why i hate feminism

because i want guys like this reproducing to the max…

…NOT guys like this (ewww!)…

(what the h*ll r u talking about, hbdchick? [more here])

bonus.

(note: comments do not require an email)

Advertisements

20 Comments

  1. Those two categories of men are one in the same. Mystery, the guy in your second picture, was just like those men in your first picture. I mean he was the nerdy, dungeons and dragons type, but developed a way for men like him to pick up girls.

    He could have put his brain to other uses, but put it into getting laid. His intellectual capability is just as much as those other men, more so perhaps, if he applied himself.

    Mystery gave a solution for those guys in your first picture that weren’t getting laid anymore thanks to feminism. That solution was learning game. So if you want the guys in the first picture to reproduce to the max, in a feminist society, Mystery would be of service to them, no? Seeing as alpha males will get laid anyways.

    Reply

  2. @red – can’t we just get rid of feminism instead of turning geeks into *ssh*les? i like it when geeks just behave like geeks, not jerks. (~_^)

    Reply

  3. @hbd chick

    Get rid of feminism? ‘_’

    ……

    Let me know when you figure out how lol

    Even then the girls are still going to respond to the jerks. Unless enough men become sooooooo jerky that the girls plead for feminism to go away ]

    Reply

  4. Well remember, reproducing and getting laid are not quite the same thing. How many children do you think a typical PUA has?

    Reply

  5. @john – “How many children do you think a typical PUA has?’

    true, true. very few, i think (i hope!).

    still, all the time wasted — and all the geeks going around pretending that they’re jerks. it’s disheartening. =/

    Reply

  6. I think the number of children a PUA has over their lifetime would vary _considerably_.

    Those operating in upper middle class environments focused on younger single, women are probably not doing that well reproductively. That may be a different story for those focused on older, less happily married women. Robin Baker writes a bit about just who the men are women choose for non-marital reproduction-but the truth is there is just a lot we don’t know.

    I supect there _are_ PUA’s that are quite reproductively successful-and those that aren’t at all. The thing is, I kind of shudder at thinking just who the reproductively successful PUA typically are.

    Another question that is important here: how likely are PUA to transition to marital reproduction? My experience is that even “monogamous” woen tend to shy away from sexually inexperienced men. Another major constraint here: if a guy has’t established a health sexual pattern by age 25, he probably won’t EVER-and pickup artistry and prostitution are someof the few paths really open to a guy that hasn’t gotten a good job by age 25. Stuff like H-1b expansion has closed of a whole social mobility route for lots of young guys.

    Reply

  7. As far as red’s comments go: Mystery is making his living teaching nerdy guys how to get sex from women. I watched a bit of one of his videos. The approach strikes me as pretty intellectual and academically grounded. I don’t object to the basic idea of teaching intellectually inclined men how to get more sex. Overall, I see that as a _good_ thing. That said: there are some intellectually inclined sociopaths out there-and my guess is someof them gravite towards stuff like Mystery’s courses/books. Also, there is more to life than casual sex. I see casual sex that in appropriate doses may be reproductively enhancing. The simple fact is that women tend to _despise_ male virgins and sexually inexperienced men-or at least they act like they do. Anyhow, Mystery seems largely focused on the goal: finding women to have sex with. There is a lot left out of that equation. A lot of women get sexually burnt out with a lot of sex without much in the way of a relationship-some of them get to be regular man haters that way-it may be lowering the overall herd fertility(but then prostitutes on average have about the same number of children as the general population)-or affecting reproductive choices. What I see is that women that have given up on having a stable relationship are more likely to gravitate towards the most extremely successful PUA artists or specific physical types when they get pregnant.

    There are a lot other issues involved in maintaining a stable relationship -or choosing partner that you might actually be happy and fecund with that aren’t addressed at all.
    For example, one thing that Mystery mentioned in one of the videos I watched: women don’t care about money. That is pretty true if we are talking casual encounters(other than prostitution/sugar baby/PnP type situations). It is particularly true of younger women or women in college(parents or student loans are paying the current bills). However, according to Gary Becker from the U of Chicago-one of the best predictors of how many children a woman has is how much money her husband makes relative to the woman’s father. Even if Mystery is100% right on everything, a rather different course would be needed on the reproductive issue.

