Game/PUA: Women Deal with Loneliness and Lack of Sex Better Than Men

Women can definitely deal with loneliness and lack of sex better than men can, and it’s all down to that unfathomable entity known as the female sex drive.

The thing is that while women have an extremely strong sex drive in a sense (provided someone turned it on in the first place – preferably Chad!), it differs from the male in that women can simply take sex or leave it if so desired. We are now starting to see some women say,

Damn, I need some cock!

You didn’t hear that so much in the past, but I had 18 year old girls telling me things along those lines back in 1975:

Damn I am getting so horny these days, I swear I’m going to have to shove a bottle up there.

But she had a very strong sex drive in addition to being an extreme slut, bless her whorish heart.

In men, sex is quite different. It’s like an itch that you can’t scratch when you do without it. Sure, we can always jerk off to deal with the physical problem, but that’s often not satisfactory, and it’s hard to do if you live with other people. Furthermore, masturbation doesn’t take care of the urge. Of course, in the Current Year, women masturbate like maniacs, while it seems like they didn’t use to so much back in the day – it seems we have created a society of female masturbating maniacs! God bless my depraved generation!

They do this but they need sex too. I had a female best friend who used to tell me things like,

Damn I am so horny these days, I’m just going to have to grab some guy and rape him!

And she masturbated all the time. I would be texting her and she would say:

Excuse me,  I’m going to go masturbate.

Can you imagine a woman saying such a thing?!

She’d come back in 45 minutes and say,

Damn, that was good!

On a sex subreddit called Stupid Sluts Club (highly recommended!) a young woman described how she was horny as Hell. She was masturbating all the time, but that wasn’t really cutting it, so she started having sex with her female roommate though she was basically straight.

So while things are changing somewhat, women are sadly not turning into men.

The sex drive is not so much physical in men, though the physical aspect is undeniable. For instance, a young man who does not ejaculate for a few days starts to experience actual pain in his testicles (blue balls). Women don’t seem to experience such a thing, though there have been reports of women feeling some sort of a “female blue balls” in their abdomen above the pubic area if they go without orgasm for too long.

But at least back in the day, many women were non-orgasmic or rarely orgasmic. Back then it was ~30% of women. I’d say it’s a lot less now, but there are probably still non-orgasmic women. That 30% of women at any time can be unable to reach orgasm while remaining that way for years on end implies that female blue balls is probably not a serious problem. Further, almost no males are non-orgasmic. There’s virtually no such thing.

Much more important than the physical aspect of sex is the psychological one. A man without sex has a huge hole in his life psychologically and perhaps even more importantly socially. If it goes on for years, a lot of men start to give up and become depressed, withdrawn, or rageful. We see the logical result of this in the incel phenomenon. The incels are not evil like the cucks and soyboys say. Incel behavior is simply the natural and normal consequence of what happens to large groups of men who are denied sex over a long period.

Many become depressed and withdrawn, quite a few become very angry in a seething sort of way, and a few of those become explosively violent, often resulting in serious massacres. To show it is not a unique Western problem, long-term incel Chinese men have been going on murderous rampages for a long time now, even massacring large numbers of kindergartners!

So, tl/dr: Women love sex but ultimately a lot can take it or leave it. Men have a much more insistent sex drive and cannot take or leave sex. They have to have it and if they don’t, serious psychopathology results.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Just Because She’s Turned on by You Doesn’t Necessarily Mean She Wants to Have Sex with You

I get shut down pretty much all the time nowadays, especially by young women. I just got shut down a couple of times in the supermarket this evening. They don’t say no. Instead it’s nonverbal. I call it The Wall. It seems like I get the Wall all day every day sometimes. It’s really discouraging. The Wall is completely nonverbal and it says, “I am not interested in you that way, ok?” You can get a lot of different walls but they all mean the same thing.

There are places I go every day where some of the women are such cunts that they won’t even respond if I say hello and say their name. On the other hand, there are others who are pretty friendly, sometimes real friendly. But they’re all really young and I am 40 years older than they are, so I need a big green light to move on an age gap like that.

One acts flirtatious. She starts acting a lot more feminine when I start talking to her. That means either that she likes you or more probably that she’s attracted to you or turned on by you. But she is giving me The Wall as far as getting to know her in “that way.” And as I just learned the other day, at age 20, she already lives with her boyfriend.

I am sure that I turn on a fair number of women who nevertheless still don’t want to get involved with me, in this case due to age.

There was a woman in the bank who always gave me blank stares, the obvious blank stares you get from women who are turned on by you. I would come up to her window, and she would get pretty cold. I couldn’t make sense of it for the longest time. I finally decided she was fantasizing. I was 55 and she was 20 after all. She thought I looked good and she liked to look at me, but that’s as far as she wanted to take it.

It took me a while to figure out that she was just looking. I got that look in a few different ways from other young women too. Some of them actually thrust their bodies forward when they first interacted with me, obviously an involuntary purely physical turn-on. But then they would catch themselves a second or two later and correct it.

Think about it. A woman sees, what? Tens of thousands of hot men in her life. She’s going to fuck all of them? Women would fuck 100,000 men in a lifetime.

I met a 39 year old woman the other night. Literally picked her up in a corner market. I have no idea how the Hell I even did that. Got her in my car and drove to my place. Halfway there, she looks at me and says, “You know what? You’re fuckin HOT!” Well, that felt nice. I think I might have said, “Ok, let’s fuck then.” Then I got a Wall.

I got her to my place. A lot more flirtation.

I got her partly naked at different times because I’m often able to get women naked if I can at least get them in the door. I often use the “Don’t you think you need a shower?” ruse. I can’t believe how many women fall for that one or maybe they want to fall for it,if you catch my drift because it gives them an excuse: “I’m not getting naked in this guy’s house because I’m a slut. I’m getting naked in this man’s house because I need a shower!” But even then, they don’t necessarily want to fuck.

I even jump in the shower with them sometimes. I’m not sure how I do that either. They often protest in a meek way, but I just bulldoze in. They have to get  visibly angry to shut me down, otherwise “no means maybe” as far as I’m concerned.

I grabbed at her when she got part naked and she batted me away. “That’s going to cost you.” She was basically charging. Money or dope. So she was a whore.

But that’s not that unusual. An incredible number of women engage in “transactional sex.” It’s ubiquitous.

I had a naked woman wandering around my place for two hours a while back. I kept grabbing her. I figured if you don’t want me grabbing you, put some clothes on, baby! She batted me away for a couple of hours. So you can even have naked women wandering around your apartment for hours and refusing to fuck. Which is her right. But I’m also going to keep grabbing at her.

She can tell you flat to your face that you’re the hottest man alive, and she still might not want to fuck. See above. Just because you turn a woman on, doesn’t necessarily means she wants to have sex with you!

I finally figured out that sex is a pretty big deal for women, especially casual sex. So many things could go wrong and it is dangerous. Women only have a few sex partners in life. The GSS reports that the average American woman has three partners in her life. Sex is a heavy-duty decision for a woman, and it’s not taken lightly.

Unfortunately, I have to respect that. I’m no rapist.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Some Very Creepy Truths about Adult-Minor Sex

I work in mental health and I specialize in people who have issues around thoughts about sex with children, etc. I’m an expert and I have people coming to me from all over the world.

First of all, no one is going to believe the facts I state are true. Trust me though: I’m right. All studies were done in the lab and have been repeatedly replicated. In fact, they’ve been replicated so many times that it seems stupid to do them again except morons keep demanding it. I guess we’ll be replicating them until the end of time then.

  1. Men are attracted to teenage girls. 100% of straight men react at very high levels, typically maximum, to females 13+. That should not be surprising to any sane person, except that in our Feminist Clown World, those men would be called pedophiles. We can call them any name we want, but we now have to call all straight men pedophiles. Are we comfortable with that?
  2. So much worse than that is the fact is that not only are straight men turned on by teenage girls who look like women, which is not surprising, but that 90-100% of straight men are even turned on by little girls under 13. More on that below.
  3. Yep, that’s right. Straight men are even turned on by little girls under 13. In general, most straight men are attracted to them at a fairly low level, less than they are to mature females, but a measurable attraction is definitely there.
  4. So much, much worse than that even is that 23% (in three studies – 21%, 23%, and 26%) of straight men test “pedophilic.” That means that 1/4 of straight men are pedophiles by our typical understanding of the term, which probably even includes DSM-5 Pedophilia, a garbage diagnosis if there ever was one. What this means is that 23% of all straight men are as attracted or more attracted to little girls under 13 as they are to mature females 13+. Crazy statistic, huh? The question arises why these men don’t run around molesting little girls. Penalties are very harsh if you get caught doing this, and almost all these men have very strong attractions to mature females, so I assume they focus on the prosocial urge and suppress or repress the antisocial pedophilic feelings. In the Current Year, tens of millions of Americans say they want to kill all the pedophiles. Well, that’s just fine. Are they prepared to execute 1/4 of the men in the US, or 25 million men? Let me know when they get those gas chambers running.
  5. Not sure if this is shocking, but .1-1% of straight men are actual, true pedophiles. They are strongly attracted to girl children and have little or no attraction to mature females, which is the only definition of pedophilia that makes sense. Nevertheless, this means there are 110,000-1.1 million full blown, real deal, scary pedophiles in the US. Once again, we say we are going to execute them. Fine. We are going to execute 100,000-1 million American men? Let me know how that goes.
Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: The 80/20 Rule: Anything to It?

