fearing man ought to be. It seems to me that a husband ought to leave certain decisions to his wife.

    What you need is a clear division of responsibility. So the husband knows which decisions are his to make, and the wife knows which decisions are hers to make.

    A ship can only have one captain but there are lots of routine decisions that would actually be made by the first officer. The captain knows which things are best left to the first officer.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @Talha
  173. Talha says:
    @dfordoom

    It actually translates to other spheres. I remember when I was first promoted to manager, I was trying to handle everything and it was just killing me and I was dropping the ball on some things. My director had a sit down with me about it.

    There are things one learns to delegate to the team lead; makes for a far smoother operation.

    Peace.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  174. Twinkie says:
    @Anonymous

    future I can neither prepare them for nor protect them from, because I don’t know what it’s going to be.

    No one but God knows the future, but you can prepare your children for it. Make them hardy and resilient. Able to play well with others, yet can go alone if necessary. Teach them to feel comfortable at fancy dinners and cocktail parties, but also able to rough it in the wilderness or underdeveloped areas. Most of all, give them nourishment for faith.

  175. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    Personnel is policy. Attract able subordinates you can trust, and you don’t have to fear delegating. And you earn the loyalty of people like that with your own loyalty to them. Mentor them, teach them, advocate for them, and shield them from the bullshit that flows down from the top. Prepare them to take over your job one day.

    If you show that you are the first one to go over the trenches, good people, people worth trusting and leading, will follow.

    • Agree: Talha
    • Replies: @iffen
    , @nebulafox
  176. @Rosie

    “Ok let’s see your evidence.”

    The evidence is the fact that the graph does not take into consideration body fat percentage, or define the parameters of the term in any way.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  177. Rosie says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    The evidence is the fact that the graph does not take into consideration body fat percentage, or define the parameters of the term in any way.

    That isn’t evidence. That’s a criticism of this evidence. Do you have any evidence to the effect that women are significantly more obese and/or less likely to maintain a healthy weight than men?

    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @MikeatMikedotMike
  178. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    FYI the obesity rate for boys (21%) is higher than for girls (18%). Presumably, it is clear at least here that we are talking about adiposity and not lean muscle mass. After puberty, young men have a huge advantage in metabolism because of more muscle mass, denser bones, etc.

    https://www.webmd.com/diet/obesity/news/20180612/us-obesity-rates-rising-again

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  179. iffen says:
    @Twinkie

    Twinkie, are you any good at putting that into practice?

    Asking for an unrequited friend.

    • Replies: @Twinkie
  180. Twinkie says:
    @Talha

    Thanks, did not know the exact term. I also like Tuareg reed mats with simply patterns.

    Kilims and other rugs with no pile are harder on the feet and wear out much faster.

    • Replies: @Talha
  181. Talha says:
    @Twinkie

    Kilims and other rugs with no pile are harder on the feet and wear out much faster.

    Me: I know (smiles, in Sufi).

    Peace.

  182. @Rosie

    I’m criticizing false evidence. Define overweight.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  183. Rosie says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    I’m criticizing false evidence.

    That’s just it. You don’t know that it’s false. You’re just asserting that without proof.

    • Replies: @MikeatMikedotMike
  184. @Rosie

    The legitimacy of your website aside (the article claims that the best way to lose weight is to eat more carbohydrates – lol) – I found a graph that shows a near 60 year trends plus defines what overweight means below the chart, and it also excludes pregnant women.

    The chart itself isn’t optimal by any means. The BMI measurement is a poor indicator, especially for men who have higher than normal muscle mass. For example, I am 6’4″, ~240lbs which puts my BMI at 29.2, which is nearly obese by the graph’s parameter. If you were to look at my physique, I think you would immediately observe that I am not obese or even overweight by any rational measure.

    It’s interesting that the graph shows the % of overweight men and women to be nearly static over the timespan, but obesity and extreme obesity climb significantly.

    Again, the fact that men include a higher % of overweight individuals compared women, but a lower % of obese and extreme obese, points to the flawed nature of BMI and overweight designations. Men with above average muscle mass are classified as overweight. Women are less active than men in general for a variety of reasons – so common sense alone suggests men would be less overweight in general. But it is most important for you to prove that women are better than men at all things.

    Page link here:

    https://www.niddk.nih.gov/health-information/health-statistics/overweight-obesity

    • Replies: @Rosie
  185. @Rosie

    Still waiting for your definition of overweight.

  186. @Anonymous

    That said, the degree and intensity of misogyny on the alt- dissident- edge-right is dismaying.

    The type of audience various dissident/alt-right sites attract matters. Some attract higher-minded commenters than others. Anything mass-oriented, whether left or right, inevitably attracts the anti-socials and the not-so-bright too.

    I have rarely detected any signs of authentic misogyny (sheer dislike/contempt/hatred of “femaleness”) on most high-quality dissident right sites. Unless one equates ‘misogyny’ with refusal to acknowledge that men and women are equal; or that women, on average, ARE inferior to men on certain scales; or that women, on average, DO have their share of negative traits, just as much as men have their uniquely masculine negative traits.
    Plus there is a hierarchy of women out there just as much as there is a hierarchy of men. Women, in general, are NOT your best women (see NAWALT), just as much as men, in general, are not your best men. Women as a mass DO exhibit negative traits and pointing those out may be more of an indication of gender-specific elitism than sexism in and of itself.

