October 2009 Comment of the Month

Holy mother of Moses, there were a lot of good comments in October.

The October 2009 Comment of the Month is a tie between last month’s winner, Doug1, who argues against date rape:

The whole effort to make intoxication sex rape at the girls option after the fact is an abomination and must be thoroughly and vehemently rejected by men.

The large majority of causal sex, particularly first time casual sex between a pair, involves some degree of drinking on both parties part. That’s our social custom among most groups in this country and has been for a very long time. If a girl’s judgment is loosened up when she drinks in ways she may regret later, then it’s her responsibility to not drink so much, or not drink at all, or not do so and then flirt re: having having sex with a new partner. If all other areas drinking does not absolve the drinking person of responsibility for their actions when they’ve been drinking. It should even less so in this one.

The whole date rape campaign of campus and radical feminists is at BEST a concerted campaign to make all but the most gentlemanly conduct on the part of men that involves sexual contact (even though not rejected), a VERY VERY SERIOUS CRIME. I.e. rape. That’s ridiculous.

At the same time a great many women, way over half and probably lots many more than that have rape fantasies. Now they don’t have fantasies about some unattractive schmuck raping them, it’s true. It’s also not true, despite what feminists say, that women never actually want to act out any of those fantasies. Plenty of women do. I know this first hand. plenty have wanted to with me.

In the case of date rape, the man is by definition almost, or certainly a guy can and should be forgiven for assuming so until there’s good evidence to the contrary that the girl did find at least tentatively attractive. She went on some kind of date, or engaged in flirting behavior, with him. No that doesn’t entitle him to then pull a knife and despite her screams rape her. Of course not. But these circumstances do mean that if a woman starts down the road towards indicating an interest in having sex with her date, the BURDEN SHIFTS TO HER TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR THAT SHE DOESN’T WANT FULL ON SEX if she doesn’t..

It’s not even as clear as a mere no. Because against despite feminist lying, and lesbian feminist lying is what it usually is, women DO often mean yes when they say no, or really more maybe when they say no, maybe, if you can make me feel it enough that my hindbrain passion overcomes my forebrain restraint and go slower, cause that kind of overwhelming is like just one of the hottest sexual feelings a girl can have, and is in fact at the core of a lot of rape fantasies or “was that rape” fantasies. Which later are EVEN MORE COMMON. Ask e.g. Bhetti, romance novel glutton.

Of course there are ways of saying no that do mean no, and I for one can nearly always tell the difference. But can a jury when the woman lies about it afterwards, when her forebrain ego and superego, are coldly evaluating the loss to reputation of putting out so easily with someone less than the number one stud on campus (and sometimes even if to him, esp. if he didn’t call the next day or week).

Actually feminist date rape extremism and climate of hysteria is moving me back to thinking that a women should have to do a lot more than say no to make it rape. She should have to actually physcially struggle and show clear evidence that she has. If that means risking some degree of injury, tough. Rape is a VERY serious charge and brings serious jail time and total loss of male reputation in all decent circles. THe incidence of false date rape accusations is just too high.

IN THIS ATMOSPHERE OF DATE RAPE HYSTERIA that campus and radical feminists have created WOMEN DO LIE ABOUT RAPE, especially acquaitance rape ALL THE TIME NOW. Maybe they didn’t used to. But times have changed. They sure do now.

…and Leopold II, King of the Belgians, who opines on the insidious evil of SWPLness:

Obsidian has the half of it.

I do enjoy the classlessness (in both senses of the word) of North America. There’s something romantic about a country where the wealthiest financiers and the poorest laborers sat next to each other in the bleachers at the games and fought shoulder to shoulder in the trenches.

This is the one of the few places on earth where a kid from nowhere can make great wealth, and perhaps the only place where making your wealth from nothing is more respected than inheriting it.

This is not merely a great story, it is my father’s story – the story of a man who came from a dirt poor country, came here with nothing. He had little “culture” of the high-brow sort, and never cared much for it. He loved the prole legends of the old country, and he loved Coca-Cola.

it is not perfect, not by half. But half of it works, and that’s more than anywhere else in this world.

—

But what is the other half? The other half are those who try to destroy it.

SWPLs who want “class” and “substance” are merely those who wish to be our aristocracy attempting to insert social barriers between the rich and the poor. Those are most SWPL are the ones with the greatest status anxiety – neither plutocrats nor working men are SWPL.

It is those who transplant to cities, those with wealthy parents but little skill, and urban white women desperate to reassure themselves of high social position, who most fear slipping in status. They fear men like my father, blue-collar men with funny accents, will overtake them. Thus, they throw up barriers, they use their obscure indie bands and their useless diplomas to give them a reason to feel superior.