There is a rule among Black Pillers called the 80-20 rule. Briefly, that 80% of the women are chasing the top 20% of the men. In the hard version of the rule, 20% of the men are having sex with 80% of the women.

There does seem to be something to the 80/20 rule. Let me say that I actually don’t mind the 80/20 rule because it has worked to my benefit all through my life.

First of all, the 80/20o rule, like most things in our social lives, is nothing new. It’s always been this way. When I was in high school, I decided that 10% of the guys were having sex with 90% of the girls. I didn’t do a study to confirm that. That was just my intuitive (female thinking) observation. Once again, it wasn’t true in the hard sense but it did seem to be true in some soft sense.

Later, on dating sites, studies repeatedly found that 80% of the women were chasing 20% of the men, whereas men were much less discriminate, with 100% of the men chasing 100% of the men. Typically men seemed to be chasing their looksmatches. However, 20% of the women were chasing the remaining 80% of the men. This means that women from 3-10 scale were all chasing 9-10 scale men and women from 1-2 on the scale were chasing the men from 1-8.

These studies also showed that women only found 20% of men attractive. The women in these studies said 80% of men were unattractive. Hypergamy, in other words.

I read an STD study done in a ghetto Black community. There they found that 80% of the women coming to the clinic had been infected by only 20% of the men. Most of the women were sleeping with only a small number of men, and that’s where all the STD’s were coming from. Even there, the women were monopolizing the best men.

As with the Sapir-Whorf theory, obviously there’s a lot of evidence against a hard 80-20 rule theory. On an incel site, an incel said that all of the men he knew were married. They were all 4-6 scale average looks men. I assume they got their looksmatches. So it’s not as if everyone but the Chads is screwed.

Once again pace Sapir-Whorf, a soft 80-20 rule theory makes a lot of sense if you plug it in as one more way, among so many others, to try to make sense of the Sexual Marketplace. In other words, in some odd, vague way, there is some certain degree of truth to the 80-20 rule at some level in Sexual Marketplace Theory. This theory is useful as a tool in conjunction with many other theories. If you plug them all in at once, the Sexual Marketplace will start making a lot more sense.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Infatuation and Love Are the Same Thing

There’s no such thing as “just infatuation” and “real love” being two different things.  First of all, true love doesn’t exist or only exists in the exalted fantasies or delusions of women. “Real love” is nonsense, and of course it’s completely antiscientific, unfalsifiable, and even tautological.

Nevertheless it’s clear there is something called love that exists even in a scientific sense. But it’s on a continuum with something called like. Like is at one end and then as like gets stronger, eventually you get to full blown love at the other end.

The initial phase of love is something I call “wild love,” and it’s a wild ride indeed! The problem is it’s not really sustainable the same as a manic episode (which it resembles possibly in more ways than one) is not sustainable. It’s just too wild and crazy, and humans can’t sustain that sort of wild passion over the long term. If mania doesn’t end, the result is death.

Chronic mania used to exist as a psychiatric entity before the treatment era. It had its own set of rather unique symptomology. I have an old p psychiatric textbook from the 1950’s that talks about it. It apparently still occurs in some Bipolar patients and is notoriously resistant to treatment. There have been some recent case studies in the literature. They never really came down. Obviously, they died young. Death usually occurred in the mid-40’s and was typically a heart attack, natch.

No one knows what happens if wild love goes on forever because the nature of the human psyche is that wild love burns out after at most a couple of years. It’s hard to imagine someone dying of too much love, but if so, it wouldn’t be the first time. What else killed Romeo Juliet but “chronic wild love?”

Though wild love doesn’t last forever is perhaps a law of the human psyche if anything is, it can last a year or two. After that it transforms into what I call “mature love,” which is a calmer but in some ways deeper and more profound thing. Perhaps it’s all down to oxytocin and maybe high levels of oxytocin are only sustainable for a year or two. Who knows? At the end of the day,  most things human, even the most mystical and rarefied, probably boil down to simply human biology, chemicals, transmitters, and receptors, neurons, cells, atoms, and ultimately mundane molecules.

After studying the subject for several decades, it’s clear to me that infatuation is simply the early, “wild” phase of love that indeed looks like a manic episode, except that the parties are more or less sane (though wild love can be quite volatile with a lot of wild swings between love and hate). The initial phase of love, wild love, is a beautiful thing! It’s pretty crazy but it’s also one of the peak experiences one can have a human being. Be thankful if you were lucky enough to experience it. Many never do!

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Nice Guy Problems with Women, with an Aside about Nice Guy Chad

I was certainly raised to be a nice guy. My Dad was in on this crap. They both taught us that happy couples never fight, which is the biggest lie on Earth. Anyway, women love fighting in relationships and they will often deliberately start fights with their men for absolutely no good reason at all other than “to test them,” which is moronic, or simply because they want to liven or spice things up, which is actually a lot dumber than even that.

What does a woman want (paraphrasing Freud)? First of all, no one knows, least of all women themselves, who are remarkably self-blinded creatures. The woman at best is ultimately unfathomable, though we are starting to get some interesting reports from MTF transsexuals or transwomen who have been both men and women hormonally and hence can report from both sides of the war.

But the nature of the woman is nevertheless to be fiendishly complex for whatever reason. Just as the nature of the man is to be rather stupidly simple.

I mean give a man a six-pack, a couch, and a football game and he’s good for the night, right? Sure, but there are so simple formulas to satisfy to convoluted object known as the woman.

But a good analysis is: The woman lives for love. Another good analysis (somewhat similar) is: The woman lives for “peak emotional experiences.”

That sounds great in theory even if its terrifying to us stoic men. The problem is that those peak emotional experiences can include negative emotions. Exhilarating negative emotions such as wild fights are after all among the most emotionally peak experiences out there.

My mother and father often said, “Do you ever see us fighting?” Well, not really, but after age 9, they fought a lot, although of course they always lied and denied it. Anyway from this bullshit lie, I was taught that if you have a good relationship with a woman, you will never really fight. Every time a woman got angry at me, I felt it was my fault and that I had failed as a man somehow. Consequently, I never really fought back. I just sat there and took it like a huge pussy.

I started fighting back against women ~10 years ago, and since then, I’ve had some of the wildest, most passionate love affairs of my life. So apparently it works to stand up to women and fight back against their shit. But men don’t want to fight back to because most men are pussywhipped, that is, they are afraid that if they fight their woman, she will cut off the pussy supply, pussy being as good as oxygen for the male psyche or emotional body if not the actual physical body, in which its effects are more trivial than anybody realizes.

It’s generally agreed that being a nice guy, like a million other things, gets in the way of getting laid. Sure, nice guys can get laid and most eventually marry if only to beta bux, but being nice is a detraction when it comes to attracting women.

The exception, of course, is Chad, as Chad tends to be the exception to all of the rules of the Sexual Marketplace. Anytime you hear someone say, “Oh don’t do that. That’s deadly when it comes to getting laid. Women hate that thing like no other!” you always have to put an asterisk by that statement that says, “with the exception of Chad.” Chad breaks all the rules because Looks trumps all for women. And that’s the essence of Black Pill right there.

Nice Guy Chad still gets laid of course. I always did, if not sooner then later. Lots of women don’t care if Chad is a nice guy. Catfishing experiments made their Chads into huge pussies, and they still got bombarded by women. Nevertheless, Nice Guy Chad still suffers from the usual nice guy problems with women. One exception I would say though is that even in the midst of these typical nice guy issues which probably see a lot of men cut off from sex after being labeled huge pussies, women keep fucking Nice Guy Chad like a human dildo machine even after they call him a pussy to his face, scream at him that he’s a faggot, etc.

It’s all down to that damned pretty face. That trumps all else, at least temporarily. I would say that the pretty face is a necessary and sufficient attribute to get laid, but it’s not good enough to sustain a relationship. Chad’s pretty face is like a drug. After a while the high wears off, and this is where you need other things – personality, money, faithfulness, love attachment, Red Pill,  masculinity – whatever. So Nice Guy Chad gets his brains fucked out for a while and is then unceremoniously and often cruelly dumped. In other words, story of my life, boyos.

The nice thing about being Nice Guy Chad though is that a new woman will always come along. If not tomorrow than definitely at some point in the future. Which is more than the incels look forward to.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: Statistical Alphas, Behavioral Alphas, Chads, and Behavioral Alpha and Behavioral Beta Societies

First of all, some basic definitions:

Statistical Alpha: 15-20% of males, attractive to most women most of the time for whatever reason.Probably no more than 15-20% in any society, existing or conceivable.

Behavioral Alpha: Displays “Alpha behavior.” This may vary. In some societies like the Middle East, a majority of the men probably display Alpha behavior. Not limited to 15-20% the population.

Chad: An 8-10 on the 1-10 looks scale. Often does well with women but not necessarily, as certain other variables can mess him up. Mental Chads, Shy Chads, Odd Chads, Introverted Chads, etc. can definitely have problems with women. Sure some woman usually grabs them and rapes them sooner or later, but they can have long incel periods. A Chad could very well be a virgin or an incel. In fact, on incel forums, they discuss the phenomenon of the Chadcel.