    Over the past few years I have frequented a few dissident right communities. Being able to compare my experience in these communities to the experience I had years ago on mainstream sites frequented largely by women (read Left-thinking) – was sobering.
    It’s been a long time since I quit posting in anything resembling the latter as I found that the interaction/alchemy between my remarks and the views and reactions they attracted from ‘mainstream womanhood’ always left me with a bitter taste.

    Interestingly enough, I am yet to experience any vitriolic, knee-jerk reactions on dissident right sites, despite posting many ‘disagree’ (but not disagreeable) posts.

    I have also learned that mysogyny is a dish best prepared by a female. If you look closer, you will realize men are amateurs when it comes to misogyny.

    Finally, calling out “hatred” of any kind (misogyny, racism, bigotry, etc) in any dispute is an incredibly poor intellectual strategy.

  187. See page 14 on this recent report. Adult sex differences in obesity don’t mirror children’s.
    For whites, the genders are roughly on par. For non-whites, women have an obesity ‘advantage.’

    https://www.tfah.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/2019ObesityReportFINAL-1.pdf

    Do we need a separate one for overweight and pure body fat?

    Why is this important again? So we can establish who sucks more?

    • Replies: @Talha
    , @nebulafox
  188. Talha says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    So we can establish who sucks more?

    This is a very important matter on internet forums. Very, very important.

    One and one’s group may suck, but if one can establish that somebody else or their group sucks even more; one can go to bed at night soundly.

    Peace.

  189. Rosie says:
    @MikeatMikedotMike

    so common sense alone

    First of all, thank you for actually bothering to attempt to produce some evidence rather than just criticizing.

    In any event, I’m not interested in relying on “common sense.” Common sense is good for formulating hypotheses, but not establishing facts.

    The question at hand is whether BMI is more likely to overdiagnose men as overweight or obese as compared to women, and if so, by how much. (If there is a gender effect, what is the size of the effect?)

    I was unable to find any direct, reliable evidence on that question. Feel free to take a look yourself.

    If you’re going to use body composition approach, the you have to determine the appropriate composition for each sex. The healthy range of body fat levels is going to be much lower for men than women, because we have more “essential fat.” Moreover, men’s health is more adversely affected by extra fat than women’s, presumably because we have evolved to be healthy with enough fat to gestate a pregnancy.

    Here are body fat percentage by age and sex:

    Here is what those percentages look like for men and women:

    As you can see, a woman looks fine at 35%. A man, not so much.

    Finally, I’m not sure you’re taking account of the fact that women are doing a lot more strength training nowadays. We prefer to recomp than to lose weight, for the simple reason that the more weight you lose, the more you have to restrict your calories to maintain that weight. Recomping provides metabolism support that we desire.

    It’s well known among gym-going women that the scale is only so useful when it comes to measuring your fitness level. We may lose a jeans size without moving the needle one bit on the scale. You seem to assume that women won’t be overdiagnosed as overweight because of lean muscle mass. That’s not really true anymore.

    Finally, the fact that the graph you posted excludes pregnant women hardly matters. The weight doesn’t just come off as soon as you have the child. It takes time. Breastfeeding is supposed to help, but then it never helped me much, because I was just starving all the time.

    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  190. @Rosie

    My goodness. All the technical hair-splitting to address the reality that men are turned off by women who come across as FAT (as in overly wide/round/fluffy/squishy), regardless of irrelevant technicalities (e.g. what the scale actually says, what the charts show, BMI vs Body Fat, the net impact of fat on health by gender, etc).

    Pleasant to hear or not, female looks are the gate-keeper criterion for men in the mate selection process. Ruin this one, ruin it all. Everything else is filtered through this stubborn pre-selection point. So an expansion of overall “female fatness” at the population level is likely to ‘unsettle’ men more than an expansion of male fatness is going to unsettle women.

    While women too can be turned off by a man’s adipose tissues, reality remains men “campaign” on many different platforms in mate selection politics. Women hardly so.
    Those who find this unfair need to take it up with the Universe, but they probably shouldn’t expect to hear back any time soon. A woman’s brain can easily adjust to ignore the extra adipose tissue when the man comes equipped with a large enough wallet, alpha-confidence, a sexy rank, buckets of sense of humor and plenty of other options. A man’s brain – not so much.
    Did anyone notice who was married to Harvey Weinstein? Good Lord.

    You hit the nail on the head when you said that men’s dismay is now exacerbated by the newly bi-modal distribution of attractiveness among women. As with the growing gap between the rich and the poor and the shrinking middle class, we are now witnessing increases in both the number of stunning women and the number of those who literally hurt the eye. The “pretty enough” pool is shrinking. Hence the mounting frustrations among men, especially as the media relentlessly brings Gorgeous-on-Steroids right under their virtual noses.

    My point: The Tit for Tat strategy in gender ‘politics’ doesn’t work.
    A better approach might be: how do we produce and raise humans who can best meet sexual market demands?

    • Replies: @Rosie
  191. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    So an expansion of overall “female fatness” at the population level is likely to ‘unsettle’ men more than an expansion of male fatness is going to unsettle women.

    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  192. @Talha

    I understand you so well here.

    • Thanks: Talha
  193. I think we’ve strayed a little from the topic.

    I can speak to my own experience with libido and say that mine has basically collpsed due to health problems. It works, but I have no real interest in using it. It’s actually been quite liberating in a way. Thing is that I couldn’t really relax and enjoy myself during sex, but I never really understood why. I assumed for the longest time that it was performace anxiety (I want the girl to enjoy herself too). However, I think I’ve finally figured it out. It seems like most of the women I’ve met are very…self-conscious about certain…aspects of their own bodies. Who the hell wants to deal with someone who skeeves their own ladyparts?