    That said: if I knew the secret to happiness and reproductive success, I’d be VERY careful who I’d share it with-I wouldn’t necessarily be selling it for $12 on amazon. My guess is that Mystery is selling something work $12-but you have to take it for what it is worth.

    Reply

  8. @nomoreh1b – “Mystery is making his living teaching nerdy guys how to get sex from women. I watched a bit of one of his videos. The approach strikes me as pretty intellectual and academically grounded. I don’t object to the basic idea of teaching intellectually inclined men how to get more sex. Overall, I see that as a _good_ thing.”

    here’s my beef with the whole game thing (i know this is going to get me in trouble, but here i go anyway…). i haven’t read that much game stuff — some roissy and some roosh — and a lot of the things that both of them have said about the nature of women, and male & female relationships, seems pretty right to me (and a lot of it has been informative for me ’cause, h*ll — I don’t understand most women!).

    but what i don’t like about game — and i’ll admit that this is prolly totally unrealistic on my part, but i’m an idealist so i can’t help it — is: i hate fake.

    i hate fake. i hate, hate, hate anything fake. i hate makeup (on men as well as women), i hate b00b jobs, i hate marketing, i hate fiat currency … i just hate fake (she said cowering behind a pseudonym (~_^) ).

    so i hate the thought of nerdy geeks going around ACTING like what the gameboyz call alpha males (iow, cads).

    there’s always going to be cads. that’s fine. i have no problem with real cads. i don’t want to be involved with them personally, and i wouldn’t want any daughter of mine to be either, but they have their place in the world — they’re one variation on manhood, and that’s fine.

    but there are also “beta” males — who are another variation of manhood. (human biodiversity, see? variation in the species — something upon which natural selection can act, right?) and i like it that they exist — and i like it when they are geeky. not when they’re wearing stupid, fluffy hats. *faceplam* and, despite what the gameboyz say, there ARE girls out there who prefer them. maybe not a lot of girls, but they are there. (some of the beta boyz might just have to change their standards a bit, that’s all.)

    i suppose i should be glad if game actually helps geeky guys to reproduce — but if they wind up reproducing with shallow, fake-loving women — i dunno if that bodes well for the future of geekdom (gene-wise, i mean). =/

    btw — i agree — no more h1b!

    Reply

  9. I used to be a manager in silicon Valley years ago. The gender ratio of Silicon Valley was a major problem for a lot of guys there.

    Anyhow, I looked into stuff like NLP _long_ before guys like Mystery came onto the scene and never could figure how it worked as far as a sexual attraction tool.

    I’m not sure how well Mystery’s stuff really works. The thing is: when I see guys on the verge of suicide-or developing substance issues or at the very least serious depression because of lack of female attention, I’m concerned-and I want something to
    refer folks to. Even a placebo is better than nothing-and I wouldn’t expect the moon and stars for $500(or whatever he’s charging for his seminars).

    There have _always_ been various characters like this out there. Mystery seems more academically/scientifically based-which means it is open to guys I’m personally concerned about.

    As far as thinking that “ARE girls out there who prefer them. maybe not a lot of girls, but they are there. (some of the beta boyz might just have to change their standards a bit, that’s all.)” The question is the _ratio_ of boys that are technically inclined vs. women catering to them _at all_.

    I think we live in a society that venerate fraud and superficiality-it is kind of like the state religion. I’d like to see that change-but until it does-we need to be realistic about what it means to survive in the world as it exists.

    Reply

  10. @nomoreh1b – “The question is the _ratio_ of boys that are technically inclined vs. women catering to them _at all_.”

    yeah, i am aware of that (from the opposite direction, being a geeky girl myself). it just seems to me that a lot of guys — at least the ones online and chatting away @roissy’s — all seem to be aiming for — i dunno — whoever’s hot right now — megan fox? when they might find a girlfriend/wife in the kinda cute but average girl-next-door.

    i admit that i might be out of touch, though.

