A Nugget of Positivity (link updated)

Considering the depressing nature of my last video (that many of you weren’t even able to watch in its entirety), I figure this time I’ll post one that’s a bit more positive.

[Update:  My work computer hates YouTube, so here’s a link to another website with the video that’ll have to do until I switch computers.]

Enjoy your moment in the spotlight, sir.

You deserve it.

Posted in Culture | 2 Comments

No Comment

[Update:  It looks like they took it down.  Here’s a link where it still seems to be in operation:  Potty-Mouthed Princesses Drop F-Bombs for Feminism by FCKH8.com]

Posted in Culture, Feminism | 13 Comments

The Rearing of the Childrens

Today instead of imparting you yet more of deti’s wisdom, I request a bit of help.

In my non-blog writing, I’m at a point where I need to explode the myth that men and women are different only because that’s how we’re socialized.  I’m refuting idiots like this.

However, one of my biggest challenges is that I’m largely ignorant of children’s movies, television programs, and books.  I’m aware of plenty of you-go-girlism in young adult stuff like The Hunger Games and Divergent, but for the under ten crowd I’m lost.

So I request your assistance.  I’m looking for stuff that either promotes the idea that girls=good/boys=bad, stuff that encourages girls to be aggressive action heroes, or that encourages boys to be soft and sensitive.

If you’re aware of a children’s movie, show, book, or game that does this, please leave it in the comments.  A quick summary of the way in which it’s socializing kids would be helpful but isn’t necessary.  Also, although my emphasis is on more recent stuff (from within the past 20 years), if you know of something older put it down.

I much appreciate any examples you can provide.  I know my overall point is right, but I’d much rather not have to waste my time watching stupid cartoons to prove it.

More enlightening posts to resume shortly.

Posted in Arts, Culture | 43 Comments

Why Men Are Pissed Off (guest post by deti)

Men are not pissed off because some girl had sex with a couple of football teams’ worth of guys.  They’re pissed because she lies about it.

Men aren’t pissed because women are attracted to good looking men with chiseled physiques and easy charm who don’t put up with shit from girls.    They’re pissed because women lie about this (and most men lie about it too and HELP women lie about it).   They downplay their sexual attraction to such men for fear of looking shallow and superficial.  Or at least before Sheryl Sandberg, they used to fearthe appearance of shallowness.

Look.  Guys aren’t lying about the fact that they like girls with pretty faces, nice hair, big boobs, firm butts, and long legs who will have sex with them with a minimum of effort.   You ladies should fess up about what really trips your triggers too.

Men aren’t pissed because the sexual marketplace isn’t fair.   They’re not pissed because the homecoming queen won’t fellate them.   They’re not pissed because a cute girl broke up with them.   They’re pissed because people lie to them about it and tell them those girls are just stupid and shallow, when in fact they’re not.   What’s really going on there is that those girls understand the actual rules of the game they’re playing.   They understand their sexual market values and are milking it for all it’s worth.

Men can deal with unfairness.  They can deal with their place in the pecking order.  They can deal with the fact that most girls don’t like them.   They can deal with the fact that nobody owes them anything.  They can deal with the fact that life can be a shit sandwich.  They can deal with life being “catch as catch can”.   They get that things won’t come easy to them and they’ll have to work their asses off for whatever they can get.

What they’re pissed about is the lying, the fraud and the dishonesty.  What they can’t deal with is being told to play by a different set of rules than everyone else is using.   What they can’t deal with is people telling them that things are one way, when in fact the truth is something very different.

They’re pissed because everyone lies to them about the SMP and tells them they have all these advantages on the SMP playing field.  They’re told to “check their privilege”.  They’re told the SMP playing field is level, when it isn’t.   They’re pissed because everyone lies to them about what women find attractive.  They’re pissed because women lie to them about what they find attractive.

I remember as a young kid hearing and reading stories, news articles and reports, about how Woody Allen is so attractive.  Funny guys, guys with senses of humor, are so attractive and desirable, we were told.