  194. nebulafox says:
    @Twinkie

    >If you show that you are the first one to go over the trenches, good people, people worth trusting and leading, will follow.

    The biggest reason why Alexander and Julius Caesar succeeded, in a nutshell. Not the only reason. But the biggest.

    Figures that those currently in charge in the US for the most part will do anything, absolutely anything, but this. The people tend to notice when there’s a huge divergence between words and actions, no different than when a child notices it with their parents. And that has a subsequent effect on behavior: or on the general fitness of your society.

  195. nebulafox says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    >Why is this important again? So we can establish who sucks more?

    Can’t we just all agree that men and women have different challenges and different advantages in life and move on?

    • Agree: Talha, Rosie
  196. @Rosie

    Re: violin…if memory serves, I think that’s called ‘being clever’. So much for ‘substantive policy discussion.’

    • Replies: @Rosie
  197. LexP says:
    @Audacious Epigone

    At 1:32 in, the old White lady is kissing on a young Black Boi robot.

    This video is more telling than anything in a long time.

  198. @Anonymous

    I do have sympathy with young men’s angst about their place in this devolving world, as I have two little boys myself and fear what the future may hold for them — a future I can neither prepare them for nor protect them from, because I don’t know what it’s going to be.

    Agree completely. This fills me with an existential angst like nothing else ever has.

  199. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    Re: violin…if memory serves, I think that’s called ‘being clever’. So much for ‘substantive policy discussion.’

    One can have a sense of humor while discussing serious matters.

    Anyway, this entire discussion demonstrates just how far we have fallen.

    The whole premise of manosphere thinking seems to be that men have no duties to society. Rather, society must cater to them, providing “incentives” for family formation.

    I find this very strange, especially among people who consider themselves rightists. There is no conceivable way for society to be arranged such that patriarchy (which they claim to want) is as pleasant and easy as dissolution.

    If a man asks (about marriage), what’s in it for me? Then the answer is nothing.

    Muslim men: “We need to have children for the glory of Allah.”
    White men: “Muh dik!”

    It’s a disgrace, really. Maybe Doom is right.

  200. Rosie says:
    @nebulafox

    Can’t we just all agree that men and women have different challenges and different advantages in life and move on?

    Post-modern nihilism has devastated White people. With no reverence for life, fear of God, or pride of culture, nobody sees any reason to bother.

    Contra Mike, I did acknowledge in this very thread that White men drive innovation. We ought to be grateful for each other.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  201. dfordoom says: • Website
    @nebulafox

    Can’t we just all agree that men and women have different challenges and different advantages in life and move on?

    You’d think so. Sadly there doesn’t seem to be much chance of that happening.

  202. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    The whole premise of manosphere thinking seems to be that men have no duties to society.

    The manosphere is at most a few thousand sad angry guys on the internet. Most men haven’t even heard of the manosphere.

    Meanwhile in the real world men are certainly not very happy these days but that doesn’t mean they hate women. They do feel that the current social order isn’t working very well. Many have effectively given up, but that doesn’t mean they hate women. They’re just frustrated and unhappy.

    And in the real world women are certainly not very happy these days either but that doesn’t mean they hate men. The angry blue-haired feminists in the Gender Studies and Women’s Studies Departments hate men but they’re no more representative of all women than the manosphere types are representative of all men. Most women would agree with most men that the current social order isn’t working very well.

    These problems cannot be solved if we let the manosphere types and the angry blue-haired feminists control the debate.

    Of course finding actual solutions might require that both men and women accept the need for compromise. Women might need to accept that if they want high-powered careers there’s a very good chance their emotional lives will suck. Maybe they will need to accept slightly lower-powered careers. Maybe at some point some will have to accept that they will have to choose between family and career. Maybe men will have to accept that if they want women to put their families first they will have to do something to make this possible.

    Maybe men and women will have to accept that major changes are needed to the economic system which currently treats both men and women as nothing but units of production and consumption. Maybe men and women will have to work together to bring these changes about.

    Maybe men and women will both have to realise that the political Right cannot provide the answers. And work together to take back the Left from the loonies who have controlled it for half a century.

    • Agree: Talha, iffen
  203. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Post-modern nihilism has devastated White people.

    Post-modern nihilism has devastated everybody. We need to come to terms with the flaws in our society that led us to this point. If we don’t then we’ll just end up making the same mistakes over and over again.

    The first thing we need to do is to stop blaming others. We broke our society and we have to fix it. That will involve hard work. Blaming others is easier but it doesn’t lead to solutions.

    • Agree: iffen
  204. @Rosie

    The whole premise of manosphere thinking seems to be that men have no duties to society. Rather, society must cater to them, providing “incentives” for family formation.

    Which society? The modern one? It is virtually impossible for modern humans to feel they have “duties” to society as long as theirs is an atomized one where the ego always calls the shots.
    I think the manosphere is reacting to the atomized society – not to the concept of society, in general.

    I find this very strange, especially among people who consider themselves rightists.

    Life gets easier and clearer when we accept that all living beings are wired to act in self-interest first. This is an axiom realist-rightists understand better than all others.
    It is self-interest that incentivizes us to collaborate, form alliances / societies, find meaning in them and ultimately dedicate ourselves to them.

    If a man asks (about marriage), what’s in it for me? Then the answer is nothing.

    Urgh – then we have a problem.
    For men and women to feel they have a duty to society, marriage included, they both must derive some kind of personal satisfaction or gain from it. Otherwise, it’s called slavery. It’s one of life’s internal contradictions that we’re programmed to serve the larger purpose by addressing self-interest first.

