Post: #1

A women with some red pill facts about marriage and why it's not longer beneficial for men to pursue it. Good drop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yzUECFwU3U

Post: #2

comments section is frothing at the mouth.

It occurred to me;

We might get our share of crazies on the RVF. But if you REALLY think about it, I'd say our discussion and discourse is considerably civilized compared to what the average blue-collar Joe is capable of.

Piss off enough American men, and I foresee a future when women lament the good ol' days in 2012 and 2013 when they had MRAs willing to talk things out in civilized discussion. At some point, the population of angered and embittered men could potentially reach a tipping point where the MAJORITY of red-pill men (not all) will conduct themselves in a rabid, violent, and angry manner.

And what a beautiful sight that will be.

Post: #3

(10-31-2013 05:17 PM)Damascus Wrote:  A women with some red pill facts about marriage and why it's not longer beneficial for men to pursue it. Good drop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3yzUECFwU3U

Excellent find dude. I'm passing this shit around!

Post: #4

Is this a dupe? I remember reading about this book here before. Instant pundits wife I believe.

Post: #5

Her statements were not well recieved with the fox news anchors.

Post: #6

This is a compilation of interviews.

Post: #7

Post: #8

I've been seeing a strong correlation lately between not looking like dog shit and having realistic views of the world.

Post: #9

It's amazing how men can deny evidence that's right in front of their face. I'm starting to think these people don't even deserve help - especially if they're just going to refuse it or refute the need for it

Post: #10

(11-01-2013 02:12 AM)WesternCancer Wrote:  I've been seeing a strong correlation lately between not looking like dog shit and having realistic views of the world.

Post: #11

I'm pretty surprised that a female is dropping some red pill knowledge about western marriage. The laws need to be changed. I don't have a problem with getting married to the right woman but god damn I do not believe in NO FAULT bullshit. Women are likely to file for divorce and the court systems are bias. If a female wants to walk away fine but she doesn't get to rape me in the ass in the process. You leave with what you came with and everything in the marriage is split 50/50. No fucking alimony. Get a god damn job. The benefit of marriage is that I take care of you during that time but bitch of you leave then my money stays. WTF is up with that concept of maintaining a certain lifestyle acquired during the marriage? That's BULLSHIT. Excuse my ranting brothas but this shit real grinds my nerves. There needs to be real consequences for divorce. No alimony and if the parents have 50% custody of the kids, NO CHILDSUPPORT. If the laws changed where the courts view things "equally" as feminist claim to want then more men wouldn't hesitate to marry. AS it stands now no man making a good living should ever get married.

Post: #12

The funny thing about men's rights is the demands they have are almost exclusively focused on the unbalanced judicial system, meaning equality could be reached overnight by simply changing the law. It's completely fixable.

Meanwhile feminists keep trying to blow up pseudo problems like this "rape epidemic" by shaming all men into believing they are rapists. What if there was a theft epidemic in Chicago? Would people put up signs saying "You thieves are really terrible! STOP THEFT NOW". The only way to actually reduce rape is to tell women to take precautions. Don't drink so much that you lose consciousness - regardless of potential rape - it's not really a healthy thing to do to your body. But once you point any sort of responsibility at women they get offended because they have been convinced they are 100% righteous victims who are exempt from responsibility. Responsibility is for the strong minded who know how to handle themselves. The only times we exempt individuals of responsibility is if they are children, mentally retarded or psychologically unstable. Now we need a 4th category for women.

Post: #13

(11-01-2013 02:12 AM)WesternCancer Wrote:  I've been seeing a strong correlation lately between not looking like dog shit and having realistic views of the world.

Amazing, isn't it?

I'm reminded of a girl from my class way back in high school. This was the 80's so fat shaming was de rigueur. And she was sloppy fat.

She had few friends. No boyfriends ever that I recall. Personality wasn't horrible and it's not like she had poor facial structure or skin.

She was physically unattractive solely due to being overweight.

Fast forward ten years; I decided to hit my class reunion since I was in town. While mingling with past classmates I see an attractive blond that I didn't immediately recognize. The guy she was with was handsome and appeared to have his shit together, but I had no idea who he was either. So, I asked someone "Who is that blond over there?"

"Oh, that's Molly."

"No fucking way."

"Seriously. I talked to her earlier. After school she decided to get herself together and went on a diet. That guy she is with is her husband. They live outside Chicago now and have a little boy. yadda yadda yadda."

I was stunned. Back in school I wouldn't have considered doing anything with this girl. Now, she was one of the most attractive women there that night.

Amongst the SAME girls she went to school with.

The moral of this story is this; Molly took it upon herself to become a better, more attractive person and reaped the benefits. She got a good loving husband, a family, and the house with a white picket fence. They are still married to this day and she still looks good for her age.

Beats the hell out of blogging about being held down by the patriarchy while stuffing your face with bon bons if you ask me.

