chicks dig jerks

since all the other kids are doin’ it, here’s my contribution to feed the growing, and soon to be unstoppable, manosphere/hbd/alt-right chicks-dig-jerks meme!

i’ve actually been sitting on this one for a while — since may when this news story was published — ’cause these men just make me sick. no, they really do. my stomach really does get upset whenever i think about the oxford muslim “groomers” (never mind my blood pressure!). =/ i had almost decided not to write about them again, but … cr*p … ok … here we go:

“‘Egyptian Mo’ and ‘Sam the Rapist’: The middle class brothers whose father wanted them to study at Oxford University”

mohammed karrar

“Mohammed, who has four children by two different women, was arguably the most sadistic member of the sex gang.

“The 38-year-old groomed one of the girls from the age of 11, forced her to have an abortion and even branded her as his property….

Mohammed has been married for seven years to a woman he met on holiday in Morocco. They have three children and he has a fourth child with an unknown English woman.

jesus! this guy has reproduced! =/ by TWO different women. ugh.

and here’s his brother — who’s reproduced, too!:

bassam karrar

“Bassam, a 33-year-old security guard and university drop-out, was given the nickname ‘Sam The Rapist’ by one of the victims after he forced himself on her at a down-at-heel Oxford guest house in 2006.

“During the trial it emerged that, like his brother, Bassam relished beating and humiliating girls….

“Bassam’s father celebrated when he won a place at De Montfort University in Leicester to study media.

“However, after two years he dropped out and started work on security at football matches.

He was married to an Indian woman for four years but the relationship broke down because she was unable to provide him with children.

Bassam went on to have a relationship with a woman called Paula Pitson, 28, with whom he has two children. Before he was found guilty, his father admitted Bassam was a ladies’ man.

“He said: ‘Even when he was younger he would have lots of young girls coming to the house asking for him. He’s a good looking boy and girls have always liked him.’

he’s a good looking boy? can’t say as i see it myself, but maybe i need to put my glasses on. or my beer goggles!

so these two evil b*st*rds have managed to reproduce, the older brother by a couple of women, and the younger one — well, only by one woman, but only because his wife didn’t ever get pregnant. AND, if the father’s telling the truth, he was something of a ladies’ man.

and the point is … *sigh* … i have a hard time believing these guys managed to be super sweet nice people in their ordinary lives and then turned into abusive, evil torturers only when they were with their english victims. i think it’s safe to presume that they probably have jerky personalities in general and behaved as such most of their adult lives.

and this, as in so many other instances, prolly attracted the women. (*facepalm*)

and then there’s also their english victims. were they attracted by these jerks being jerks? the official story is that these men gave the girls presents and were nice to them in order to “groom” them, but is that the whole story? who knows? maybe the girls, too, were attra….

but i’m not even gonna go there. i’ve taken enough red pills to last me a lifetime, thankuverymuch! i think i’ll pass on this one. contemplate the possibility on your own and discuss among yourselves, if you like.

in any case, we’ve got another shining example here of how chicks dig jerks.

(i don’t! except for steve M*THERF*CKIN mcqueen, of course. (~_^) )

see also: Where the Men Are from john derbyshire and America’s Sociopath Fetish: Chicks Dig Chechens And Other Killers from michelle malkin.

previously: sex and “the other”

(note: comments do not require an email. happy thoughts! happy thoughts!)

69 Comments

  1. Wouldn’t matter a damn bit if chicks dig jerks like this if we dangled them from lampposts promptly after discovering this behavior. You actually do get less of things that you punish. Ugh.

    Reply

  2. Hello. First timer here. This story about foreign male immigrants swarming England made me think of the effect on birthrates – could a surplus of Middle Eastern migrant job seekers of the male gender upset the English birthrate, causing more females to be born among the native population?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/mammals-pick-offsprings-sex-to-maximize-number-of-grandchildren-study-shows/2013/07/10/553b1a5a-e969-11e2-8f22-de4bd2a2bd39_story.html

    Among the migrant asylum seekers seeking a foothold in the West, men seem to outnumber women. Among some immigrant communities, the women seem to be cloistered and otherwise don’t participate in daily life or higher education. Then there is male-preferred sex selection at birth. If sons are seen to be the numeric majority in daily life, wouldn’t nature’s forces recognize this imbalance and try to remedy it?

    Now, a twist. If foreign males are seen to be untouchable, culturally celebrated, and economically mobile, doesn’t this translate into sexual currency, at the expense of the native born males? Would nature ignore this, or react?

    Too many males in one place means either a war to thin the numbers, or a reaction of some other kind. Surely. When white males from Spain and France colonized the New World hundreds of years ago, it led to inter-marriage with Indians, spawning hybrid races, and wars of territory. What of the West, after a tide of Middle-Eastern or Asiatic male migrants?

    Reply

  3. The harshest red pill in my view is that women both love rapists and love being raped – more likely to have orgasms, more likely to conceive when inseminated by rape, have fantasies about being raped, etc.