    Muslim men: “We need to have children for the glory of Allah.”
    White men: “Muh dik!”

    Muslim men don’t just have babies for Allah. Saying so doesn’t make it so. I think it is pretty obvious those Muslim babies come under conditions that cater quite a bit to the Muslim dik.

    Given the aforementioned axiom, western men and women would be best served if they started to pay attention to what makes the opposite sex happy. Then aim to please.

    The major trouble here is that women often confuse what they THINK makes them happy (often what they’ve been TOLD should make them happy) with what ACTUALLY makes them happy.
    Then they go out there and confuse a lot of men by communicating the wrong information.

    • Agree: Mark G.
    • Replies: @Rosie
    , @Onebelowall
  205. @dfordoom

    Maybe men and women will both have to realise that the political Right cannot provide the answers.

    Why not?

    And work together to take back the Left from the loonies who have controlled it for half a century.

    Why? Because the Left holds the key to true “gender equality?”

    Show me a woman who feels she is equal to her man in all respects, and I will show you a relatively unhappy woman. Show me a woman who feels she is superior to her man, and I will show you a spectacularly miserable woman.
    I have more hope in the Right, because at the very least, the Right can provide reassurance that it is normal for women to feel miserable when they “have it all” like this and then some.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  206. dfordoom says: • Website
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    Maybe men and women will both have to realise that the political Right cannot provide the answers.

    Why not?

    Perhaps I should have said that the Economic Right cannot provide the answers.

    It’s the Economic Right that has been in control for decades and they’re the ones who got us into this mess. They’re the ones who have reduced us to units of production and units of consumption. All in the service of the great god of corporate profits.

    And work together to take back the Left from the loonies who have controlled it for half a century.

    Why? Because the Left holds the key to true “gender equality?”

    It’s the loonies who have controlled the Left for decades who gave us nonsense like gender equality. And they’ve been backed in this by the Economic Right.

    • Agree: iffen, Talha
    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  207. @dfordoom

    Oh, the free-marketeer zealots. The materialist half-wits. The ‘successful’ leftists. The Republicucks.
    I wouldn’t dignify them with the ‘economic right’ term. It’s a misnomer – they are still a form of left.
    It’s called neoliberalism. “Work hard” (read ‘waste tour life’), compete for money and rank, rise above your genes and raisin’.

    The actual economic right sees a place for capitalism insofar it reflects the needs of culture, community and excellence through vocational calling. Not competition to maximize personal profits and ‘rise’ in society at any cost.

    Yes, those need to go but for them to go, they first must be exposed for the leftist riffraff that they actually are.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  208. Rosie says:
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    The major trouble here is that women often confuse what they THINK makes them happy (often what they’ve been TOLD should make them happy) with what ACTUALLY makes them happy.

    People keep saying this, but I’m not seeing it.

    Women make .79 cents for every dollar men make. Feminists say this is because of discrimination. I don’t agree with that. I think it’s just a fact that men prioritize their careers more than women, yet I keep hearing, as always without evidence, about how “careerist” women are.

    Now, I quite agree with Doom’s basic proposition that compromise is the name of the game. The manosphere has put a great deal of effort into promoting the idea that men’s desires are prosocial and women’s are antisocial. Therefore, men’s interests are legitimate, and women’s are not.

    This is why they will call you a solipsist while they tell you that “male self-interest makes the world go ’round” or some such.

    Of course, there can be no point to any compromise on those premises, even though compromise is precisely what is needed to ensure the greatest happiness for the greatest number, which I realize is not a perfect measure of social welfare, but it’s a place to start.

    Any constructive suggestions as to what sorts of compromises women can make are more than welcome, of course.

    Then aim to please.

    Except that sometimes desires and expectations are unreasonable and need to be adjusted.

    It’s not reasonable to expect your wife’s body to ever go back to how it looked before kids.

    It’s not reasonable to expect your husband to sustain the level attention he gave you during courtship.

    Etc.

    I think it is pretty obvious those Muslim babies come under conditions that cater quite a bit to the Muslim dik.

    Is it? Perhaps Talha can enlighten us as to beauty standards in his culture.

    All I know is this. If a man is obsessively concerned about a woman’s waistline before marriage, how can he be trusted to stick around after two or three kids ruin your figure?
    And they will ruin your figure! And BTW, they’ll also make you look older sooner rather than later.

    https://www.workingmother.com/science-says-more-kids-you-have-faster-you-age

  209. Rosie says:
    @Rosie

    If a man asks (about marriage), what’s in it for me? Then the answer is nothing.

    Urgh – then we have a problem.

    I disagree on a very fundamental level with this. Of a man feels there is no point getting married and having kids, he has a spiritual problem that cannot be fixed with any “incentives.” Indeed, some of them will even talk about how keen they are on the idea of sexbots.

    That tells you right there that they’re not playing with a full deck.

    • Replies: @iffen
    , @dfordoom
  210. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    It’s the economics; ain’t no way ’round self-interest, Rosie.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  211. Rosie says:
    @iffen

    It’s the economics; ain’t no way ’round self-interest, Rosie.

    Hang it all, then. Cancel humanity.

    • Replies: @iffen
  212. iffen says:
    @Rosie

    Hang it all, then. Cancel humanity.

    No, no–Rosie.

    It’s the fight for the virtues, the ideals.

    We wuz kangz at one time, and we can get it back.

  213. Talha says:
    @Rosie

    Is it? Perhaps Talha can enlighten us as to beauty standards in his culture.

