Ball-Breaking Bitches of the Right

Sharon Angle told Harry Reid in a debate last nite: “Man up, Harry Reid.” The debate was about the “insolvency” of Social Security. On another level, Angle is cutting off Reid’s balls. She’s telling him he’s not much of a man. Sarah Palin, hero of sexist rightwing males, is also a castrating bitch. When she told Barack he lacked cojones, she was telling him he’s not much of a man. It’s interesting that rightwing, anti-feminist women are doing this without a peep from rightwing, anti-feminist sexist men in their party. I can’t tell you how many bitches have done this to me. Mostly girlfriends too. You know what? I want to kill every single one of those bitches. I’m not going to do it, of course. I’m a pacifist, and I’ve never even hit a woman outside my immediate family. You know why I want to kill them? Not because I’m a psycho misogynist pig. It’s because they attacked my masculinity. You see, in Man World, those are fighting words. Not just that, but they can get you killed. Every sane man knows that. So most guys don’t attack other guys’ masculinity, especially if the target of the attack is a scary guy. We don’t dare do it, even if we hate the guy. But these bitches do this to us all the time. These bitches are insane. You know what? They’re trying to get murdered. My Mom said she never wanted to attack my Dad’s masculinity. Sometimes I would ask why don’t you say such and such to him, and she would say, “Oh, I’m afraid he would see that as an attack on his masculinity. I don’t want to attack his masculinity.” And they used to argue quite a bit too towards the end. But that was one line she would not cross. I told her that women in my ignoble generation did this all the time, and she said that was terrible. She said it was a major taboo in her generation to attack a man’s masculinity. A woman just did not do that. And one who did was reviled by other women as an evil bitch, even if they guy she attacked was a wimp. Maybe in some ways, they were the Greatest Generation. Better than mine anyway.

You Can’t Get Sad, and You Can’t Get Mad

A Black commenter notes that either Blacks are more emotional than Whites, or Whites are taught to keep their feelings under control:

Either we are more emotional and excitable as a people or other cultures teach the need to keep said emotions under control. One of these has to be true I think.

I will tell you, it’s been drummed into my head in the most major way, not just in childhood but certainly in adulthood, that one must keep one’s emotions in check. In fact, it is so bad, that I am now something like a rock. Which is not really good at all, but at least people won’t call me crazy for having feelings. For a long time in adulthood, it seemed that whenever I felt or displayed strong feelings, people would start calling me crazy. I really hate being called crazy! So now I’m afraid that if I show feelings, I’m going to get called crazy. I’d rather be a rock than be called crazy. The two things in adult White male society are:

  1. You can’t get mad.
  2. You can’t get sad.

The last one is especially tough. A girlfriend died some years ago, and I was sad for quite some time, about a year actually, but it was all OK, but that was a normal and appropriate and real response. It actually felt good because I finally had a feeling, and it was beautiful in a way to have such a wonderful sad feeling. Because when someone dies, you ought to feel sad. Well, within I think a few days or maybe a week, White people were already angrily ordering me to snap out of it. A couple of them ended friendships with me because I would not snap out of it soon enough. After she died, I cried maybe 15 times over a year or so. I went into this place called The Feeling World where I felt like I was on acid all the time for like 6-8 weeks. It was horrible, but it was wonderful too because it was real.

Men Should Be Terrorized Too

This post, The Bitch Question, has provoked a strong response from one of the female commenters. I feel that she misunderstood the piece. I think that men should be terrorized too! The world of men is a world of fear. Men are careful what they say to each other. We are afraid of the responses of other men. We are afraid of their violence and their rage. So Man World is all about being nice to other men and not pissing them off. Makes for a pretty well-behaved place. There are strict rules in Man World. One of the rules is the fighting words rule. There are certain things that, if I say them to other men, that man has a right to hit me. Not kill me, but hit me. I know this, all men know this. So we don’t use words like that with other men. And if we do, we are well aware that that man has a right to hit us. He will hit us, and there’s hardly a man on Earth who will come to our defense. They will all say that that man had a right to hit us. Even a cop might agree. So Man World is actually a pretty peaceful place as long as you play by the rules. But we are all being terrorized, all the time. And it’s good and right. It makes for a very well behaved society. In Man World, I don’t get into it with other guys much. I show them respect, typically whether they deserve it or not. I even show scumbags respect, assuming they’ve done nothing to me. In fact, I might show them even more respect because I’m often afraid of them. Fear is the glue that holds the world of men together and makes it work. Without rules like that, we would be at each other’s throats all the time. Now I suppose I’m not being very nice to some guy out in Man World. All my words are OK, but I’m sort of cold, snide or arrogant. He has a right to retaliate against me, and often he will. He will act cold, snide or snooty back at me. If he starts being reactively aggressive, I can do various things. I can smile. I can compliment him. I can back off. I can look down. I can try to go into a submissive mode. Man World works like this: you show me respect, and I show you respect. Or, barring that, you’re at least not openly disrespectful. You show men respect because you are terrified of them. Terrified of their violence and rage. You fear them, so you humor them and butter them up. Women come along and upset the whole thing. Because women don’t understand these rules at all. Western women say things to us all the time that would get them hit or worse in Man World were they men. They violate all the rules of our world, and they do so just because they think we won’t dare hit them. It infuriates men, and I’m sure it gets a lot of women hit. One thing Western women do a lot is attack our masculinity. They do this even to the most macho of men. The only reason they do this is because they know that there’s nothing we hate worse. In Man World, if you attack a man’s masculinity, he might just hit you. Worse, he might try to kill you. So that’s one thing that we are very careful not to do, especially with more masculine men. When Western women attack our masculinity for no reason than because they know that we hate this more than anything else, they’re frankly asking to get murdered. Western women take lovers and even parade them around in front of their boyfriends and husbands to humiliate the man. That’s simply outrageous. It’s one thing to take a lover. It’s another to parade him around in front of your man. You’re once again frankly asking to get murdered. I don’t understand Western women. Why are they trying to get themselves killed?

I’m a Dropout

Kind of like this guy. But not nearly so extreme.

The weird thing is, I’m actually quite content. I’m defeated. I ran up the white flag in the war against life along time ago. Life won, I lost. The world can do with me what it wills at this point; I’m not fighting back anymore. I’m not an pessimist; nor am I quite an optimist (though I do feel like one at times), more properly, I’m a defeatist. I don’t think much of anything is ever going to work out, but I don’t care either.

That means I spend very little time ranting, raving, complaining, bitching around and being a negative person like so many of the neurotic middle class White people around me. Since I don’t expect anything to go right, I’m constantly being surprised by everything that does more or less go ok.

And I get a lot of enjoyment and pleasure out of life. I love challenges, and I involve myself in challenging things all day long. Negative people think challenges are a drag. I think they are tear-your-hair-out difficult, but I kind of like that.

Every day is so full of interests and things to do that I can honestly say that I’m swamped. That means I can’t necessarily get back to you. So maybe call or write again.

If you keep yourself busy with interesting things all day and night, you don’t have much time to sit around and think about how shitty your life really is. And, as Thoreau noted, if you sit down and think about it, most of our lives probably do suck.

Now that I’m outside of the rat race, I’m done with the whole money game. I think I must give off dropout vibes, because no one ever asks me how much money I make. No one ever even brings up money around me. They just figure I don’t care about money, so why bring it up? No one ever asks me if I’m married either, so I guess they figure I don’t give a damn about that either.

The only reason pecking order guys start going on about how much they make is because they think that you give a damn and don’t make as much as they do. I obviously care nothing about money, so there’s no one to one-up. It’s actually kind of a nice place to be.

The only reason guys taunt other guys with their hot babe girlfriends and wives is to get the others riled up. If your attitude is, “Women? Who needs em?” you’ve left them stumped and they won’t challenge you.

It also helps to look some combination of macho, cocky, swaggering, intimidating, scary, dangerous, and yet content and indifferent. I guess that’s me. Probably a lot of people are going to hate you if you act like that, but they will do so silently, and hardly anyone will ever insult you.

People used to insult me all the time, I think because they knew I cared, so they knew they could hurt my feelings and watch me squeal. Also I seemed like the nice guy type who would not fight back. Even adult humans actually love to do this. Every civilized adult has a 13 year old sadist lurking beneath that sleek and grownup exterior, however genteel.

If you look like you’re going to bite their ear off, or if you look like you don’t care if they insult you, or some combination of both, most people won’t say anything nasty to your face. They might not talk to you at all. But if they do, they often just stand around trying to say nice things.

Say nice things back and compliment them a lot. Act gentle and speak in a soft, kind, voice. Smile, laugh and say dumb nothings. Show sympathy and decency and criticize bad people. Speak of higher moral values and claim you uphold them.

They’ll think you’re Clint Eastwood on a good day, and who could turn that down? If they do try to insult you, act like they just stepped on your foot and get outraged. That usually puts a stop to that.

A woman came to my door the other day.

I said, “You owe me $25.” She said, “ExCUSE me?” I said, “You owe me 25 bucks, dammit.” She said, “Open the damn door.” I said, “Screw you. You owe me 25 bucks.” She said, “Oh? Is that the way it’s going to be?” I said, “Yep.” She turned and stormed off. I said, “Don’t come back!”

I saw her a few days later. She started laughing and came running towards my car.

She said, “I’m gonna kick your ass, Bob.” I said, “You owe me 25 bucks.” She said, laughing, “No I don’t. I owe you $10.” I said, “25”. She said, laughing, “That does it. I’m coming over to your place tonite!” I backed away and drove off.

It never pays to be wimpy with women.

Obviously, the poor but happy and I don’t care thing is going to run into some horrible roadblocks with American women, but as you get older, it gets easier. Women actually get way nicer as they get older. Into their 40’s and 50’s, they’re looks are going or gone. And even if they still have looks, they know they’re second choice.

When you’re looks are headed south, you need money or personality. No man cares about a woman with money, so that’s out. As a woman ages, she better have a good personality, or no one will give her the time of day.

The worst bitches of all are around 20-40 yrs old. Mid-30’s is particularly horrible. But they’re mostly bitchy towards men their own age. Even younger women are often a bit more subdued towards older men, or at least they won’t insult you to your face. There’s still a bit of “respect your elders” residue left in our blighted culture.

Act like, “Look, woman, talking to me is a damned privilege. It’s earned, and you don’t earn it by being a bitch. The first gratuitous damned insult, and you’re out of here. I don’t need you or care about you, and there’s women after me all the time anyway. I don’t need any of you women, and I can get any woman I want anyway.” She’ll go into good behavior mode to make sure you don’t storm off.

So, as we age, some things get a bit easier. You get to bail out of the shark tank and splash around in the kiddie pool again.

After age 40 or so, most of the intense competition is over and things are just the way they are. You’re rich, poor or middle class, and however it shook out, that’s the way it is. Most people reach some sort of an accommodation with wherever they are, and most egos have been bodyslammed so much, they’re subdued and housetrained.

Our bodies are falling apart, but the world’s at least nicer, and we aren’t dogs fighting over bones anymore. And if we are lucky, when our backs aren’t hurting too much, we can even still have sex.

Gay and Bi Men Versus Straight Men: A Neverlasting Peace

A straight commenter notes that queers are pissing him off too. Well, of course they are. Friendship’s not really possible with these guys, except in rare cases.

I’m starting to get annoyed, too. I used to be pretty pro-gay, even though I’m totally not gay, but now old gays keep talking to me and I talk back, being friendly as I am, but then I just get trapped in conversations with gays (who are usually pretty smart and alright to talk to) and can’t talk to girls. Gays recruit, and they usually want me. I’ve avoided them permanently, but unfortunately not all my family has. Annoyingly, where I am at the moment, girls tend to think I’m gay. Why? because I’m not a beef head jock and if you’re not like that in Nevada, apparently you seem gay. So everyone thinks I’m gay when I go out. Annoying. The pro-gay movement has made it hard to be even the slightest bit androgynous, not totally over the top masculine, without appearing gay.

I would not talk to old gays at all. I’ve had very few positive experiences with those guys as a young man. They always tried to hit on me. There’s no way around it.

The only way to deal with them is to adopt this very harsh mental set that says, “I know you’re gay, but I’m straight, and if you try anything, I will so kick your ass!” I used to be a punker who wore leather and studs all the time, and all the gays and bis were afraid of me. If you terrify them a little bit, they won’t make a move on you. They seem to read the mental language and will have this very coolish conversation with you with no gay flirtation.

I’m actually glad people think you’re gay! People have been saying this about me since I was 15 years old. Of course I’m not, but it’s annoying. I compensate by acting very macho, tough and hardass, but for some insane reason, they still keep calling me gay! WTF. They say I look gay, walk gay and even talk gay. You’ve heard my interviews. WTF, I talk like a fag?

Thing with me is, like the commenter, I’m just not a macho beefhead type guy. Plus as a young man I was very goodlooking (Not anymore.) Any goodlooking guy who is not a macho beefhead jock is automatically a faggot.

The women where you at are retarded. Have their parents mated with the livestock or something? What’s the source of the retardation then?

Females ought to be able to tell if you’re gay or not, unless they are retarded. Unfortunately, many women are retarded. Queers don’t look at chicks, I mean never ever ever. I mean, they look at them, but not like we do, ok? They treat them like they are part of the walls or the floor. So non-retarded chicks can always tell if a guy is non-queer, if he checks out chicks.

That’s why chicks always think I’m “bi.” Which I consider to be an insult.

Guys, being seriously retarded, will think you’re queer, because they totally don’t get it.

Actually the queers and bi men are very easy to spot.

1. Queers do not check out chicks. They act like they are part of building, like they are not even there. If a guy checks out chicks, he’s not gay. Period. Exclamation point.

2. Queers and bis will almost always, 10

Now and again, a straight guy will give off a vibe like that, but that’s just some weird rare queer sexuality leaking out of a straight guy. Also, sometimes you get queer vibes off a straight guy, but he seems really uncomfortable with it. This is just queer vibes leaking off some straight guy that bugs and bothers him. He doesn’t want to do it. It’s just weird shit leaking out of his sex-brain.

Truth is, if you are a very goodlooking young man, lots of people will be attracted to you. Lots of females, and lots of males. Not all the males will be gay at all. Very handsome guys are so gorgeous that they are attractive to a wide range of people of both sexes.

A lot of straight guys will react to a very goodlooking straight guy by being attracted to him, denying that attraction, projecting it off on the hot guy, deciding the hot guy is a “fag” (more projection) then feeling rage and wanting to “kick the fag’s ass.”

I know this is Freudian, but I’m so sure it’s true.

This is the source of a lot of homophobic assaults: unacknowledged and infuriating attraction to a very goodlooking young man.

Stupid Site

PUA Hate.

The site is all chicks, run by chicks, and nothing but hate for the Game and PUA community.

There’s nothing wrong with showing how these PUA/Game guys might be wrong, but it’s definitely the case that some guys do better than others when it comes to women. It makes sense to try to figure out what these guys are doing right and tell the guys who are not doing well what they are doing wrong.

These dumb cunts’ attitude is that PUA and Game is wrong, it’s lies, crap, nonsense and ripoff. What are guys supposed to do instead to get women? Let’s ask the cunts on this site:

Not rely on any of this stuff. Use common sense. “Be confident.” “Be yourself.”

All the usual crap advice females give to guys to get women that never works.

There are guys posting there who were involved in the community, and they post their stories. The bitches rip all over them, calling them tools, losers, chumps, dorks, guys no woman would ever want, on and on.

The bitches rant on and on that most of of the guys at PUA seminars have Aspergers’. I doubt if that’s true, but what if it was? Aspies are born that way, and there’s not much cure for it. What’s these cunts’ argument? That Aspies are all loser tools and deserve to be celibate for the rest of their lives?

I am trying to understand why these bitches are so furious at PUA and Game stuff. A lot of guys, for whatever reason, don’t have any women in their lives. They aren’t getting any. They’re lonely. A lot of guys are socially retarded. It follows that these guys could use some advice. Is all PUA/Game advice crap? That’s really dubious.

I’m still trying to figure out what these lame cunts’ problem is. Someone help me out.

Transcript of My Latest Interview on Voice of Reason Radio

This runs pretty long – it runs to 48 pages on the Net – so be forewarned. In case you didn’t listen to it, here it is. The audio is here, with some comments, mostly silly as usual.

Robert Stark: We’re going to be discussing something a little bit different. The topic tonight is The War on Men. Robert, I’ve just got to say that you’ve gotten a lot of slack for some of your views on this show.

Robert Lindsay: That’s true. I’m going a little easy on the Jews I guess.

Robert Stark: Kevin MacDonald uses the term, “a hostile elite” to refer to the elite, and he’s talking about the Jews, but you could say that the whole elite in general is dangerous when it has no loyalty to the nation-state whatsoever.

Robert Lindsay: The multinational corporations – and these White people in America, they love these corporations so much – they are a hostile elite. The elite is not just the Jews in America, it’s these hundreds of millions of very wealthy people – of rich people – all over the world. They are hostile not just to Americans but they’re hostile to their own people. They’re only out for themselves, and they’re sending the whole world down the tubes really.

