Rose is a super relatable character for girls and women, one with whom they can identify strongly. And what’s not to like?
You get awarded luxuries for merely existing, like an expensive necklace and a voyage on the world’s largest ship. Ugh, the stupid shiplet is only 880 feet though, not even 1,000 feet. At least you get to stand and sit around the boat looking cute each day, with your cute dresses, cute gloves, and cute hats. Yay! But you feel sad, because life is so exhausting, your rich handsome fiancé gives you the ick, and you just can’t even anymore. You’re in the midst of considering whether to throw yourself overboard, when a Manic Pixie Dream Chad (MPDC) shows up out of nowhere to rescue you and sweep you off your feet. You cuck your fiancé with MPDC because why not? Girls just want to have fun, teehee. Plus, your stupid fiancé deserves it for being a jealous and controlling jerk. He and MPDC fight over you, which is literally the worst because you definitely hate drama. But then the shiplet hits an iceberg and starts sinking (you knew it, this totally wouldn’t have happened if you went with a real ship). MPDC sacrifices his life so you can live. Awww, how sweet of him. Your (ex-)fiancé survives but later on commits suicide. Oh well, it’s like whatevs. With both MPDC and fiancé gone, you eventually branch swing onto a husband, with whom you have children and grandchildren. You return to the wreck site as a centenarian, wistfully fantasizing about your fling with MPDC and throwing the necklace (now a priceless artifact) into the ocean like Willa yeeting the iPad in Succession. lol, whoopsie.
In contrast, Titanic is a horror film for men. It's Male Expendability: The Movie, where not even Manic Pixie Dream Chad was immune to male expendability. Who do men have to relate to?
The guy who froze to death hanging onto a door, submerged in frigid waters? The guy who brought his fiancée and her mother onto the maiden voyage of the world’s largest ship, only to get cucked in return? The guy who free-fell when the ship broke in half and went vertical, clanging against a propeller along the way? The guy who eventually dedicated his life to alpha-widowed Rose? The nameless hordes of men who waited on the ship as it sank, listening to the string quartet play their last set while the women scampered off with the children onto lifeboats? At least door-popsicle-guy had the fresh memories of smashing sweet seventeen-year-old redhead puss as a morale boost in his waning moments.
For men, there’s also the meta-horror that women consider this a great love story. Five minutes of Alpha >> lifetime of Beta.
The participants in the Reddit BoRU and RA threads are unwittingly putting on an illustration of our threads that discuss male vs. (lack of) female approaching, the Women are Wonderful Effect, the societal eagerness to vilify men.
The elephant in the room there, an elephant that Reddit women will generally avoid (or whose existence they will deny, as the elephant makes them feel less like strong independent #GirlBosses), is that women are extremely passive when it comes to approaching and will not take initiative to… initiate. Men have the burden of performance. It’s up to men to read women's minds as to know when/how to approach or risk making women “uncomfortable,” since nothing is worse than the sin of being a man and making a woman feel “uncomfortable.”
Not that the slightest of fucks is given to a man’s comfort—like hypothetically, gossiping to turn his classmates against him, confronting him about asking a girl to hook up (when it’s none of your business), or texting him from an unfamiliar number to insult him.
How dare Study Session Guy look for a friend with benefits when he’s a stupid low-status virgin? Ugh, the male entitlement. Who does he think he is? Doesn't he know he's a low-level character who lacks the EXP to unlock that part of the map yet, much less pursue that quest? He should be grateful for her friendship, know his place and patiently stay in the friendzone, slowly orbit and monkey dance and maybe one day the friendship evolves into a relationship if he’s lucky she so deigns.
It’s also amusing how young women sometimes act like spoiled children—especially when it comes to courtship and dating—and we pretend it doesn’t happen, provide an “oh dear, dear, gorgeous” like the Ramsay meme, or actively condone and encourage them. Study Session Girl could had just said “no thanks” and discontinued the friendship. She could had even said “no thanks” and continued the friendship. Either way, a level-headed response that might befit an adult. Yet, she had to poison the well, start a gossip mill, sink his reputation, and essentially create a hostile work study session environment for affronting the Lady's honor, for having the audacity as to be insufficiently attractive while thinking she might be That Kind of Girl (which she likely is, just not for him). The crowd had to be set upon him, in name of her honor. Slay, queen! He had it coming.
Obviously, this is not to say directly asking a girl to be your friend with benefits is wise, tactically. Quite the opposite, as it takes away her plausible deniability and ability to dodge accountability, her ability to tell herself and others “we were just talking and hanging out; somehow one thing led to another and omg it just like happened!” If a younger brother, male cousin, nephew, etc. recounted me a story like Study Session Guy's, I'd shake my head and be like "Did we not teach you anything? Let's review the ways that could had gone better..."
@Quantumfreakonomics remarked earlier this week that he would in the past think:
"oh, I'm just too honest for the dirty, lying, backstabbing tricks required for success in the dating market." I typically dismiss this as egoistic rationalization, but I am again starting to wonder if it is true.
I wouldn’t say dirty, lying, backstabbing tricks are necessary for success; I certainly wouldn't like deploying dirty, lying, backstabbing tricks (Russell Conjugation, perhaps: “Others might deploy dirty, lying, backstabbing tricks, but I deploy subtle, creative, smooth maneuvers”). However, I would say a large degree of social engineering and maintaining kayfabe is certainly needed for consistent success. Asking a girl if she wants to be your friend with benefits breaks kayfabe.
