Take the Black Pill

This is a video from one of the most popular posters on the Robot9000 board on 4chat where the Oregon shooter may have posted before he did his dastardly deed.

I would listen in particular to the section from 14:00-16:00 where he predicts a pre-civilizational future where the top men amass harems of 10-15 women each and the rest of the men get none. It sounds crazy but…

The feminists, the male feminists, the blue pillers, the SJW’s, the Left, almost all women, and quite a few men flat out say that all of these incels are imagining things. There is no Alpha, Beta, Omega, etc. It’s all made up pseudoscience. There is no Game, or if there is, it is pseudoscience that doesn’t even work. All these incels have brought this matter on themselves. The feminists say that all they have to do is bathe regularly, practice good hygiene, get some decent clothes, work out, get a job and act halfway normal and they will find a woman just like that. Their whole problem is a lousy attitude.

Yet there is a very important question at stake here. Has the Sexual Marketplace indeed changed since the 1960’s, 70’s, 80’s and even beyond. I certainly don’t recall anything like these mass incel movements before. We never saw anything like this in the 70’s and 80’s. Sure there were guys who couldn’t get laid to save their lives, but they were not common and everyone assumed they were bringing it on themselves. Of course there were many fat and homely men of all sorts, but most of them seemed to be able to find a similar woman with ease. There was no talk of Chad Thundercock, incels,  Game, hypergamy, PUA gurus, PUA bootcamps or any of that. Now these things may well have existed, but no one was talking about them.

According to the the feminists, the male feminists, the blue pillers, the SJW’s, the Left, almost all women, and quite a few men absolutely nothing whatsoever has changed about the Sexual Marketplace between the 70’s and today. All of these clowns could go get a woman anytime they want to. In other words, they are imagining all of this. They’re hallucinating. They’re making it up. They’re getting all upset about something that’s not even real.

And yet…and yet…I can’t help thinking that the Sexual Marketplace has indeed changed since the 1980’s. I also have a nagging feeling that these poor, lost, forlorn men may well be onto something. I know the Game/PUA guys are onto something.* I am frightened that there is more than a grain of truth to  what they say and on some level, they may be complaining about some real phenomenon that is manifesting itself as a substantially changed Sexual Marketplace. I don’t think they are making this stuff up or hallucinating. And sadly, I don’t think they could get a woman by snapping their fingers either.

Everybody thinks that when I write about this stuff, I am complaining. I’m not. However, aspects of the incel movement resonate with me as a longterm bachelor who experienced the feast or famine of the dating world. I’ve had some incel periods myself and in those times, I can see myself in the faces of these poor sods. But to answer the question, no I am not complaining? Why should I? All indications are that if this phenomenon exists, I’ve been benefiting from it since age 17.

If this is some real new sociosexual phenomenon, I think it might be interesting for some bright minds and scholars to look into it. Right now all the work is being done by amateurs. The scholars are all ignoring the phenomenon and claiming it doesn’t exist. But it would be nice to get at least a conversation going about this subject.

As usual, I have no solutions. It is erroneous to think that life is full of solutions. Most chronic human problems are more or less unsolvable. Apparently most people can’t bear the thought of that, and this is why you always see people going on and on about how to “solve” this or that problem. It’s a delusion, a defense against the painful truth that on a lot of levels, we’re pretty much screwed and there’s not a thing to be done about it.

* I know for a fact that Roissy and the rest of the dirtbag PUA’s are onto something. This “Game” stuff is nothing new. These guys haven’t discovered anything. Sure, they have come up with some nice theory, but there are no groundbreaking new discoveries. I and most of my friends figured out this “Game” stuff back in the 1970’s when I first started dating. It’s nothing but the timeless wisdom of ages that men have always used as tools of seduction and understanding the female mind. Female nature now is the same as it’s been for 2,000 years.

Please follow and like us:
Tweet 20

0 thoughts on “Take the Black Pill”

  1. PS- There are several books & sites written for & by women on how to attract & keep a man. Most are just as stupid as the male ‘game’ sites with advice on how wearing your hair a certain way, finding just the right shade of eye shadow, reciting magical phrases, or getting those thighs toned to tempered steel will get you that Chad Thunderfuck of your dreams.