You see, every one of them will sell out their own country. The elite of India will sell out India. The elite of Pakistan will sell out Pakistan. They will all sell their own countries down the tubes.

Robert Stark: I don’t think the elite in Israel has really sold out their country. That would be the one exception.

Robert Lindsay: Yes, they are patriotic in a sense I suppose. But what these elites will do is they will ruin their countries’ economies in the name of getting richer. They don’t care about their own country’s economy.

Robert Stark: The people who call themselves patriots, they often defend these sorts of people.

Robert Lindsay: The patriots, you mean the Tea Party types?

Robert Stark: Yes.

Robert Lindsay: The Tea Parties are simply an arm of the corporations. The Tea Partiers really are rootless cosmopolitans. They’re effectively all “Jews” if you want to put it that way. They’re a Judaized people; they’re infected with the Jewish spirit.

Robert Stark: Yes, Sarah Palin, she made some comments that she considered herself to be a Jew, and she has an Israeli flag in her office, and she’s the leader of the Tea Party movement.

Robert Lindsay: Sarah Palin is a Jew! All the Tea Partiers are Jews! And they’re also shilling for the multinational corporations too, so if you think about it, the Tea Parties are just the forward movement of these multinationals. They’re like the army of the multinationals, and they’re also shilling for the elite. They’re like this Brownshirt White army for the richest people in America, and I just fail to see how that’s a progressive working class movement in any way, shape or form, forget it.

Robert Stark: Yes, it’s definitely been co-opted. But let’s move on to our issue for tonight, the War on Men. So can you introduce us to our topic and talk about how feminism has really changed our society? You support equity feminism, but you are critical of the movement in a lot of other ways. You are saying that it has really destroyed marriage.

Robert Lindsay: It has in a way because we used to have mandatory marriage in America, and in most societies have mandatory marriage or especially mandatory early marriage. And what happens with mandatory early marriage is that just about everyone gets married in their early 20’s or so, and that takes care of the sexual problem. Here in the US, everyone got married, everyone. And then, in marriage, apparently, there was sex, I guess, or there was or there wasn’t – many women didn’t like it that much, but back then, I think they just put up with it.

And back then, most men got plenty of sex in marriage, or at any rate, there wasn’t a big issue about guys being sexually frustrated. You’ve got the Alphas, that’s like 1

Robert Stark: Yes, it was sort of like sexual socialism. You can talk about wealth, but when it comes to the mating market, it’s a zero-sum game, because there is one person of the opposite sex for every person of the other sex, and with marriage, you can distribute that evenly.

Robert Lindsay: Exactly. It is sexual socialism. There’s also a group called the Omegas. There are the Betas, who are like 7

Robert Stark: So they would marry a woman in their own league.

Robert Lindsay: Right.

Robert Stark: What’s happening now is that with the destruction of marriage, we are reverting back to caveman times when we had more of a polygamous society. The idea is that women are hypergamous, and they go for men who are above their status. Whereas biologically, women can only have a limited number of children, men can impregnate large numbers of women, so men want to impregnate as many women as possible.

I think in the past before feminism, women were not allowed to work. Women do have an advantage over men in the mating market. So in a society where men controlled the wealth, that sort of evened things out because women were dependent on men for money. Now, middle and upper class women have good jobs, and lower class women are taken care of by the welfare state, so they don’t really need men anymore. So we are reverting back to this really primitive system.

Robert Lindsay: If you study primitive agricultural societies in Africa and New Guinea, what you find is polygamous societies. You find the head man thing. African Blacks evolved in this polygamous society. There’s a Head Man and maybe his buddies – they get all the women. And then, a whole lot of the rest of the guys, apparently, they don’t get any. So with the African Blacks, they’ve evolved for 9,000 years with these Head Man type guys impregnating all the women, and so Blacks have gotten bigger and stronger, with high testosterone, etc.

Robert Stark: That’s probably a factor in why there is so much crime and violence in their societies because if they can’t have a woman and reproduce, they have no incentive to contribute anything to society, so they all just become criminals, and that’s probably why there is such a high rate of sex crime in Africa.

Robert Lindsay: Well, I’m not sure if the setup is like that anymore, with the Head Man thing, but the thing is they’ve evolved this big huge super-athletic bodies over time because it’s only been the most macho, masculine, roughest, toughest and most high testosterone man has been impregnating most of the women for like 9,000 years and so what we’ve ended up with is that Blacks have high testosterone, they’re really big, strong and aggressive because they’re all descended for 9,000 years from the biggest, baddest, roughest, toughest guy around.

Robert Stark: One of the main problems in the Black community, what happened was, in the past, even though they were poor, there was some level of decency because there was an incentive for Black men to go out and get a job in order to get a woman, recently what happened was the Great Society came in with the welfare state, and Black women were dependent on the government, so there was no incentive for the men to be decent.

And then their culture glorifies being a thug and a criminal. It’s seen a lot with rap culture, but it goes back a lot further than that. Well, the women favor the men who are criminals. So the whole system is subsidizing criminal behavior, and there’s no incentive to be decent anymore if you want to get a mate.

Robert Lindsay: Well, I’m a liberal, so I don’t agree with that analysis of the Great Society. I think the Great Society was a great thing. Furthermore, welfare was put in by FDR in the mid-30’s – AFDC. So we had welfare all through the 1930’s, 40’s, 50’s and early 1960’s, and hardly anyone was on it because everybody had a job.

But it looks like what happened was the jobs all took off in the industrial areas of the North. All those Blacks had moved up to there to those cities, and then the factories started shutting down, and then the Blacks were out of work, and apparently the women started going on welfare. Welfare has always been there.

Robert Stark: You’re right that the best manufacturing jobs have all gone overseas. Then you have the sexual revolution, and men were lied to, like Playboy Magazine sold that idea to men that the sexual revolution would benefit them, but that turned out to be a total lie. You were at your prime during that era back in the 1970’s. Can you go over some of the trends that you saw and what it was like back then?

Robert Lindsay: Back then, that was the sexual revolution that we were growing up with, and there weren’t many sexual diseases. I think Herpes wasn’t really around that much. The worst STD seemed to be crabs. I never knew anyone who was catching anything other than that one. A lot of people were having a lot of sex. I went to a White high school, and all the girls were on the pill, every single one of them. Not one White girl at my school had a baby.

There were pregnancies – one of my girlfriends got pregnant, but it wasn’t me. It was some other guy. They would automatically have an abortion. Back then there was not much controversy about abortion, and the anti-abortion people were not around so much like they are now. If girls were pregnant, they automatically got an abortion, no ifs ands or buts about it.

We had a White society there and a White point of view, and where I was growing up, for a White high school girl to have a kid out of wedlock, that was like the lowest, worst, most disgusting thing you could possibly do. You were thought to be acting like a Black or a Mexican, and you just weren’t supposed to do that. So we had no girls with babies at my high school. There was a lot of screwing around back then, it’s true. This was the hippie era, and it was free love. I suppose there were guys that didn’t have a lot of fun, but I did.

Robert Stark: But you see the destruction of marriage as a negative trend?

Robert Lindsay: It has been, because that whole hippie free love thing seems to have gone out, and now, it’s been replaced by a sort of a consumerist sexual culture, and women have reverted back to Cavewoman tendencies. Now that we’ve gotten rid of marriage, and women can survive on their own, women don’t need men anymore. See, back in the old days, women needed men to survive.

So a woman would hook up with a guy, and the guy would support her, and she’d have kids by the guy. The truth is, she stuck around with him for the support. And in return for the support, she gave him sex. It was a trade-off. The guy was satisfied. He was getting the sex, love and companionship of marriage, and the woman was also satisfied, she was getting support and then the love and companionship of marriage.

And now, women can have sex, have babies and raise children. That’s what the single Mom’s are all about. They don’t need men to support them anymore, so they’re simply not marrying.

And so what you have is we are reverting back to Cavewoman times. In Cavewoman times, the Alphas get all the women. It was Head Man times, just like in Africa and New Guinea. The Alphas are 1

He’s The Man With the Golden Sperm. He’s the guy with the best genes. See, women think biologically. At a very subconscious level, they all want the guy who has the best genes. They all want to have his baby, to have his kid and pass on his superior genes. Even if they are on the birth control pill, and they are not going to be having any babies, they are still thinking that way.

I mean, I knew guys in junior college…my idol in junior college, he would have say 3 or 4 dates in a day. He would have a morning date, then an afternoon date, then an evening date, then at midnight, he would climb into some girl’s window at her parent’s house. And he would have sex with all of them. And this was how he lived. And every girl and woman wanted this guy. They were basically lining up outside of his door, and it was like take a number. They would have sex with him, and they would walk out of the door with a big smile on their face, and they were quite satisfied.

He used to live on the beach in the summer, and those guys would go through like 3 different girls or women every single day. They would have a keg of beer, an ounce of Thai weed, and they would surf all day. That’s the environment that I grew up in on the beach in Southern California with a bunch of hippie stoner surfers.

Robert Stark: What effect do you see this having on society if as you say, a large portion of men are being kept out of the mating market? Society could collapse. For instance, that guy Sodini, I think he had psychological problems, but his situation is symbolic of this phenomenon. If you look at what’s happening in China, how there is this huge shortage of women in China, and you see rising crime there and other problems that this is leading to, due to the shortage of women. This could be problematic in the future if this trend continues.

Robert Lindsay: They are having a lot of Sodini-type mass killings over there too. A lot of these guys apparently are not married and not getting any women, and they’re going crazy with bulldozers, tractors, guns and knives and whatnot and mass murdering people. Just like Sodini. Probably because they aren’t getting any. Back in my parents’ generation, Sodini would have gotten married. There were no Sodinis, not really anyway.

So what’s going on nowadays is that these 1

Robert Stark: Some of them will settle for a regular guy when they are past their prime. In a sense, who wants someone else’s leftovers?

Robert Lindsay: So now they all want Alphas. At least the White women that I see around here, they are all looking for the Alphas. And the Alphas, they are all pretty much taken. And by age 30 or so, the Alphas are all just gone. And these women, they don’t want Betas. So you have all of the best women going for say 1

Robert Stark: What’s ironic about this is that the feminists got rid of sexual socialism, and in other ways, the feminists aligned themselves with socialism economically, but at the same time, they don’t want the real free market to work in terms of sex. I know a lot of people have moral issues with prostitution, I can understand that. I’ve had concerns too, but with the current situation, I think it would be the fair thing to legalize prostitution but only based on the current situation.

Another thing, the feminist Senator from Washington, Maria Cantwell, she co-introduced this bill with this neocon Senator Sam Brownback which would make it difficult for men to find wives from overseas. So they use socialism and get rid of the free market in certain cases where it suits their agenda. So you don’t have a problem with feminism if it’s about gender equity. But they use the government to rig the system when it suits their own interests.

Robert Lindsay: Well, the problem is that radical feminism has become Female Rule. You can probably never have true equality in a society sexually. It’s probably the case that you either have Male Rule or you have Female Rule. And there are a lot of problems with Male Rule, which is Patriarchy, but at least it seems to work. It’s not very fair to women in a lot of ways. But it’s a zero-sum game.

Robert Stark: It’s the same with race relations. I think that very rarely will you ever have true racial equality. One group will always end up dominating the other. That’s just human nature.

Robert Lindsay: It seems that way. If the men don’t rule, then the women are going to rule. And that’s the way it is in relationships. I’ve concluded that in relationships, the man has to dominate the woman. I came out of the 1970’s, and we were into this hazy gender role thing, and we were all supposed to be androgynous, and we were the New Men and the Feminist Men. And we were into not being macho and all that.

Thing is, that stuff doesn’t really work, because women do seem to want a macho guy who takes charge and who frankly dominates them. Women get off on being dominated. They enjoy it. That’s an essential part of their sexual nature. The man must be the dominant partner, and the woman must be the submissive partner in marriage or in any kind of a sexual relationship or love relationship.

If you don’t wear the pants in the relationship, she’s going to take those pants right off of you and put them on herself. Either the man dominates the woman, or the woman dominates the man. And if you look around at marriages and relationships, you notice that that’s how it works. If the guy doesn’t dominate the woman – if he’s a really wimpy guy – have you ever noticed that the woman ends up playing the male role and dominating him. Then you have these situations where the woman is playing the role of the man and being really nasty to the guy and lording it over him and the guy being all cringing and wimpy.

Robert Stark: The social conservatives haven’t really tackled any of these issues. The problem with them is that they the two issues that they are obsessed with are abortion and gay marriage. Gay marriage is purely a symbolic issue – it doesn’t have any really strong negative effect on society. As far as abortion goes, I know that you are pro-choice…

Robert Lindsay: Definitely!

Robert Stark: The thing is that women no longer have responsibility, and they can be promiscuous and not depend on a man. Social conservatives focus on these two issues, but they are not really offering any alternatives. Then we have the conservative feminists. For instance, I believe that Sarah Palin calls herself a conservative feminist. They want the men to go back to being chivalrous and be the traditional men, but then the women will enjoy the perks that liberal feminism has brought them.

Robert Lindsay: Yes, they want it both ways, don’t they? Equity feminism is a good thing. I want equality for women in all of the important ways. I’m on the mailing list for many of the big feminist organizations in the US. I used to be a member of NOW.

The only thing that I don’t like about these organizations is that they’ve been taken over by radical feminists. And a lot of them are lesbians; a lot of them hate men. And there’s a real animus in this movement against male sexuality, towards what it means to be male. What they prefer is female sexuality. There are two types of sexuality. There’s female sexuality, and there’s male sexuality. I don’t really have to define them. Every guy around knows what male sexuality is.

Robert Stark: You’ve defined the War on Men as a War on Male Sexuality.

Robert Lindsay: Exactly, because females want female sexuality to be the dominant paradigm in society. Female society is ruled by female sexuality. That’s what females want; that’s what their lives are ruled by. Male society is ruled by male sexuality.

And typically, male sexuality has been privileged at least somewhat in society as far as our rules go. And most societies tend to be more or less dominated by male sexuality. On the other hand, most societies tend to temper male sexuality by instituting early marriage because if you totally allowed male sexuality to take over, most guys probably wouldn’t even get married.

But the feminist movement attempts to make female sexuality the dominant paradigm for all of society, for all of public space. So all males must live under the rules of female sexuality.

That’s why they hate what they call the exploitation of women in porn, in advertising. Any advertisement that shows a sexy girl in any way whatsoever is evil according to them because that represents male sexuality. To them, male sexuality is all about the objectification and the use and abuse of women. For instance, porn is all about the objectification of women and the use and abuse of women, and to guys, it’s just sex, that’s all it is. Porn is all about getting off.

Female sexuality hates pornography, they hate erotica, they hate any sexuality at all being displayed in the media, in advertising, or in movies or TV. They want a completely desexualized public space. They want to desexualize the media, advertisements, consumer culture, movies and TV. Female sexuality is basically puritanical!

Robert Stark: That’s true, but if you look at our popular culture, it has gotten a lot more sexualized over the years, so we have these contradictory factors in our society. But one thing that you have been talking about is this mass hysteria where all men are being viewed as potential sexual predators.

Robert Lindsay: Yes, that’s right. The radical feminists – that’s their thing. Male sexuality is all about rape! And males are all about rape, and we are all rapists. And they can’t stop talking about rape. You talk to these radical feminists, and they’re just rape rape rape rape rape rape rape rape. And these are White women! And their claim is that the men who are the rapists are White guys like you and me. Well, if you know much about rape in this country, White guys like you and me, we don’t run around raping women.

Robert Stark: I don’t know what the statistics are, but Blacks are about 1

Robert Lindsay: All I know is that they commit rape at about 6 times the White rate.

Robert Stark: So you are trying to say that a lot of the propaganda that they put out is to try to show White men as being sexual predators.

Robert Lindsay: The feminist movement never talks about the fact that Blacks and Latinos are six times more likely to rape a woman than a White man is. Their whole thing is that White men like you and me are these evil sexual predator rapists. And their definition of rape keeps on expanding and expanding. Now, if you have sex with a woman who is intoxicated in any way whatsoever, I suppose if she even has one glass of wine, if she’s high, if she smoked a joint, if she did a line of coke or speed or if she’s on acid, then that’s rape.

Well, then there must be hundreds of millions of instances of rape occurring every week in this country. Because lots of women are having sex when they are intoxicated. And I simply do not believe that that’s rape.

Robert Stark: So you think that they are promoting a lot of these false accusations.

Robert Lindsay: Yes, and to them, any kind of coercion that leads to sex, especially verbal coercion, really, seduction itself…The feminists are now claiming that seduction itself is rape because the seducers are supposedly brainwashing women and tricking and fooling them into bed. Well, that’s what seduction is all about. Seduction is all about brainwashing women and tricking and fooling women, casting a spell on them, and more or less lying to them, in order to get them into bed. And men have been doing this for 100’s, or probably 1000’s of years.

And the whole idea of being a woman…mothers and fathers are supposed to raise their daughters with the idea that guys are just dogs, they’re no good. Guys will say and do anything to get you into bed. And an aware and savvy woman knows that guys are like this, she’s aware of it, and she’s got all of her defenses up to keep this guy from putting one over on her and seducing her and getting her into bed when she doesn’t want to.

