[Feldeinsamkeit]

Here in the UK, it is not uncommon in my part of the country (NE England - near Middlesbrough) to see even the most ugly, overweight woman with a guy. Furthermore, I'm seeing ever more younger guys who are tall, i.e. at least 6 ft and in good physical shape, dating women that are around the same age but much lower on the attractiveness scale, mostly on account of their being hambeasts par excellence. It's obvious from this phenomenon that the dating market is heavily - pun intended - tilted towards women and I know from personal experience that there are quite a few incel guys who even the planetary sized girls don't want to touch with a bargepole. As an older man, I can still just about remember the time when fat girls would have struggled to get even beta boyfriends and would have had to settle for their equivalent sooner or later; those days now seem like but a very distant and almost utopian past in comparison to the dystopic dating scene of today.

One thing I've often wondered about, though, is how aware women are of the incel issue amongst men. Given how many dating options even the slim plain Janes and the frumps have at their disposal, do they ever stop to reflect what the implications of this are for men, i.e. that there is a sizeable surplus of guys left on the dating market unable to find even a fatty to date? As I'm not privy to the conversation of women, I really can only speculate here, although it would be fascinating to know what - if anything - women think on this matter. Has anybody on here ever been a fly on the wall overhearing females discussing this issue?

[Handsome Creepy Eel]

Women are generally pretty clueless (or you could say solipsistic) about this.

Being naturally attracted to alphas and ignoring betas, they are barely aware of the "lesser caste" and often claim how men have it great and are playing the field so much. Yeah sure, maybe 15% of all men!

[dog]

(07-26-2015 03:48 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Women are generally pretty clueless (or you could say solipsistic) about this.

Being naturally attracted to alphas and ignoring betas, they are barely aware of the "lesser caste" and often claim how men have it great and are playing the field so much. Yeah sure, maybe 15% of all men!

Probably one of the better Red Pill Comics about this:

[Feldeinsamkeit]

(07-26-2015 03:48 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Women are generally pretty clueless (or you could say solipsistic) about this.

Being naturally attracted to alphas and ignoring betas, they are barely aware of the "lesser caste" and often claim how men have it great and are playing the field so much. Yeah sure, maybe 15% of all men!

Well, that was my initial thought, too. Exclamations such as, "Where have all the men gone?" really reflect this, in that women are only thinking about the top 15% of the crop in terms of looks and money. On second thoughts, though, it struck me that, given the lengths women go through to avoid interaction with "lesser males" of the species (iPhone bitch shields, constantly avoiding eye-contact, power walking, et.c.) that they must surely have reflected at least once on how many thirsty dudes there are, if only for the purpose of avoiding them in future. For example, a lot of younger guys are hitting on older women out of necessity. So maybe not the teeny bopper generation, but surely the older women have noticed a significant uptick in attention relative to 10-15 years ago and have at least once made a mental note of this?

But maybe you're right, women are utterly solipsistic because they don't have to face any consequences for their sexual (mis)behaviour.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

"One thing I've often wondered about, though, is how aware women are of the incel issue amongst men."

After having lived over four decades, one observation I feel very comfortable making is that women have less awareness in general than men about almost every subject except two: Themselves and their kids (if they have kids).

I don't see this as a sexist statement. I see it as a biological reality. Women's role was to bear children and raise them and it's natural that's what their focus is. They can hear nuances in the way a baby cries that men can't.

Meanwhile, it was (and is) men's job to build the world and keep the homefront safe. That's why men have a better sense of direction, the ability to make repairs on virtually anything, and a penchant for analysis of almost any kind. On top of that, it's the male of the species who has to go out and find women to breed with.

So men are natural observers because it's that instinct that keeps the species going and creates a workable environment for it. This does not go for women. Therefore, they observe less because they have little need to.

Allow me to digress for a second, because this is important. It's probably not a coincidence that the biggest Web site we have now, Facebook, was borne of some young guys' desire to check out women. The reverse didn't happen. Women were not sitting around Harvard wondering what the men were up to and how to get on their radar.

When men stop looking, humanity stops in its tracks. This is also one reason feminism repulses a lot of men and women. Because it seeks to neuter this impulse in men and most sane people know that telling men not to check out women is like telling women not to ogle babies.

So, to answer your question: Women probably do not notice and if they do, it doesn't register too much emotionally. Most women are oblivious to men and men's needs and desires, unless they're fixated upon one man. And sometimes not even then.

