Freud wondered that too and couldn’t figure it out, except to suggest that perhaps they were envious of men (his infamous “penis envy”), an observation that runs back to the story of the Garden of Eden (and women’s envy means they want to destroy men, hence feminism, which is leftist…and leftism of course is based on envy).
It doesn’t matter what women want. It only matters what they get.
80% of women are unattractive, and it gets worse the older they get. You’ll never find a female Sean Connery or Paul Newman. Or even a George Clooney. And oh how older actresses howl when their offered roles dry up and disappear!
“Alpha Fux and Beta Bux”? Doesn’t exist. Never seen it, not even once. Neither have any of my friends. Any studies at all on this? Not a one, and there never will be (the True Believers of the Manosphere don’t want any scientific studies since it will destroy their fantasies about how these “Betas” will take an “Alpha’s” worn-out, over-the-hill rejects).
“Cash and prizes.” Never seen it, not even once. Same with my friends. Again, no studies and there never will be.
Where did these concepts come from? Did the originators pull them out of their asses, along with their heads (“preposterous” literally means having your head up your ass)?
What women get – and men too – is Associative Mating. There have been a lot of studies about this and all have confirmed it.
“Birds of a feather flock together.” That observation is thousands of years old. I first read it in Aesop’s Fables when I was about 12.
I occasionally see some obese woman at Wal-Mart with her scrawny drug addict boyfriend/husband and their ugly retarded children. Does she want better? Doesn’t appear so. They’re a good fit, even though they’re both trash. Again, Associative Mating.
I also occasionally will see some loser drug addict couple riding their junky bikes together. Know why? No car. Either can’t afford one or lost their drivers’ licenses. (I’ve actually seen this many times, and generally they are on welfare/disability). And neither of them is attractive. They might have been 20 years ago before the meth and heroin and alcohol wrecked them.
I’ve met women who reached their peak at 16 or 17 and by 35 I didn’t recognize them because they looked so horrible (I recently met one who has really cute when I met her when she was 16 and at 50 was a completely unrecognizable monster). And these women are going to engage in “Alpha Fux and Beta Bux”? Or hundreds of them would share Brad Pitt because they wouldn’t even touch Joe the Plumber? What sort of demented hallucinations are these? Those things never happen.
When the weather is nice my friends and I hang out outdoors at coffee shops. I asked one to rate the women as they walked by. Again, 80% of them were unattractive (this is known as Pareto’s 80/20 rule).
I’ve done this before, more than once. Same thing: 80/20.
I’ve mentioned before I still have two of my high school yearbooks, from my junior and senior years. Many years ago I went through both of them and rated the girls. Same thing: 20 percent attractive, 80 percent unattractive.
I’ve also read how 80% of the women go after 20% of the guys. Guess what? Even if true (and it’s not) these women can’t get them. They can’t even get these guys to fuck them, although some of these women place such a premium on their skanky selves they seem to think they deserve guys far out of their league. I’ve seen that way more than one time.
How many guys are going to screw a woman who is far less attractive than he is, plus also crazy? (I once had an older friend, when I was far younger, tell me, “Never screw a woman who’s crazier than you are”).
I’ve had people tell me “women have changed since you were growing up.”
Guess what? They haven’t.
Human nature doesn’t change and women were the same 6,000 year ago (the limit of written history) as they are today.
You’re certainly not going to find out much about women by reading the hallucinations of the Manosphere. You’d be better off reading the Bible, which is full of stories about every good and bad thing men and women do.
I know there is cognitive dissonance is giving up lies and learning the truth, but that’s just the way people are.
Many intelligent men in the past have offered their opinions on women (their opinions tend to be about noticing many women are big children). That’s been much of my experience, too.
28 comments:
Assertive mating
"80% of women are unattractive, and it gets worse the older they get."
It's not just their looks, it's their personality too for many women it seems.
Women peak really early compared to men, like 15 - 18. When Facebook first started, I looked up some of the cute girls that I grew up with, and it was a big, shocking, disappointment (Jowls do not look good on women).
And you're very correct, women should be extremely thankful that men can love them so much.
"I looked up some of the cute girls that I grew up with, and it was a big, shocking, disappointment"
Same thing. Didn't recognize them.
Darn autocorrect. The technical term is "assortive mating", even though it is assertive association.
