Friday, July 2, 2010

Friday Roundup

Oh, how I love to hate the SPLC, if nothing more than for their stature as being the foremost authority on hate groups, despite the fact that they focus nearly entirely on white hate to the exclusion of hate excreted from other races and ethnicities. What is even more troubling is that LEAs use SPLC agitprop as templates to train their officers. Apparently, not only is the SPLC considered a "charity", they are a poorly performing one at that.

The best thing about Game is the red-pill it provides those willing to let the scales fall from their eyes. This NYC girl--and her commenters too--prove that, while feminism quite ably takes the stain of feminine out, no amount of ideological conditioning will bleach hypergamy out of the female psyche. And what the h.e. double-hockey-sticks is meant by "straightish" as a sexual orientation?

VD's counsel to marriage-minded men regarding the above woman is so apt, I'm quoting it here:
This is why it is a very risky and probably foolish endeavor for men to marry women over the age of 25...[t]here are two ways to address the situation. One is to marry a genuinely religious or submissive woman, as she will have a strong inherent resistance to her hypergamous instincts. Remember, instinct is merely an influence, it is not a controlling factor. The second, of course, is to not marry at all. But whatever you do, do not even speculate about the possibility of considering the thought of marrying an aging, debt-laden feminist who is scouting about for a long-term delta provider following an extended ride on the thugacious carousel.
The target age for marriage-eligible women is 17 - 21 in my book. Old enough to maturely handle a home and family, young enough to not have absorbed too much of society's poison about marriage and relationships. And be wary of college-educated chicks, as college is merely a proving ground for sluts, and she's likely to be saddled with debt for a vanity degree that will be yours to pay off once you marry.

Our culture has this huge blind spot toward feminine violence, to the point that it encourages feminine misbehavior. Here's the latest: mommies scuffle at a kindergarten graduation near Victorville. What can there possibly be to fight about at a kindergarten graduation? Seems these chicks found it.

Two things of note about this story, other than women behaving badly, which is fast becoming the norm in our culture: first, why are there kindergarten 'graduations', again? Second, note that, predictably, white knights get involved to defend the non-existent honor of their women.

Remember when you read this that the market is the best mechanism for efficient resource allocation. Due to lack of money, LA exurb fires everyone, subcontracts everything.

Mercantilists are us. RIAA and MPAA finally succeed at getting the FedGov to enforce their copyrights for them. Guess all that lobbying paid off. What is interesting to me is, from the above-linked article, that the FedGov's own GAO can't confirm the supposed losses to the economy from so-call piracy that the RIAA and MPAA allege, and piracy may even help the economy overall.

Seems the feminist octopus has tentacles even in red states like Wyoming (although one can easily argue that Laramie is ideologically more similar to nearby Boulder than to neighboring towns like Rock Springs or even government-heavy Cheyenne). Fellow blogger SteveK locates a case where a student attempted to transfer an English college course from a U California school, but was denied because it featured literature about men, not women. Yet another example of how academia is not about the free exchange of ideas, but about indoctrination of the leftish party line. Although one does have to wonder why any man could be so masochistic as to be an English major...perhaps it is because he is into self-torture and pain as former Marine.

Some good news from the misandry front...sort of...BA settles discrimination suit brought by a man told to find another seat on an aircraft. For the crime of being a man adjacent to an unaccompanied minor.

From Christianj...DV is causal for less than 1% of women's ER visits.

The value of a college degree is far less than previously thought. About $400,000 in earnings over 30 years, rather than around $1M, according to this article. And these 'value of a college degree' calculations routinely fail to account for the 5-6 years of lost wages and the financial overhang of student loans, both of which eat mightily into the much-touted college advantage. When one adds this financial penalty to the man-hostile environment at your run-of-the-mill college, a fellow must be very calculating and pragmatic about the cost-benefit tradeoff of going to college.

I completely understand the threat that the Chinese military is trying to contain by restricting their troops' access to dating sites and other social media. Yet I note that such a move further socially isolates the hordes of single Chinese men with no wives in sight and wonder what sort of social instabilities such a population will inflict on the host culture.

Anyone else getting the distinct impression that one religious system is displacing another? In other words, Jefferson's ‘separation between church and state’, originally meant to protect the church from the state, is being used to protect the state church against other competing religious institutions.

1 in 5 US women will never bear children, further proof that feminism is a societal suicide pact, to say nothing of being fatal to the socialist hegemony upon which feminism depends.

Further evidence that marriage is increasingly the vehicle by which men's earnings are appropriated for women.

To be fair, we don’t and won't know what really happened. But this is what you get with Marxism...not unreasonable doubt that racial/ethnic minorities and women can put their class identification behind them and execute the law faithfully and without prejudice.


MikeT said...

The BA thing doesn't surprise me. Based on what I've read online about Britain, Britain makes the US look as apathetic toward child sex offenders as the RCC in the 1980s. It's so hysterical in some parts that photographers literally cannot safely take normal pictures outdoors without being accused of being a pedophile.

Christina said...

The target age for marriage-eligible women is 17 - 21 in my book. Old enough to maturely handle a home and family, young enough to not have absorbed too much of society's poison about marriage and relationships. And be wary of college-educated chicks, as college is merely a proving ground for sluts, and she's likely to be saddled with debt for a vanity degree that will be yours to pay off once you marry.