    Maybe it wasn’t just the jerky personality, maybe it was the nickname “Sam The Rapist”…

    Reply

  4. Chicks DO often dig jerks, but it doesn’t follow that these two fine specimens were dug by all the chicks they impregnated or abused. Why did they seek out such young victims? Because the younger, the more naive, the less experienced and the less aware of what they were getting themselves into. The parents, on the other hand, could see, but it’s often been the case that the police have prevented parents from taking the necessary steps:

    Police went to a house outside which a father was demanding the release of his daughter, who was inside with a group of British Pakistani adults. Officers found the girl, 14, who had been drugged, under a bed. The father and his daughter were arrested for racial harassment and assault respectively. Police left, leaving three men at the house with two more girls.

    http://gatesofvienna.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/south-yorkshire-police-and-rotherham.html

    There are plenty more of these cases in the judicial pipeline. Another trial finished at about the same time as the Oxford trial, so it didn’t receive the attention it might otherwise have done (warning: be prepared for an unpleasant quote):

    “They’ve heard appalling accounts about men who would ejaculate and then urinate in children’s mouths, violating them in every orifice, as well as gang-rape by queues of men while girls were held hostage for hours, sometimes days – all the while being forced to listen to the screams of girls in other rooms with other men.”

    http://www.channel4.com/programmes/dispatches/articles/britains-sex-gangs-tazeen-ahmad-feature

    No mention of the “ethnicity” or religion of the abusers on that page. After all, it happens in all communities, doesn’t it? And Sue Berelowitz, the UK’s deputy children’s commissioner, is fully open to the danger of goyim, sorry, people misreading the situation and starting to think mass immigration hasn’t been such a blessing after all.

    The author of a report into gang sex abuse today hit back at government criticism of her findings that there was no particular problem among Asian groups. The study by deputy children’s commissioner Sue Berelowitz came to the controversial conclusion, despite figures in her own report revealing that more than a quarter of perpetrators of gang-based child abuse known to the authorities are Asian.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2236045/Anger-sex-abuse-report-Sue-Berelowitz-turns-blind-eye-Asian-gangs.html

    Reply

  5. In short, I am surprised that you forgot about the essential thing that all features whcih exist in a population and which depend on many small factors are distributed in a normal fashion. I would say that “girls dig jerks” characteristics is also normally distributed along females, with a preference from jerkiness from extreme wish to be raped and misabused (probably tiny fraction of females) to total dislike of even slight jerkiness. What is the median of jerk-preference is unknown, but the fact that there are girls, who dig jerks is not a proof that females in general do.

    In any substantially large population, if you are jerk, you will find a lot of girls digging jerks even if the percentage of such girls in general percentage is small. Think my home town, just half a million of people, say 10% girls and conservatively assume only 1% of them prefers jerks. That means five hundred jerk-lovers, and if they actively seek jerks, you will find them.

    Reply

  6. These men are primitive and about to be weeded out by evolution. The women who like them are probably the same. Their liberal enablers aren’t primitive, in fact they have a lot of good qualities, but I fear they are also being weeded out unless they start getting a grip on reality.

    Reply

  7. @ hbd chick: “Bassam’s father celebrated when he won a place at De Montfort University in Leicester to study media. However, after two years he dropped out and started work on security at football matches.”

    Lol. I live in Leicester and this doesn’t surprise me. De Montfort has very low entry requirements. Many of their ‘students’ are inner city Londoners of extremely mediocre academic standard to say the least. Leicester University, on the other hand, is very good.

    Reply

  8. These two seem to be of Eritrean background, maybe Tigre, who do indeed practice consanguinous marriage (no surprise) and are members of clans:

    [From Eritrea Minsistry of Information website]

    http://www.shabait.com/about-eritrea/history-a-culture/343-marriage-and-family-among-the-tigre-ethnic-group

    “The reason for the preference of close blood relationship in matrimonial union is to be found in the desire of both families to keep their wealth within the clan circle and to ensure the continuity of unity and cooperation..”

    Reply

  9. @ hbd chick: “in any case, we’ve got another shining example here of how chicks dig jerks..”

    I’m not so sure that it’s the case that ‘chicks’ specifically dig *jerks* per se. It’s more the case that chicks seem to dig men who are over-confident, pushy, unapologetic, masculine, who don’t care much what anyone thinks about them, and have a bit of a dangerous, exciting edge. And many of these type of men also happen to be jerks as well.
    I think that chicks find the middle class, white, suburban ‘Mr. Nice Guys’ simply too un-masculine, too un-confident, too shy, too nerdy, too boring, too non-sexual, too un-threatening, too dull, too safe, too predictable, etc. And because other women are also not very sexually attracted to these type of men, this just confirms to a chick that her assessment was correct. They might be a safe bet for security in a long-term relationship or marriage, or good for platonic friendship, but there is no ‘spark’ there.
    The wimpy ‘Mr. Nice Guy’ types seem to be the end product of 5 decades of feminism, coupled with the anachronistic persistence of chivalry in the present day.
    In a country like Britain, women increasingly don’t need a safe, nice guy ‘provider’ type man for their needs. For example, women at the lower end of the social scale can have their needs met by the welfare state, and middle class women have their own careers. Therefore, women have the option to ignore the ‘nice guys’ and go for the cads, jerks, players, bad boys, generally more masculine men that actually turn them on so that they can have fun.
    In Britain, that can include ‘chavs’ [lower classes], working-class men, and men of immigrant background.
    I think that the Oxford groomers wouldn’t have got very far in trying to seduce older women in their twenties, so they went for the easy target of inexperienced, naive, teen or pre-teen high school girls who were more easily duped and manipulated. Plus in Eritrea where their family originate from grown men often marry young girls of that age. The fact that it is illegal and morally unacceptable here in Britain failed to deter them unfortunately.

