Counter-Currents
1,282 words
Spanish version here
A troubling little news nugget sailed across my desk today: For the first time in American history, whites are declining not only as a percentage of the population, but in terms of raw numbers.
The news seems even more dire to me when I consider that the tiny sliver of politically-active men who voice a concern about white demographics seem to hate white women more than even black women hate white women — and black women really hate white women.
Many of these guys display an especially rancid hostility for white women that seems to have emerged from a sense of betrayal. Yes, I agree that white women are being played quite successfully against white men via endless anti-white and anti-male propaganda.
But do you think the best strategy is to alienate them by shooting equally vicious propaganda with a blowtorch from the other direction?
I’m referring specifically to the lonely and toxically bitter unfuckables of the manosphere and their almost comical hatred of women. They act as if it’s women’s fault, rather than their own charmlessness and lack of physical desirability, for why they can’t get laid. Sorry, but it’s retarded to blame feminism for why you can’t score, Beavis. Women became a lot more sexually active as a result of feminism. It must be humiliating to be unable to get laid in an environment when women are far more promiscuous than ever.
Imagine a woman complaining about why she can’t find a man. It would be immediately apparent that her problem isn’t men. So incel, blame thyself.
These types — and it is a type, one that’s been memed into existence — have become the mirror image of ridiculous Andrea Dworkin-level feminists. Some of these Right-wing trad incel types appear to be nothing more than the inverse of ugly radical feminists, blaming the opposite sex for a litany of miseries that are largely self-inflicted. It seems like a lot of these types utterly demonize women in a way almost identical to how rad-fems demonize men.
But how the fuck do you expect to attract a baby-making machine if that’s your attitude toward the machine in question?
Encased in their little virgin bubbles, do these schmucks even hear how ridiculous they sound to others? I might be inclined to feel some empathy for their bitterness and pain if they weren’t so clueless about how to cure it.
They seem to think that if they cry loudly enough online and engage in the occasional mass shooting, suddenly we’ll be back to the days of arranged marriages and universal non-suffrage for women. Sorry, cats, but the pussy’s out of the bag. The mating game is being played on a new battlefield, and you’ll have to change your strategy if you want to have the remotest chance of success. It’s not 1910 anymore, and it’s definitely not 1310 anymore. I realize how many people it pains to hear that, but if you seriously intend to win the game, you have to alter your game plan.
What’s strange is that it’s the “good optics” crowd that is constantly spouting, “Women are subhuman, childish retards who should be rendered mute as they are chained in basements and force-impregnated.” Yeah, that will have the ladies flocking to you. That definitely will appeal to the “normies.” That’s a surefire method for pumping up the white demographics. Yeah, run with that, fella.
“Yes, darlin’, I want you to stay shackled in the basement on a filthy straw bed not fit for a donkey as I forcibly rape you into having 16 babies, continually call you a retarded child who has no place in politics or in making decisions, and hang out exclusively with men when I’m not raping you or belittling you. So when can we meet up for dinner? Hello? Hello?”
If saving the West is your goal and preserving white demographics is essential to the core of your very being, why do so many of you seem to think that bitching constantly about white women is going to help the cause?
Sure, fine, say that women don’t belong in politics. But they are essential to demographics. And if white demographics are crucial to your politics, you’re going to have to appeal to white women.
I hate to be the guy to interrupt your all-male poker party to break the news, but if reversing white demographic decline is your goal, you’re going to need white women. Or at least you’ll need them until top-secret Nordic scientists perfect a Caucasian Robot Womb.
Mind you, I’ve basically built a literary career out of being a misogynist. There are probably few men on the planet who know how supremely awful women can be more than I do. I am acutely aware of how self-centered, infantile, power-mad, unstable, and cruel women can be, and that’s when they’re not premenstrual.
Despite all that, I’d be happy as a clam never talking to another guy for my entire life, but I’d go absolutely howlin’-at-the-moon mad without a woman by my side who loves me. Perhaps I’m atypical, but once I discovered pussy, it was like, “Who needs guys?”
I find something intensely suspicious about post-pubertal male bonding. It’s why I’ve avoided the whole MRA, incel, PUA, and MGTOW worlds — too many dudes. I suspect that any adult male who says he doesn’t need women has either been rejected by women his whole life or is a closet case. But so much of the “Dissident Right” is, both by accident and by design, a gigantic political sausage fest. At least the Left pretends to be nice to women.
The idea that heterosexual men should only use women as cum-dumpsters and towel-folders while spending most of their time around other men seems inherently contradictory. But that’s the odd notion that seems ubiquitous in these machismo-oriented Right-wing political circles — that “being a man” involves “only being around other men” rather than “ditching men for women the moment you get the chance.”
As I’ve previously confessed, I don’t think I’m very good at proposing viable strategies. I think my strength lies in pointing out the flaws in strategies that have already been proposed.
Sure, it’s odd to hear li’l old woman-beatin’ me say that some of these guys take it too far with the woman-bashing. What seems even weirder is that they seem to think they’re going to win the demographics war by aggressively alienating women. If they simply want to spend their remaining days being lonely and bitter video-game players who engage in endless online pseudo-intellectual circle jerks inside their all-male cocoon, then they’re doing it right. But if they sincerely want to find a woman, get married, and pop out kids with her, they are like blind men walking into traffic.
May I be so bold as to suggest another strategy? Instead of constantly waging a doomed counteroffensive, how about declaring a truce?
Rather than telling a woman what she wants, have you ever thought about asking her? Sometimes what they want is demented. That’s when you gently excuse yourself, leave the room, and lock the door from the outside. If they don’t want what you want, move on to the next woman and ask. Keep asking until you find one who wants what you want.
If you’re looking for a queen bee, best to use honey instead of vinegar. If you expect to breed with women, maybe telling them that they’re subhuman she-demons isn’t the best way to go about it. Unless you intend on clubbing them over the head and dragging them into your cave, you’re going to need a bit of persuasion. Of salesmanship. So quit with the ugly jeremiads about Medusa and work on trying to charm Venus.
* * *
Counter-Currents has extended special privileges to those who donate $120 or more per year.
- First, donor comments will appear immediately instead of waiting in a moderation queue. (People who abuse this privilege will lose it.)
- Second, donors will have immediate access to all Counter-Currents posts. Non-donors will find that one post a day, five posts a week will be behind a “paywall” and will be available to the general public after 30 days.
To get full access to all content behind the paywall, sign up here:
Enjoyed this article?
Be the first to leave a tip in the jar!
75 comments
Women are hypergama, and that is a very big problem in a country where men and women have almost the same salary, as they have in many European countries. Another problem is that in the good old days we had lifetime relationships. When the most wanted men were off the “market”, the women could stop dreaming of them and had to look for other men. Nowadays, with all divorces, I think many women are waiting for their “prince” to appear, even if he is married at the moment. The “market” has changed and that is a huge problem. I don´t think that many men have difficult to get an intercourse. They have problem to get a stable relationship and to raise a family. Is is a big problem in Europe today that men, especially working class men, are lonely, but an equally big problem is that many men get Asian women instead of european women. The european women have to a large extent chosen to live alone instead of living with a man who not earning enough money. Many European men, and I really mean many, have then chosen to import an asian woman. In a traditional society the men provided for the women and protected them. In modern society the role of men has been replaced. The women do not feel that they need men any more. Unfortunately, I experience that both men and women have the same attitude to children. They feel that they do not need to get any children. It’s actually an equally big problem as immigration. It is not a minor problem that he immigrants have a significantly healthier attitude to having a family.
This situation also follows from the propaganda millieu in which we are raised. Television, film and books contain no valorization of family formation and home-making, let alone heaven forbid racial purity. Children are indoctrinated about sex and sexuality at a very young age in school but little emphasis is placed on the reasons that sexuality exists. Pregnancy is mentioned mainly as an undesired side-effect which will ‘ruin’ your real reason for living – your career. Certainly no-one must learn of the precipitous declines in female fertility that occur from the late twenties onwards, at least not until they are in their mid-thirties and may have begun to shake off some of the programming.
Well said.
The white men with healthy instincts (but not racially aware) do often choose to go with a feminine Asian woman.
Another problem is the casual sex/hook-up culture which is ironically still promoted by some young men on the right.
White women need more role models and targeted marketing. There are a few already like Brittany Pettibone and Blonde in the belly of the beast. But not enough.
Would it be fair to say that wealth inequality is another major contributor to this problem?
The social engineers have really screwed up our relationship dynamics. But I believe we can social engineer our way out of it.
I do often would love to forward some of Andrew Anglin’s stuff to friends, but even I worry about sounding like a nut because of the way he writes about women. And I truly do not care about sounding like a nut, but some of his “women” stuff is just a bit much. It’s sad, too, because it’s mostly women I would like to share this sort of information with.
“They act as if it’s women’s fault, rather than their own charmlessness and lack of physical desirability, for why they can’t get laid.”
For me, I think the problem has nothing to do with not getting “laid”, because I’m a divorced middle aged father of 2 who never had a problem with the “laid” part. The issue is not lack of sex, but lack of cohesive families and low birthrates.
