[DirkJohanson]

(08-22-2013 12:46 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

(08-22-2013 02:57 AM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

But what if there is an inherent bias in the increased frequency of girls sucking cock that makes the distribution of all cock-suckings more skewed towards the minority of men - alphas? I.e., the greater the sexual openness, the more men left in the dust and getting less, rather than more as one would expect? And what if this bias is so strong that it makes it practically impossible to reduce the number of frustrated men by turning on the cock-sucking tap, no matter how much more abundant cock-sucking ever becomes?

Great question.

We can assume that alphas will always get more then betas.

Guys have to do their part by making themselves more alpha.

I would love to find a way to reduce the number of frustrated men.

There is a way, and its been found already; its called prostitution. And feminists are desperately trying to make it harder and harder for you to be able to do it.

[Apollo]

Long post, but relevant. Inspired by the 3 hour outage from Nasdaq today had my mind in market mode.

There are two markets for pussy.

There is a consumable goods market and an insurance (investment) market.

The girl in the story has chosen what market to offer her services.

Most women wish that they could be highly priced in both markets, but they do not understand that a consumable and an investment are substitute goods. Most of the regret they experience comes from trying to price their consumable goods pussy in the investment market (and vice versa) and they want to pretend like their 10Ks don't mean shit. It does, and for that reason, we do not invest.

One of the biggest reasons for the rise in the stock market over the past decade in half has been because the game has changed in regards to capital gains vs. dividends. Asset prices have risen because dividends are taxed at a higher rate. Is it no surprise that men also have fled from the investment market for pussy for the same reasons? The return is much greater in the consumable market (for those with disposable currency AKA...GAME) than those deluded enough to believe that the investment market is still bringing marginal (if any) return.

I think the mistake here is to have hate/resentment for consumable goods, thus coercing everyone into an investment market. Inherently, that is an affront to personal liberty and happiness. So, if you disagree, go ahead and advocate your sexual socialism so that pussy is redistributed more equally OR you could just accept market dimorphism, engage in non-price competition (dick trades for pennys on the dollar, so there is a different standard than pure sexual competition), and join the oligopoly of alphas that control 80% of the consumable goods market.

Is it so surprising that betas will do everything in their power to bend over backwards to protect that meager, often long-term illusory, return they get from this market? They know they can fight tooth and nail for a small return OR they can eject from the market altogether, resent the market, and receive no return from it.

This is purely an adaptive strategy based on our current environment. As more and more begin to realize that their investment was a malinvestment, the more the market will begin to dry up. All of that effort will now be taken to the consumable good market, where competition will be as fierce as ever. On a societal level, you know that this will not be good.

The million dollar question is whether or not the investment market can be restored. Are there incentives for participants (buyers) of either market to promote the other? I believe that there are...and in that spirit, we shouldn't be shunning this girl, we should be be shunning the try hards in media and society who are parroting some moral high ground, as if their happiness and the ways they go about achieving it, are any more important than the girl in the story.

Women will shame her as a slut to try to validate themselves into a higher market price.

Men will either shame her as a slut to try to reduce the price so they can compete or to shame her into switching markets (in which they are participants) so that they can profit. A Red Pill man would know that this attitude is worthless since a woman's general ability to distinguish between a "dad" and a "cad" is virtually non-existent.

Betas like that remind me of protectionists and trade unionists. Unable to compete in today's economy, they cling to tariffs, quotas, and regulation to control the labor market. You can either choose to affiliate with this group of unproductive and uncreative losers by treading water in the shallow end for the rest of your life or you can learn to swim and do something remarkable. I choose the latter.

[Giovonny]

(08-22-2013 04:47 PM)DirkJohanson Wrote:  

(08-22-2013 12:46 PM)Giovonny Wrote:  

I would love to find a way to reduce the number of frustrated men.

There is a way, and its been found already; its called prostitution. And feminists are desperately trying to make it harder and harder for you to be able to do it.

Yes. And, we can locked in a cage like an animal simply for trying to have our sexual needs met.

It's taken me almost 5 years of being on this forum to understand the dangers of feminism.

I'm starting to see how it destroys the natural state of men and women.

[bachelor tax]

(08-22-2013 05:00 PM)Apollo Wrote:  

There are two markets for pussy.

[GameTheory]

(08-21-2013 11:49 PM)Tuthmosis Wrote:  

[...] She could just as easily be eating a corn dog.[...]

[Kaiserfranz]

I agree with the others: blowing 2 guys in front of 80.000 people is a dictionary worth definition of slut.

And regarding that stupid jezebel article, I do not remember feminist complaining about "twitter shaming" when Adria Richards's actions got one innocent guy fired!

Two standards, as usual...