****

In conclusion, there is an easy way to tell the difference between what men and women think about. Just look at the media they consume.

Men's magazines and TV shows are usually about other things (sports, music) or women. But women's magazines and TV shows are about...women! Women grace the covers of men's mags and women's mags. There is a woman's mag called Self. It would be unthinkable to have a men's mag with this name. Why is that? Whatever the reason for all this, it alone should answer your question.

Finally, most of the blogs that make up the manosphere itself came from men's desire to figure out WTF is up with women. But the blogs and Websites about women (Feministing, Jezebel, Bustle) are about...women.

[N°6]

There isn't a day that goes by before I see a man who has quite obviously put some effort into his appearance, physique and profession who is unequally yoked with an ox.

The older woman thing started online where a man in his early twenties has a similar market value to a woman of a certain age. Young men online found that a new car was out of their reach so they were forced to buy a used car. There used to be a gulf between online and real life but women's online market value seems to have been translated to real life thanks to smart phone social media. It is sad because British men's market value on the international markets is quite high but unfortunately British men are drunk and too lazy to learn a foreign language.

To answer your question, women are surely aware that in nearly every club and bar and on every dating site, there is an abundance of men. They are naturally going to raise their selling price. British men's historical thirst has the same affect that cheap mortgages had on the subprime housing market, it caused the overvaluing of poor property. Once a house is bought for a certain price, the vendor is likely to resist selling it again at a lower price.

[Feldeinsamkeit]

(07-26-2015 04:06 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

"One thing I've often wondered about, though, is how aware women are of the incel issue amongst men."

After having lived over four decades, one observation I feel very comfortable making is that women have less awareness in general than men about almost every subject except two: Themselves and their kids (if they have kids).

I don't see this as a sexist statement. I see it as a biological reality. Women's role was to bear children and raise them and it's natural that's what their focus is. They can hear nuances in the way a baby cries that men can't.

Meanwhile, it was (and is) men's job to build the world and keep the homefront safe. That's why men have a better sense of direction, the ability to make repairs on virtually anything, and a penchant for analysis of almost any kind. On top of that, it's the male of the species who has to go out and find women to breed with.

So men are natural observers because it's that instinct that keeps the species going and creates a workable environment for it. This does not go for women. Therefore, they observe less because they have little need to.

Allow me to digress for a second, because this is important. It's probably not a coincidence that the biggest Web site we have now, Facebook, was borne of some young guys' desire to check out women. The reverse didn't happen. Women were not sitting around Harvard wondering what the men were up to and how to get on their radar.

When men stop looking, humanity stops in its tracks. This is also one reason feminism repulses a lot of men and women. Because it seeks to neuter this impulse in men and most sane people know that telling men not to check out women is like telling women not to ogle babies.

So, to answer your question: Women probably do not notice and if they do, it doesn't register too much emotionally. Most women are oblivious to men and men's needs and desires, unless they're fixated upon one man. And sometimes not even then.

****

In conclusion, there is an easy way to tell the difference between what men and women think about. Just look at the media they consume.

Men's magazines and TV show are usually about things (sports, women, music). But women's magazines and TV shows are about...women! Women grace the covers of men's mags and women's mags. There is a woman's mag called Self. It would be unthinkable to have a men's mag with this name. Why is that? Whatever the reason for all this, it alone should answer your question.

Finally, most of the blogs that make up the manosphere itself came from men's desire to figure out WTF is up with women. But the blogs and Websites about women (Feministing, Jezebel, Bustle) are about...women.

As a general analysis of the sexes, I think this is spot on and can be condensed into a single principle: Women don't observe because they don't have to. But my thought was that, as I said in one of my previous replies, given the extent to which women are taking aversive action to avoid coming into contact with "lesser males", i.e. 90% of the male population they don't get the hots for, doesn't the need to at least avoid men occasion in them a reflective moment that makes them aware of the ocean of thirst beckoning them?

[Days of Broken Arrows]

(07-26-2015 04:13 PM)Feldeinsamkeit Wrote:  

(07-26-2015 04:06 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

"One thing I've often wondered about, though, is how aware women are of the incel issue amongst men."

After having lived over four decades, one observation I feel very comfortable making is that women have less awareness in general than men about almost every subject except two: Themselves and their kids (if they have kids).

I don't see this as a sexist statement. I see it as a biological reality. Women's role was to bear children and raise them and it's natural that's what their focus is. They can hear nuances in the way a baby cries that men can't.

