[John Michael Kane]

(01-09-2015 05:27 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

These statistics really are eye opening. They hit me pretty hard in thinking about it yesterday. TBH, the only way to find happiness in the USA as a man is to be wealthy or to have serious tight game and then not have kids because game will not get out of jail for failure to pay child support.

Enough so I am tempted to quit my middle class job, focus on other ventures, knowing that my middle class job will get me no where. I will not do anything as drastic as just quitting my job, but it has pushed me further into knowing I must ditch it one day.

But what I have fully realized is fat acceptance is simply violence acceptance. Like it or not, young men will fight over women. Men don't find fat women attractive. They just don't and they NEVER will. So you have more men fighting over fewer women, because more women think being a lazy fatass is acceptable. And the end result is more violence and more death.

Fat women are truly making the USA more violent.

This is very true. If you've ever gone to a bar with tons of men and few non-fat women, there is a high probability that a fight will break out. Simply put, the competition is fierce! That's part of the reason why I only go out to get a drink with buddies, not to hit on chicks, as it very well could be an invitation to a fight in some parts where the sex ratios are out of whack.

[SlickyBoy]

The large male unemployed population is a very real problem, particularly in Islamic countries. Ther, you are not a man if you can't provide for your family, and you get no chance at a wife without some means to do that. Hence, when a radical imam starts promising rewards like 72 virgins it becomes a very reasonable alternative to the guy with nothing.

Even in the west the governments are legitimately concerned about the rise of illiterate Islamic converts.

The presence of homosexuals in large (or at least larger) numbers than 20 years ago is not a positive development since so many of them an able the SJW party line and fan the flames of the hamsterized bonfire.

[Clemmo]

(01-09-2015 09:52 AM)It_is_my_time Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 09:45 AM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(01-08-2015 09:44 PM)unbowed Wrote:  

It does feel like the walls are closing in. The attitudes are getting more rotten. 3 years ago I was younger, stupider and less game-aware and I didn't feel it to be as bad as now. Girls just shove through, ignore people when they don't like what they hear and act like they dominate the place. I can also feel guys getting more aggressive. The thirst is manifesting in 24/7 Black Friday behavior.

For some of you younger guys let me give you an example as to how bad it has gone downhill. Back when I was in college during the late 90's-early 00's you could hit up girls and they would insta-date or even open you in class. Even my broke no game ass back then was able to get girls to give me rides to places and then back to my place for "study" sessions.

Some were as cunty then as they are now but there were a lot of girls who had workable attitudes and specific demographics (ie. asian and latina CA girls) were pretty good. I'd say back then it was as easy to cold approach a girl up as it is in most of SEA right now. Getting a number with no flake wasn't that hard.

This whole not talking to guys at all or giving a rude bitch answer right off the bat was pretty much unheard of.

It's standard behavior for many American girls now.

I can verify this. I went to college in the late 1990's. There was no such thing as PUA back then, or at least I never heard about it. I was CLUELESS as to what women wanted.

I joined a Fraternity, and the older guys there sort of showed me how to get girls. Basically..

Dress some what preppy, a $40 button down shirt was enough and a pair of Doc Martins (that was the style in 1997) that lasted like three years.

Drink a few drinks.

Then make eye contact and say "hi".

That was about all it took. I remember walking across campus just to say "hi" to random girls. I didn't even have to get their number. I would say "hi" maybe stop and talk for a few minutes. If I saw them out that weekend some where, she would likely seek me out. It was very easy back then, as it should be.

There were no false rape claims. There wasn't all this nonsense young guys have to deal with today. I truly feel bad for the guys who didn't get to experience this life.

Even 8 years ago. It was way easier to meet random girls at parties, bars, or other places. Where you just introduce your yourself. Ask if you want to meet later. And that was that.

I remember getting a ONS just going to a Buffalo Wild Wings with a friend, and a women who sat next to me started flirting with me. And I told her to let's go to a hotel and we smashed after that.

