Open Thread

Open Thread #116

The Open Thread is a place for open discussion among my readers. Post anything you feel like sharing! From now on, the Open Thread will no longer be monthly. Instead, there will be a new Open Thread whenever it is adequate. The stage is yours. Go ahead!

The latest Open Thread is made ‘sticky’ to improve access.

Please consider throwing a few coins into the tip jar, and buy my books! They are great. Your support is greatly appreciated.

65 thoughts on “Open Thread #116

  1. It seems that YouTube is pushing hard for “age verification” nowadays. More and more often do I get a pop up message telling me that the content of the video I’m going to watch is not suitable for minors (unlike all their trans garbage they push on kids, of course) so I should verify my age. I can do so by uploading a picture of my ID or giving them my credit card details. I had to lol pretty hard when I got that.

    Apart from fash wave, there is very little I consume on YouTube nowadays. Looks Maximus is one of the few channels I occasionally watch. I expect him to sooner or later move all his videos to Bitchute, though. On the note of Looks Maximus, I’m more and more convinced that this guy’s channel is only kept alive for plausible deniability, so that YT can claim that they are not rabid censors for kicking off Stefan Molyneux and other huge channels as they let a few channels with a four-figure subscriber count survive. By the way, Looks Maximus tries hard to use coded language like “cunny” for “cunt” or “sloot” for “slut”, but if you pay attention, you catch him slipping up from time to time. Suddenly, he says “cunt”, “bitch”, “fuck”, “nigger” and other banned words.

    1. I also think they let small channels live to keep the plausible deniability.

      As long as the vast majority of Youtube users only watch the approved bluepill/gynocentric channels, these small channels are not a treat to the cultural hegemony of the cultural Marxists.

      One other tactic that Looks Maximus employs, is not calling for actual actions, but speaking in terms of hypothetical realities:

      Instead of

      “we should treat women like X”

      he speaks

      “in an androcentric society, men would treat women like X”

      The second doesn’t fall under the strict definition of “hate speech”, as it is not a direct callout for violence.
      But it is not like they give a fuck about definitions… I think they will just ban him once he reaches a certain viewer count.

    2. Looks Maximus also opposes simp behavior; however, he’ll occasionally advocate for it. For example, he advocates buying worn panties from a teenage girl and smelling them until you get an erection. I’m assuming this is another part of his plausible deniability.

    3. @Herkerderker:

      His panty sniffing makes him more likeable and authentic to me.

      I mean a lot of men probably have some weird fetish, but they would never admit it in public because they lack a backbone.

      And that the smell of a pussy can be sexually arousing is not exactly weird anyways.

      Him doing it online shows that he truly has no problem with himself.

    4. In my view, his panty-sniffing is just a joke. I think hose videos are only a parody of unboxing videos where guys orgastically unbox a new video game or GPU. Therefore, I don’t put much significance to it. It is quite obvious that he is putting on a persona in his videos. Of course, we don’t know how much of it is rooted in his real personality and how much is simply acting.

    5. Yeah I see what you’re saying. Given that he only paid a miniscule amount for it, I suppose it’s not really all that big of a deal.

    6. “I mean a lot of men probably have some weird fetish, but they would never admit it in public because they lack a backbone.”

      Or perhaps they just have some basic social awareness…

      “Him doing it online shows that he truly has no problem with himself.”

      Sounds like mental gymnastics to me.

    7. @bayet: na he has the social awareness.

      In one of his videos he stated that he doesn’t plan to have a family or date women again, so he doesn’t care about his social status anymore.

    8. I listened to quite a few of Looks Maximus’s videos in the background. In one of them he states that his plan is to “rope”. He is now in his 40s and he is also aware of the health risks due to his excessive roiding. Thus, it’s not implausible that he’ll just spend a few more years “cooming in prime slave cunny” before calling it quits. I also recall him stating that he is past his prime already and that he is happy that he has had all those “life-affirming experiences” when he was in his 20s.

    9. True for him then. My comment was more directed at the generalisation to other men not talking about their own fetishes in public though.

    10. Sure I’ll send you my ID. So that you can send over the police to my house when I watch the wrong video. I was laughing so hard when I saw the message the first time. Well, they got a picture from me. I sent them a middle finger.

  2. @Ubermensch

    Are there good german forums and or apps which make it possible to find cheap and good prostitutes / escorts / enjokōsais?