This 80% figure is bullshit. Looks are based on cultural and societal standards; subjectivity thus plays a fundamental role.
"It's not just their looks, it's their personality too for many women it seems."
It seems to YOU, yes. But not to the majority of men. They are still chasing, dating, and mating with them.
"Women peak really early compared to men, like 15 - 18. When Facebook first started, I looked up some of the cute girls that I grew up with, and it was a big, shocking, disappointment (Jowls do not look good on women)."
Women "peak" between the ages of 18-30. Some women, like men, age gracefully, and others, like yourself, look like Herman Munster. Men and women above 30 thus make personal choices as to whether to ensure that their looks measure up. Yes, some of the women I found attractive in high school back then now look not so good, while others have blossomed.
"And you're very correct, women should be extremely thankful that men can love them so much."
You should thank your lucky stars that you even have a woman in your life. Your mom must be proud.
^One hostile - and alone woman - guys.
You might be mangling your definitions again, Bob
I think the term 'cash n' prizes' refers to the loot a woman gets at the conclusion of a frivolous divorce. I dunno about you - but I see it every day. I also disagree with your assertion that women are the same today as they always were. You said it yourself - an alarming and growing minority of women are on antidepressants. Today's woman is unhappier, sluttier, and less moral than any woman in history.
Agreed about cash and prizes. I know a guy who has lived in the same house since he bought it in his 20s outright.
The woman he later married, were married for about 20 years, left and he had to take out a $200k mortgage to pay out her share.
What happened next is the biggest rort.
He met a woman some time later, she moved in with him (never married) and a couple of years later she walks out.
Her lawyers successfully claimed half of his house which was worth $800k now. So he had to take out a $400k mortgage to pay her out.
The real rub? The last relationship ended when he was in his late 50s. Imagine being in your late 50s and having to go into debt to pay out a woman who had lived in your house less that 5% of the time you had.
Agreed about cash and prizes. I know a guy who has lived in the same house since he bought it in his 20s outright.
The woman he later married, were married for about 20 years, left and he had to take out a $200k mortgage to pay out her share.
What happened next is the biggest rort.
He met a woman some time later, she moved in with him (never married) and a couple of years later she walks out.
Her lawyers successfully claimed half of his house which was worth $800k now. So he had to take out a $400k mortgage to pay her out.
The real rub? The last relationship ended when he was in his late 50s. Imagine being in your late 50s and having to go into debt to pay out a woman who had lived in your house less that 5% of the time you had.
Oz, it's a fact of life. Get a prenup, make sure it's armour plated and bullet proof and get the lady to sign it in blood, in triplicate, in front of 100 clergymen. It is in your interest to make sure that if your relationship fails, you leave with everything you brought into it.
Which ALSO underlines my hypothesis and undermines Unca Bob: In the past it was not in a woman's best interest to divorce. Now, divorce WILL appeal to women that are too stupid to play for the long term and invest in an adult relationship.
@Glen
I have been having the talk with one of my daughters and explained that, because of there being such an imbalance with divorce laws, if she wanted to build trust with a potential husband she might want to consider signing a prenup and even bringing the subject up first.
I think modern American women need to start suggesting these things as a way to show their willingness to commit for the long term.
We need these empowered women to take the lead and just...MAN-UP!
@Anonymous, you may be falling foul of the "Apex fallacy". If you think that it isn't true that %80 of women are unattractive, it may be that it's because you aren't noticing them. Pick a sunny day, go outside, and look at *all* the women, *all* of them including the ones your eye would ordinarily skip over, and then think again about the numbers.
"^One hostile - and alone woman - guys."
Bobby, you're projection is showing. Now, show this man the the hard data proving this percentage is accurate.
Anonymous...
"If you think that it isn't true that %80 of women are unattractive, it may be that it's because you aren't noticing them. Pick a sunny day, go outside, and look at *all* the women, *all* of them including the ones your eye would ordinarily skip over, and then think again about the numbers."
What metrics are you using when defining "unattractive" for women?
What metrics are you using when defining "unattractive" for men?
For those of you talking about getting an iron-clad pre-nuptual.
It. Does. Not. Exist.
If there is a child involved, any family-court in the USA (and New Zealand, and likely Australia and the UK and etc as well) WILL tear it up "in the interests of the child".
Now, while I do tend to believe in the "cash and prizes" situation: thinking about it, One Fat Oz Guy has a good point. It actually dovetails very nicely with what Uncle Bob states.