I think social media and smartphones have ruined social interaction between the sexes in a lot of ways. Especially with the large amount of attention and 5 get from social media and online dating from Thirsty men.

[Ingocnito]

(01-09-2015 12:54 PM)OGNorCal707 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 10:11 AM)eljeffster Wrote:  

I think there is an unstated assumption for ratio purposes of 1:1 but we all know that isn't true. Most girls (7+) are never truly "single." They always have an ex, FB, or orbiter around. Players are running multiple girls at one time but where those girls are still meeting other guys and so its like a giant share culture- lot's of guys get a ride.

+1 on this right here, I think that's an excellent point, any 7+ American female is getting constant dick from somewhere, whether that be a boyfriend, fuck buddy, "friend with benefits", ONS, or all of the above. These women just have too many options for cock nowadays and believe that they are exhausting all of these options. Even if you get a girlfriend it's just a matter of time before she meets another dude and fucks around on you, or pulls a hypergamy maneuver once she meets a guy she likes better. Unless you are some super-alpha... good luck with that.

Yep. The flag that ushers in the hypergamy quest is the "invented fight" out of nowhere. Translation, she wants to break up for a few weeks or months to go try out some other dicks she's been secretly entertaining...

Had one pull this shit on me when I wasn't able to give her the hardcore dicking I usually was due to workload and waning interest, my time was becoming more valuable than waste it on her. She tested the waters and came back crying for me to take her back saying:"You literally ruined me for sex."

Translation:"You gave it to me way better than anyone before you, I went and fucked some guys who didn't compare. I thought I'd follow the path of entitlement and creatively cheat because your Red Pill ways short circuit my brain and make me hate you, especially after concurring with my GFs who say you're bad for me." Fuckin whores. next, next, next.

[Feisbook Control]

(01-08-2015 02:41 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  

If you think it's bad here, it's going to be worse in China and Korea in the years ahead. There's a traditional preference for male children there, and women have been using modern technology to figure out the gender of their babies before birth. This has led to a lot of quiet abortions of female fetuses. It's fucked up, but that's what's been happening. The result is a gender imbalance.

It is illegal to determine the sex of a foetus in Taiwan before 24 weeks. I suspected a similar thing would be true in other countries also. So, I looked it up, and here's what I found:

Quote:

There are already laws forbidding fetal sex determination and sex-selective abortion in China, India and South Korea. But only in South Korea has the law been strongly enforced. As early as 1991, physicians in Seoul had their licences suspended for performing sex determination, with a resulting fall in the SRB from 117 to 113 in the following year.4 In South Korea this enforcement, along with public awareness campaigns, contributed to a reduction in the SRB from a high of 118 in 1990 to 109 in 2004.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3168620/

China and India both have such laws also, but they're not nearly as well enforced, and so sex-selective abortion is rampant in both countries.

[Aliblahba]

This forum is a sausagefest.

[davyjose]

(01-09-2015 04:04 PM)SlickyBoy Wrote:  

Totally true. In the 1990s I never recalled the shit-testing, smart alecky attitudes back then like what is standard procedure for American women now. They think talking and acting with "bro-like" behavior makes them attractive and it definitely doesn't. I started to notice it more with 'sports chicks' but by now it's permeated most of the population. They have zero idea how to act like ladies, no modicum of common courtesy and are actually proud of this development. Same type of women in the UK from what I observed, only with shittier teeth.

Nowhere is this "bro behavior" more apparent than in the average chick's online dating profile. Typically she'll have lots of photos of her traveling, snowboarding, climbing mountains, doing Tough Muddas, surfing, even photos of her bloody pets.

No photos of her actually being attractive mind, or in any way interesting to men in general. Instead it's photos of her scoffing burgers at some fucking artisan foodie festival, up to her face in mud at a cross-country 10k or her fat arse plummeting to the earth in a skydive.

Just photo after photo of the "Eternal Solipsism of the Female Mind", indulging in activities she probably finds attractive in men, but nothing approaching what men actually want.

