Post: #1

Interesting article on good girls embracing the cock carousal and the affect it will have.

I need to move the fuck out this country; it's starting to depress the shit out of me.

http://elitedaily.com/dating/gentlemen/g...-unicorns/

Post: #2

I actually didn't think the article was that well written. For one thing, he makes the mistake of thinking that the women having this "quick sex" are giving it away to all men, not just the top-tier ones -- and therefore leaving the "Beta provider" types of the past with no one.

But then I saw the hilariously angry comments and realized it's pretty cool that a semi-mainstream Web site published this. People are practically throwing tantrums. Sample comments:

"This is some of the most sexist, vile shit I have read in a long, long time."

"Am I the only one that feels this article is contributing to the same damaging ideas about female sexuality that it is attempting to critique?"

"As a male, I think this article is ridiculous. As a web designer/developer, I merely think it's a ploy to stir the pot and drive traffic here."

"this is quite possibly the most sexist article I've ever read. you're just fucking reenforcing that old stupid double standard that guys can have as much meaningless sex as they want but girls should remain chaste and innocent. fuck that shit."

Hahahaha. Comments are through Facebook, which means Red Pill guys who want to keep their jobs are not represented but Blue Pill white-knighters are out in full force.

Post: #3

(05-16-2013 04:20 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  But then I saw the comments and realized it's pretty cool that a semi-mainstream Web site published this, because people are practically throwing tantrums about it. Sample comments:

That’s because comments from Facebook accounts which include photos will usually be quite PC. I read an article not long ago about tattoos on women and the comments, which also came from Facebook accounts, were exclusively pro-feminist.

Besides, sex is only easy to get in the US once you’ve gone through the psychological torture of actually getting a girl (who will generally rank well below your potential as far as looks go). Almost every guy I know, myself included, has gotten sex more easily overseas and with higher quality (although in my case the hottest have been white-Americans, but that's because I spend 99% of my life here).

Just because American women have more lifetime sexual partners and attention-whore about it doesn’t mean they’re easier. If anything, American sluts are a pain in the ass to get sex from and this is hardly the sex paradise this article is making it out to be.

Post: #4

I read the article and thought it was blaming men too much. On the other hand, it does shine a light into the deranged Western Woman psyche and he's getting a lot of hate for that.

Post: #5

If you read the comments it's easy to see why some of those guys don't get laid. It's because they're vaginas themselves.

Post: #6

(05-16-2013 04:37 AM)Atilla Wrote:  Just because American women have more lifetime sexual partners and attention-whore about it doesn’t mean they’re easier.

From a numbers perspective, isn't that exactly what it means?

If a woman is riding the carousel, she will be more likely to be DTF. That is great if you are looking for a notch or hook up, because they are looking for the same.

but these women do don't have much relationship potential.

Quote: If anything, American sluts are a pain in the ass to get sex from and this is hardly the sex paradise this article is making it out to be.

Post: #7

(05-16-2013 04:37 AM)Atilla Wrote:  

(05-16-2013 04:20 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  But then I saw the comments and realized it's pretty cool that a semi-mainstream Web site published this, because people are practically throwing tantrums about it. Sample comments:

That’s because comments from Facebook accounts which include photos will usually be quite PC. I read an article not long ago about tattoos on women and the comments, which also came from Facebook accounts, were exclusively pro-feminist.

Besides, sex is only easy to get in the US once you’ve gone through the psychological torture of actually getting a girl (who will generally rank well below your potential as far as looks go). Almost every guy I know, myself included, has gotten sex more easily overseas and with higher quality (although in my case the hottest have been white-Americans, but that's because I spend 99% of my life here).

Just because American women have more lifetime sexual partners and attention-whore about it doesn’t mean they’re easier. If anything, American sluts are a pain in the ass to get sex from and this is hardly the sex paradise this article is making it out to be.

I don't know. With the exception of SE Asia, is there an easier country to get laid in than the US? Maybe Peru if you're a white guy.

Girls who ar travelling are always easier than they are in their own home cities. In most countries, casual sex is nowhere near as big as it is in the US.

Post: #8

I fucking hate how a lot of sites post through facebook now.

I'm going to register a fake account just to post comments on news sites so i don't have lose my job.

Post: #9

(05-16-2013 12:20 PM)frenchie Wrote:  I fucking hate how a lot of sites post through facebook now.

I'm going to register a fake account just to post comments on news sites so i don't have lose my job.

I made one. I had just watched "Dazed and Confused" so my name is Soul Pole. And I'm from Pha Q.

Post: #10

I'm actually intrigued by the "dating" articles on this site. It seems they've actually got somewhat red-pill advice for women:

http://elitedaily.com/dating/how-to-go-f...irlfriend/

Quote:Just like guys trying to get out of the friend zone, girls are trying to get out of the side zone. I’m going to assume that you want the ‘elite’ type of guy. By elite, I mean successful, confident, driven and passionate. For the other types, it’s going to be very different. One of the key elements of this guy is he’s driven.

The cause of this drive is different for everyone. It’s what makes him successful, but also hard to hold on to. Most guys pursue their dream girl. He pursues his dream, and invites the girl to come along. One thing you must understand is that you won’t be able to force the elite into a relationship. They fight wholeheartedly against the force

Quote:He will only chase so much; you have to meet him halfway. He has too many other options to play around with a serial flirt. If a girl starts being too coy he won’t chase; just replace.