Oz: "Now, divorce WILL appeal to women that are too stupid to play for the long term and invest in an adult relationship."
Bob: "Many intelligent men in the past have offered their opinions on women (their opinions tend to be about noticing many women are big children). That’s been much of my experience, too."
And I myself have done posts about female best intentions and female doublethink and self-deceit. (Bob probably laughs at those and thinks that I'm deceiving myself. He might be right. I'm not 100% certain and try to look for other thoughts and information on various matters.)
So, think about it. Most children have zero long-term thinking capacity.
So: what some of us term as "frivorce with cash and prizes" is not exactly a long-term planned strategy. It's simply the result of a spoiled child, bored with the current situation, suddenly deciding that they want out so that they can do something else. But they're also going to get what they can from the situation - because they're spoiled and greedy.
If 80% of women are children and 20% of women are adults, and (as Oz states) adult women invest in an adult relationship, would this be why a large number of marriages seem to end in divorce? (According to the government statistics from the CDC, 93.4% of all marriages in the USA break up/end in divorce within 10 years.)
I'm beginning to wonder re how many men are actually grown-up, also. The lost boys of the manosphere might be the 80% male children vs the 20% male adults. For me, these days, the entire PUA culture seems to be something that a child would indulge in.
I don't understand why guys keep bringing up the "just get a prenup" argument - they are not effective protection as other commenters have said. Get a clue: Do some Googling on prenups. This should be common knowledge by now.
Hell hath no fury like a women scorned.
" You’ll never find a female Sean Connery or Paul Newman. Or even a George Clooney. And oh how older actresses howl when their offered roles dry up and disappear!"
I wouldn't be so sure about that. It's a big world. There are a few unicorns. Check out pics of Helen Mirren. She looks amazing for an older broad; even in a bathing suit. That being said, she's still fucking old. Up close she probably looks and smells like an old lady. Statistically, she is probably 1 in 100 million. It helps to have Hollywood money and the Hollywood incentive to stay attractive. Also, I suspect dog shit has a more appealing personality than her.
Since the beginning of time, women have have instinctively understood that their youth and beauty is fleeting, and must be capitalized on quickly. Then, the later part of the 20th Century hit, and suddenly every disgusting war-pig thinks she can fight above her weight, making ridiculous claims that 50 is the new 15. It's not. More like 15 is the new 50.
It's easy to bag on women these days. They are such a fucking mess. It's mind-boggling. I'd have more sympathy for them if they weren't such nasty, arrogant monsters as a group. Modern circumstances have exposed the true nature of women for all to see. It's no wonder that in the past, men had to make up silly fairy tales exalting the virtues of femininity. Gotta sell it somehow.
"I’ve had people tell me “women have changed since you were growing up.”
"Guess what? They haven’t."
Whoa! Slow down there. Talk to the under 40 crowd of men about that one. We'll tell a different tale. Sleeve tats and pink hair are normal on women? I think not. Human beings are being socialized in modern environments that never existed before that are absolutely changing their nature. It's called evolution. It's not necessarily a positive thing. Human beings adapt to their environment. Their nature will most certainly change over time as their environment changes.
Never in history have women gone to such great lengths to deliberately make themselves unattractive to the opposite sex. This is most certainly a new thing. Please make the connections and recognize that.
To Black Poison Soul:
"For those of you talking about getting an iron-clad pre-nuptual.
It. Does. Not. Exist."
Absolute truth. There is not a single divorce lawyer on planet earth who couldn't wipe his ass with even the "best" prenup.
Guess who came up with prenups? You guessed it...lawyers. Making $$$ prior to, and after the marriage. Those lawyers...so clever.
"Talk to the under 40 crowd of men about that one"
Women are the same as they were 6000 years ago.
Hardly anyone knows their history anymore.
Much of female nature is the same as it was, perhaps. But under modern circumstances (technology, female economic emancipation, affirmative action, etc), the more negative aspects of female nature, from the male standpoint, are allowed to manifest themselves in very grotesque ways. The fucking toxic shit that women can get away with now and not be accountable for has has NEVER, EVER to my knowledge been tolerated in any other human civilization that I have studied. The world has never allowed the conditions for women to have such unbalanced power over men. Nature hates imbalance.