[Yatagan]

Speaking of "bro behavior", I came across some chick's tinder profile and she had a bunch of pics of her doing wheelies on an atv. I don't find that particularly sexy.

[eljeffster]

(01-12-2015 01:30 PM)Seboist Wrote:  

Speaking of "bro behavior", I came across some chick's tinder profile and she had a bunch of pics of her doing wheelies on an atv. I don't find that particularly sexy.

Like the ones where they are shooting guns.

[YossariansRight]

RE: "Bro behavior".

Many "females" do act/dress/behave/copy men. They effectively are guys with tits and a pussy.

[allaround]

One can say that increasing obesity in the population favors women, because for them things like height, money and status is in general more important than their partner's BMI, Body Mass Index. While for guys BMI is perhaps the most important feature.

Countries with best "number of women per 100 men" ratio in the 20-29 age group according to United Nations 2012 World Population Prospects estimates for 2015:

122 Nepal
121 Curacao
111 Mayotte
110 Niger
110 Lebanon
110 Antigua and Barbuda
...
96 USA
91 China

When including only the share of women with an estimated BMI in the range 18-25 (WHO suggests 18.5 - 25 as the healthy range), but men of all BMIs we get the following number of women per 100 men in the 20-29 age group:

91 Nepal
80 Niger
79 Burundi
75 Madagaskar
75 Bangladesh
...
64 China
36 USA

Ref: singlesatlas.com

[Nailer]

(01-08-2015 04:17 PM)MrXY Wrote:  

The 80/20 rule occured to me as well, although I think it' more like 85/15 at this point and may worsen to 90/10 for girls 7.5 and above.

I'd say at this point it's more like 99.9 / 0.1%.

[Travesty]

This may have been the thread that gave me the motivation to learn some Spanish years ago...

[SamuelBRoberts]

(01-22-2017 11:18 PM)Travesty Wrote:  

This may have been the thread that gave me the motivation to learn some Spanish years ago...

Did it pay off?

[Designate]

(01-22-2017 11:18 PM)Travesty Wrote:  

This may have been the thread that gave me the motivation to learn some Spanish years ago...

Easily one of the better things I've done for my life.

It's been a real value add no longer having to deal with the spoiled pancake asses who age like 2% milk.

[Travesty]

(01-22-2017 11:34 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(01-22-2017 11:18 PM)Travesty Wrote:  

This may have been the thread that gave me the motivation to learn some Spanish years ago...

Did it pay off?

Does a bear try to shit on Paul Ryan in the woods?

[Kid Twist]

that jonathan soma chart was fascinating

[Simeon_Strangelight]

The US becoming a major sausage fest is nothing. Germany right now got an input of 2 million men in the ages of 20-35. Germany has 15 mio. locals living in that age group and even then you get a surplus of men already. So we are talking roughly 8 mio. men vs 7 mio. women in that age back in 2014. If you add 2 mio male immigrants, then we are talking about 10 mio. men to 7 mio. women. That's a veritable sausage fest there.

Sweden is probably worse. But I guess that is what women love and strangely enough what makes their lives ever more miserable since they are ill-equipped to deal psychologically with that much sexual market value.

[armenia4ever]

So when do these men start marrying foreigners and bringing them over in vast numbers? (I did hear Swedish feminists tried to put the kabash to that - either out of jealousy and/or wanting complete control of the SMV female population there.

[Lunostrelki]

Well, here's one more way the world is closer to disaster and not on the cusp of scarcity-free economics or whatever utopian crap the left is trying to push on us now.

[John Michael Kane]

(01-23-2017 04:23 PM)armenia4ever Wrote:  

So when do these men start marrying foreigners and bringing them over in vast numbers? (I did hear Swedish feminists tried to put the kabash to that - either out of jealousy and/or wanting complete control of the SMV female population there.

There's a reason why the finding a wife abroad thread here has dozens of pages of replies. A minority, but a significant minority of men, are looking for alternative options. Simply put, there aren't enough quality marriageable women in the United States (and many Western European countries) relative to the number of quality men who want to get married.