    (i do know that plenty of women today are b*tches. i actually fired my best friend for being a jerk to her husband, now ex-husband. so i guess i do know it’s tough out there.)

    Reply

  11. “I don’t object to the basic idea of teaching intellectually inclined men how to get more sex. Overall, I see that as a _good_ thing.”

    I think the whole game thing is whacked. Although a lot of it is true it’s only true for a certain type of man. If you’re not that type of man then stop looking for sex and look for a girlfriend instead – it’ll work a lot better.

    On the other hand the potentially good thing about game is if *really* shy, nerdy men try to do the alpha thing it won’t work but it might work just enough to make them less shy – which would probably work – but not because the girl thought he was alpha but because a geek trying to be alpha would come across as regular.

    It was still better when the adults arranged chaperoned line-dancing though (exercise combined with speed-dating).

    Reply

  12. @g.w. – “On the other hand the potentially good thing about game is if *really* shy, nerdy men try to do the alpha thing it won’t work but it might work just enough to make them less shy – which would probably work – but not because the girl thought he was alpha but because a geek trying to be alpha would come across as regular.”

    maybe. and that might be ok. another thing i wonder/worry about, though, is that when geeky “beta” males adopt cad behaviors, but aren’t really cads themselves, they just might come off as looking ridiculous. more ridiculous than just being geeky. i mean, can you really fake a “charming” cad personality? i’m not so sure.

    and/or the geeky “beta” males might just come off as jerks.

    i have a bad habit of thinking about human behaviors in terms of the ulterior motives of sneaky genes (sorry for anthropomorphizing genes) — for instance, i sometime wonder if political correctness, although it sounds nice on the surface, might really be a way to keep minorities in their place (eg. if we’re all the same then there’s no need for any special, extra education for lower iq blacks, right? — see what i mean?). in the same vein, i sometimes wonder if an underlying, unconscious motivation of cads sharing their secrets to “beta” males (apart from $elling book$/video$) comes from some intuitive understanding that the “beta” males will, in fact, fail at applying the cad techniques since they are not natural cads, thus making the “beta” males even less successful in the mating marketplace.

    i know. it’s one of my more wackier ideas.

    @g.w. – “It was still better when the adults arranged chaperoned line-dancing though (exercise combined with speed-dating).”

    (^_^)

    Reply

  13. “i sometimes wonder if an underlying, unconscious motivation of cads sharing their secrets to “beta” males (apart from $elling book$/video$) comes from some intuitive understanding that the “beta” males will, in fact, fail at applying the cad techniques since they are not natural cads, thus making the “beta” males even less successful in the mating marketplace.”

    I’m sort of the opposite in that i think it is entirely malign in intent – anti-female disguised as anti-feminist – but for a certain type of basically decent but hopeless with women man, game plus their natural basically decent self is likely to just create a more confident basically decent composite.

    On the other hand if men who are serious about judging women entirely on their looks while condemning women for judging them the same way fail…good.

    Reply

  14. @g.w. – “…for a certain type of basically decent but hopeless with women man, game plus their natural basically decent self is likely to just create a more confident basically decent composite.”

    well, i hope you’re right — really! ’cause i want nerds and geeks (and trainspotters) to go forth and multiply! (~_^)

    Reply

  15. I dunno… I’ve never had a woman “despise” me when I mentioned my lack of sexual experience, even though I certainly despise myself for it. In fact, they universally seem to think it’s not a big deal. (This also seems to be the attitude girls take on reddit.)

    Like all the “game” stereotypes in general, I think it’s oversold. Maybe I’m just lucky that all the people I hang out with tend to be smart and reasonable.

    Reply

  16. Let’s not denigrate the guys in the top picture. Not only did they send and return men to the moon, they figured out a way to give them a car in which to ride around! (and supposedly using computers that were less powerful than a college student’s scientific calculator)

    I am sure Mystery’s parents are proud of his accomplishments too.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s