"Yes means yes” comes to mind and how it can be construed as an intentional or unintentional civilisational-level shit-test. The nice feminist guys who take it slow and overcommunicate every step of the way will fumble their chances away and remain pussless, whereas the toxic inconsiderate chauvinists who go full steam ahead all gas no brakes will see many more touchdowns. It separates the socially savvy from the non-socially savvy (and in the case of “yes means yes,” helpfully gives women another way to retrospectively claim non-consensuality if they so feel like it).
Decades of gender egalitarianism and mainstream feminist propaganda certainly don’t prepare young men for navigating sex and dating. Men and women are the same, except for when women are more Wonderful but sometimes more vulnerable—and when men are shittier and more toxic.
If you believe their pretty lies about women, the same cultural forces will only blame you for believing their lies. Study Session Guy paid the price for believing that male and female sexuality are similar, that men and women have a similar disposition toward honesty. As @erwgv3g34 commented on the Motte subreddit back in the day:
>Television: *lies to you about women all your life*
>School: *lies to you about women all your life*
>Women: *lie to you about women all your life*
>You: *believes lies about women*
>Society: "Haha, you actually believed the lies we told you about women? FUCKIN' AUTIST".
This is why I hate normies.
If you aggregate up Reddit women’s reactions to threads like these (about men bungling initiation attempts)—and their dating advice (more like “advice”) in general on approaching—it shakes out to something like this:
-
Don’t cold approach women. What kind of creep pesters women he doesn’t know? Women don’t date strangers.
-
Don’t ask out women from class or work. What kind of creep exploits school or work to pester women who are a captive audience?
-
Don’t ask out women from your social circle. What kind of creep takes advantage of his friendships or social circle to pester women?
-
Don’t ask out women that you meet through hobbies like dancing or sports. What kind of creep takes advantage of hobbies to pester women? Women are there for their interest in the hobby, not to meet men.
-
Oh and don’t message girls on online dating or social media. There’s already too many creepy losers in online dating
(like you)and what kind of creep pesters women on their social media accounts? Ugh, just because her profile is inundated with bikini pics and lingerie shots doesn’t mean she’s looking for sexual attention.
Of which, Study Session Guy violated the second (while being insufficiently attractive and sufficiently unattractive, of course). However, a man who dutifully and obediently follows these commandments will find himself with no options to improve his dating prospects. Reminds me of that hilarious Motte thread: “Just tell me where you think white people are supposed to live” started by @knob. A confused, frustrated, or indifferent man reading Reddit women’s advice might ask: “Just tell me where you think men are supposed to meet women.”
Nowhere. In the eyes of women, if you’re the type of man who deliberates about where and how to ask out women, you’re unworthy. Women generally view men who approach courtship strategically or opportunistically as inherently creepy or suspicious. They want naturals—not some imposter who, by some combination of the numbers game and clever strategery, managed to punch above his weight. After all, for women, courtship and romance are just magical things that happen to them serendipitously like Acts of God, so what’s wrong with these men who need to bombard women with messages, plot to join hobbies to meet women, or bother innocent study session classmates? So gross and unromantic.
An obvious solution for men, naturally, is to ignore women’s dating advice for men, ignore sanctimonious vilification of men who approach courtship the “wrong way,” strive toward being attractive and not unattractive, and keep a cost/benefit analysis in mind to see what trade-offs of risk and reward might work for you. My approach in recent years is to aggressively DM on social media/online dating (preselection and female mate-choice copying for the win) when I foresee having lots of free time in the near future, but be very conservative in approaching through social circle or the workplace (lest an errant attempt gets my social credit points knocked out Sonic’s-rings-style like what happened to Señor Study Session).
When I read men’s opinions on women and interactions with women it gives me this disgusting skin crawling feeling all over that makes me want to puke. I wish I was born a lesbian.
Ha, this is such a female way to write. If a guy wrote “when I read women’s opinions on men and interactions with men it gives me this disgusting skin crawling feeling all over that makes me want to puke. I wish I was born gay” he’d come across as a histrionic fruit-cake and would get mocked into the shadow realm for being an incel instead of receiving 200 upvotes.
I imagine part of that woman’s dramatic reaction was motivated by OP writing about women like they’re objects that can be fumbled, and not acknowledging women as Wonderful, agentic girl-bosses. However, women are incredibly passive in dating and courtship, especially in the early game, so it’s understandable for men to metaphorise them as inanimate objects that can be fumbled away like a crappy gather or sloppy behind-the-back-pass. Sometimes a man has been James, sometimes he’s been Curry, sometimes he’s been Thompson looking exasperated while a wingman botches a group approach or double date.
Men need to do the approaching, lead the interactions, drive the conversations, perform the monkey-dancing and court-jestering, hold court if necessary, navigate any shit tests, figure out when/how to make the first move, make the first move, and figure out how to seal the deal from there. Women just exist and follow or not. For men, picking-up and/or dating women is like going on job interviews and conducting escort missions; whereas for women getting picked-up and/or dating men is like shopping and going on guided tours.
Online women like to prattle on about emotional labor and so forth, but the efforts of men when it comes to dating and courtship are completely invisible to them. Romance and courtship are things that Just Happen to women like Acts of God. Yet many of them enjoy shaming and mocking men for perceived dating ineptitudes as if they were petty Monday Morning Quarterbacks, just like they’ll pin white feathers on alleged draft-dodgers and laugh at men running to escape the draft. As Norah Vincent remarked in Self Made Man:
Dating women as a man was a lesson in female power, and it made me, of all things, into a momentary misogynist... I disliked [women's] superiority, their accusatory smiles, their entitlement to choose or dash me with a fingertip, an execution so lazy, so effortless, it made the defeats and even successes unbearably humiliating.