    Reply

  10. I think the girls were attracted to someone, anyone, paying them some attention.

    I think Mr Nice Guy is a breed. Some men are domestic, some aren’t.

    I think the groomers wanted pubescent girls for purely sexual reasons and didn’t spend anytime considering what would or wouldn’t be easiest to acheive logistically.

    Did you already discuss the sermon? Big news, 500 mosques voluntarily read it out. Little news, 300 were in prisons. 3 out of 4 in Oxford didn’t – but, said the man who wrote the sermon on Newsnight, ‘there were particular sensitivities in Oxford’. How awkward for them.

    There was also a meeting organised in Oxford by a local and some members of the community admitted knowing who was up to no good and what sort of no good it was.

    Meanwhile, back up north, According to Radio 4 there is an Operation Sunrise in Rochdale that inspects the upstairs rooms of all mini-cab and fast food businesses. The broadcasters were on the road with the police. The police woman looked at the room and said there was a bare mattress, empty bottles and a pair of leggings. The proprietor said the leggings were his brother’s. The policewoman said ‘I don’t believe you and I’m going to keep an eye on you’. But she didn’t arrest him on suspicion of sex with underage girls, so that he could be questioned about his movements, even though apparently she was in fact suspicious.

    Reply

  11. Whatever the general case is re chicks and jerks it doesn’t apply to the grooming gangs as proved simply by how the average age of the girls fell over time and by how the percentage from children’s homes increased over time. They targeted very young, naive girls with little or no family or protection and they seduced them as children with toys and treats. As what was happening became common knowledge in the areas concerned the girls targeted had to be either younger and more naive or younger and more messed up for the grooming to succeed.

    .

    “so these two evil b*st*rds have managed to reproduce”

    Both of their first marriages would have been arranged marriages. It’s big business with the family gaining the UK passport paying a lot of money to the family already in the UK. Whatever the papers say it’s unlikely they ever met before the wedding.

    .

    “He said: ‘Even when he was younger he would have lots of young girls coming to the house asking for him. He’s a good looking boy and girls have always liked him.’“

    He was probably dealing. Dealing is a great way for an unattractive man to get lots of sex.

    Reply

  12. In the general case szopeno is correct imo. There is a spectrum and although the 15% at one end of the spectrum are particularly important to “game” types who want to have sex with lots of different women they don’t represent women as a whole.

    I think the underlying truth behind the chicks dig jerks spectrum is chicks dig protection.

    (This aspect is relevant to the grooming gangs vis a vis the girls from children’s homes as children’s homes are often very unsafe places except it’s the opposite of being attracted to jerks – they’re attracted to what they think is safety.)

    Protection can vary from physical ability to protect to financial ability to protect. Being attracted to either makes perfect sense from a female point of view.

    The more violent the environment the truer this becomes. In a gangbanger dominated environment girls will throw themselves at gangbangers because it’s better to go with one gang member than be raped by all of them.

    Reply

  13. So many comments are trying to rationalize away the fact that chicks dig jerks.

    The only way to deal with this problem is to actually deal with it. Abortion should be mandatory for children conceived during rape. The rapist then needs to be executed. His children all need to be sterilized. Women who have voluntarily had children by him need to be sterilized. There, now the rapist has no offspring and the fitness of women who are attracted to him is greatly reduced.

    Now to mention something else. You have a great blog but there is one group that you seem to ignore: central Asian nomads. The Mongols were famous for their universalism. They had no problem with incorporating people of various races/ethnicities/religions into their societies. The Ottomans retained this somewhat from their Turkic ancestors.

    I’ve had a few ideas jumbled around in my head for a while and I think that I finally see the big picture.

    Think about the Sociopath/Clueless/Loser theory of business personality types that you see on various blogs. Those psychopaths are mobile. The global elite is mobile. Spengler criticised Anglo-American society as being “viking” and “pirate”. Todd’s puts the English and the former Vikings into a family type that is the most nomadic. Hillaire Belloc made the comparison between the rooted small farmers and craftsmen vs the capitalist elite (and he blamed the Reformation). AnonymousConservative makes the case that liberals are r-selected, meaning that they aren’t really family focused. The Ribbonfarm blog brought it all together for me. He points out that the upper classes tend to be descended from conquerors and thus have more nomadic ancestors. His idea is that nomads are farmers… of civilizations. The nomads allow civilizations to grow and then when they are ripe they eat them.

    Some stuff to think about.

    Reply

  14. @szopeno

    Nature does ‘react’. I’m surprised, given the topics of discussion which fall under Human Bio Diversity, that anyone would assert otherwise on this website.

    If an environment is altered, nature will react. Adaptation is mostly an expression of nature.

    Reply

  15. @nyb – “could a surplus of Middle Eastern migrant job seekers of the male gender upset the English birthrate, causing more females to be born among the native population? “

    oh, that’s a VERY interesting idea! i never thought of that. thanks!

    this is one for jayman who’s particularly interested in birth rates, along with more general hbd stuff.

    jayman? any idea if westerners are having more female babies these days?