So, seduction is not rape. Seduction is just the normal human way of going about sex, and it’s normal male sexuality to seduce women. So when they say seduction is rape, they’re saying that all us guys are rapists. And most radical feminists theorists, not just Andrea Dworkin or Katharine McKinney, but really all of them, they all say that we live under a system of patriarchy, and under patriarchy, all male-female sex is rape.

Robert Stark: Another thing is that they vilify large age ranges in relationships such as an older man dating a younger woman. One thing that I noticed is that Alphas can get good-looking younger women early on, but other men who are not Alphas can build up their wealth and get them later on. Historically, women would often marry a much older man because they were dependent on them economically.

Robert Lindsay: Another thing about female sexuality is that women age quicker than men. They live longer than we do. I don’t know why it is, but if you have a woman and a man, and they’re both married, and they’re both around 50-60 or so, the woman is going to look 10-15 years older than the man.

Robert Stark: Women have a huge advantage in their 20’s, but once they get past 30, men have the advantage. That’s why the feminists are trying to pathologize men who are dating women who are much younger than they are.

Robert Lindsay: This has been going on forever and ever and ever. If you read literature all down through the centuries or even millennia, the theme over and over is that a man, as he’s aging, continues to want younger women. And an older woman has a hard time keeping her husband around because as she starts getting into her 40’s and 50’s, he starts wanting to chase younger women.

So one of the prime aspects of female sexuality is this hatred for this aspect of male sexuality in that aging males want to chase young women. And it’s hard for an older woman to keep her man around. How do you keep him around? And in many cases, middle-aged men leave their older wives and go for young women. And women hate that; female sexuality hates that, so feminism hates that. And that’s the reason for this law that Maria Cantwell and Brownback passed…is it Brownback?

Robert Stark: Sam Brownback is this social conservative…

Robert Lindsay: Right, so what’s going on is that American guys who’ve just had it up to here with nasty Western women are heading off to the 3rd World, and they are picking up younger 3rd World women, and they are marrying them.

Robert Stark: What’s really strange about this is that Cantwell and Brownback and both very much pro-immigration Open Borders types.

Robert Lindsay: Cantwell represents female sexuality, she represents feminism, actually radical feminism and the rage of feminists and aging women over the fact that a lot of White guys are shining on these nasty feminist witches here in America, and they’re going to get women overseas. And also middle aged guys are blowing off their older White spouses and going to get some young hottie overseas. This is all just about – “cut off the competition.”

And it’s the institutionalization of female sexuality in law. This is one of the things that the feminists are tying to do – they are trying to make law and the legal code that we all live under in our public space to be an institutionalization of female sexuality.

Robert Stark: Yet at the same time, they got rid of marriage, which was a fair form of socialism. I’ve analyzed these various movements, not just the feminist movement but also various economic movements, and it’s way too complex to say that this person is a capitalist and this person is a socialist if people pick and choose either free markets or government intervention when it suits their own interests. That’s why I object to these people who break everyone up into, “You’re either for free markets or you’re not.”

Robert Lindsay: And the sexual harassment thing, this is another one. The feminist movement, as I noted, wants to remove all sexuality from the pubic space because female sexuality hates sexual expression in the public space. If you’re a good-looking woman, apparently as soon as you walk outside the door, you have guys after you all day long. And women don’t like this. Female sexuality doesn’t like this hyper-aggressive nature of male sexuality in which we are always raping them with our eyes and chasing after them and all.

What they would really like, in their female sexual utopia, is to ban us from looking at them, they would like to have us arrested and sent to jail for “illegal looking.”

Robert Stark: This was targeted against pedophiles, but there was a law in Maine making it a felony for adults to stare at minors in public. I think what the radical feminists – I think the woman who introduced that law was a radical feminist – what they would like is to make it a crime to men to stare at adult women in public as well. So this looks like a slippery slope.

Robert Lindsay: This is one of the aspects of sexual harassment. Now, if you’re in a workplace, or even outside of a workplace, you can be accused of sexual harassment just for looking at women. A friend of mine, he’s an older guy, and he was in a coffee shop, and the young women didn’t like the fact that he was an older guy and he was looking at them so they complained, and the management told him to quit looking at the girls or they were going to throw him out.

So it’s not just happening in the workplace, although in the workplace, if you look at the women too much, if you check out the women, they call that sexual harassment and a “sexually hostile workplace.” I think they also want to remove all sexual commentary, sexual banter, sexual wording and flirtation from the public space.

But after all, people have a very strong sex drive, at least males, and the entirety of public space is where we spend most of our time. We go out in public all the time doing this or that, and the workplace is a large part our lives now, a lot of us are spending almost all of our time at work. And female sexuality and radical feminism wants to completely remove all sexual expression from the public space, where we are spending so much of our time.

I don’t think they even want us talking to women, honestly. They certainly don’t want us talking to them about anything sexual in any way whatsoever. For women, to remove all sexuality from the pubic space makes that a friendly space.

But I came out of 1970’s, remember, I came out of the hippie movement, I’m a liberal, I came out of the New Left, I’m a sexual revolutionary and a libertine. And I don’t believe in any kind of Puritanism at all. My attitude is, “Do it in the streets.” Not literally of course, but I’m very pro-sex. And it really bothers me how anti-sex the feminists are. And that they are trying to reproduce their view of female sexuality, which is very anti-sex, it’s very puritanical, onto the whole of society.

Robert Stark: What is strange is that if you look at some aspects of our society, they have become much more sexualized. If you look at commercials…I really don’t know what to make of the whole thing.

Robert Lindsay: This is strange, the extreme sexualization of our society – although the feminists would love to get rid of all that too, but they haven’t been able to yet…on the one hand, we have this hypersexualized society…

Robert Stark: One thing I’ve also noticed if that teen sexuality has been really glorified, like teenage girls, one the one hand, they are encouraged to act slutty, but on the other hand, if a man so much as looks at a teenage girl nowadays, they are being called pedos. So what do you think of these two polar extremes?

Robert Lindsay: Well, on the one hand, you have this hypersexualized media space in terms of advertising and consumer culture and the corporations and then in our popular entertainment…

Robert Stark: Yes, because sex sells, they want to make money.

Robert Lindsay: Music, TV, movies and all that, the sexual mores have been loosened down. So if you’re a person who is immersed in our consumer and entertainment culture, you are being bombarded with sexual messages all day long. And after a while, it’s probably going to make you pretty horny. If you’re a young man, you’re probably pretty horny as it is, but all this media sex stuff really gets you thinking about sex all the time.

And then as soon as you step out your front door and go out into the public space, now you’re out in this feminist world where the feminists are trying to put their Female Rule (matriarchy) over everything, and you can’t look at women, you can’t talk to women, you can’t say anything sexual, you can’t do anything sexual…

Robert Stark: What are some of your thoughts on the racial component of the dating market?

Robert Lindsay: Well, like I said, the White women, they all want an Alpha guy. And then by the time they’re 30, almost all of them, they didn’t get him, and so they’re angry. And then they either hook up with a Beta, and they’re not really all that happy about it, and they try to dominate him, and they’re aggressive and mean towards him. Or they get married, and then they get divorced at some point.

For instance, I have a Yahoo group for people who are fighting the Internet love scammers. The group is about ½ women. Most of the women are middle aged White women, and a very large

We’re macho pigs, we’re jerks…and they are filled with hatred towards male sexuality. We don’t treat them right, we’re mean, macho jerks. And all of them are radical feminists. And then at the same time…they’re all going for Black guys! And I didn’t understand that at all!

Robert Stark: The Black men would probably treat them a lot worse than a White man would.

Robert Lindsay: They will treat them a lot worse! But I finally figured it out, and I finally understand it. These White women who are going for Black guys, it’s a way of giving the finger to the White man. It’s a way of saying “F- you” to the White man, screw you to the White man. That’s the ultimate way of insulting a White man. Saying, “The heck with you, White men, here I am, I’m going to go for a Black guy!” And I think that Black males and White females share a common enemy. Remember that guy in Connecticut who shot up the beer factory when they accused him of stealing beer? And he said he “shot the racists?”

Robert Stark: I think you told me about it…

Robert Lindsay: He said he shot the racists, and he killed like 7 White people. He hated White people. We see over and over these Black guys who hate White people, and they’re attacking Whites, but then over and over, you see that this same guy has a White girlfriend!

Robert Stark: Yes! You’re familiar with the Knoxville Murders? They raped, tortured and killed two Whites, and their defense attorney tried to say that this guy’s not a racist because he had a White girlfriend.

Robert Lindsay: Right! Exactly! What’s going on there…I finally figured it out, is that the Black male and the White female share a common enemy. Their common enemy is the White man. So that’s how a Black man can hook up with a White woman and be happy, and they can have a common enemy, the White man, and how a Black man can have a White girlfriend and then go and shoot up 15 White guys at a beer distributing plant because they share a common enemy. These Black guys – they don’t hate White women. They hate White men.

Robert Stark: If you look through history at basic human tribalism, one tribe would try to steal the females from another tribe and yet be protective of their own women. And that’s why, to this day, a lot of men have double standards. They’ll date women of other groups, but they will get very defensive if someone tries to date their own women.

Robert Lindsay: Exactly! And in White society, the worst thing that a White woman can do is go out with Black guys. I know really liberal White guys, and they told me that if any White woman they know, if they find out that she dates Blacks, she’s through. She’s gone. They won’t even consider her. And a lot of White guys think this way. She’s history. She is basically evicted from the White race.

So this is a way that White males have of controlling and policing our women. This is how, just as you were saying, how we protect our women. We essentially banish them from the tribe, from the White tribe, for messing around with Black guys. Just like in the old days when tribal groups would evict you from the tribe for a transgression.

And at the same time, males of any race will have sex with females of the opposite race. Because then they are basically stealing the other tribe’s women, and if you impregnate them, you are forcing their women to bear your children. At the same time, you protect your own women, because your own women are your seed stock, and they are the continuity of your tribe. And you can’t allow them to be contaminated by the genes of these competing tribes because then your women are going to be raising the children of the competing tribes. And I still think that these ancient tribal ways are still ongoing in modern society.

Robert Stark: This is basic human instinct, but it’s not politically correct due to this Cultural Marxism has made these notions into something pathological to even discuss, but it’s still an essential human instinct nevertheless. So you see all of this as a part of the War on Men.

Robert Lindsay: It is, it is. It’s mostly a war on male sexuality. Even this sex offender thing and the pedophile thing, the Pedophile Mass Hysteria…have you noticed something? The pedophiles? They’re all men! And the victims are all women and girls.

Robert Stark: And the media portrays pedophiles as mostly White, which is also a myth. You were comparing it to Salem Witch Trials. There are dangerous people out there who we have to keep an eye on, but this whole pedophile hysteria, it’s gone way too far, and a lot of innocent people are being caught up in this and having their lives ruined. All men are being suspected that they are up to something no good sexually. This has just gone insane…

Leykis Vs. a Middle Aged Woman Caller

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5gue4aGMd90&feature=related]

This is even meaner and more misogynistic than the last one, but it’s funny as Hell. The woman goes nuts, starts bitching him out, ranting and raving, and he just turns her volume down and steamrolls right over her.

I must say, middle aged women who are losing their looks need to try to make up for it in other ways. Like being nicer. For every 5 points you lose in looks on a 1-100 scale, you need to gain 5 points in personality. I mean, c’mon, you’ve got to give us a reason to go out with you, right?

I will say that the angry middle aged woman is not solely an American thing. I’ve met them originally form the Philippines, Peru, Colombia, Bulgaria and Japan at the very least. I guess they have a lot to be pissed off about. But they’re competing with young women. Young women have them beat on looks. So where does the middle aged woman compete?

Personality. It shouldn’t be hard because a lot of beautiful young women are pretty mean and bitchy. Why? Because they can afford to be. If you’re young and beautiful, you can have the personality of a wolverine and they guys will still stampede over each other to receive your tirades and mistreatment in hopes of the side dish at the end of the bitch meal.

Young woman has looks. She doesn’t need personality. It’s nice if she has one, but it’s no requirement. Middle aged woman is losing looks or hasn’t any anymore, so she needs personality. Right? Instead they get meaner and meaner. Mean and homely is two thumbs down. Screw that. There’s always Internet porn and your hand.

Tom Leykis on Older Women

[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOezYzK3yck]

Damn, this is some mean, misogynous stuff here, but that’s Leykis. Unfortunately, a lot of what he says is true about White American women. So many of them are bitter and mean in middle age. Why should we bother with them?

I haven’t had a ton of experience with non-White middle aged women, but I would say that middle aged Latinas, Arabs, Iranians, Europeans, Chinese, Vietnamese and Filipinas don’t seem to be nearly so angry.

I really don’t get it. The less feminism in a society, logically, the worse women are treated, but the happier they are. The more feminism in a society, the more miserable the women are. All feminism does is make women miserable. Miserable and angry. I don’t see the point, honestly.

Man World 101: A Potential Fight and How I Dealt With It

The other day these two little bratty 11 year old girls were bugging me. One’s White, one’s Hispanic. They were calling me gay for some reason. I didn’t dig it, so I walked by them and gave them the finger. They flipped out and went to go get Daddy (Mexican tough guy).

Later the parents came to the door. It’s this Mexican guy, who is tough but OK and his fat Mexican wife who looks White. I come out of the house with this big huge metal coffee thermos in one hand. I’m holding it like it’s a weapon, and I might bash someone in the head with it. I’m holding it to my side at mid-body, about one foot away from my waist with a very firm grip, about where you would hold a gun or knife. I’m not raising it over my head. Plus I have deniability. Maybe I’m just drinking coffee, right?

They ask what’s going on, then they see the thermos, and start backing away real quick with their heads down and turned away. This means they don’t want any violent scenes with coffee thermoses. But I’m not directly threatening them with it, so they can walk away. If I’m swinging it over my head, it’s fight time. Plus that makes me a loon.

I tell them.

They ask, “What did they say?” I said they called me gay. The woman snickers, insulting my masculinity. The Mexican guy turns away, like he’s ashamed. What’s going on here is he knows I’ve been humiliated male-wise by his wife, and he doesn’t want any part of it. He’s respecting my manhood by putting his head down and looking away, saying he’s not attacking my masculinity. Plus he realizes what an insult this is, and he doesn’t like it.

The mother says, “They’re just kids!” I say, “I don’t care who they are. You don’t say that about me. I’m not gay, and nobody calls me gay. You call me that, and I’m going to flip you off.” The Mexican guy acts like he respects that. The woman shrieks, “What? You said you’re going to fuck them up?” Provocation. I don’t fall for the bait. I say, “No, I’m going to flip them off.” Real cool like. Then the parents just walk away with their heads down.

A few lessons here.

First of all. I only flipped off the girls. Did not say one word. Better to just make a gesture, because any words will just be twisted. You say, “Fuck you,” and the girls will say, “He said come fuck me.” It’s hard to twist a gesture. Besides a gesture is not as bad as words.

Second, come out with a (fake) weapon but don’t be too aggro about it. Act like you’re going to defend yourself.

Third, don’t escalate the situation in the face of provocations. Keep it level. I was going to say, “You sure are a lousy parent letting your kids run loose like this,” but that would have just escalated things. The woman would have gotten really mad, and the Mexican may have felt a need to defend his insulted wife.

The Mexican dude totally respected the whole way I handled it. I handled it just like a Mexican would have. He respects that. But if I got in his face, he would have had to fight me.

This is why social skills are so important. Commenters on here says they doesn’t care about social skills, but this confrontation was all about social skills. You have to say and do exactly the right thing and not say or do the wrong things. If you mess up, things escalate and turn real ugly or weird real quick.

Where Do Anxiety Disorders Fit in on the Alpha – Beta – Omega Continuum?

I asked this question of Ferdinand Bardamu, the fine blogger at In Mala Fide. I work as a therapist/counselor for mentally ill people, but I mostly only deal with anxiety disorders and in particular OCD which I am something of an expert on.

Anyway, I got to thinking where OCD behavior is on the Alpha -Beta – Omega spectrum. On thing is for sure, it can definitely turn women off. I know guys with this illness who have not had sex in 20 years. Depending on the nature of the obsessions, it can really be a woman repellent and lead to a lot of avoidance. I’ve also noticed that a lot of these guys seem to have issues with occasional and sometimes longer-lasing impotence. That seems to go along with the anxiety stuff.

I also noticed that some of these guys have girlfriends. Some of them are getting a lot of sex too. Some are deeply depressed, even suicidal. Others complain to their girlfriends all the time that they are worried that they are child molesters, even though they are not. Incredibly, their women put up with this, love them dearly, stick by them through thick and thin, and even give them lots of sex. Some of the women are pretty good looking too.

I’m no stranger to the type of behavior these guys are engaging in, though I’m over much of it as I age. My experience was that depression and anxiety were serious killers for relationships with women. My anxiety and depression aroused nothing but contempt and raging hatred. It’s true that some of them felt sorry for me too, and there were a lot of good times in there, but I came away with a bad taste in my mouth.