    Most of the local brothels and Reeperbahn establishments are scammers, muggers and cutthroats. Not worth it.

  3. Hi, first off, I don’t want to talk you into anything,
    I have tried it with a few friends, and it doesn’t really work.

    If you don’t have the right mindset, you will most likely not enjoy it.
    You see it with a guy like Lisbon. He fucked 500+ prostitutes (if he didn’t lie
    to us, which I’m still not sure, I think he exaggerated a lot), but
    he still feels like shit.

    So to get into the space where you can actually enjoy it, you need to get the right mindset first. (this took me quite a while, so in the beginning of my whoremonger career I wasted quite a lot of money on bad experiences)

    I recommend the show “Rome” (has 2 seasons).
    Especially the character of Mark Antony. He is the prototypical masculine man.
    (real masculinity, not the fake masculinity of our current culture, which basically means being a slave to the gynocentric masters).
    Immerse yourself in it. How did this guy think about the world, how did he feel. In the end of the 2nd season he becomes a little bit of a simp, but I don’t want to spoil anything, you will know what I mean.

    And read books about ancient Rome / Greece. Try to see the world through their eyes. I’m currently reading two books, I maybe will post a review here once I’m finished.

    But basically you need to have the capacity to see through the current cultural
    framework of morality. A lot of your beliefs about the world and women are not some inherent hardcoded feature of your brain, but they are just memes of our current culture.

    Also recommend the book:

    https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/36413818-power-nihilism

    (it is about morality and meta ethics, you may ask how this is related to prostitution: a lot of the guys like Lisbon who cannot enjoy prostitution, they are like that because they internalized the current system of slave morality which has the cultural hegemony in the West. You will understand what I mean once you read the book)

    Now, some actual advice:

    Avoid tourist areas. Most of the prostitutes there have a scammer mentality, because they don’t expect to see you again.
    You need to be assertive. The problem is a lot of guys who go to prostitutes have a beggar mentality, they are “thankful” that the prostitute has sex with them because they see themselves as sub humans.
    If you are like that the prostitute will recognize it and try to do as little as possible and get you out as fast as possible.

    In Germany I would go to the FKK sauna clubs. These places are godlike. You can get a true Harem experience in those places.
    (user Looks Maximus on Youtube would call this a “life affirming” experience)

    It works like this: You pay the entry fee (which is ~50€ in most places) then inside there is a Sauna, buffet, sometimes a pool, and lot of hot girls walking around naked.

    When I go into such a place, I imagine myself as an ancient Roman emperor, going into his Harem of obedient sex slaves.
    How would this guy treat the girls. How would he let himself treated by them.
    Would this guy think “I’m a sub human who has to pay for sex” ?
    What would this guy think when he sees a hot girl? Would he think “oh I hope she likes my face, I hope my dick is big enough” ?….probably not.

    You see what I’m trying to get at here:

    You need to be in the right head space to enjoy the experience.
    If you are a guy like Lisbon, and you are thinking “omg I’m such a loser I have to pay for sex”, you
    won’t enjoy the experience, and it might actually make you feel more bad.

    And don’t expect too much of your first experiences (if you want to go down this path). It took me almost 20 years to reach my current mindset.

    Again, I don’t want to talk you into anything. If you have a different brain structure than me, you might not be able to enjoy it as much.

    1. modest entry fee. how much do the naked girls want for sex once you’re in there?

    2. In most of these places you get a full service session (30 minutes) which includes blowjob without condom, cuming in her mouth, sex, kissing for 100€
      But again if they think you are a beta pushover, they might try to charge you much more.

    3. @Aaron: Currently I’m reading and am ~2/3 in these 2 books:

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/91017.Rubicon

      This I read mostly because it is about the same timeframe the show “Rome” is also about, and I wanted to check how much the show was true to the real events. Was a very enjoyable read so far. I’m also even more impressed now by the show, especially the display of Roman culture was quite accurate.

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/46113446-der-faszinierende-alltag-im-r-mischen-reich

      Also very enjoyable. It is about how the life was in the Roman empire for different persons like soldiers, slaves, women, farmers, merchants and so on.