Alpha behavior is probably learned, and Alpha behaviors are best acquired early in life, hopefully by high school or at least college age.

Chads are basically genetic. There’s no reason to brag about your Looks. They’re a gift from God. You didn’t do one thing to deserve them. You just lucked out in the genetic lottery is all.

However, I do think that men do better in societies where more men are Behavioral Alphas. They do better with women and male-female relationships are a lot better. There’s not much hypergamy, there aren’t many incels, and women don’t cuck men, monopolize Chads, or marry Beta Buxxers and then shut down the pussy, etc. The men are naturally masculine and the women are naturally feminine and both sexes seem to like each just fine that way. In addition, the men seem to love women (at least they are very sexually attracted to them), and the women seem to love men.

Societies Where Most Men are Behavioral Alphas (Male Rule Outside Northern and Western Europe and the Anglosphere)

On the other hand, these are typically patriarchies, and societies with many Behavioral Alphas are not great for women, face it. Some societies where most men are behavioral Alphas include Spain (though suffering from a wild feminist insurrection and the beginnings of a soyciety, though heavily resisted by the men), Portugal, Italy (feminism failed there, though that may be changing as new reports indicate the possibility of a soyciety arising there of all places), Greece, the Balkans, and frankly Eastern Europe and the Baltics.

Russia, the Caucasus, Turkey, Arabia, Mesopotamia, the Gulf, and the Levant. North Africa too. Of course we must include all of Black Africa. All of Latin America obviously. Micronesia, Melanesia, Polynesia. Central Asia and South Asia – Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan, and even India and Nepal. The Stans. I actually think SE Asian men are behaviorally Alpha. And traditional Korean, Japanese and Chinese societies were very behaviorally Alpha, and the older men still are.

Cucked Soycieties Where Most Men Are No Longer Behavioral Alphas (Behavioral Beta Soycieties under Female Rule in the West)

The soycieties where the men are no longer mostly behaviorally Alpha and have become behaviorally Beta are obviously most of the West as in Western Europe, the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and Asians in the West, especially in the US. These are really the only places where Female Rule (Feminist Rule) has been implemented, though the infection is spreading, not diminishing, and the target is the whole world, as it is with all totalizing ideologies.

The result of Female Rule is an extreme reduction in:

  • Behavioral Alphas.
  • Sex for young single men.
  • Patriarchy.

Obviously all three of these are related.

The latter is often replaced by the rise of an oppressive matriarchy in its place. Why? Because in society just as in the home, someone has to wear the pants. If the women take the pants off the men, they won’t throw them in the corner or burn them as they probably should. They put them on themselves, turn into men, and turn the men into women.

Basic heterosexual behavior always exists. If the norm is toppled, the inverse simply takes its place. Someone’s got to rule and someone’s got to be ruled. Pure equality among the sexes is obviously not possible. Even Gloria Steinem admitted that!

What’s true among the sexes is probably true for society too, as basic sexual behavior is probably mirrored in some odd way in our sociopolitical world. There’s no escaping sex. It never ends, even in your 80’s.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Fake It Til You Make It

The Red Pill and PUA sites deny this, but I think it is true nonetheless. They claim that women can tell if a man is faking it or not, and there is a difference between, say, faking confidence and actually being confident.

That strikes me mostly as an affectation, a defense, and of course ultimately a cope, as so many things in life are when you get right down to it. I think they may have a bit of a point, but I think the effect size is probably pretty small.

For instance, I think of myself as a confident guy, but when I examine myself when I am in that situation, it’s clear that a lot of the time, I really don’t believe it and I’m covering up for some pretty massive insecurity way back there somewhere. So I try to get my head into a place where I don’t feel like I’m faking it. I feel like I’m just doing it and believing all the crazy lies that I tell myself about myself. If I don’t fully believe it, it does feel a bit off, at least to me. I’m not sure if anyone can tell, but it bothers me on some level, so I try not to feel that way.

My view:

If you think you’re confident, you’re confident. This one is a bit up in the air but perhaps not as much as we think it is. No insecure person thinks they’re confident. Of course we may have different definitions of confident. A long time ago, I thought I was fairly confident, but then extroverts would make friends with me and tell me that I lacked confidence.

I think they were just commenting on my introversion. Introversion and lack of confidence are not necessarily the same thing but of course extroverts confuse the two horribly because, well, because they’re extroverts and that’s what extroverts do. Some introverts are fairly confident in their odd way, often surprisingly confident for their introversion.

If you think you’re masculine, you’re masculine. This one seems like it is absolutely true. If you put the idea in your head that you’re a masculine guy, you simply automatically start acting more masculine right then and there. There’s no way that an effeminate, faggoty man is going to tell anyone that he’s masculine. I don’t think even wimpy men think they are masculine.

There are straight men who are “soft” but not effeminate. I call these men feminine rather than effeminate (acting like a woman). I’ve known a number of men like this. Some were good friends. As a general rule, they freely admitted that they were not particularly masculine, often laughing softly when they said it. And of course it caused problems in their relationships with women. I remember one friend who told me that a girlfriend used to hit him in a rather playfully but nevertheless in a frustrated way, telling him to act more like a man. He always laughed nervously and told her, “I can’t.”

But getting down to brass tacks, if you’re trying to do it, you’re doing it. I’m not sure anyone cares if you are “really doing it for reals” or “just faking it lol.”

Fake it til you make it, that’s the motto of life.

Who the Hell says women can even tell the difference? Women like Alpha behavior. I doubt if they have the slightest clue about what’s “real” Alpha behavior and what’s “fake” Alpha behavior, and I doubt if they even give a damn. No one cares what you are “really” like deep down inside. All they care about is that shiny exterior with all those fancy bells and whistles.

Life is all about surface appearances, bullshit, and lies and not about inner truths, deeper structures, or the ugly truth.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: The Primary Goal of a Woman’s Life: To Achieve Love and to Be in Love

Women always talk about wanting “commitment.” But women are hardly honest about a single thing they say in the Gender Wars. There’s too much at stake.

Dated a lot of women and I’ve hardly met one who cared about commitment. Don’t think it was ever mentioned to me once. But one thing I noticed over and over was that the most important thing in the relationship to the woman was love – that she was in love with me.

Beyond that and interacting with many women over the years, it’s obvious that the primary female drive is for love. They often idealize this is preposterous ways that never make any sense:

Woman: “That’s not true love…that’s not real love…that’s not love, that’s infatuation, etc.”

Me: “What’s not true love?”

Woman: 100 million completely arbitrary, idiotic, unfalsifiable, often tautological, and completely unscientific notions, such as, “True love is for life,” and other nonsense.

There’s a good reason for most of women’s ridiculous and irrational behavior, and the good reason behind this is that women dislike the idea of love being trivialized.

Why? Because several decades of studying women have shown me that the primary female drive is for love. In a sense, this is what their whole life is wrapped up in. Sure, they have all these other things, career and whatnot, going on, but all of that pales compared to the primary drive or goal of a woman’s life: to achieve love and to be in love.

Even with women (18-28) who say they don’t know what love is or they’ve never experienced love, the primary drive for love is there. These often young women are confused because they think they have not experienced real love yet.

Having been involved with some young women like that recently who were obviously crazy in love with me for a while (but then of course denied it later), it was clear that they simply had not developed a schema of what love was that they could plug their feelings into.

Also, I think they were looking for the fireworks, sparks, and “Hollywood love affair of the century” notion of love, and most love isn’t really that intense. They fall in love, but it’s not the explosions and fireworks kind they expect, so they say it’s not love. They’re wrong of course, but women are wrong about a million things.

Some seek refuge in a ridiculous concept called Aromanticism. I had a female best friend who insisted she was aromantic. Studying the concept, I decided she could not possibly be one, plus the whole concept was a bit silly they way it was laid out.
Supposedly there are all these folks out there who desperately want love, but they have a genetic or biological inability to fall in love which prevents them from doing so. That’s nonsense. There are no such people.

Real aromantics are just cold fish who have chosen to not experience love because, well, because they’re cold fish! It’s a disorder of choice like so of these stupid new Millennial identities, most of which don’t even exist in any real way.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

How Straight Men Use the Words Fag and Faggot

Any of you snowflakes out there who might get triggered by this post and need another three months of therapy and hugs, please bail out right now. I don’t want your trauma on my conscience.

Faggot. This is a mean word. It’s said with this savage bite. You could almost feel the hate. Faggot is still used that way, but you don’t hear it much because it’s seen as a slur.  But now it has a new meaning. Faggots are just (male) idiots, fucktards, dumbasses, dumbshits, fools, morons, and other pinheads. It has nothing to do with gay men!

Fag. Often simply a descriptive tern for gay men. It could be negative, neutral, or positive depending on tone. People want one word for gay men, and “gay men” is two words. Fag is not used this way so much anymore because now it’s now a slur. Fag is mostly used by straight men towards other straight men! Fag means pussy, wussy, girlyman, cuck, soyboy, etc. It’s used towards male feminists, men who have declared war on the men. We call them those names to insult them to get them back on our side. Because calling a straight man unmasculine is the ultimate insult. We ain’t talking about you!