    Reply

  16. @quite said fred – “Chicks DO often dig jerks, but it doesn’t follow that these two fine specimens were dug by all the chicks they impregnated or abused.”

    no, it doesn’t follow — i was just wondering.

    it sounded from what their father said that the younger brother was a ladies man — although maybe greying wanderer is correct and that the truth is he was just a dealer. that would also fit with lots of people (including women) hanging around him.

    the older brother met his wife on holiday … and had a child by a british woman with whom he had an affair, so presumably those two women did actually dig him. (although, jesus! wtf is wrong with these women? he looks like a total psycopath in his arrest photo! =/ which is exactly the point, right?)

    whether or not the abused girls were into these men because they were jerks is just a question i thought was worth (almost) asking. into them AT FIRST, i mean — i.e. that they were initially attracted to them because they were jerky. it’s not something i believe either way. i have no idea … but it IS a possibility.

    Reply

  17. @quite said fred – “There are plenty more of these cases in the judicial pipeline.”

    i know. =/ it’s just sickening. =/

    @quite said fred – “No mention of the ‘ethnicity’ or religion of the abusers on that page. After all, it happens in all communities, doesn’t it?”

    oh, yeah, sure! of course! =/ ugh.

    there’s a whole class angle here, too — in addition to certain groups not wanting the truth to come out. the middle- and upper-classes in england — i mean those who are english plus other whites — don’t give a sh*t about these mostly lower-class girls. it’s disgusting. makes me so angry.

    Reply

  18. @szopeno – “I am surprised that you forgot about the essential thing that all features whcih exist in a population and which depend on many small factors are distributed in a normal fashion. I would say that ‘girls dig jerks’ characteristics is also normally distributed along females, with a preference from jerkiness from extreme wish to be raped and misabused (probably tiny fraction of females) to total dislike of even slight jerkiness. What is the median of jerk-preference is unknown, but the fact that there are girls, who dig jerks is not a proof that females in general do.”

    i didn’t forget. from my life experience, the mean preference of western — or, maybe, european-american — women seems to be that they do like jerky men. not to be raped/abused — there’s obviously a lesser number of women who go for that — but there are a certain number of those, too. (see david buss‘ work, for example.) most of the girls that i went to school with really seemed to like the jerky sports jocks — for reasons that were simply inscrutable to me and my friends. it was a regular topic of conversation between us! and i went to a nice, middle-class high school.

    i’m at the other end of the spectrum, btw. i was always hoping for a knight in shining armor! (^_^) (found him, btw! sans the armor. never mind … the armor was never essential! (~_^) )

    Reply

  19. @chris – “These two seem to be of Eritrean background….”

    yes, they are eritrean. dunno if they’re tigre or not. thanks for the link! (^_^)

    Reply

  20. @chris – “It’s more the case that chicks seem to dig men who are over-confident, pushy, unapologetic, masculine, who don’t care much what anyone thinks about them, and have a bit of a dangerous, exciting edge.”

    well, i’d call those men jerks! but, like szopeno said above — and with which i agree — there are a whole range of jerks out there from the “over-confident, pushy” ones you describe to the scary as all h*ll psychopaths. =/ the oxford groomers (all of the groomers, probably) are the latter, i think — or awfully close to it.

    @chris – “In a country like Britain, women increasingly don’t need a safe, nice guy ‘provider’ type man for their needs. For example, women at the lower end of the social scale can have their needs met by the welfare state, and middle class women have their own careers. Therefore, women have the option to ignore the ‘nice guys’ and go for the cads, jerks, players, bad boys, generally more masculine men that actually turn them on so that they can have fun.”

    yes. this is what a lot of guys in the manosphere have been saying. and they’re right!

    enforced monogamy — which europeans (esp. nw europeans) had for several hundreds of years — was really genius in that it enabled nearly all men in society to get a wife and reproduce. more than in a polygamous society anyway (which is what we’re ending up with now). and, then, a lot of the “nice” guys got to reproduce, too. which is just what i want in society! (although maybe then you wind up with a society that has difficulties defending itself against invading hordes of immigrants, etc., etc…?)

    @chris – “The fact that it is illegal and morally unacceptable here in Britain failed to deter them unfortunately.”

    well, they don’t have the same morals, do they? =/

    Reply

  21. @big nose kate – “Did you already discuss the sermon? Big news, 500 mosques voluntarily read it out. Little news, 300 were in prisons. 3 out of 4 in Oxford didn’t – but, said the man who wrote the sermon on Newsnight, ‘there were particular sensitivities in Oxford’. How awkward for them.”

    no, i haven’t. ooohhh — didn’t hear/read about any of that re. the sermons/where the mosques were located. how awkward for them, indeed!

    @big nose kate – “There was also a meeting organised in Oxford by a local and some members of the community admitted knowing who was up to no good and what sort of no good it was.”

    most of them are not going to turn in one of their own (as compared to the english, i mean) to the authorities. they’re just not. =/

    Reply

  22. @soren – “Here’s a talk Charles Murray recently gave called ‘Rediscovery of Human Nature and Human Diversity’.”

    thanks! thanks for the verbruggen link, too. (^_^)

    Reply

  23. @grey – “Both of their first marriages would have been arranged marriages.”

    do these groups arrange marriages cross-culturally? i know a lot of the fake marriages are between — whatever — poles and nigerians (i.e. someone who can be in the u.k. legally and someone who can’t), but are arranged marriages also cross-cultural? i mean, the elder brother is married to a moroccan and the younger one was to an indian woman. (i’m assuming those women are moroccan and indian, respectively, and not eritreans living in those countries….) i thought the idea with arranged marriages with these immigrant groups in the west was usually to import a cousin from back home. -?-

    Reply

  24. @grey – “I think the underlying truth behind the chicks dig jerks spectrum is chicks dig protection.”

    yup. and, presumably, your offspring will do well if they’re jerks, too. (although not too jerky ’cause that can get you in trouble — more or less depending on what sort of society you find yourself in. unless you’ve got a really high iq, of course.)