My questions to Ferdinand were whether this was Beta or Omega behavior on the part of the guys, and how it was possible that these guys had hot, horny, loving women who put up with this shit.

Ferdinand:

The easiest way to think of the Alpha-Beta-Omega spectrum is like this:

Alpha – inherently attractive to women Beta – neither attractive nor repulsive to women Omega – inherently repulsive to women

Betas are like your average guy – a few issues maybe, but they can function on a day to day basis and are more or less normal. I’d say 60-80 percent of men are beta. Omegas are like homeless bums or ultra-dorky World of Warcraft shut-ins with hygiene issues – people on the margins of society and are pretty much loathed by everyone.

I’d say having extreme, crippling anxiety when women are around (as opposed to the normal anxiety that most guys have) is Omega. Basically any trait that would impede not only getting with women but just being a functioning, social human being is Omega. For more info, you might want to read this blog.

The guy who writes it describes himself as an Omega and has more first-hand knowledge of social dysfunction then I do.

As for how some of ’em have girlfriends, it may be because they have other redeeming attributes that balance out their issues. There’s a class of girls who would be attracted to a guy like that because they view him as a “project” and think they can fix him with their love or something. Of course, they have to be attracted to him to begin with.

And there are some chicks who like wimpy guys. Outliers, but they exist. I was in college when the whole emo fad was starting to get big. One of my roommates was a whiny little bitch who was emo to a tee – lispy voice, effeminate manner and dress, complained all the time. Only thing he didn’t do was slit his wrists. He basically had a rotating harem of three or four girls for the months that I knew him. Some girls just find that shit cute. Don’t know why.

If you think this website is valuable to you, please consider a contribution to support the continuation of the site.

Womanizers and Misogyny

I’ve known some record-setting womanizers in my time. Some guys would just amaze you. My friends used to rent a house on the beach in the summer. They had a continuous keg of beer going, and they sold Thai weed all day and nite. That’s when they were not surfing. There was a constant party at the house, with women and girls flowing in and out at all hours. My friend Steve might go through 150-200 women in a single summer. I think he was trying to set a record.

I’ve studied guys like Steve. My conclusion is that these guys genuinely like women. I think most guys don’t like females that much. They’d much rather spend their time with guys. Steve was a very masculine guy, and had guys around all the time, but he also had women around all the time. Most of these guys have no illusions about women. They don’t put them on a pedestal at all. They are well aware of the female, her nature and her limitations and frustrations. But they like them anyway.

Steve hung up on females, called them bitches, on and on. He didn’t put up with any shit from females at all. He was always making them cry. His Mom would say, Steve, she’s crying!” and he’d just grin sheepishly and shrug his shoulders.

Nevertheless, the womanizer doesn’t treat women very well.

So he’s a guy who really loves women, but he doesn’t treat them all that well. Which is sort of weird right there.

I’ve noticed that many of the most notorious womanizers on Earth also have reputations as being horrible misogynists. Which is weird. If they treat women like shit and hate them, why do the masochistic crazies keep coming around?

I finally realized that a lot of these guys have dated hundreds of women and they’ve had sex with hundreds of women (not like me). These guys are drowning in women all the time. They’ve had to deal with so much drama, nuttiness, insanity, etc. that maybe that’s what provoked the misogyny.

Alt Left: The Epidemic of Situational Male Homosexuality in the US

First of all, I’m straight. I’m only attracted to females. I’m maximally attracted to females and minimally attracted to males, if at all. Also, I don’t do it with guys. Refuse to. And have to desire to either. In fact, I’m repelled by the notion.

From about 1979-1986, I witnessed an incredible amount of situational homosexuality among mostly young White men in Southern California. The men were generally in their 20’s, about 22-30 or so, though there were some all the way to middle age.

In terms of the situational homosexuality, I think most of them were either straight or mostly straight.

I also had to deal with endless gay and bisexual men after me, but that was another matter altogether.

I followed up on a number of these situational guys, and they later married, settled down, moved to the suburbs, got high paying jobs, had a couple of kids, and I assume gave up the gay shit altogether.

Some of these guys were truly bisexual, but truly bi guys who have strong attraction to females can always give it up. The ones I knew had very strong attractions to females. I know because they were my best friends for a long time. They also had some strong attractions to men which I noticed.

A friend of mine is stunned about the levels of this stuff that I am reporting. But it’s true, and I know it is. Why did they want me? I’m not sure. As a young man, I was said to be very good looking in a pretty boy, male model – actor kind of way. I had offers from Hollywood and modeling studios. Of course, during this period, I had females of all ages after me all the time too, so I wasn’t worried. If it was only guys, I would have started worrying.

Thing is, if these guys were going to hit on anyone, they would hit on me. Why? Not sure. Maybe strong good looks I supposedly had, maybe that lots of people back then were certain that I was gay or bi, so they thought they could get away with it without getting their asses kicked. All I know is that I lived a nightmare like this for a number of years.

You have absolutely no idea how many guys are into this stuff; I don’t know what the numbers are, but they must be incredibly high. For young men, figures ranging from 10-1

But I also had middle aged guys, macho guys, cops after me – even officers like sergeants, married men with little kids, on and on. A lot of them, you wouldn’t think they were gay or bi at all. Because although gay men are usually effeminate, bisexual guys or situationally gay guys can act any way you can imagine. They can act like the most macho guys on Earth.

I remember once I made friends with this guy was said he was bi, but I think he was mostly gay. We were over at his place, and he hit on me. I turned him down, then he confessed to his homo or bisexuality. He whipped out this set of about 50 photos. Young White guys, 18-25, all construction workers who were working on local sites. Really tough, hard-ass working class guys. He’d sucked all their cocks. I guess you just lie back, close your eyes, and pretend it’s a woman.

The only thing you can be sure of with a really macho guy is he’s almost always not completely or even mostly gay. However, femininity and effeminacy are related to male homosexual behavior. Quite a few wimpy, girly, or faggy guys of all orientations are into gay stuff, and the more sissy they are, the more likely that they are into it. So femininity is a marker for male homosexual behavior to a strong degree. But there are also a very small number of completely straight men who act queer as the Ace of Spades.

There were other guys, well, they had some feelings that way, you could tell, but it was obvious that they did not want to act on it. Those guys aren’t gay or bi or situational or anything. I’m simply convinced that a lot of young men have a low level of attraction to other guys that they don’t wish to act on at all.

I was supposedly very good looking as a young man, and a lot of guys, not really gay at all, are attracted to very goodlooking men. That’s why straight guys hate pretty boys so much. These straight men get turned on by pretty boys, and they have a gay attraction in their makeup, however minor, and it drives them furious that they feel this way. So they see a pretty boy, think, “Look at that fag!”, and feel like beating him up.

At the time, in Southern California, in the crowd I ran in, there was nothing wrong with this situational gay stuff. I spoke out against this fagging off nonsense and was condemned as “evil” for doing that.

There was a while when I wasn’t having sex with anyone, and I wasn’t even dating that much, and I was told I was “evil” for doing that too. Truth is, I was desperate for sex, but there just wasn’t much going on for whatever reason, not my choice. So I was involuntarily celibate or incel for whatever reason for a period of up to months or possibly longer. I just wasn’t getting any for various reasons, mostly shyness.

This is why I have some sympathy for incels. Most single men are incel for varying periods in their lives. And I hear about more and more sexless marriages all the time, so marriage is not a guarantee of sex at all. Quite a few married men might be technically incel. We are all incels now!

At that time though, everyone had to be fucking someone 10

A friend of mine asked me if guys are desperate these days. I don’t think so.

In my Dad’s generation, there was little to no sex before marriage. Guys hardly fagged off at all. I don’t know what they did instead, maybe jack it.

In many countries, that’s still pretty much the case. If a young man wants sex, he needs to get married. Otherwise, no sex. Young guys have a tradition of buying whores in these places to lose their virginity and become men.

So young men 30 years ago in Southern California were not desperate at all historically and on a world scale. I would say that on a world scale in time, single men in Southern California 30 years ago were getting record amounts of sex from women.

But during that era, you were always supposed to be having sex. Young single guys are probably not going to be getting constant sex. If you want that, you get married. Even back then, it was common or even typical to find young guys who, while not virgins or never had a date types, had no particular woman at the time. Dry spells.

Then again, a lot of guys who came after me were married, had steady women, lived with women, etc. I assume they were getting plenty of sex, or they could have if they wanted to.

I conclude that situational homosexuality or bisexuality is a pretty significant part of a lot of a very small percentage (possibly 10-1

It needn’t be that way. In a proper society, situational homosexuality would be minimal.

Believe me, I have utmost respect for men who are truly gay or deeply bisexual. I know they can’t help it. If guys turned me on as much as women do and women turned me on  as much as they do now, I would have a hard time turning it down. I’d probably be out screwing guys like crazy, HIV be damned. If guys turned me on as much as women do, and women not at all, I hope I would have the guts to be gay.

But situational homosexuality is just that. It’s totally elective behavior, and they can knock it off anytime they want to.

The surveys are all wrong.

New surveys are done with complete anonymity. They take you into a room with a computer, and you fill out the questionnaire. No one knows who you are, and a computer program reads it.

They are getting very high scores of male homosexual behavior, crime, even violent crime, and drug use, even hard drugs. I saw a recent survey done on computers with total anonymity that had 1

This is the thing. You really need to have strong societal prohibitions against situational male homosexuality. Either that or mandate early marriage, cheap or free prostitution, or force young women, possibly at gunpoint, to have sex with young men. None of those last three are really possible.

Hence stigma is the only thing that keeps men from doing this. If you take the prohibition off of male homosexual behavior, as modern gay rights wants to, guys will engage in tons of situational homosexuality.

The only thing stopping them is stigma.

War World to Man World

A commenter talks about males and blood lust:

You know Alpha, I agree that women are outwardly not physically violent like men are. They tend to only kill for a just reward, like money, revenge, power.Ego never plays a part in it. They don’t kill for pleasure like men do. At least some men at any rate. When I went into the Army at age seventeen, I was looking to kill. It was all ego. Nobody had to convince me to like the idea. It was primal fun. A lot of men lust for it.

Boys live in War World. War World is prep for Man World. When we were boys, we played endless sorts of army type games where we would attack the other boys’ armies with various weapons. Often we would pretend to die when shot or hit.

We also collected GI Joes, fake toy weapons, plastic army men, etc. We used to mutilate our army men, cut their limbs off, lash scars all over them, cover them with dog crap and bury them in some place we called “The Graveyard.” The destroyed army men were called “The Spooks,” and we were all scared of them.

Then we made plastic reptiles out of Plastigoop and had wars with them. Some of them lost limbs in battle. The leader of my army was a red spider named Tim with missing limbs he had lost in a war. We used to send them on huge “army marches” all over the house. My Mom thought it was insane.

We also spent much of our boyhood fighting in various ways, teasing and tormenting other boys, etc. We used to play a game called “Kill the Man on the Hoppityhop” or “Smear the Queer.” One guy would ride the Hoppityhop, and the others would all jump all over him and try to massacre him. Whoever stayed on longest and endured the massacre won.

Boyhood was one endless war. Our mothers were always breaking it up, but then it would just start up again the next day. My late Dad was a dipshit about this, insisting that we were pure evil, since he and his angelic brothers never fought for one second. I guess they were a bunch of fags? Anyway, I don’t believe that.

Boyhood is training for manhood. It’s boot camp for manhood. Mostly, it’s about creating a straight and masculine male. I don’t think that gay boys (future gay men) go through this sort of thing. I’m not sure what their boyhood is like, but I don’t think it is like ours. I suspect they are inside with Mom baking muffins instead.

Guys who tried to hang out but were babies or effeminate were totally destroyed. One guy was a friend of mine, Dave. He was a wuss who was always crying for no reason. Every time we saw him crying, we called him a fag and beat him up!

It was the right thing to do!* Yeah! Not only that, but it was fun! Hell yeah!

He eventually got the message and turned into a normal guy. In fact, he was one of the most incredible womanizers I have ever met. However, he also had a bisexual side which he finally gave in to when he was 22 years old. He stayed with that for some time, and then I lost track of him.

One time, in 1981, I went up to visit him in West Hollywood where he was living with some very annoying queer named Raul. I didn’t know he had gone bi at that time.

We went to the Lingerie Club in LA and tried to pick up chicks. We ended up at a table with these two knockouts dressed to the nines who looked like actresses or models. They were sitting at a table with two empty seats across from them. I walked up and asked if we could sit down. The one hottie, Reyna, said, “Ok, for now.”

They kept reminding us for a long time that we were “temporary” because supposedly these two hot guys who they were with were going to show up. When they said this, Dave and I turned to each other and said, “Yeah right! Temporary! Their boyfriends are coming later! Sure!” We burned the chicks. But the dates never did show up. Later we made fun of the chicks by pointing out that their hottie dates never showed up.

My friend Dave was wearing leather pants, which in LA, often means you’re queer, but maybe not always. Reyna pointed out, insultingly and in an outraged tone of voice, that he was wearing leather pants. What she meant by that was, “You’re a faggot!” Dave and I shrugged our shoulders and said, “So what? So he’s wearing leather pants? What about it? You got a problem with that?” Then we turned around and laughed at the chicks.

In the middle of the show, some guy was eating a chick’s pussy on the dance floor near me. Or at least I think he was. I pointed it out to Reyna, and said, “Is that weird?” She looked over at the scene, shrugged her shoulders, and said, “No, that’s not weird.”

Dave went out to car, snuck a bottle of Tanqueray gin in, and we started pouring free drinks for ourselves. At first the hotties insisted that they didn’t want any. Dave and I gave each other high-fives and said, “Cool! More for us! Haha!” and gave the chicks snarky looks.

After a while, of course, the hotties started asking for gin themselves and we gave them some. At first they only wanted a tiny bit, but then of course, they kept asking for more and more. The waitress was Texeira, a singer in a punk band. She saw that we snuck the bottle in, but she didn’t care.

Later Dave said, “This band sucks.”

I said, “Fine! Go sit in the car!”

We struck out anyway with the chicks, and Dave stole my car.

He and Raul came and picked me up afterwards, and we went back there. I slept on the couch. I woke up in the middle of the night and I could tell they were fucking in the bedroom. My best friend, getting fucked in the ass by a guy! Damn!

Somehow I went back to sleep and woke up in the morning. Dave had this arrogant, “So I fagged off, what about it?” attitude, and Raul was very annoying. Raul of course spent most of the morning trying to seduce me, and he laid this weird trip on me the whole morning like this:

“Bob! Admit it! You’re gay! You’re living a lie! You say you’re straight, but you’re not! You’re gay just like me! You can try to get women your whole life, but it will never work, because you’re gay gay gay gay! You’re a sad case. I pity you, a closeted gay.”

That’s a Hell of a thing to say to a young, 23 yr old single guy!

Apparently this was one of his queer lines he used to seduce straight guys because he did the exact same number to a friend of mine, Deron.

One reason I dislike queers is because they move Heaven and Earth to try to seduce straight guys and convert them to queerdom.

In fact, my friend Dave had been converted to queerdom. He had moved in with Raul as a roommate (Bad idea!), and then Dave got fired from his job and ran out of money. After a while, Raul said, “Your ass or I throw you out on the street.” Dave came back and lived with me in my apartment for a few days, and then he left. I was told he went back to live with Raul.

I strongly urge all straight guys to not make friends with gay or bi men. My experience has been that they will never stop trying to seduce you, and friendship with these idiots is simply not possible.

*However, I certainly do not agree with raping other boys or men to shame them for their lack of masculinity. That’s just evil, and the guy is possibly screwed up for a long time afterward into adulthood, or maybe permanently, as a result.

A Couple of Bad Approaches for Meeting Women, With Suggestions for Better Ones

I have a friend who has Social Phobia. He’s had it his whole life, and it’s so bad that he is actually on disability for it. It’s gotten better lately. He also has OCD, and I think he has other anxiety stuff going on. Bottom line, he has some issues dealing with chicks. He’s also young, horny as Hell, and trying to get laid without tremendous success like a lot of guys nowadays.

He asked me recently for a couple of ideas about meeting women.

1. “What about going into a bar, acting like you’re better than the place, and ordering a beer, but acting a little aloof? This is what Tom Leykis says to do.”

2. “What about getting some chick I know to be near me in a pubic place, like a bar, then she goes over and starts talking to some other chicks, and I ask her beforehand to say stuff about me like, “Look at that hot guy? Isn’t he cute?”

1. I don’t think that this is going to work. It sounds too much like Asshole Game to me. Of course I have done this, many times, but I learned from experience. You have to be friendly. People don’t really like those who act like they are better than everyone else.

Here is the mindset, and yeah I often do walk around like this. “I am King of the Fuckin’ World, man!” That’s the Confidence Mindset.

I got this mindset from many years of success with women, often with hot chicks. I’ve literally dated scores of hot chicks of all ages over a lifetime. I suspect the success was necessary for the development of the mindset. Even though I have OCD, I am still able to go into this mindset because I lived it for many years. I just go back into my old self, plug into it, and there I am.