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: SJWism Is Based on Female Thinking

Really all SJWism is based on female thinking. I believe I read this somewhere else but I’m not sure how well it clicked with me at the time. But now that I understand women so much better, I finally get it. Of course SJWism is female thinking. Of course Identity Politics is female thinking.

Hence, all IP and of course all SJWism is pussy, and real men should not indulge in this pussy crap. That goes for Men’s Rights too. Men’s Rights is often based on female thinking, so it’s a pussy movement. The best Men’s Rights Movement would employ cold, hard logic and scientific thinking to promote the cause of men. This is no problem because logic is in our favor.

We are just too afraid to use it because once you go logical, you don’t get to play black and white, good and bad, good versus evil, the same splitting game that all IP movements play. In other words you have to play fair.

Ever tried to argue fairly with a typical fucktard human?

It’s based on emotional logic and it has the contempt for science and logic as tools the strong use against the weak, which is precisely how women see science and logic, neither of which they have much use for. SJW’s see themselves are completely weak and their enemies as completely strong. This is just the way female thinking works. According to female thinking, women are weak and men are strong and therefore, women get to break all the rules or follow no rules at all simply on account of being weak.

They are correct that the only way a weak party has a chance in a fight is if they fight dirty. Only the strong can afford to fight by the rules, which is why they always insist on rule-based fights. In a rule-based fight, the strong party always wins. Weak parties are smart enough to realize that if they play by the rules, they lose, so they all tend to fight dirty.

Women are weak and men are strong. Women realize that on a fair playing field, we will kick their asses in no time. So women don’t fall for the “let’s play by the rules” game that men set up for fights. And women believe that since they are weak, they have a right to fight dirty because all parties to a fight must appear to be on equal grounds. In  fact, according to women, men demanding rules for fighting is profoundly unfair itself because it will result in men always winning and women always losing.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Most People Are Simply Incapable of Arguing Fairly or Using Logic in Argumentation

Let me tell you something. Most people don’t believe in fair argumentation. It’s just too male, and humans are too insecure to engage in pure male thinking. Nietzsche was onto this. In fact his strong man was not a fascist but someone strong enough use cold hard logic and live with the results without dissolving in emotional insecurity like a little bitch. In other words, an ubermensch.

So most people argue in a very dirty way. Everyone I argue with takes the black and white position. My guys/my side 100% good, 0% evil. They won’t admit to one bad thing about their side. The other side 100% evil, 0% good. You can say anything good about the other side. If you say 99 bad things about them and one good thing, you have gone over to the enemy.

Sometimes I will praise Trump. Of course I hate him as much as any Trump hater, but now and then, he does the right thing, especially on foreign policy, where he is actually halfway different from the usual bloodthirsty imperialist maniac US president. But whenever I point out that I support some one thing Trump did, my idiot Democrat friends smile and say, “You going to vote for him?” Other times they will positively scream at me, “Don’t praise him! Don’t say anything good about him!”

Well, I hate Trump 98%. A few times he’s right. Because I think he’s right 2% of the  time, that means I’m going to vote for him! Because if you don’t oppose someone 100% (99% is never good enough) that means you support them!

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: For the 800th Time, Why Women Hate Nice Guys and Love Abusive Assholes Who Treat Them Like Shit

As I mentioned previously, I’m a nice guy, and really there’s no reason on Earth I should have gotten laid even one time in my life, but nice guys never get laid, anyone knows that. Why? Because women refuse to fuck them. Why? Because women prefer extroverted Alpha assholes and pieces of shit who abuse the living Hell out of them to nice guys. Why? Because they find nice guys boring and wimpy. They think they’re pussies.

On a more fundamental level, it is absolutely essential that you dominate your woman. Female sexuality is such so that if you’re not dominating her, she won’t be turned on. You have to dominate her in order to turn her on at all. That’s why putting women on a pedestal, simping, etc. doesn’t work.

Women have 10,000 lies about why they don’t like nice guys and prefer assholes. The biggest lie of all is that most women say that’s just not true. So they deny it out the starting gate. Obviously we’re not getting anywhere here. After they deny it exists, they say why they do this. You see the fundamental flaw with this argument. As with so many female arguments, it contradicts itself laughable almost before it even starts, so we don’t even get to hypothesis. We are stuck with tautologies and unfalsifiable arguments, which makes up most of women’s thinking.

Ok, now that they get honest, they say that they hate nice guys because most of them are not even nice. Well, that’s obviously a huge lie, although it’s true of Nice Guy (TM) types. So they’re not nice. They’re really assholes in disguise. Except that women actually preferentially select assholes and no even that but they prefer the biggest assholes of all when they do so. Who are far worse than your average nice guy, I might add.

Next argument is entitlement. I get very tired of this argument. If women had to live like men, they’d blow their brains out in a year. There’s no way they could handle this. They’re too pampered. Male life is so awful that women wouldn’t be able to take it. They’d break down, flip out, go neurotic, suicide out, who knows? It’s women who are entitled. Entitled every single day from the day they are born. Women are addicted to entitlement because it’s all they’ve ever known. Take it away from them and  they’re gone.

Of course men are not entitled to sex. Everyone knows that. But women think that every man on Earth out to be perfectly happy or better yet ecstatic about the possibility that he might live his entire life without ever having sex.

Women to a one insist that this is no big deal and that every man ought to just prepare himself for this possibility and be ok with it. Well, most men are not going to be very happy about that to say the least.  A certain number of them are going to go ER (go Elliot Rodger). That’s terrible, but that’s just the way it is. If you deny men sex, a certain number of them will flip and go on massacre sprees. Incels in China have been doing this for some time now.

Women can bitch till the cows come home, but this is simply a law of nature. It’s the natural, normal, expected reaction when huge numbers of men are denied sex for much of their lives. Yeah, no one’s entitled to anything. But you women are therefore not entitled to live a life free of the fear of being massacred by maniacs that you created by the policies that you set up. Fair is fair.

Furthermore, ha ha. Alphas aren’t entitled? Players aren’t entitled?  Macho guys aren’t entitled? Don’t make me laugh.

The guys who have sex with the most women are the most entitled assholes of all. They commit 50 times more sexual harassment than nice guys. They are 50 times rapier than nice guys. But women don’t really mind because behavioral or better yet statistical Alphas get to be about as rapey and sexual harass-y as they like.

Women don’t mind being raped and harassed by Alphas. They mind it but they never go to the cops. They never try to get them fired. They let Alphas hit on them annoyingly all night long and try every sleazy trick in the book  and women just say, “Tee hee,” and let them get away with it because Alphas get away with everything forever. Until they don’t. But at least they get a nice long run.

Meanwhile the nice guy of behavioral Beta gets in trouble for looking at women. Literally looking at them! He’s not even allowed to look at them! For a woman, a Beta looking at them is exactly as bad as an Alpha date-raping them. It’s literally the same thing.

A Beta gets in trouble and gets fired for mildly flirting with a woman even one time, for asking a woman for her number or out on a date. Meanwhile, Mr. Alpha POS acts 100X worse and he gets away with it forever, drowning in pussy the whole time until life caves in. Even then he’s only out temporarily and you check back in a bit and he’s back on his feet again, doing the same dick moves as ever.

Another one: Nice guys are only being nice to us to try to get into our pants! Yeah and Alphas aren’t? Anyway, most men are only being nice to you to try to get in your pants. If you women didn’t have vaginas, most of us men wouldn’t even give you the time of day.

Yeah. This is the world, ladies. Most men are trying to fuck you. Terrible, isn’t it? Get used to it. It will this way until your looks go and you turn ugly and then you will brag and swoon every time a man flirts with you or checks you out. The same attention that made you suicidally depressed when you were pretty will be sorely missed and painfully missed when your looks are shot.

Also, Alphas are only being nice to you to get into your pants too, and they are much worse about it than nice guys. They do something called the Honeymoon phase. That’s when they don’t just callously pump and dump you by showering you with love until you give it up and then dumping you out with the trash afterwards.

If they bother to try to have a relationship with you, you get the Honeymoon phase, typical of all Cluster B scums. They shower you with love and devotion as part of a scam to wind their way into your heart. It’s all completely calculated in the most cold-blooded way. And then once they are in and have you nice and trapped and cut you off from all your friends and support and have no where to go and are at his mercy for a place to stay, the abuse begins. And gradually gets worse.

Because all Cluster B’s can do is abuse people, especially in sexual relationships. They literally cannot be any other way. Relationship = abuse for Cluster B’s. That’s how they play it.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: The Teenage Boy Bullshit: The Fake Catholic Priest Pedophile/Child Molesting Epidemic

In short, it never even happened! There were no priests molesting kids*. There was no “kidfucking*.” There was no “child rape.” There were no pedophile priests*. There were not priest child molesters*.

*To be fair, 5% of the cases did involve actual child molesting. And a few of the priests, surely less than 5%, were pedophiles.

We are now in the midst of an idiotic mass hysteria and moral panic about the sexuality of teenage girls. I call it the Teenage Girl Bullshit. In contrast, in the cases of the fake pedophile priests, we are dealing with what I call the Teenage Boy Bullshit.