    Right, but you also said that “Game” in and of itself was nonsense.

    Since Game properly defined is simply whatever behavioral, cognitive and presentational strategies a man utilizes to attract and seduce women and in the case of Married Game or Relationship Game to keep the partnership on the up and up, do you really believe that there are no behavioral, cognitive or presentational styles that men could and do use successfully to attract, seduce and keep women?

    If so, that’s a pretty outrageous statement. Or were you attacking the specific normative PUA Game out on the Net which admittedly is an ugly beast, even though I assure you that toxin can work.

    By the same token, you attack these sites for women on how to get and keep a man. Are you attacking them because they happen to have bad advice, which would be sensible? Or are you attacking them because the very idea of a woman using strategies to get and keep a man is preposterous, which is a pretty extreme statement?

    Thank you for your comment. One thing though. My last name is Thundercock, not Thunderfuck.


  2. Sexologists don’t want to investigate the trend towards mass male sexual eviction because the field has the agenda of promoting feminism and women”s sexual freedom while normalizing male homosexuality.

    Fifty years ago society shamed sluts and called gay men losers, while viewing incels with normal desires as laggards who could probably become adequate husbands and fathers if they could get a break with suitable women. Now that has turned around to where the sluts and gays have become the cool kids with institutional support, while the incels have become the freaks, weirdos and expendables who get thrown to the wolves. I’d like to know how this inversion of sensible values has happened, and why..

    1. People accepted the bourgeois sexual revolution. Now is the time for the proletarian sexual revolution, the revolution of unattractive men against women and attractive men.

      The ONLY solution is sexual socialism and the dictatorship of men, and this can ONLY be achieved by the armed struggle of a small conspiratorial band of professional revolutionaries.

  3. Most millennial males are incel or fucking way down in looks. Even with a 6 pack, the only girls I could ever get were obese. The idea of a slim, young woman being interested in me has always been so far out of my realm. Like visiting mars or something.

    College was hell. There I was, in peak physical condition with so many prime females around – in my classes, in the dining hall, outside – and not ONE of them would have me. They treated me as if I were a 50 year old man.

    So I finally lost my virginity to a hooker at 21. Gave up on dating entirely and have been fucking hot, 19-22 year old whores ever since. I’d encourage other incels to do the same.

    1. I’ve compared sexual relationships to a science-fictional experience like going to Mars myself.

      I really hate it that it has come to this for so many men. Prostitutes can’t teach you how to get into sexual relationships with regular women.That has to come organically from women who really feel attracted to you,and if women don’t oblige you with those experiences, that deprives you of acquiring the important skill set you need for knowing how to deal with women in general. .

  4. it is right I think that to most big problems there is no solution, especially no political solution. Though one has to admit that the IS, which I dislike for numerous reasons, has at least solved the problem described in the article above. But the IS does not really solve the problem, because what we are seeking is a solution within the frame of modern western societies.
    Also there is no solution on the individual level. A looser within in the system will stay a looser in most cases. The guys who spend their time in the internet when talking about incels, lookism are right, they are so right that it hurts. They have gained deeper and better insights into modern society than almost all social scientists etc. who get payed for their so called observations. And I personally think that humanity has reached a great point, looking at the fact that many young men can spend their lives in the internet, talking and thinking about these things, and by that understanding a lot. It is real luxury.
    But even if there is no individual or collective solution those guys from the internet forums should seek to better their situation. This won´t work within the system, they have to flee, go round the problem rather than confront it. The world is just to rich to be angry about one specific competition you are loosing in all the time. For example they could gather all money they can get, go and live in some third world country like a king for a year. It would change the perspective. And by the way over there they could most likely become a family father within this year.

    1. We had a practical system a few generations back which treated men more equitably regarding access to mates. Women screwed it up by abusing their privilege of sexual freedom, so that shows what we would have to revoke – HARD – if we want to restore a healthy patriarchal society.