It may be difficult to create this mindset out of whole cloth. I’m not sure if you can fake it and get that mindset without all those great successes that created it for me. Maybe you can, I don’t know.

Thing is, when you get into that mindset, there is a tendency to look down on all the normal guys who are just regular dudes walking about. There’s a tendency to think a lot of them are nerds, geeks, dorks, etc. You look at guys who are fat, old, ugly, awkward, whatever, and you look down on them a bit. It’s a side-effect of the confidence thing, and it goes with it.

Well, then I try to get outside of that. I look at some regular guy and try to get under him. I tell myself bullshit like, “This guy is way better than me. I’m nothing, I’m a loser.” I also try to find good things about the guy and focus on that. “Oh wow man, this guy is so cool. What a winner! I like this dude!”

Stuff like that. It waters down the Confidence thing (which is really kind of a strutting, swaggering bastard thing) nicely, but there’s no side effects, because I really don’t believe it.

It’s really necessary to deal with other guys on as much of a one to one level as you can.

When you walk into a bar like you are better than the place, you are insulting everyone. All the guys there, maybe even the chicks there, the owner. It’s a form of Asshole Game. Does it work? I have no idea, but I would avoid it. If I did that, I think most people in the bar would think I’m an asshole and not want to deal with me.

Best way to walk into a bar is like, “Wow! What a cool place! I am right at home!” With me, it’s like, “I’m King of the World, and this is just the place for Him!” You compliment the bar, the guys in it, the chicks there, the owner, everyone. You want to get along with people, not alienate them.

I do this even in bars that I actually think are lame or sleazy. There’s a Hispanic bar I go to sometimes. It’s basically a dive, and it’s full of illegal aliens speaking Spanish. On weekends, there are strippers who barely have a thing on. There are also plenty of gangbanger looking types, Hispanic and Black. Wild fights break out from time to time. The place is a bit dangerous. You might as well be in fuckin’ Tijuana.

Anyway, I go in there like this is the best bar in the world! I just adopt the persona of the guys in there. I turn into a Mexican in Mexico myself. I even speak Spanish! I’m actually this Noam Chomsky academic type, but I go into full macho working class hardass in that place. I go into gangbanger mode if there are bangers around. Heck, I even have a big N on my sneakers. For Norteno! Yep, I live in a Norteno hood, and my homies are Northerners.

I also try to go into the macho thing so I don’t get my ass kicked. For some reason unknown to me, it’s common for people to think I’m gay or bi. I’m not, but it can be an issue. So in that dive, I really get out of that and into macho Mexican hardass as much as possible. You do this by putting a mindset into your mind and watching your body language. I don’t want to get my ass kicked by a bunch of Mexicans for “being a fag.” No thanks.

I was doing that in that bar a while back and the bartender Hispanic chick (35 years old) started talking to me in front of everyone. She was getting people to sign some petition about “immigrants” to the federal government. Probably telling to leave illegals alone. She said, in front of everyone, really loud so everyone could hear, “I want you to come over to my house and sign the petition!” Then she made this little flourish with her body.

I looked at her like, “OK, you just asked me to come over. That’s sort of boring. I mean, chicks I barely know invite me over all the time. So you’re the new one. OK, yawn.”

So I asked her if she wanted to give me her address or her #. She gave me her #. The other guys at the bar were like, “Fuck, that chick just basically told that guy to come over to her house!” I acted like getting the number was the easiest thing on Earth, like I get dozens of chicks’ phone numbers every day. What’s one more? Big deal. I’ll see if can work her in!

The other Mexicans crowded around me and stayed with me for a couple hours, even buying me drinks. I got to know them. I didn’t act like I was better than them for getting the #. That won’t go over.

Don’t act like you are better than the joint. Maybe it works, I dunno. But I would not do it.

2. Get some chick to say good stuff about you. Well, that’s interesting, but I would not do it. It’s so obviously deceitful, and plus to me it implies I am totally lame and need to resort to this outrageously dishonest thing to get chicks. Maybe it’s true, maybe I do need to sink that low, I have no idea. But I won’t do it. After all, I’m King of the World! King of the World doesn’t do sleazy shit like that! Why should he? I mean, chicks are maybe already saying that about me anyway, right?

Does it work? No idea. Maybe it does. It almost strikes as Asshole Game, it’s so dishonest. Me? I would be afraid of backfire. I would be afraid that the woman I put up to it would turn on me and tell the other chicks that I had put her up to that. This might humiliate me and make me a laughing stock. The idea behind #2 is that if one chick likes you, the others all think you’re interesting too. Well of course.

For instance, I do start talking to hot strangers. Or I start conversations with hot chicks at the cash register. I have noticed that when I do this and it goes over halfway decently, most of the other women in the vicinity start looking at me. “He’s talking to that hottie! Look at him! Does she know him? He’s got some balls!” I haven’t the faintest idea what they are thinking, but it may be along those lines.

Women like guys who other chicks like. If no chicks like you, then other new ones will like you either. It takes women to get women. Etc.

Modern Women Have No Understanding of Males Whatsoever

Modern women have no understanding of the male sex drive and what it means to be a male whatsoever. My Mom’s generation and Third World women understand us very well. They’re not wild about our sexuality, but they figure boys will be boys, that’s just the way men are, and what can you do about it?

The feminist generation is the first one to actually declare war on male sexuality and pathologize it. It’s also led to profoundly disturbed views among females about male sexuality. Modern women seem the extremity of a young man’s sex drive. He almost literally has a fucking hardon all day. If not, all it takes is a breeze and he’s got one. And often no place to put it at that.

Hence the epidemic of situational homosexuality among young males (at least when I was growing up). Most of these guys were not the slightest bit gay, but they just were not getting laid. For a young guy, that’s a damned five-alarm fire. If there’s a queer around who will jerk you off or give you head, hey, any port in a storm. I’ve followed up on a number of these guys. Most of them got married, had kids, live in the suburbs, and as far as I can tell, knocked off the situational bisexuality crap.

I once had a friend who was a bisexual guy. I don’t like these guys too much because they always try to screw me, but anyway, after I turned this guy down at his place, he started confessing. The guy was basically gay, but he liked women too. He brought out a collection of pics of young guys, head shots. There must have been 40-50 pics in the collection. They all looked like young, macho construction workers around 20-25. They’d all let this queer suck them off, and not a one of them looked queer themselves.

A friend of mine served on a ship as a young man.

“There was this fag on the ship,” he told me once over some wine and weed. “He was going around sucking guy’s cocks on the ship.”

I winced. I didn’t want to hear that.

“I guess he sucked a lot of cocks,” nodding his head with dead seriousness in his eyes.

“I guess so,” I said, wincing again, this time twice as hard.

Modern women don’t understand how often a horny young guy will jerk off. A young man with no partner may well jerk off every single day, often more than once. I know guys who told me they did it for hours a day, for weeks and months on end. Modern women think there is something sick, weird, strange, or stupid about that. There’s an attitude that only losers jerk. No, you silly dames, only men jerk off.

In marriage it’s even worse. Apparently even most young married men keep on masturbating. Modern women think this is horrible and consider it perversion and infidelity.

Same with porn. Young single males nowadays often look at tons of porn. I know guys who have hard drives full of the stuff. Even young married men probably look at the stuff. Modern women are freaked, once again consider it cheating (LOL!) and are divorcing men for looking at porn, accusing them in court papers of sexual perversion and “pedophilia” for looking at porn. There are a few cases right in my town.

A surprising number of modern women think that single guys can have sex anytime they want to. They don’t get it. Who can have sex anytime they want to? Females! Attractive females spend every day swatting away horny males. Surely it must be the same for guys.

Nope.

I’ve had women repeatedly tell me that any single guy can get as much as he wants, anytime he wants. There are all these women out there who want to make “sexual arragements” with you, you know. You know, you fuck her, she fucks you, no wedding bells, no babies, no mortgage, everything’s cool.

Yeah right.

Hell, women are ringing my phone off every day here asking for these sexual arrangements. At least 10 a day. I’m gonna need to change my number!

Well, if there’s no women around, a guy can always buy it, right? That’s not an option for most middle class White males. I know very few men who ever admitted to me that he bought sex. As a rule, if a young middle class White guy admits he bought sex, all of his idiot friends are going to pound him for him. “I’ve never paid for it!” They will all exclaim. Yeah right. Like Hell you haven’t.

Funny thing is I’ve never heard any man over 40 give me that line, “I’ve never paid for it.” You always pay for sex, one way or another. All men know this. That’s what is so retarded about the, “I never pay for it,” line.

I know one guy who had sex with a lot of whores. He also did it with a lot of women. I figure he’s had over 100 partners easily. He’s a great looking guy, sort of Alpha, and he’s horny as Hell. He just never got married, that’s all.

He’s screwed a bunch of whores, but he’s done a ton of so-called “non-whores” too (who also charged him). Back in the 1980’s, he used to buy high class call girls in Hollywood. Going price was around $65 if you were lucky. In addition to getting laid, you also got a Herpes infection. As he already had it, he didn’t give a fuck, but he kept getting new infections in different places, from both prostitutes and non-prostitutes, but the whores were the worst.

He also went to Oriental Massage Parlors a lot. You can get seriously get laid in these places, but they are also a serious bust, since they operate with open signs, advertisements, you name it. The women in these joints are Asian, often young and very often attractive to extremely beautiful. Going rate was $65-85+ for 30 minutes to 1 hour.

Thing is, you often had to seduce the masseuses. They make a decent wage just giving massages, and a lot don’t want to go to jail or screw every client, or any client. If you’re not Joe Slick Alpha, you might never get laid. Even this guy, who is Joe Cool with chicks, often struck out in massage parlors. In that case, you just get a nice $55 massage. The sex is extra, tipped directly to the girl.

If you’re slick and cool, you can often seduce them. Then you get handjobs, blowjobs, even eat pussy and 69 if you like that sort of thing. Sex is rarer. The women are very clean, and he said he never caught a thing.

He also sampled street whores, who he said were a disaster. Often Black, often on drugs, often with very bad, sleazy attitudes, and yes, they have lots of diseases. They were cheap, $20 back then, but no sane guy goes there.

Here it is 20-25 years later, and the price must be around $150 for Oriental Massage and $130 for call girls, or possibly much more. Even street whores must be $40 at least.

There is another thing to consider. Prostitution is against the law. You can be busted as a john for trying to buy a whore. Oriental massage joints are often busted. The cops take over the joint and send in Oriental female undercover cops. You go in there, offer the chick $40, and you’re cuffed for soliciting.

My friend made good money, but even back then, he could only afford whores maybe once a month. That’s not enough sex for a typical young man. At the going price of ~$150 a shot, how many young guys can afford to buy whores?

Even if, as a single man, you find a women willing to give it to you, she’s charging. Dinner, movie, bar afterwards, is what? $100. I don’t know, it’s been forever since I did it. If you’re getting it regularly, she probably wants to be taken out once a week, if not 2-3 times a week. Figure $100/week easily for the girlfriend. I paid my dues as required, but my memory was endless bitching about how I needed to start making more money. And how the women I was dating were always making more money than I was, but would never even so much as pay the fuckin tip.

At $100/week for a girlfriend, how many guys can afford that?

Don’t forget anniversaries. It’s our one month anniversary, our two month anniversary, our one year anniversary. Don’t forget holidays. Christmas, Easter, Valentine’s Day, on and on. Fork, fork, fork. Now you’re going to be asked to actually buy some stuff. Jewelry, outfits, cellphones, computers, Hell, even cars!

Yeah, free love, right. What were we fighting for back then anyway?

Interesting Article About An Alliance Between Alpha Males and Feminists

I don’t really agree with the premise of this article, that there is some nefarious alliance between Alpha Males and feminists, but it makes an interesting point. The suggestion is that Alphas are benefiting disproportionately from feminism, and the rest of the guys are losing out. There may be a point there, but I doubt if the Alphas set it up that way.

Anyway, under feminism, females are free to pursue their basic Cavewoman natures, which is not that great for most guys. Life ends up being an endless replay of high school, where 1

I am in my 50’s, and I must say, this is still ongoing! There are not many single Alphas left in their 50’s. Life, marriage, illness, death, disability, alcoholism, defeat, economics, takes its toll on most men by this age. If you’re still strutting around past 50, either you’re fucked in the head or you deserve a medal for survivorship if nothing else.

There are only a few Alphas left around age 50 or so, like I said. Nevertheless, all of the best women around my age (Yes, there are still some good women left at age 45-55) are all flocking to the few Alphas, and the few Alphas are cleaning up with all of the good women! And I know plenty of guys age 40-56 or so who are not getting anything at all. They are alone and lonely.

Now this is the age bracket where single females start outnumbering single males, and women supposedly start getting desperate and chasing any decent guy out there, so I was getting my hopes up. Forget it. The best women are as picky as ever. I don’t know about the less desirable ones, because I’m not interested. I know a beautiful woman aged 55. I saw her dating profile on a dating site. She is deluged with good-looking, moneyed guys around her age who are all fighting for her.

Anyway, single middle age is not exactly a sexual paradise.

There is a lot of good commentary at the end of the piece. As the piece points out, under feminism, 1

The PUA and Game Community have been playing up the increasingly desperate state of the Betas under feminism.

This situation is best summed up from this quote from a PUA blog:

They are free from social, religious and economic constraints to revert to their Neolithic programming of seeking the best male genetic specimens (strong+ attractive +willful) and reject the genetically mediocre. Nature is cruel – Do not blame women for it!

The reason for this state of affairs is that women no longer need men economically. The old way was really better. Enforced marriage at an early age, followed by female economic dependence on men. Those that don’t marry early, their relatives set them up in more or less forced marriage later on. Everyone gets married, everyone gets sex, and frustration level is low. Feminism has gotten rid of this nice, stable state of affairs.

Thing is, Alphas make lousy mates. These guys are not reliable at all. Most women refuse to stay with them and leave them sooner or later. They’re fun for a while, like Spring Break in college, then it’s back to the serious stuff. Women, even the best women, often marry Betas later on, because Betas are good providers. I’m not sure how the marriages work out. Nowadays, a lot of these guys are probably pussy-whipped at home. At worst, he’s a Meal Ticket. At best, he’s a Reliable Husband.

There are endless debates about the meaning of the terms Alpha, Beta, etc. There are said to be high Betas and fake Alphas. That makes sense. If you cut off the Alphas at 1

I don’t think these labels are important so much as if a guy has what it takes to get women.

I define an Alpha as a guy who is charismatic and dominant, with leadership qualities, whether he uses them or not. He’s the guy who walks into the room and every woman turns around to look at him. These are the guys who get most of the best women, or they could if they wanted to. They’re not necessarily unfaithful, but they often are.

Many marry, but they tend to be unfaithful after marriage. In marriage, Alphas rule the roost. Being pussy-whipped at home is basically a disqualifier in terms of Alphahood. This is where you see a lot of your fake Alphas. I know a lot of guys who try to act really Alpha, but they’re p-whipped at home. Forget it. Fake Alpha or High Beta.

Alphas do not always make a lot of money. In fact, even far into adulthood, quite a few of them are broke. Many more or less live off wives or girlfriends who bring home the bacon. Even in relationships or marriages, they tend to come and go as they please. They’re not always phoning home and asking Wifey permission for this or that. They don’t need her permission for all that much. Many have continuous affairs while married, toning them down somewhat as they move into middle age.

Many Alphas are not very nice people. Quite a few are criminals. Many are ex-cons and even ex-felons. Some are killers. Serial killer Ted Bundy was an obvious Alpha.

Here is an Alpha who is not a very nice person, doesn’t treat women very well, is a criminal and ex-con, yet has women crawling all over him. He has sex with 200+ women a year (hard to believe but anyway you get the point). My opinion of women just dropped 9

On “harems”-

A guy i was friends with in high school is now an ex-con neo-Nazi drug dealing “enforcer” for a gang in his blue-collar town. He is extremely popular with women and definitely has a harem, though he probably doesn’t even know what that word means.

A couple of years ago I went out for beers with him and women were literally running to him and letting him grab and squeeze their breasts, hard. He would also scream in their face “I am going to fuck you in the ass until you bleed and then I’m going to stick it in your pussy,” and they would giggle and squeal like he was George Clooney. He says he sleeps with hundreds of women a year and I believe him.

I learned more in that night about the true nature of women than any library of books could have taught me.

There’s a notion that Alphas are all assholes, but I doubt if this is true. For sure some of them are. But I’ve known quite a few who were nice guys. Alphas are leaders, and they are dominant. In order to be a good leader, you have to get people to like you. If you’re a natural leader, you don’t have to be an asshole. Everyone knows you’re in charge, and you don’t have to be a dick to prove it. Nevertheless, quite a few Alphas are bastards. In particular, they are often highly narcissistic and can be very much the fair weather friend.

On PUA sites, there is endless discussion about Alphas and how to act like one. PUA is really about teaching the 7

Women hate PUA because it confuses them. They all want the 1

This is behind a lot of the rage against PUA. That only a select group of men has a right to access the best of women. Rightfully, PUA rebels against this.