    The Muslim world is massive – I cannot speak for all of it. I can give insights into my community and others like it. Beauty is of course prized, but hijab helps with this quite a bit from a couple of perspectives; 1) make-up and outward display is discouraged (unless for your husband) and 2) the religion emphasizes piety and character of the woman above beauty:
    “A woman is married for four things: her wealth, her lineage, her beauty and her religious commitment. Seek the one who is religiously-committed, may your hands be rubbed with dust (i.e., an Arab saying akin to ‘may you prosper’).” – reported in Bukhari and Muslim

    So it all depends; not-so-religious Muslim guys concentrate a lot more on beauty than religiously oriented guys. And I’d say women don’t have to worry as much about beauty since they aren’t in so much competition; my wife and daughter often leave the house without thinking about their hair more than simply tying it back (they’ve probably saved months, if not years of their life in this regard) – they could literally be bald under there, no one would know and it helps that there is a good level of gender-segregation (at least among religious-oriented folks) so women don’t feel as much a need to compete – there are many friends of mine that I have known for years and have no clue what their wife looks like (not my wife, not my business). That said, even religious Muslim women will deck themselves out for things like weddings, ESPECIALLY if it is segregated from men.

    Encouragement for loose clothing also helps take some pressure off of women, though it is pretty cool what some traditional men and women can pull off even in very modest circumstances.* There are hadith where men were discouraged from letting themselves go or criticized for putting on too much weight, but I’ve never come across one where women are criticized for the same (despite the fact that one of his wives was heavy-set).

    As I mentioned, I myself plan on encouraging my son from looking too much into beauty, but rather keep his eye open for a woman that is in the 7-8 range on a 10 scale and generally stay away from 9 and 10. This is actually a very real scenario for me; apparently my daughter wants to eventually hook him up to a young Bosnian sister in our community – this girl’s older sister (who is a good friend of my daughter) also mentioned to her that she would like to see her younger sister marry my son. The only problem (as far as I see it), I’ve seen this girl before since her father is a friend – she could be a magazine model hands down, without any makeup (mashaAllah). I would personally advise against it unless my son brings something extraordinary to the table (financial or otherwise), because the imbalance is way too much in my estimation.

    Hope that helps.

    Peace.

    [MORE]

    *This may not be for everyone, but it is a traditional Algerian style, influenced by the era of the Turkish elite:

  214. @dfordoom

    Thing is that manosphere does have a point about certain things:

    * The expectations of many women do not seem to match the reality of their situations. If a women works as a barmaid, cashier, waitress, etc; it’s a little strange that these women should than expect that every man that courts them be making at least 50K plus per year. Even the poorest of women expect to be lavished like queens, princesses, or royalty.

    * Somewhat in line with above: Average, if not 0utright unattractive, women now seem to think they’re entitled to Fonzie or some other top guy. They seem completely unable to comprehend that these men are not interested in them or are that they’re simply being used until something better comes along. A few years back, I accidentally found a message board where plus-size women gather for emotional support. The most common complaint was that they were “good enough to [in engage in sexual intercourse with], but not good enough to take on a date or be a girlfriend.” I lurked there for a few days and saw that one member had posted pointing out that “everyday someone is posting on here about how they’re being used for sex. You all need to close your [expletive deleted] legs and stop letting these men treat you that way. You’re the one letting these men treat you this way.”

    * There are also women who would rather be part of some Alpha’s harem, instead of having a beta to themselves.

    *Here’s the thing that really resonated with me: What exactly are women bringing to relationship but their vaginas? Are they offering anything else? Do they offer companionship, emotional support, etc.? Will these women be the ones who would drive you to your cancer treatments in 30yrs or will they divorce you because “they’re unnnhapppy” after they get bored.

    I posted in this thread about how health problems have killed my interest in sex. Once that happened, I realized that I was putting a bunch of effort into these women who really were not worth it.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  215. @In-Praise-of-Higher

    It is virtually impossible for modern humans to feel they have “duties” to society as long as theirs is an atomized one where the ego always calls the shots…For men and women to feel they have a duty to society, marriage included, they both must derive some kind of personal satisfaction or gain from it.

    Another point that was made: People are constantly told that “society doesn’t owe you anything.” Now they’re realizing that they don’t owe society anything either. You cannot expect passive complacency from men in society when they have no stake or investment in society, it’s not going to happen as it is delusional fantasy land. If men have nothing to fight for they’re not going to be productive and even more so are going to less likely care about the society they’re living or residing in.

    • Replies: @Audacious Epigone
  216. dfordoom says: • Website
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    I wouldn’t dignify them with the ‘economic right’ term. It’s a misnomer – they are still a form of left.
    It’s called neoliberalism.

    I think we might be talking past each other a bit. I see classical liberalism and neoliberalism as right-wing ideologies. But I admit the left-right thing isn’t very useful any more.

    I think we mostly agree that liberalism and neoliberalism are evils.

    • Replies: @In-Praise-of-Higher
  217. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Any constructive suggestions as to what sorts of compromises women can make are more than welcome, of course.

    I think that if women want to have families and want the option of putting their families first, in other words they want at least the option of being stay-at-home mums, then one political objective should be to restore the principle that married men should be able to earn enough to support a wife and kids without the necessity for the wife to work. The modern idea that every household must be a two-income household is very destructive.

    But modern capitalism hates the idea of having to pay men sufficiently decent wages.

    • Agree: Rosie
    • Replies: @Rosie
  218. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    I disagree on a very fundamental level with this. Of a man feels there is no point getting married and having kids, he has a spiritual problem that cannot be fixed with any “incentives.”