Meanwhile, it was (and is) men's job to build the world and keep the homefront safe. That's why men have a better sense of direction, the ability to make repairs on virtually anything, and a penchant for analysis of almost any kind. On top of that, it's the male of the species who has to go out and find women to breed with.

So men are natural observers because it's that instinct that keeps the species going and creates a workable environment for it. This does not go for women. Therefore, they observe less because they have little need to.

Allow me to digress for a second, because this is important. It's probably not a coincidence that the biggest Web site we have now, Facebook, was borne of some young guys' desire to check out women. The reverse didn't happen. Women were not sitting around Harvard wondering what the men were up to and how to get on their radar.

When men stop looking, humanity stops in its tracks. This is also one reason feminism repulses a lot of men and women. Because it seeks to neuter this impulse in men and most sane people know that telling men not to check out women is like telling women not to ogle babies.

So, to answer your question: Women probably do not notice and if they do, it doesn't register too much emotionally. Most women are oblivious to men and men's needs and desires, unless they're fixated upon one man. And sometimes not even then.

****

In conclusion, there is an easy way to tell the difference between what men and women think about. Just look at the media they consume.

Men's magazines and TV show are usually about things (sports, women, music). But women's magazines and TV shows are about...women! Women grace the covers of men's mags and women's mags. There is a woman's mag called Self. It would be unthinkable to have a men's mag with this name. Why is that? Whatever the reason for all this, it alone should answer your question.

Finally, most of the blogs that make up the manosphere itself came from men's desire to figure out WTF is up with women. But the blogs and Websites about women (Feministing, Jezebel, Bustle) are about...women.

As a general analysis of the sexes, I think this is spot on and can be condensed into a single principle: Women don't observe because they don't have to. But my thought was that, as I said in one of my previous replies, given the extent to which women are taking aversive action to avoid coming into contact with "lesser males", i.e. 90% of the male population they don't get the hots for, doesn't the need to at least avoid men occasion in them a reflective moment that makes them aware of the ocean of thirst beckoning them?

It's a great question. I don't have a definitive answer. I definitely don't hear women talk about this in offices and didn't hear it in school. It would make a great satire to have the hot cheerleader sit around and worry that the science nerd was getting frustrated and how could she help...because it's so far removed from reality.

The only media I have ever seen by women that focuses on the needs and desires of incel men is a blog run by a prostitute, The Honest Courtesan. And (hate to say it) that's probably only because men's needs and desires are what make her money.

[Neo]

They definitely don't have a realistic view about how men have it. But really it's futile to think about and imo just creates resentment.

I see a lot of guys get super pissed thinking about how easy women have it when it comes to dating. Quite frankly I was angry as well, but I've learned to just let it go and focus on what matters.

I've met guys who totally fuck up their mindset by looking at hambeasts with decent boyfriends and they start resenting 'how hard they have it.'

Here's a lesson I've come to terms with. As men we will always have to work, and many times have to work harder. We have to deal with rejection, bullshit, and nobody gives us a free ride. People aren't nice to us for no reason. Take a hot girl and she's like a celebrity.

That's life, that's reality. But because that is our reality we're also tougher, and have much stronger characters. This strength also transfers to game. When you remain calm under pressure, it transfers to the women you meet. You're like a mountain withstanding a storm...unmoving...strong...and she'll feel very safe with you.

So I say just embrace that the work will never end for us. When something goes very bad for me or I have a major setback, I just think to myself...character building that is all.

[Feldeinsamkeit]

(07-26-2015 04:25 PM)Neo Wrote:  

They definitely don't have a realistic view about how men have it. But really it's futile to think about and imo just creates resentment.

I see a lot of guys get super pissed thinking about how easy women have it when it comes to dating. Quite frankly I was angry as well, but I've learned to just let it go and focus on what matters.

I've met guys who totally fuck up their mindset by looking at hambeasts with decent boyfriends and they start resenting 'how hard they have it.'

Here's a lesson I've come to terms with. As men we will always have to work, and many times have to work harder. We have to deal with rejection, bullshit, and nobody gives us a free ride. People aren't nice to us for no reason. Take a hot girl and she's like a celebrity.

That's life, that's reality. But because that is our reality we're also tougher, and have much stronger characters. This strength also transfers to game. When you remain calm under pressure, it transfers to the women you meet. You're like a mountain withstanding a storm...unmoving...strong...and she'll feel very safe with you.

So I say just embrace that the work will never end for us. When something goes very bad for me or I have a major setback, I just think to myself...character building that is all.