Woody Allen is an ordinary New York City dweeb who happened to become a respected filmmaker with a bent for telling funny stories.  Through some hard work, luck, networking, getting the right jobs, and serendipity, he was able to get into filmmaking.    Allen has a keen eye for describing life, death, God, Judaism, relationships, sex, love, loss, morality, and immorality in humorous and insightful ways that resonate with the common folk.  His talent has made him wealthy and put him in the upper echelons of society.  (Or at least it didbefore that whole Soon Yi thing.  Don’t miss the point I’m making here.)

Take that same funny, talented guy, call him Allen Konigsberg (Woody’s real name), and put him in a job in middle management for BigCorp in Omaha or Scranton or Bakersfield.   Still sexy?  Still gets to date Diane Keaton and Mia Farrow?   Yeah.  Didn’t think so.

THAT’s what they’re pissed about.   You telling them they’re Woody Allen, when in fact they’re Allen Konigsberg – just like MOST guys.  You tell them to just be funny like Woody and they’ll get the girl.  Just have to have some money, a good job, and  the girls will come
a-running.   Most guys who LOOK or ACT like Woody Allen don’t get the girl.   So stop lying to them about it.   Figure out the truth, and tell them THAT – that they’re NOT Woody Allen.  They’re not going to be rich or famous.   They’re not going to get the girls they want, so they’ll have to settle for the girls they can get.

So just tell them the truth

Posted in Alpha, Culture, Feminism, Game | 8 Comments

Musings, Odds & Ends (guest post by deti)

There are some who say  that the so-called “bottom 80%” of men have sorely misjudged their own sexual and marriage market values, because they are punching above their weight, going for girls out of their league.   They all want the homecoming queen, the beauty pageant winner.   They all want one really hawt woman and will dump a lesser model for a hawter one.

First, there’s a whiff of “know your place, and don’t try to chasewomen you have no chance with”.  Not going to fly in today’s world, where men have nothing to lose by aiming high.  Second, it’s a massive projection fail.   Flip the sexes, and we have a precise description of women’s prime sexual strategy.   The difference between men and women is that men run an up front, honest game most of the time. Most men are clear about what they want – a reasonably physically attractive, faithful, nonstupid, nonbitchy girl with her head on straight and her priorities in proper order of importance.  Unlike women, with most men, “want” and “can get” are two very, very different things, and men learn this early on.  Most men know they can’t even breathe the same air as the highest SMV women.   So they take what they can get.


Some also talk about sex and relationships being extremely costly and risky for women.   The idea is something of a throwback to evo biology and evo psych.   It’s said that women have to be really selective in their sex partners/mates because every sex act can result in pregnancy, and if they mess up that decision, it’s two decades of work and heartache.

Sex is no longer costly or risky for women.   Modern technology has reduced the odds of unplanned pregnancy to near-zero.  The risk of STDs is quite low if condoms are used.  Any moron who can take a pill at the same time every day or even improperly use a condom can stay pregnancy and disease free.   Slut shaming?  Don’t make me laugh.  There are absolutely NO social or cultural sanctions against premarital or extramarital sex anymore.  Even most of the women you know from church have done or are doing it.  Besides, to the extent there are sexual risks and costs, most women have made it crystal
clear they’re willing to run the risks and pay the costs if the guy is hawt enough or they need the ego boost badly enough.

If sex is so costly and risky, and women have to bear a disproportionate amount of that risk, then shouldn’t women be saving it for marriage or Really Serious Relationships?   It’s odd to hear women in the same breath talk about how risky and costly sex is, and then divulge casual sex stories about wild, passionate, bounce-off-the-walls sex with really hawt guys (the names of whom they can’t even remember), as just about every woman over age 19 seems to do.


I’m told there’s no such thing as an “alpha widow”.  It’s said that the alpha widow concept is men seeking excuses for their failure to sustain attraction.  If a man falls victim to an alpha widow it’s his fault for choosing poorly.