      Naturally many of today’s women find this prospect abhorrent, even though patriarchy worked for thousands of years at keeping the human species in business in a harsh and dangerous world. Our spiritual traditions didn’t make some kind of mysterious accident or mistake by teaching that we don’t live for ourselves, and for our personal notions of fulfillment – and especially not women. You don’t have to believe in a god to see that these traditions acknowledge a tragic truth of the human condition that doesn’t go away when you stop believing in it.

  5. Ironically a lot of male atheists wind up as incels, despite all the atheist propaganda about how religion causes sexual frustration while atheism leads to sexual liberation and self-actualization. For example, Madalyn Murray O’Hair in her Playboy interview back in the 1960’s says that teen girls should become sexually active as early as 13 if they wish, and the boys at 15. Yet I have it on the authority of two people who knew her family that her younger son, Jon Garth Murray, never moved away from home, never had a girlfriend and apparently died a 40 year old virgin at the time of his murder in 1995.

    Apostasy as a path to sexual fulfillment might work for Christian girls who grow up in sex-negative churches with abstinence indoctrination, virginity pledges, purity rings and such. The average-looking Christian girls burdened with those doctrines can easily become freethinking sluts because they held the gatekeeping power all along.

    Unfortunately this doesn’t necessarily work for Christian men who want to break free and enjoy sexual hedonism. The sexually unattractive Christian guy doesn’t increase his sexual market value by becoming an atheist. He just becomes a sexually unattractive atheist guy.

    I think we’ve lost something when we secularized sexual relationships. In the religious Before-Times, girls could reject the advances of sexually yucky guys by saying that god forbids fornication. This had the effect of sparing the rejects’ feelings, because they wanted to obey god as well, and they could maintain the delusion that a god loves them even if women don’t.

    Now women can give more or less the real reason for rejection: You don’t make me wet, so go away and leave me alone. The secular guy who receives scores of such rejections, with not one success to his credit, must feel really bad about himself eventually. When you remove imaginary religious reasons for living, that leaves material reasons grounded in biology. If you take sex away from a healthy young secular man, what does he have left? No wonder we’ve seen so many incels going on rampage killings lately.

  6. Note: most of the following is my own opinions and somewhat limited perspective. Feel free to disagree and bear with me if I’ve lost track of reality (or if you assume I have).

    Robert’s mention in his posts on female tendency towards hypergamy, that traditional values of monogamy and possibly marriage acts as a restraint on most of the women chasing the most desirable of the men, does hint at what might be part of the problem and a possible (imperfect) solution. But is it an answer all of us want to hear?

    That is, that modern anything-goes (as long as it’s safe, sane and consensual) approach to sexual ethics is, in fact, bankrupt. That we need to return to at least the ideal or expectation that intimate sexual relationships between men and women need to be in the context of life-long, ideally monogamous marriage. Obviously, that is not going to work perfectly and certainly requires social pressure if not a change in legislation to back it up.

    This is not everything: there seems to be a superficiality to modern society

    Clearly I do not agree IS holds any solution to this problem if that means imposing their values via murderous force, and the taking of unbeleiving women as what are essentially rape slaves. One would have to be deeply misogynistic to wish that on any woman.

    Ultimately, as an evangelical Christian (I hope) I’d have to say that the ultimate root cause of all human and social problems is human sin*, and that there is one solution to that: Jesus. That nothing will be perfect until His second coming, but if (and only if) we repent and are born again, we can be personally free of the sin problem. I leave it to the reader to decide whether or not to believe and accept that.

    The problem with the “incel” type, I find, is an unwillingness to accept the possibility that sex and relationships are not the be-all-and-end-all of life, and that (what the guy in the video does get right) some men might just not end up getting it, as he’s the kind of man women are just not all that interested in.

    However, it’s easy to judge from my position being on the one hand the kind of person who is less bothered anyway and probably doesn’t even try that hard where girls are concerned. These guys are not me, and can’t be expected to be like me.