For in a world where some kid writing software in garage, some high school dropout driving a front-loader in Fort Mac, some Indian immigrant who borrows money from his family to buy a gas station, all can gain entry to the middle class, how do those born into privilege set themselves apart? SWPLism, the ersatz Europhilia, the smugness about foreign travel, the obsession with obscure bands, all this is an attempt to set hard class boundaries. Thus, they create these SWPL shibboleths to set themselves apart.

Make no mistake, this is a dagger aimed at the heart of the American Dream and the middle class.

It is attempt to create a hereditary aristocracy.

Sheer awesomeness. Great work.

Runners-up include Hermes on female solipsism:

Remember that season of The Bachelor a few years back, where the bachelor was a doctor, and one of the female contestants, who was a doctor as well, lamented “my eggs are rotting!” She also kept talking about the fact that she was a doctor, as though she thought it was unfair that he wasn’t impressed by that. (That was one of my first glimpses of sex-realism: I remember some blogger writing, “news flash ladies–we don’t care about your resumes!”)

Another important example of this is how women judge other women’s attractiveness by the same standards by which they judge men’s (personality, style, etc.) Thursday wrote a good comment explaining this. I’ve seen this so many times in my own social circles, where girls will get all jealous around the girl who dresses and does her hair really stylishly and wears lots of makeup, but whose raw materials are only so-so, and then be utterly flummoxed when men display interest in the jeans-sneakers-and-ponytail girl-next-door who just has a prettier face and better body.

…Marquis on women and game:

i’m always amazed at women with knowledge of “game” theory, who admit it works, but then in the same breath will talk about what women “say they want”…if women wanted what they SAY they wanted, more beta males would get laid, there’d be less divorces, less alimony/child support payments…and chicks would be happy. to quote Chris Rock: “I never met a happy woman in my life.”

…Obsidian on asshole game:

While I definitely have my problems with Tucker Max, and will delve into that issue a great deal more in the coming weeks (Obsidian: The Blog, launching Oct 31 2009), I have to openly and freely admit that Asshole Game WORKS.

Yes, that’s right. It works. Emphatically. And one need not be a PUA or a Dating Advice columinist of whatever stripe to see and know this-all you need are your lying eyes. We’ve all known complete and utter jerks who get more ass than the proverbial toilet seat, while the nice guys not ending up finishing last, but they’re feverishly working it out w/the Five Fingers Of Death on a lonely Saturday night in Anywhere USA.

And, as you rightly put it Ferdi, its in the genes. Women are indeed hardwired for this sort of thing, *especially when they’re younger*, ie, btw say, 20 and 30 or so. Truthfully, I think its a lifelong thing. A few examples, ripped from the Obsidian Files, will suffice.

Just last night I had to resort to a bit of Asshole Game w/my Woman, Brown Sugah. Like virtually every Woman I’ve ever had, she goes off the rails at least once a month, and I have to set things straight again. Last night was no exception. After giving me a day’s worth of snarky text messages and playing “hide and seek makeout”, I abruptly ended the session and turned to watch the tv. When she tried to touch me, I violently shrugged her off and kept watching the tv (btw, Michael Clayton is a very interesting movie, check it out if you haven’t already). In Game parlance, this is known as a “Freeze Out”, and trust me when I tell ya fellas, IT WORKS.

Brown Sugah sat there, befuddled for a few minutes, then slowly rose up from the bed and walked aimlessly around the house. Then, as she washed dishes, she started crying.

I wasn’t moved in the slightest. I let her stew in her shit for an hour, then went back to Good Cop and consoled her. The resultant hummer rivaled Vanessa Del Rio’s.

Second story…a true one:

My grandfather was a Good Man in every sense of the word; a true Virgo Gentleman. But he happened to be married to a firecracker of a lady in my grandmother, and I could only imagine what she was like when they were youner and courting. He should have gotten an award just for simply marrying her in the first place, and I say that out of sheer love for both of em, lol.

Anyway, one day while at the dinner table, my grandmother was really on the rag and on a tear, bithing up a storm. She had been at it nonstop for at least a half and hour. When it got to the 45 minute mark, my grandfather, a Man I’d known all my life, who didn’t believe in whipping his own kids (RARE in the Black community let me tell you, especially bck in the 50s-60s) and was always, always, always a most concilliatory guy-turned into the Incredible Hulk.

Out of nowhere, he smashed his fist on the glass dinner table and bellowed “ENOUGH!!!” the table? Toast. Had a big assed crack that ran the full length of it. My grandmother? That was the first and only time I saw a Black Woman turn as white as a sheet. Her haughty, snarky tone was completely gone, replaced w/a barely audible mousy whisper, begging my grandfather to calm down and that she was sorry. I could see the veins in my grandfather’s neck bulging. That shit scared me.

We ate in silence, and directly afterward, my grandad got up from the table and went upstairs, followed closely behind by my grandmother.

