A (supposedly) female reader got very upset after reading my article “The Plummeting Price of Pussy“. She writes:
You guys are a bunch of sexless incels. By the ignorance of your sexist conversation none of you get regular consistent sex. It’s like the blind leading the blind with these comments. Sound like a bunch of bitter cocks. Try talking to guys who are desired and are great at sex. Who are not misogynistic and not more familiar with their palm than with Susie. Normal men do not think like this. Just the dejected and under sexed. You guys are dinner and a show.
Is it just me or does she sound like a meme? I can almost hear Terrence Popp aping her, in particular the “bunch of bitter cocks” part. Anyway, let’s pick her comment apart. Ignoring all the spewing of hatred towards men who do not want to fuck her, a few factually completely wrong statements remain.
First, the number of men who are desired and great at sex is small. Let’s revisit the “great at sex part” later and help this misguided woman’s argument by enlarging the set of men to those who are merely desired, regardless of whether they are great at sex or not. What those men have in common is that they invariably end up having a very dim view of women. If you are not a Chad yourself, just try picturing you are one: women proposition you and women have sex with you quickly. That’s all great, right? Well, if you don’t think past getting your rocks off, then maybe. Yet, what you will also learn is that a lot of those women openly cheat on their boyfriend or husband. You don’t need to bang a lot of women in some dingy bathroom stall while their “betabuxxing” boyfriend is trying to order drinks at the bar but getting ignored before you end up detesting them. What you hear out of the mouth of women has the potential of making you want to quit pickup altogether and just bang hookers.
Most men have both the power of introspection as well as the ability to look beyond their own, meagre existence. The same woman who tells you that you don’t have to care about her boyfriend or that she’d dump him if you wanted to commit to her does not just appear to be some kind of outlier to you, particularly after you have encountered more of them. The first time some slut takes off her engagement ring, saying that “it’s not cheating if I’m not wearing his ring” you may chuckle. The next time some other slut says something comparable, your view on women may have gotten a lot worse already. Then you may abstract from your current situation and realize that you are witnessing a basic female trait: wanting to fuck the most desirable guys. Unfortunately, this is not the end of it. Because your inner life does not completely resolve around yourself and the kind of solipsism that is often attributed to women is completely foreign to you, you also realize that if you indeed dated such a woman, she may cheat on you the exact same way she is now cheating on her boyfriend because once he has committed to her, he is seen as the safe option as opposed to a wild stallion.
You may be a great guy and she may be really into you. Yet, other tall and handsome guys have big dicks, too, so while you’re chilling with your bros, she may be on a night out with her girlfriends, getting railed by a guy who may objectively not even be as attractive as you. Yet, she is disloyal and horny, and you are not there while that other guy is, so she just sucks his dick because it does not count if she’s only acting on her horniness, and him fucking her didn’t count either because he did her from behind and she was not looking at him. Yes, women really tell that kind of bullshit: they love their boyfriend, but with you it’s just lust, so it’s not cheating. How can you end up not detesting such women?
Second, the “great at sex” part in that reader’s comment is a great example of female solipsism and the inability to see beyond their own very limited horizon. Sex feels great to a woman if you are good looking. Sure, there is a certain level of skill involved in fucking, but this is nothing compared to the physical reaction she has to you before you put your dick in her. Have you ever had a woman orgasm before you even touched her? This happened to me twice. They were so horny and the sexual tension so strong that they just couldn’t control themselves anymore and just came. They also seemed to have enjoyed sex with me a lot, despite the fact that, back then, I was only starting out and not particularly good at sex yet, in my opinion. That did not matter to them.
Third, even normal men have started to realize that the real nature of women is far from the women-are-wonderful bullshit mainstream media is feeding us. The Old Testament, the Koran, or any other ancient text somehow is a lot more insightful regarding the true nature of women than our feminized media. As it turns out, the brainwashing is no longer working reliably. It is all due to women collectively overplaying their hand. Effectively, the first generation of women was able to royally fuck over men, that was when no fault divorce with lavish alimony was first pushed through. That was in the 1970s and 1980s. In the 1990s and 2000s, female abuses of men got a lot worse and more widespread. More and more men got burnt. However, this also caused much more awareness of this problem. Men began viewing women a lot more critically and, indeed, increasingly as a liability. Now, in the 2010s, the tide has turned. You find countless young men who have no interest in dating because they have seen their fathers and older brothers getting destroyed in family court. Those are today’s “normal men”. Yet, those men are better off on their own than women are, simply because men are a lot more likely than women to have hobbies and personal interests. How many women do you know who can hold their own in a conversation or who have mastered some skill they pursued on their own? No, some boomer-parents pushing little Stacy to lean how to play the violin does not count.