    (In all honestly there have been opportunities which have presented themselves. Be it the occasional girl who’s tried to chat me up, to the female friends I’ve – believe it or not – probably “friendzoned” myself if they have not done so to me.** At the same time, I’ve mild Aspergers and am somewhat socially awkward too, so it’s not always easy for me either.

    As is, why some of these guys can’t get girls no matter how hard they try I don’t know. I’ve not exactly tried.)

    That life is not perfect, that we don’t always get all we desire, seems common sense, so it’s odd anyone would have to be told otherwise, and that this whole “Red Pill” business*** would need to gain a foothold. But, obviously this is not true for all.

    The thing is probably not to be too bitter about it, and if you seriously need help, admit it and get it. Certainly not trying to blame society, and at worst, grabbing a gun and murdering people.

    It’s easy to blame society, human nature whatever, and not one’s own personal failings. Myself included, nay especially. I’m all too hypocritical at times with these things.

    What I do not agree with concerning the linked video is:

    The assumptions the guy makes about the behaviour of most women. I don’t see that the majority of women are nearly as promiscuous as he claims. Some no doubt are, but it doesn’t fit either those I know or what I’ve read in terms of all.
    The use of the term “genetically superior”. Is this even a scientifically valid concept? I know when it comes to sexual selection, some potential mates are naturally more desirable than others and there are obvious reasons behind this, but I don’t think that’s the sole determinant of what makes one’s genes “superior”. If one is Darwinian about it, nature doesn’t always get it right 100% of the time.

    Moreover it has overtones of eugenics if not Nazi type ideology, though clearly not intended that way.

    Sin, that is, in falling short of what God intends for us to be ideally. We were created to be better, but, without the Spirit of God, we tend to lapse into “the lusts of the flesh” and no better than the animalistic instincts Darwinian standard models of biology would explain as being the result of natural evolutionary processes.

    ** Usually down to concerns over what “people might think” which on reflection seems like a curiously old-fashioned notion not in keeping with the realities of modern day Western society. Or, down to a reluctance to take things in a direction which might turn out badly.

    *** I don’t agree with everything that the whole “Red Pill” movement claims as absolute truth, but I hold to what I call the “broken clock principle” – i.e. the old adage that “a broken clock is right twice a day”, and that even if an ideology or opinion is questionable, there will usually be some grain of truth to it/something it gets right.

    Yes, male and female sexuality is not the same, and there are other essential differences. No, human nature is not perfect or what we’d always like it to be, nor is the world. To lay the blame at one sex over another, to fail to apply the broken clock principle to feminism, and to make arrogant claims to The Truth whereas everyone else is deluded, seems to be the mistakes some of its adherents make. There’s probably more but I don’t understand the ins and outs.

    1. Clearly I do not agree IS holds any solution to this problem if that means imposing their values via murderous force, and the taking of unbeleiving women as what are essentially rape slaves. One would have to be deeply misogynistic to wish that on any woman.

      “Misogyny” is just a word fascists use to shame those who support the liberation of man. I am 100% in favour of misogyny, and you should be too. Everything depends upon men learning to hate and revile women so that they can enact class struggle against them. I bet you would call those serfs who demanded their emancipation “misogynists” too. Well us men are not going to stand for your hateful and bigoted worldview any longer. You may call yourself a “man” but insofar as you betray the collective interests of all men you are a class traitor and not a man at all. Your condemnation of “murderous force” is just more reactionary bile. The revolution can only succeed by using “murderous force,” and good riddance to all those who stand in our way! In the end all women’s wombs will be nationalized and they will all be “rape slaves” of the state.

      Certainly not trying to blame society, and at worst, grabbing a gun and murdering people.

      The more people who blame society, the better. Nothing will change until you grab a gun and murder people. Anything less than the total extermination of the ruling class is a crime against humanity.

      1. Given some of what has been mentioned with regards incels, beta uprisings and so on, I’m going to assume you actually are serious about this.

        Most of your post somehow seems to be assuming that men are being somehow oppressed by women and therefore there is some need to rise up against them, almost using quasi-Marxist language. Whilst I have some ideas about why you and some others may think that, I’ll first ask you to describe what you mean by that. Because frankly I don’t see it. It’s not exactly like the world is in some dystopian SF setting where women have all turned into amazons who oppress and enslave men for their own ends, but you make it sound like that.