As noted above, there was either no child molesting or only very little. 95% of it was straight statutory rape, or as I prefer, illegal intercourse.

Kidfucking or child molestation: sex with children under 13.

Statutory rape or illegal intercourse: sex with teenagers 13-Age of Consent.

As it turns out the illegal intercourse in the case of the priest scandal was a particularly ugly kind because it was creepy and coercive. It had to be creepy and coercive because almost of the boys were straight boys seduced into gay sex. In general, straight teenage boys do not want to have gay sex, and thank God for that! Thank you very much, teenage boys! However, they can be manipulated into gay sex via creepy and coercive means.

There’s a problem here: Being seduced into gay sex can be very traumatic for a teenage straight boy and it may indeed cause problems extending into adulthood. Not because a straight teenage boy had sex (God forbid!) as the hysterics say. Instead it was because the sex was gay sex and not straight sex.

If the boys were gay, this scandal would not even exist. No one except the sex hysterics would give a damn because a majority of gay teenage boys are either fucking adult men already or they want to. Most if not all gay men who had sex with adult men when they were teenage boys look back on the experience with fond nostalgia.

Also there was no “kid rape.” There was illegal intercourse and child molestation. Statutory rape per se isn’t really rape. It’s really illegal intercourse. Child molesting per se isn’t rape either. Child molesting and child rape are two completely different things and the latter is a lot worse and more dangerous than the former.

As it is, it doesn’t look like anyone forced anyone to do anything. Rape is forced sex. As my mother pounded into my head a million times as a teenage boy and young man, rape involves force or the threat of force.

I have no idea of the sexual orientation of the boys. Most I heard of were straight. I have no idea if some were gay. I’m quite certain that any gay ones weren’t the ones complaining because gay boys never complain about consensual sex with adult men. They always say they like it.

But most of the sex in this scandal was bad it involved straight boys and not gay boys. The straight boys were tricked into gay sex and this is often bad for their psychological development.

Of course the 5% of cases involving little boys getting molested was very bad. I certainly don’t approve of adult men molesting little boy-children. I don’t know how harmful it is, but I doubt if it’s a good thing. It’s certainly bad for little girls under 13 to get molested by adults, and in quite a few cases the harm lasts into adulthood.

Probably none of the complaints involved gay boys.

The question was posed to me, Would I care if any of those boys the priests had sex with were gay? Of course I wouldn’t care! Other than possibly an abuse of a power dynamic and something a priest should not be doing as part of his job description, it’d be fine with me, and I’m sure it would be fine with the boys too! It’s not rape if they love it. Gay boys almost universally love their teen-adult sex, so I don’t understand what the problem is.*

*They like it if it’s consensual. There was some #metooing of gay men in the movie business by gay teenage boys, but that’s because those men were rapey and coercive towards teenage gay boys, not because they had sex. In a number of cases, those boys were actually raped. On the other hand, some of those gay boys #metooing those Hollywood adult men were teenage male prostitutes. I’m sorry they got coerced into rapey sex but they weren’t exactly paragons of moral value.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: After Menopause, All Women Are Born-Again Virgins

As she ages, my Mom is turning into a worse and worse feminist every year. I hardly even knew she was one before.

This is happening in tandem with her increasing puritanism. Same thing: every year, she gets more and more puritanical and weird about sex. She was always like that a bit, but at least you could talk to her about it, and to some extent she was always proud of me in a sort of “my son, the stud” sort of way. She always thought my playboy ways were hilarious and she would almost fall on the floor laughing at my latest exploits. That makes sense as most women, and humans in general (even some little kids) think players are funny as Hell for some reason.

And of course, feminism is intimately tied in with puritanism and has been from day one. It makes sense as feminism is simply female thinking empowered, reified and increasingly legislated to become the ruling force in society. Feminist Rule is nothing but Female Thought in Power. And puritanism, along with, oddly enough, nymphomania, is part of the Female Character.

Her increasing puritanism got me to thinking. Menopause nukes your sex drive. Women with no or low sex drives tend to become puritanical anyway,  and the longer they stay that way, the worse they get. So my theory now is that increasing puritanism is something all postmenopausal women experience. It may well get worse with time too, as so many miserable things do.

Postmenopausal women for all intents and purposes turn into complete prudes and born-again virgins. I’ve seen complete whore to nun conversions, just like that! Snap of the fingers.

Postmenopausal women a few years out of menopause (they stay horny for a couple of years for some reason) are basically insufferable, and I don’t want anything to do with them. I’ve been battling puritanical shitwads my whole life. I’m sick and tired of them and their crap.

Postmenopausal women don’t fuck anyway, so what’s the point? Why even be with a woman if she doesn’t fuck? That’s pretty much the only reason to be with her anyway, right?

I’ve got my porn and my hand, and neither one ever turns me down.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: The Primary Goal of a Woman’s Life Is To Achieve and Be in Love

Good point. Women always talk about wanting “commitment.” But women are hardly honest about a single thing they say in the Gender Wars. There’s too much at stake. Dated a lot of women and I’ve hardly met one who cared about commitment. Don’t think it was ever mentioned to me once. But one thing I noticed over and over was that the most important thing in the relationship to the woman was love – that she was in love with me.

Beyond that and interacting with many women over the years, it’s obvious that the primary female drive is for love. They often idealize this is preposterous ways that make any sense but boil down to them not liking it being trivialized.

Woman: “That’s not true love…that’s not real love…that’s not love, that’s infatuation, etc.”

Me: “What’s not true love?”

Woman: 100 million completely arbitrary, idiotic and completely unscientific notions. “True love is for life,” and other nonsense.

There’s a good reason for most of women’s ridiculous and irrational behavior, and the good reason behind this is that they dislike the idea of love being trivialized.

Why? Because several decades of studying women have shown me that the primary female drive is for love. In a sense, this is what their whole life is wrapped up in. Sure, they have all these other things, career and whatnot going on, but all of that pales compared to the primary drive or goal of a woman’s life: to achieve love and to be in love.

Even with women who say they don’t know what love is or they’ve never experienced love, the primary drive for love is there. These often young women are confused because they think they have not experienced real love yet.

Having been involved with some young women like that who were obviously crazy in love with me for a while (but then of course denied it later), it was clear that they simply had not developed a schema of what love was that they could plug their feelings into.

Also, I think they were looking for the fireworks, sparks, and “Hollywood love affair of the century” notion of love, and most love isn’t really that intense. They fall in love, but it’s not the explosions and fireworks kind they expect, so they say it’s not love. Or if they are a young woman, they fall in love, are ashamed of it, so they deny it later on.

I had a couple of young women do this but it was obviously that they fell out of love with me at some point, and then felt terribly ashamed of themselves for falling in love with a man 30-40 years older than they were, so they denied it.  In one case, I was 58 and she was 27 (31 year age gap),  and in the other case, I was 59 and she was 18 (41 year age gap).

These women were wrong of course, but women are wrong about a million things, and this bothers them not.

Some seek refuge in a ridiculous concept called Aromanticism. I had a female best friend who insisted she was aromantic. Studying the concept, I decided she could not possibly be one, plus they whole concept was a bit silly they way it was laid out.

Supposedly there are all these folks out there who desperately want love, but they have a genetic or biological inability to fall in love which prevents them from doing so. That’s nonsense. There are no such people. Real aromantics are just cold fish who have chosen to not experience love because, well, because they’re cold fish! It’s a disorder of choice like so of these stupid new Millennial identities, most of which don’t even exist in any real way.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: Women Are Not Irrational – They Are Just Employing a Different Kind of Logic

To women, being wrong or right is not important. What is important is that they feel that certain things are right or wrong. Whether they really are or not is of no consequence. She’s not trying to be right at all costs. She’s trying to feel good, avoid painful confusion and cognitive dissonance and probably to keep from falling into depression or killing herself. If women do this to keep from killing themselves and to keep on trucking in life with a happy smile, I’m not going to fault them.

Female Emotional Logic:

Is this idea true or false?

Does it make me feel good,  calm, comfortable and at ease? Does it line up with the way I think the world should be, not how it is? It is true.

Does it make me feel bad, depressed, confused, suicidal, or anxious? Does it conflict with the way I think the world should be (not how it actually is, as this is of little importance to women)? It is false.

In other words, to women, there’s no such thing as the ugly truth. If it’s ugly, it’s untrue. Real simple.

And to some extent, there are no such thing as pretty lies, though they definitely grow more cynical and less utopian as they grow older. If it’s pretty, it’s true.

Women are utopians. If you understand one thing about women, understand this. And pretty lies are the very definition of utopia.

It’s not that it’s irrational logic so much as it’s what I call emotional logic – the logic is emotionally driven and it is logical in an emotional sense. When men say women are irrational what they are really saying is that women are using emotional logic instead of the logic of pure, cold, objective thought.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Trash’s Journeys to Return of Kings and Unz

Trashman Returns: Roosh V readers and even Roosh himself read this site.

What? Roosh V and even Roosh himself read my site?

Trashman Returns: But I was often called a “cuck” and “a shill”.

You’re not a cuck.

Trashman Returns: I moved on to an Alt Right site. But here I was called a Leftwing Libertarian-and I’m not Libertarian.

Unz. You’re not a Libertarian. I actually think you are Alternative Left! Maybe the liberal version and not the Leftist one.