Modern Western women are most certainly operating under different conditions than in the past. Their behavior is starkly different than what we have seen in the past, at least in Western Civilization. I have dealt with women from 3 generations in this country. Modern women are dramatically different than their predecessors. There has never been a time in history in any civilization where a female can survive without direct help and resources from male members of their community that they know directly. NEVER!!!! EVER!!! I cannot overstate that, and the change it brings about in the female mind.
You can believe whatever you wish. The thought process of the human female has changed dramatically along with the environment. It has occurred in a very short amount of time, especially by evolutionary standards.
"Women are the same as they were 6000 years ago."
That is a massively broad statement. Life expectancy, height, overall reproductive health...nothing has changed in 6000 years? No evolution has occurred at all?
I guess hormonal birth control is a non factor too.
Jesus man. It's your blog. I get it. But fuck. Maybe you just have the time to respond fully, but I don't think you could be anymore intellectually lazy.
"Women are the same as they were 6000 years ago."
Well...no. Completely untrue.
For 2 entire generations, the vast majority of American women have been on hormonal birth control since the age of 14 years old. Western doctors prescribe birth control like they are handing out Pez.
I'm no scientist, but I'm pretty sure altering a human female's hormonal physiology at such a young age will have lifelong irreversible impacts on them.
Women are not the same as they were in past.
Your turn. Whatcha got? I won't be upset if you can't twist your way out of that one.
Anony September 13, 3:29
“It helps to have Hollywood money and the Hollywood incentive to stay attractive. Also, I suspect dog shit has a more appealing personality than her.”
Men and women who have money, from sports to entertainment, are more readily able to stay fit for longer periods of time. And your suspicions, per usual, are misguided.
“Since the beginning of time, women have have instinctively understood that their youth and beauty is fleeting, and must be capitalized on quickly.”
Men and women’s youth and level of attractiveness is fleeting.
“Then, the later part of the 20th Century hit, and suddenly every disgusting war-pig thinks she can fight above her weight, making ridiculous claims that 50 is the new 15. It's not. More like 15 is the new 50.”
Same thing for men.
“It's easy to bag on women these days. They are such a fucking mess. It's mind-boggling. I'd have more sympathy for them if they weren't such nasty, arrogant monsters as a group.”
Your bitterness as a gamma male toward women is typical considering you’ve been rejected numerous times.
Anony September 13, 5:23
“Much of female nature is the same as it was, perhaps. But under modern circumstances (technology, female economic emancipation, affirmative action, etc), the more negative aspects of female nature, from the male standpoint, are allowed to manifest themselves in very grotesque ways.”
Replace “female nature” with “human nature” and “from the male standpoint” to “from the male and female standpoint” and you would be accurate.
“The fucking toxic shit that women can get away with now and not be accountable for has has NEVER, EVER to my knowledge been tolerated in any other human civilization that I have studied.”
Considering that Roissy is your Bible, I understand why your knowledge base is extremely limited.
“There has never been a time in history in any civilization where a female can survive without direct help and resources from male members of their community that they know directly.”
Except in today’s modern world.
Anony:
Roissy is my Bible? Who the hell is that?
Gamma male? Where the fuck are you coming up with this psycho-babble horseshit?
Like most normal men I have been with, and been rejected by many women. Don't confuse experience with bitterness. I imagine you are a very lonely person, and you have strong tendency in your writing to drop pointless personal insults. That's the mark of a very insecure person. I'll return the favor.
When you die alone in your apartment, the good thing is that you won't need to pay for the funeral. Your cats will eat your dead body.
Also, you're a cunt. Don't forget to vote for Hillary.
"Roissy is my Bible? Who the hell is that?"
Playing dumb is your strength...and your weakness. It's rather amazing.
"Like most normal men I have been with, and been rejected by many women. Don't confuse experience with bitterness. I imagine you are a very lonely person, and you have strong tendency in your writing to drop pointless personal insults. That's the mark of a very insecure person. I'll return the favor."
You are making generalizations from your bitter experiences.
"Also, you're a cunt. Don't forget to vote for Hillary."
I'm voting Libertarian.
"Women are the same as they were 6000 years ago."
Abortion, murdering infants, birth control...all the things women are today, they were in the past - and worse.
"Abortion, murdering infants, birth control...all the things women are today, they were in the past - and worse"
QFT.
Heck, they wrote plays about it.
The Greeks certainly did.
Post a Comment