“Getting laid” implies meaningless hook-up sex. This is exactly what we *don’t* need. This is exactly the PROBLEM. Because meaningless hook-up sex only results in children when condoms break or pill taking cycles get neglected. And even that doesn’t guarantee a cohesive family…in fact, unwanted pregnancies from women you “score” with usually just means a resented child support payment.
Caledonian Scold!
I don’t usually comment but this sentence compelled me to. Goad’s sentiment here is the archetypal boomer response for young guys struggling with women today. They were lucky enough to grow up in a prosperous age still characterized by residual trappings of traditional European society that produced feminine women. Because this system allowed them to “get pussy” or “get laid” when they were young, this means that there must be something wrong with young guys today who are struggling with women.
Truth is, most older men have absolutely zero advice to give to younger guys, who now have to navigate an unprecedented toxic waste dump to try to find a wife. Old guys have no wisdom to contribute because they have no reference point for this environment. An obvious issue is online dating and hookup culture, which is unique to this last decade. Add OnlyFans, where millions of girls are whoring their bodies out the instant they turn 18. A lot of girls would rather be “strong and independent” by selling their pussy online than get married, which is being glamorized by today’s culture and by their peer groups. Tinder and OF have basically destroyed an entire generation of women. Additionally, aside from being pumped and dumped by a multiracial spectrum of tinder hookups, an unprecedented amount of women have been on psychotropic drugs due to clinically diagnosed mental illnesses since their early teenage years, and carry an insane amount of baggage that no sane man wants to deal with. It is also increasingly difficult for strong men to override cultural influences on their women, because men are now competing with pervasive signals from educational and medical institutions to social media. Social media fads, especially those related to woke critical race theory white guilt psyops, have fried young women’s brains.
So while not all women are completely and irreparably damaged, the truth is that it’s genuinely harder to find a wife today, and that millions of young white people simply do not have the opportunities that their ancestors had to form healthy families. Instead of helping young guys work through these new cultural hurdles, older guys would rather tell them that they are losers for not being at the top of the tinder fuck pyramid. You can fuck these neurotic zoomer tinder whores, but good luck making wives out of them. Commentators blaming young guys instead of addressing the quality of young women today are just not engaging with reality.
WRONG! Met my current wife two years ago. Even being Methuselah, I have never had a problem “navigating” the “sexual marketplace,” both the digital one and the real-world one, that so stymies the Young Unfuckables. I was plucking women of all ages like peaches from a tree late into my fifties until I found one gorgeous and noble enough to settle down with.
And since you brought up the “boomer” thing—you fools can’t help it, you’ve been brainwashed into it and don’t even realize it—I’ve never seen a boomer who’s as clueless, dishonorable, or emotionally frail as you digitally raised meme-tards. Maybe if you spent less time playing video games and indulging in whiny, all-male “dissident” online circle jerks about how women are monsters—and more time figuring out how to make yourself appealing to women—you wouldn’t be such griping little twerps. You have no one to blame but yourselves.
I think most of the women you got were Gen Xers, who’d now be over 40. A much easier generation on the margin and women become easier to get in their late 30s according to the OKCupid data. And even if you got millennials, then why the hell would you think millennial men would want to hear about a Gen Xer like you hawking yourself millennial women? If I’m clueless, then I’m not the only one. I mean, if I go for a Zoomer girl, I’ll be apologetic about it.
I like the humorist Goad but not so much the chest beating one. You are famous for humor and not chest beating. You could quip that I’m not famous for anything, which is the sort of humor we’d expect and even appreciate, but for record, I don’t need to be famous. I just need to be right. If dating site data shows a 6-1 ratio of men to women’s interest, if it shows women want to date their father’s salary but in a young man, if data shows an increase in hypergamy, ie, women taking turns with fewer men, if the fact that 45% of millennials are single (how can half of men be incel losers?), the fact that China has no singles epidemic and sons are richer than fathers, the fact that this holds somewhat true for Hispanics in America as their singles epidemic isn’t so bad–if all of this is pseudointellectual, and if dismissing evidence rather than disproving it is intellectual, then I will proudly be pseudointellectual by your standards.
We must decipher the nature of the problem before we can solve it. We need to talk about it online. The problem is collective. It calls for a collective solution in the long run. Not current year appeals. The current year is current but not forever. I’m not saying short term advice is for nil, as I plan to give my own, but this calls for a long term solution. Perhaps wealth controls on rich older men hogging too much money, stigmatizing spinsterhood, regulating income percentile differences by age so they are not too extreme, punishing firms that nepotistically hire petered out Gen Xers over more qualified millennials, publishing all data points in BLS surveys such as to be able to sort people by age, gender, and race to see who’s being overhired, and many other things that can be done to mitigate extreme status differences and ease the singles epidemic.
Listen, if I were too harsh in my analysis of women’s contribution to the singles problem, then I’m sure my objectors appreciate your article, but deep down, I don’t care, because the demographic clocks are ticking–ticking to the sound of Gen-X chest beating.
If you actually cared about data, you’d realize I’m a boomer, not a Gen-Xer. Then again, I don’t ascribe to this tedious idea of “Generational Astrology” that seems to have so many of you in its thrall. The art of seduction is timeless and follows rules that transcend the stale memes of the Sexless Neo-Right.
But what you’re entirely missing is the main point of the article—to snag a woman, scolding her with Excel spreadsheets that attempt to prove why it’s her fault that young men are having trouble playing this age-old game will leave you lonely in a room full of spreadsheets. I’m not portraying women as “victims” at all in this article—just that they aren’t prone to lubricating at the specter of a nerdy scold. Truth.
And regarding optics—incels who buy into this pathetic excuse-making are worse optically, and may even be piling up more bodies in mass shootings over the past few years, than all “wignats” combined.
There is a problem. The White population is collapsing. Probably women at fault as your analytics prove. But Goad is correct on an individual level. Brazen it out and make an individual effort to suavely score and have plenty of children as a result.
Anecdote <> data. Apologies for not finding the not-equal symbol.
This is kind of obnoxious gorilla-suiting. Facially, Mr. Goad is easily in the top decile: not quite an A-list actor or model but probably not far off back in his prime either. How tall is he, 6’3? He obviously has an antisocial disposition, with ZFG being his congenital default, and takes naturally to violence. He’s done time in West Coast state prison where he thrived. He’s also at the top levels of internet famous, which confers turbostatus in some contexts.
On top of other prizes already heaped, his cad lottery win can therefore be recognized by all and lauded.
The above paints a picture of someone who is likely in the 99th percentile in terms of male attractiveness to women. Outliers don’t disprove trends. Mike Tyson not getting beat up doesn’t prove 1980s Brooklyn was actually a great place to raise kids. And Mike Tyson going to visit some poor runt who’s just coming out of a coma with, “just be Mike Tyson, you little thitbird” is less advice than gleeful sadism.
As far as the five words of advice hidden in the second mush puddle of self-righteous vitriol, “make yourself appealing to women”, we must turn to cost-benefit analysis.
First, if you’re a disgusting slob or a twig-armed Antifa recruit, will lifting or biking or running improve your attractiveness? Sure. But it’s not a panacea. It might take you from a 5 to a 5.5. Expecting more is probably unrealistic for most. The same goes for some meek nerd going to jail or hanging out in the projects or biker bars. Bending one’s personality just so slightly towards psychopathy through misadventure, deliberate or not, isn’t a recommendable form of self-improvement. But such things will almost certainly make you harder, violent and more assertive, gems that gleam in a thot’s eye.
Beyond hair replacement therapy — Mr. Goad is among the very few who looks good bald, another sign of elite fitness — little can be done to improve one’s facial aesthetics, the Looks part of the male attractiveness heuristic LMS, and by far the most important in the highly efficient online-dating-mediated sexual marketplace of today*.
It could be argued that self-improvement, including working out, is the very purpose of life. But self-improvement for the sole purpose of gaining sexual attractiveness points is a harder sell. You might go from a 5 to a 6 with herculean effort. But the average millennial woman can snag herself a 7 or, if lucky, an 8 in 15 minutes on Tinder. The latter is what an economist might to as “the better offer”.
What going from a 5 to a 6 will do, however, is drop one’s failure rate from something like 99.9 percent to 99.5 percent. Driving that high failure rate are many social factors over which the individual has zero control, many of which were already insightfully outlined by a commenter above: a hyper-efficient sexual marketplace, women becoming financially independent through state intervention, alpha widowdom and psychological damage from ultra-high partner counts — neurotic vulnerability from a parade of failed relationships coupled with entitled hyperconfidence from having been with hot, rich and high-status men, her yardstick used to judge all present and future partners.
The question arises, is pursuing women worth it given an individual’s specific failure rate, opportunity costs and ultimate chances of success in finding a long-term relationship? This is the subject of Aaron Clarey’s recent essay “The Book of Numbers”. The question is not taken as rhetorical or even variable by the author and is answered with a simple “no”.
A few of Clarey’s calculations are suspect. But the approach is sound, and the numbers are never wildly off the mark.
Hurling clichéd boomertropes like rocks at those being sexually drowned by a ruthless marketplace is only shouting at deaf clouds. Costs that cannot be paid won’t be.
*Fame and wealth, Money and Status in LMS, can overtake looks in importance, but typically only at blowout levels.