Unless, of course, you get to know her and discover that she's been WANTING to get married since she was 17 and only went to college because she felt like she needed some method of occupying herself/paying for herself because marriage seemed so incredibly unlikely considering she'd never been kissed.

I started looking for a husband when I was 16 years old =p Its not like I was THAT picky. I had some criteria, most of it my current husband doesn't meet. Having only dated 3 guys (the only 3 guys in my life who showed interest and made it known to me), can't say I was overly picky =p

But we all know this already. And where the above is anecdotal, where one exists there are more.

Christina said...

the only 3 guys in my life who showed interest and made it known to me

Ok that's not entirely true - there were more...but they all happened about the time I finally realized my husband was interested in me so I had to pick one and go with it.

Elusive Wapiti said...


"photographers literally cannot safely take normal pictures outdoors without being accused of being a pedophile."

I recall reading a story a couple of years back about a fellow in NorCal taking pictures of cheerleaders at a high school football game and getting quite a bit of 'yer a pedophile' heat for it.

Never mind that the girls were 15 y o, +/- 1 yr, making, at worst, his crime one of ephebophilia, not pedophilia.

Moreover, his supposed crime...photographic teen girls in a fraction of what Madison Avenue, Disney, ABC Family, and the CW network do regularly, which is sexualize teen and tween girls and feed those images to young men.

This brings me to may next point...what strikes me is how ate up our culture has become over time about sexuality. I don't think it was this bad even in Victorian times. What is even more curious to me is how it is the fembots, in a fit of congnitive dissonance, enforcing it. Women/girls can display yards of skin and shake their moneymaker in public all day long, but a man dare not notice, else it is 'eye rape' or some such nonsense.


While I contend that 17-21 is the ideal target, I acknowledge it is also far from the norm in today's society, with the average age of first marriage for women pushing 27 (and the average age of first intercourse hovering somewhere around 16-17, tho it's much lower for kids from low-income families and those raised by choice mommies)

I met Mrs Wapiti when she was 25 and married her when she was 26. She was also a college grad, and, most anomalous, a virgin when we married and had only one romantic interest (and a not very serious one at that) until we met.

I have settled on my 17 - 21 opinion based on two conclusions:

(1) A young woman, for her own good, should transition directly from the covering of her father to the covering of her husband, do not pass go, do not collect $200. This shields her from absorbing the nasty sexual lessons of the world and/or exposure to serial dating, both of which hobble her ability to stay in a stable lifelong relationship with a man.

(2) If said young woman wants children, and a shrinking majority still do so, then it is wiser in my judgement to whelp said children when she is younger, when her body is more fit to handle it, when her body will bounce back quicker from it, and when her children will be healthier overall (i.e. less asthma, birth defects, allergies, etc).

College and remunerated work can and should wait until after the family has been completed. This has two advantages: one, when/if a woman does attend college, it is with a purpose in mind. Thus her studies will be with an eye toward the direct economic benefit of having the degree, vice augmenting one's vanity, or simple wastefulness as is ususally the case today.

Second, a young woman wouldn't bring mountains of debt for a vanity degree into the union, and the additional financial stress that causes. Seriously, how many women really utilize their degrees at all, let alone after they marry and have children? And financial issues are the #1 cause of marital strife...begging the question 'why load up on that debt in the first place'?

(3) Early childbearing is also demographically advantaged over late childbearing. In other words, for the good of the culture, early childbearing is significantly advantaged over late.

Justin said...

E.W. I don't think Game has any insight to offer on that NYC chick. She is exhibiting materialism, explicitly rejecting a search based on character for a search based on money. She will have her reward. But I don't see what insight Game gives us on her?

But man, as for her boyfriend, she just contemptuously dismissed him in a published article. OUCH

The real problem is that our laws protect women like her from the natural consequences of her own stupdity. I am quite sure that when she is still childless and single in her late 30's/early 40's, she will be paying big money for artifical insemination and looking forward to raising children as a single by choice mommy.... Quite sad really. Not for her, I mean, for the child.

Elusive Wapiti said...

I was thinking that game has done much to tear women off the pedestal our society has placed them on.

And while we hear every once in a while about 'gold diggers', game explicitly calls out the hypergamous nature natural to female sexuality.

The NYC chick is merely an obvious instantiation of what can happen when female sexuality is uninformed and unfettered.

And yes, she did throw her current beau under the bus quite well.

Hermes said...

You forgot to mention the latest Boundless Show. They had some "marriage and family expert" from FotF on to discuss that Hannah Rosin piece in The Atlantic about the "end of men." Predictably, the guy was a white knight and just kept repeating over and over that men need to man up, women are good and desire what's right, it's men's fault for not teaching the next generation of boys how to be men, etc.

Laura Grace Robins said...

I love your response back to Christina re: marrying young. I can't say enough how important that is.

Elusive Wapiti said...


That sucks. I wish FotF would themselves man up and call a spade a spade, instead of kissing up to the wimmenz. They are becoming increasingly irrelevant in today's world--and increasingly a chick ghetto--until they do.

Lady Laura,


Anonymous said...

The ones that marry young are much more likely to divorce the guy and put him on the hook for huge alimony because their SMV at 25, after divorce, is MUCH higher than the SMV of a 35yo divorcee with two kids. Marry her at 30, have her breed right away, and she has little choice but to stick to you.