Lastly, this reader gives us further ammunition for refusing to date the common Western whore and only use her for sex. She writes that we are “a dinner and a show”, i.e. she views men she does not sexually desire as a resource to be financially exploited. Men have been catching on to this as well, which is why, as many women complain online, dating is dead. You will find few men nowadays who are willing to pay for dinner in a nice restaurant. Today’s dates consist of a cup of coffee at Starbucks. Men are willing to invest a few dollars in a woman. I don’t know how you would interpret this, but I’d say that this is a clear indication that the price of pussy has dropped like a rock.
Did you enjoy this article? Excellent! Here are some further steps to consider:
1) If you want to read more from Aaron, check out his excellent books, the latest of which are Sleazy Stories II, Sleazy Stories III, and Meditation Without Bullshit.
2) Aaron is available for one-on-one consultation sessions if you want honest advice.
3) Donations for the upkeep of this site are highly welcome.
The worst opinions about the female gender I ever heard all came from Chads. I’m talking charismatic male models. In any niche you go to, if you find the guy who bangs the most women, you’ll find he has the lowest opinion of women.
I found it interesting and noteworthy, that you mentioned the Quran as one of the ancient texts in your (once again) spot-on, astute essay
In 2015/16 out of personal private interest I read and intensely familiarized myself with the core muslim texts (qura, the strong hadiths, the sirra and the codex of the sharia. No, not “online”. I own those texts in authoritative, printed editions and worked them through.). I guess I wanted to intellectually substantiate my deep latent notion of towards the religion of Islam and the “culture” associated with it. And now I now why. 😉
And the only aspect about Islam that I sort of “respect” or can “accept”, is its basic notion about the nature women. “Islam is right about women.” To the generic woke specimen this phrase might come as quite a shock and isn’t it fun how cognitive cognitive dissonance works? People will they try to say it’s “hate speech” but since they themselves put muslims at the top of the victim pecking order, they can’t without being called islamophobes by other woke leftists. Muahahaha. Have a look at thir real treat and giggle: “Controversial Signs Posted In Downtown Winchester” https://youtu.be/_FeiIs4hN14
(No, unfortunately it wasn’t me who put up those signs in Masachusetts. But I certainly would have.)
I’d say when the police are investigating a piece of paper on a lamppost, then you know you’re winning.
I’m only curious about how the “Islam is right about homosexuality” flyer campaign might be received…
The sentence in the se k d paragraph of my post was supposed to read:
“I guess I wanted to intellectually substantiate my deep latent notion of contempt and disdain towards the religion of Islam and the “culture” associated with it. “
How did your research affirm your disdain and contempt for Islam?
Also given what you know on the subject, would you recommend Tommy Robinson’s “Mohammed’s Koran: Why Muslims Kill for Islam”? I’ve been sitting on it for a long time now, not sure if it’s worth the time. My impression of the book’s main selling point is that the Koranic verses are chronologically ordered to prove that the religion is inherently violent, i.e that the preachings of peace are always overridden.
It seems as if homosexuality has been losing its privileged status. In the oppression olympics, women are on top, everything foreign is second, trans-sexuals are third. Mere homosexuals are basically paleo-conservatives. There are plenty of attacks against homosexuals committed by muslims. Yet, mainstream fake-news media do not perceive it to be noteworthy, and if our most-favored muslim neighbors attack a Jew, it’s a case of “right-wing violence”.
I have no love lost for Islam, but I will admit that i have met several women raised with such background that I would consider good marriage material.
@ Sleazy’s wife:
„How did your research affirm your disdain and contempt for Islam?“
Well there are several aspects for this, but the main one is based in logic. As you will certainly know the fundamentals of what we know to day as the science of logic and how to discern (if possible) „true“ statements from „false“ ones have been laid out by Aristoteles. Aristotelian logic is one of the pillars of everything we have around us and responsible for the progress of humanity. One of the most shocking insights I had was that Islam deliberately does NOT follow the Aristotelian concept of logic. If A is the opposite of B and A is false then B might be true. But in Islam depending on the circumstances according to its ideology both A and B can be labeled „true“ at the same time, even if (or even so) they are opposites. This is of course part of the “taqquiya” concept of deception and subversion and also one trait of Islam’s overall inherent brutality towards anything of real value.