This analyses is completely correct, Boomer tries to associate his high level genetic lottery win to all men, and women’s hybristophilic nature to all men, ANOTHER BOOMER TROPE PRovEN right, you are in extreme percentile and women now only care about LOOKS LOOKS LOOKS , please watch tiktok, women tell on themselves. Looks money status is now out the window as they have their own money and past 70k money doesnt make much diff. Looks will also get you status through social media where you can hawk garbage products to women to generate money. And all Looks is GENETIC, which cannot be changed, beside losing weight, you cannot alter your race, your height, there is no gym for your face. There is no such thing as game beside having the ability to speak, its all looks, Goad thinks its his game or other crap that makes him attractive, but his looks are what was handed to him at birth, plus he has a criminal record which in this environment is a plus plus plus. He is not boring poindexter, he is CHAD. The same exact Goad exact face, if he was 5’4 , i bet would not be married. Let alone all the other people who are ethnic, no good face, no height, how are you not boomer again when you compare your great genetics with those with garbage genetics and say try harder. Please tell us! The boomer meme is funny because its true, most meme’s are true which is why they break the propaganda so quickly, exact same reason why the left cant meme because it ontologically cant, because everything they spout is LIES, you cant meme a lie you have to create movies and tv shows and books and news pieces and studies and a trillion dollar industry to enforce the lie, which can be broken with a one sentence meme, cause the lie requires institutional force.
and women now only care about LOOKS LOOKS LOOKS
Unattractive guys blame their looks for their failures.
Poor guys blame their lack of money for their failures.
Lower status guys blame their lack of status for their failures.
In short, women care chiefly about whatever any particular misogynist crybaby believes he doesn’t have.
The simpler explanation, that he’s an insufferable creep with an unacceptably utilitarian and hedonistic approach to relationships, escapes him completely. Yet, we’re supposed to believe these guys have motives that are pure as the driven snow.
Lol, “make yourself appealing to women”, Boomer saying he is not typical boomer meme, while being typical boomer meme. You are the reason we are in this problem, you have no clue, by 18 an avg 6 has been ran through with 8 to 10 bodies, people in college collecting 10 to 20 bodies a semester being even moderately attractive even a 4. You are proposing gynocentrism instead of androcentrism making you the obvious retard boomer meme, this will end as all civilizations have ended, Romans, Etruscans, and all of them, so YES you are the meme, women should bend backwards for men even if they have to snap their spine instead of the reverse , otherwise civilization dies, then they get slaughtered/enslaved. Please tell us how you are NOT the the epoch of the boomer meme.
Please tell ALL of us you aren’t so hopelessly brain-damaged that you misuse words such as “epoch.” The point that keeps flying WAYYYY over your soft virginal heads is that you’re not going to attract women if you come at them like you’re going force them to bend over backwards so much that they snap their spines. Anyone who’s ever had success with women knows you’re going about it all wrong. This is exactly why cluelessly meme-tarded clowns such as you and your hilariously hapless ilk keep failing. It has nothing to do with “androcentrism,” “gynocentrism,” or any other word you learned on an all-male forum that’s going to make every vagina in the world dry up like beef jerky. Reducing such complicated issues into such simpleminded binaries is the core of the problem. Not only that —it’s the fact that so many of you are so developmentally arrested somewhere in your early teens, you seem much more interested in impressing other males than in appealing to women. But no, don’t listen to me—keep hanging out in your all-male e-clubs poking around in the dark and blindly griping about why you can’t get anyone to fuck you.
“Geez, where can I go to figure out why I can’t find and keep a woman? I got it—I’ll go to an online forum filled with bitter men who can’t figure out how to meet and keep a woman, either! YEAH!!!”
I’d actually feel sorry for you sexually handicapped types if your attitude didn’t make that impossible.
I’m going to side with Anon on this one. I find Jim Goad’s commentary of “WRONG” as somewhat arrogant. While it’s great that Jim has been able to find a loving wife many of us are truly perplexed by the dating situation.
I’ll provide some background. I am older (>55) & recently divorced. When I was young & single I moved to a major city, known for its engineering, after finishing my graduate degree. I’m relatively tall, good-looking? (judging from comments), had a nice convertible car & a boat in a private marina. I also had a good job and eventually my own consulting company and worked out seriously at the gym doing cardio & wt lifting. Also, I had (& still do) a lot of interests and didn’t just go to bars. Yet for the 1st 4 years of living in a major city, I had not one single date. Eventually, after 11 years I did get a few dates but then worried about getting too old to have a family, I married from a magazine advertising for Latin American brides. While this worked out, she’s of a very different viewpoint than I on many issues and of course is dead set against white identitarianism {w.i. note: lower case}, believing that whites had & have absolutely no culture, so any foreign takeover is fine.
It’s not that we guys hate women, it’s just that, in my experience, women found me as “too intellectual”. They were looking for guys with money, but apparently also wanted those to be stupid. Now this is all without telling any of them that I now follow white identitarianism. In looking at dating profiles online today I note that a large % of older (50+) single women also include the qualifier “No Trumpists” or “Conservatives need not apply”. Also I do serious wt-lifting and have a better physique even than many younger Black men. Yet at the gym, the athletic white women always smile at the Black guys and always talk to them. This never happens with me; even when I return their cell phone that they forgot. I think it’s also a social ranking. Right now white males are at the absolute bottom of the social ranking system– and women are very in tune with social status.
One advantage of now being divorced is that I am free to put some time & effort into w.i. I don’t know where all the white women are. I think they’ve taken up raising their cats & dogs.
Avg. Age of menarche is now broken under age 11, do you understand that it used to be 16 or 17 in the late 1800’s. They have literally transformed the White race from K selected to R select. This is way way bigger than just race mixing. THE WHITE RACE IS DONE and white women will kill it due to completely logical reasons.
This is in actual numbers in 2021 and not as percentages or per capita and trending lines are linear positive slope – probably skewed towards hyperbolic eventually
–Most trans kids – white
-Most – other sex – alternate gender (gender is fake) – white
-Most other sexual orientation – white
–most gay/lesb kids – white
–most liberal men- white
–most liberal women – white
-most rabid people against racism – white women
-most pro immigration and refugees- white women
-most bullied children – white children
-most antinatalist – white
-most parents adopting outside of their race – white
most cucked people – white
Today even before CRT, white men are rejected from grants, jobs, and colleges and soon it will be made illegal to hire white men. Also, the route of creating small business or medium size will be impossible as Covid has shown that the government can destroy them at anytime. If they breed with minority, they can claim all the benefits including triple or quadruple privilege in the privilege social stack because they want their kids to succeed socially and economically and women biologically have to breed and create successful offspring for their legacy so its a 100x negative to have 100% white children. Infact having 100% white kids will lead to massive discrimination for their children including bullying, violence taken to extreme– XXX. No woman wants to see her child ended so they will do what their instinct says to preserve their children which is any/everything possible to include having non white kids
Why don’t you go to a pet store or animal rescue outfit then? Go where the White women are.
I don’t see what misogyny has to do with pro-White politics. It seems to me that some folks who are pro-White to some degree or another want to throw some of their baggage onto the unsteady wings of White Nationalism for reasons that have nothing to do with furthering the goals of the 14 Words.
I don’t see what misogyny has to do with pro-White politics. It seems to me that some folks who are pro-White to some degree or another want to throw some of their baggage onto the unsteady wings of White Nationalism for reasons that have nothing to do with furthering the goals of the 14 Words.
I used to be puzzled when when misogynists called me a man-hater for defending women. No longer. From their point of view, to deny women’s total responsibility is to blame men to one degree or another for their refusal to marry and have children. Since voluntary childlessness is frowned upon in nationalist circles, men must blame womwn for their failure and/or refusal to marry and have children.
Despite all that, I’d be happy as a clam never talking to another guy for my entire life, but I’d go absolutely howlin’-at-the-moon mad without a woman by my side who loves me. Perhaps I’m atypical, but once I discovered pussy, it was like, “Who needs guys?”
Woah…disheartening to read
Varg Vikernes years ago advised: find a skanky woman and marry her. You both have baggage. Deal with it. Make babies. Grow up together. Brilliant advice.
Possibly the worst advice I’ve heard all day.
Yep. Anyone who’s ever tried that “two peas in a pod” approach to relationships tends to find out real quick it’s a match made in hell. It’s like fire and gasoline. You need someone you get along with yet who balances out your, um, less desirable traits.
The part I disagree with is the ‘skanky woman’ part. Finding a woman who is similar to oneself is good advice. ‘Opposites attract’ is bullshit.
You don’t want to find your opposite but your complement.
Possibly the worst advice I’ve heard all day.
Right, it would make much more sense for men to pump and dump through their twenties and expect to marry a 19-year-old virgin when their hair starts falling out.
Don’t normally go taking advice from death metal murderers. 🙂
*black metal
a skanky women which will divorce rape you and then become single mother while you pay child support for your 2.5 kids, who will have no morals and will be alienated from you by the mother, better to have no kids than garbage kids.
“Women became a lot more sexually active as a result of feminism. It must be humiliating to be unable to get laid in an environment when women are far more promiscuous than ever.” – Jim Goad, August 12, 2021.