      In the past I read 2 other books, one I don’t remember the title, and I tried to read

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/19400.The_Decline_and_Fall_of_the_Roman_Empire

      but my English was not good enough at that time, so I gave up in frustration, but plan to read it again but it is a huge task.

      I also read 2 books by Seneca about stoic philosophy, which is related to the morality which was common in the empire.

      In my current backlog, next entries will be:

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/29022.The_Twelve_Caesars

      and this

      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/261243.History_of_the_Peloponnesian_War

      Also plan on reading the originals by Caesar and Cicero but I find reading the old language very exhausting, so I need to get my motivation up first.

    4. Thanks for the recommendations. Gibbon’s The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire has been on my reading list for probably over a decade now. I think I will check out all those books. If I recall correctly, I read either part of Thucydides or all of it, but that was about twenty years ago. I read a good chunk of Caesar’s De Bello Gallico in Latin even, and the entire thing in translation.

      I recall that the collapse of the Roman Empire was glossed over by my history teacher. It was apparently not in the curriculum and when asked, that useless parasite of a teacher said it was because of “lead in the water pipes” (lol). Looking back, I find it much more plausible that the leftists in the education industry realized that Rome collapsed due to vibrant diversity, so they just omitted this chapter in history books that had the primary purpose to indoctrinate you. Somehow we covered how bad Nazi Germany was in multiple years and for some strange reason, we had to visit three concentration camps over the years. My faggot teacher told us about the horrible gassings of joos at the concentration camp in Dachau, even though this was a labor camp, and that when we visit, we should display “Betroffenheit” (shock and dismay, but this lacks the implication of the German word, which is closer to “saddened to the core”). What a clown show that was! In contrast, my Latin lessons were such a breath of fresh air.

    5. Thanks for pointing this out. This happened because there are multiple links in your comment. Your comment has been approved, of course.

    6. Guys like Lisbon are not into it for the sex but for the validation. I think guys like that cannot be happy ever. You can think that you are the loser for paying for it, but you can also turn it around. She may be disgusted by your presence, but she has to be humiliated and spread the legs for you – the ogre – because she is too low-life to make a living in a normal way. But this is a mindset that is not available to those approval-seeking submissive types unfortunately and may never will.

    7. @Dude: this is a very good point.
      if you think about it, the most masculine & dominant way to have sex is rape.
      (this is also the most common sexual fantasy of women)

      (for the FBI if you are reading this: I’m not calling out for anyone here to do violent or illegal behavior, so calm down, this is all purely hypothetical)

      In the past when feminists argued “rape is not about sex, it is about power” I always thought this is bullshit.

      I still think it is mostly about sex, but considering that quite often men end up raping women who would not need to (super VIPs, politicians and so on), the power argument also has a lot of merit.

      There is something deeply arousing about forcing a women to have sex with you. It is an act of ultimate dominance.

      And ironically, you can only get this experience if she doesn’t find you attractive / doesn’t want to have sex with you.

      So in a way you can experience this (at least partially) when having sex with prostitutes, but not with “real” women (as long as you prefer not to go to jail)

    8. Rape is, by and large, not about power, it really is about sex most of the time.

      Where sexual outlet is readily available eg where prostitution is legal (and porn widely accesible) sexual crimes go down. There are even a few natural experiments, like some years ago Rhode Island accidentally decriminalized prostitution for a time and the effect was noticeable.

      The “sex is about power” bullshit stems mostly from conflating sexual aggression with a marxist interpretation framework of opressor-opressed classes. It is assumed that point of the rape is the feeling of “powerlessness” that the victim feels, ignoring the fact that this is a consequence of the violence that is instrumental in forcing the sexual intercourse.

      The work of Katharine Mckinnon, who wrote a book titled “Against our will” did much to further this idea, but it is poorly argued (my opinion) because it relies too much on anecdotal evidence from exceptional circumstances like warfare.

      Once I came a question posed in an online magazine, where someone asked if rape existed among animals. The gender studies “expert” who replied answered that no, because although forced copulation exists among animals, there are no “opressive patriarchal structures of domination” or some bullshit like that among animals, that give rape its meaning.

      For a more scientific examination of the subject, start by reading A Natural History of Rape, by Thornhill and Palmer.

    9. @Yahara: generally agree. We evolved the ability to rape because it was a successful reproductive strategy. No reason to overcomplicate it.

      You seem to have an interesting taste in books. What other books would you recommend (any topic) ?