        I’m not sure how you can claim to speak for all men either, as I don’t know of many men who quite share your rather unique take on things. Even most MRAs are not quite that extreme.

        Grabbing a gun and murdering people is only going to result in either death or imprisonment for the person doing it. And if it’s for some ideological motive it could be classed as terrorism, and I beleive inciting terrorism is against the law too. I seriously doubt any such uprising will ever take place as a mass movement. I would think seriously about what you are saying and planning to do here.

  7. I think that a lot of it also has to do with the immutable law of supply and demand. I remember Tulio once provided a link that showed that among prime age adults (ie. 18-30), there are 22% more men than women.

    It’s kinda similar to why employees have it so rough nowadays; thanks to excessive numbers of people graduating from college and mass immigration, the job market is saturated with labor that employers can pick and choose from.

    (And don’t buy this whole employer bs about how they “can’t find people with the right skills.” If that were really the case, they would be offering higher wages to attract skilled and talented workers. Yet wages are utterly stagnant, with the exception of a few specialized fields)

    In the realm of dating, women are now the employers. Sure, not all employers/business owners are doing well, and there are certain job hunters who are in high demand. But by and large, it’s better to be an employer than a job seeker.

    1. Bingo! This times e^(infinity). What I’ve observed in the job market lately is that employers are behaving very much like women in the mating market. You’ll see job posts for positions go unfilled for months, and often over a year, without it anyone being hired. The requirements list is a mile long. Exactly like women who keep rejecting men well into their 30s searching for the perfect man and never seeming to find him. Employers, like women, never seem to ask: “Well, if this prospect is so perfect why would he want to work for me or marry me?” In truth, anyone who qualifies would be too good to work there or marry her. But they don’t seem to grasp that. It’s never questioned that maybe the Mr. Perfect Prospect doesn’t think the compensation is good enough.

      As for the job market, in my guesstimation 90% of these “hard to fill” jobs could be easily filled by finding a candidate with 50-60% of the background/requirements and OTJ training him/her for 3-5 months. Of course, they could pay him/her less during that time and use the excuse that he was under qualified but they were giving him a chance to prove himself. I think it was Woody Allen in one of his movies said that 70% of any job is just showing up to work on time. Employers aren’t aware enough to ask how much money the company is losing by not having that position filled.

      Anyway, that’s just my cents…

  8. “Has the Sexual Marketplace indeed changed since the 1960’s, 70’s, 80’s and even beyond. I certainly don’t recall anything like these mass incel movements before. We never saw anything like this in the 70’s and 80’s.”

    I think its called THE INTERNET.

    1. Give it up dude. The same exact thing was happening in the 70’s and 80’s, except we never heard about it because there was no Internet? Get real.

      If this was going on back then, we would have heard about if only because people would have been talking about it. And I don’t recall much if any talk along these lines back in those days. Apparently something is changing in the new dating landscape. Note that I can’t really observe this myself because apparently I am rather immune to these changes. Guys like me have usually done great in these scenarios.

  9. Like I’ve said before, I feel sorry for these guys. Just like some men are so handsome, many women will like them regardless of game, there are men who have tried a lot and not had success, maybe never even kissed a girl or found a girl who was attracted to them. That is why they resent game and they have a point, in regard to themselves.

    Its certainly not impossible for them to meet someone but they often have developed a very negative attitude, let their presentation deteriorate and are really down on themselves. They need a different sort of coaching to PUA I think. Somethign gentler, more encouraging, more relaistic for them.

    However, a lot of what they say is wrong. They have a distorted view and exaggerate to an extreme when they say that only the top 10 or 20% of men can attract women and in future such elite men will have harems etc. That’s nonsense.

  10. Now everyone thinks they deserve a 9 or a 10.

    No, only women do. Stop projecting your oppressive female consciousness onto men. Men are too good to think like that, the way all women do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)