Bunk.   First, it’s not the man’s complete and total responsibility to “sustain attraction” in a relationship.  Denial of the alpha widow phenomenon completely absolves the female part of the equation of any responsibility whatsoever to nurture and cultivate attraction in a
relationship with her man.   It is as if women expect a man to be little more than a dancing monkey who must constantly ensure his woman is sufficiently attracted to him to keep the relationship in good health.  “Is this good enough?  Is THIS good enough?  How about this?  Are you still attracted?”  No man can possibly live his life this way.

Second, a lot of men aren’t good at selecting for many reasons.  No one has ever taught them how because society says that teaching men about their sexual value and sexual nature is evil and must be avoided.   A lot of sluts are exceedingly good at concealing sluttery and assuming the role of “good girl/wife material” when it comes time to seek husbands.  They engage in flat out fraud and deception about their partner counts and experiences.   Most sluts clean up well enough to fool an average man – they can cook, clean and put on a good show for an unsuspecting man’s family.  (They also use rapid sexual access to snag most thirsty men.)

Our entire society excuses, defends and justifies female conduct, because it’s for the “good cause” of getting these women married when they alight from, or get kicked off, the carousel.   At the same time society has intentionally sandbagged and malinformed men in
intersexual relationships, while simultaneously denigrating and deriding men in every way possible.  The express purpose of this is to give women every advantage while hampering men with every conceivable disadvantage.


There’s much talk lately of “male sexual entitlement” (MSE).   The claim is that  men’s “need” for sex is an attempt to justify “sexual aggression”.   It is also argued that low sociosexual value men claim that it’s time for them to “get theirs” and that they deserve a piece of the SMP pie.   It’s said that the manosphere is comprised of low value men agitating for “sexual socialism”, i.e. demanding that womengive low value men their “share” of sex.

Bunk.   There’s no MSE here.  Men don’t claim entitlement to sex.  What’s going on here is men learning the rules of the game. No, not the rules the Cathedral posted on the high arched doors.   No, not the artificial rules your pastor used to court his wife back in seminary school.   No, not the stupid rules your best friend from college was taught, and that he used to date the woman who became his ex- wife.

I’m talking about the  REAL rules.   The ones the top men use.   The ones the girls all know about but steadfastly refuse to admit using.  The ones Great Granddad Fred used to court Great Grandma Gert.   The ones Gert didn’t “like” but deep down knew about and understood.

It’s not about “sexual aggression”.  No, what you claim is “aggression” is actually boys chasing girls they like and finding out what works and what doesn’t work.   It’s not about “fairness”.  It’s not about men demanding affection or attention from girls who don’t like them.   It’s not about your strawman argument of ordinary guys demanding sex from prom queens and cheerleaders.

It’s about men figuring out how to find the girls who DO like them.  It’s about men figuring out what to do with and for those girls who do like them.   It’s about men telling girls “No Thanks” to “Let’s Just Be Friends”.  It’s about men figuring out how to get better.

Posted in Alpha, Culture, Family, Feminism, Game, Religion | 7 Comments

The Marriage Problem (guest post by deti)

After spending some time with men and women around these parts, I amconvinced that the primary cause of unhappiness in marriages is this:

The vast majority of married women are married to men who are less attractive, (or to whom they are less attracted) than the men they used to sleep with.

There are two real causes here.

Unattractive Men

There is a large glut of unattractive men in today’s society.   They exist because (1) they’ve been specifically taught and lied to over the past couple of generations about what is and is not attractive; and (2) most have little to no incentive to be anything else.  These men have been taught specifically that being nice, supplicating, pedestalizing and obsequious are attractive to women, and that women love men who have these traits.  They’ve been told that their own looks, physical appearances and physical conditioning don’t matter at
all to women.   And men get even more demoralized and disincentivized when they discover that being those things doesn’t work, and everyone around them has been flat out lying to them.

Going back a little further, there are a lot of reasons for this.  Women (and some men) complained about boys and young men being sexually assertive, i.e. seeing a girl he likes and going after her.  This is what we used to call “normal sexual behavior”.

A boy sees a girl he likes and runs his best game on her.   This is now decried as abusive, deceptive, fraudulent and manipulative.  Or a boy sees a girl he likes and perhaps pinches her derriere in high school, or sneaks a kiss.   The alarms sound, because this is sexual
violence.  He’s a sexual harasser, a rapist in the making.