Well, my post is less motivated by resentment at the status quo and more by the philosophical question of which factors concerning the dating game actually percolate up from womens' intuitive understanding and into the daylight of their conscious awareness.

[PapayaTapper]

(07-26-2015 04:13 PM)Feldeinsamkeit Wrote:  

(07-26-2015 04:06 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

"One thing I've often wondered about, though, is how aware women are of the incel issue amongst men."

After having lived over four decades, one observation I feel very comfortable making is that women have less awareness in general than men about almost every subject except two: Themselves and their kids (if they have kids).

I don't see this as a sexist statement. I see it as a biological reality. Women's role was to bear children and raise them and it's natural that's what their focus is. They can hear nuances in the way a baby cries that men can't.

Meanwhile, it was (and is) men's job to build the world and keep the homefront safe. That's why men have a better sense of direction, the ability to make repairs on virtually anything, and a penchant for analysis of almost any kind. On top of that, it's the male of the species who has to go out and find women to breed with.

So men are natural observers because it's that instinct that keeps the species going and creates a workable environment for it. This does not go for women. Therefore, they observe less because they have little need to.

Allow me to digress for a second, because this is important. It's probably not a coincidence that the biggest Web site we have now, Facebook, was borne of some young guys' desire to check out women. The reverse didn't happen. Women were not sitting around Harvard wondering what the men were up to and how to get on their radar.

When men stop looking, humanity stops in its tracks. This is also one reason feminism repulses a lot of men and women. Because it seeks to neuter this impulse in men and most sane people know that telling men not to check out women is like telling women not to ogle babies.

So, to answer your question: Women probably do not notice and if they do, it doesn't register too much emotionally. Most women are oblivious to men and men's needs and desires, unless they're fixated upon one man. And sometimes not even then.

****

In conclusion, there is an easy way to tell the difference between what men and women think about. Just look at the media they consume.

Men's magazines and TV show are usually about things (sports, women, music). But women's magazines and TV shows are about...women! Women grace the covers of men's mags and women's mags. There is a woman's mag called Self. It would be unthinkable to have a men's mag with this name. Why is that? Whatever the reason for all this, it alone should answer your question.

Finally, most of the blogs that make up the manosphere itself came from men's desire to figure out WTF is up with women. But the blogs and Websites about women (Feministing, Jezebel, Bustle) are about...women.

As a general analysis of the sexes, I think this is spot on and can be condensed into a single principle: Women don't observe because they don't have to. But my thought was that, as I said in one of my previous replies, given the extent to which women are taking aversive action to avoid coming into contact with "lesser males", i.e. 90% of the male population they don't get the hots for, doesn't the need to at least avoid men occasion in them a reflective moment that makes them aware of the ocean of thirst beckoning them?

Sure it does and the reflective moment manifests as "Why do all the creeps have to check me out?...ewww" ...not in any kind of empathy

[Feldeinsamkeit]

(07-26-2015 04:22 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

(07-26-2015 04:13 PM)Feldeinsamkeit Wrote:  

(07-26-2015 04:06 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

"One thing I've often wondered about, though, is how aware women are of the incel issue amongst men."

After having lived over four decades, one observation I feel very comfortable making is that women have less awareness in general than men about almost every subject except two: Themselves and their kids (if they have kids).

I don't see this as a sexist statement. I see it as a biological reality. Women's role was to bear children and raise them and it's natural that's what their focus is. They can hear nuances in the way a baby cries that men can't.

Meanwhile, it was (and is) men's job to build the world and keep the homefront safe. That's why men have a better sense of direction, the ability to make repairs on virtually anything, and a penchant for analysis of almost any kind. On top of that, it's the male of the species who has to go out and find women to breed with.

So men are natural observers because it's that instinct that keeps the species going and creates a workable environment for it. This does not go for women. Therefore, they observe less because they have little need to.

Allow me to digress for a second, because this is important. It's probably not a coincidence that the biggest Web site we have now, Facebook, was borne of some young guys' desire to check out women. The reverse didn't happen. Women were not sitting around Harvard wondering what the men were up to and how to get on their radar.

When men stop looking, humanity stops in its tracks. This is also one reason feminism repulses a lot of men and women. Because it seeks to neuter this impulse in men and most sane people know that telling men not to check out women is like telling women not to ogle babies.

So, to answer your question: Women probably do not notice and if they do, it doesn't register too much emotionally. Most women are oblivious to men and men's needs and desires, unless they're fixated upon one man. And sometimes not even then.