In the discussions about Alphahood, there is a lot of discussion about developing an Alpha state of mind, about sizing up other guys as far as their Alpha or Betaness and being submissive or dominant to them in return. Supposedly, when Alphas meet a Beta, they express dominance over him and basically treat him like shit somewhat.

I don’t buy it for one second. First of all, real Alphas are not walking around all of the time thinking, “I am an Alpha.” They are not sizing up other guys regarding their Alpha or Betaness. An Alpha could quite well be very nice and friendly to a Beta or even an Omega. After all, the Betas and Omegas are no competition, so why worry?

So I don’t believe that Alphas think this way at all. To me, and Alpha is thinking of two things:

1. What am I doing now?

2. What am I going to do in the (immediate) future?

That’s it. He doesn’t think of the past much (What for?) and he doesn’t worry about the future either (Do animals worry about the future?) No Alpha consciousness, no sizing up other guys, no dominating them, none of that. An Alpha is like an animal, or a machine. He’s almost a sociopath (in some cases he is) but not quite.

Also, one can probably fade and in and out of Alphaness. There are guys who had it in high school and/or college, then lost it, as what it takes in school is not really what it takes to do well in life after school. There are guys who move in and out of Alphahood in various phases of their lives. I know guys who have lived as Alphas, Betas and even for a while, lived the monastic, no date in 100 years of solitude life of Omegas. Life is strange.

But as much as Alphahood can be lost in one who once had it, and then regained (as the base is already present in the mind), I’m not sure that Alphahood can be created out of scratch. My Mom loves men, so she finds Alphas fascinating. As she said about Alphas and the PUA notion of creating them out of thin air, “I doubt if it can be done. You’ve either got it or you don’t.” If you’re not an Alpha and you’ve never been one, past a certain age, you may never become one.

This is an interesting subject, and I hope to write more about it in the future.

Safeguard Your Own Women, Steal the Enemy’s Women

In the comments section, Cyrus points out that some ethnic groups do place priority on breeding within the group, particularly the Jews and the Armenians:

Robert, in addition to Jews having a fixation on non-intermarriage, I might also add that I have noticed this pattern with Armenians as well. Just an observation. Though, I believe there exists a social rational behind Jews and Armenians holding such views. A similar history of persecution, perhaps? A Near Eastern cultural element?

Yes, the Armenians and the Jews do want you to marry inside the group. And many immigrants to the West do too. I have noticed that with East Asians, there is strong pressure for Chinese to marry another Chinese, Koreans another Korean, Japanese another Japanese, etc. Even among SE Asians, there is pressure to marry your own. Khmer are pressured to marry other Khmer and not those horrible Lao or Viets, etc.

What’s funny is that marrying your own tribe can’t really be natural, since in order to keep it going, you have pound it into your people’s heads how evil the other tribes are. Most of these accusations against the other groups are simply lies. So the only way to prevent mass miscegenation is with mass lying propaganda. Doesn’t sound like an inborn trait to me.

If you study tribes, it’s clear that most totally don’t give a fuck about genetic purity. I studied Amerindian tribes, and it was quite common to take a wife not just from another village, but even from another tribe. She left her tribe and came to yours, abandoned her language and culture and adopted yours, and she was automatically one of your people. It also makes sense from a genetic POV, as you are avoiding becoming inbred. It seems that primitives had some understanding of genetics after all.

Further, tribes have always conquered other tribes and raided them to steal their women. One thing you can do is raid the other tribe and rape all their women to force them to bear your genetic line. Or bring the women back to your tribe and breed them in with your tribe, and extinct their tribe in the process.

Primitives did not understand genetics very well, but clearly there was a prerogative to keep the tribe going and in many cases to wipe out the competing tribes. By kidnapping their women, bringing them back to your village, and making them bear your kids, you extinct their tribe while incorporating their genes into your own line.

Any group doing this cares not one whit about genetic purity. They just mass-miscegenated with the enemy! Come on!

However, they did keep their tribe going and extinct a competing tribe. These tendencies may well be genetically driven.

Kevin MacDonald says that humans have evolved traits to do two opposite things:

1. Guard the women of your own tribe from breeding with enemy or competing groups.

2. Conversely, the men have a drive to breed with the women of the competing group (in addition to breeding with their own)!

Maybe this is not so contrary as it seems. Women are the seed stock of your tribe. When they are gone, you are gone. You need to preserve them from the enemy taking them out and extincting your group. On the other hand, by stealing the enemy’s women, you weaken them, force them to carry your line, and possibly wipe them out altogether.

The result is the imperative in the title: Safeguard Your Own Women, Steal the Enemy’s Women.

All makes sense from a group competition POV.

Sugar and Spice and Everything Nice

That’s what little Afghan boys are made of.

Oh, and don’t forget man-love Thursdays. Beats TGIF by a mile! J/k.

I’m not trying to dog their culture or anything, but this is what happens  when you put your females in purdah starting at age 12 and make them wear bags outdoors for the rest of their lives: the guys start screwing each other like crazy.

Situational homosexuality is universal. If the chicks aren’t putting out for one reason or another, the guys, especially the young guys, are going to start fucking each other. Which is a great argument either for socially approved mass early marriage, sexual revolution or legalized prostitution, or some combination.

I’ve seen it with my own horrified eyes in California in the early 1980’s, and I fended off plenty of “straight” (wink) guys myself. A young man has a semi-hardon all day, and all it takes is a breeze to give him a full one. Nature abhors a useless hardon as much as she abhors a vacuum and will strive to fill the vacuum and find any hole in a storm for that lonely hardon.

Your choice, Afghans. Don’t like man-love Thursdays? Fine. Get rid of the purdah for tweens and the bags later on.

"Liberation," by Alpha Unit

Henry Miller wrote a novel over seventy years ago in which the narrator spoke fondly and admiringly of prostitutes – and low-rent prostitutes at that. One of them was quite exuberant in her whoredom – “a whore all the way through,” the narrator says proudly, because she acted the part “with feeling,” even though it was a part she acted for anybody. The novel was Tropic of Cancer. The narrator is an expatriate American writer, committed due to circumstance to live in the present, with a focus on the satisfaction of bodily needs, sort of the way animals live (at one point, he declares himself, happily, to be “inhuman”). The descriptions he gives of how these needs were satisfied – especially those satisfied by prostitutes – shocked and mortified several states and the U.S. Post Office, leading to an obscenity trial that eventually produced a ruling in the publisher’s favor in 1964. I’ve read the opinion that this ruling ushered in what some call the Sexual Revolution – a distinction it shares with some other cultural shifts in post-World War II America. At the very least, it was part of a trend toward more and more openness in the discussion of sex in the United States. Those who came along in the generations after Tropic of Cancer was published sometimes applauded it as an example of a modernistic, stream-of-consciousness style of literature that broke through convention in the same way some earlier novels had. But a lot of people were impressed with it in a different way – they were appalled by the graphic descriptions of sex acts, in the context of sordid encounters, and by the way Henry Miller wrote about women. Women were “cunts.” If they weren’t “cunts” they were “sluts” or “bitches.” But they were mainly “cunts,” whether they were whores or respectable. Feminists have long had a problem with Henry Miller, n’est-ce pas? Seen as some kind of maven of sexual liberation (and perhaps excess), Miller was interviewed during the 1960s by Esquire magazine and others. Naturally, he was asked for his assessment of the “new” sexual climate in America. The interviewer David Dury asked Miller if he was bored with sex – referring to the openness with which Americans could speak of it and partake of it. Miller responded:

One can’t get bored with sex. But one is bored with making such a tremendous issue of it. This constant harping on sex all the time is so immature, not just sexually, but socially and politically. It’s as though we’re a race of adolescents.

Dury tells Miller, that it is he, Miller, who harps on it in his books, but Miller’s not having it.

I harped on trying to get at the whole truth of one man: myself. Sex was a big part of that, but no matter how you add it up, in pages or print or words or volumes, it was only a part. It just happened that this was the part that had shock value.

Miller agrees with Dury that all the talk about sex is better than the old ignorance and secrecy that once prevailed. He adds:

But because in the past we have been so Goddamned backward about sex, this revolution is causing sex to become a preoccupation. This I find sad, and even deplorable in many ways.

According to Miller, sex is now a commodity, but what’s worse is that women were becoming commodities. There is a lot of promiscuity, but no passion or vitality. Miller lets Dury in on what things used to be like in the “bad” old days:

During my time, the girls were so shut in, and you were always watched. Now everybody’s free about sex, but they’re shut in in other ways. In the old days the great difference was that when we were committing these – What are they calling them? Adulteries? Fornications? Illicit sex? Ridiculous words! When we did it, we did it! We didn’t sit around and talk about it first, intellectualize it. There was always pleasure involved. I mean, great fun! For everybody! Joy, do you see? That’s the big difference, that element of joy! Joy in sex! You’d have to be a blind man not to see it. In my time, either they weren’t having any sex because of too much guilt, or they were having wonderfully joyous sex. Now everyone’s having sex, the guilty ones probably more than anyone – but it’s so joyless, so much of it.

Dury asks Miller, “Do you consider sex without love to be harmful?” To which Miller replies:

There’s nothing wrong with sex without love. But much more is needed, because just to have a good sex fling isn’t enough, there has to be something more. A man has to fall in love. He has to want something more of the woman and see more in her than an object to be used.

Does this sound like any misogynist you know? The next question is, “What exactly do you think men are missing in the way they relate to women sexually now?” I love Miller’s response, as most women probably would!

They’re missing a lot of things. For one, there’s no adoration for women! Now there’s another word I would like to emphasize – adoration! Where do we have any adoration today in our talk about women and sex? I believe in adoration, not only in relation to women, but in relation to men as well, where the man above you is someone you adore and admire and want to emulate, the adoration for a master. This is completely lost in our society today. Instead of adoration for women, men seem to be just always on the chase.

This was all from a man who was seen as someone who despised women and saw sex as nothing but an outlet for a crude impulse – a conclusion people arrived at on the basis of a work of art. Miller gave this interview back in 1966. I can only imagine what he would think of the way a lot of men see women today. The contempt with which some of these pickup artists speak of women would probably be gravely disturbing to him! But, as always, the problem is not that simple. The feminism that opened so many doors for women and created so many opportunities for them – a development Miller looked upon favorably – has contributed enormously to the disgust so many men exhibit toward women. In another interview with Dury, Henry Miller expressed a fear that the sexual revolution was “masculinizing” women – something that would be to their detriment. With foresight, he told his interviewer:

These aggressive females, particularly the American type, aren’t improving their situation vis-a-vis the male…I am sincerely convinced that a woman’s greatest reward comes from the role of – what shall we call it? – stimulator and comforter. Now if she takes the greater independence and equality necessary for her own development, and becomes masculinized by it, then she is the tragic loser, as much or more than the man. She loses her powers as the seductress, when she becomes masculinized…She’s best when she’s that way. And it’s also best for the man. It brings out all that is masculine about him.

But Dury isn’t giving up entirely on the idea of female independence and equality. Couldn’t these make the woman a better seductress? Miller answers:

Yes, it really should. But if it makes her equally aggressive in the male sense, instead of truly seductive, then it will be like two machines coming together…put a coin in the slot and bang! bang! You see? The poetic prelude and the art of it all will be gone. Just get it over with, bim-bam! I still believe a man really wants to woo a woman. It gives him great satisfaction, don’t you think?

Henry Miller dismissed the idea that he had ever set out to be some kind of expert on sex or love. But for someone who for decades endured a reputation for being some kind of hypermasculine woman-hater, the truth about him is quite refreshing. Could it be that lurking inside your average latter-day misogynist is a romantic who, sadly, has given up?

References

Miller, H., Kersnowski, F. & Hughes, A. 1994. Conversations with Henry Miller. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi.

“Liberation,” by Alpha Unit

Henry Miller wrote a novel over seventy years ago in which the narrator spoke fondly and admiringly of prostitutes – and low-rent prostitutes at that. One of them was quite exuberant in her whoredom – “a whore all the way through,” the narrator says proudly, because she acted the part “with feeling,” even though it was a part she acted for anybody.

The novel was Tropic of Cancer. The narrator is an expatriate American writer, committed due to circumstance to live in the present, with a focus on the satisfaction of bodily needs, sort of the way animals live (at one point, he declares himself, happily, to be “inhuman”). The descriptions he gives of how these needs were satisfied – especially those satisfied by prostitutes – shocked and mortified several states and the U.S. Post Office, leading to an obscenity trial that eventually produced a ruling in the publisher’s favor in 1964.

I’ve read the opinion that this ruling ushered in what some call the Sexual Revolution – a distinction it shares with some other cultural shifts in post-World War II America. At the very least, it was part of a trend toward more and more openness in the discussion of sex in the United States.

Those who came along in the generations after Tropic of Cancer was published sometimes applauded it as an example of a modernistic, stream-of-consciousness style of literature that broke through convention in the same way some earlier novels had.

But a lot of people were impressed with it in a different way – they were appalled by the graphic descriptions of sex acts, in the context of sordid encounters, and by the way Henry Miller wrote about women. Women were “cunts.” If they weren’t “cunts” they were “sluts” or “bitches.” But they were mainly “cunts,” whether they were whores or respectable.

Feminists have long had a problem with Henry Miller, n’est-ce pas?

Seen as some kind of maven of sexual liberation (and perhaps excess), Miller was interviewed during the 1960s by Esquire magazine and others. Naturally, he was asked for his assessment of the “new” sexual climate in America.

The interviewer David Dury asked Miller if he was bored with sex – referring to the openness with which Americans could speak of it and partake of it. Miller responded:

One can’t get bored with sex. But one is bored with making such a tremendous issue of it. This constant harping on sex all the time is so immature, not just sexually, but socially and politically. It’s as though we’re a race of adolescents.

Dury tells Miller, that it is he, Miller, who harps on it in his books, but Miller’s not having it.

I harped on trying to get at the whole truth of one man: myself. Sex was a big part of that, but no matter how you add it up, in pages or print or words or volumes, it was only a part. It just happened that this was the part that had shock value.

Miller agrees with Dury that all the talk about sex is better than the old ignorance and secrecy that once prevailed. He adds:

But because in the past we have been so Goddamned backward about sex, this revolution is causing sex to become a preoccupation. This I find sad, and even deplorable in many ways.

According to Miller, sex is now a commodity, but what’s worse is that women were becoming commodities. There is a lot of promiscuity, but no passion or vitality.

Miller lets Dury in on what things used to be like in the “bad” old days:

During my time, the girls were so shut in, and you were always watched. Now everybody’s free about sex, but they’re shut in in other ways. In the old days the great difference was that when we were committing these – What are they calling them? Adulteries? Fornications? Illicit sex? Ridiculous words!

When we did it, we did it! We didn’t sit around and talk about it first, intellectualize it. There was always pleasure involved. I mean, great fun! For everybody! Joy, do you see? That’s the big difference, that element of joy! Joy in sex! You’d have to be a blind man not to see it.

In my time, either they weren’t having any sex because of too much guilt, or they were having wonderfully joyous sex. Now everyone’s having sex, the guilty ones probably more than anyone – but it’s so joyless, so much of it.

Dury asks Miller, “Do you consider sex without love to be harmful?” To which Miller replies:

There’s nothing wrong with sex without love. But much more is needed, because just to have a good sex fling isn’t enough, there has to be something more. A man has to fall in love. He has to want something more of the woman and see more in her than an object to be used.

Does this sound like any misogynist you know?

The next question is, “What exactly do you think men are missing in the way they relate to women sexually now?” I love Miller’s response, as most women probably would!

They’re missing a lot of things. For one, there’s no adoration for women! Now there’s another word I would like to emphasize – adoration! Where do we have any adoration today in our talk about women and sex? I believe in adoration, not only in relation to women, but in relation to men as well, where the man above you is someone you adore and admire and want to emulate, the adoration for a master.

This is completely lost in our society today. Instead of adoration for women, men seem to be just always on the chase.

This was all from a man who was seen as someone who despised women and saw sex as nothing but an outlet for a crude impulse – a conclusion people arrived at on the basis of a work of art.

Miller gave this interview back in 1966. I can only imagine what he would think of the way a lot of men see women today. The contempt with which some of these pickup artists speak of women would probably be gravely disturbing to him!

But, as always, the problem is not that simple. The feminism that opened so many doors for women and created so many opportunities for them – a development Miller looked upon favorably – has contributed enormously to the disgust so many men exhibit toward women. In another interview with Dury, Henry Miller expressed a fear that the sexual revolution was “masculinizing” women – something that would be to their detriment.

With foresight, he told his interviewer:

These aggressive females, particularly the American type, aren’t improving their situation vis-a-vis the male…I am sincerely convinced that a woman’s greatest reward comes from the role of – what shall we call it? – stimulator and comforter.

Now if she takes the greater independence and equality necessary for her own development, and becomes masculinized by it, then she is the tragic loser, as much or more than the man. She loses her powers as the seductress, when she becomes masculinized…She’s best when she’s that way. And it’s also best for the man. It brings out all that is masculine about him.