I don’t know if old folks screw or not, and I certainly wasn’t trying to find out if my grandparents did, but I do know this: had they been my age at the time, and knowing what I do today about Human Nature, they’d be humping like rabbits.

My point? That you simply cannot be too nice w/Women. They can and will see it as a fundamental weakness, even though, in a modern and advanced world, such reasoning, if one can call it that, makes about as much sense as their liking for exclusively tall guys. Nevertheless, its TRUE. And the Freeway of Love is littered with the corpses of Nice Guys who didn’t know the rules of the road.

I am philosophically opposed to Asshole Game; at heart, I’m a chip off the ole block that was my grandfather. But I see and realize a simple, yet profound truth: Nice Guy=Supplication=Beta Male=Five Fingers Of Death. The ONLY way you can be a nice guy and get away with it, is to, every once in awhile, let your Woman know that you can and will go Rambo on her or anyone else who fucks with you. Not only do Women respect this, it makes them dripping wet.

Women like the one you wrote about above Ferdi, can afford to write the things they do, because it in no way is connected with their ability to get Dick On Demand; simply put, there’s a reason why Witchcraft and the Paranormal are such hue draws for Women, while hard sciences and High-Tech are such huge draws for Men, and Game is no different. The reasons why are simple: Women really don’t need “Game”-all they need is to be hot, be feminine, and be available, and the line will soon form to the left.

For guys, unless they were born w/the rarified Alpha Gene, they need to figure out ways and methods that actually net him poon and the chance to win the evolutionary arms race-or, he’s toast. Game exists because Men HAVE to figure Women out. Women don’t HAVE to figure Men out, at least until they hit their Wile E. Coyote Moment. All a Woman’s gotta do, as Kim Kardashian and Paris Hilton showed the world so very well, is lay back, and spread her legs.

As we all know here, but ladies like the topic of this post either don’t, can’t, or won’t accept, is that the sexual marketplace is as real, and for my money, even moreso, than anything Wall Street could cobble together. Because the stakes are so high and impactful, not a lot of abstract concepts and Fed Chairman speak. And when it comes to the sexual marketplace, Women set the price-Men, mostof them anyway, have really only one of two options: “buy” at the going rate, or, refuse to buy. Like most consumers, most Men would rather pay a little more than go without.

Natural Alphas and Men w/Game, though, have a third option-they can haggle over the price that Women set. In fact, that’s how I see Game-the extent to which you, as a Man, can negotiate for a better deal with the seller. Until very recently in the sexual marketplace history, it was a Seller’s Market. Noawadays, with the advent of Game, things done changed-it’s a Buyer’s Market for those who are saavy enough.

Asshole Game, much as I may personally dislike it, is the “negotiations with a lightsaber” of the entire system. And again, I have to say, it works.

No doubt.

If Women don’t want assholes winning out, they can change that situation overnight. But, as you said Ferdi, we guys and the only ones that are led around by their nether regions.

…Bhetti on male body language:

When I was exposed to the explicit idea that men could be gym rats and not get any female attention to speak of, I started trying to really see the men around me and their likely ability to elicit female attraction.

Time and again, I would see tall and even muscled out gentlemen utterly compromise themselves by ‘I’m going to make myself look smaller and as least threatening as possible’ body language. This practically makes them invisible to a woman, I think.

…Gunslingergregi on niceness and cowardice:

Plus I found out my dad is nice but not kind. Definetly a distinction poignant shit you wrote there. Really good stuff. A ton of guys thinking they are so nice and wondering whats wrong and why they got fucked up. It is because you are a pussy that you where being nice. Not out of kindness because you could personnally make the scenerio go either way.

…MNL on Shakespeare’s alphaness:

Shakespeare clearly understood asshole game. He had it down cold (as he did so many other social roles and situations). But it’s important to remember in this Youtube clip–as well as in other modern re-enactments of historic social relations–that what we’re seeing is not 16th century game per se. What we’re seeing instead is some modern, Hollywood-influenced writer’s INTERPRETATION or spin on those historic social relations. What we often see is a characterization of historic game–washed through an (often unconscious) lens of modern social agenda. And there’s no guarantee that agenda matched Shakespeare’s. (This comes out most apparently when one sees a clip of some obviously feminist-motivated historic re-enactment.)

Nevertheless, Richard Burton here appears to be perfect for the role. He plays it to the hilt. The guy (Burton) was alpha in real life.