Women certainly have ones that got away (cue the Katy Perry song), but they generally don’t have ones that they think of having fumbled away. In contrast, just reading the words "the haunting feeling of fumbling a 10/10" was a cognito-hazard; I got a pit in my stomach while the memories of past fumbles flash-flooded across my mind.
In the romance novels most popular among women, the female protagonists are passive, hypoagentic damsels in distress to be swept off their feet by an active, hyperagentic suitor. Sometimes there are even two such suitors for a Let’s You and Him fight scenario.
I don’t think men are fundamentally disinterested in female protagonists. Ripley in the Alien and Lara Croft in the Tomb Raider franchises come to mind, as female protagonists that are more popular among men than among women. Even brutish, cynical wrong-thinkers like me have contentedly watched the entirety of Love and Death. However, men don’t like getting lectured about #GirlPower in what should be entertainment, from Marvel girl-bosses assembling for a pose-down to an X-Men Mystique walk-off of “by the way, the women are always saving the men around here. You might want to think about changing the name to X-Women.” All while the actress has photos floating around of her on her knees getting facialed.
Both men and women are more concerned for the safety and well-being of girls and women in a movie or television series, just as they are for girls and women in real life. It’s no coincidence that popular works like 28 Days Later, World War Z, The Last of Us, Station 11 have the protection of daughters/daughter-figures as plot points to keep the emotional stakes high for the viewer. A girl/young woman dying gruesomely is/would be much more of an ”oh shit” moment than a boy/young man doing so.
Nor do I think men are inherently incapable of admiring women for their achievements. It’s not like Cathie Wood's lacking in simps and fan-boys. Neither is Elizabeth Holmes, for that matter—strong, independent #GirlBoss when winning; damsel in distress when getting charged with fraud. If anything, women garner greater male (and female) admiration for a given level of achievement than men do.
There’s some apex fallacy here. Men don’t generally admire women for their achievements, because they don’t generally admire other men for their achievements either. The Don Draper I-don’t-think-about-you-at-all is the default.
When men admire the achievements of other men, it’s often in the realm of right-tailed achievements in science, mathematics, business, or sports, where women are usually absent. Given greater male variability in interests and ability, there are far fewer female Terence Taos, Elon Musks, or Jeff Bezos’s; the Forbes list of top 10 female billionaires is a who’s who of widows, heiresses, and divorcees (including MacKenzie). It’s even more sensible that men generally don't admire female athletes, as they generally don't admire random high school boys athletes, who are often better than professional women. It’d be weird as hell if grown men admired random high school boys athletes, Foxcatcher vibes but worse (it’s already pretty weird how many grown men admire and have parasocial relationships with their favorite professional athletes/teams, wearing other men’s names on their backs and cheering their performances).
Yet, despite the relative lack of right-tailed female achievement in sciences, mathematics, business—even aided by the tailwind of affirmative action—and female professional athletes being worse than high school boys, men are constantly bombarded by girl-power propaganda in media and entertainment, schools and workplaces. So it’s natural if some annoyance results, especially when men's experiences in romantic contexts suggest that women are not, in fact, strong independent hyperagentic girl-bosses (more like the opposite).
In their forced apology letter, Karissa and Kelly spend half of it non-apologising.
It’s not our fault that we lied; if you believed our lies, it’s your fault for misinterpreting. We had no way of knowing our accusations of sexual abuse would be interpreted as accusations of sexual abuse; our campaign to accuse Chris of sexual abuse was not intended to accuse him of sexual abuse.
They spend the other half reiterating their allegiance to women, minorities, LGBTQIA+ persons. People whose safety and security matter. The safety and security of white heterosexual men, on the other hand…
It’s pretty funny that, even in a statement on falsely accusing a man of sexual abuse, they managed to allocate half of it to idpol preening. It’s also funny them doing so isn’t even surprising nowadays. Next steps for being better would be to include a stolen land acknowledgement and a reaffirmation of their commitment toward sustainability and combating climate change.
"He got me blackout drunk on Midori Sours (on the company dime).
“He got me,” not “we got” or “I got.” As if Chris beamed the Midori Sours into her stomach using a Star Trek transporter, with her having no role in the part. What happened to being passionate about the agency of women? Schrödinger’s feminism: Strong, independent #GamerGirls one moment and damsels in distress the next.
He and two friends somehow got me back to my room, where he pounced in front of the other guys.
Okay, the image of Chris pouncing made me chuckle internally. Pounced, like a cat! And what would she claim his game-plan here was? Bang her in front of the other guys while they watched? Run a train in the spirit of “It ain't no fun, if the homies can't have none”?
Along with the lawsuit, Avellone published a blog post titled "It's Come To This"(opens in new tab), in which he claims that Barrows became antagonistic toward him when his relationship with a friend of hers soured. In 2020, Barrows claimed that her best friend "endured over a year of heartache, gaslighting, and emotional abuse at [Avellone's] hands." Avellone says that the friend in question did become "unhappy," but that they had not been in a committed relationship. (The friend is only identified in the post as someone named Jackie. She is not identified in the lawsuit, either.)
So it sounds like this whole thing started because Chris did not treat a member of his soft harem with the wonderfulness she and her friends thought she was entitled to, thus hoes maddening ensued. Between this and UVA, a takeaway is to avoid girls named Jackie/Jacqui.