    Reply

  25. @t – “You have a great blog but there is one group that you seem to ignore: central Asian nomads.

    i don’t mean to ignore them, so much as i just haven’t gotten around to them yet. (^_^)

    @t – “The Mongols were famous for their universalism. They had no problem with incorporating people of various races/ethnicities/religions into their societies. The Ottomans retained this somewhat from their Turkic ancestors.”

    well, they were somewhat universalistic, but hardly the most. just because you incorporate other peoples into your empire doesn’t necessarily make you universalistic (see: the arabs). the fact that the mongols were very tolerant of different religions is extremely interesting, and that’s pretty indicative of some level of universalism; but they weren’t very democratic — at least not the way we understand it. instead, they had one of those tribalistic democractic systems — councils of khans — no elections.

    Reply

  26. @t – “Think about the Sociopath/Clueless/Loser theory of business personality types that you see on various blogs. Those psychopaths are mobile. The global elite is mobile. Spengler criticised Anglo-American society as being ‘viking’ and ‘pirate’. Todd’s puts the English and the former Vikings into a family type that is the most nomadic. Hillaire Belloc made the comparison between the rooted small farmers and craftsmen vs the capitalist elite (and he blamed the Reformation).

    “AnonymousConservative makes the case that liberals are r-selected, meaning that they aren’t really family focused. The Ribbonfarm blog brought it all together for me. He points out that the upper classes tend to be descended from conquerors and thus have more nomadic ancestors. His idea is that nomads are farmers… of civilizations. The nomads allow civilizations to grow and then when they are ripe they eat them.

    Some stuff to think about.”

    there is a lot of good stuff there to think about, thanks! (^_^) like you, i’ve been thinking that one ought to examine the upper classes — the globalists — very carefully, because they are a BIG part of our current problems. they’re not rooted, like you say — they’ve got NO stake in any of our countries — and we can all pretty much see that they don’t give a sh*t — except for themselves and for making money. a LOT of money. obscene amounts of money.

    what’s their story? it’s complicated. a lot of alt-right people will point out how many jews are up there, and yes — that’s right. but there are also plenty of non-jews there, too. is it just that psychopaths rise to the top? are the western ones a bunch of individualists — like all nw europeans — only they lack whatever behavioral traits it takes to be concerned with the commonweal? is it just greed? i dunno.

    no moral scruples, though, that’s for sure! =/

    Reply

  27. @steve – “The harshest red pill in my view is that women both love rapists and love being raped – more likely to have orgasms, more likely to conceive when inseminated by rape, have fantasies about being raped, etc.”

    oh, i swallowed and digested that red pill a long time ago. dealt with that one — and i’m ok with it.

    it makes sense. there’s been a lot of rape in human prehistory and history — a LOT. who survives all that? the women who fight back? nuh uh.

    and it’s all older than that anyway, i think. there’s an awful lot of … insistent sex out there in nature. primates — good grief! bunch o’ barbarians most of our fellow primates! (except for the tamarins. (^_^) ) the other day i watched a male deer chase a female around the house/property here for about half-an-hour, until eventually he chased her out of my sight. poor him! he was exhausted in the heat (of the day) and laid down panting a few times! (~_^) but he wasn’t going to give up! (if he only had opposable thumbs, he’d be able to hang on to her!) the problem for him is she’s a young filly — i think she’s just a yearling (or whatever you call deer of that age) — so she can out run him — or she’s got more energy anyway.

    i think the difficult red pill here is that maybe — maybe — some or all of the abused girls were initially attracted to these guys because they were jerks. doesn’t have to be. it’s just a possibility. but you can see some of the reactions in the comments above. a lot of people — including me! — don’t even like the thought.

    Reply

  28. “i think the difficult red pill here is that maybe — maybe — some or all of the abused girls were initially attracted to these guys because they were jerks.”

    Over the time period grooming was increasing the average age of the victims kept decreasing. This should tell you everything you need to know about the form of seduction that was being used.

    Reply

  29. @grey – “Over the time period grooming was increasing the average age of the victims kept decreasing. This should tell you everything you need to know about the form of seduction that was being used.”

    yeah. you’re probably right.

    (doesn’t make me feel any better though. =/ )

    Reply

  30. @Steve Johnson

    Sexual abuse is, in general, not a one way street! Many people here are describing the proclivity of a victim to put themselves in close proximity of a rapist, as essentially a female phenomenon and uniquely part of the female sex drive (whether they like the jerk or like to be the victim). But this cannot be true given the high rate of female-to-male sexual abuse.

    Most rapists were subjected to some form of sexual abuse in childhood. A startling amount is perpetrated by females. Peer-reviewed studies conclude that between 60% to 80% of “rapists, sex offenders and sexually aggressive men” were sexually abused by a female. […] According to a 2004 U.S. Department of Education mass study of university students, 57% of students reporting child sexual abuse cited a male offender, and 42% reported a female offender. Interestingly, 65% of the survivors of female abuse who opened up to a therapist, doctor or other professional were not believed on their first disclosure. Overall, 86% of those who tried to tell anyone at all about their experiences were not believed. According to a 1996 report from the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect (NCCAN), about 25% of child sexual abuse is committed by women, but that figure may be low, because survivors are far more conflicted and shamed in admitting abuse by their mothers than by fathers. In one study of 17,337 survivors of childhood sexual abuse, 23% reported a female-only perpetrator and 22% reported both male and female. A U.S. Department of Justice report finds that, in 2008, 95% of all youths reporting sexual misconduct by staff member in state juvenile facilities said their victimization experiences included victimization by female personnel, who made up 42% of the staff. […] One study found 8% of female perpetrators were teachers and 23% were babysitters.