Trashman Returns: When I pointed out the harm of neoliberal markets I was accused of being a shill and cuck and all the usual tedious Gen Z tags.

You’re a cuck if you’re against turbo-capitalism? How many times does capitalism have fall on its face before people wise up? Some people never learn.

Trashman Returns: Back came the response from one Unz Poster “Do you realize how f***ing gay that sounds, boss?”

Oh, you were on Unz. So many terrible rightwingers on there. We certainly don’t think being against neoliberalism is gay! We are conservative liberals and leftists, if that makes any sense. We are the Conservative Left! Rather conservative on social issues, but more left on economics and most everything else. In between the Cultural Left and the Republican social conservatives on social stuff.

Trashman Returns: Meanwhile, on RETURN OF KINGS, commentator’s wanted to tell me how “Alpha” they were and what a “Soyboy” I was.

Toxic masculinity. I hate that phrase, but that’s Roosh’s sites, sorry. Hell that’s all PUA sites. I am trying to get away from that here and create a PUA site for ordinary guys.

You’re not a soyboy? You’re for the men, right? Bros before hos! You’re against the manhating Feminist Enemy and you are with your brothers in solidarity against them. Ok, you’re not a soy or a cuck then. The soys and cucks are the male feminists and other fags who have taken up arms against their brothers by lining up with the feminists who wish our destruction.

PS I’m not against gay men here. Gay men are for the men! I usually call straight men gay. Almost all straight men nowadays are male feminists fags. The male feminists who are working against the men to ruin our jobs and careers and put most of us in jail or prison (the goal of modern feminism) – those are the guys that I call cucks, soyboys, fags, wussies, girlymen, etc. I just call them that to humiliate them and attack their masculinity for lining up with the enemy against their brothers. I do this to shame them away from their gay anti-male tactics. Also, if you’re with the women and against the men, you’re not much of a man. You’re a pathetic wuss, a girlyman.

No real man is for the women and against the men. If that’s you, then you’re a fag.

People like Jason think I am against feminine men but I’m really not. I don’t care how masculine or feminine any man is. Hell, a lot of people used to think I was gay! And I’m a pretty soft guy myself and it’s caused me problems with women my whole damned life. I don’t care how masculine you are! You want to be a wimp, knock yourself out, man! I think straight effeminate men are bizarre. Why don’t you just go gay if you’re going to act like that? I’m not against effeminate gay men either. Cats meow, dogs bark, and gay men are effeminate. I dislike effeminate behavior in men, but I understand that it’s normal for gay men to be this way.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Leftwing Dindus: Who’s Behind the Riots?

Alpha Unit: LAS VEGAS (AP) — Three Nevada men with ties to a loose movement of right-wing extremists advocating the overthrow of the U.S. government have been arrested on terrorism-related charges in what authorities say was a conspiracy to spark violence during recent protests in Las Vegas.

Federal prosecutors say the three white men with U.S. military experience are accused of conspiring to carry out a plan that began in April in conjunction with protests to reopen businesses closed because of the coronavirus.

More recently, they sought to capitalize on protests over the death of George Floyd, a black man who died in Minneapolis after a white officer pressed his knee into his neck for several minutes even after he stopped moving and pleading for air, prosecutors said.

The three men were arrested Saturday on the way to a protest in downtown Las Vegas after filling gas cans at a parking lot and making Molotov cocktails in glass bottles, according to a copy of the criminal complaint obtained by The Associated Press.

Make of this what you will.

So, did they spark any violence? No. What is the name of this group? Boogaloo Boys?

The vast majority of the people I see smashing stuff up, setting things on fire, and looting are young people. Many of them are young Black men who don’t exactly look like fine upstanding citizens. In the West many of the rioters are young Hispanic man who don’t exactly look like model citizens either. In all of these riots, and most particularly in Minneapolis, the smashers and burners were young White men who look something like antifa types or skate punks. Antifa has indeed had presence in these riots. Look at all the antifa graffiti.

The vast majority or rioters are young lumpen Black, Hispanic and White men. They live on the fringes of society and are estranged from mainstream culture. Many are anti-society. Most don’t seem to have much if any money. Many do not appear to be married or have children.

If these rioters vote at all, they may vote Bernie. The Blacks and Hispanics will either vote Bernie or simply Democratic if they even vote at all. These are leftwing riots all the way. Not even liberal riots. Leftwing riots, as in to the left of liberal Democrats. No party is behind this. Almost all Democratic Party politicians are condemning the violence. There are no organizations called antifa and Black Lives Matter.

Of course people on the left do not wish to believe that these are leftwing riots. Left-wingers, like everyone else, are Dindus. I suppose Blacks also wish to deflect the blame, and Blacks are the original Dindus. Leftwing Dindus are saying that all the rioting is being caused by far right racist White nationalists and undercover police instigators. This is simply the natural human tendency to deny and deflect blame whenever members of your group do something unsavory.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: America Has a Wild Hair up Its Ass: The Culture of Perpetual Outrage

I get banned from local establishments for no good reason except I pissed some silly cunts off unbeknownst to me.

The world’s antisocial now: #metoo was the death knell for socialization, and now Corona put a stake in the heart of human closeness and commingling, never to let the gregarious beast of human intimacy rise again.

We are ruled by our fears. Of creeps, of horny guys, of dangerous people who barely exist, of weird diseases. Of everything. Of nothing. Mostly, of not much of anything important.

We live in an Outrage Culture or Culture of Perpetual Outrage where you’re supposed to be outraged about the SJW nonsense du jour. The Zeitgeist is Perpetual Outrage, and the expression on everyone’s face is “one minute away from outraged offense.”

Offended! Offended! Offended! I’m offended! You’re offended! We’re all offended!

Cool, now we can have an Offended Party. We can get drunk and call each other names until we all beat each other up!

Let’s go on the net. Ban! Ban! Ban! Ban! That poster looked at you wrong! Ban the heretic.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Semantic Entropy Is Here: We Are All Lexicographers Now

Definitions of crimes, thoughtcrimes, or offenses against this, that, or whatever social norm creep steadily upward ever year.

Rape? It’s as big as the Atlantic Ocean now.

Assault? What is that? You looked at someone wrong. That’s assault.

Sexual assault? The definition spreads every year like a kudzu vine. In my opinion, sexual assault is simply another word for dating. It didn’t used to be, but that’s how the ladies have it set up now boys, and the girls make the rules now in this world, and don’t you ever forget it.

Battery? What’s that? I tapped a woman on the shoulder. That’s literally battery nowadays.

Sexual battery? What’s is that? Can someone explain to me what it is so I don’t do it because it sounds kind of fun, and I might try it. They want to get pounded anyway, and that’s kind of right battery now that I think of it.

Sexual abuse? What does it even mean? It means any time an adult human had sex with an adolescent human ages 13-17, the poor teenager got abused. Oh boo hoo. Not only that, but the little lass now needs 20 years of therapy for that time she got sexually abused by seducing that 25 year old man at that party and grabbing his cock. She seduced the guy, so I guess she abused herself. Oh well, self abuse is fun. I prefer to do it with some porn though.

But no matter. Abused she was, and abused she will be! The inevitable damage is already there. We can’t see it or measure it, but women tell us it’s there, so we have to take their word for it. Damaged how long? Forever more. Because of the scars that won’t heal.

All women are not only Permanent Children but they are also Permanent Victims.

The victimization starts on the first day when any men around, if there even are any that is, start misogynisting the newborn girl. Because that’s what males do to little girl babies. They misogynist them in all sorts of microaggressive ways. The microaggressions are hard to see or measure, but if you get an electron microscope, you can make them out all right. Wicked men. Turning their misogynist abuse into nanotech!

Because that’s what we men to do females. We misogynist them. Every day. All day long. Like a rocket barrage that never ends. Poor women! Poor babies! Women are crying! Women are babies!

Quick, someone get that lady a handkerchief to wipe her tears. That man over there walking away just misogynisted her, and now she’s going to cry for half an hour!

The misogynisting goes on all through the wretchedness we call the Life of Woman, even in those retirement villages where those evil old men who can’t even get a hardon anymore still misogynist those little old ladies all the doggone day. What’s a lass to do?

Grooming? What’s that? I guess you can groom anyone now. Men can groom 40 year old women. Who knew? Turns out I’ve been grooming females my whole life. And I had no idea! I heard lower primates like to groom each other as a show of affection, but I had no idea I had so much chimp in me!

Illegal looking! Watch those eyes! It’s illegal to look at women now in California! Stamp out that male gaze! We’ll put out your eyes and send you to Purgatory to stand on a cliff for half of eternity till you work it off!

Pedophilia? That’s probably 90% of all sex now, especially now that all women are shaved as bare as 12 year olds. It’s mass hysteria and a moral panic. So half the population are effectively psychotic at least on the issue being hysterisized.

Hitch a ride on the moral panic train! It’s a fun ride, folks. Full of thrills and spills and an outrage around every bend. You’ll be scared from the moment you hop on til the moment you disembark, if you ever do. But that’s the whole idea.

Pedophiles? Well that’s 100% of us men for sure because if you get turned on by 17 year old girls, nowadays you’re literally a pedophile. Well not all men. Dead men and gay men don’t count, but the rest are disgusting pedos!