Originally, I had no idea who these people were, so I did some googling (how does a video game writer, of all people, have so many groupies in the first place? Maybe I’m in the wrong profession). Jacqui’s Insta quickly came up, which like those of many young women, has a fair share of bikini pics, and outfits and poses to show off her rack. Including a bikini pic with one of the more blatant displays of camel toe I have seen on the app.
I was about to make a sarcastic comment like “ugh, stupid Chris. How could he proposition her over text message, thinking she’s that kind of girl?” But I returned to read some more about the situation.
Apparently, the Insta camel toe pic is just the tip of the thot-iceberg. Jacqui has actually done porn, a video with James Deen under the name “Violet,” evidence of which she has since tried to scrub away from the internet. However, NeoGAF commenters here have receipts in the form of screenshots, and tips on how to find the video.
One commenter remarked in that thread: “Now we know why she talks shit. She eats JD's ass!” Interesting, but I haven’t watched the video to verify. Another noted: “To her credit as a upstanding feminist, she doesn't seem to be among the ones that let Deen shove their heads into the toilet during sex.”
The irony of a porn actress pearl-clutching over some sexual text messages did not go unnoticed. For example, RPG Codex user ScrotumBroth declared: “A frigging porn cumbucket moralising sexual advances via text is a new peak.”
The existence of corners of the internet like RPG Codex and NeoGAF that still contain many based users gives me greater hope for the world.
I’m not particularly interested in the woman-cum-backpack-reviewer at the center of the story
Hmm yeah, she does have a lot of experience with cum backpacks.
I don’t think I could had done better if I were assigned to write a satirical article with “Coffee Emoji: Backpack Edition” as the prompt.
If that is the published version of the article, I wonder what her earlier drafts were like—
Her editors: And your article provides an insightful, analytical, and comprehensive review of the backpack?
Her: Backpack?
>In 2019 I tweeted, “Please G*d, Please don’t let me be a 30-year-old with roommates.” I am 30 and a half years old, and I hear sex noises that aren’t my own when I go to sleep at night, and I think about this tweet all of the time. I don’t have my own bathroom.
Self-censors the “o” in God ironically or not, but sees no issues about broadcasting her promiscuity.
>Recently, after I finished seeing a guy who had three other girlfriends, I started seeing another guy. This one just had one girlfriend. I thought, Must be love.
Another W for polygyny and female mate-choice copying. The cringe doesn’t really get better from there and I tapped out.
It raises the question for me: does Feminism actually have any realistic solution to how men should react to female promiscuity?
Yes, feminists do have realistic solutions, ones that they've successfully deployed over the past few years/decades. As evident from academia, pop culture, mainstream opinion pieces, to subreddits like AmItheAsshole and relationship_advice, and even supposedly more neutral ones like PurplePillDebate—women (and sometimes even men) will often express an opinion to the tune of:
You WILL propose to a woman after she's had her fun and is ready to settle down.
You WILL buy her an expensive engagement ring that she can show off to her friends, family, and coworkers.
You WILL give her the princess wedding of her dreams.
You WILL be happy. The past is the past. Nothing better than a woman with experience. Only incels would disagree.
Shaming, deplatforming, and pushing contrary opinions outside of the Overton Window can work in preventing men from comparing notes... and in getting women to believe that ugh, only shitty, toxic men are too insecure to date an experienced woman.
If men prefer female youth, beauty, and chastity, it’s because they’re shallow, controlling, misogynistic pedophiles. Women are Wonderful and don’t care about male height, strength, income, status, and/or ability to pull other women, but if they do it’s only due to internalised misogyny or because men are so shitty that women have to use those factors as heuristics.
Women are valid if they get the ick from short men, but it’s gross and problematic if men get the ick about committing to promiscuous women (such men are only telling on themselves).
Graham launched into an interrogation of the system, questioning multiple executives about it. Amazon took the issue seriously and dropped the system of ranking shows based on audience scores… Still, several Amazon veterans believe the system remains too dependent on those same test scores. “All this perpetuation of white guys with guns — it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy,” says one. And another: “Relying on data is soul crushing … There’s never, ‘I know the testing wasn’t that great, but I believe in this.'” Graham declined to comment.
Am I out of touch? No, it's the audience who are wrong.
The principal-agent problem allows executives and middle managers to express their open hatred for white men through corporate operations, hiring, and promotions at little to no personal cost. Even personal gain. And there’s nothing anyone else can do to stop them.
It’s funny how normalised this all is nowadays.
Sloot
1yr ago
A boring dystopia.
I enjoy how “hotdesking” has already been rebranded as “agile seating” because it’s so widely despised. The euphemism treadmill strikes again.
Thanks to hotdesking and hotwifing, I’ve been conditioned to automatically hate anything that starts with a “hot” and ends with a “-ing.”
As others have suggested, many women (performatively or genuinely) overestimate the danger men pose, due to a combination of lipstick feminism, movies and television, being meme-susceptible, humble bragging as to being so desirable as to be a constant target for rape, a lifetime of being sheltered away from actually being under real risk of physical harm, perhaps some rape fantasy and hybristophilic wish-fulfillment sprinkled in there.
I’d also posit that on the flipside, women underestimate the danger animals, whether wild or domesticated, pose in general. Or at least, the modal woman underestimates the danger animals pose to her in particular, under the belief that in such situations her Disney Princess powers will kick in and she’ll have immediate rapport with the animals. Hence why defending pitbulls as nanny dogs is female-coded and the countless selfies of young women making a sad face with cuts and scratches after some mostly gentle mauling from getting too cuddly with a dog.
There’s a video that comes to mind but I can’t find, of a girl in a skirt or dress and Uggs getting rammed by a goat or sheep (wait, not that kind of video) because she picked up its offspring for a cUtE Insta photo. When she saw the mother coming, she tried evading by daintily kicking up a puff of dirt (“ugh, stupid mother! shoo”) and half-heartedly jogging away with the offspring in her arms before getting chased down in like half a second. Thot status: patrolled and offspring protected.
And of course, as always there’s the whole Who? Whom? aspect, as the bear vs. black man permutation hilariously illustrates.
every other commentator, even putatively conservative ones, are doing the expected throat-clearing about how Neely’s death is a tragedy, that we all wish he “could have gotten the help he needed”, etc. If anyone believes, as I do, that the first step to saving our civilization is for tens of thousands of people to pull a Daniel Penny on their local subway-screaming bum, they’re sure not saying it out loud. The veil of self-censorship and paying homage to liberal pieties will persist no matter what happens to Daniel Penny, and nobody will get the public catharsis of hearing a powerful or important person say out loud that Jordan Neely’s death was a good thing and we need more of it.
Indeed, the graceful losing will continue as long as mainstream conservatives keep playing by the left’s playbook and agreeing to their terms.
There are only two tragedies here. One is that the hero’s getting his name dragged through the mud and facing social and legal harassment for taking out the trash. The second is that there are far too few subway vigilantes in the world, and far too many “Michael Jackson impersonators” terrorizing public spaces. The Subway Marine should be honored, just as Rooftop Koreans should be honored, and become a celebrity spokesman for the sandwich chain. SubwayTM: So much sandwich that you might choke.
An amusing thought that comes to mind: If, ex-ante, I were told there was a viral video of a military member grappling with an NYC subway hobo, I’d immediately guess Marine. Like, it’s much harder for me to picture an Airman, for example, doing something as based and gritty as this. Chad Marine vs. Virgin Airman. It takes a special kind of guy to be willing to grapple with a gross hobo or on an NYC subway floor (much less the two combined), such as the kind of guy who’s down to crawl around in shitty, muddy water while in gear. I’d have to take a chem-shower after hobo-jiu-jitsu on a subway floor, or get myself hosed down like the mother in 28 Weeks Later (possibly while sobbing like her, too).
I was sickened and humiliated not only by the actions of the schizophrenic loser who accosted me, and by my relative inability to effectively defend myself if the guy had started attacking me, but also by the inaction of the other grown men standing nearby. Without telling the whole story, I ended up in that position because I attempted to stop the lunatic from harassing a different guy, and then that guy stood around and watched the assailant menace me and did not intervene in any way.
That’s seriously brave of you, particularly since you’re a self-described smaller guy who’s never been in a “proper fistfight.” I’ve thankfully never had to confront or defend myself against such public transit creatures (Creatures of Public Transit?). Especially since, in recent years, I’ve made it a priority to live in areas with less vibrancy. As a (still) young athletic man with some familiarity in fist fights, I’m mashing RUN rather than FIGHT each time a WILD HOBO appears. Too bad there is no irl REPEL for low-lifes that I can keep in my ITEM stash.
Defending yourself against people with much less to lose than you is really a lose-lose situation, especially given Who? Whom? considerations. It’s not like wild hobos fight fair under unwritten gentlemen’s mutual combat agreements. A self-defense situation with a crazed hobo could get you killed. Or perhaps worse, it doesn’t.
If I stand my ground against a hobo and lose, I just got my ass kicked or killed by a hobo who then just returns to his life of doing low-life things. Great. I might be stabbed, seriously injured, or dead. Who knows what a deranged person might do to you after you’re incapacitated. Onlookers don’t help due to fear of personal injury or fear of being accused of bigotry in one way or another.
If I win the fight, I get the full-force of anarcho-tyranny coming down upon my head. I’d get hunted down and socially and legally prosecuted, my name smeared while the hobo has hagiographies coming out about how he is/was a gentle soul who loves/loved putting smiles on people’s faces, and was just having some mental struggles after his mom died until some bigot lynched him in a subway (an experience akin to a certain Marine might have recently had). If a shadow-realming occurs, my devices would probably be seized, where it’d possibly emerge that apparently I’m an extremist who somehow masqueraded for years as a typical member of the PMC while sometimes commenting in a hive of scum and villainy filled with racists, misogynists, White Nationalists, Russian misinformants, etc., which would only serve as further proof to my supposed guilt.
I have fantasized about doing exactly what Daniel Penny - the NYC subway hero - did. Except for in my fantasies, I didn’t unintentionally end the man’s life due to a tragic and unforeseen accident; I just kicked the absolute shit out of him, taking him by surprise and beating him within an inch of his life, or stabbing him before he could get a hand in me.
Maybe my fantasies are more boring, but when I was living in a more… vibrant… area, my fantasy was that one day I’d move to a place where I wouldn't have to deal with the Neelys of the world as much. And now, my “fantasy” is that perhaps Anglosphere/European countries will just enforce their laws, and stop letting in and stop subsidizing people, inside or outside their countries, who will only increase the Neelyness of their country and/or the planet.
Sloot
7mo ago
Indeed, the topic of women and alcohol, especially if sex is involved, is a recurring source of horseshoe compass unity between libleft and authright when it comes to women's (lack of) agency and accountability:
"He got me blackout drunk on Midori Sours (on the company dime).
“He got me,” not “we got” or “I got.” As if Chris beamed the Midori Sours into her stomach using a Star Trek transporter, with her having no role in the part. What happened to being passionate about the agency of women? Schrödinger’s feminism: Strong, independent #GamerGirls one moment and damsels in distress the next.
Even when a woman is ascribed some semblance of agency and culpability, double standards and Russell conjugations arrive to provide mitigating and inverting factors.
You, @Walterodim, got drunk and became an embarrassing oaf and burden to deal with. What kind of man-child husband has to lie in the shade to sleep off his inebriation? In similar but reversed circumstances, your wife would had just had a bit too much to drink and it was beyond time for you two to retire for the night anyway. What kind of man-child husband would leave his wife in the shade to sleep off her inebriation?
Sloot
11mo ago
Great list. Also:
-
Men compose the majority of the homeless -> homelessness is a women’s issue
-
Male journalists are more often killed than female journalists -> STOP TARGETING WOMEN JOURNALISTS
-
Working husbands tend to die earlier than their stay-at-home wives -> Suddenly these poor widows have to perform the uncompensated physical and emotional labor of managing a bunch of boring bank, brokerage, and retirement accounts that their stupid husbands left behind
This is one of the more ridiculous articles I’ve ever read. Thank you. This journalist and her friend are the future. Post-wall women with no families, aged out of Twitter and Hinge, racking up body count with “open minded” men, nonbinaries, couples, and other people that are similarly alone.
The future? More like the present, it appears. This article is one long coffee emoji, better than any weak- or straw-woman the manosphere, dirtbag left, or dissident right could ever conjure.
They sound like big kids. The journalist loses her apartment suddenly and has to throw her stuff in a storage unit and her dad’s car (that she’s presumably using). She’s 39!!! And random hookup sex was her answer to this!
Can we call-in a wellness check for her father to make sure he’s okay?
Your childless, middle-aged daughter suddenly needs your car because her relationship “abruptly collapsed” (surely due to no fault of her own), then next thing you know she authors a longform article on how she continues riding the carousel to cope. feelsbadman.jpg
She talks about a friend who was “house sitting” for her parents.
Her friend couldn’t even house-sit at her parents’ for a night without inviting a random guy over to raid their liquor and rail their daughter. I’m sure her parents are proud.
This approach should, theoretically, neutralise right wing arguments against open borders. These arguments either have an economic basis (a vast surfeit of labour will decrease pay and bargaining power for domestic workers) or a social basis (large amounts of unmarried, low skill men will cause unrest, violence and buggery).
Perhaps some “right wing” arguments within the Overton window.
The immigrants, especially those of fertile age and younger, would disproportionately come from low human capital regions of the world, especially given self-selection bias. Like men, these women and girls would still need places to live and food to eat, but not have the means or ability to provide for themselves. Seeing as most of both the left and right are highly susceptible to female tears, their food and shelter would be footed by tax-payers, as well as that of any offspring they have in the mean-time.
One might posit that 100% female-biased migration would have the benefit of giving local men more dating options in the present and future. However, any girls would presumably be coming with a female guardian, in particular their mothers, and women with children aren’t exactly inspiring as dating prospects for most men. The same low human capital regions of the world also produce women that have had children at an early age and would otherwise be physically unattractive to local men only interested in pretty childless women.
Like men, women pass down 22 autosomal chromosomes and a sex chromosome to their offspring. Any future children of the immigrant women would inherit these chromosomes; any daughters they bring already have. Furthermore, given assortative mating, these women (and their daughters) would likely be having children with local men low in socioeconomic status and cognitive ability, thus producing more offspring to enter the underclass.
The US runs colossal deficits each year, so a given “right wing” man would likely prefer that any immigrants, even if all female, to be at least close to average US white and Asian cognitive ability in order to have a decent chance for them and their descendants not to make things too much worse. After all, US women are already net-tax recipients relative to men.
It’s probable that the immigrant women and their daughters (and their combined descendants) would join the Coalition of the Fringes—which would be unfavorable to a “right wing”-er—potential producers of more foot-soldiers in the anarcho-tyranny arc of the United States. Furthermore, even aside from financial economics, there are known downsides, known unknowns, and unknown unknowns with regard to such an immigration policy relative to its benefits, including a re-molding of “culture, institutions, and politics,” as @Walterodim put it.
Assume for the purposes of this argument that the male only border control is fullproof and has no workarounds.
Okay, but at some point not too long ago the concept of women’s beauty pageants and women’s sports were thought to be fullproof with no workarounds, as well.
I was telling my brother about the movie and he said "I reckon there are a lot of very mainstream progressive types who really believe that gay men and gay couples are no different than straight men and straight couples aside from the objects of their attraction, and if they knew the kind of sexual behaviour which was seen as completely normal in the gay community, they'd be horrified."
The 22-year-old Onion article comes to mind: "I'd always thought gays were regular people, just like you and me, and that the stereotype of homosexuals as hedonistic, sex-crazed deviants was just a destructive myth."
The median gay man could, if he so wished, live a life of sexual abundance and satisfaction that would be beyond the wildest dreams of at least a 95th percentile heterosexual male in attractiveness. Having sex in a nightclub bathroom with an attractive stranger is the highlight of your life; for me, those are Tuesdays. This was a concept I put to use in the day, transitioning her group to a gay nightclub if I needed to shake-off the gay friend(s) of a girl I'm trying to bang.
It's not uncommon, nowadays, in various spheres of the internet to see young straight men wishing they were gay, both ironically and unironically and anything in between; as well as gay men of varying ages gloating and/or being relieved that they don't have to deal with and jump through hoops for women in romantic/sexual settings: "Look what they [straight men] need just to mimic a fraction of our power."
We may be at an interesting time where a greater percentage of young straight men wish they were gay than where young gay men wish they were straight.
Where's the part where she hit the gym, started dressing better, and practicing social skills that will make her attractive to men?
It's always amusing when "Women are human beings; men are human doings" emerges organically/unwittingly.
There was a post high up on reddit featuring a clip from Jack Reacher season 2's opening, where a man deduces that a woman in front of him at the ATM is being held hostage by a carjacker. For extra morality simplification in case the audience is thinking too hard, her kid is in the car too. The hero then walks over, smashes the window, and beats the shit out of the carjacker. Very cathartic, and the reddit post is titled as something like this is every guy's fantasy.
My fantasy is keeping myself out of trouble and to avoid injecting myself in such situations so that I can live to die another day. I rather enjoy living and having my body bereft of stab wounds and bullet holes. A random woman certainly wouldn’t reciprocate to provide free protection services if the situations were reversed.
Well, this is very dramatic, but I'd rather wish more lower-level heroics took place. Instead of beating up a carjacker to save a child, can we have a hero who beats on the door of the reserved parking spot thief and leave a note that says to never intimidate the poor woman ever again?
I’m more than down with normalizing vigilantism against antisocial behavior in the spirit of a general “fuck around and find out”edness. It should be open season for motorists to provide mostly peaceful love-taps to groups of “teens” riding their bicycles dangerously in the streets, for storeowners or third-parties to Rooftop Korean-away looting flash mobs like the compound outbreak scene in 28 Weeks Later. In the current state of affairs, this is largely restricted by Who? Whom? concerns, as a certain NYC subway marine found out the hard way.
However, I don’t like the gender-biased nature of it. Women already feel entitled to random men serving as their white-knights, meat-shields, and bodyguards; I’d prefer not to exacerbate that. If women are to be regarded as Strong Independent #GirlBosses with the rights and status of men, they can solve their own problems and fight their own battles. Fists, knives, and bullets hurt men too. I’m not a fan of Schrodinger’s feminism, where women are #GirlBosses one moment and damsels in distress the next, depending on what’s more beneficial and emotionally convenient for them.
If the Reddit woman in her 20s or 30s were instead a small man in his 20s or 30s, hardly would anyone call for a “hero” to step-up on his behalf. Beating on some hot-head’s door may result in it opening for a fist or knife fight. Who knows what might happen to your defeated body if you lose the fight. If you win, it may result in protracted legal, social, and professional troubles, especially if the hot-head is a member of a favored class. It’s also a great way to get yourself shot right through the door. You’d deserve it too for white-knighting, fucking around and finding out, when you’re not a peak human with borderline supernatural powers like Jack Reacher.
If she were my daughter, I think my system-level advice would be to try to escape that environment entirely, which might mean moving to a safer city/town, or paying more to go to a higher end apartment complex, etc.
Yes. To paraphrase Steve Sailer, the tough part of being poor in Western countries is not for lack of essentials or material goods, but rather having to live next to other poor people. And violent, low impulse control, and generally antisocial behavior is far more common among the poor.
In this specific case, the reddit thread mostly has people suggesting she call the apartment complex to tow the car next time this happens, and to file a complaint so there is a record of potential violence and intimidation. Another upvoted comment says to put up a camera near her car so she'd know if he retaliates, maybe by keying her car or something.
If moving is not an option, these are reasonable solutions for a woman (or a man, for that matter).
Chinese surveillance / social credit state. Use technology and broad public support to directly manage against low level offenses.
The cure might be worse than the disease here. The surveillance and social credit system could be readily turned against you in anarcho-tyrannic fashion.
Japanese homogeneity. Stop outsiders and troublemakers from entering society. Then in this cohesive society, everyone pitches in to punish low level offenses without the additional complication of being accused of discrimination.
Without mass deportations (or something more... drastic), the ship has already set sail on this front in the United States and Europe. Eugenics would work, but might take too long depending on what degree of eugenics is deployed, even if it somehow could be.
Semi-failed state where the stakes are high for low level offenders themselves. Some guy parks in your spot? Shoot up his car windows. No legal consequence will come because that's considered a misdemeanor here. Perhaps things escalate, but perhaps not, but at least he won't park in your spot again.
Tempting, but escalating when you’re less crazy and have more to lose than your opponent is a risky venture, to say the least.
Surely a rich society has a fourth option?
Calling for and voting in a manner for politicians, DAs, and the police to just do their jobs. For a Reddit woman in her 20s or 30s, chances are this is a leopard-eating-her-face situation.
Worse, once they are discarded by these better men, they are unlikely to want to settle for worse options.
At least one paper found confirmation for the notion that—not only do discarded women not settle—they take out their frustrations on lesser men: "Rejection by an Attractive Suitor Provokes Derogation of an Unattractive Suitor."
It is hard to form a secure attachment with a woman if you're not the best person she has ever dated.
Indeed, hence the notion of an alpha-widow and the risks of trying to turn a hoe into a housewife.