    Clearly males are sexually abused by females and in turn this tends to beget sexual abuse towards females. So automatically we should expect sexual abusers and sexual victims in any combination to be in the same circles regardless of which gender is doing what. And I wouldn’t be surprised if there was actually a draw between these types of people. However, this bad type of attraction between rapist and victim is less of a female victim fetish and more of a people problem. I think the hardest pill for people to swallow is that females can sexually abuse males.

    Reply

  31. “yeah. you’re probably right.”

    Let’s assume for the sake of arguments that chicks dig jerks. Whatever explanation there is for it will be based on sexual maturity, yes? Young girls just going through puberty like Justin Bieber. At some point they switch to Eminem but initially it’s Justin Beiber (or David Soul or Donny Osmond or whoever the equivalent is at the time).

    So if the average age of the victims of the grooming gangs was going down year on year – which it was – then they weren’t using “jerk game” they were using “nice guy game” which only works on very young girls and it was becoming increasingly difficult to find victims.

    I’m not saying “jerk game” doesn’t work, especially in the general case of girls being led into prostitution, i’m saying it (mostly) doesn’t apply when you’re talking about girls this young.

    Reply

  32. szopen here,frommy daughter’s laptop

    NYB: nature does not react, not in the sense that if there will be more males, then morefemales will be born. Rather, if there is some mutation preferred by current environment, then this mutation is selected for which post-factum creates illusion that nature “reacted”. Mutationsdo not appear asreaction to new environmental factors.

    Reply

  33. @grey – “Young girls just going through puberty like Justin Bieber. At some point they switch to Eminem but initially it’s Justin Beiber (or David Soul or Donny Osmond or whoever the equivalent is at the time).”

    you’d be surprised, though, at how many young girls — and i mean like aged 10(!) — were big fans of the evil(ish) draco malfoy rather than good guys harry potter or his pal ron! i was surprised! and i’m talking here as someone in regular contact with a lot of girls that age (family) AND from what my schoolteacher acquaintances had to say (they were surprised, too). of course, draco turns out to be not that bad after all, but still … there’s a little tendency there amongst even some pretty young girls. (same was true back in the day, i recall, over han solo [kind-of a bad guy] vs. luke skywalker.) precocious little girls, perhaps.

    i think it would make sense, though, to imagine that the mean probably shifts as girls get older. like you say, the majority prolly start off liking nice guys (although some do like the malfoys of the world), and then as the average age of the groups increases, the mean prolly shifts in the direction towards preferring jerks more.

    Reply

  34. @grey – presumably the mean is different in different ethnic groups/races, of course. and, possibly, classes.

    also, what about father absence? girls seem to mature faster when their fathers are not around. most of these girls in these “grooming” cases don’t have any fathers in their lives….

    Reply

  35. All of that may be true, however in this particular case the average age of the victims was going down over time.

    There is an exactly similar thing going on in London involving black gangs which remains unreported but there the average age is older and hasn’t changed over time.

    Reply

  36. @grey – “All of that may be true, however in this particular case the average age of the victims was going down over time.”

    yes. that’s why i said you are probably right about this.

    it’s sick. people need to be told what’s happening. and it’s sick that they’re not being told. =/

    edit: it’s not just sick, it’s evil. and i don’t use that word very often.

    Reply

  37. @hbd chick
    really … honestly … if THIS doesn’t make people wake up, what will it take?

    A lot of people have woken up but there seems to be some sort of system in place that keeps people terrified of being called racist. People are so fearful that some of them will simply ignore this sort or thing or try to deny it is happening. It is a terrible situation. And those that do speak out often only do so anonymously on the internet.

    There is a website called wondercafe.ca (run by the left wing United Church of Canada). I tried to talk about this problem on that site and was chased off. They called me a nazi for spreading “Islamaphobia” and deleted the thread

    By the way, I don’t think any females are attracted to these hideous pedophiles. They lure the girls by giving them drugs and alcohol.

    Reply

  38. @melykin – “I don’t think any females are attracted to these hideous pedophiles.”

    well, maybe not the girls — they were probably duped and then given drugs, terrorized, etc.

    but these men do (did) have wives — and one of them a mistress — so, however repulsive they might seem to you and me, somebody’s attracted to them. =/

    Reply

  39. @melykin – “There is a website called wondercafe.ca (run by the left wing United Church of Canada). I tried to talk about this problem on that site and was chased off. They called me a nazi for spreading ‘Islamaphobia’ and deleted the thread.”

    never ceases to amaze me how so-called religious people can be so hypocritical, never mind being complicit in evildoing. self-deception is a powerful thing.

    Reply

  40. What kills me about this is that it’s just as bad for the women, in the long run, as it is for the betas. Most women I know who aren’t married don’t seem particularly happy with the current sexual marketplace either. I know tons of women who have jumped from one bad relationship to another for years, all because they were “following their hearts”. And people wonder why one-fourth of women are on anti-depressants these days.