Or a college guy takes a girl to a party where she enjoys herself a bit too much, and she ends up back at his dorm room, throwing caution (and her clothes) to the wind.   This is “date rape”, it’s “male sexual entitlement”, it’s dangerous.   We cannot have girls actually, you know, having buzzed or drunk sex with guys they, um, LIKED enough to say “yes” to a date with.

The truth is a little different, of course.   The boy who struts up and puffs out his chest is displaying in the hopes he’ll be selected.  The boy who pinches or kisses is trying to show some dominance and get noticed, as is his natural bent.  It’s in his blood to find a girl he likes and try to get on her radar screen.    And, the college girl who gets out of control with a guy she likes is doing what she wants to do anyway.

Going back even further, women (and some men) understood that nice, kind, polite, “good” men were the best bets for young girls who might not be so good at picking out the best fits long term for themselves.  So, daddies and mommies told their princesses to go for the really nice young men, because they were the best “husband” bets.    They told their sons to get the “nice” girls by being “nice” themselves.

Fast forward, back to today.   The “nice” men were trained by parents and grandparents for a mating and pairing system that hasn’t existed for decades.    They’re being told that if they do anything, anything at all, that even HINTS at sexual misconduct, their lives are OVER.  They will be charged as sex offenders, with lifetime registry, the whole bit.  They’ll lose their jobs.   They’ll lose social connections.  They’ll suffer ostracism, poverty, financial and social ruination.

Yet at the very same time, these very selfsame men are being derided as spineless pussies, wimps, and unmotivated, incentiveless sacs of plasma who couldn’t assert their way out of wet paper bags.

To a great extent, they’re 100% correct.   These men exist because the vast majority of women created them.   YOU created the spineless pussies who can’t step to a woman and ask her out, because YOU demanded that they never ever ever talk to a woman for fear of sexual harassment accusations.   These men exist because YOU threaten to have them frogmarched out of schools and jobs.   These men exist because you told them that nice, kind, supplication and pedestalization are “attractive”.  They exist because YOU TOLD THEM TO BE THIS WAY.   They exist because YOU told them that this is attractive.

Damaged Women

Most women are increasingly unable to be attracted to men who those women can actually lock down for marriage.   The reason for this is well known.  They are spending their younger years having sex with the most attractive men they can find.  They’re not doing so for the purpose of locking one down for marriage, but specifically for fun and
enjoyment.   (Remember:  If a woman wants marriage, she can get that.  Might not be the best guy; but she CAN get married.)

Most women are not virgins when they walk down the aisle.  Even using the conservative CDC figures, the typical woman in the United States marrying today has had 3 or 4 prior sex partners.   Somewhere in there is a “serious boyfriend” she was really attracted to and whom  she really cared about.   There’s probably also at least one “in between guy”, a very attractive man she decided to have sex with on a lark and a whim.  The opportunity was there to bed down with a really hawt guy, so she took it.

The primary reason she isn’t with any of those prior men is because she couldn’t get, or didn’t want, commitment from any of them.    So, when she finally decides to get serious about marriage, she has to continue looking downmarket until she gets to a man who puts
commitment on the table.   Most of the time, the man who offers her commitment is not as attractive as the men she had sex with before him.    And she is less able to work up attraction for that man.   She has real time, real world experience with other, more objectively attractive men she can remember, usually through quite vivid memories.  She cannot help but  compare and contrast him with her past memories of more attractive men.   This recollection, comparison and contrast almost always leads to the woman (now wife) feeling disappointment, disillusionment, frustration, and ultimate unhappiness.

The true reason is almost never identified.   That true reason is almost always (1) she isn’t as attracted to her husband as she was to the prior men (by far and away the most common reason); or (2) she was attracted to him but the attraction has been lost because of his conduct, her conduct or both; or (3) she was never attracted to him in the first place.   She feels shortchanged and cheated, because she “settled” for less than what she wanted.   This isn’t fair, because she feels she HAD to settle.   It was either this “less than” guy, or nobody.  It’s this mediocre, “meh”, “best I could do at the time” guy, or a lifetime of spinsterhood.