An alpha might not even be necessary: A woman with a long sexual history may subconsciously or consciously find you to be dissatisfactory as a partner if you're not in the top X_i percentile of each attribute i (e.g., height, looks, income, etc.) among her exes, fuck buddies, and one night stands, even if none of those men are particularly remarkable individually across all attributes. Not even Chad can compete against Stochastic FrankenBrad.
Is this "pressure" or is it playful banter that both parties are enjoying
Yes.
Russell conjugations all the way down: He pressured her; you convinced her; I charmed her.
Regardless of the particular example and whether it be arranging the first date, having sex for the first time, or anything in between, the choice of verb to describe the same words and actions from a man can be determined and redetermined retroactively by a woman based on how she feels about the man at the time of the retroactive (re-)determination.
Women generally don't like to take ownership of their actions in the dating/courtship process. This kind of ambiguity, plausible deniability, and ret-conning of their Lived Experience is a feature, not a bug, and helps their ability to say "omg it just like happened" and protect their sense of Wonderfulness.
Sloot
8mo ago
My favorite politician pseudonym is “Carlos Danger,” to the extent that I can recall it faster than “Anthony Weiner” (which already sounds like a pseudonym in itself). It’s so cheesy yet awesome and memorable; I love it.
How awful and disgusting. Does anyone know where else on the internet race realist blonde chicks in their late teens to early 30s hang out? Just so I know which places to avoid.
drops the Finnish n-word several times (it's a linguistic question whether that word is the equivalent of English n-word or the word "Negro", but these are angry enough one might say it's the former in this context), as well as talking about a Middle-Eastern man as a "Turkish monkey or whatever", as well as uses some more creative (common in the Finnish racism community) slurs, such as the ones translating to "mocha dicks", "somps" (Somali + chimp) etc.
marsey_taking_notes.jpg
“Somp” has the added bonus of sounding like the name of those angry grey spiky cubes that try to smush you in Mario games.
Purra has copped to being "riikka", and while she originally commented this by saying "there's nothing to apologize or explain", she ended up apologizing and saying that of course the government or she don't tolerate racism and so on.
maybe you already have a bunch of groypers in America making edgy jokes on Twitter or wherever who will have to eventually explain that stuff 15 years from now when running for Senate or some other high post
Well Riikka was unusually bad with her opsec, using her real-life nickname and leaving copious details about her life in time and space that could be confirmed. Not posting about your personal traits or your location is a good start; some even advise to imply false details about your life to throw potential priers off your trail. This is why I never posted much about the Rotherham scandal when it occurred, despite it being the city where I was born and grew-up before I left for uni in London as a 5’5” 120 lb woman.
The guy: “Yeah I was definitely out jogging and totally not lying on my couch in sweat pants and a t-shirt mass-texting chicks hoping one bites. This one bangable cougar sent me slutty photos of her in a tub so I immediately diverted my ‘jog,’ drove near her place, parked my car two blocks away and walked over for the slumpbusting lay-up.”
I wanted to add a follow-up to @KMC 's comment, where he beat me to pointing out the straw-man.
Sex differences do confer tremendous advantages for the median male over the median female in sports. For example, one well-cited study suggested: "The results of female national elite athletes even indicate that the strength level attainable by extremely high training will rarely surpass the 50th percentile of untrained or not specifically trained men".
The difference in athletic distribution between males and females is so great that not only is the combined distribution bimodal, it's qualitatively different. Given tail effects and a roughly bell-curve distribution, this competitive advantage is only exacerbated at the tails.
It's basically a dog-bites-man story nowadays each time some regional-level mid-teens boys team defeats a professional, even-Olympic-level, women's team. Hockey and football/soccer have provided a regular reminder.
Aside from mandatory PE classes, throughout my teenage years I rarely played any sports with girls due to the gulf in athleticism between teenage boys and girls. The limited times that I did was generally because a local girl's team was competitive on the national-level, and thus invited a given team of mine for a friendly to help them prep in giving them better competition than a local girl's team could.
We'd be instructed by our coaches and asked by the girls to play normally, but it was tough. We would basically treat the girls as fine china, playing tentatively and being extra careful not to hurt them. Chivalry runs deep. It felt weird playing in a friendly against opponents who were, on average, so much smaller, slower, and weaker than us. They even seemed to have slower reaction times, like they were running on constant lag. Maneuvering or dribbling around the girls wasn't all that more difficult than doing so around traffic cones.
It would quickly devolve to us going 1 on N_sport against them on offense ("your turn" then "my turn" to solo and shoot), and 0-2 on N_sport on defense (we'd lazily jog or walk back), where N_sport is the number of players typically on the court/pitch/field/or whatever, depending on sport. Our coaches would typically reduce the numbers of players on our side until the play became more balanced. It'd generally have to get under 0.5*N_sport until things got more interesting.
In a brighter timeline, “gender-affirming care” would refer to men going on TRT or doing a steroid cycle. “Yeah bro, I’m undergoing some gender-affirming care. Currently on 500mg Test a week and 50mg DBol a day.”
Sloot
4mo ago
I really do feel bad for Joe regarding Hunter. He doesn’t appear to have been a particularly awful father.
Speculation: As a toddler, Hunter might have received lifelong mild brain damage from the accident that killed his mother and sister. Wikipedia notes that, “Beau suffered multiple broken bones while Hunter sustained a fractured skull and severe traumatic brain injuries.”
Masterpiece of a stacked bar chart.
Look at that subtle axis breakage, the tasteful placement of it. Oh my god, components are even split out into different columns.
The AI-art naysayers are right; there’s no way AI can generate art with this much soul and creativity.
More options
Context Copy link