    And what also kills me is that feminists won’t ever admit what the real problem is. Ask a feminist why so many women are in these bad situations, and they’ll tell you the same thing they’ve always told you. It’s because women are somehow “economically dependent” on these guys, when in reality, their economic freedom is what allows them to chase after jerks in the first place.

    If they really wanted to, feminists could make a big difference when it comes to fixing this situation, or at least getting it under control. But they don’t, because to them, it sounds like an insult to women to say that they are hardwired to be attracted to men who are bad for them.

    But why? Nobody considers it an insult to say that humans are hardwired to be “attracted to” fat and sugar, and if left to their own devices, would eat way more than would be good for them. So you wouldn’t think it would be too much to ask for people to realize that that’s how it is with women’s sexual desires too. After all, that fact was common knowledge only a few generations ago.

    Feminists have so much control in the media now that, if they wanted to, they could make all kinds of TV shows and magazine articles and whatever playing up this theme, but they don’t, for some reason that is obscure to me. I’d hate to think it was just not wanting to admit that they were wrong.

    Of course, if they did do something like this, it would just end up with telling women that they shouldn’t be with any man who doesn’t approve of every bit of feminist nonsense. Never acknowledging that both women and men have lots of perfectly good reasons to be against feminism, considering that it’s what got us into this mess in the first place.

    Sorry for the rant. But it’s something that’ been bugging me for years.

    Reply

  41. @disgusted – ” It’s because women are somehow ‘economically dependent’ on these guys, when in reality, their economic freedom is what allows them to chase after jerks in the first place.”

    yes. although the funny (ironic) thing is that i’ve heard more than a couple of women — who were very feministic in their thinking in their 20s — once they got to their 30s (especially their late 30s) and didn’t have a husband — complain that they were sick and tired of taking care of themselves and really wished that they had someone to take care of them. i think a lot of women out there really wouldn’t mind being economically dependent on a husband! that’s the irony of it all.

    feminists have got a LOT to answer for. the mess between the sexes in western society right now — all their fault. AND most of them are completely silent when it comes to how muslim women in the west are treated by their men. and, obviously, the above (the post) as well. ugh.

    @disgusted – “Sorry for the rant.”

    no worries! it was a good rant. (^_^)

    Reply

  42. I found the feminism discussion at the end of this thread the most interesting part of the whole thing. In my experience women who label themselves feminists, especially aggressively so, tend to be both more intelligent and more masculine in behavior (more hard driving, goal oriented, not interested in excuses, etc.) than most other women. It seems to me they wanted the feminist revolution for them, so they could have access to the same opportunities men had, without understanding that they were a small minority among women. I don’t begrudge them their MDs and PHDs, what annoys me is when they look down upon other women who put family, friends, and homemaking first. My wife’s educated friends are constantly trying to get her out to do more out of the home, like she’s selling herself short or something, but she has no interest which is totally fine in my mind. I encourage her to do whatever she wants but I make enough that there’s no need for her to work.

    That said, I think economic factors have played a large role in the woman-in-the-workforce phenomenon that has exploded since the seventies and eighties. We’ve had a lot of inflation in US currency but not so much in salaries, especially for middle to lower levels of income. Now two people have to work to keep a middle class household afloat. In my mind we’re committing cultural suicide by allowing all our home grown corporations to outsource their production to cheaper locales. We needed those jobs here to provide bread winners in the bottom 60% with stable income with benefits.

    Regarding the women like jerks discussion, I have to agreed that in general, according to my own anecdotal life experience up to this point, they do. I would likely be considered a Beta male by the game guys. I am soft spoken, non aggressive, intelligent, nerdy, short, artistically inclined, etc. Women have been repulsed by me for pretty much my entire life, until recently when I started lifting, grew my hair longer and starred in a local play… then BOOM, smiling female faces everywhere. I figure all I need is a tribal tattoo and a motorcycle and I’ll have to beat them off with a stick. (neither of those is going to happen by the way)

    -S

    Reply

    1. @Sisyphean “In my mind we’re committing cultural suicide by allowing all our home grown corporations to outsource their production to cheaper locales.” That is a very thouhtful reply overall. I have nothing to say in contradiction but I do have some reactions. 1) I agree that agressive women (I used to see the words “termagent” and “virago” on IQ tests. I suspect political corectness has elminated them.) pushed through the feminist agenda on behalf of a minority of women but I also suspect that the proportion of aggressive women is increasing while the proportion of viral men is decreasing. I suspect it is part of an overall pattern of infertitily that has a biological basis I shall spare you. 2) Your experience after being in the play corresponds with my own in Jamaica. It was quite scary for us in those days. Our compound was raided by men with shotguns. The official response was to post a man with a baseball bat to protect us. I grew my hair out, wore the local bush jack at work, shorts and hushpuppies, sported an African inspried shirt when I was not at work. Insisted on using a little contraption to cool my fanny when driving and only drove with gloves on. Took every occasion to visit the stews of Trench Town (the company said if you got into trouble down there they would not send help). I didn’t get any offers from the hookers, possibly since I would be the only white face in a sea of ebony. Elsewhen and elsewhere I have always been retiring, nerdy, painfully polite and pretty much socially isolated. I was the image of the total jerk in those days although in fact I was as kind and thoughful as I knew how to be. The chicks focked to me. The guys did, too. Nobody else much wanted to drive anywhere. (It was a running game of chicken the whole way every trip.) So yeah, the same guy can be a nice nerd one day and at least in image be a jerk chick magnet the next. 3) I agree that it’s cultural suicide to ship jobs abroad. Of course those with the power to have any influence say we aren’t harming ourselves; we are helping others to become like us. If they want to be like us, they need to do it by the bootsraps like we did, wouldn’t you think?