“The truth is that fewer younger people are having sex these days compared to previous generations.” – Jim Goad, March 4, 2021.
Which Jim Goad sho
I guess you’d have a “gotcha” there if you equated “young people” to “all women.”
But the studies I was talking about regarded high-schoolers, hardly any of whom are women by the legal definition: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/12/the-sex-recession/573949/
Keep trying, though.
The whole thesis of your article in March was that white people weren’t fucking, as you put it. Not all white people are in high school.
“A giant difference between the boomers and the younger generations is that the boomers liked to FUCK. And to BREED.”
Not all younger generations than boomers are in high school.
You then imply low birthrates are a consequence of people not having sex.
You weren’t talking about high school kids alone in that March article, and if you were, it would be a little strange.
Just as a note, college kids are having less sex.
https://www.jhunewsletter.com/article/2019/02/why-are-we-having-less-sex-today-than-ever-before
As are millennials after they graduate.
https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/item/americans_are_having_less_sex_but_is_that_a_problem
You are wrong to imply in this article that men have as many opportunities as men did in previous generations. Gen X men, your generation, earned more in today’s money than millennial men, and the Silent Generation fathers of Gen X men earned less than the boomer fathers of millennials, so today women are comparing richer fathers to poorer potential boyfriends. Gen X men also had higher testosterone levels. Social media also wasn’t around when they were young, so women didn’t have that distraction.
Many Gen X and boomer women didn’t believe their men were ideal, but they went with them anyway. Because of this, their birthrates weren’t as low. Meanwhile, millennial women don’t think men are ideal, so many hold out, often forever, and their birthrates are lower.
I would estimate that the current singles epidemic is responsible for over half of the degree to which the total fertility rate is below replacement level because I estimate that an extra 25% of women in the millennial generation won’t have kids as a result of being single as compared with the boomer generation. (35% are single now who otherwise wouldn’t be, but I predict about a third of the 35% will marry and have kids). Add this to the fact that non-whites are streaming in and paired up whites are having smaller families, and the future looks bleak. But just how much bleaker for the singles epidemic? Those 25% staying single will likely reduce the total fertility rate by 28% (25/90 since 10% would be single regardless). In 50 years from now, this would make the US 29% white instead of 40% white. This would be almost like the difference between 23% white South Africa in 1911 and 40% white current-day California. Granted, both percentages are bad and may be irreversible from decline, but that would be in 50 years, and the effect of a low millennial birthrate will become evident in only 10 years from now as the kids of oldest millennials, now 40, are less numerous due to the singles epidemic. The road to California is easier to deal with than the road to old South Africa.
However, one could argue that by turning their backs on men, single white women are making them more stressed and likely to get interested in politics and join pro-white movements. This is obviously not women’s motive in staying single, but it may be a good side-effect.
On the other hand, women being single may alienate white men from their race and make them give up on it since they have no stake in it.
Regardless of short term effects, the singles epidemic is not a good thing in the long run.
I would argue that in some sense I am giving women more credit than you are. You are framing them as victims, and I am framing them as conscious actors. When African Americans commit crimes, they do so out of their own volition, and when millennial and zoomer women remain single, they do so because they want to. Of course, unlike blacks, women are a necessary part of white society. Women are half of white society, so I’m not advocating MGTOW, and I never have. To support sexless nationalism would mean either a test tube society or being amoebas.
I am merely stating that women are coming up with the singles epidemic all on their own, perhaps reacting to a different economic, hormonal, or technological environment, but acting on their own. Plus, the notion that women in virtually all longstanding developed countries, including Japan, European nations, the US, etc, are nearly equally helpless victims of feminist propaganda seems a bit far-fetched to me. The degree of feminism across these regions varies more than the economic and technological conditions. Therefore, I blame feminism less than how economic, hormonal, and other factors affect the singles epidemic. I mean, is feminism as toxic in Eastern Europe and Japan as it is the US? I think you’re giving feminists too much credit.
Stating that mutations are increasing, as I have, is fair because mutations correlate with psychological disorders, and these may be more common among single women and men. Women are more responsible for the singles epidemic, so maybe the mutations affect their sexual competence more, but it may also affect that of men. This would be a good topic for a research study. However, men in academia are too busy trying to impress women, and women may not like this harsh truth.
In your optics article, you stated that the optics debates are overstated because at the end of the day, cringe people would have our back if ANTIFA were to assault us. My response was to state that while we argue about optics, a race with far worse optics than ours, the black race, is doubling every 28 years, mainly in Africa, and our women seem to be, according to my estimates, responsible for a 28% per-generation decline in our total fertility rate by perpetuating a singles epidemic.
I don’t blame anything distinct about white women for the singles epidemic. It seems to be common all women, including Japanese women, who live in developed nations.
I often wish I was a Gen Xer or boomer because although they don’t have as much technology or access to truth, women were nicer on average. Millennial women were nice but seemed exhibit a decline as I graduated college and as smart phones and high speed Internet took off. This is consistent with the evidence we see on OKCupid of their overall lesser interest in men and the drop they show in interest after men graduate college and don’t earn as much as their frequently overpaid upper middle class to rich Gen-X fathers.
I prefer to discuss the singles epidemic with women. Does believing they can understand it make me a misogynist? It may make me naive. They often, along with you, don’t seem to care about the evidence that women are mostly perpetuating it. I told this one girl about it. A few weeks later she’s telling her friends about how it is “so worth it” to hold out for the right guy. Well, they seem to be holding out too much. Forget about whether I’m in the 35% of single millennials who would have married in the last or the 10% who wouldn’t have, these girls need to know they’re getting the dating game wrong. If anything they need to hold out less. This doesn’t mean I’m on their particular level per se, but some guy may be who they refuse to go with.
I look at what women do more than what they say. They say they want quality guys. They solicit ones with at least as much money as their dads on dating sites more frequently. One thing they say that is informative is that they want men not boys. That would pertain to the lower testosterone among men. Quality seems to mean money and testosterone, but they would never say that. They also waste their lives on social media quite a bit. They don’t see the influence that has.
I plan to write an article on how whites can end the Singles Epidemic. I await your critiques. Please make them better than this article you did here. I feel like you’re trying to settle the ego score on behalf of older men and young women here more than tell the truth. The idea that Gen X men tried harder doesn’t make all that much sense. Millennial men spend more time in the gym, acquiring graduate degrees, and reading about how to get a girlfriend, and yet they are far more single. Should they be fatter, less educated, and less concerned with how to impress women as previous generations of men appeared to be? Maybe that’ll do the trick.
I won’t comment about the singles epidemic on your articles unless you write about it. I was merely stating that if allegiance trumps optics, as you claim, then demographics trumps allegiance. If whites don’t exist in the first place, in part because women are perpetuating a singles epidemic, then allegiance between the cringe and non-cringe doesn’t matter so much.
After all, non-existent people can’t have good or bad optics.
I feel like you’re trying to settle the ego score on behalf of older men and young women here more than tell the truth.
That’s rich coming from a serial liar who goes on repeating the same nonsense after it’s been soundly refuted.
I look at what women do more than what they say.
Evidently you don’t, because you continue to ignore the evidence of women’s actual communications with men in favor of the fact that we say ~80% of men are less attractive than the average male. This is an artifact of women’s idiosyncratic judgments about men’s physical appearance, not “female hypergamy.”
https://www.livescience.com/5502-men-agree-hot-women.html
You claimed in your response to me on Goad’s optics article that 78% of women are competing for the top 20% of men. There is no evidence whatsoever to support this claim. It is pure fiction.
You attempted to salvage your argument that women’s underrepresentation on Tinder reflects our relative lack of interest in finding a mate. This assumes, again without evidence, that men on Tinder are totally looking for a wife rather than a quick roll in the hay. Of course, if there more women on Tinder, that would just prove what irredeemable whores we are.
Regarding the 78% /20%, I found it in the Quillette article to which I linked on Goad’s other article, which cites the Medium article linked below. At the time I trusted the Quillette article and didn’t realize the Medium article was a bad source. Good job contesting it. It may be true, but it’s methods aren’t explained. https://medium.com/@worstonlinedater/tinder-experiments-ii-guys-unless-you-are-really-hot-you-are-probably-better-off-not-wasting-your-2ddf370a6e9a
Regarding the article you linked, it’s findings were that women’s tastes were more variable than men’s. This does not mean they liked a greater proportion of men.
What is not in doubt is that women fare better on Tinder. According to the NYT, “men are nearly three times as likely to swipe “like” (in 46 percent of cases) than woman (14 percent).” https://www.nytimes.com/2014/10/30/fashion/tinder-the-fast-growing-dating-app-taps-an-age-old-truth.html?_r=0
I need to clarify something I posted earlier. Regarding the woman who said holding out was “so worth it,” I liked her but had talked to her a few times before and concluded she was indifferent toward me. She was sitting with some people at a table. I wanted to see what their reaction to the singles problem would be. Some of them listened intently, but she wasn’t interested. By no means would I “scolding” them. I was just being cheeky and trying to see what they thought. Cheeky with a long-winded monologue. Quite awkward, but hey, I wanted to see what they thought.