So, to make sure you’re not being spoon-fed some agenda, it helps to keep the original in mind below. In fact, you’ve gotta love, where Katherina bitches that Petruchio just wants to play the field: “He’ll woo a thousand, ‘point the day of marriage”

Says Katharina:
No shame but mine: I must, forsooth, be forced
To give my hand opposed against my heart
Unto a mad-brain rudesby full of spleen;
Who woo’d in haste and means to wed at leisure.
I told you, I, he was a frantic fool,
Hiding his bitter jests in blunt behavior:
And, to be noted for a merry man,
He’ll woo a thousand, ‘point the day of marriage,
Make feasts, invite friends, and proclaim the banns;
Yet never means to wed where he hath woo’d.
Now must the world point at poor Katharina,
And say, ‘Lo, there is mad Petruchio’s wife,
If it would please him come and marry her!’

Shakespeare = uber alpha.

…Max on the nature of morality:

When people talk about “moral superiority” it makes me cringe.

There is this lingering Bronze Age belief that morality is a universal code of +/- that exists in a vacuum.

Morality is an abstract system of relative value judgements based on the human physiological experience of the world.

Hot stove: Ouch! Hot stove bad.

Infidelity: Sad. Infidelity bad.

The reason morality -seems- universal is because is is based on our very similar individual human experiences of stimuli.

. . . Of course women have a slightly different experience of the world then men, hence their cock-eyed circle-logic morals.

…Mike T for finding a Biblical justification for game:

Auster also seems to have forgotten God’s curse on Eve: “your desire will be for your husband, and he will rule over you.” Far from enjoying a higher position in the world, women enjoy one of subordination to men. The very reason why game works on women is because God ordained that part of the curse on the entire gender through Eve would be domination by men.

…and for these two comments on “Sluts Against Rape“:

Women like this are the ones who jump into big cat exhibits at zoos to take close up shots and then act incredulous that the big cat mauls them. They are so addled by the poison of tabula rasa that it never occurs to them that things operate according to their nature, and that predators, by nature harm that which they perceive as weaker and a target ripe for predation. It is in the nature of a lion to hunt and kill, even humans; it is in the nature of a rapist to rape women.

This reminds me of a conversation I had with some white, middle class undergrads about 9/11 while I was in college. They said we need to “educate people like the 9/11 hijackers.” I looked at them and said, “you damn fools, these people have advanced degrees from some of the most elite universities in the world, whereas we are getting undergrad degrees from an above-average state university… what do you think you could say to them that would ‘educate them?’”

It shut them up and made them very uncomfortable. It was like the sub plot in From Hell when the upper class couldn’t believe that Jack the Ripper was a gentile, educated man… that education had absolutely not a single impact on his nature or character.

…and finally, Thursday on the varieties of game-haters:

People dislike game for different reasons. Just calling them haters doesn’t tell us much about their motivations or what arguments they are using.

There seem to me three varieties of haters:

1. Pedastalizers – Don’t like their view of women as morally superior beings disturbed. Often religious and/or socially conservative.

2. Equalists – Don’t like that women are attracted to men who are dominant over them. Often liberal whether right liberal (libertarian or neoconservative) or left liberal.

3. Hyper-Moralists – Don’t like the fact that the main discoverers and theorists of game are almost all libertines and/or nihlists. They also don’t like that game contains techniques for getting women to have premarital/extramarital sex, and that it seems too consciously manipulative.

Larry Auster and Conor F. are a mix of pedastalizer and hyper-moralist.

Will Wilkinson is an equalist.

Todd White, Anakin Niceguy and his commenter Justin are hyper-moralists.

I would also point out that Save Western Civ guys aren’t identical with Social Conservatives who aren’t identlical with haters. Lots of Save Western Civ guys do accept game.

Good comments, everybody.

Mike T scores a record FOUR-FER with the LMAO Award for this remark on the male biological clock:

3 minutes past the hour: Get laid
6 minutes past the hour: Get laid
9 minutes past the hour: Get laid

The male biological clock >:)

A lot closer to reality then the mainstream claims.

njartist49 wins the Zinger Award for this line directed at Kirsten Gillibrand’s detractors:

Did I just walk into a blind men’s dicussion of who is hot?

Heh, heh, heh.

Titter wins the Good Advice Award for this remark on Meghan McCain’s boobs:

The stats don’t lie.

Big, luscious tits sell. Forget about all your intellectual content-driven drivel. The real content that counts is pics of hot chicks.

That was lesson 1 in advertising. Out of 1 lesson total.

Rule 5 rules your ass.

Professor Hale wins the Funny ‘Cause It’s True Award for sharing this bathroom graffiti:

Written on the porta-john wall in Kuwait:

Army women… one plane ride away from being ugly again.

And it is true.

Finally, David Alexander wins the Sacklessness Award for outdoing himself:

I’ve generally felt that the politeness is a sign of a proper, well civilized culture that suppresses it’s meanness for the sake of creating a safe environment for everybody. Politeness is what separates us from the savages, and it’s a great way to avoid being threatening to whites (and women)…

Wow. Just wow. I am in awe of your lameness, Lord of the Betas.