Trespassing? What’s that? I don’t even know what that is anymore.

Breaking and entering? That includes reaching inside someone’s door to knock on their door now. You broke into their house with your hand to knock on the door. I got the cops called on me the other day for that. A cop came to my door and threatened to arrest me for putting my hand into someone else’s doorway, and thereby breaking and entering their residence. I tell ya, we got one Hell of a serious crime wave in this country!

Sexism? What’s that? Define it. Another word with either no definition or any definition, whichever you prefer. Take your pick! Or just make up your own definition. DIY!

Misogyny? It’s everywhere. How do we know it’s everywhere? Because it’s misogyny. How do we know it’s misogyny? Because it’s everywhere.It’s a great theory because it’s not even wrong. There! I just saw some misogyny crawl under the bed! Get a broom and stop it before it kills again!

Racism? What’s that? Define it. Ever notice that no one can even define that word? It’s literally a word with no meaning at all or a meaning that encompasses half of life, so it’s everything and nothing both at once.

Nazi? That’s 42% of the population now. Didn’t I know that? Silly me!

Hater? That’s half the population. Well, now you can feel better as you stew. Know you’re not alone.

Homophobia? Nowadays we are at the point where if you won’t suck another guy’s cock, you’re a homophobe. Another word with no meaning. Define it. If you’re going to accuse half of society of it, the least you could do is define it. Nope. No one knows what it means, or worse, it means whatever the person uttering the word thinks it means. Everyone gets to define their own words now. Fun, huh? We are all lexicographers now!

Sexual harassment? If a woman was made to feel uncomfortable, she got harassed. That’s literally the definition. Crazy, huh? How to avoid giving the crazy the lovely lass a wild hair up her ass? Easy, just read her mind. Easy as pie. Anyone can do that, come on!

Sexual harassment means whatever the woman who says it thinks it means. If the little lady thinks she got harassed, she did.

Rape? It’s all rape, baby! What is? Sex! All of it? Well, not all of it, sure.The vanilla stuff isn’t rape at the moment, but don’t worry, the feminists are hard at work on it. Inventing new crimes every year!

But most of the fun kind of sex is rape, or rapey, or grey rape, or acquaintance rape, or spousal rape, or rape by deception rape (otherwise known as “seduction”), or rape by handing her a beer before you  have sex with her rape, or regret rape the next morning or 20 years later rape, or coercive rape by talking or better yet arguing her into it rape (my specialty).

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: Latest Sexual Adventures: The Knockout Gorgeous Thieving Meth Head Bitch

An update to my latest sexual adventures, or should I say unadventures the way things are going these days.

I had a methhead chick over at my place recently. She was smokin hot and not fucked up by meth yet. 39 years old, 5 kids, divorced. Basically a complete airhead which I don’t mind because airheaded women can act extremely feminine. Idiotic and childlike, sure, but oh so feminine. Anyway, raw femininity does have an idiotic and childlike quality to it, but I love it anyway because I even love women when they are being idiotic.

I got her in my car and she said, “Damn! You’re fucking hot! You know that?”

I said, “Cool, let’s fuck then.”

She said, “Nope, I don’t give it away for free. Either dope (meth) or money, one or the other.”

Guys, once a woman says she doesn’t give it away for free, just get rid of her. She’s a whore. A pure, 100%, real deal, no lie, fucking whore. Not even in the typical way that most all women are whores. Chicks like this are on the level of a streetwalker.A nasty, lowdown, sleazy, streetwalking, thieving, criminal fucking prostitute of the lowest variety.

You never do anything but lose money or stuff with real deal whores, and a lot of the times, you don’t even get laid. They just take your money or stuff, withhold the pussy, and take off. You have no idea how many cunts like this there are. They’re literally everywhere, mostly young women aged 23-29. This one at 39 was a bit old for this crap, but being an addict, it made sense.

45% of real deal whores are female psychopaths. Real deal whores are pretty much the worst women of all. That’s what female psychopaths do – thieve and whore, whore and thieve. Male psychopaths of course are so much worse as they are vastly more destructive and often extremely aggressive and even violent.

I did manage to get her naked. I often get women naked once I get them in the door. I’m not even sure how I do it. I just somehow get their damn clothes off. Ladies, if any of you dare to tread into my Lion’s Den (otherwise known as Enemy Territory), keep in  mind that there’s a pretty good chance you will lose your clothes, at least for a bit. Plus my place is sort of a free fire zone. If I get you in here, I’m probably going to be grabbing at you and steering you towards the bedroom. Because that’s what we do with hot lady visitors here at Bob’s Hotel for Wayward Gals.

I grabbed at her a few times but she knocked me away with a “That’ll cost ya.” I gave her a bunch of stuff like toiletries because she was poor. To add insult to injury the bitch stole some of my stuff. Actually my roommates stuff but still…And she gaslit me real bad too.

She took my roommates’ jacket. I saw her with it and told her that’s ours and she was stealing it. She gaslit me and said she’d been wearing since I met her. I’m going back over my memory and I can’t think straight. She walks out the door with my roommates sandals and jacket while I’m still doubting my damned memory.

I didn’t  really get anything other than getting her naked. But that’s got to count for something, right? Just getting a hot woman over to your place and getting her damned clothes off is pretty awesome. I give myself a Bronze Star for that achievement.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Alt Left: Of Course I’m Not a Misogynist

Polar Bear: He’s pro-woman at his core but is suffering a bit of racial ageism.

Of course. I’ve always liked women better than men. If I had my way, I’d just be around women all the time or as much of the time as possible. I love being around guys too, but women are better in a way.As you can see, if I like women better than men, I’m obviously a misogynist, right? Feminists are so full of shit.

But in a way it’s a circular argument because no matter what, you will be around men.

You don’t like women much? Ok, you will be around men.

You like women as much as men? Ok, you will be around men half the time at least.

You like women better than men? The weird thing is that even there you will have men around a lot because if you are around women all the time, pretty soon you will have guys hanging around because “I want to hang out with the guy who has all the chicks around him.” Get the picture?

I’m almost like a gay man in that sense. In fact, I used to think I was like “one of women’s gay friends, except I’m straight.”

I agree that I am “one of the girls” in a sense. But I’m not really. I’m just pretending to be one of the girls. I’m really an evil spy pretending to be one of the girls except I’m secretly a guy infiltrating them in order to deviously trick, fool, and scam them into having sex with me.

Part of my brain is like a woman’s brain, so in a way, I think like a woman. That’s why I understand women pretty well. Most women’s conversation seems insipid to us men – hot guys, makeup, clothes, gossip, bla bla, lot of silly giggling and verbal hugging. It’s just pure idiocy. They seem like children.

But I’ve heard that women think the same of us when we get together with fart jokes, sports, and arguing politics. Men are insipid to them.

So I can sit around with a bunch of women being women and doing their girl chat, completely idiotic and senseless, like chirping birds fighting for no reason at your feeder, and I’m right at home amidst all this silliness and idiocy. Sure it is silly and idiotic, but I love it because I even love women when they are being idiotic. Because I’m sort of one myself.

Now mind you I am not a tranny at all. I love being a man and I respect any man, especially a gay man, who loves being a man. I’m also as masculine as any man that ever lived in a sense, and that’s my primary self-image. So I don’t hate being a man and wish I was a woman.

Women weren’t being very nice to me a while ago, but I completely changed my looks. I have long hair now, look like a 1970’s glam rock star, and now women are being way, way nicer. See how shallow women are? Pathetic, isn’t it?

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Is It Gay to Say Another Man is “Hot?”

I say it myself. But then I add, “And I’m straight,” or “No homo!”

Hey, some men are hot. And I’m completely straight.

As a young man, I had many other young straight men tell me that I was very goodlooking. There is a way to say that without sounding or looking gay. None of the men who did that appeared gay to me when they said that. They were simply stating an obvious fact.

It’s not so much that you want to fuck the guy or even do anything remotely sexual with him. It’s more you want to be that guy.

A Universal “Law of Attraction?”

I even feel “attracted to” or “drawn towards” some of these guys. It’s like a force field sucking towards the man. It freaks me out because it seems gay as Hell, and I don’t like to feel gay. But then I think, “Would you kiss that guy or do anything remotely sexual with him?” and the thought of doing that makes me want to jump 10 feet backwards.

But I think attractive people of both sexes do have this sort of “force field” effect that almost physically sucks you into their orbit. I wouldn’t be surprised if it were biological. Attractive people make you feel good. It feels good for you to even be around them. It’s almost as if some of their attractiveness leaks out of them and onto you.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Still Watchin’ That Gay Porn?

They say if you look at gay porn, then you’re gay, but that’s a bad argument.

I assure you that all straight men who look at porn have seen some gay porn, obviously photo stills, but a lot of them have seen some videos. Sometimes that stuff just sneaks up on you while you are trying to watch straight porn.