A few weeks later, she was talking about how it was “so worth it” to hold out. She has her own ideas obviously. If I run into her again, I’ll ask her opinion on the dating scene.
Hypergamy means that sexual activity is (increasingly) Pareto skewed, with those at the head taking the lion’s share and those behind vying for an ever-thinning trail of scraps.
For any cohort, it’s likely that average n-count has continued to increase while the median has fallen with the usual caveat that survey results, especially those regarding sex, are fraught.
I like your commentary on post-pubertal male bonding. When I got married my mom sardonically quipped, “I’m so glad you’re finally living with a woman.” It was nice having male roommates throughout my early and mid 20s but there was a time and place for that. And amen on the discovering pussy commentary. The extent of my male bonding is shaking hands with men after services at my place of worship, talking shop with colleagues at work, and maybe a beer/ cigar every once in awhile with the guys.
I think the boomer criticisms here aren’t warranted. I think one of the problems with incels is video games. I say this as a millennial who’s played a shit ton of video games. I used to blame religious brainwashing for me not getting any pussy in high school and college but the fact of the matter is I spent most of my free time playing video games. You have to be social to be sexual, at least in most cases. If I would have spent more time at social events at school I probably would have more social contacts, including girls who could vouch for me, “oh yeah, he’s a nice guy and real funny.” That’s very important to have girls who are your friends and can vouch for you. I incorporated this into my dating strategy I used in my mid-twenties was to host single’s mixer dinners at my house on the weekends. I had some friends who were girls I met through various social outings and used my dinners as my own sort of “The Bachelor.” I covered all my bases: I showed I had friends who were girls and that I wasn’t a total creep, I had cooking skills, and I can host a meal and hold a conversation with other people. It was what ended up helping me meet my eventual wife.
There was an intramural co-ed dodgeball club at my school. That’s just a recipe for finding a girl, ask a girl out for a smoothie after a hot sweaty dodgeball session and talk dodgeball strategy and then maybe after a couple of smoothies get to know each other a little better. It’s really not that hard and the paradox is that being a butthurt incel is a sure fire way not to get pussy. Looks are important but women really want confidence. It’s probably why I started dating in my late 20s because I had more confidence and hence more sex appeal.
Sorry Mr. Goad, but I side with your critics on this one. As an older White married mother of White sons (one married and one not) I have seen what’s out there and can confirm just about every example cited in other comments. Perhaps it was your physique or your attitude or some combination of other traits, but you say you never had difficulty appealing to women – congratulations. Not all guys are fat or computer nerds or incels, but a large contingent of younger White men who actively want marriage and White children cannot find it with White women. It enrages me to see so many of them default to Han or Mestizo women and then try to portray their mixed children as White, but at the same time I can hardly blame them when I see so many White women drape themselves around blacks or eat and tattoo themselves into ugly oblivion. And no, I don’t have a solution to suggest other than a White ethnostate with strong and traditional social values such as parental input and introduction and an emphasis on lauding traditional marriage and motherhood.
Seriously suggest everyone check on this film. 1960 School for Scoundrels. There are several very practical ideas here that pre date the silly concept of game about asserting yourself. One meta dynamic that I think is worth thinking about, acting on and recognising, is having two guy pretend to compete over a girl. Give her two apparent options. While it’s not directly addressed in the film I think that’s what is going on. The male competition turns her on, see men “compete” and all sorts of biological triggers occur. Eventually you’ll find the right companion.
School For Scoundrels starring Alistair Sims and Terry Thomas!
For some reason, this conversation reminds me of a joke I heard on The Sopranos many years ago. For your consideration:
A rich man and a poor man are discussing what they are going to get their respective wives for Christmas. The rich man says “I’m getting my wife a diamond ring and a new Mercedes.” Even though he knows the man is rich, the poor man is surprised at this level of generosity and asks why he is getting both gifts. The rich man tells him “Well, if she doesn’t like the diamond ring, she can hop in her brand new Mercedes, drive down to the jeweler, and return it.”
The poor man says “Interesting! Well, I’m getting my wife a pair of slippers and a dildo.” The rich man chuckles at the combination and asks why such an odd pairing of gifts. The poor man says “Well, if she doesn’t like the slippers she can go fuck herself.”
Don’t forget to tip your waitress, folks!
The Pratical Guide to Women by Shawn T. Smith, PsyD
Written by someone not sympathetic to the women’s movement.
I recommend women read it too to see what a man should be looking for and how he should be going about it. I wish it was around when I was in my early 20s.
A quick read.
Correction to the title I posted above: The Tactical Guide to Women: How Men Can Manage Risk in Dating and Marriage.
In other words, how to avoid the crazies.
Enjoy the read. And stop complaining. There are some great women out there (in every generation). We’re not all f____ing nuts.
This fits this post. A white Scottish male working class caregiver, a severely disabled guy in a wheelchair, and a black whore – what could go wrong?
https://whorattledyourcage.blogspot.com/2021/07/white-caregiver-blues.html
I’m surprised that a man of Jim’s intelligence doesn’t understand why the white birth rate (along with the birth rates of other races) has declined. The white birth rate is low for biological reasons – the average age at which women first give birth has increased. The average age of white first-time mothers is 27. That means there are more women 30+ giving birth than in previous generations. That means there are more miscarriages and birth complications than in populations with younger first-time mothers. I.e., it is harder for women in their 30s to give birth than women in their late teens/early 20s.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/260386/mean-age-of-mothers-at-first-birth-in-the-united-states-in-by-hispanic-origin/
The white birth rate has nothing to do with “incels” or men having bad attitudes toward women. It is a function of the choices that women make to delay childbirth.
And sure, guys could get laid by turning themselves into characters that women find exciting but that won’t help white people reproduce. If anything, such couplings will give rise to out of wedlock births, single mothers and defective men. We now have an entire generation of men socialized by their mothers and the female staff in the K-12 school system.
Jim doesn’t like it when millennials play the boomer card, but there are differences in perspective between boomers and millennials. When Jim was born in 1961, divorce was rare. When millennials were born in the 80s and 90s, divorce was commonplace. How many of these “incels” come from broken homes?
The solution isn’t to change our attitudes toward women (as if they don’t enough sympathy and affirmation of their inherent value already); it is to push for social change. Boys need fathers.
The white birth rate has nothing to do with “incels” or men having bad attitudes toward women. It is a function of the choices that women make to delay childbirth.
Years later, I’m still waiting for evidence of this proposition. The choice of when to start our family was very much a joint decision in my household, and, I assume, in almost every other relationship.
That means there are more miscarriages and birth complications than in populations with younger first-time mothers. I.e., it is harder for women in their 30s to give birth than women in their late teens/early 20s.
And yet, there are more financial complications when women have children in their late teens and early twenties. As the daughter of a teen mother, I would know. Growing up, my mother impressed upon me the importance of waiting for children. I followed her advice. As a result, I was able to quit work and just keep on having them.
The mainstream media ignore age-related infertility; the dissident right wildly exaggerates it. The fact is that a woman in her late twenties or early thirties has plenty of time to have a large family.
Lexi, your personal history doesn’t interest me in the slightest.
The fact is that a woman in her late twenties or early thirties has plenty of time to have a large family.
The issue is the birth rate, so you want to talk about populations and not a hypothetical woman. The average age of first-time mothers has been increasing because there are more women older than the previous average having kids for the first time. If there are two populations, A and B, and the average age of first-time mothers in A is 21 and 28 in B, then there are going to be more birth issues in B than in A.
Just because an individual 30 yr old woman might be able to have 2-3 kids, it doesn’t follow that a population where nearly half of all first-time mothers are 30+ will be able to do so. There will be more birth complications for populations with older moms than for populations with younger moms.
There will be more birth complications for populations with older moms than for populations with younger moms.
Probably true, but also irrelevant. Birth complications rarely limit family size. If you have a miscarriage, you get pregnant again and repeat as necessary until desired family size is reached. Women’s bodies are very efficient at clearing out defective fetuses early on in pregnancy to make way for a healthy pregnancy.
Just because an individual 30 yr old woman might be able to have 2-3 kids, it doesn’t follow that a population where nearly half of all first-time mothers are 30+ will be able to do so.
But they will be able to do so. Average American child spacing is 30 months. That means a woman who has her first child at 30 would ordinarily have her third at 35. This is simple math. Meanwhile, the average Amish woman has her last child at 42.
Teen mothers have higher completed fertility for all sorts of reasons having nothing to do with the biological clock. First of all, teen mothers are more likely to oppose abortion on moral grounds, obviously. That’s why they had a baby rather than an abortion. They are also more likely to have accidents. Finally, they are more likely to have subsequent children with their future spouse, who may not be satisfied with just having stepchildren. This situation is, of course, not ideal.
Do you have any evidence at all that completed fertility is higher among women who start at 30 rather than 20? At first blush, this stands to reason, but we already know that older first-time mothers progress more quickly to a second pregnancy compared to younger first-time mothers. When a couple is ready, they’re ready.
Of course, generation times are an issue, but only in competition with immigrants who shouldn’t be here anyway.
Older parents have a greater likelihood of children with physical and mental handicaps, and if the first child turns out that way, it reduces the likelihood of any further children, because of the costs such children impose on their parents, in terms of time and money as well as emotional costs.