But Dury isn’t giving up entirely on the idea of female independence and equality. Couldn’t these make the woman a better seductress? Miller answers:

Yes, it really should. But if it makes her equally aggressive in the male sense, instead of truly seductive, then it will be like two machines coming together…put a coin in the slot and bang! bang! You see? The poetic prelude and the art of it all will be gone. Just get it over with, bim-bam! I still believe a man really wants to woo a woman. It gives him great satisfaction, don’t you think?

Henry Miller dismissed the idea that he had ever set out to be some kind of expert on sex or love. But for someone who for decades endured a reputation for being some kind of hypermasculine woman-hater, the truth about him is quite refreshing.

Could it be that lurking inside your average latter-day misogynist is a romantic who, sadly, has given up?

References

Miller, H., Kersnowski, F. & Hughes, A. 1994. Conversations with Henry Miller. Jackson, MS: University Press of Mississippi.

Sexmaniacman On Seduction

Repost from the old site.

Sexmaniacman just told me the following:

Hey Bob, a woman just told me that I have a take it or leave it attitude. I was interested, but obviously, I said, “Yeah, so what?” Then she said, “See? That was take it or leave it right there.” I said, “Sure, I know. So what.” Then she said that was what she loved about me (this take it or leave it attitude that she says she actually dislikes), and then mentioned how she wants to have sex with me.

For some reason, I thought, “Ho-hum, she wants to have sex with me, yawn.” And I like this woman. But this “I can take it or leave it” attitude towards sex feels really liberating. Make them work for it. I’m a privileged catch and you have to work to get me. I think women really despise guys who crawl all around trying to kiss up to them and accommodate them.

I never realized I had such a dicky attitude, but I think it’s the best. On the other hand, you should also try to be accommodating to others to some extent, and I do.

I’m reading this guy’s blog here, which is all about picking up chicks. It’s for young guys in their 20’s who are upper middle class yuppies. Everyone else needn’t bother to read.

I disagree with some of the stuff he says, but he does have some good points.

He says never complain about a lousy kiss from a woman. I disagree. You go to kiss a woman at the end of the date and she turns her cheek and lets you peck her cheek. Lean back and say, “Wow,” real sarcastically.

Most of the time, that will get her back up and she’ll start kissing you for real. If that doesn’t work, make fun of her. Say, “You call that a kiss? Where’d you learn how to kiss? You don’t even know how to kiss.” But say it humorously, not angrily.

Women actually like to be provoked. It works pretty good to suggest they can’t kiss worth a crap or they are probably frigid and lousy in bed. That’s a direct challenge, and a lot of the time, they will respond to it by showing you, “Damn right I know how to kiss/fuck, etc, baby!”

The mistakes he is talking about are guys who don’t know how to read women. You have to read women. You need to be an expert in verbal and nonverbal communication. I’m still learning this stuff every day, and I figure it’s a Lifetime Course. I can’t emphasize this strongly enough, because you really do need to learn this stuff in order to deal with women.

Here the guy asks his date to kiss him. I’ve always thought that’s the stupidest thing in the world to do. Never ask a new woman if she wants to have any kind of sex act. Don’t even ask your girlfriend if she wants to have sex. Let her ask you or take the initiative.

I’ve always just been a Rapist and an Attacker. I just grab at them or needle them with my feet or make rude sexual remarks. I always make a big joke out of it and I’m laughing and screwing around the whole time.

It’s hit or miss that way, but I’ve had sex with scores of women. The only new woman you should ask if she wants to have sex with you is a whore. Any other female is probably going to say no, and they don’t get better as they get older.

Generally, you have to wait until you get the proper signals that it’s ok to assault her. You might have to wait a while. The signals might never come, in which case you probably don’t assault her. Just figure she’s a lost cause and don’t date her anymore.

If you try to assault her and she pushes you away or threatens to call the cops (Yes, it’s happened to me) just shrug your shoulders, forget about her, and then act mildly put out the rest of the night. She’ll feel bad and try to make up for it. Act like, “Gimme one reason why I should date you again?” Not angry or anything, just “take it or leave it.”

Assault can be very soft, slow-motion and tender, like a movie that’s in slow motion, or you can just push her up against the wall and kiss her really hard. I’ve done both many, many times, and I do recommend this approach.

Bob, I remember one time I was out with this rock band. I was trying to screw the lead singer, whose name was Ann.

I won’t give you the name of the band because there were sort of big around LA for awhile (she’s still kind of famous and there are pics of her on the Net)and this might get back to me.

I just Googled her and it turns out that later she went solo and formed her own band and released some albums. She also played with some of the big LA punk bands. You can order her records on Amazon and some other places. She’s still performing up til 1989, then she’s gone.

There was another woman there, Linda, and I’d already had sex with her, but now we were sort of through. I think Linda and Ann were having sex at some point.

They were all a bunch of goth rockers and I was a punker with a leather jacket and an attitude. The goth guys were mostly fags or bi or might as well have been. If you were good looking, confident, cocky and didn’t act like a total queer, you could clean up with the goth chicks, who were mostly bi themselves, by the way.

You just had to play this role of arrogant, old-fashioned guy disgusted by all the rampant homo/bi-sexuality in the scene. The chicks all thought that mean and horrible and disgusting, but then they wanted to have sex with you too, because you know, you were really the only real man around.

I was in the back seat in a car full of this punk band’s members, and I kept reaching up in front and grabbing Ann. She was reaching back and we were playing games with fingers and grabbing or some shit.

Everyone else was talking and watching us like, “What are they doing, anyway?” I was partly doing this to piss off Linda, and she didn’t like it too much. But she wasn’t putting out anymore anyway, so I was a free man, and she needed to avert her eyes and shut up.

We were walking into this Denny’s at like 2 AM and I finally realized how pissed I was at Ann. She’d been teasing me like this for way too long. As we walked into the doorway, I suddenly grabbed her and shoved her up against the wall and kissed her real hard. Then, just as quickly, I let her go and smiled like nothing had happened.

The whole party (the band members) was like, “Whoa!”

Linda asked with a weird smile, like I was acting extremely weird, “Sexman, what do you think you are doing?”

Duh. What do you think I’m doing? Ann acted like she didn’t know what hit her, but she liked it of course. The guys in the band were like, “Whoa, this dude’s hardcore, man.”

We went to the table and everyone made sure Ann was out of reach of me because now I was a confirmed public assaulter-rapist, and they didn’t want any more scenes. But Ann was smiling and chatting me up the whole meal.

It’s good to give women orders too, Bob. Have you ever done that? Do. I picked up this woman in a bar once within like three minutes of walking into the joint. It was a place called the Anti-Club in Hollywood. It was 1985, the show was Christian Death, and it was too awesome.

Three minutes, I bought her a drink, had my arm around her and was feeling her up. We left the club for a while, drove around and sort of had sex in the car while driving around Hollyweird, then went back to the club.

At the end of the show, the date had gone sour, and she tried to ditch me.

I looked at her and said, “Hey, look, you don’t understand. You’re not going home with them. You’re going home with me.” Smiling the whole time.

That got her back up good. “Oh yeah? Who says?”

“Says me.” Still smiling.

“Wait a minute. Let me try something.” She tells me to stand up straight on the sidewalk and looks me up and down lasciviously for about a minute like it’s some kind of test.

“OK,” she said. So I drove her home from LA to Orange County and we managed to have sex in the car on the 5 Freeway in downtown LA going 55 miles an hour at 2 AM, which is always interesting.

She had the same name as my Mom. I told her that, and she acted disgusted, like, “Fuck your Mom, you wimp. Obviously you’re abnormally attached to her.”

Another time I had a new woman in my bedroom. I had her top off and was feeling her tits.

She whimpered, in this totally lame voice, “Please let me go home.”

Obviously she didn’t mean it.

I said, “No way, you’re staying right here.” Not real psycho-like, but firm nevertheless.

She was free to leave, as the cops say, and her car was in the driveway. At some point there was an argument.

I said, “Get over on that bed right now.” Same way, not real crazy, but firm nevertheless. She was free to say no.

Of course, she scurried over to the bed very obediently like a little puppy. Then, later, at some point, she didn’t want to have sex or something.

I just got out of bed, walked over to the couch and said, “Fine, if you don’t want to fuck, I’ll just sleep on the couch. You sleep on the bed. See you in the morning.”

And closed my eyes.

Not two minutes went by and I heard this little bird chirping, “Come on over to the bed.” You can guess what happens next.

So a proper mixture of assertiveness and indifference can sometimes work wonders.

I’m sitting here, Bob, thinking that I have to get rid of this take it or leave it attitude, but the major part of me says, “Who cares? This is the way I am, and I’m not out to kiss up to or accommodate everyone else. This is me and this is my style, like it or not, I’m not making any major changes to suit you or anyone else.”

This Roissy guy is going on and on about alpha males and beta males. I confess I don’t get it. What’s the difference? Do betas get lots of women, or is that impossible? I have a huge ego, I strut around like a rooster, I’m cocky and vain, and I think I’m Joe Hotshot With the Chicks and King of the World combined, even though it’s not true at all anymore. So is that alpha or what? I’m not sure I understand what he’s getting at.

On Female Emotionality/Illogicality

Alpha Unit comments in the I’m So Sick and Tired of This Shit thread:

Men don’t really know women at all.

Instead of actual knowledge and understanding of women, what they have are assumptions and myths.

“Women have no souls.” “Women are illogical.” “Women see you as friends after you’ve unsuccessfully dated them.”

How did these soulless, illogical beings gain the upper hand over you men? You, with all the soul and all the logic?

Could someone answer that?

Answer: They don’t have the upper hand. We guys rule, even still, probably. It’s a Man’s World, even 2010 USA. As far as the rest of the world, sure, of course we’re in charge.

Look, sure women are more emotionally directed, and men less so. Everyone knows this.

You’re out hunting a bunch of woolly mammoths. You can’t be getting all emotional. It’s dangerous. You have to stay calm and quiet so you can kill the beast. One of you might die in the assault on the mammoth. Man World is an intensely violent place. If guys were as emotional as females, we’d be beating and murdering each other all over the place.

You’re a caveman. You see some guys from another tribe. A dispute occurs, a potentially fatal one. Instead of flipping out and turning to all out war like women do, and then regretting it the next day, you negotiate your way out of it. What if we went to all out war, some of our guys got killed, then we sat down and cried about it the next day and went back to say we’re sorry to the other guys. They’d probably kill even more of us!

We can’t afford to be emotional. It’s deadly. Women can afford to be emotional, hate each other’s guts, start fights and wars with each other all the time, because females are not dangerous. Female aggression is nothing. What happens when women are having a catfight? Nothing. Someone cries, and everyone gets their feelings hurt. Oh, boo hoo. If a men had the same type of catfights that females do on a regular basis, someone’s going to get killed.

Female emotionality is best because her emotions probably pick the best provider for her and tell her when to stay with him and when to leave him. They probably also help keep him around.

Also, female emotionality is great for raising kids and building bonds with other females. Women create the network of civilization around the village. They string it all together through their friendships. Men are also lousy at friendships, so we don’t sow a connecting network together to make the village thing work.

I think men suck at raising kids. Women’s emotionality helps to tune them in to the baby or kid’s emotions and attend to his needs. If it were up to guys, a lot of kids would just die because we don’t care.

The sexes are different. Female emotionality can be hard to deal with at times, even for other women, but it was obviously evolutionarily necessary and probably still is. I don’t feel that either sex is maladaptive. Both sexes are for the most part probably very adaptive in most ways.

The sexes complement each other, yin and yang, and make a whole. Alone, each is incomplete. Together, the circle is complete.

Sure, men complain about women. Hell, women complain about women. But they can’t help it, and neither can we.

And female emotionality is easier to take and less destructive than male violence. Women are nutty and hard to take sometimes, but there’s always another one across the way to trade her in for, and anyway, males have tried to kill me. Not once, but repeatedly. I’m lucky I survived. No female has ever tried to kill me. Compared to male dangerousness, the breezy emotions of the female are a walk in the park.

Getting down to brass tacks, do you really want a world where the women all act like men? Forget it. It’s bad enough that 5

Looks Is Everything For Women, Nothing For Men

In the comments section, Shawn says that what matters for young men is looks and for older men it’s increasingly money as they get older.

The problem is that looks alone is almost completely worthless for males of any age. Females of any age simply do not place any value whatsoever on looks absent other qualities.

I’ve known some young goodlooking guys (age 20-45) who were just about the best looking guys in the whole town. No woman would have anything to do with them, not even one, or not really. These guys went many years without even so much as a date. No sex at all, and very few if any dates.

I don’t think that looks alone matters one bit to females of any age.

Now, if you have other attributes, such as confidence, charm, etc. in addition to looks, you can do well. But looks alone doesn’t mean jack  shit to females of any age. I’m pretty sure of that.

Some of these guys had what this Feminist Critics column calls gender-nonconforming behaviors – they were overly agreeable, shy, introverted, unassertive, or sensitive. Any one of these behaviors, not to mention all of them, is pretty deadly in a male. Females simply will not tolerate it. If they do end up with females, the females typically are mean and cruel to them, bitch at them, and constantly complain that they are not masculine. It’s a lot of fucking Hell to go through just to get laid. I can’t blame some of them for just saying fuck it, I’m through with women.

Even worse are mental disorders. Mood disorders might be ok, especially manic-depression, as the manic phase is pretty masculine. I don’t see how depressive males of any age, looks or wealth status can get any woman on Earth. It’s beyond me. Depression is seen as utterly unmasculine, and females do not accept it in males at all.

Yet I suppose depressives do better than anxiety disorders. There’s almost nothing worse for a man than to have some sort of a nervous or anxiety condition. Anxiety is just not masculine, that’s all there is to it. Women are nervous. Guys aren’t. Nervous guys are just screwed. I don’t see how they can get laid at all by anyone, but some of them do. In general, guys with anxiety are seriously treated like shit by all of the women in their lives, and this will continue as long as the anxiety disorder is ongoing.

Small wonder that few men will admit to such things. Or that males treat depression and anxiety disorders with booze and drugs. It’s tragic that it’s more ok for a guy to be a heavy drinker than to be depressed.

Some of the guys I refer to above seemed to have some sort of anxiety disorders, some seemed depressed, and some just seemed like of spacey or out there. Quite a few were extremely intelligent. These guys had two things going for them. They were nearly the best looking guys in town, and they were also just about the smartest guys in town. As a previous post pointed out, brains is worthless to women. So the smartest and best looking guys in town were completely worthless to nearly the whole female population since they lacked certain other attributes.

Now compare that to men. Suppose we had some women, aged 20-45. And they were just about the hottest chicks in town. Could you imagine any possible world where all the guys would completely ignore or even disdain them and refuse to have anything to do with them? Are you kidding?

Suppose they were depressives, or nervous, or spacey? Guys think most women are depressives anyway, and the rest are sort of nervous. As far as spacy, that would probably make her even more popular. I’ve never heard of a guy refusing to date a totally hot babe because she’s sort of out there. That’s ridiculous!

There are certain paths out of these dilemmas, but I’m not sure how well they work. The commenter on Feminist Critics said that he changed his gender-nonconforming behaviors towards a more acceptable form of masculinity and soon he found women wanting to date him. That would be the way that I would suggest to go. Some guys just won’t have it in them.

Sexmaniacman, for all the 100-plus women and girls he’s slept with, has found that no matter how macho he acts, people still think he’s a fuckin fag or a wimp. He’s basically given up on the project as hopeless and instead works on inner masculinity. He’s not a queer, and he’s not a wimp at all. Wimps won’t fight back, and if you mess with Sexdude, he will slit your throat without batting an eye.

Inner masculinity is very important for a man, assuming you want it. Now a guy like Sexman, he’s pretty androgynous in a 1970’s glam rocker kind of way. He’ll still  be New York Dolls 1974 when he’s in his 80’s if he makes it that far. As he put it to me, he says the masculine part of him is like the toughest, hardest, baddest, most ultra machisimo guy that ever lived, but then, you know, he’s got this other side.

But he says he’s much happier since he has gotten into his inner masculinity. He’s still got that other side, but that just means that his Yin and Yang are in harmony, like they ought to be.

Thing is, a lot of straight guys are just not very masculine. That’s just the way they are, and most of them want to be this way. I leave them alone, because I don’t see anything wrong with it, and I figure other people are going to be pummeling them over this their whole lives anyway, so why add to it. A lot of guys are not into being masculine. It’s not part of their image. A lot of like admit to being wimps and say that they like it. But I don’t think it works.

I’d recommend getting rid of the sensitivity part. Emotions are useless in man, so who needs em?

If you’re depressed, ok, but don’t talk about it, and try to cover it up. Don’t admit it if asked. Do something else instead, like drink.

If you have anxiety stuff, try to get outside of it the best you can. A lot of people are hopeless, but at least you can try. There are also pharmaceutical drugs you can take.

If you’re introverted or shy, that’s a tough one. When you’re in a store, start talking to the person at the counter. Make casual conversation with the doctor, the receptionist, the repairman, the checker. If you’re overly agreeable, call people on their shit. Be prepared to lose friends and lovers when you do so.