****

In conclusion, there is an easy way to tell the difference between what men and women think about. Just look at the media they consume.

Men's magazines and TV show are usually about things (sports, women, music). But women's magazines and TV shows are about...women! Women grace the covers of men's mags and women's mags. There is a woman's mag called Self. It would be unthinkable to have a men's mag with this name. Why is that? Whatever the reason for all this, it alone should answer your question.

Finally, most of the blogs that make up the manosphere itself came from men's desire to figure out WTF is up with women. But the blogs and Websites about women (Feministing, Jezebel, Bustle) are about...women.

As a general analysis of the sexes, I think this is spot on and can be condensed into a single principle: Women don't observe because they don't have to. But my thought was that, as I said in one of my previous replies, given the extent to which women are taking aversive action to avoid coming into contact with "lesser males", i.e. 90% of the male population they don't get the hots for, doesn't the need to at least avoid men occasion in them a reflective moment that makes them aware of the ocean of thirst beckoning them?

It's a great question. I don't have a definitive answer. I definitely don't hear women talk about this in offices and didn't hear it in school. It would make a great satire to have the hot cheerleader sit around and worry that the science nerd was getting frustrated and how could she help...because it's so far removed from reality.

The only media I have ever seen by women that focuses on the needs and desires of incel men is a blog run by a prostitute, The Honest Courtesan. And (hate to say it) that's probably only because men's needs and desires are what make her money.

When an issue turns a dime, you can bet that women will suddenly be sensitive to it, such is the nature of all humans that walk this earth. A propos prostitutes speaking on behalf of incel men, I've often noticed this in the media, especially in regards to proposals in the UK to ban prostitution altogether by making it illegal to exchange money for sex, where prostitutes are often the only ones to point out in this date that there is a subset of men shut out of the regular dating market.

[birthday cat]

I like Neo's perspective of not being resentful but some things women say and do can be funny if you don't take them too seriously.

I knew a couple of attractive strippers once who had been convinced by someone that the large city we lived in had 7 women for every 1 man which would be 87.5% women and 12.5% men. The real numbers for that city were almost exactly 50-50 and those numbers rarely go beyond 53-47 for most cities unless it is something like a military town. One of the girls always complained about how she couldn't go to the grocery store without getting hit on several times but she was convinced there was unfair competition with 7 women for every man in town. Sometimes I think they have a filter that filters out all logic before thoughts can enter their brains.

So, how aware are women of the incel issue amongst men? I don't think they are aware of much of anything at all. There are exceptions like if there is another similarly attractive woman in the room then they will be aware of things like "that bitches shoes don't match her outfit" and "look how thin she is she must be a slut" but that's about it.

[Feldeinsamkeit]

(07-26-2015 04:50 PM)birthday cat Wrote:  

I like Neo's perspective of not being resentful but some things women say and do can be funny if you don't take them too seriously.

I knew a couple of attractive strippers once who had been convinced by someone that the large city we lived in had 7 women for every man which would be 87.5% women and 12.5% men. The real numbers for that city were almost exactly 50-50 and those numbers rarely go beyond 53-47 for most cities unless it is something like a military town. One of the girls would complain about how she couldn't go to the grocery store without getting hit on several times but she was convinced that there was unfair competition with 7 women for every man in town. Sometimes I think they have a filter that filters out all logic before entering their brains.

The filter you're referring to is the hypergamy filter which sieves out all but the top 10% of guys as even worthy of notice.

[Days of Broken Arrows]

I think women's obsession with themselves and obliviousness to the outside world is being reflected in pop music as well.

Back in 2011, a news story made the rounds that said the lyrics in pop songs were getting more narcissistic, with "I" and "me" appearing more frequently than in generations past.

The story was based on a computer analysis that examined trends in hit songs. This wasn't broken down by gender, but I wonder if the rise in this kind of lyric isn't due to women's domination of the Top Ten in the past ten years.

I remember hearings songs like "Genie in the Bottle" and "If You Had My Love" back around 2000 and thinking the thrust of those lyrics was more narcissistic than almost anything I'd heard. This seems to have gotten worse when Taylor Swift arrived on the scene and ratcheted this up to a whole new level.

If this is the case, a pretty good argument could be made that women's inclusion in any given arts genre damages that genre because it makes its focus more insular and less outward looking. As much as the grandstanding of U2, Springsteen, and Sting annoyed me back in the old days, at least they looked at ideas, issues, and other people, not just themselves.