Older parents have a greater likelihood of children with physical and mental handicaps, and if the first child turns out that way, it reduces the likelihood of any further children, because of the costs such children impose on their parents, in terms of time and money as well as emotional costs.
Do you know that for sure, Greg? I would think it equally likely that such a couple would opt to have more children to make up for the one that “turned out that way.” Indeed, I suspect that most people would choose an abortion in those circumstances, anyway, unless they are serious pro-life Christians, in which case, they are not the problem. As older parents, they’ve probably already had multiple other children.
Anyway, I’m not advocating waiting until 35 to start a family. I am simply disputing that women are causing White population decline by choosing, unilaterally, to postpone motherhood.
Nor have I ever said that deferred childbearing doesn’t have any drawbacks. It clearly does. Early childbearing has drawbacks, too. These include: the stress involved in raising children without a secure income sufficient to afford a house in a good (white) neighborhood. Couples are particularly vulnerable to divorce in the first year after a child is born, and fights about money can devastate a marriage.
Deciding when to have children is about balancing all these considerations. White women have their first child, on average, at 27.8. That sounds about right to me. On the other hand, I certainly wouldn’t object to efforts to reduce it further by affirmatively furthering affordable White family formation.
But they will be able to do so. Average American child spacing is 30 months. That means a woman who has her first child at 30 would ordinarily have her third at 35. This is simple math.
Think about variation within populations and not about individual women, because they don’t matter. If you take 1000 first-time moms between 20-25 and 1000 first-time moms 30-35, there will be more variation in the second group than in the first. Why? Because women 30-35 have fewer eggs to fertilize than women 20-25 and fewer fertilizable eggs without genetic abnormalities. If you need evidence of that, go back and take human physiology 101 (and take stats 101 while you’re at it – this is about variation and not about individuals).
So in the 30-35 group, you’ll get some women who have 4 healthy kids and others who are lucky to have 1 child. You’ll get more miscarriages, more birth defects, more failed attempts at getting pregnant and more uterine prolapses that make it harder for the mother to have a second child. Not to mention Greg’s point that a child born with Down Syndrome or severe form of autism is like having a child for life. The risk of having another child born with autism for some of these couples is too great.
There are proportionally more of these outcomes in populations with older mothers than in populations with younger mothers.
In the 20-25 group, there is less variation in birth complications. Most attempts at pregnancy succeed and fewer birth issues (defects etc). There is more variation in the # of births because younger women are able to have more kids than older women.
Dear Iamidiot,
I’m not sure why you call yourself an idiot, but the shoe seems to fit.
Anyway,
Teehee, i am not like other girls says every girl
Teehee, my friends are all unique and not like other girls, says every girl
You’re projecting here, idiot. Because men tend to all find the same women attractive, you assume we are the same way, despite the evidence to the contrary.
They all want something, children, stability, a marraige, emotional support, always something,
Heaven forbid!
that love develops over time but is CONDITIONAL,
Assuming, for the sake of argument, that this is true, how is this any different from men who love their wives so long as they remain trim and young-looking?
For the men, read it and weep, avg man, white, who is young under 28 with 5 or 6 looks, lie in a medium metropolis area, swipe 20,000+ women get 5 first dates, 2 second dates. Sounds FAIR TO ME!!
Fair? Lol please! Nothing about romance is fair. Anyway, most Tinder users are men. Why is that? I’m sure this doesn’t help:
https://www.hayvine.com/social/4-most-horrific-tinder-murder-stories-that-will-leave-you-petrified
The fundamental problem with your claims here is that tinder swipes or matches or whatever do not evince availability for serious commitment and children. Until you overcome that, your tinder data do not support the claim that women are responsible for a “singles epidemic.” No Harvard papers necessary, just solid, relevant data.
https://hauterrfly.com/sex/are-men-looking-for-just-sex-on-dating-apps-this-woman-went-undercover-on-tinder-to-find-out/
Why are you responding to Lexi, she is Feminist, where is the evidence, while society is burning down around her, she needs meta analyses of white papers written only from harvard PHD’s is acceptable, about society trending downwards. That is how deluded she is, she even misses basic english
“Evidently you don’t, because you continue to ignore the evidence of women’s actual communications with men in favor of the fact that we say ~80% of men are less attractive than the average male.”
If she means the now obsolete OK Cupid survey, it was for all men, not avg men, actually you are again being deceptive, the OK cupid study states 2 things
Only 8% of ALL men are attractive
92% of ALL MEN are unattractive
that 80% worse looking than average wording was just to provide cover for how ruthless women are and this is in 2009, TRUST ME, its probably now only 2% men are attractive the rest are INVISIBLE. Lexi will try to spin this, she is a woman so she will fail naturally. The reason we even have relationships with women is they need something, support, children, companionship, love, money, status, a wedding day, make friends jealous, so she can look the other way and fake herself to love you. There is only two realities, You are CHAD, or nothing. You should see the worship CHAD gets from women on tiktok, there is your white paper. Chad literally stops traffic.
Tinder statistics to give you an idea, women match and like a profile only 1.8% of time on their swipes while men do it 56% of time on their swipes, women are ruthless in Eugenics for them good good genes. We have data analyses of many profiles where a avg white man 25 did 20,000 swipes, resulted in 40 matches which resulted in 5 dates, 2 second dates. This is the reality. over 35% of the male population is effectively incel, and you would scoff at the male virginity rates, but who cares keep pushing, keep pushing, All the men on this forum must be lying, only Lexi knows the truth, Muh muh studies, need Muh muh reference.
Only 8% of ALL men are attractive
92% of ALL MEN are unattractive
That sounds about right. I have seen and met thousands of men in my life and only a tiny fraction of them ever interested me in the slightest. Women don’t fantasize about mating with every reasonably presentable member of the opposite sex we set eyes on. That’s a man thing, or so I’m told.
On the other hand, the one I wound up marrying would, most definitely, not be considered “attractive” by the average woman. Likewise, not a single one of my girlfriends has a man that appeals to me in the least, but there they are happily married with children.
We have data analyses of many profiles
And yet, for some reason, noone has ever bothered to share these with me.
All the men on this forum must be lying
The mere existence of a grievance does not prove its merit. Almost everything you say about women, we also say about you. It’s certainly easier for us to get casual sex, but that isn’t what we want. From our perspective, it is you lot who have unreasonable expectations and refuse to commit.
Teehee, i am not like other girls says every girl
Teehee, my friends are all unique and not like other girls, says every girl
Like i said, they worship chad like god on earth, their love for you is pragma, their love for Chad is unadulterated 1000x eros, chad can stink and be homeless, still he will get devotion and worship if his facial features and height are great and his jawline can cut steel.
They all want something, children, stability, a marraige, emotional support, always something, that love develops over time but is CONDITIONAL, but the insane eros, mania and ludus unrequited love for Chad is a whole different ball game. its like the universe to an apple seed, incomparable.
Lexi please use your brain, https://www.reddit.com/r/TinderData/
please read it and weep for the males, but you are right all of them are garbage so who cares about their plight, ofcourse they are all lying, their data pulls from tinder are BS and they are just complaining. Remember this, ignore reality at your own peril until a 2×4 hits in the face at 90 mph, OOh who could have known, no one saw that coming, where was academia, where are the white papers, how come the news didnt report on this.
here is for your 1.8 match rate, but ofcourse its all lie and your quadruple digit iq can detect all the failures of thedata interpretation methodologies by just smelling the barchart, am i rite, i am a dumb sub 25 iq person who doenst know the difference between prestigious white papers and this purely hypothetical flawed data collection.
https://thebolditalic.com/the-two-worlds-of-tinder-f1c34e800db4
For the men, read it and weep, avg man, white, who is young under 28 with 5 or 6 looks, lie in a medium metropolis area, swipe 20,000+ women get 5 first dates, 2 second dates. Sounds FAIR TO ME!!
Ich höre nur Mi Mi Mi…
Goading young men to get their act together is a wiser approach than trying to leave them feeling comfortable and vindicated in their failures.
Of course there are forces outside of our control influencing the sexual marketplace. There’s no point in blaming men, but patting a grown man on head and saying “It’s not your fault” isn’t going to make him more appealing to women.
The transfer of wealth and power to younger generations has obviously been retarded. I think this is the root of the “anti-boomer” sentiment. This economic situation presumably attenuates the problem of hypergamy, since household formation is more difficult when you can’t afford a house. But given that reality, men should try to remedy that within their own life. For the most part, that’s all they can do.
Hypergamy is a salient trait in women – self-awareness is not, Lexi – but harboring generalized or generational grievances is a doomed evolutionary counter-strategy.
Jim Goad is broadly right: Irritate young men and make them want to prove him wrong.
Hypergamy is a salient trait in women – self-awareness is not, Lexi
I know I must be sounding like a broken record by now, but, like the hypergamy hoax, lack of self-awareness among women is yet another of our traits for which I have seen no evidence.
What do you even mean by “self-awareness”? You probably won’t tell me, because doing so would expose your claim to empirical scrutiny.
https://hbr.org/2013/05/few-executives-are-self-aware.html
This economic situation presumably attenuates the problem of hypergamy, since household formation is more difficult when you can’t afford a house. But given that reality, men should try to remedy that within their own life.