I Do Not Think It Means What You Think It Means

A related and contributory issue is that most women conceal, or are simply confused about, what they find “attractive”.   For men, the word “attractive” means sexual desirability – an “attractive” woman is a woman he wants to fuck.

For women the word “attractive” can connote a myriad of things, and usually means a man she would like to just “be” with or really, really like.    For women, sexual desirability is one of the things going into the cocktail of “attractive”, but most women never admit this out loud.    To a woman, “attractive” men are sexually desirable AND intelligent AND wealthy AND kind AND handsome AND righteous AND like kids AND have a sense of humor AND well-traveled AND any number of other things.   So when a woman says a particular man is “attractive”, she could mean any one or more of those things.     She will almost always downplay the importance of her sexual attraction to him, because to give it primacy would make her look shallow and slutty.  It IS important to her, but she will never verbally ADMIT that it is, even to herself.


And so though the powers that be and the Cathedral will never admit it, this is why we have the marriage  problems we have.   We are a nation of unattractive men because most of those men have no chance even with the average women who would be their assortive
mating/pairing counterparts.    Those unattractive men have scant incentive to improve themselves for a nation of women who don’t want them and employers who don’t need them.   And we are also a nation of women who have casual-sexed themselves out of their own markets.  They’ve damaged themselves to the point that they are unwilling and unable to forge long term bonds with the men who will have them.

This is why we have the marriage and divorce problems we have – because of too many unattractive men, too many women  having sex with men they can’t marry or don’t want to marry; women who marry men they aren’t attracted to; and too many women with unrealistic and unreasonable expectations.

Posted in Alpha, Culture, Family, Feminism | 25 Comments

She Does What She Wants (guest post by Deti)

[Martel’s note:  Much thanks to deti for providing these posts.  As I’m sure many of you know from his comments throughout the Manosphere and posts elsewhere that he’s got some great insights.

As for me, the book is proceeding well.  Book writing is a different animal than blogging, and I admit that for a while I found it pretty daunting.  Fortunately, through trial and error I’ve found a system that works well for me.  It’s still far from easy, but I can actually envision finishing it (albeit quite some time from now).

However I miss blogging, so I’ll be doing a post or two of my own soon.

But to tide you over, here’s deti:]

I  said in my last guest post here:

Almost all the time, when it comes to sex a woman does what she wants to do.   Women have sex when and with whom they want, and don’t have sex when they don’t want to, regardless of their mental states, their stations, or their life circumstances.    Whatever a woman has done sexually in the past, she did those things because she WANTED to do
them.   She had sex with other men because she wanted to do so.

Even the most naïve, sheltered women know the score.  They know what they’re getting when they go home with a PUA.   No woman gets with a player unless she wants to.    No woman has sex in the bar bathroom unless she wants to.    No woman has a same night lay or a one-nightstand unless she wants to.

If she does not want to have sex with you, trust me –she won’t.

You will hear women tell you variations on their stories of how they never wanted their lives to turn out the way they did.   They didn’t want to wait so long to marry.  It was never their intent to rack up their double digit Ns.   They have always wanted to be wives and
mothers, but things just never worked out.   The vagaries of time and circumstance never aligned in their favor for one reason or another.

It always comes out something like this:

I have always wanted to be a wife and mom, but I just couldn’t find a good enough man.

I didn’t mean to sleep with all those men.  I was drunk/high/had low self esteem.

I didn’t want it to turn out this way, it just kinda did.

I wanted to get married, but I was just a piece of ass to them.  I guess they didn’t ask me because they just wanted to have sex with me.

I made a lot of mistakes in my past.

When you hear a woman begin to spin tales to excuse, explain and
rationalize her past to you, remember this:

We live in a society which has been almost completely reordered over the past 50 years to maximize women’s freedom and options.   Since about 1960, American women have been more free and have had more options than at any other time in history.   Her freedom of speech and association is near-absolute.   She can do and say whatever she wants, wherever and whenever she wants.   There are men with fists, tasers, billy clubs and guns who are just a yell or a phone call away who will arrive posthaste to enforce those rights at any time.