    10. For early Roman history (the Republic), you can try Theodore Mommsen. Since German is your native language, you can read him for free.

      There are lots of good books on the fall of the Western Roman Empire, just check out wiki on this topic or google the list.

      I am not knowledgeable about Roman history in general, so that is my take.

    11. @Cuong:
      What exactly do you mean with ” Gibbons is hopelessly dated.”

      For me, history is 2 parts:

      – getting reliable sources
      – interpreting the sources

      So when you say Gibbons is outdated, do you mean new sources were discovered, or that the interpretations changed?

      In our current culture there is a big trend to rewrite history to fit a political agenda, so that’s why I’m always concerned when people say that some part of history is outdated now.

      Of course I’m aware that the text of Gibbon is biased, but how do you know that other texts are not biased as well?

      And I’m reading for me enjoyment mostly, to immerse myself in a different time and culture. 100% accuracy is not required, I prefer a readable text over it.

    12. An example:

      In the current book I’m reading
      https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/91017.Rubicon

      the author points out in the beginning, that it is not clear to historians, if Caesar really crossed the Rubicon, and in what year.
      It is not even 100% clear which river was the Rubicon. (and if it still exists, because it was a very small river, more like a tiny stream)

      But, this is not important to me. When I’m reading the book I’m aware that a lot of the details are not as exactly as they happened.
      But it is very exhausting to read a book in which every 3rd sentence is like “but according to this source… blabla”.
      I want this stuff to be in the footnotes at best, but not in the main text.
      (basically, I want to read it like a narrative, a story)

      And I mean you can never get 100% accuracy anyways, the sources are way too limited and too biased for that. So it will always be part myth and part facts.

    13. So @Cuong Quoc Vu, I think your arguments are valid from a historian point of view, but from a layman point of view, they don’t really matter that much.

    14. “So when you say Gibbons is outdated, do you mean new sources were discovered, or that the interpretations changed?”

      Both, Gibbons wrote his history in the 18th century. Plenty of new materials have been discovered since then. Even Mommsen could be said to be dated, but he was much more knowledgeable than Gibbons. His work on legal history of Rome is still relevant and quoted.

      “In our current culture there is a big trend to rewrite history to fit a political agenda, so that’s why I’m always concerned when people say that some part of history is outdated now.”
      That is not just a modern tendency. It also exists in ancient or medieval historiography as well. The task of modern historians is to decipher and reveal these tendencies.

      Take, for example, the field of history of mathematics. Naturally, this field is much less susceptible to biases. Yet there are also unverified claims propagated in this tiny field. For example, the claim that 18th century mathematicians thought that all continuous functions are differentiable (counterexample is the Weierstrass function). Modern historians such as Viktor Blasjo, who have dwelt deeply into primary sources, assert that no such assertions are found in the works and correspondences of the titans of this era (Euler, Daniel Bernoulli, Lagrange, D’Alembert,…)

      “Of course I’m aware that the text of Gibbon is biased, but how do you know that other texts are not biased as well?”
      That’s your job to find out. Naturally, after reading and comparing many books, you will see the biases expressed in Gibbon’s work.

      “And I’m reading for me enjoyment mostly, to immerse myself in a different time and culture. 100% accuracy is not required, I prefer a readable text over it.”
      Then don’t take that text and discuss online because you will propagate dated or wrongful interpretation online. Have a look at historum.com forum for discussion on Gibbon’s work.

  4. In the last open thread I had a short discussion with Ubermensch about the movie Gone With the Wind. I mentioned how I hated the Scarlet O’Hara character, and Ubermensch made an interesting point about machiavellianism. That Scarlet had the admirable trait of doing what she had to do to survive.

    I understand this, which is why many gravitate to Scarlet. However my worldview is that you can be tough as nails, a survivor, yet still have empathy. Something Scarlet seriously lacked. Here is a scene from two characters that embodied these traits in the movie, Rhett Butler and Belle Watling:

    https://youtu.be/p64b6FSMJMI

    1. As someone who is low on empathy myself, I didn’t see her as bad because of that. If I was a beautiful woman in an harsh environment, I would have acted like Scarlet.

      My general opinion about empathy:

      It can be good as long as it is mostly directed at people close to you and your ingroup.