There is an inverse correlation between household income and fertility (see link below). I.e. those who can afford a house don’t have many kids.
Forgive me if I’m putting words in your mouth, but this idea that millennial men aren’t able to start families because of stagnant wages implies that women are looking for good providers like we’re still in the 1960s. It isn’t true. If that’s what they were looking for, few women would go to university after high school and spend their 20s working. Women are happy to provide for themselves. What women in their 20s want is excitement.
It isn’t difficult for young women to find men who can support a family. There was a 19 yr old woman who auctioned off her virginity for $3 million and before that a 28 yr old woman auctioned her virginity off for $800k. The “price” of virginity varies depending on the girl’s looks, but judging from these bids it is quite high and there are men willing to pay it.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/241530/birth-rate-by-family-income-in-the-us/
There is an inverse correlation between household income and fertility (see link below). I.e. those who can afford a house don’t have many kids.
That’s because, in order to afford that house, both spouses need high-paying jobs, and daycare is expensive, often exceeding a couple’s mortgage payment for even one child.
If that’s what they were looking for, few women would go to university after high school and spend their 20s working.
Nonsense. We learned from the bitter experience of prior generations of women that a woman must be prepared to take care of herself, and the way to do that is to get an education. Hugh Heffner said men should be able to dump their aging wives with no strings attached and men went along with it. They have destroyed alimony and along with it the security and wellbeing of stay-at-home mothers. If you have a problem with women prioritizing their careers, take it up with the “men’s rights movement.”
Women are happy to provide for themselves. What women in their 20s want is excitement.
Women are more interested in excitement in their twenties than in their thirties, but they are far less interested in excitement than men their age and even older. This is a matter of documented fact.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dan-Romer/publication/318716836/figure/fig2/AS:522989875757057@1501701911821/Trends-in-sensation-seeking-by-gender-in-a-national-U-S-sample-With-permission-from.png
How are you going to get men under 25 to start families? You’re not. And no, we’re not going to marry men ten years older so they can “sow their wild oats.” Women live longer than men as it is, and we don’t want to and shouldn’t be expected to spend 20 years as lonely widows waiting to die. Odds of divorce are lowest when a couple is the same age. The odds go up with every single year of age difference. (Google it.)
You can’t just look at the pros of something, like early childbirth, and ignore the cons, let alone the feasibility of the idea, and declare victory. Statistics show that marriage before age 25 is associated with elevated risk of divorce. And of course, you continue to ignore the fact that delayed childbearing is necessary for couples who want to live in a decent community. Women see higher education as a necessary financial precondition, not an alternative, to motherhood.
Recent fertility data suggest they are correct, as fertility rates for the most educated women are rising while less educated women’s fertility is in free fall.
https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2015/05/07/childlessness-falls-family-size-grows-among-highly-educated-women/
lol, quoting a jew Hugh Hefner, while 80% of all divorces are filed by woman, while still blaming men. According to Lexi, woman are perfect creatures that can do no wrong while all of the philosophers and all the religions consider otherwise ,but of course they are all wrong, and lexi is right, many religions including non cucked Christianity considered that women have no souls, and Buddhists even today say that women can never reach enlightenment , but ofcourse all those people are wrong and lexi is right because of muh studies, which she can pick and choose. Even though the OK Cupid 2009 study showed that almost 80 % of ALL women are attractive to men exactly as a normal distribution would imply while only 8% of all men are attractive to women (in 2021 its probably somewhere between 2 to 4%), still the men are to be blamed, of course, its always the men, dont worry like I said, reality wont give a crap about your muh white papers and studies, it is ruthless. Civilization is built by men, when men abandon supporting it, then you will get a taste of reality, i hope you are quoting your muh studies and muh white papers while they do what they want. Its a thin veneer and its very artificial!
and Buddhists even today say that women can never reach enlightenment
Just when I thought it was impossible for you to look any more ridiculous, you come up with this nonsense.
Women, Ananda, having gone forth are able to realize the fruit of stream-attainment or the fruit of once-returning or the fruit of non-returning or arahantship. -The Buddha
https://www.learnreligions.com/maha-pajapati-and-the-first-nuns-449897
Likewise in the West:
https://www.repository.cam.ac.uk/handle/1810/277046
many religions including non cucked Christianity considered that women have no souls,
Right. Perhaps you can explain to me how they squared that with Genesis 5:1-2.
while 80% of all divorces are filed by woman,
So what? As you lot never tire of pointing out, women do not have the luxury of time to waste on bad husbands. In Saudi Arabia, men can divorce their wives unilaterally. Women have to petition the courts and show cause. Still, divorce is rampant in Saudi Arabia.
Recently, divorce there has skyrocketed as wives have found out about their husbands’ other wives, whom they married behind their wives back. No doubt reactionaries there are kvetching about women filing for frivolous divorces over this.
https://gulfnews.com/world/gulf/saudi/covid-19-divorces-up-30-in-saudi-arabia-as-women-find-out-husbands-married-others-in-secret-1.71781600
Even though the OK Cupid 2009 study showed that almost 80 % of ALL women are attractive to men
It doesn’t matter what they say. What matters is what they do, and the fact is that they are less generous in their actual communications with women than the reverse.
still the men are to be blamed
Misogynists like you picked this fight. I’d be more than happy to drop the subject, but you won’t give it a rest, so don’t expect me to pull any punches.
Civilization is built by men, when men abandon supporting it, then you will get a taste of reality, i hope you are quoting your muh studies and muh white papers while they do what they want. Its a thin veneer and its very artificial!
I realize that you are so bitter and vengeful that you would love to see civilization crash and burn. If I were so obsessed with sex that I turned into a deranged psychopath like you for lack of it, I would truly detest myself.
Your attitude toward sex, women, and life reveals that you are a fool who believes that satisfaction is to be found not in virtue but in what is external to yourself. As such, you are, for the time being, not fit for marriage and fatherhood. Women know what you are and reject you accordingly.
You have to really love Lexi, but seriously take heed, the way she thinks is the way all modern women think nowadays, and i dont just mean the west, even an average college girl in bumfuck nowhere in India thinks the same way. There are very specific instructions in all religions on how to keep women in control or bad things happen, and then everyone dies.
Women think their magic gold plated P sleeve and sex is what keeps civilization going, just too funny.
No kids or worst single mother households with no fathers, no opposition to violence, no opposition to degeneracy, no opposition to invasion aka immigration, men checked out of society, no religiosity, no kinship, deracination, weak family bonds, population doped out and drugged unconscious on entertainment and weed/alcohol, obesity. Those are points of failures for countries and civilizations, i am sure lexi will spin this too as all mens fault, as that is the only lens all women can view anything from. Its endemic in their nature for how god created them. Look at how me pointing out that civilization is burning around us, she spins to i want civilization to burn down cause i hate women cause i get no sex. Also that i am a deranged psychopath not worthy of fatherhood or marriage. I mean the leaps are incredible
I love all the links and abstracts that posted, i mentioned Christianity, she posts an abstract about Pythagorean villages in 6th BCE in southern italy. They were probably destroyed for being retarded by the Carthaginians, or Etruscan and later Romans but the real heart of the issue, is Lexi doesnt understand what the Academic white paper grant Industrial complex is and how its easily steered to specific agendas and is a giant Jewop creating lie after lie after lie as truth. She will never understand its just words on paper and that doesn’t necessarily make it true. And Yes in Buddhism, unless they fully cucked too now or some bastardized sect, women can never reach enlightenment, and they discussed seriously in the 12th century in Christianity if woman posses souls or souls equivalent to men. This is true no matter how many links you post. Look how traitorous white women have been to white men, they threw them under the bus on the behest of jews for a taste of that sweet sweet power granted by affirmative action 60 years ago, but they never understood cause they have no forsight, that once their men re removed, white women will lose all their power to bipoc females. They simply have forgotten about the Ottoman slave trade and the barbary slave trade, dont worry they will relearn it the IRL way.
For the record, Hugh Hefner was a goy. Allegedly, his wife cheated on him before they were married. He used that as an excuse to “break bad” and cheat on her during their marriage, eventually leading to a divorce and Playboy. Bad things happen when men break bad. We will have to remember that.
Don’t be discouraged. I recommend Brittany Sellner’s channel. She has a level-headed take on the singles problem. She’s not an “e-girl” just an honest white woman trying to make a difference. Many other white women are of similar good will.
https://odysee.com/@brittanysellner
I estimate that about a third of single millennial women in the US will eventually go with guys, likely just not having found the right one yet. Millennial men should find one of them and forget about the e-girls and perpetual hold-outs–at least on an individual level, but maybe policy changes such as better income for entry level workers and less exorbitant income for older people would induce some to go with someone.
That’s because, in order to afford that house, both spouses need high-paying jobs, and daycare is expensive, often exceeding a couple’s mortgage payment for even one child.
That’s very specific. You’re saying that joint income households earning +$200k have made a commitment to invest most of it into their mortgage payments vs having kids. Where is the evidence that two-income households earning +$200k have made this specific financial decision? (I’m asking for data here, not a story about how white people want to live in a nice neighborhood before they settle down and have kids.)