[Feldeinsamkeit]

(07-26-2015 05:25 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

I think women's obsession with themselves and obliviousness to the outside world is being reflected in pop music as well.

Back in 2011, a news story made the rounds that said the lyrics in pop songs were getting more narcissistic, with "I" and "me" appearing more frequently than in generations past.

The story was based on a computer analysis that examined trends in hit songs. This wasn't broken down by gender, but I wonder if the rise in this kind of lyric isn't due to women's domination of the Top Ten in the past ten years.

I remember hearings songs like "Genie in the Bottle" and "If You Had My Love" back around 2000 and thinking the thrust of those lyrics was more narcissistic than almost anything I'd heard. This seems to have gotten worse when Taylor Swift arrived on the scene and ratcheted this up to a whole new level.

If this is the case, a pretty good argument could be made that women's inclusion in any given arts genre damages that genre because it makes its focus more insular and less outward looking. As much as the grandstanding of U2, Springsteen, and Sting annoyed me back in the old days, at least they looked at ideas, issues, and other people, not just themselves.

Yes, that's a good point you make about the increasing narcissistic trend in Anglosphere society as reflected through pop music. Although I don't believe that female entitlement is the only factor driving this, it does seem to me to be a very significant contributing factor all the same. It appears to be a sign of the gynocentric turn in Anglosphere societies over the last few decades and can be seen as what results when no restraints are placed on women's natural hypergamistic instincts: the carousel, an epidemic of single mothers, cuckoldry, a celebrity and false rape culture, a burgeoning underclass of beta and not just omega incel males, as well, of course as the breakdown of marriage and the nuclear family. Well done feminism ... you go Grrlll!

[MKDAWUSS]

(07-26-2015 05:36 PM)Feldeinsamkeit Wrote:  

(07-26-2015 05:25 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

I think women's obsession with themselves and obliviousness to the outside world is being reflected in pop music as well.

Back in 2011, a news story made the rounds that said the lyrics in pop songs were getting more narcissistic, with "I" and "me" appearing more frequently than in generations past.

The story was based on a computer analysis that examined trends in hit songs. This wasn't broken down by gender, but I wonder if the rise in this kind of lyric isn't due to women's domination of the Top Ten in the past ten years.

I remember hearings songs like "Genie in the Bottle" and "If You Had My Love" back around 2000 and thinking the thrust of those lyrics was more narcissistic than almost anything I'd heard. This seems to have gotten worse when Taylor Swift arrived on the scene and ratcheted this up to a whole new level.

If this is the case, a pretty good argument could be made that women's inclusion in any given arts genre damages that genre because it makes its focus more insular and less outward looking. As much as the grandstanding of U2, Springsteen, and Sting annoyed me back in the old days, at least they looked at ideas, issues, and other people, not just themselves.

Yes, that's a good point you make about the increasing narcissistic trend in Anglosphere society as reflected through pop music. Although I don't believe that female entitlement is the only factor driving this, it does seem to me to be a very significant contributing factor all the same. It appears to be a sign of the gynocentric turn in Anglosphere societies over the last few decades and can be seen as what results when no restraints are placed on women's natural hypergamistic instincts: the carousel, an epidemic of single mothers, cuckoldry, a celebrity and false rape culture, a burgeoning underclass of beta and not just omega incel males, as well, of course as the breakdown of marriage and the nuclear family. Well done feminism ... you go Grrlll!

That's something I actually hadn't noticed due to the fact that I hardly listen to modern music. I can attribute much of that to my upbringing, as I was, for a good chunk of time, raised by my grandparents, and ended up listening to the things they listened to.

I think that that narcissism is a product of the modern American psyche - we all want the latest and the best. Loyalty, for the most part, is dead. Is there a better job available? Ditch your current one. Better phone available? Ditch your current one. Better car available? Ditch your current one. Why would this also not apply to people? Better man (or woman) available? Ditch your current one!

[Mikan]

If there is some benefit to a woman, be it material or a positive emotional experience, then they will notice it. If there isn't, they don't. Its largely an automatic, non-deliberative process. This isn't just the issue of incel either, its the way they process all of reality.

[Wutang]

(07-26-2015 04:25 PM)Neo Wrote:  

They definitely don't have a realistic view about how men have it. But really it's futile to think about and imo just creates resentment.

I see a lot of guys get super pissed thinking about how easy women have it when it comes to dating. Quite frankly I was angry as well, but I've learned to just let it go and focus on what matters.