She is free to go to school, live with her parents or on her own, and get a job.   She has her own livelihood and can do with it whatever she wishes.

She can have sex (or not) with whoever she wants.  She can determine the kinds of relationships she is willing to have and with whom she will have them.   Birth control is cheap, safe, effective, widely available and easy to use.  There are no societal sanctions or
restrictions whatsoever on any woman to prevent or avoid premarital or extramarital sex.  She can choose not to have sex with her husband; can choose to stop having sex with him at any time she wants.   No pastor, no judge, no family member will tell her to have sex with her husband against her wishes or desires.   The only conjugal rights a man has within marriage are those his wife decides to give him.

For years, women have been screaming from every rooftop and every media outlet that they are fully personally responsible for their own lives.   They are fully autonomous; they have complete and total personal agency in every conceivable area of their lives:   moral,
legal, rational and decisional.   This is the society and culture that women fought for, and won.

Remember that a woman’s past is the sum total of her decisions and choices.   There are no “mistakes”,   there are only decisions.   From same night lays to ex husbands, she had sex with the men in her past because she made the choice to do so.    If she is not having sex, it’s because that’s what she wants.    A single woman is such because she doesn’t want to be married.

It is not a chemical substance’s fault that she is having sex.  No one poured it down her throat, put it in her lungs or shoved it up her nose.  She did that all by herself.   If she is having consensual sex while drunk, the booze freed up her inhibitions, just gave her that
little push to do what she wanted and intended.  Even while intoxicated, people don’t tend to do things they don’t want or intend to do.   Intoxication does not absolve her from responsibility for her conduct behind the wheel of a car; it should not relieve her of the
consequences of a decision to get busy with a guy.  No matter her mental state, she is free at any time to say “no, I don’t want to do this” and BY LAW her erstwhile paramour must stop or he will see the inside of a jail cell for a number of years after the aforesaid men with guns arrive to crack open his skull.

It’s not her lack of self esteem.   Her friends are not requiring her to have sex.   Nor is any good looking player forcing her into that bedroom.   She could have chosen any number of  other things to boost her self-worth and self regard.  She chose sex and sexual validation.  That’s her choice and her decision to make; she is free to make it; and no one can stop her from making it.

Her having sex with a guy who “done her dirty” was not a “mistake”.  It was a judgment call, a choice, a decision; the responsibility for which is fully hers and hers alone.

She can’t blame the charming cad or the good looking player.  Ultimately, she made the decision to sleep with the man.   Her body, her choice.   In the final analysis, she’s the sex gatekeeper.  When it’s all said and done, her decision to sleep with the player is on HER, not him.

She is single not because there are no good, available, marriageable men.   She is single because she doesn’t want to marry any of the available marriageable men, isn’t attracted to such men.  She is single because she prefers that to marriage to any man other than a top man.   Or, she is single because she had a good man and (70 to 80% chance) chose to end the marriage or forced an end to it.   It is only when her options starkly disappear that she will change her heart and mind.

So when she tells you her sexual history, lays it out for you, and then ratchets up the excuse machine, remember that she’s not a victim of circumstance.   Things worked out the way they did because of HER choices.   Her past is what it is because of her decisions.   She had sex with each of those prior men because she wanted to.   She had sex
with them because she made the decision, made the choice, to have sex with them.   She isn’t married because that’s the life she has chosen for herself.

She made the choice to get drunk, to get high, to party.   She made the choice to use her sexual power to serve her own purposes:  to boost her self-esteem, for validation, for affirmation, for a sense of belonging.  She could have chosen other things to elevate her own self-regard and worth.  She didn’t.  She chose sex.

She made the choice to have sex with the top men instead of pursuing commitment from a good man.    She could have chosen to hold out for marriage.   She didn’t.  She preferred sex with a top man now over commitment from a more stable, more attainable man later.

No one made those choices for her.  She, and she alone, made them.  The decisions, and the consequences that flow from them, are on her.

Her life turned out the way it did because she chose it.

Posted in Culture, Feminism | 17 Comments