    I think I might have to agree with Rosie on this one. Of course it applies to women as well. If either a man or a woman does not see getting married and having children as being a good thing to do for its own sake then I don’t think any amount of bribery in the form of economic incentives will have much effect.

    In fact it may be a bad idea to offer incentives to people who really don’t want marriage and children. They’re not likely to be good parents. Does any kid really want to find out that Mummy and Daddy only had kids in order to get money from the government?

    I think that if you’re worried about low birth rates you have to address the social and cultural factors that have caused people to lose interest in having children.

    • Agree: Talha
  219. @Onebelowall

    It’s a seductive thing:

    We’re going to need heroes to pull us away from it:

  220. Rosie says:
    @Onebelowall

    * There are also women who would rather be part of some Alpha’s harem, instead of having a beta to themselves.

    This isn’t true, but you make a good point about why women let men treat them like crap.

    Part of the problem is that women don’t understand that men do this. Anyone who has a daughter has to constantly strive to seek a balance. If you tell your daughters the pure, unvarnished truth about men, you’re likely to wind up with a strident, man-hating feminist on your hands. If you don’t, they’re probably going to get used …and wind up hating men anyway.

    If there is an easy solution to this dilemma, I’d love to hear it.

    *Here’s the thing that really resonated with me: What exactly are women bringing to relationship but their vaginas? Are they offering anything else? Do they offer companionship, emotional support, etc.? Will these women be the ones who would drive you to your cancer treatments in 30yrs or will they divorce you because “they’re unnnhapppy” after they get bored.

    You’re either going to have someone to drive you to your cancer appointments, or you’re not. The one way to be certain that you will not, is to not get married.

    Another point that was made: People are constantly told that “society doesn’t owe you anything.” Now they’re realizing that they don’t owe society anything either.

    I very much agree with you about this. Society certainly does owe young men a reasonable chance at a decent life. Globalization has fallen very hard on men, but that was largely men’s doing.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
    , @dfordoom
  221. Rosie says:
    @dfordoom

    The modern idea that every household must be a two-income household is very destructive.

    One way to accomplish that would be to allow mortgages to be based on only one salary, to be determined by the couple. This would almost always be the man’s salary.

    As I said above, women earn only .79 for every dollar men earn, and that’s not even counting women like me who’ve left the workforce altogether.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  222. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Globalization has fallen very hard on men, but that was largely men’s doing.

    It wasn’t men’s doing. It wasn’t women’s doing. Globalisation was pushed by the corporate sector as a means of maximising corporate profits and it was pushed by a faction within the managerial class who felt that the only purpose of society should be money.

    • Agree: In-Praise-of-Higher
  223. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    Another point that was made: People are constantly told that “society doesn’t owe you anything.” Now they’re realizing that they don’t owe society anything either.

    I very much agree with you about this.

    A lot of the things that have happened to our society have simply been unintended or unanticipated consequences of changes that seemed like a good idea at the time.

    When the contraceptive pill was introduced at the beginning of the 60 no-one foresaw the full consequences. As divorce became progressively easier no-one foresaw the full consequences of that either. As women were encouraged (and often pressured) to prioritise careers over family, again nobody realised the full extent of the social consequences. As the idea that sexual fulfilment was vitally important and would liberate everybody was promoted, again nobody realised just how profoundly that would change society.

    Nobody foresaw the full consequences of things like social media and online dating either.

    To a large extent we have trashed our society accidentally, through making changes that at the time seemed good and positive. Nobody could have foreseen how the combination of all these factors would effectively destroy society as it existed around 1960.

  224. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    women earn only .79 for every dollar men earn

    Unfortunately if women earned more that could only be at the expense of men. There’s only one pie to be divided up. So as women’s earnings have increased, men have earned less, to the point where very few men now earn enough to support a wife and children. If women’s earnings increase still further then even fewer men will earn enough to support a wife and children.

    Which means women will be put under even more pressure to contribute a second income to the marriage. Which means more and more couples caught in the two-income trap.

    Women will need to decide if they really want full income equality. If they do then they will have to accept that married women will be forced to work whether they want to or not, which is going to make it even more difficult for women to have families. The end result will be a further decline in birth rates as more and more women find that they simply cannot combine high-paying careers with having children.

    Again it comes down to unintended consequences. Sometimes things that seem likely to make society fairer actually make society less fair. In this instance women who want children will end up being the big losers. Women who don’t want children will be the big winners.

    • Agree: In-Praise-of-Higher
    • Replies: @Rosie
  225. Rosie says:
    @dfordoom

    Again it comes down to unintended consequences. Sometimes things that seem likely to make society fairer actually make society less fair. In this instance women who want children will end up being the big losers. Women who don’t want children will be the big winners.

    I don’t agree with your claim that women are taking income from men. (The pie can be made bigger.) I think men’s wages have flatlined and declined in real terms because of outsourcing and immigration, not women working.

    Still, the low-income family feeds into inflation in the housing market (i.e. “good schools”) that does in fact push women into the workforce., so there is a tradeoff in that respect. (Perhaps that’s what you meant.) Of course, as long as the borders remain open, this is more or less an academic question, but there are ways to address that, such as progressive taxation or very generous head-of-household tax deductions or what have you.

    I don’t think very many women are all that concerned about equal pay. Yes, we want equal pay for equal work, but for the most part, women know they’re not doing “equal work.” A woman doctor in family practice doesn’t expect to make what an orthopedic surgeon makes.