The core concepts AND the fine details of canonized Sharia law are simply ridicolous and absolutely shocking and they pertain to literally any aspect of human life. This “culture” stifles and destroys human civilizational progress. The amount of classic European knowledge destroyed by Islam is massive.
Then there are the casualties Islam has been producing for 1400 years worldwide. It is a sight of unspeakeable horror and subjugation.
Islam also destroyed the Graeco-Roman empire in 1453 (a fact I take particular grievance in) and turned Constantinopolis into something it was never meant to be … etc.
„Also given what you know on the subject, would you recommend Tommy Robinson’s “Mohammed’s Koran: Why Muslims Kill for Islam”? I’ve been sitting on it for a long time now, not sure if it’s worth the time. My impression of the book’s main selling point is that the Koranic verses are chronologically ordered to prove that the religion is inherently violent, i.e that the preachings of peace are always overridden.“
I own several books of critical and scholarly analyses, most of them in German. I’m not familiar with Robinson’s book, though. The basic premise as you describe it is true. The Quran itself is an almost unreadable piece of rubbish. This is in part due to the “redactions” which were made to it in Baghdad in the 8th century, when it was put into its present form of deliberate disarray, when the verses were chronologically mixed-up and were declared “perfect” in this shape so that analysing and unterstanding the book would become almost impossible. Several authors have reconstructed the chronological order (e.g. Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam) of the sures and connected this chronology to the biography of Mohammed. The striking parallels in those two chronologies then completely unmask the quran as nothing but skewered propaganda and an effective tool of this Mohammed guy in his ruthless personal quest for power, violence and control over the fortunes of other people.
From an ideological and or “philosophical” point of view Islam is an eclectic mix of several local tribal Arab cults of the time, awkwardly combined with certain aspects of Christianity and Judaism. (There is an interesting treatise called “The sources of Islam” dating from 1901, by a Christian British Missionary of the time, who within 100 pages does quite a good job in deconstructing the several sources of Islam until almost nothing of original “islamic” content remains. I own it in print, it certainly might be available online). The aspect you correctly referred to is called “abrogation” and war “introduced” by Mohammed in order to conveniently facilitate his authoritarian rule. It is one of the nasty core anti-Aristotelian features of Islam.
@ Yarara: “I have no love lost for Islam, but I will admit that i have met several women raised with such background that I would consider good marriage material.”
Islam most certainly panders to the procreational instincts of women. It has to, because the armies of Mohammad need many soldiers to die for his timeless cause. Unfortunately in Islam marriage is a religious duty, so there would be little to no freedom from the yoke of marriage for single man or women under the rule of Islamic law.
For sure, Western male effemination and the current lack of a male “will to power” with regard to women would be done away with for good in an Islamic society. But – at least for me – that is not enough to make the all other horrible features of an Islamic society even a bit more tolerable (e.g. the end of music and musical culture, no more sports, no appreciation of children and of the idea of childhood, no more irony, no more satire, no more funny jokes, no appreciation for learning & critical thinking… just to name a few) .
Thanks for the long reply. It seems like there’s a lot of truth to the saying that a peaceful/moderate Muslim is only one who isn’t devout enough.
I consider this incorrect. The Koran permits two ways of converting infidels: by force (jihad) or deception (taqiyya). Moderate Muslims practice the latter, but they have the same goal as the vibrant enrichers who commit terrorist acts.
My perception is that a great number of muslims actually don’t really know the core tenants of their religion, or they are only indirectly aware of it. They treat it more like a tradition into which they simply got born into (just like many Christians who are similarly unaware e.g. of the Neo-Platonic Hellenistic rubbish which eventually got incorporated into Christianity early on).
But the psycho-programming of Islam is quite slick! This means: a muslim who is living in a non-muslim world will be by default unable to strictly observe all relevant religious rules and laws as set by Sharia law (which is sunna, i.e. derived from the example of Muhammad’s life and thus the highest guiding principle). Furthermore he might even get “seduced” by some of the sinful things of his non-islamic surroundings (music, alcoholic beverage, porn, sex, critical thoughts etc.). If his religious programming was indeed sufficient enough, he WILL at one point of his life feel terrible guilt and shame for having sinned against the laws of allah. The built-in problem with Islam in such a situation is: there is no guaranteed deliverance from sin. Even if he atones for his sins and from then on obeys all laws religiously (literally), allah may still cast him into the fiery pits of eternal hell for reasons unknown to the individual muslim. But! There is one certain way of atonement which allah does approve after all and which guarantees entry into paradise after death: it is djihad, spreading Islam by all means, either violent or through deception and deviousness.
That is the catchy situation most muslims will find themselves in at some point in their life and it is quite hard to deprogram oneself from this curse, particularly if you grew up inside a “culture” that specifically doesn’t value reading and learning! I always found it to be so absurd: in Islam many children and teenagers are routinely made to memorize the quran by heart. Imagine yourself being forced by society (and under corporal punishment) having to memorize a book, which is written in a language you don’t understand and will never ever use in daily life (ancient Arabic) and which – even if you were able to understand its mixed-up contents – wouldn’t provide you with anything of real life value or insight. Now if that doesn’t get you fed up with books, reading and learning I don’t know what else would.……
If dating is dead, what could/should we do?
@Daniel
How about H&H? (Hookups & Ho’s)
Unless I find some unicorn to settle with long term, my current plan is to do the first until I get too old and undesirable, and switch over to the 2nd… or maybe by then robotics and AI will be advanced enough to make a synthetic companion worthwhile 😂
Classic dating is dead, i.e. the dinner-and-a-movie script. Casually hanging out and banging a slut after a cheap coffee as a gameplan is alive and well.
@Aaron
I am not calling you wring, but have you considered the possibility that you have some selection bias due to the female pool you predominantly tapped into (figuratively and literally).
While my lay numbers may not be as high (upper double digits) as yours, and I have seen most of what you describe in real life, my vision of women is not as bleak as yours.
I very rarely go to clubs. It occurs to me that the club scene exposes you to a somewhat self selected lower standard of women.
I feel the same way. My lay count is ~30. I counted one day while sick in bed, never kept count on purpose, so might have missed a couple. I basically share Aaron’s views, but my sense is that there is a subgroup of superhoes (typically with daddy issues) who are extra-promiscuous and extra-disployal. Other women are also often promiscuous and disloyal, but not to the same degree IMO.
Dealing so much with superhoes may have colored Aaron’s picture of women even darker than it actually is. The hardest thing for any of us is to think outside our own experience.
Yes, there are “superhoes”. However, these are a small minority. In your regular club, you meet plenty of regular women. I’ll expand on the discussion in this thread in a separate post.
I get the sense that women in big cities like London that frequent clubs are probably a world apart from women in my little hick town. However, women from my small hick town still exhibit many of the red flags that MGTOWers like Sandman go on about. So there is definitely something awry with modern women as a whole IMO. Perhaps society was able to subdue the dark side of female nature in the past more effectively, but it’s currently on full display.
I very recently had a married woman (she feels it’s fine because she’s been contemplating divorce) snap chatting me dozens of lewd photos. I was trying to move the interaction towards sex because she is really cute (7/10, mid 20s, petite, augmented tits, bubble butt, long hair, minimal tats) but it seems like she just wants male attention (from me) and won’t take it to the ultimate conclusion (of full on cheating). She did buy me a nice breakfast at least. However, under the exact circumstances, this chick could easily fall prey to Chad in the club and hit up a nice luxarious bathroom stall – I don’t doubt it!
I think a big difference between you and me is that you live in a different culture. I’d argue that in your country, the average woman is a lot more virtuous than the average Western woman. This means that even regular Western women who do not go to clubs may of a rather low quality. In fact, it is often impossible to tell. I met plenty of women who put on a good-girl act but who were whores of a caliber you would not believe.
Thanks for the reply.
More virtuous women in the USA you say? As a whole? Probably in my neck of the woods and many other parts of the country. But maybe places like LA and San Francisco are comparable to…?
I’m gathering that you mean to say that Western European women are far worse than what I have encountered here. If so, then that is pretty startling. I need to get out more.
Oh, that was meant as a direct response to Yarara’s top-level comment. From what I was told, Berlin is worse than L.A. and San Francisco. I only have anecdotal confirmation of that, and second-hand one at that, but both Americans in Berlin and Germans who returned from the United States made such statements.
*wrong!
First sentence meant to say “not calling you wrong”. 🤦♂️
I remember Jordan peterson comment on a promiscious socity it was like “the average guy gets bitter because he gets no action, the super attractive chad gets cynical and women are the biggest losers in the end, altough they’ve been the ones starting this shit”