      When empathy is expanded to include everyone, including rapists and leeches and parasites, it becomes pathological, and the results of that we currently see in the West.

      Millions of low IQ savage immigrants flooding Europe, and all because we are such moral and empathic people, who need to help everyone. Clearly it is our responsibility to give free stuff to those people, they clearly deserve it.
      If they rape our women, it is just because the systemic racism in our society oppressed them, they didn’t have any other choice. Now go pay more taxes for more cultural improvements. And if you don’t like it, always remember that is because you are a selfish asshole 🙂

    2. I also love it how the mainstream turns the perpetrators into victims whenever it suits them. When a Muslim, Hispanic, or black person wantonly kills someone white, it is the former “communities” who are now “afraid of a racist backlash”. It reminds me of a certain tribe that is said to cry out in pain as it strikes you.

    3. Also, Scarlet did lack empathy for her in-group. Both before and after the war.

    4. “Scarlet did lack empathy for her in-group”

      yeah if I reconsider, she didn’t even care about her daughter, which puts her more on the narcissistic bitch side.

      “What did you think of Rhett Butler?”

      Liked his character. But he was simping a little bit too much for my taste. But the end saved it. Also if we consider it in the context of the time, it was probably quite normal. Women were still feminine and chivalry still made sense.

  5. Aaron made a comment, that the current obsession men have with their dick size, is a true sign of their total pussyfication.

    I 100% agree with this.

    If you think about it, dick size doesn’t really matter for the man (unless you have a real micro penis, so that you cannot penetrate a woman, but this is a very rare condition). It only matters for the enjoyment of the woman.

    If you look at statues of ancient Greeks, like this:

    https://howtotalkaboutarthistory.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/david_von_michelangelo.jpg

    Most of them have small/average penises.

    This tells us a lot what those men considered important.

    Having an athletic body and muscles was important, because the ancient societies needed warriors to defend themselves and to conquer other cities.
    Weaklings could not be tolerated in such a society.
    Having a big penis on the other hand was not important to them, because women didn’t have the power of choice. The sexual desires of women were not a consideration at all.

    Now in a broader context, I think the entire talk about sex is very gynocentric now.

    Rape:

    In our current culture, the meaning of rape is, when a man fucks a woman against her consent.

    But in ancient society, the meaning of rape was totally different, it was when a man fucked the woman who belonged to another man. Basically, it was a form of property damage. It had nothing to do with the consent of the woman.

    Premature ejaculation:

    The current meaning is, if the man cums before the woman has an orgasm. He came “too early”.

    The original meaning was, if you came before you even put your dick into the pussy. (which obviously is a problem because it doesn’t lead to impregnation)

    Lasting long:

    This is now considered masculine, but if you think about it, it makes little sense for a man to last long. He is supposed to blow his load very fast to minimize the risk of getting attacked by someone while he is humping a woman. And that is exactly the reason why most men can orgasm very fast if they don’t actively hold themselves back.

    1. EDIT: the statue I posted was not from the ancient Greeks, but I saw such statues in real life when I was in Rome/Athens, and they look very similar to the one I posted, and all of them had quite small/normal penises

    2. I can orgasm in under 10 mins consistently with masturbation, but sex takes me close to an hour. I wonder if losing my virginity late in life/christian upbringing have to do with it.

    3. Why is it that we cum quicker with masturbation vs sex? Is it because “nobody can love you like you love yourself?” I remember this Syrian dude that said. “No girl as hot as my imagination. No pussy as tight as my hand. ”

      Feminist propaganda says that premature ejaculation stems from adolescence. That teen boys feel scared and try to jizz quick before they get caught. Fucking lol. Everything they believe in is dreamt up.

    4. I wouldn’t necessarily deduce from a statue that the men they depict, or purport to depict, have small penises. You notice that the male and female physique is generally idealized in sculptures whereas it is quite unlikely that all those Greeks and Romans looked like Gods walking the Earth. It is more likely, as you also state, that penis size was not nearly as important as being in good shape.

  6. The vaxx isn’t very popular. In Berlin, “hundreds of thousands”, i.e. 630k out of a million residents did not show up for their vaxx shot despite getting a personal invitation:
    https://www.welt.de/vermischtes/article229101699/Impftempo-stagniert-Hunderttausende-ignorieren-Einladung-in-Berlin.html

    This does not necessarily mean that 63% of adults are woke to the globalists gene-therapy program as a significant number of adults in Berlin live off benefits and/or are unable to read German. I think it’s about 1/3. The implication is that people who live off benefits may have a hard time with showing up on time anywhere.