I've met guys who totally fuck up their mindset by looking at hambeasts with decent boyfriends and they start resenting 'how hard they have it.'

Here's a lesson I've come to terms with. As men we will always have to work, and many times have to work harder. We have to deal with rejection, bullshit, and nobody gives us a free ride. People aren't nice to us for no reason. Take a hot girl and she's like a celebrity.

That's life, that's reality. But because that is our reality we're also tougher, and have much stronger characters. This strength also transfers to game. When you remain calm under pressure, it transfers to the women you meet. You're like a mountain withstanding a storm...unmoving...strong...and she'll feel very safe with you.

So I say just embrace that the work will never end for us. When something goes very bad for me or I have a major setback, I just think to myself...character building that is all.

I went through a phase where I was bitter about how women could get romantic attention without even having to do anything while for men we would have to fight tooth and nail for every scrap - even good looking guys still have to put in the work to push an interaction through to the end game.

But then I realized I was thinking basically like a fat feminist who demands the world conform to her expectations. Rather then change her body she would rather everyone change their preferences to better suit her.

By accepting the reality that men and women are simply different and to due these differences we play by different rules I no longer feel the need to be self-loathing or to always have a "woe is me life is unfair" victim mentality. This is a sign of maturity; screaming at society and the universe for not adapting to your needs in the matter of a fat acceptance activist is not.

[Ingocnito]

"do they ever stop to reflect what the implications of this are for men?"

I've actually "tried" to have this convo with a few women, and naturally it's rather bewildering (read: off putting) to them.

In the biological sense, I agree with much of what is posted above, however, in that "naturalness" guys tend to abandon the truest element man excelled at which allowed our species to flourish. Efficacy via basic math equations.

Exponential fish growth in a fish tank full of fishies is a huge part of the ignored equation here. 1885(ish) 1B people on the planet. 2013, 7.3B people on the planet. What did we think was gonna happen? Well none other than and ever-increasing amplification of what existed in the first place.

As time rolls on, women become "choosier," alpha males get more puss (and need to be increasingly more alpha to maintain those levels), betas get less puss (and even lesser than ever because in comparison to the alpha's that 'get it' the divide has become greater.. naturally), entitled women get more entitled.. etc.. There's massive momentum in high numbers, exponentially growing numbers in ALL categories we speak of on these boards.

Look how fast Latinos out numbered whites in the state of California (as if it was some mathematical blasphemy which should have been unexpected to occur so quickly). Game. more than ever, is a numbers game for all.

So the disconcerting solipsism of women, and flaky scatter brained, information overloaded, opinionated option-filled minds and bodies of women, are simply occurring in lock step with the runaway growth of the planet.

[Kamikaze]

I'll tell you one area where they are slightly more aware of it... latin dancing, especially salsa and bachata. A few enterprising incels still, rightfully, believe they can pick up their preferred hambeasts if they put in some time to learn to dance. Some guys, though, are so socially inept and physically and rhythmically cursed, that they never get their dicks wet, because they just never get good enough. But the girls are aware of them, because they have to dance with them. And they feel slight pangs of pity.

For the most part, girls refuse to see the difficulties in being in the top 10%. But, many girls in salsa openly admit how hard we have it, as leaders, to direct everything in the dance.

For men:
1. We have to keep the count without seeming robotic, yet transmit that to the girl so she doesn't look stupid if the bitch can't count.
2. We have to learn enough patterns to keep it interesting. I should stress again we have to keep count in this complicated mess as well.
3. We have to calibrate to the level of the girl. So we have to have tiers of moves, from beginner moves to moves only understood and properly executed by pros. Doesn't mean you go after pros, but you might get a chick who's pretty damn good and you can 'test' her with something a lot more advanced. The look of satisfaction when they do something they've never done is like crack to my fragile ego.
4. We have to connect to the music somehow, whether it's telling us to go fast and complicated or slow and simple, to stay partnered or break free.
5. We have to talk at some points and be interesting. Hit as many nodes in the lizard brain as possible to moisten that pussy.

Goes without saying we should be in damn good shape to best develop that physical connection. If you hit all of these points and are a personable motherfucker, and combine that with the knowledge on this forum, you can drown in mediocre salsa pussy in any city that has a decent scene. Even if you're a balding, ugly mothafucka like me.

Girls do face their own challenges, but it all boils down to one thing:

1. Do what the man says. Unless you and the guy are at a sufficiently high level that you can interject something and playfully put the guy on edge, don't do it. If you don't teach, don't know how to lead, and much less don't know how to count, just settle down and enjoy the ride.