      Reply

  43. Its more of chicks not liking nice/gentle-men/baby-face/good-looking guys. Whats left? – jerks. They want drama in their life, as in slutty drama. If I’d paint Muslims with one generalization, it would be their default ‘game’ they are born with. They are natural flirts. And that is all they do, flirt. Isn’t it surprising they are lured in with the prospect of banging 72 virgins in heaven?

    Reply

  44. Sisyphean
    “It seems to me they wanted the feminist revolution for them, so they could have access to the same opportunities men had, without understanding that they were a small minority among women. I don’t begrudge them their MDs and PHDs, what annoys me is when they look down upon other women who put family, friends, and homemaking first.”

    I think that’s the crux of it. They wanted a niche for themselves – which is fine – but in the process distorted the whole culture so their niche became the new norm.

    .

    “My wife’s educated friends are constantly trying to get her out to do more out of the home, like she’s selling herself short or something, but she has no interest which is totally fine in my mind.”

    If a woman wants children it makes perfect sense to focus on them.

    Reply

  45. @GW

    Yes, the pendulum swung too far as it is wont to do. I even see glimmers of the next over-swing in the recent re-growth of the ‘earth mama’/attachment parenting movement among whom it seems breastfeeding children into adolescence is the new normal. It’s never the outliers who suffer in any over-swing, it’s the regular folks who struggle to keep up with whatever new norms the nuts have in store for them. Bear in mind I say this as one of those nuts. I’m just one who isn’t terribly interested in imposing his values on others.

    -S

    Reply

  46. Self-respecting women don’t dig jerks. The ones that do usually have some issues and either like being abused for whatever reason (they grew up in an abusive home and think it’s normal, have a victim complex, screws loose etc.), or mistake jerky behavior for male behavior because all the other men are too soft. Or something.

    I also think manipulative people are able to turn their bad behavior on and off as it suits them. It’s not completely uncommon for some people to think “but they were so nice!”

    Reply

  47. Leaving aside any moral considerations regarding abortion or involuntary sterilisation, no way will society ever accept forcing rape victims to have abortions nor sterilising non-criminals who have not yet raped anyone, and might not. Though I am rather callous myself, I find this kind of thinking beyond normal humanity. You know, like rape itself.

    Besides ‘T’ doesn’t actually understand that the rapist is not consciously seeking to pass on his genes, because the procreative urge works subconsciously. People rape because it feels good to them, and though rape may have evolved as a way for men to pass on their genes, reducing the possibility of procreation to zero won’t remove the underlying urge. Or to put it another way, if people were deterred from sex by the risk of non-procreation there’d be no contraception. .

    The bit about killing rapists ought to, but rape carries strong legal penalties anyway as it is but men still do it assuming they don’t get caught.

    Reply

  48. @AS
    “How does a man discern the minority of genuinely maternal, compassionate girls from the majority who like hunky bad-boys?”

    What sort of jobs would they be attracted to?

    Reply

  49. I see these things as r-selected low-IQ extroverts vs. K-selected high-IQ introverts. It’s the former who are the promiscuous destroyers and the latter who are the creators and conservators of society and culture. When women are let loose to do as they please many tend toward the r-selected low-IQ destroyers, so some of them tend toward the same kind of men. It’s not the superior K-selected introvert females who are attracted to “bad boys.” It’s the inferior women and every pressure should be applied to prevent them from reproducing.

    Reply

    1. @ Bob Wallace “It’s the inferior women and every pressure should be applied to prevent them from reproducing.” I feel your pain. But it’s more complicated than that. Alas few inded are willing to look at the complex reality.

      Reply

  50. HBD chick: “and we can all pretty much see that they don’t give a sh*t — except for themselves and for making money. a LOT of money. obscene amounts of money.”

    Surely you don’t think money is the ruling class’ (I never call them elite; it implies merit) primary motivation. They want to rule the world. They want to control and micromanage not merely what we buy, sell, eat, and take as medicine but what we think and even what we dream. The totalitarian panopticon managerial-nanny state vision is impossible so long as White Western peoples exist as anything but a remnant.

    Reply

    1. @Ron “The totalitarian panopticon managerial-nanny state vision is impossible so long as White Western peoples exist as anything but a remnant.” If it’s what you want then I think I have some good news for you.

      Reply

  51. @jon – “Surely you don’t think money is the ruling class’ (I never call them elite; it implies merit) primary motivation. They want to rule the world.”

    true. power is a huge motivator for these people, too, i agree. greed/money just happened to be the first thing that came to mind, that’s all.

    Reply

  52. @ Lisa

    That’s nonsense and you know it. The reality is that women with higher self-esteem are actually even more exclusively attracted to “bad boys”, because those women tend to be more reckless “jerks” themselves and women in every culture are universally more attracted to men with higher than average masculinity. This tends to explain race differencesin male attractiveness (East Asians guys on the bottom).

    Also, women with higher self-esteem tend to also have more rape fantasies (this was covered by Roissy), which is more evidence that women naturally want dominant aggressive men, not soft nice guys.

    and
    and w

    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