Post: #14

(10-31-2013 09:18 PM)bacon Wrote:  



Her statements were not well recieved with the fox news anchors.

She looks pretty good in that interview.

WB

Post: #15

The Manosphere/Roosh suffer the casualties and this broad and her ilk http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/30/...-feminism/ show up when the tide is turning and claim the spoils.

Post: #16

(11-01-2013 09:11 PM)Kingsley Davis Wrote:  The Manosphere/Roosh suffer the casualties and this broad and her ilk http://www.the-spearhead.com/2013/10/30/...-feminism/ show up when the tide is turning and claim the spoils.

Can you say youre suprised because i'm not.

Post: #17

This is a damn good thread! Men have no rights in the U.S. and until we stand up and fight for 'our' rights, women will continue to run our asses over! These laws need to change now!

Post: #18

(10-31-2013 09:18 PM)bacon Wrote:  



Her statements were not well recieved with the fox news anchors.

The part of this video 2:44 on, where she says; "Men haven't written this book because people will listen to a woman and not a man about this topic.."

Well in fact men surely have written books about this, but from her earlier years she admits in the first video she had an early feminist mindset.

So it seems she's playing this idea that people won't listen to men of course, to sell her book which is B.S.

But regardless, at least she brings some truth and stats to the forefront, and due to culturally ingrained western feminism and the tides not having yet turned substantially, marks a score for MGTOW.

Post: #19

Quote:The part of this video 2:44 on, where she says; "Men haven't written this book because people will listen to a woman and not a man about this topic.."

Put ego aside and it's a very valid point.

We're in a war of the genders.

Put any guy from the manosphere under the spotlight and they'll demonize him no matter what, as this recent fiasco with ABC proved. They'll search as long as they have to find that one angry MRA.

If a woman spreads the same message, it's much more potent. I don't like it either, but face reality.

This woman is no saint either, she's not out to help men through altruism. She's just intelligent to realize that the future of her gender depends on rehabilitating their relationship with men and that the current generation of feminazis and their government goons are ruining it for women everywhere. I applaud her efforts.

Post: #20

(10-31-2013 09:18 PM)bacon Wrote:  



Her statements were not well recieved with the fox news anchors.

Wow, she fucking owned them. They tossed a ton of bullshit her way but she controlled the frame all the way. Very impressive.

Post: #21

I don't think men are on strike as much as just exploring other options. The secret is out now that you don't have to be beholden to the American female mindset if you don't want to be. More guys are traveling or hearing and reading stories about adventures and realizing they can get more bang for their buck in many other places.

Post: #22

Interesting discussion about the declining relations between men and women...

Post: #23

Although men are seeing the cost - benefit - risk of marriage being wanting, I am still not convinced that there is a marriage strike.

Prince Harry on his knees to an older divorcée who gave the best of herself to everyone except her previous husband, with a ring that rivals the GDP of an African nation is sadly indicative that men will settle if they have enough coin to interest a woman with.

There is a difference between being unemployed and on strike because shop steward has stopped work. Most men are on the dole queue, not on the picket line.

The dating and mating market is exactly how women want it to be, and it takes on the image in accordance with the actions of women of prime fertility and their dating habits range from hook ups to serial monogamy with increasing elements of polyandry.

Although men have more leverage over the MMP than the SMP, talk of marriage strikes seem like the cuckservative argument because it denies women agency over the SMP and certainly doesn't recognise that women have a feral sexuality.

Post: #24

^ This is true.
We have to remember that, sans sexual restraints, women naturally flock to the top 20% or so of men. Men in this position (many of us here), can enjoy a sexual buffet and decide against 'buying the cow' since 'the milk is free.' When we decide to marry, we aren't going to be picking some old harridan.

As such, what we are really seeing is a marriage strike against older and used up women, but definitely not a strike against marrying young fertile women. Marrying young fertile women is simply not an option for many men.

The cycle works this way (on average):
1. Young women think they can 'snag an alpha'
2. A lot of young guys need some time to develop themselves - that Rollo graph has some truth to it in today's world (the shape of the graph was always the same, all the ages have just been bumped up in modern times)
3.a. If these guys get their shit together, they aren't going to want to settle for an aged slut
3.b. If these guys are just average, some of them will settle, but a lot of them (and more each passing day) hear about divorce stats and think about their potential spouses' slutty past and other manosphere truths and they don't want to settle for an aged slut, too
(4 - bonus: There are A LOT of women past their prime who don't want these average guys either and complain 'where have all the good men gone.')

So, all in all, there absolutely isn't a marriage strike against young fertile women, but there definitely is one growing against older barren females... just as there always has been since time immemorial.

p.s. If I ever have daughters, I'll be marrying them off early - before it's too late.

Post: #25

It's a good book and a quick read. It is not very surprising.