    I saw a poll on feminism recently that indicated the priority that women put on various “women’s issues.” Protection from domestic violence was, if I recall, very near the top, whereas equal pay was much lower. I need to see if I can find that again.

  226. @Rosie

    Women make .79 cents for every dollar men make. Feminists say this is because of discrimination. I don’t agree with that. I think it’s just a fact that men prioritize their careers more than women, yet I keep hearing, as always without evidence, about how “careerist” women are.

    I could not agree more with the above. Women’s ‘careerism’ is an enormous pile of BS.
    But this is not what I was referring to when I said that women don’t always know what they really want. We are herdist creatures. Highly susceptible to external influences (social mores, cultural pressures, propaganda, group-think, desire for popularity, desire to please/fit-in, vanity, etc), which can cause us to suppress biological wiring, moral compass, logic or honesty with oneself.
    What women don’t understand is that taking power away from men (both in the public and the private sphere) doesn’t result in their own empowerment or increased well-being. It may appear so on face value, but subconsciously, women resent being in positions of power and dealing with the responsibilities that come with it. They also despise disempowered men.

    Re: women’s careers. I don’t have data to support what I am about to say but even if I did, I would not put much stock in such because social studies rely on self-reports which are plagued with enormous social desirability bias. I am speaking strictly based on lucid observation.
    So here’s my dissertation on women’s ‘careerism.’

    The vast majority of women could not give a crap about their career. Let me restate emphatically.
    The vast majority of women could not give a crap about their career.

    They don’t care about the actual profession/subject matter – unless it’s the glamorous, vanity-friendly kind (arts, modeling, showbiz, visible journalism, etc).
    Never mind most women work in menial, inconsequential, dull jobs. Most suck at what they do and contribute little value to society that way. Many men are in a similar situation, of course, because many people today do make-work for employers or customers, not needed work.

    Men have always worked because they had to. Nobody asks them if they enjoy their careers. If they do – bonus. If they don’t – tough. So here are ACTUAL reasons for woman’s ‘careerism’ today. It’s one or a combination of the factors below. Some are pure taboo. I only have sympathy for #1.

    1. INPROVS (I call it “female involuntary providers’)
    Family needs the additional income to maintain a middle class lifestyle. The family has no choice, she has some income potential in a make-work/fake-work economy, family feels compelled to use it, both spouses may resent the situation or not, but the woman surely does. You can quibble here over how much of this is real ‘need’ and how much it’s about the family’s ‘materialism,’ but you can’t work much around standards of living and you can’t expect people of middle and upper-middle class stock to live like the lower classes. I mean, you can, but they won’t.

    2. SOCIAL FUN SEEKERS.
    Many women would much rather shuffle papers in an office where they get to dress up, hang out and gossip in a social environment rather than dedicate themselves to the substantive, gritty and often lonely work their family needs from them at home. None will be crazy enough to admit this, although you will hear the occasional candid soul blurt out something along the lines of “staying at home is boring.”
    To save face, they say they ‘love their jobs’ because now it is socially acceptable to imply that love of career can justify a woman sticking her kids in daycare or nanny care. Humans are masters of self-deception. These women would never admit that their choice (IF it is just a choice) simply means they love socializing or doing light work in an office more than they love their children.
    Women en mass don’t possess the virtuous, motherly sainthood society projects on them. It must be more or less culturally, institutionally and communally modeled and enforced. It is not some magic energy that springs out of the heart of every mother. The reproductive instinct is biological. Virtuous motherhood is not.

    As more women were coaxed into the workplace, the private sphere became more or less deserted. Not many people are left there – just a lot of work to do.
    Even when you examine the contemporary SAHM population – how many today provide the highest level of service to their family and household and how many socialize / mess around on the Internet , ‘volunteer at children’s school?’ or go to health clubs, etc. (No matter how you twist it, you see the need to ‘socialize’). Most homes with SAHM-s I have visited were a hot mess. Most children of SAHM-s do not necessarily betray a finer upbringing or better education, erudition, etc than those of working women, on average. Outcomes will vary a lot by social class, obviously.
    Yet it would make sense for things to be so, considering the SAH mother’s availability and the working mother’s sheer absence. But it’s not so – studies have confirmed that too.
    What it boils down to is that most women, just like most men – whether working or SAH – are simply not that virtuous.

    3. VANITY FAIR – see intro. A woman with a ‘career’ in modeling adores her work (read ‘herself’).

    4. INDIVIDUALISM + FEMINIST SCARE TACTICS.

    The modern woman has been convinced that a career is a vital Plan B in case of marriage failure.
    Marriage failure is of two kinds:

    a) failure to happen.
    Modern people are individualistic people. Even those who agree with you that family is for a larger purpose (few) – they still select mate for self, not for society. We’re too far gone down the self-awareness / ego development rabbit hole to ignore this need.
    This means both men and women are encouraged to wait long enough until they find a great match who gives them romantic butterflies (marry for love); or the partner one thinks one deserves, which is usually quite a bit (marry for status). Feminism in particular has trained women to overvalue themselves, although both genders tend to aim high in the modern mating market.
    This means the hunt will take time – and in the meantime, women need a job. Hence ‘career.’

    b) failure to last.
    Women bought into feminist propaganda according to which men are natural-born bastards likely to cheat, abandon or abuse power. While there is some grain of truth to this, women too can initiate bad things in a marriage. All people can. But regardless of who started the ‘bad things,’ traditional society told both “make it work, don’t care how happy you are.”
    The individualistic society says “ditch the bastard/bitch and be prepared to fly on your own to find true happiness.” Hence ‘career.’

    5. CONSCIOUS OR SUBCONSCIOUS PARENTAL FEMINISM

    Western parents have been feminists for quite a few decades now – knowingly or not. Mothers AND fathers. Even the most ‘conservative’ of them raise their daughters in 1000 feminist ways, without even realizing. They set them on the longest-term academic path possible and cheer along, strongly encouraging academic competitiveness of the kind that leads to careers but not necessarily useful knowledge or feminine wisdom; they raise them with an entitled, flippant attitude; they either princessify or masculinize them. Not only do they buy into the mentality “the more years of formal education for my daughter, the better,” but now they buy into the “Girls in STEM” idiocy.
    Most women hate STEM with a passion – as it should be.

    I remember a recent conversation with a self-identified uber-conservative who never fails to vote Republican. She was proudly talking about how her 15 yo daughter had rudely and abruptly rejected an invitation from a boy to go out for some school event. Her angle was that her daughter is still a child. A ‘good girl’ who won’t hear of boys and will make that very clear to all. Yet she could not see how much toxicity she was encouraging in her daughter’s head when she failed to teach her that there are ways to be a ‘good girl’ that don’t involve being cruel to a boy. One can refuse a boy’s advances with grace and kindness.
    The cherry on top was that her daughter is hardly anything to write home about – a 5 face with an overweight future, mediocre academics and delusions of becoming an aeronautical engineer.
    If that sounds mean, it’s because it is. Just not untrue.
    On the bright side, I am the kind who would never hurt a fly, so I would never give away the slightest indication in front of the people concerned that this is what I think of them. If this sounds like a hypocritical white lie, it’s because it is. We should protect people’s feelings but that doesn’t mean we should not call out crappy social trends likely to lead nowhere good.

  227. @dfordoom

    I think we might be talking past each other a bit. I see classical liberalism and neoliberalism as right-wing ideologies.

    They are not. Liberalism, at its roots, is an individualistic, leftist concept. It stands for freeing the individual from constraint of any kind.
    It’s the subversion of everything pre-1789, which is where the right-wing sits. I do not see the old ‘right wing’ as an ideology. It’s pure adaptation to reality.

    Liberalism, socialism, and neoliberalism are all modern doctrines of leftist origin.

  228. dfordoom says: • Website
    @Rosie

    I don’t agree with your claim that women are taking income from men. (The pie can be made bigger.) I think men’s wages have flatlined and declined in real terms because of outsourcing and immigration, not women working.

    Of course I agree that outsourcing and immigration have depressed wage levels, especially for men.

    The pie could be made bigger (which would be nice), but unless that happens I still don’t see how female incomes can rise without male incomes falling. The problem we have is that when the pie gets bigger the top 1% get all the extra pie so the amount of pie remaining to be divided up among ordinary people remains static. In fact the amount of pie that’s left to be divided among ordinary folk may actually be increasing. The top 1% have a huge appetite for pie!

    And yes, the two-income family has certainly fuelled massive increases in housing costs.

    I saw a poll on feminism recently that indicated the priority that women put on various “women’s issues.” Protection from domestic violence was, if I recall, very near the top, whereas equal pay was much lower.

    Yep. I suspect that income equality is something that really only matters significantly to upper middle-class and elite women (who unfortunately dominate feminist debate). It’s another example of the way feminism gets used as a tool to make life better for wealthy privileged women while in practice it actually makes life worse for most women.

    I’d be interested to see how much priority that poll indicates that women give to affordable housing. I’d have thought that few things would matter more to women than affordable housing. Along with affordable healthcare and affordable energy bills. And these are things that the elite women who dominate the feminist movement don’t care about at all.

    • Replies: @Rosie
  229. Rosie says:
    @dfordoom

    It’s another example of the way feminism gets used as a tool to make life better for wealthy privileged women while in practice it actually makes life worse for most women.

    Pretty much.

  230. @Rosie

    I don’t agree with your claim that women are taking income from men. (The pie can be made bigger.) I think men’s wages have flatlined and declined in real terms because of outsourcing and immigration, not women working.

    I do agree with that claim. Women’s entry in the labor force has hardly made the pie bigger. Activity is not the same as productivity or value. There are many make-work/fake-work/red-tape jobs in the modern economy that yield no real value, many of which are occupied by women.
    A lot of income is now transferred from value producers (mostly men) to activity-fakers (mostly women) via ‘jobs.’ A job does not automatically equal value creation.

    • Replies: @dfordoom
  231. Rosie says:

    There are many make-work/fake-work/red-tape jobs in the modern economy that yield no real value, many of which are occupied by women.

    Another unsubstantiated manosphere talking point.

    A lot of income is now transferred from value producers (mostly men) to activity-fakers (mostly women) via ‘jobs.’

    Blah, blah, blah.

    Because corporations have proven that what they really like to do is waste money on generous salaries for useless jobs.

  232. dfordoom says: • Website
    @In-Praise-of-Higher

    Activity is not the same as productivity or value. There are many make-work/fake-work/red-tape jobs in the modern economy that yield no real value, many of which are occupied by women.

    I agree up to a point, although there are also many such jobs occupied by men. And there are many such jobs occupied by members of privileged interest groups, such as the LGBT crowd.

    There is an overall problem with modern economies being increasingly dominated by unproductive work, and with GDP being artificially inflated not just by useless jobs but entire useless industries (such as green energy).

    That pie is to a large extent composed of a mixture of genuine nutritional content and empty calories.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Audacious Epigone Comments via RSS