So it also goes without saying, to execute things properly the girl should be fit. But as far as demeanor, all they have to do is be polite and not dress like a slut.

So yea, at times some dumbass girls will complain about how difficult it is to understand everything guys want them to do. But when they momentarily think about the other side of the equation, countless girls have openly admitted to me, "Holy shit, I don't know how you guys do it. I wouldn't be able to lead like you do." It requires athleticism, anticipation, rhythm, control, and yes, thinking, until it eventually becomes instinctive. It's a crazy process to outsiders, and getting to an elite level is damn difficult.

Just because it applies here, this is my favorite salsa video of all time. Not only because the guy is nuts and does some incredibly complicated shit, but because he hits all the notes in the song, improvises like a motherfucker, and best of all... when he does his own freestyle, his girl gets pissed that he's showing her up. He's way, way, WAAAAY above her, and he's letting her know it... and she can't do shit about it. Her face and stance at 4:55 is just too delicious. And he doesn't stop like some lesser man would. He keeps going and tells her to bring it just 20 seconds later. Oof, such a tasty video.

We're like those "Birds of Paradise" on the BBC "Planet Earth" doc.



Watch this 3 minute clip and see just how much of a show these birds have to put on for sex from some mediocre-lookin-ass female bird. Things heat up at the 2 minute mark.

That's us, whether in salsa or at the supermarket. But girls don't want to know about this, and you shouldn't remind them. I find myself thinking about Excelsior's post about never letting bitches know just how much work goes into being a quality man at least once a week. I used to make the point that us salsa guys had it difficult to some girls and I could feel the vaginal dryness in the air as the words spilled out of my mouth like whiny vomit.

So yea, it's hard for guys and many girls don't see it. But you better get over it quick and take it in stride, or it'll cost you pussy.

[Ingocnito]

(07-26-2015 05:25 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

I think women's obsession with themselves and obliviousness to the outside world is being reflected in pop music as well.

Back in 2011, a news story made the rounds that said the lyrics in pop songs were getting more narcissistic, with "I" and "me" appearing more frequently than in generations past.

The story was based on a computer analysis that examined trends in hit songs. This wasn't broken down by gender, but I wonder if the rise in this kind of lyric isn't due to women's domination of the Top Ten in the past ten years.

I remember hearings songs like "Genie in the Bottle" and "If You Had My Love" back around 2000 and thinking the thrust of those lyrics was more narcissistic than almost anything I'd heard. This seems to have gotten worse when Taylor Swift arrived on the scene and ratcheted this up to a whole new level.

If this is the case, a pretty good argument could be made that women's inclusion in any given arts genre damages that genre because it makes its focus more insular and less outward looking. As much as the grandstanding of U2, Springsteen, and Sting annoyed me back in the old days, at least they looked at ideas, issues, and other people, not just themselves.

More people, means any one person risks having less importance in this world. Listen to modern R&B pop. R&B that once had lyrics of "love" are now flat out singing sentimentally "I'll fuck you all night long, better then the last guy you left me fore and I took you back from, bc I'm better at hitting that pussy." Literally, verbatim lyrics like that.

People are so worried about the "I" in music, that besides the guys writing the arrangements and playing the music, the cleverness required to convey that same message without outright saying it, has fled the industry. R&B, (Rap obviously), much of rock, and now country. I call it "sounds of music," and "Audible Marketing set to Music-like sounds." It's not music anymore, it's audible marketing.

[rpg]

Girls are far more aware of what guys are doing before they hit puberty so the blinders come in time. What is far worse than being ignored is receiving a pat on the head.
I have seen women do this and there is no coming back from it. The pat on the head is the forever banishment of sexual value. An ignored incel is much better off.

[Suits]

(07-26-2015 08:31 PM)Kamikaze Wrote:  

...girls refuse to see the difficulties in being in the top 10%.

Girls refuse to acknowledge that the top 10% is in fact the top 10%.

They prefer to refer to the top 10% of men as "normal guys."

i.e. "I just want to date some normal guys who aren't weird."

[Tuthmosis]

(07-26-2015 04:06 PM)Days of Broken Arrows Wrote:  

After having lived over four decades, one observation I feel very comfortable making is that women have less awareness in general than men about almost every subject except two: Themselves and their kids (if they have kids).

This (excellent) post reminds me of a tweet I made some time ago: