Tag Archives: marriage

The Concubine Class

Chicks dig power; power, specifically, a power differential, is at the core of women’s sexuality.

The Christian manosphere types came up with the acronym LAMPS, later changed to the more Biblical PSALMS, to describe what women find attractive in men. I always think it’s funny, because what women find attractive in men is obvious to all women, and perhaps even most men. But clueless guys are always saying, “damn it she keeps on fucking all those assholes that don’t really care about her!”

So LAMPS, Looks, Athleticism, Money, Power and Status.

Think of yoga. Yoga chicks are hot, right? It’s sexy to see them doing all their poses, right? In high culture, perhaps the ultimate woman is the ballerina, and in the modern Olympics, it’s the figure skater. That is the sort of athleticism we expect in our women.

What about men? Also easy. What is the most popular sport in the world? Soccer. You think that when girls look at European soccer players, they aren’t getting randy and having sexy thoughts? So, looks and athleticism, athleticism simply being the beauty of the body. Beauty. Women like beauty in men, same as men like in women.

I know, these manosphere guys are like autistic, but hey, I’m just trying to help.

Now this is what the “betas” hate. Women love *power* – that’s the other part. Money, Power, and Status.

Ok, so status. Think about college. Which men have status in the college? Well, the hockey players, the White athletes. The rich guys. You know, like the frat boys. Is it any surprise that it’s frat boys that college girls have sexual fantasies about? They are not fantasizing about servicing the Audio Visual club or the Sociology department. They are fantasizing about servicing the frat boys on the Lacrosse team.

So, chicks form sororities.

See, this is the most sexist thing I’m ever going to say. Women mimic men in this hilarious way. Remember when you were kids, and some girl was a “tomboy” and liked to roughhouse with the boys? So, these college girls see men forming the Male Hierarchy: the sports team, the fraternity, etc. So women, engaging in what is, essentially, cargo-cult masculinity, say, “well the boys formed a hierarchy, we can too!” So they make a “sorority” which is just a group of girls mimicking what they see boys doing.

Then, the sororities hold parties and invite fraternity boys so the boys will fuck them. Which they do.

So, then you graduate. Imagine you are a typical White man, 25 years old. Let’s say you have a job, and you work long hours, working on getting a promotion, and a raise, and saving up your money until you establish yourself.

Well, you’re 25 right? You are going to get horny. But you don’t have time for a wife, or even a girlfriend really. You aren’t ready to marry and have a family – at 25? That’s crazy too young, right?

So what are you going to do? Well, you are going to avail yourself of the Concubine Class.

So, women see men getting jobs at these corporations, and they engage in cargo-cult masculinity and mimic what they see the men doing. So the men go work for these corporations. So the girls want to as well. So they get a job as a secretary, or in the Human Resources Department. These girls may or may not be smart, but they don’t have any clue what they are doing, generally. They would almost certainly be happier as a wife and mother, but unfortunately, the boys that are in their league, looks wise, status wise … CLASS WISE … are actually making less than them, or have jobs seen as lower status than them. Their potential boyfriends might be plumbers or something, while they wear sharp looking blouses and skirts to work.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/catherine-rampell-for-millennial-women-the-one-must-have-a-steady-job/2014/09/29/008afa02-480e-11e4-891d-713f052086a0_story.html

Since women get aroused by power differentials, they want a man who is:

Better looking than them (Looks)

Has a beautiful, masculine body (Athleticism)

and has more Money, Power, and Status than her.

How many men can actually fulfill those requirements?

Not many.

So, the handful of men that DO fulfill those requirements, what do you think they are going to do?

Well, the are going to see these girls as the Concubine Class.

Which they are.

It gets even more interesting when you add race into the mix. So once I had this hot little 21 year old Indian chick. Believe me, I have no fetish for Indian chicks and really do not find most of them attractive. This girl was. Come on, I’m probably 28, and some young little thing right out of college starts throwing herself at me. I actually used to go out the side entrance to avoid her. Young girls, being dumb, don’t even realize how transparent they are when it comes to flirting.

So, all of the Indian guys see her chatting me up, so what do you think they think?

They are thinking, “goddamn Americanized whore!”

What are the Indian chicks thinking? They are thinking, “By the many arms of Vishnu, I’d love nothing more than to bag one of these White American men, think of how light skinned my kids would be!”

Of course, the typical White guy isn’t really interested in having little brown babies. But some slightly off-color poon? An exotic concubine for a weekend?

Yeah, maybe, you know.

But even in an all white context, the end of monogamy has singnaled a new sexual regime, and funnily enough, it looks a lot like the traditional sexual regime. Men at he top of the hierarchy of Money Power Status have themselves, essentially, a harem. Usually it’s one at a time, but you’d be surprised.

Now, of course, women think that they are just playing the game too. Girls just wanna have fun, and plenty of these boys are not marriage material anyway. They are not Mr. Right, they are Mr. Right Now.

But girls can only play this game for 15 years. From the age of 15, to the age of 30, that is pretty much all they got. Then, they are regulated to second stringers as the new crop of hotties comes of age.

Guys have about, er I dunno, from 15 to 40? 50? At age 50, you know, you just give the 20 something keys so she and her girlfriends can use the pool when you’re away. Either her, or one of her girlfriends, will do what is necessary to keep access to that money, power, and status. Even if it’s some old dude. And I guess once a man really ages out, like Bill Clinton, he’ll just move to call girls.

This is, after all, the actual Traditional Arrangment. The men at the top have always been polygamous. In the Muslim world, men can have up to four wives. Does anyone doubt some Chinese businessman living in Hong Kong has a few Chinese hotties adorning his yacht?

So you see, when you look at those girls at Spring Break, dancing around in their bikinis, you can tell where you stand by your reaction to it.

If your reaction is, “damn it women these days are such sluts. Are there any decent girls left? How am I going to find a wife if all these girls are slutting around in their bikinis at Spring Break?” that means you see these women as the Wife Class.

If your reaction is, “the one of the left. Let’s hire her as an intern after classes” that puts a whole new spin on it, doesn’t it? You see these women as the Concubine Class. You do, or will, have enough power and status and money to be attractive to these women. If you have looks and athleticism too, you get the cream of the crop – not just young concubines, but particularly hot young concubines.

All the career gals saying “well women like sex too. Women don’t have to be married. Women can have a rewarding career.” Ok sure, but you know what? Most people, men nor women, don’t have great careers. Most people kind of hate their jobs. Most women do not, in fact, have fabulous careers where they “lean in” and finally break that glass ceiling and get the corner office.

Come on. And even the tiny few women that do, they get so angry and write so many articles on the internet saying, “well, the men my age at my salary level, they are too busy fucking girls right out of college! And they aren’t even settling down anyway! It’s so sexist! Sure that girl may be 22, have a perfect body, and will fuck his brains out every day, but I have a freaking Master’s Degree and even make as much money as him!”

LOL.

Traditionally, what women did was to support a system of monogamy. They could never and will never enforce monogamy on the top men, but they can get most men to settle down and become husbands and fathers. But the more concubines there are, the fewer men are going to settle for monogamy.

Of course, there is an easy, simple solution. Girls need to get married right after high school. A girl needs to be married by 21. She needs to pop out two kids immediately thereafter. This “catches” the man for life. There is no reason girls have to go to college before they have a family. You can go to college at 28 instead of 18. Do family first, then get the degree.

But let’s be honest – it’s actually rather exciting to be a concubine isn’t it?

Ask a typical guy, would you rather have one average looking wife, or have three good looking college girls waiting for you when you came home?

Everyone understands the deal.

But as a typical woman, would you rather have one average Joe husband, or would you like to have a torrid affair with a wealthy, mysterious man of means before you settle down with average Joe?

Guys get real butthurt when they find out her answer is about like his.

Those good looking, wealthy men of means, something like Spring Break is just a menu to them. “I’ll take that one, that one, and that one.” The manosphere guys are young, you can tell, because they see these things through a young man’s eyes. They are looking for girls in their class, that class being socio-economic as well as looks. But for upper class men, the prole women are concubines, and they always have been.

When the middle and working classes had a system of monogamy, there were few concubines available. Oh, believe me, they were still there it just hadn’t become institutionalized. Spring Break is institutionalizing the Concubine Class.

Because women love power, the men who have power are the men that the women want.

People who see this through the lens of morality are missing the greater point. The Concubine Class is emerging out of the former middle class. The male peers of these girls are simply not going to be economically able to be fathers, so the girls that otherwise would have married these men are going to go to college and start “careers.”

As was said recently, these are Pink Collar jobs. But they pay as much, if not more, than the jobs that the male peers of these women would get.

Who is creating these Pink Collar jobs?

Well, surprise surprise. It’s men with money, and they want to hire your daughter to come work for them.

What happens when one nation occupies another? What happened when Germany invaded France, and France lost? Well, all of a sudden French women took quite a shine to those handsome Germans in their spiffy uniforms, eh?

I remember when the stories emerged out of Iraq. One of the military contractors had set up a system. Blowjobs from local Iraqi girls: one dollar. Girls from teenager to 20 somethings. It was a scandal because it even involved some officers.

I just read that after their defeat, the Japanese immediately set up brothels for the occupying Americans. They “got out in front” of the problem. Anytime you have a bunch of high testosterone men from one group lording it over another group, the women from the defeated group become the Concubine Class for the victorious group. They didn’t want American soldiers seducing and raping Japanese women randomly, so they recruited a Concubine Class to contain the problem. You gotta give the Japanese credit, they know how to solve problems.

The fact that we have “loose morals” these days and the fact we have reliable birth control certainly has an impact, and makes the situation a bit more extreme, but this is not a new pattern. It has always been this way.

So if you are the father of a daughter, it really would make sense to decide if you want your daughter to become a Wife, or a Concubine.

Don’t “let her make her own decisions about her own body” – LOL what a fucking joke. She is not going to make good decisions based on long term goals. She is going to get horny around all that power and won’t even understand what comes over her.

Blogger Heartiste recently had an article about seducing “prole girls.” He mentioned how you could go to some small town, and signal that you have an exciting, fancy job in the city. It’s just a blatant power display, it’s no different than flexing your muscles or her bending over and showing her ass.

Can upper class, white collar guys go to some small town and seduce prole girls? Of course, it’s the easiest thing in the world. In fact, you can see how, in some ways, the manosphere is creating it’s own Concubine Class from the ruins of the former White American middle class.

It’s becoming institutionalized.

Neat huh?

I’m not a progressives, progressives believe that history is linear, it goes from bad and primitive and progresses to good and sophisticted. As a traditionalist, I realize that history goes in cycles; groups vie for power, some groups defeat other groups. History doesn’t repeat, but it does rhyme.

Why I Don’t Do Outrage Porn

–www.dailystormer.com/these-are-your-women-white-man-yesallwomen/

Some guys go to Spring Break and have sex with these girls. This makes the guys who don’t get to have sex very jealous. But of course, if they were good looking enough and had enough “game” they would have sex with these girls too. So they really can’t blame the men that do this.

So, they blame the women for having sex with other men.

It must have been my first experience of “Slut Shaming.” So, anyway, I was fucking this guy’s girlfriend. We had spent half a week at my place humping away. This girl was a really sexy little thing too. Blonde hair, blue eyes, teenie tiny with a cute little round bottom and perky tits. Goodness, I loved fucking this girl.

So anyway one day her boyfriend realizes what’s going on so he comes over to my place. He says, “oh so you’re the one fucking her now, huh? Well congratulations.” I mean, I felt bad for the guy, but I didn’t go out of my way to seduce his girlfriend. She saw me once, phoned around all her friends to find out my phone number, calls me up say she wants to “hang out” and she comes over. We go to my bedroom, she pulls out some weed and rolls a joint. We smoke it.

So, she lies back on the bed and just looks at me. I figure, hey, she called me, she smoked me out, now she’s laying in my bed. I guess she wants to make out. So, I kiss her, we start making out then start ripping each other’s clothes off and start fucking. I mean, I knew she had a boyfriend, but you know, she was really super-duper cute and I was a horny teenager.

So anyway, her boyfriend doesn’t really seem mad at me, honestly. But he starts screaming at her, calling her a slut, etc. etc. I mean, he did have a point. She was his “girlfriend” and she didn’t even bother to tell him they were “breaking up” so she could have sex with hotter men. So he gets his yell on, and at some point I’m like, “ok dude enough. Sorry it didn’t work out.” So he drives away, then his girlfriend and I fuck again. I couldn’t help myself, I just sort of fell over and my dick went in her pussy by accident. It wasn’t slutty because it didn’t count, we barely knew each other.

So that thread on the Daily Stormer, it follows the same pattern most of this “outrage porn” does. You can smell the beta butthurt as all of these guys are getting boners looking at all these hot drunk girls in bikinis. They want nothing more than to fuck these girls, but they can’t. So they start calling these girls sluts.

Which they are – don’t get me wrong. They showed up to Spring Break and got drunk so they could get fucked silly by guys they don’t know. It doesn’t count if you’re in another state. Girls just wanna have fun.

Then, of course, inevitably the women show up. They start whining at the men. The typical woman says something like, “well you men go after these sluts, so what do you expect? If you wanted smart intelligent women with a brain in their head you would go to the library or something.” But of course that’s just silly. The real purveyors of the Madonna/Whore axis are women. They are always saying that it is those other girls that are sluts. And as one of the commenters said, these girls are above average in attractiveness, they are the daughters of the upper middle class, and while obvious in their drunken state they aren’t going to be discussing the finer points of Edith Wharton, but they are probably above average in IQ too.

Chances are, the typical Daily Stormer commenter is not as smart, not as rich, and not as good looking as the men and women at Spring Break.

All women are sluts, really, at least all women like sex and now that they have reliable birth control they are going to fuck at least a few different men before they hopefully find one who will stick around. If this was a problem, and people wanted this problem solved, they would.

They would be doing what Scott over at the courtshippledge website is doing. Finding families with marriageable boys and girls and hooking them up together. Really, it’s not very complicated. When it comes to teenagers and young adults, you pretty much just stick them in a room and nature will work it out naturally. If you want them to be married first, get a dress and say the vows first, but it all ends the same.

But White fathers, at least of the middle classes, really don’t seem to want their daughters to get married and have their grandchildren. No men are good enough for them, so they just sort of look the other way as their daughters slut it up with boys. Once she actually marries, she’s not daddy little girl anymore so these fathers postpone that as long as possible. Delayed marriage = unmarried sex. Duh. This isn’t rocket science.

But White Nationalists – at least the comedy/Daily Stormer version – don’t really care about marriage, they just like pointing and gawking at “degeneracy.” They go and find videos of slutty girls. They go and look for mudsharks (it’s that cuck fetish, white guys fantasizing about Negroes fucking their girlfriends.) Sometimes they look for pictures of Gay Pride parades and point and gawk and dudes in buttless chaps wearing makeup. They also love Negro crime and videos like at HipHopStar.com showing blacks acting ghetto.

This is the kind of thing that DS types enjoy – it is their hobby. It is not in any way done because they care about White people and feel that sexual liberation is hurting White families.

No, they do it because they love to stroke their outrage boners.

Think about this. Men only need *ONE* wife. That means each of these men only needs to find *ONE* single White girl who isn’t a slut. But I’m guessing that they are not actually looking for a White woman to wife up. They are looking for degeneracy. They are looking for sluts. They are looking for mudsharks. They are looking for queers. They are looking for ghetto Negroes.

It’s their hobby.

I’m not trying to stop them or anything. They can have at it. But I don’t see how it helps anything. It doesn’t solve a problem. It does not convince the undecided. It doesn’t make White people care about themselves as a group and recognize their own group interest.

Because it’s not supposed to. It is merely there to generate an outrage boner so they can stroke away.

Downton Abbey

So I’m through Season 3 of Downton Abbey. The typical critics are up in arms about it and the fact it is an international sensation. The leftists of the Labor party are steaming mad that the international audience prefers the stately, classist, “reactionary” Britain of old to the multi-cultural, globalist Commissar state of Political Correctness that they have transformed Great Britain into.

Of course, the entire show is about old fashioned men having to get with the times of Women’s Libbers and their “liberated sexuality” and they even throw in gay rights for good measure. Thankfully, so far, they haven’t forced any Magic Negroes on the audience, yet, although the matriarch is said to be a half-jewess.

All the best characters are uber-reactionaries and elitist snobs, of course. The old lady Dowager Countess basically steals every scene and even the IRA rebel and middle class heir evolve into responsibility-accepting oligarchs.

The best part about it though was the absolute business-like way marriage is done. The women approach marriage as an economic proposition – the duty of family is what is important, if the marriage happens to develop into a loving relationship with good sex, it’s all gravy. On the other hand, there is a nod to actual women’s sexuality, the eldest daughter hops right into bed with the first handsome (white) Turk that sneaks into her bedroom, but instead of crying “rape” she readily admits it was consensual.

Yes, I know, I always very late with these reviews but at my age I’m far behind the times when it comes to popular entertainment.

Why They Hate 50 Shades Of Grey

Mr. Grey: “I could hold you to some impossibly high ideal, like Angel Clare, or I could debase you completely, like Alec d’Urberville.”

Anastasia: “Well, if there’s only two options, I take debasement.”

The film version of 50 Shades of Grey came out this weekend, and the media, online and off, is in full hate mode. Full disclosure: I’ve never read it. But my lady friend did, and her opinion was the typical one: poorly written and kind of goofy. I think she was upset it wasn’t really racy enough. For all of the brouhaha about the BDSM, apparently Mr. Grey didn’t even spank Ana all that much.

submissivewoman

On reddit’s conspiracy section, someone asked: why all this hate toward some silly romance novel? The hate and “controversy” over what amounts to “Wuthering Heights with spanking” is somewhat astounding. I realize some in the White Nationalist crowd get their klan robes in a bunch over anything sexual that isn’t married missionary position. Forget the queers and the sluts – even a husband tying up his wife is “degenerate” and caused by “jew porn” and yet another sign of the Total Collapse Of Western Society And Christendom. So, our friends over at the Daily Stormer have added BDSM to their long list of “degeneracy” along with the homos and sluts and miscegenators.

The manosphere types, especially the Christians, often mention that feminism has infected even the right wing conservatives and the Church. White men are “White Knights” – especially the older generation – and automatically cater to whatever women want, acting like “manginas.”

I would posit it’s all of a piece. Sure, traditional conservatives and Christians are not “feminist” in the cultural Marxist sense of the word; believing that women and men are separate “social classes” engaged in the “class struggle” of oppressors vs. the oppressed. But there is a wide and deep habit of “White Knighting” in traditionalist circles – and it is absolutely related to the bizarre hatred toward 50 Shades of Grey – a silly piece of erotica with some spanking and bondage, after all.

Not only does feminism “shame” male sexuality – we’re all rapists, wife beaters and we “objectify” women’s bodies, after all – but so does conservatism and modern Christianity. For the right-wingers, feminists are correct that men are deeply afraid of women’s sexuality. But it’s for a good reason.

If men really knew what turns women on, civilization would come to a halt, because so much of civilization is based on chivalry and wanting to believe that women tend toward monogamy and are attracted to “good men.”

They are not. Quite the opposite, in fact.

When men discuss their own sexuality, they quite often focus on how shallow it is – a nice pair of tits and a round ass. Men will go on and on about how they will “fuck anything that moves” and how men are all “sluts.” But these same men project this quite Victorian notion onto women. You see this in the worst parts of the manosphere, who really do believe – and the feminists have them correctly pegged here – that women want to “trade sex for resources.” The man provides the “resources” and the women pay for it with sex – which the man wants, and the women don’t, really.

Then, when these manosphere men look at how women actually behave – quite the opposite of their Victorian fantasy – they get angry and resentful. They drag the women down from that pedestal they placed her on and disparage her as a “hypergamous slut.”

I feel for women, I really do, because they are only allowed to be a Madonna, or a Whore. There’s never anything in between.

nude-girl-in-heavy-bondage-feature-600x355

Of course, the feminists hate 50 Shades of Grey because Ana is submissive and Mr. Grey is dominant. It’s essentially a Patriarchal Rape Fantasy, and feminists hate women’s sexuality even more than Conservative men do. The same feminists that hate the idea of 50 Shades would be praising a similar novel up and down if the roles were reversed. If it was a high powered woman CEO Dominatrix that loves to spank young studly pool boys, the feminists would love it (even though it would leave them drier than the Sahara Desert.) But the fact the novel essentially portrays traditional roles – the man is powerful, the woman is submissive – they hate it.

You will find the worst hate coming from the uber-feminist “BDSM Community.” The “BDSM Community” has done nothing but shriek about 50 Shades of Grey, saying it’s not “real BDSM” – they didn’t even use s safe word!!! – and that it’s really just abuse. The BDSM community keeps hating on the “50 Shaders” – young women interested in BDSM because of reading the novel, and how they “totally have the wrong idea.” Just like hipsters upset that the mainstream has finally caught on to some underground band, the “BDSM Community” feels like it’s losing it’s monopoly on what “real BDSM is” and love nothing more than to morally posture about how everyone else is doing it “wrong.”

Believe me, the “BDSM Community” is more obnoxious than the worst sorts of “Social Justice Warriors” blathering on about “transphobia” and “tolerance for Otherkin.”

Of course, the humorless conservatives, including Christians, are not only afraid of their own penises, but doubly afraid of vaginas, apparently. Bondage? That’s “degenerate!” “Spanking? Only an evil, sick man would be rough with a woman! Sex is supposed to be about tender caresses and the missionary position. My wife in an innocent angel, why, she doesn’t get turned on ever, except when I rub her feet on date night! My daughter is totally chaste and she tells all those nasty boys “no” – she would never purposefully and with malice aforethought seduce a man – especially not an older man! That’s just sick!”

To any man who actually has experience with women, these guys are jokes. I remember these fathers well, from high school and college. They “trusted” their daughters, so no problem her taking the car and meeting up with Sleazy Hipster Boyfriend for some good, clean teenage fun.

Like bowling or watching a movie, you know. Certainly not blowjobs in the car, threesomes and all sorts of raunchy sex. Only “those kinds of girls” do that – “not my wife and daughter.”

You have to laugh.

Women are sexually aroused by power. It doesn’t make any difference whether the man with the power is “good” or “evil” – in fact, I suspect women have an instinct toward “evil men” frankly. Women are sexually aroused by being overwhelmed by that power, to submitting to that power – willingly, or even hotter, unwillingly.

The key part of the Rape Fantasy is that the woman is so desirable that the man, powerful though he is, is in fact, overpowered by her – by his desire for her.

Feminism makes women deeply ashamed of their own sexuality, and that is why the “BDSM Community” was invented. Gals want what they want sexually, so the “BDSM Community” does its best to contain their submissive natures. That is why there is all the obsession with “safe words” and “consent” and “role play.” It has to be “just playing,” “just role play,” and “verbally consented to without duress.”

To feminists, a woman consenting to be tied up and flogged at a sex club is fine – but a wife obeying her husband; that’s sexist misogyny. A woman who is a “slave” in the “BDSM Community” can be collared and made to eat dogfood – that’s just a “kink.” But a girl putting out for her boyfriend to keep him happy – that’s “date rape.”

Conservatives are right, in a sense. Because of women’s hypergamous nature, unleashed female sexuality will destroy a civilization. Monogamy exists for a reason, patriarchy exists for a reason. Patriarchy makes men invest in children, and monogamy is how men are assured that the children are his. Without monogamy and without patriarchy, men have no incentive to invest in the future, in the society, in the tribe. Without Patriarchy and Monogamy, there is no civilization.

woman-in-fishnets-spanking-498x332

Women are hypergamous, and polygamy is the nature state of humans. Women have little problem sharing a high status man with other women. The wives of wealthy and desirable men have been looking the other way at their husband’s affairs since forever – it’s the natural state of things. Most women would rather put up with cheating from a handsome, wealthy man than be married to a faithful but poor schlub.

The reason we have monogamy is because, left to their own devices, women would share the top 50% of men, and the bottom 50% of men would have no women at all.

Yet, for a society to actually work, you need the bottom half of men. It’s those “betas” that make the trains run on time, not to mention kill the ragheads that are living on top of our oil.

Since reliable, scientific birth control was invented, women have been able to pursue a “double strategy” – the so called “alpha fucks and beta bucks.” By postponing marriage, children, and family formation, women have been able to get sex from men “out of their league” while young, but still be able to find a caring man “in her league” for marriage. Men who object to their wives previous promiscuity are simply shamed as “insecure” and the whole point of giving out free condoms in high school is to make sure that there are no virgins left by the time boys and girls are of marriageable age.

That’s by design, because men might choose the virgins for marriage, thus incentivize women to remain chaste.

This worked for 50 years, until the internet destroyed the consensus, like it has the consensus on so many things. The “manosphere” has sort of let the cat out of the bag. The numbers don’t lie – marriage is a dead institution. If present trends continue – and they almost certainly will – most people will never marry. Fertility will continue to drop like a rock, and more and more men will simply “opt out” of society.

It’s laughable to read the complaints of pseudo-feminist women wondering where all the chivalry has gone. Chances are, women aren’t even going to be taken out on proper dates anymore. For the average men, women have virtually nothing to offer him – but sex. As the days of a wife, a mother to your children, and an exclusive lover are gone, what do women have that men need? Just the sex, that’s it.

You can see the results of this with the increasingly crass attitudes of men toward women, and vice-versa. Many advanced cultures are going through this phenomenon, Japan being a noticeable example, with their “herbivore men” who don’t bother chasing women, never get married, and simply drop out of the culture. They do not contribute to the culture except in the most minimal way, as consumers.

The same thing is happening in the USA, although mass non-white immigration and multi-culturalism obscures the effects somewhat. The bottom is dropping out of the White middle class, and it dropped out of the White working class 30 years ago – exactly at the time when the Sexual Revolution was finally mainstreamed.

This is not a coincidence.

Feminists and Conservative both hate 50 Shades for the same basic reason: it’s an accurate account of women’s sexuality. Feminists hate it because it reminds them that women want “the wrong thing.” Women are supposed to want an “equal relationship with a peer who respects her as a person.” But women tend to actually go for men who are higher status than her, and if he’s “emotionally unavailable” she just wants him more. Conservatives are also upset that women want “the wrong thing.” Women are supposed to want a Good Conservative Christian – you know, like them. Instead, women go for the Bad Men, even men who are “abusive” and they generally don’t get wet for the husband that reads the Bible to her before he gently fucks her in the missionary position. Worse for the conservatives, women are not particularly interested in monogamy. They want one man – at a time – but are always looking for the opportunity to “trade up” and while young, they are in no hurry to marry the Beta Boy Next Door that’s “in her league” – not when she still has access to Studly Hockey Players to gang-bang after practice.

That is where all this hate for a silly romance novel with some bondage and spanking comes from. It’s not about the bondage and spanking.

It’s about power.

That’s why they call it “Power Exchange.”

How To Do Heteronormativity And Natalism The Right Way

Queer-bashing just makes you look mean and obsessed with gays. Just as there is a difference between pro-white and anti-black, there is a difference between promoting marriage and attacking gays.

I’m on the fence when it comes to “Commander” Rockwell, perhaps the first costume clown. I listened to his famous speech at GWU and it made a lot of sense, but associating segregation with Nazis just handed the forced-integrationists an image they would use for the next 50 years to bash white people with, not to mention disgusted Southerners who had just defeated Germany in the World Wars. Even if he was completely sincere, he did harm to the cause of white people.

A “hate bus?” Really?

“Gay” “marriage” is legal in 30 states and public support for “gay” “marriage” is at an all-time high. Thanks to, in no small part, the Westboro Baptist Church. You remember them, the folks that went to funerals with signs that said “God hates fags?” They even admitted that they knew they were helping the cause of “gay” “marriage” and said they hoped it would pass, because then God would destroy America with hurricanes and earthquakes.

Well, they certainly helped the cause of the LGBT movement. In fact, in the famous planning document from the 1980s, LGBT activists proposed an ad campaign showing “homophobic fundamentalist preachers” screaming and yelling. As if by magic, a few years later the Westboro Baptist Church appears and is given wall to wall media coverage for nearly a decade. Then, as anyone could have predicted, the LGBT movement gained massive sympathy. The fact the WBC attacked soldiers as well as gays likely even greased the wheels for gays in the military – another development the WBC said they encouraged.

In France, the opposition to “gay” “marriage” did not run lurid pictures of gay pride parades and fat guys in leather. Instead, they promoted images of healthy, normal French families, and said that children needed both a father and a mother.

White Nationalists and cultural conservatives could learn something from The Cheese-Eating Surrender Monkeys. Apparently, the Irish have also figured this out.

Both the French and the Irish have made this about *children* not love, or sex. But I don’t think conservatives in America are able to do that, because promoting natalism requires acknowledging a woman’s duty to bear children. But that will be met with loud complaints from the shriekosphere, and conservatives are too cowardly to stand up to their women. Thus, conservatives are in abject denial of the anti-natalism present in society, so they try to make what is really about family into something about sex.

As I mentioned in an exchange with tteclod, these days, a father would rather his 16 year old daughter have sex on birth control than to actually marry and bear a child. Let that reality sink in, consider the anti-natalist assumptions that underline that attitude. It’s coming from the men as much as the women. Daddy doesn’t want his little girl growing up and becoming a wife and mother, but he’ll look the other way when she becomes an amateur prostitute.

What a queer attitude.

Feminists and White Knights

Feminists and White Knights both share a certain assumption; that is that women are morally superior to men. I would posit it is exactly the opposite, by anyone’s usual understanding of morality, men are morally superior to women. The most obvious case is in the example of truth – men tend to want the truth and want to tell the truth. Women lie automatically, women are deceptive by nature. Because men tend to be physically stronger than women, women have evolved to do things indirectly; they manipulate men indirectly because they generally can’t bash men over the head with a club and make them do what they want.

Why is it women get so furious at the idea of an older man with a younger woman? Isn’t it obvious? They are jealous of younger women. They used to be young, fertile, and sexy. Then, they age, and are no longer young, fertile, and attractive, so they lash out.

You will notice, however, it’s only OLD women that have a problem with younger women and older men. Younger women LOVE the attention of older men.

Since women – through feminism – liberated themselves from patriarchy, they have come up with a new system of morality that they expect men to follow. According to this logic: it’s ok when women are promiscuous, no slut shaming. It’s ok when older women go with younger men – cougars are liberated. But it’s bad when older men go with younger women. Why? It’s simply because that’s when men have more power.

When women come up with a system of morality, it’s hilariously self-serving. In whatever situation women have the upper hand, that’s good, and in whatever way men have the upper hand, that’s bad.

Mrs. Duggar - a Christian, not a White Nationalist - that fulfilled the 14 Words better than any WN woman.
Mrs. Duggar – a Christian, not a White Nationalist – that fulfilled the 14 Words better than any WN woman.

Did you know that in the beginning of feminism, in the earliest days, feminists did NOT pose as victims? In the book that started it, The Feminine Mystique, the Jewish Communist author shamed women for wanting domestic life. There was no assumption that women were victims of men. But that sort of feminism didn’t last, becuase by pretending men were “oppressing” women with patriarchy, anything a woman did was ok, anything a woman did was justified, because it was a “strike against patriarchy.” Sort of like how a shoplifter justifies his theft because “the big companies rip off people anyway” women justified any selfish and immoral thing they did because “well, men are oppressing us.”

Since women revolted against monogamy, they had to come up with a new system of morality to serve their interests. Hence, the absolute rage at older men dating younger women. That’s their new rule. “It’s ok for women to be promiscuous, it’s ok for women to use birth control, have abortions, but when we are ready, at 30, men must then marry us, settle down, and not go with younger women.”

It’s just that – self-serving, and nothing else. Women, generally speaking, aren’t even smart enough to hide their self-interest in this case. I mean, just get a load of this article – this is “alpha fucks, beta bucks” spelled out openly and in detail. And the bimbo who wrote it just can’t understand why men are disgusted with her attitude.

http://www.rantchic.com/2014/01/14/men-you-marry-vs-men-you-bang/

Monogamy was good for women, and it was especially good for OLDER women. Monogamy meant that a man wasn’t allowed to toss aside an aging wife for a hot young thing. But women rebelled against monogamy – they just wanted to get rid of the part that reigned in THEIR behavior, while keeping the parts that reigned in MEN’S behavior.

Monogamy was good for FAMILIES. When women had children YOUNG – as in late teens and early 20s – they lived long enough to see their grandchildren, and sometimes their great grandchildren. When women had many children, not just one or two, you had tight knit clans. A woman would AGE GRACEFULLY – she would become a well respected Matriarch of a family, adored by her children, grand children, and great grandchildren.

Mostly, what women accuse men of doing is what they themselves are doing. Women say that men aren’t “aging gracefully” – that’s just a projection. It’s women that have stopped aging gracefully. I mean, Botox? Hair dye? It’s laughable.

Now, young men, look around you. Read the women’s blogs. Is there a SINGLE example of a White Nationalist woman mentoring younger women? Is there a SINGLE example of old WN women warning younger women to avoid the mistakes that they themselves made?

Not on your life. It’s the exact opposite. The WN movement is FULL of old divorcees whining about men. That is why I said to younger men, on MWIR a while back – go for Christian women. Christian women are the ONLY ones that still at least pay lip service to traditional morality. There are lots and lots of Christian women blogs (like SunshineMary’s old blog) mentoring younger women to avoid the Slut Club.

White Nationalist women? Not a one. The type of women that are attracted to controversial social movements like White Nationalism are outliers – they tend to be more masculine, less feminine, and more “feisty” – meaning, bitchy.

These WN women are doing no one any favors. Most of them – with a few notable exceptions – do nothing but chant “nigger kike spic” – which makes US look bad and makes our enemies look good by comparison. They are an embarrassment to the movement. They are the female equivalent of the Costume Clowns, fat dudes with swastikas on their arms chanting about how much they hate people. There’s a reason people often get suspicious that these people are being paid by the enemy, because they do the enemy’s work for them.

Here’s a fun experiment – go to some moron Nazi site like DailyStormer – read the WN women that post there. Long, obscene screeds, weird homoerotic rants about anal sex, and superstitions about Jews. Compare and contrast a fact-based deconstruction of Jewish anti-Whiteness from someone like Kevin MacDonald to the faux-Catholic White Nationalist women. There’s just no comparison.

It’s so ironic that, as far as I can tell, most of the women that troll the WN sites are DIVORCED, OLD, and in many cases, CHILDLESS. These are the women that many WN men “white knight” for. These are the women that screech the loudest about the “manosphere” too.

Here’s another eye-opening thing to see: go to the DailyStormer thread about 50 Shades of Grey. Read an article there posted by some woman saying that 50 Shades of Grey is “pedophilia hiding in plain sight.” How is 50 Shades of Grey really about pedophilia?

*Because the character was a virgin.*

You hear that men? If you want to marry a virgin bride, you’re actually a pedophile, according to old feminist faux-traditionalists. You can see the Feminine Imperative in action. If you don’t want to marry an old whore, you’re a pedophile.

Mrs. Romney - a Mormon, not a White Nationalist - that fulfilled the 14 Words better than any WN woman.
Mrs. Romney – a Mormon, not a White Nationalist – that fulfilled the 14 Words better than any WN woman.

At the end of the day, however, women are just women looking out for their own interests. They evolved to be the way they are, and there is nothing wrong with the way they are. The real question is – why do men “white knight” for these feminists?

I can guess. These “white knight” men are submissive men. They are looking for a Mommy Figure and probably get off on a Dominatrix type. Hey, different strokes for different folks, but I, like most men, tend to want to wear the pants in a relationship.

Here’s the deal, religion aside: sexual morality is a JOKE when young, fertile women are having promiscuous sex on birth control. Complaining about “PUAs” is idiotic when young fertile women – the people who create the race – are “pick up artists” themselves. Complaining about men is a JOKE when white women are aborting nearly as many white babies as they are bearing. Bitching about men fucking younger women is laughable when women divorce their husbands and split up their families nearly half the time. Talking about the 14 Words is one big pile of steaming nonsense when not a one White Nationalist woman is even promoting the idea of women marrying and having children young.

As is usual, this battle will be fought and won by white men, and white women will be dragged along, kicking and screaming. For the most part, it’s best to just ignore them – ESPECIALLY the old ones.

Now, a quick parting shot AGAINST the “Christian manosphere.” There are thousands of “Christian manosphere” blogs complaining about Christian women, saying that Christian women are just as slutty as their secular counterparts and that Christian women aren’t interested in Christian men.

YET – however – one of the most prominent Christian manosphere bloggers has a young, virgin Christian woman – who is quite pretty – that is perfectly willing to marry him – but he won’t marry her. He continues to blog about how there are no good Christian women, yet he has one who all but offered herself to him, and he still wouldn’t marry her.

He really has no right to complain. I know both of them read this blog at least occasionally.

Uh – MAN UP, dude. You know who you are.

Life in Patriarchyland!

http://dalrock.wordpress.com/2014/06/19/when-dennis-rainey-got-it-right/#comment-128312

(daughter) “Daddy, I would like to get married.”
(dad) “Good.”
(daughter) “But I don’t know who to marry. I don’t trust my own judgment.”
(dad) “You shouldn’t.”
(daughter) “So how do I know if he’s the right one?”
(dad) “I’ll tell you.”
(daughter) “But what if I don’t love him?”
(dad) “That will grow, it will come and go.”
(daughter) “But what if I’m not always happy?”
(dad) “That is not marriage. You want to be married right?”
(daughter) “Yes.”
(dad) “Okay, do you only want to be married if you are always happy in it?”
(daughter) “Well, isn’t that the way its supposed to be?”
(dad) “No.”
(daughter) “So what do I do?”
(dad) “I will pick the boy. You will fall in love with him. You will do absolutely everything he tells you to do. You will give me 12 grand children.”
(daughter) “That’s a lot. What if he can’t afford to support them all?”
(dad) “I will buy you two a house near us, keep it in my name, you two will live in it free of charge, and your mom and I will help with the grandkids.”
(daughter) “What if I don’t agree with everything he says?”
(dad) “Doesn’t matter. Do whatever he tells you to do.”
(daughter) “Sounds like slavery?”
(dad) “No. he has headship. You are his property and he will take care of you, he had pride of ownership.”
(daughter) “Okay. So get him for me.”
(dad) “I will.”

—– (two weeks later) —
(dad speaking to another dad) “So what did your son think of the picture of my daughter?”
(other dad) “He said she was beautiful. He loved her long hair.”
(dad) “Good. I picked out a starter house around the corner. How’s his job going?”
(other dad) “Its a hassle. His boss is being deliberately difficult so I told him to send out the resumes and not to quit until he found something else.”
(dad) “Understandable. You’ll be in church Sunday?”
(other dad) “Of course.”
(dad) “See you then.”
—- (two weeks later) —-
(daughter’s dad to young man) “So you think she’s pretty?”
(young man) “Yes sir.”
(dad) “Do you think you could ever love her?”
(young man) “Yes sir.”
(dad) “And if you two get married, you are okay with living around the block from us?”
(young man) “Yes sir.”
(dad) “And if you two get married, you are going to try and get her pregnant on your wedding night?”
(young man) “Yes sir.”
(dad) “And if you two get married, you are going to consummate this marriage every single night of the week?”
(young man) “Yes sir.”

(dad) “And do you know what happens if you ever hit her?”
(young man) “Yes sir.”
(dad) “Okay you may court her.”

—- (two months later) —-

(dad) “Do you love him?”
(daughter) “Yes daddy.”
(dad) “Do you love her?”
(daughter) “Yes sir.”
dad “Okay you have my blessing.”

– (two weeks later) —-
(her) “I do.”
(him) “I do.”

– (12 hours later)—

(her) “I’m pregnant.”

Feminism – Not Porn – Ruined Marriage

The most dangerous people to any sort of renaissance of Western culture and the European peoples are White feminist women, especially those middle age or older.

Full stop.

I realize I’m already treading on thin ice, because these old biddies remind too many people of their mothers. But not me; my mother was not a feminist in the slightest. That’s probably why she is still happily married – to my father – had more that double replacement level children, and is now a beloved grandmother – *and* great-grandmother. She had both boys and girls and has both male and female grandchildren and great-grandchildren.

So none of these aging second wave feminist women remind me of my mother, at all. I feel perfectly ok criticising them.

So one of the most common feminist complaints is the “double standard.” Women who are promiscuous as sluts, while men who are promiscuous as studs. Leaving aside this really isn’t the case, no one seems to ask – why should there be a “single standard” for both men and women? Considering that men and women are different – not just their reproductive systems, but even their cognition – why would anyone expect there to be one single rule for both?

It’s actually a really simple thing to figure out. Ask one of these aging second wave feminists how they want to “fix” this problem of double standards. Should we start “stud shaming” promiscuous men? Christian and many traditional men seem to think so, which you see in the backlash against “game” and “PUA.” This is why Christians and traditionalist men like to assert there is some “gay” or homosexual about promiscuous men. (The more women you have sex with, the gayer you are, apparently. That’s the sort of logic conservatives are famous for.) The problem is, of course, women *love* promiscuous men. How do you think they had the opportunity to be so promiscuous?

So the aging second wave feminists will tell us the solution to the “double standard” is to stop “slut shaming.” Since men are praised (by women) for being promiscuous, women should be praised by men for being promiscuous.