You load the video, and “Oh no oh my fucking God get that fag shit out of here gross!” and you can’t close out the video soon enough. Other times you’re watching some, uh, straight porn, except it’s not completely straight. Two men on one woman, fine, we’ve all seen that a million times. But whoa, one guy’s fucking the woman, while the other guy…

“Whoa! Wait a second there buddy! Hooold your horses, pal! WTF have we here? The other guy…is…sucking the first guy’s cock! Queers! Faggots! Oh gross! Oh noes! I mean I love threeways but not this fag shit get outa here no way ew gross faggots faggots fags fags fucking fags I hate fags I swear dammit!”

That’s your thought process. So my thoughts are un-PC. So fuckin what?

Fire me, if I even have a job. Ban me, if there’s even a site I haven’t been banned from yet. Destroy my career. No whoops I don’t have one! Dox me! Whoops we can’t find Robert Lindsay anywhere because he’s not in any public records! What is he, a ghost? Nope, he’s a mere man who has mastered the art of disappearance in this all so Big Brotherly modern wired up Internet digitalized you’re being watched, listened to, recorded and monitored everywhere dystopia we call Late Capitalism.

I refuse to watch that stuff because to me it’s horrible, however I do like to watch incredibly fucked up shit like a gay man shitting on another gay man’s face and mouth while the other guy eats the shit.

That’s so fucking gross and sick that I just have to watch it.. Why? Because I’m a sick fuck, that’s why! Not because I’m gay. Those are the only gay videos I can handle – the ones where gay men are being disgustingly sick fucks. Even then, I’m watching it because it’s gross, not because they’re gay.

I admit to being a bit of a homophobe too, so I like to make fun, mock, laugh at, and insult the gay men in these videos and call them insulting names. It’s not PC, but it’s my private thoughts, so so what? The SJW’s haven’t made having certain thoughts illegal. Not yet anyway. I’m sure they’re working on it.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: How Many Attractive Women Aged 18-30 Are Not Whores?

I don’t want to know how many of them are whores*. That would be almost all of them. I want to know how many of them are not whores? Is there even one out there anywhere in the US?

If Tinder cleaned out the scammers, porn seller whores, onlyfans whores, camwhores, real whores, and just out and out beggar whores, it would be a lot better. Nothing but whores on there when it comes down to it. Many different types of whores, but all whores nonetheless.

Just about every attractive young 18-30 year old woman on there is some sort of a whore. They’re all selling pussy. Come to think of it, how many attractive women aged 18-30 are not selling pussy? 1%? Is it even that high?

Have goodlooking young women always been such a bunch of whores, or is this some new thing?

* Keep in mind that I’m not talking about sluts. I luvs sluts. Sluts make the world go round. Let’s hear it for sluts!

I am talking about actual fucking whores. That means women who are quite literally selling pussy. They’re charging cold, hard cash for pussy. Any woman who is doing that is a fucking whore, sorry.

I really dislike whores. To me that’s as low as a woman gets. In fact, 45% of arrested prostitutes (the hardcores) are diagnosed psychopaths. I’ve had some experience with whores, even recently. I didn’t bring them over as whores. I brought them over as dates, more or less.

And then when it got down “Hey are you gonna put out or what?” Lo and behold! They were whores! One thing I heard over and over from these women, who ranged in age from 23-43, was “I don’t give it away for free. If I’m going to give it up, I want to get something out of it.”

One was a meth addict and she gave me the choice of money or meth if I wanted her to give it up. She got naked in my house too at various points. I made a grab for her tits, but she got angry and said, “Hey, you have to pay for that!”

I’m tired of this shit. When I was young I never had to pay for it. No woman ever actually charged me like this. Sure, I had to take them out to lunch or dinner or this or that at times, but there wasn’t this actual whorish shakedown. I wonder if it’s because of my age.

Seems like just about any woman who wants to have sex with me these days thinks I ought to pay for it. That’s damned insulting. The only way women will have sex with me is if I pay them! What an insult. That makes me feel so ugly and unattractive.

My Mom said that was actually the typical attitude most women had when she was growing up. Not to be a whore of course, but to not give it up unless you get something in return. My Mom said, “We were taught that if you were going to give it up, you better get something out of it – like a wedding ring!”

I don’t mind this mindset and I don’t consider women who think this way to be whores.

And @AlphaUnit has agreed with me that this seems to be a general attitude among women – that you don’t give it up for free and if you’re going to give it up, you need to get something out of it.

Whores are not very nice women. And the bigger of a whore she is – like actually getting arrested for it – the more likely it is that she is psychopathic.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

PUA/Game: Just Got Banned from Tinder

I have no idea why. And if I mail them I can assure you that they will not tell me the reason for the ban. I can’t fathom a reason except I talked some real shit to some bitches who came to start a fight and to a Nigerian scammer who was nothing but a dirty criminal.

I have heard though that Tinder is full of the worst SJW feminists and that is why so many men are being banned. In other words, it’s infested with the Cultural Left, like just about all Dot.com businesses.

They refunded my money though.

Tinder’s a waste of time anyway, at least for someone my age. Just about everyone is a Nigerian scammer or selling porn or a cam girl trying to sign you up for an account on her onlyfans or a sugar baby looking for a sugar daddy (cost – $400-2,000/month) or just a desperate woman with her hand out begging money.

I was getting bombarded by sugar daddy requests – maybe 5/day sometimes. But perhaps that is a function of my older age. Is it normal for older men on dating sites to get bombarded by sugar daddy requests, or is it just me?

I’m almost glad I got banned. I got three dates out of that thing and one lay ha ha. I spent ~$500 on Tinder so I got one lay for 500 bucks. A lot of whores are cheaper than that. Waste of money.

I was also banned from r/Tinder on Reddit. I’m banned from quite a few subs on there frankly.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: If Women Practice Hypergamy, Do They Actually Fall in Love with Men?

Of course they do.

There have been a number of women (and girls for that matter) who were quite madly in love with me in my life. More after I turned 40. Been a couple of years though and I really miss it. Last one was an 18 year old girl!

It was real love, too. Not fake. And some of it was wild Hollywood love affair of the century Romeo and Juliet sparks and fireworks “crazy love.” That’s the high of a lifetime, but it’s pretty exhausting because the woman veers from extreme love to extreme hate very quickly.

I really don’t think they were faking it. Not only that, but I can spot a woman in love a mile away at night blindfolded. Basically they all act the same. Over the years you learn to spot the signals, and yep, there it is again!

I wonder how much of this falling in love women do has to do with Looks though. I’ve been said to be goodlooking since age 18 and even to this day, incredibly. After the Blackpill, I’m starting to wonder if all those women fell in love with that pretty face. Or was the pretty face the trigger, the necessary but not sufficient element to set off the love cascade that followed?

Women’s endless obsession with true love and real love and fake love and not real love and love and infatuation and all of their insane solipsism around their weird reification of love is all nonsense. Women mystify love to the point where they don’t even know what it is anymore. I mean they do, but they hide it from themselves, like they do with so many things.

They create some weird ideal standard that’s the real, true, pure love, and all the rest are some weird “fake love.” Got news for you, women. You’re wrong. Love ranges from a slight feeling where one is a little bit in love or on the verge of falling in love all the way to head over heels insanity. Women’s endless parsing of this basic human feature, possibly rooted in chemicals like oxytocin, is just silly navel-gazing on the part of women.

One thing, though. The most important thing in most any woman’s life is love and being in love. Way more important than sex. They literally live for that feeling. In a way, the entire purpose of women’s existence from the view of the female psyche is to fall in love. Since this seems to be the very reason women exist in the first place, it makes sense that they go nuts over-defining it and chopping it up into idiotic pieces of nonsense. Women don’t want to believe that this very thing they live for is quite commonplace.

If we use my definition of love above:

Love ranges from a slight feeling where one is a little bit in love or on the verge of falling in love all the way to head over heels insanity.

Most women will be in love, one way or another, especially in those early phases, quite a few times in her life if she dates a lot of men.

The best definition I have found for love is “fondness.” I get this feeling of overwhelming “fondness” for me from a woman who is truly in love with me. We think this is commonplace, but honestly I almost never really get that sort of true, pure fondness of the heart in my day to day life. You really only get that from a woman in love. Maybe a male friend, once in a while. Perhaps a close relative. But those are a bit different, though closely related.

I haven’t read the replies yet, but I assure you that below you will see many silly women talking about the real love, the pure love, the true love, and how rare it is, and give some stupid definition of it like “true love lasts for life” or something. It’s all bullshit. Women delude themselves. It is their nature to do just that.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20

Game/PUA: Do Women Practice Hypergamy or Not?

Answer is complicated as with most things.

Everyone knows women practice hypergamy. Everyone knows that. The evidence is overwhelming. But do they practice it exclusively? No.

Women practice hypergamy and then they don’t practice hypergamy, that is they practice monogamy. I’ve had women in love with me, and I gave them freedom to date other men and they said, “I don’t want to date other men! I only want you!” And that wasn’t just once, either. That were a number of women who said that.

Pretty sure my Mom was faithful to my Dad for 50 years.

Women are completely contradictory creatures. Are women nymphos or prudes? Good question. The truth, oddly enough, is that they are both, often at the same time! Being prudish and being nymphomaniacs are both essential aspects of the Female Character. I know it doesn’t make sense but that’s just how they are. And once you figure out this ambivalent weirdness, a lot of things about women will start to click and make sense.

Please follow and like us:
error0
fb-share-icon20
Tweet 20
fb-share-icon20