The Latest Salvo From the Feminist Enemy

I don’t know what it is with radical feminists. They just seem to get nuttier and nuttier.

Denise Romano, M.A., Applied Lunacy, M.A. Advanced Feminist Batshittery, touched on earlier. Females have always been censors. Males tend to be civil libertarians. A society based on Female Rule will not be a civil libertarian one, because at their core, most females simply do not believe in basic civil liberties.

They love to censor and ban speech, especially hate speech (whatever that is), pornography and God knows what else. Females are just natural born censors; that’s all there is to it. Which is one more reason that Female Rule must be opposed with all of our might.

Crazy feminazis like Denise Romano claim that any sex with a “drugged or drunk” female is rape. Well, maybe so, but maybe one guy in 500 billion cases goes down on this charge, if that. In general, all of these charges are laughed out of court, when they are even filed. Women “raped” in this way never even bother to file.

Truth is, lots of women like to drink. Plenty of women are heavy drinkers, and many of those are alcoholics. It’s reasonable to assume that many bar-hopping, heavy drinking and alcoholic women can never consent to sex, since they are probably loaded most of the time they are in bed.

Many females nowadays like to take drugs, especially cannabis, cocaine and methamphetamine. Ecstacy, LSD and other hallucinogens are very popular. Quite a few women use heroin. Female users of all of these drugs very commonly have sex when they are flying on this or that illicit substance. Many find this drugged sex experience quite rewarding. I’ve never in my life heard of a guy going down on rape for having sex with a stoned female.

Recently, the UK, which has recently started to come under some serious Female Rule, has decided that any sex with any “drunk” female is rape. There have been a few charges here and there, but most have been laughed out of court, as should be the case. In one recent case, a judge said that just because a woman was drunk, it doesn’t mean she was raped. Well, of course.

Now it’s another thing to see some chick who is falling down drunk at a bar or a party and hone in on her and take advantage of her just because she is wasted. That’s a dishonorable thing to do for any man.

If she’s so wasted she is on the verge of passing out, why are you targeting her? To get laid? Sleazy.

I must say, I’ve never been seduced in my life. I’ve been drunk off my ass more times than I can count, and I’ve been blasted out of my skull on just about every drug known to mankind more times than I can count.

Plenty of women have made plays for me when I was totalled, and a lot of the time I said no. Sometimes I agreed, but it was something I wanted to do at the time. I had buyer’s remorse in the morning, but that’s not a crime on her part. Gay men have made plays for me many times too, often when I was pretty wasted. Of course I never let them seduce me. Why are women so stupid that they allow themselves, like children, to be seduced?

Denise and Raine complain that PUA is teaching men how to hypnotize and brainwash women into sleeping with guys. They say this is rape. No it isn’t. It’s seduction. I’ve been trying to brainwash and hypnotize women and girls my whole life into getting sexual with me, although I never thought of it that way before. “Hypnotism” and “brainwashing” is just Seduction 101, always has been. What of it?

I’ll make you an offer. Any woman I find unattractive or even any man can try to brainwash me or hypnotize me all they want to to try to get me into bed. It’s not going to work, especially for the guys. No guy can use mentalism to get me into bed, and if I don’t like the woman, it’s going to be hard for her too.

I’m having a hard time understanding the feminist hysteria about rape.

I’ve been beaten over the head with a baseball bat so bad I had to go to the neurology ward.

I got my lights punched out repeatedly.

I got jumped and pummeled by five guys in a nightclub.

I got assaulted at a party, fought back, picked the guy up and threw him onto a table, smashing the table to bits.

After a party, another vehicle accused me of cutting them off. They chased us in their car, drunk, throwing loaded cans of beer at us. Somehow they cornered us on a street and I was lugging the gears. They were out of their car and attacking us on foot, kicking the car, beating it with their fists, trying to pull the doors open. If they would have gotten the doors open, we would have been seriously beaten or maybe even killed.

I finally put the car in first gear and floored it. A maniac was running headlong at my car from the side. “Watch out!” my friend yelled. I didn’t care. I floored it. The car hit the guy and he went flying like in the movies, maybe 5-10 feet. I hit him with my car. On purpose. I don’t know if I killed him, but I hope I did.

This is normal Growing Up 101 for guys. How many guys have been pummeled, robbed, mugged, assaulted, etc in their lifetimes? Most of us. Is rape really worse than this? Why? Prove that it’s worse than the typical life-threatening or life-terrorizing beatings, attacks and tortures many or most of us males experienced when we were young men.

Even more, I’ve been raped (or sexually assaulted), by feminist definitions. I picked up a sociopathic hitchhiker, he commandeered my vehicle, tried to destroy the engine, sexually fondled me, pummeled me and poured beer over me, all while I was driving on a freeway. I was a psychological wreck for 3 1/2 weeks, then I said, “Screw it, I’m moving on.” Isn’t that as bad as what a lot of female rape victims experienced? Was what they experienced worse? Why? Prove it.

Hey, come on. Life’s tough for everyone. Women get raped. So do some guys. And lots of guys get kidnapped, pummeled, gang-beaten, beaten with objects, often over the head, robbed, mugged, threatened with death and, by the cops, arrested, brutalized, beaten, threatened with death and imprisoned in the Hell of incarceration, on and on. Who says females have a Pain Monopoly anyway?

No one gets out of this shit called life unscathed. No one. Females have not patented Victim Status.

"Cyberfists of Fury," by Alpha Unit

My Mom, who is the smartest woman I know, says about men, “Men love to fight. If they can’t fight with guns, they fight with words.” “Why?” I would ask. “Why do they love to fight?” “It’s fun!” She says. “They love it!” Well, as she is about so many things, of course my Mom is right once again. As a boy I was cruel, vicious and sadistic, just like most of the other boys. That sucks, but it was normal, and there were lots of boys worse than I was. There was a Professional Bully class and a Professional Victim class. Being the oldest, I lucked out and got to be a Bully. My younger brother was much worse than I was, and the favorite Victim was my youngest brother. My youngest brother is still pissed about all the shit we did to him. I’ve apologized over and over, but he still wants more. The other day he asked me why we did it. Did we disrespect him in some way. Of course not! I at least actually respected him a lot on every level. Well then, why bully him? “Because you were littler! You were smaller, so we picked on you.” “Yeah, that’s it, huh? Just like animals,” he said. Exactly. Males are animals, wild animals. I got to play the Victim role a few times myself, and it wasn’t much fun, but it never sank in much. We even tortured animals, but we stuck to bugs (mostly pests at that) and fish we caught, so I don’t feel too bad. When you start torturing mammals, you’ve got issues. I’ve still got a sadistic little boy inside of me, just like most men do. I haven’t killed him, but I like to think he’s locked up most of the time, or at least on a short leash. Some men never let go of the grinning 13 year old sadist. You see it all over the Internet, the Net Bullies. Almost always males, between teenage and 50 or so, sometimes older. The older guys don’t seem so mean, probably because their testosterone is going down. It’s bizarre to see grown men, sometimes with PhD’s and good jobs, acting like sadistic schoolboys on Usenet, bulletin boards and chat sites. This is really worse than what we did as boys. When we tormented my brother, we didn’t tease him and run away. We would stand right there and tease him, hopefully provoking him to hit us. Then we’d nail him back. I have some respect for a bully who sticks around. The Internet Bullies are nothing but Pussies. They’re hiding behind their computers saying shit that they would never dare say in meatspace, because if they did, they’d cause a shouting match or maybe even get their ass kicked. So like complete Pusses, they hide behind their computers and bully each other, because there’s no consequences to their bullying. That’s like sucker punching a guy and then running away as fast as you can. If you’re going to bully someone, at least stick around long enough to give the victim a chance to fight back. That way you retain at least a hint of honor. My dad never watched any sport besides baseball. So that was the only sport that I ever saw on TV growing up. In our neighborhood was a softball field, and one of the highlights of summer were the games kids would be playing there. So softball and baseball were the only sports I grew up with any appreciation for, although I myself didn’t play. I had little curiosity about sports; in fact, the best way to get me into passive-aggressive mode would be to force me to play sports. You would be begging me to get the Hell off your team before it was over with. The only other sport that snagged a little bit of my interest was boxing. And that was all because of a gleam in my mother’s eye – a gleam reflecting the glory of Muhammad Ali. I believe my mother was in love with Muhammad Ali. It wasn’t just the look in her eyes; she sounded positively girlish talking about him. That alone suggested to me that there was something very special about him. I just couldn’t get into what Muhammad Ali did. In the ring, that is. Two guys circling each other. Swinging at each other. Jabbing each other. What was even more curious to me was the audience. They loved it. They ate up every moment of it. What was so great about two guys fighting? I later learned that boxing has a nickname: The Sweet Science. This is a sport in which two men are to fight each other with fists until one of them can no longer continue. Yet, what’s going on here is said to be “sweet.” Hitting, punching, and knocking out…mmm. As most people know, boxers used to fight bare-knuckled. Gloves weren’t required until 1867, with the Marquess of Queensberry rules. And yet, before that, two guys could go at each other for hours. The longest bare-knuckle boxing match took place in Australia in 1856. It lasted for 6 hours and 15 minutes. This is just breathtaking to me, that two people would endure such punishment. Nevertheless, to the fighters and the spectators, the whole thing must have been incredibly “sweet.” I’ve been told that men go at each other on Internet forums, goading and savaging each other verbally for hours. It’s not bare-knuckle fighting, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t take stamina. Fighting and tearing each other down in this way is “fun,” I’ve heard – like any other sport. And I believe it. It doesn’t seem to matter what the arena is – put a bunch of guys in it and watch the sweetness unfold.

“Cyberfists of Fury,” by Alpha Unit

My Mom, who is the smartest woman I know, says about men, “Men love to fight. If they can’t fight with guns, they fight with words.”

“Why?” I would ask. “Why do they love to fight?”

“It’s fun!” She says. “They love it!”

Well, as she is about so many things, of course my Mom is right once again.

As a boy I was cruel, vicious and sadistic, just like most of the other boys. That sucks, but it was normal, and there were lots of boys worse than I was. There was a Professional Bully class and a Professional Victim class. Being the oldest, I lucked out and got to be a Bully. My younger brother was much worse than I was, and the favorite Victim was my youngest brother. My youngest brother is still pissed about all the shit we did to him. I’ve apologized over and over, but he still wants more.

The other day he asked me why we did it. Did we disrespect him in some way. Of course not! I at least actually respected him a lot on every level. Well then, why bully him?

“Because you were littler! You were smaller, so we picked on you.”

“Yeah, that’s it, huh? Just like animals,” he said.

Exactly. Males are animals, wild animals. I got to play the Victim role a few times myself, and it wasn’t much fun, but it never sank in much. We even tortured animals, but we stuck to bugs (mostly pests at that) and fish we caught, so I don’t feel too bad. When you start torturing mammals, you’ve got issues. I’ve still got a sadistic little boy inside of me, just like most men do. I haven’t killed him, but I like to think he’s locked up most of the time, or at least on a short leash.

Some men never let go of the grinning 13 year old sadist. You see it all over the Internet, the Net Bullies. Almost always males, between teenage and 50 or so, sometimes older. The older guys don’t seem so mean, probably because their testosterone is going down. It’s bizarre to see grown men, sometimes with PhD’s and good jobs, acting like sadistic schoolboys on Usenet, bulletin boards and chat sites.

This is really worse than what we did as boys. When we tormented my brother, we didn’t tease him and run away. We would stand right there and tease him, hopefully provoking him to hit us. Then we’d nail him back. I have some respect for a bully who sticks around.

The Internet Bullies are nothing but Pussies. They’re hiding behind their computers saying shit that they would never dare say in meatspace, because if they did, they’d cause a shouting match or maybe even get their ass kicked. So like complete Pusses, they hide behind their computers and bully each other, because there’s no consequences to their bullying.

That’s like sucker punching a guy and then running away as fast as you can. If you’re going to bully someone, at least stick around long enough to give the victim a chance to fight back. That way you retain at least a hint of honor.

My dad never watched any sport besides baseball. So that was the only sport that I ever saw on TV growing up. In our neighborhood was a softball field, and one of the highlights of summer were the games kids would be playing there. So softball and baseball were the only sports I grew up with any appreciation for, although I myself didn’t play.

I had little curiosity about sports; in fact, the best way to get me into passive-aggressive mode would be to force me to play sports. You would be begging me to get the Hell off your team before it was over with.

The only other sport that snagged a little bit of my interest was boxing. And that was all because of a gleam in my mother’s eye – a gleam reflecting the glory of Muhammad Ali. I believe my mother was in love with Muhammad Ali. It wasn’t just the look in her eyes; she sounded positively girlish talking about him. That alone suggested to me that there was something very special about him.

I just couldn’t get into what Muhammad Ali did. In the ring, that is. Two guys circling each other. Swinging at each other. Jabbing each other. What was even more curious to me was the audience. They loved it. They ate up every moment of it.

What was so great about two guys fighting?

I later learned that boxing has a nickname: The Sweet Science. This is a sport in which two men are to fight each other with fists until one of them can no longer continue. Yet, what’s going on here is said to be “sweet.”

Hitting, punching, and knocking out…mmm.

As most people know, boxers used to fight bare-knuckled. Gloves weren’t required until 1867, with the Marquess of Queensberry rules. And yet, before that, two guys could go at each other for hours.

The longest bare-knuckle boxing match took place in Australia in 1856. It lasted for 6 hours and 15 minutes. This is just breathtaking to me, that two people would endure such punishment. Nevertheless, to the fighters and the spectators, the whole thing must have been incredibly “sweet.”

I’ve been told that men go at each other on Internet forums, goading and savaging each other verbally for hours. It’s not bare-knuckle fighting, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t take stamina. Fighting and tearing each other down in this way is “fun,” I’ve heard – like any other sport.

And I believe it. It doesn’t seem to matter what the arena is – put a bunch of guys in it and watch the sweetness unfold.

"We Are All Gentlemen," by Alpha Unit

In the comments section of Don’t Tread On Me, Randy asks:

Have you ever heard a man say, “I’m offended”?

Of course, I haven’t, but after replying I realized that there was, in fact, a class of men who would make it known that they had been offended and would not rest until someone had paid for it. They were known as gentlemen. Gentlemen had something called honor, and a gentleman’s honor had to be defended at all costs. From medieval times, a European gentleman defended his honor by challenging the offender to a duel. According to Wikipedia:

The traditional situation that led to a duel often went something like this. After the offense, whether real or imagined, one party would demand satisfaction from the offender, signaling this demand with an inescapably insulting gesture, such as throwing his glove before him, hence the phrase “throwing down the gauntlet…”

Those engaging in duels could use either swords or pistols, but the goal was often:

not so much to kill your opponent but to gain “satisfaction,” that is, to restore one’s honour by demonstrating a willingness to risk one’s life for it.

The challenger to a duel could decide whether the duel would be fought to “first blood” or to death – or something in between. In a pistol duel, the challenger could decide that his honor had been satisfied even if no one actually got shot. In other words, it was all for show. Countless men have died doing this. And even though the practice is generally outlawed in the world today, men still challenge each other to duels, most notably in Latin America, according to Wikipedia. Some US states still have no statutes expressly prohibiting duels. The notion that honor was reserved for gentlemen is one of those social artifacts people smile at and consider quaint. Today we are all equals, at least in some places, and hence we all have unassailable honor. A person who declares “I am offended,” has been robbed, and you are obligated to give them satisfaction. That way everything will be smooth and even the way it was before. We are all gentlemen now.

“We Are All Gentlemen,” by Alpha Unit

In the comments section of Don’t Tread On Me, Randy asks:

Have you ever heard a man say, “I’m offended”?

Of course, I haven’t, but after replying I realized that there was, in fact, a class of men who would make it known that they had been offended and would not rest until someone had paid for it. They were known as gentlemen.

Gentlemen had something called honor, and a gentleman’s honor had to be defended at all costs. From medieval times, a European gentleman defended his honor by challenging the offender to a duel. According to Wikipedia:

The traditional situation that led to a duel often went something like this. After the offense, whether real or imagined, one party would demand satisfaction from the offender, signaling this demand with an inescapably insulting gesture, such as throwing his glove before him, hence the phrase “throwing down the gauntlet…”

Those engaging in duels could use either swords or pistols, but the goal was often:

not so much to kill your opponent but to gain “satisfaction,” that is, to restore one’s honour by demonstrating a willingness to risk one’s life for it.

The challenger to a duel could decide whether the duel would be fought to “first blood” or to death – or something in between. In a pistol duel, the challenger could decide that his honor had been satisfied even if no one actually got shot.

In other words, it was all for show. Countless men have died doing this. And even though the practice is generally outlawed in the world today, men still challenge each other to duels, most notably in Latin America, according to Wikipedia. Some US states still have no statutes expressly prohibiting duels.

The notion that honor was reserved for gentlemen is one of those social artifacts people smile at and consider quaint. Today we are all equals, at least in some places, and hence we all have unassailable honor. A person who declares “I am offended,” has been robbed, and you are obligated to give them satisfaction. That way everything will be smooth and even the way it was before.

We are all gentlemen now.

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)