  7. I recently found out that a family friend is getting divorced from his wife. He’s loaded. Millionaire. Good looking dude. We found out that the bitch is addicted to coke and has been physically beating him for years. Mentally was probably worse. We always knew this bitch was just in it for the money. Blonde fake titted Newport Beach girl. Actually of Mexican heritage. We’ll see how the divorce proceedings go.

    1. I’m sorry to hear that. I find it baffling when men don’t walk away. He has endured this kind of treatment for years whereas the sane reaction would be to banish her the moment she steps out of line.

    1. According to the abstract there are “54 million Americans diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder”. I don’t think this is true as this would be roughly 1/6 of the population. If the number is based on speculation and we take it at face value, we are not talking about a disorder but simply personality differences. At the other end of the bell curve, you have 50 million Americans who suffer from “Sportsball Addiction Syndrome”.

  8. Hello Aaron,

    I just read a Reddit post that made me scratch my chin. It was posted in a subreddit for females trying to maximize their dating success. The poster (a woman) asserts that female hypergamy is a myth because “only the top 10-20% of men are equivalent in mate value to 80% of women.” So, in her view the problem is not that women only like the top 20% of men and ignore the rest. The problem is that 80% of men are not date worthy by default and thus unpalatable for the average woman.

    Here are a few additional key points she makes in case you do not wish to read the entire original tex. These points are not word for word:

    – Men are more obsessed with sex than women because the average woman is highly sexually desirable. The average man is a sexually unfulfilling option so women generally do not bother or are dissatisfied.
    – Men are more desperate to find a partner for a relationship than women because men benefit more from relationships than women do. Women tend to improve a man’s life when dating whereas men often drag a woman down.
    – The social construct of men paying for dates is a sort of tax to prove their worth due to the obvious low average value of the gender as a whole. Women pay no such tax because the average woman has high value

    I will reproduce the entire text verbatim below for you and anyone else interested. Be warned. It is a long read:

    (What follows below is a direct copy of a Reddit post written by a woman, for women).

    I wrote the “80% of women are equal in value to 20% of men” post that was mentioned in the podcast.

    A while back I wiped out most of my post history because scrotes were combing through my old stuff to try and dox me. I’m reposting the one about the 80/20 rule, lightly edited to redact some personal info. This was also one of my most controversial posts. The male tears were INCREDIBLE. It got reposted to all of our stalker subs, including the pedo incel furry diaper one, where they urged their users to mass report everything I wrote for “misandry” so… enjoy 😂

    Title: **”Female hypergamy is a lie. The reality is that 80% of women are equal in value to 20% of men”**

    The manosphere likes to point to [studies such as these](https://blogs.sas.com/content/sastraining/2014/10/16/how-do-men-rate-women-on-dating-websites-part-2/) as “evidence” that women are *hypergamous.* 

    The definition of hypergamy is forming sexual attraction only to those with higher status, better looks, and just overall higher value than themselves.

    According to the manosphere, the reason why “average” (translation: ugly) men such as themselves struggle to attract women is because “80% of women only go for the top 20% of men” instead of going for their “looksmatch” (meaning someone of equivalent physical attractiveness), which they claim unfairly sidelines ~~ugly~~ average men.

    #This belief relies on the assumption that both men and women have a similar distribution of attractiveness and overall value.

    #This assumption is false.

    #The reality is actually much simpler: only the top 10-20% of men are equivalent in value to 80% of women.

    Let that sink in: The average woman is quite literally just more attractive than the average man. 

    Don’t believe me? Go to [REDACTED] and compare the men vs women who are rated 5/10. The women who are fives are all gorgeous, the men who are fives look like trolls.

    As a bisexual woman, I’d say approximately 40% of women in my area meet my standards of attractiveness and personal character, whereas maybe less than 1% of men meet the exact same standards.

    The average woman I know (at least in my social circle) has a face and body that is nice to look at, puts effort into her appearance, a warm and inviting personality, good emotional intelligence, at least some education and a job, a clean and well-decorated home, basic life skills such as cooking and time management, a wide variety of interests and hobbies, and a compassionate, loving, and high empathy nature.