Really, they give themselves away. For all the bra-burning and blabber about “equal rights” and the like, what they really want is to have their sluttery praised. Notice that they do *not* want men to stop being promiscuous, they want it to be ok for women to be promiscuous. In other words, these aging second wave feminists are not very different than their Third Wave Sex-Positive Feminist counterparts – the only difference is, the Third Wavers had the ovaries to admit they were Empowered Sluts. The aging second wavers don’t have the courage their younger counterparts do.

Now even the pseudo-traditionalist types who say they are against men being promiscuous too make it awfully convenient for themselves. They will say that men and women should avoid promiscuity, but it can be overlooked in either sex. It’s just that, at some point, the promiscuous men are supposed to “man up,” stop being so promiscuous and marry the women – *when the women decide they are good and ready for marriage, and not a moment before.*

I mean, they spent their teens and 20s fucking these promiscuous men, and now the men won’t “man up” and marry them. Instead – horror of horrors – these promiscuous men just started screwing around with younger women! That’s basically rape, child molestation, and certainly exploitation in some way, right?

The pussy should have been enough. I mean, these Feminist Princesses were so gracious to “allow” you to have sex with them, so now you owe them a ring, a house, and alimony and child support when she decides to replace you. Otherwise, misogyny. You hate women.

So one of these things these aging second wave bra-burners will tell us is that it was Playboy – porn – that ruined marriage. Or the media – anything, anything, except any hint that it might be women – particularly, women under the sway of that left wing crank ideology of feminism – that actually caused the massive shift in public morals that led to the sky high divorce rates, fatherless children, the massive decline in white fertility and all of the associated dysfunctions caused by these things.

Many feminists openly stated they wanted to destroy marriage, and they did it in two simple steps. First, they encouraged women to give away the milk for free, thus removing one of the major incentives for buying the cow. The fact that this little saying is conventional folk wisdom – something your married, non-feminist grandmother might have said – shows you there is some wisdom behind the notion.

The second thing they did was even worse. Plenty, perhaps most, men will overlook a woman’s past – *if he got the other benefits of marriage.* After all, marriage is not just about sex. But feminists took away all those benefits as well. Let’s see – presumptive maternal custody. If wifey decides she is unhaaaaaapy and wants a divorce, she gets the kids. The courts favor this and the culture favors this, only the most highly motivated fathers will fight the culture and the courts to get custody.

A man used to get married because it came with certain benefits – regular sex, children that were his, the leadership of his family, and the social prestige that came with being a married family man.

Well now, thanks to feminism *and nothing else* a husband can have no expectation of regular sex. That is “entitlement to a woman’s body” – which makes you just like that half Asian pretty boy killer – not to mention it’s marital RAPE!!!

Second, “leadership of your family” – what is that, some sort of misogynist throwback to the 1950s? Why should the man be in charge? It has to be “equal” – or better, the woman should have the final say, because women are just so much more mature and sensitive than men, they are just morally superior of course.

Is there any social prestige left in marriage? I don’t see any. The culture assumes that married men are morons who are lucky to have his sweet precious long suffering wife, a dopey moron always being corrected in the TV commercials by his wife and an ever present African American gentlemen.

You see, chivalry works when a man who has *more power than a woman* uses that power in a gentle, respectful way. If the men don’t have power, then they are just “beta orbiters,” supplicators and pedestalizers. Chivalry from a beta schlub is creepy or pathetic – at best – and sexual harassment at worst.

The manosphere classic, Sexual Utopia in Power by F. Roger Devlin catalogs all this brilliantly. This is the new arrangement that men are supposed to accept:

A white woman is expect to “find herself” by having lots of sex with many numerous sexy bad boys from her 16th birthday until her 29th birthday. Then, one of these studs she has been regularly servicing for 13 years is supposed to “man up” and make an honest woman of her. They will have 1.5 kids, then divorce (his fault, he probably watched internet porn or something) and he’s stuck paying for her, the kids, and her new boyfriend who is quite possibly living at the house he paid for.

Failing that, she might panic and find some “beta” schlub she isn’t particularly attracted to, but since he’s never had sexual attention from a woman before, he gets all pussy crazed and actually wifes up one of these amateur prostitutes. This, of course, will inspire nothing but *contempt* in the woman, because this beta schlub actually found her to be marriage material – when she knows damn well that she is not.

Is anyone really shocked that men are no longer signing up for this “privilege?”

To fix the problem is actually pretty simple – STOP EXPLOITING YOUNG WOMEN. Teach young women the differences between men and women. Teach them that their duty is to compliment – not compete with – her husband and bear children. I urge all the young virgin women who are interested in marriage – say so. Say you’re saving yourself for marriage. Say you are going to be the kind of wife a man wants. And start it young. 16 years old? You’re old enough to be considering marriage. If you are old enough to “find yourself” by having sex with boys and men – you’re old enough to consider marrying one of those boys/men.

Feminist don’t want this. Feminists believe they should be able to have two children by two different “alpha studs” and have the welfare state pay to support them should Alpha Badboy not come through with the ring and the mortgage. Feminists believe that women will invent as much as men, will build the large corporations that dominate the economy just like men do, and that given the right education, women will become construction engineers, just like men.

The only thing holding them back is The Patriarchy – that social construct where by men know they are the father of their own children. To a feminist, that *is* oppression. Not just a double standard, it’s actually “misogyny” – hatred of women!

There has always been a class of prostitutes in every society. It’s just that in the modern West, our prostitutes are usually amateurs. Which means it’s great for whoremongers – sleazy hipsters who just happen to be relatively good looking and not shy around women – and it’s terrible for those good, responsible family men that women want to marry them on their 29th birthday after the whoremongers have moved onto younger flesh.

Bed, made, lie in it, feminists.

No rings for sluts.

P.S. – feminists go out of their way to suppress how much feminism itself was sold to them by big business, most notoriously, Big Tobacco. From the “Torches of Liberty” march to the Virginia Slims commercials of the 60s and 70s, women were told it was a “double standard” that men could smoke and not be socially shamed while women were looked down upon for smoking cigarettes.

Was the feminists response to fight against men smoking? Of course not. It was to fight for the right for women to smoke as well. Good job, wimminz, you totally weren’t suckered by men far smarter than you that did not have your best interests at heart.

You’ve come a long way, baby!