And why are birth rates higher for middle-income earners, according to the data from Statista? There are more births per 1000 families in households making $50k-$75k than for top earners.
Nonsense. We learned from the bitter experience of prior generations of women that a woman must be prepared to take care of herself, and the way to do that is to get an education. Hugh Heffner said men should be able to dump their aging wives with no strings attached and men went along with it. They have destroyed alimony and along with it the security and wellbeing of stay-at-home mothers. If you have a problem with women prioritizing their careers, take it up with the “men’s rights movement.”
Bizarre. How did Huge Heffner destroy marriage and alimony? Women only pay alimony if they earn more than their ex husbands. Hugh Heffner didn’t do that, the Supreme Court did. Why should a husband pay alimony if his ex wife is a dentist with a million dollar income, while he makes considerably less?
And no, we’re not going to marry men ten years older so they can “sow their wild oats.” Women live longer than men as it is, and we don’t want to and shouldn’t be expected to spend 20 years as lonely widows waiting to die.
We’re not prioritizing your feelings anymore because there is nothing in it for us. Civilization is more important than women’s feelz.
Jim Goad is broadly right: Irritate young men and make them want to prove him wrong.
That seems to be his MO in part. He has a history of saying and doing provocative things on purpose. The Hitler mustache and rape shirt for example. I guess that was from the 1990s. Everyone could tell that was a joke, deliberately offensive. The TRS guys did shock jock humor too. They and Goad are not cringe like Heimbach because they were being silly on purpose. Unlike Heimbach, Goad and TRS could maybe speak at the Scandza forum, but they wouldn’t be the next head of Amren. Nor would they want to be. The humorist and Jared Taylor paths are separate. That was my point.
This article was I guess was part hyperbolic admonition, part humorist license, part triggering people into trying harder to get women, part contradiction, and part misunderstanding.
First, a little biology then I’ll give you the load of shit most of you deserve for even allowing your dick based brains to form, elaborate but the worst, express them publicly in the hope that some virility deficient cry babies like themselves will “understand” how hard finding a cute, healthy, self assured, socially appreciated, compassionate and intelligent lady who would love you and love having children with you, work part-time at the most and at home if possible to have time for the kids and the house, to spend the rest of your life with you without conditions, threats or vicious female manipulations or being the cause of any other typical difficulties couples have to face today… Well, the good news is it’s much much easier than you think. The bad news is that just by participating in discussions like this one saying that women are not as they used to be or should be rather than saying that SOME women have problems but not all and that maybe, just maybe adequate women are hard to find because YOU are not adequate desqualifies you instantly without explanations, appeals or any other chances givcen no matter how you look, have wealth or any other attractive features, love does not tolerate one way critics, love wants collaborative efforts. Would you be attracted by a woman who claims that men only want to have sex, that 70% of them have affairs, that they always go out with their buddies but not you, that they’re too busy to play with the kids and that after sex almost everyday he turns around and falls asleep immediately while you’re still looking for the pleasure you heve learned to fake to avoid being told that you’re greedy and that if you’re not satisfied “you know what to do”, would you even be capable of having sex with a woman who talks about you like that?
WELL dudes, fuck the biology, maybe later, I’ll tell you a huge secret nobody knows and that will put you ahead of everyone in your relationships, are you ready? Talk to us instead of talking about us and learn to listen, if a woman is hysterical there’s a good reason for that and that reason is most likely… YOU!
I agree with Goad on these points, even if they are crude this time. However this doesn’t get at a more difficult problem, staying together with the same woman as a family unit long term. Frequent divorce is also putting a damper on the breeding program. It slows progress to get another mate and its expensive, especially if a guy is with a feminist who wants 51-80% voting power but then chooses a low paid career in social work, liberal non-profits, college lecturer getting paid less than public school teacher, etc. I don’t see easy answers here but welcome future debates.
Oh my God, now I’ve had a chance to read some of the comments! For some of the whiners, above, it’s not all looks. That helps, but just google some Cosmo quizzes on what women want. Successful men, admired men, funny and magnetic men, intelligent men, whiny men…. Oh wait, NOT whiny men, but the rest are ok. Looks and height help, but find some of the other things women like and cultivate them and play the long game. There are exceptions, but women are disproportionately picky and there is a bit of being at the right place and right time (in her life).
College Students having less sex: The decrease is from 72% to 67%. It’s not a dramatic drop. That amounts to 1 in 20 not having sex and that’s assuming the numbers are valid… e.g. statistical p values are often set at 1 in 20.
Lower quality women after graduating college: One commenter thought this was specific to younger and millennial generations. I don’t think so. The higher quality people are pairing off younger and the older you get there are more “leftovers”. If you are single at 40, then the divorced singles (of either gender) are often going to be of higher stock than one never paired (lots of exceptions).
Lexi: 80% of divorces filed by women because of bad husbands. Her explanation is a one sided view that husbands are disproportionately bad. If the man ends it, he is awful. If the woman ends it, of course, it’s because he was awful. The ladies are angels apparently. The same explanations are proposed for affairs. The numbers are the numbers, same with the OK cupid stats on the discrepancy of women vs. men rating what percent of the population is attractive. Men are not saints, but this joke gets at women’s (evolutionary?) pickiness: https://www.paintsquare.com/humor/?jokeID=5633
Someone above said women have their own money and a woman making over 70K doesn’t care about a guy’s salary. BULL-SHIT. How many female doctors are there married to another doctor?… usually from a higher paying specialty! It is a hypocrisy of feminism, but even successful chicks want their guy to be smarter and more successful, even if it puts them at hopeless odds… Then they start trying to go for the chair of the department or the superstar visiting speaker. There are all sorts of women, some are impossible to please but there are plenty out there and you have to find one for whom you tick enough of her boxes. I give kudos to the feminists who practice what they preach and are willing to marry a guy making much less, as that was what men did decades ago.
Every one of the responses that mentions ‘boomer’ seems to be wrought with about 5-10 other excuses on why life is hard for men and they probably have another 5-10 excuses for why they can’t get a better job, etc. Change the attitude and life will improve. Try it seriously for 12 months and get back to us if we’re wrong.
Another comment mentioned women on dating apps demanding “No Trumpers”, “No Conservatives” etc. Take it as a blessing you can quickly ignore them, because that chick also has about 80 other “No this” “No that” you will have to put up with after you get to know them. James Carville and Mary Matalin are professionally working on opposite politics yet make it work.
There are so many things wrong with this take and and I’m too tired to break it all down now.
But I will say that I’ve arrived at the conclusion in recent years that my lack of success with women is mostly attributed to the fact that I’m generally too nice to them and, in spite of knowing better intellectually, actually treat them as human, i.e. as equals. When I consciously attempted to stop doing this and went out of my way to behave as a callous, emotionally distant manipulative asshole, it was only then that I was able to “get pussy.”
But ultimately I just found this depressing and soul-crushing. Realizing that women genuinely get off on being treated like shit and just use “nice guys” as emotional dumping grounds/crutches was a painful realization and ultimately I felt it better to just abandon the whole pursuit? I mean for what? To bang used up 30 year old roasties? What’s even the point? It’s contrary to my nature. Any adult man who is out doing cynical parlor tricks to snag trim seriously needs to re-evaluate what the hell he’s doing.
Let the record show that Jim, in his 60 or so years on this earth has produced ONE offspring who is autistic to the point of functional retardation due to being the product of a union with an aged thot whose ovum were rotted beyond the point of viability. So if we’re talking about demographics (and we are not gonna outbreed muds at this stage of the game anyway) I’m not sure this is the guy I’d take advice from
That last shot was low.
Don’t listen to this clueless boomer, kids. We have surrogacy today, so there is no reason at all to hook up with a white woman.
You can say that surrogacy is expensive, but it is cheaper in the long run than being with a white woman. After the princess wedding, maintaining her mass gaining diet, paying for her mental health drugs, divorce lawyer fees, etc, surrogacy amounts to only a fraction of the money that would have been flushed down the toilet while being with a white woman.
And the most important thing is that you won’t be playing Russian roulette with your children. With a white woman today, you have about a 50/50 chance that she will destroy them permanently in some way. You might as well start saving up for your kid’s tranny hormones now if you’re stupid enough to have a child with a white woman. Why risk your children because you’re too cheap to pay for surrogacy and hookers if you want to get your dick wet?
For millennials and gen Z, I wholeheartedly recommend abandoning white women entirely and going with surrogacy. If you’re emotionally feeble, like this boomer Goad, such that you feel you must be with a woman, then get with an Asian. Have her bear your IVF white children. Unlike a white woman, the Asian tiger mom will raise your children properly.
In a few more decades, we will have synthetic eggs and artificial wombs, so women wont even be necessary for reproduction at all. Since reproduction is the only value women have in the first place, they will become completely redundant and we can just stop producing them. For now, surrogacy is the answer.
Comments are closed.
If you have Paywall access,
simply login first to see your comment auto-approved.
Note on comments privacy & moderation
Your email is never published nor shared.
Comments are moderated. If you don't see your comment, please be patient. If approved, it will appear here soon. Do not post your comment a second time.
Paywall Access
Lost your password?Edit your comment