    In contrast, the average man nowadays is quite literally the opposite of what I just described. Dad bod despite no children, ugly face, puts zero effort into their appearance, contrarian and offputting personality, poor emotional intelligence, no education and minimum wage job (or no job at all), lives in moms basement or with roommates, filthy living space with zero attempt at interior decoration, struggles with basic life skills, their main hobbies are porn and video games, and a nature that is domineering, hateful, misogynistic, and lacking in empathy.

    #When held to the same standard, it is so obvious that there are far more high quality women than high quality men. The reality is that it is men who are hypergamous. The male sex is the one most likely to pursue a partner with superior value.

    By acknowledging this reality, so many aspects of dating culture just start to make sense:

    **Why are men so desperate to be with women whereas women are just kinda “meh” about men?** Because women have more to offer men than vice versa. Men benefit from relationships more than women.

    **Why are men more obsessed with sex than women?** Because women are AMAZING and having sex with women is AMAZING. Whereas men are “meh” and having sex with men is “meh” [*Edit: I considered redacting this one because it got flamed for being “homophobic against gay men” which is a ridiculous accusation because this is a* ***women’s*** *dating sub. Our audience is women. We aren’t having sex with gay men. This paragraph is obviously not* ***about*** *gay men and I’m obviously not commenting on the quality of gay sex. Like, duh. 🙄 This feedback was just incels tokenizing gay men because they wanna get this sub banned.*]

    **Why are women so much more picky than men? They only go for the top tiny percent of men, but men seem happy with just about any woman?** It is natural for women to expect to be with someone of equivalent value as themselves, and it just so happens that only the top tiny percent of men have equivalent value as most women. In contrast, men are happy with “just about any woman” because even “average” looking women are still quite pretty, whereas “average” men are not.

    **Why should men pay for dates?** To show his date that he is high value, and therefore capable of adding value to her life. Women have so much more apparent value than men that it is practically a self evident fact that women don’t need to go into the first date trying to prove their worth. Whereas men have a much worse proven track record and therefore must put more effort into courtship to prove themselves.

    **Why are women these days so wary and untrusting of men?** Because we *know.* A woman is more likely to improve a man’s life, whereas a man is more likely to ruin a woman’s life. Women give men joy and pleasure, whereas men give women trauma and pain. So, women need to be careful.

    #What are the implications of this?

    **First of all: Ladies, know your worth. Don’t ever let anyone make you feel ashamed about having high standards. Don’t EVER let a man convince you to lower your standards for him. You are an amazing human being just the way you are, and you deserve to be with another amazing human being!**

    **Second, this means that there are going to be a lot of lifelong single high value women, and lifelong single low value men (provided that women stick to their standards and refuse to date down).**

    This is already a growing trend in recent decades. Intelligent and accomplished women are realizing that most men have little to offer them, and that it is better to stay single than to settle for a LVM. Meanwhile, there’s an army of incels, redpillers, and MGTOW dudes who are forever alone because they are too low value.

    This is a reality that is difficult for many people to accept. Humans are social creatures after all, and it is completely normal to crave companionship and intimacy.

    Unfortunately, our society’s romanticized idea of men is largely a fantasy. The men you see in romance novels and hollywood movies do not exist in real life. Most men IRL just want to dominate and use women, and are willing to deceive us and pretend to be HVM as a means to that end.

    Sure, there are a small number of genuine HVM, but revolving your life around finding a HVM is like making a budgetary/financial plan that is dependent on winning the lottery. You can have a wonderfully happy life without winning the lottery, and you can live a wonderfully happy life without a HVM.

    #You may never find a HVM, and that’s okay, your life will still be complete without a man.

    Lastly, I just want to acknowledge that this whole post is probably really hard for most men to wrap their head around. Their misogyny tells them that women have *no* inherent value, so the notion that most women are actually *above* them just does not compute. In general, it is really hard when someone holds up a mirror and you don’t like what you see. I expect that most men reading this are just gonna end up doubling down on their misogynistic worldview, because it is easier to believe comforting lies and blame everyone else but themselves, rather than admit that they are flawed and commit to self improvement. Oh well 🤷‍♀️

    1. While reading this post a mental image came to mind… an image of a hamster furiously racing in its wheel while chugging down red bulls and snorting cocaine….