When company number one fails to respond to market signals, company number two fills in the gaps and takes market share. Foreign women are slowly chipping away at the block. I hope Trump gets rid of VAWA funding, as it has been rumored it is on the chopping block:

http://www.refinery29.com/2017/01/137406...grants-cut

Quote:

As part of the new administration's planned budget overhaul, the Trump team plans to cut funding for some crucial government-funded programs, reports The Hill. Among those that may be slashed is the relatively small — yet essential — group of 25 grant programs set up by the 1994 Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), which help women who are survivors of violence.

These grants help states implement programs that are aimed at preventing all kinds of violence against women, including sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking. But, as Ed Chung, vice president of criminal justice reform at the Center for American Progress, tells Broadly, that also includes programs that provide survivors of violence with crucial resources, such as legal assistance and housing.

"Eliminating the Violence Against Women Grants is a clear and direct attack on women," said Sung Yeon Choimorrow, interim executive director of National Asian Pacific American Women’s Forum, in a statement. “This move would particularly harm Asian American and Pacific Islander women and other women of color, as well as immigrant and LGBTQ communities. These women experience disproportionate rates of violence, and they face discrimination when when they seek support services following violent experiences."

Others have noted how troubling this move would be coming from a president who has dismissed women when they've come forward with stories of sexual assault about him. “A man with a well-documented history of sexually assaulting women is [taking] over the federal government, so it is sadly not surprising that he is gutting programs vital to protecting women from violence,” said Nita Chaudhary, one of the founders of women's rights advocacy group UltraViolet, in a statement. “With these cuts, Trump is also making it harder for law enforcement to protect women from predators like himself and members of his senior staff.”

However, the grants haven't been cut yet. And we're still short on actual, concrete plans for Trump's budget. So although this fight isn't over, feel free to freak out — in constructive ways, of course.

The VAWA is just one of many ways that make it harder for American men to marry foreign women. Hopefully there's enough red pilled guys feeding this up the food chain within the Trump administration to get the eye of the bean counters. This can safely be earmarked for deletion. We don't need this kind of crap. Violence against men or women is already illegal in all 50 states. No need for additional laws.

[Lunostrelki]

Quote:

These grants help states implement programs that are aimed at preventing all kinds of violence against women, including sexual assault, domestic violence, and stalking.

I don't doubt that funding for this kind of thing is useless, but how does it make it harder for American men to marry foreigners?

[John Michael Kane]

Because it assumes bad faith on the part of men who marry foreign brides:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/2006/01/10/...users.html

Women are constantly told of their rights of protection but grant-funded feminist outfits which paint all men as abusers. It is a political tool to make foreign women make all American men as trouble waiting to happen. If you Google about it, you'll see that there is also no Violence Against Men Act for the millions of American men who have been victims of domestic violence from their fathers, mothers, sisters or wives. It is a shame piece of law that needs to go.

[Lunostrelki]

That makes sense, in addition to the whole "he was too repulsive and chauvinistic for an independent free-thinking woman so he found an oppressed golddigger from some backward hellhole" stigma. As usual, denigrating other people's countries and women is fine when the left does it.

[iknowexactly]

(01-07-2015 11:45 PM)speakeasy Wrote:  

I've been sounding the alarm on this for some time. The gender imbalance gets very little attention, especially in mainstream media.

I agree, and also would emphasize the non-linearity of this type of market imbalance.

1) The number of guys remains mostly the same, and they get ever taller -- I see many guys over 6'3", with a small but significant amount which is 6'5" or more which was rare 20-30 years ago-- and really makes a 5'9" guy look a whole head shorter and inferior.

and there's a synergistic effect of

2) "go grrrl" glorification of being disagreeable ( "attitude")
3) obesity as well as ...
4) more job competition for the type of jobs that can give a single woman a middle-class lifestyle (100k+ on coasts) . This equals more girls spending their fertile years toiling in grad school and early career proving years.

"The goal of capitalism is to reduce all human interaction to the cash nexus"
--Leon Day.