Although there's no actual "how-to", just a bit of wishy-washy vague "advice", this writing still has solid acceptance that guys with options will be getting around, aren't going to commit to something that comes super easily but also aren't going to bother with girls that are too recalcitrant (it's a fine line, as the article says). Seems very un-mainstream and quite realistic to me.

I'd be interested to know what others think.

Post: #11

One red pill comment
"Oh...he's so mean and wrong. I married a woman who had been with half the football team and we have a great relationship. Shes stable as anything. She has agency and assertiveness. ...still good friends with a lot of the guys she used to date. I'll come home from work and they'll be visiting, playing with the kids."

Most insightful post there yet.

Post: #12

Feminism has played probably the biggest role in the decline of the nuclear family.The world was genuinely a better place when women knew their role and played it.Now you have women that try and do manly things while completely abandoning their female responsibilities.

Post: #13

(05-16-2013 04:20 AM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  I actually didn't think the article was that well written. For one thing, he makes the mistake of thinking that the women having this "quick sex" are giving it away to all men, not just the top-tier ones -- and therefore leaving the "Beta provider" types of the past with no one.

But then I saw the hilariously angry comments and realized it's pretty cool that a semi-mainstream Web site published this. People are practically throwing tantrums. Sample comments:

"This is some of the most sexist, vile shit I have read in a long, long time."

"Am I the only one that feels this article is contributing to the same damaging ideas about female sexuality that it is attempting to critique?"

"As a male, I think this article is ridiculous. As a web designer/developer, I merely think it's a ploy to stir the pot and drive traffic here."

"this is quite possibly the most sexist article I've ever read. you're just fucking reenforcing that old stupid double standard that guys can have as much meaningless sex as they want but girls should remain chaste and innocent. fuck that shit."

Hahahaha. Comments are through Facebook, which means Red Pill guys who want to keep their jobs are not represented but Blue Pill white-knighters are out in full force.

Yeah I noticed the same thing. The writing seemed very clumsy and he kind of careened from topic to topic along with frequent reminders that he's a male perspective. But-- his scattershot strategy did manage to hit a lot of relevant points.

Post: #14

(05-17-2013 06:54 AM)TheMachinist Wrote:  Feminism has played probably the biggest role in the decline of the nuclear family.The world was genuinely a better place when women knew their role and played it.

I strongly believe that Feminism can be viewed as follows: utterly clueless upper middle-class princesses falling for the old Tom Sawyer's whitewashing the fence scam:

Quote:Tom surveyed his last touch with the eye of an artist, then he gave his brush another gentle sweep and surveyed the result, as before. Ben ranged up alongside of him. Tom’s mouth watered for the apple, but he stuck to his work. Ben said:

“Hello, old chap, you got to work, hey?”

Tom wheeled suddenly and said:

“Why, it’s you, Ben! I wasn’t noticing.”

“Say – I’m going in a-swimming, I am. Don’t you wish you could? But of course you’d rather work – wouldn’t you? Course you would!”

Tom contemplated the boy a bit, and said:

“What do you call work?”

“Why, ain’t that work?”

Tom resumed his whitewashing, and answered carelessly:

“Well, maybe it is, and maybe it ain’t. All I know, is, it suits Tom Sawyer.”

“Oh come, now, you don’t mean to let on that you like it?”

The brush continued to move.

“Like it? Well, I don’t see why I oughtn’t to like it. Does a boy get a chance to whitewash a fence every day?”

That put the thing in a new light. Ben stopped nibbling his apple. Tom swept his brush daintily back and forth – stepped back to note the effect – added a touch here and there – criticized the effect again – Ben watching every move and getting more and more interested, more and more absorbed. Presently he said:

“Say, Tom, let me whitewash a little.”

Men work because they have to provide for their families. Women are provided for, so they can stay at home, in a safe environment, taking care of the kids, cooking, cleaning, washing, etc. Is it fun? No, but neither is man's work.

To convince men to do very unpleasant work and thus accumulate resources that would allow them to start a family (which would make slaves of said men), utterly ridiculous notions such as "career", "fulfillment", and "job satisfaction" were created. You want to make a man do mind-numbingly dull work with a smile on his face? Call him an "artist", and tell him that he's doing "creative work". Hey, who wants to be an "uncreative" 9-5 office drone? Those uncreative neanderthals are probably racist and homophobic and they may even vote Republican. Yuck!

This scam was created to lure men. Amazingly, increasing prosperity and economic surplus gave women too much free time to think, and the more detached from reality they grew. At some point, women, the pragmatic gender, became as stupid as men. They fell for the lie. Suddenly, they wanted to work, too. Because they weren't haaaaaaaaaappy and needed "fulfillment".

Them damsels should have read Tom Sawyer. Instead, they lost touch with their biological natures, and became 2nd class humans, who fail both at being women, and at being men. No legislation will ever change this fact. And this is not a particularly recent phenomenon, since Schopenhauer saw it in the 1850s. I blame the decline of feudalism, and the prosperity brought by the 1st Industrial Revolution.