      The last couple sentences betray a hilarious lack of self awareness.

      I dont feel like doing a detailed dissection of all the nonsense there, but I will highlight a couple points:
      – She does not define what high mate vale means for men and for women, and neither does she acknowledge that men and women are valued by different traits. Notice how she says that “when held to the same standards” more women are valuable than men are… implicit seems to be the notion that men and women should be valued by the same femenine standards.
      – She claims to be bisexual, which may go some length in explaining this. Notice how she says she finds 40% of women attractive based on looks and personality.
      – She does not differentiate between short and long term mating strategies
      – She does not acknowledge the rapidly diminishing mate value of women as they age and hit the wall.
      – her stereotypes for both men and women are risible.
      – If women are happy growing old single, i have yet to see evidence for it. All the evidence that I am aware of in the psychological literature points to the contrary.
      – Notice also the incoherence: telling women that they are amazing “just the way they are” and should not be told otherwise, but this just the way you are mantra does not apply to men.

    2. Methamphetamine is one hell of a drug. That last line was so hypocritical I almost fell out of my chair. This post smells like cat shit. Women are lazy as fuck. They are lazy at work. They are lazy at exercising (until they get older, then it’s too late) and they are lazy in the dating game. The worst was when she claimed that women have more empathy. Fucking LOL!! Today’s Western women have empathy for their children. And oddly, outsiders, which is detrimental for society. That is where their empathy ends full stop.

    3. A lot of women do not seem to have much empathy for their children. A good example are all those famous and not-so-famous Karens who transition their kids to the opposite sex. Also, I would argue that any woman with children who divorces their husband in order to go her own way, with daddy government’s cheques, to have little empathy for her children as they are almost invariably worse off when being raised by single moms.

    4. I also think she was lying about being bi. It gives her the veneer of impartiality.

    5. The women who are fives are all gorgeous, the men who are fives look like trolls.

      This sentence was my favorite part hahahah 😀 Aside from being funny, it’s at the core of her claims.

      She deems women rated as 5 to be “gorgeous” therefore women are more valuable than men 😀

    6. Thanks for posting this. I was unable to make it through the text. She lost me when she claimed that the average woman is basically perfect. This was either written by a troll or by an utterly deluded feminist.

    7. The beauty of this is, these women voluntarily remove themselves from the gene pool because most don’t have children. (or only one child)
      It is like watching evolution in real time.
      Whatever brain structure made them fall for feminist bullshit, will become less common, and whatever brain structure makes a woman adopt traditional roles, will become more common in the gene pool.

    8. I had to wonder if this was a troll as well, so I briefly looked her up on reddit. Given her posting history, she seems to be legitimately deluded as fuck.

    1. @Lisbon: John is a psychopath/scammer. In one of the last open threads there was a discussion about him.

    2. I know.

      Everybody is a scammer in the manosphere.

      Only guy i trust is Aaron Sleazy and FaceandLMS.

      Aaron Sleazy is a nobody, he doesn’t have youtube channel, nothing, just a blog. Aaron Sleazy is underrated.

      Aaron Sleazy was the first guy trying to warn you about pua scam and about Looks. Nobody listened. Back in the days, 2009 I guess?

      John Anthony Lifestyle pays prostitutes from the beginning of time.

      21 Studios / 21 Convention, is the same shit.

      Alex Playing with fire is another scammer too, a chad teaching incel how to get more matches on tinder, 😂.

    3. But one thing you have to kind of admire of John Anthony is, this guy seems to have a lot of determination to run his scam business.
      There is one hot girl who is in a lot of his videos. I would not be surprised at all if she gets a fixed royalty from his profit to pretend to be his girlfriend.
      I mean this is what I would do and I’m only light on Machiavellianism :D.

      John Anthony is basically what you get when you combine high psychopathy with high determination.

    4. @Ubermensch, the content on this site needs to get out there. Dry spells happen. It’s totally understandable instint to go to the internet when you’re unsure how to proceed at anything really. There’s no way guys paying that 5 grand don’t have a voice in their head saying “am i getting ripped off here?”. Sex is a powerful biological driver, and hookers are illegal and frowned upon in so much of the world. Shame on these “gurus” for taking advantage of men. Men need to look out for each other. Not scam each other.

Leave a Reply to Lisbon Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.