A woman wants a nice man, a man who will open doors for her, a man who treats her with respect at all times. A woman wants a gentleman who will let her trod his jacket, rather than muddy her toe. A woman would never give up the ass to a rude jerk…

She’s now very happy in a new relationship…

The 23-year-old begged with Magistrates to impose an anonymity order on her trial to keep her case out of the public eye. Glencross’ lawyer Shelley Buchecker said there were multiple Facebook posts showing her client could be in danger following the savage beating. Goolang Magistrates’ Court, in Victoria, Australia, threw out the application under the presumption of open justice. It was ruled she would have to live with ‘demeaning and humiliating’ posts on social media after finding no evidence of threat among the messages. Open justice is based on the fundamental principle that the actions of the courts should be transparent to the public.

Apparently, there is one judge in Australia with the guts to say ‘no’ to the ho’. Good for him (or her).

Read more here.

Earlier we noted an interesting juxtaposition. On one hand feminists claim to be deeply concerned about health care and saving lives. On the other hand they promote policies and behaviors that cause increased numbers of deaths. One such example is the relationship between “Breast Cancer and Abortion.” Over at Sigma Frame, Jack writes in “How the Pill Kills” of another. For context, I strongly encourage you to read it before reading my supplemental commentary here.

In the United States, ~700 woman die each year (out of ~4,000,000) from complications related to pregnancy or delivery.^[1] By contrast ~250 women die each year (out of ~13,000,000) from VT associated with oral contraceptives.^[2] Similarly, the risk of getting VTE while on the pill is about 5x greater than the general population, while about half the risk of getting it while pregnant.^[3]

As with breast cancer and abortion, we found that feminists play games with statistics to make it seem as if their policies and behaviors save lives rather than cost them. The same is true here, since these statistics do show that it is somewhat safer to be on oral contraceptives compared to being pregnant. There are multiple problems with this reasoning.

First, being on oral contraceptives is more dangerous than not being on them. It is significantly more dangerous than other pregnancy preventatives, such as breast feeding, NFP, condom use, abstinence, and sterilization. Indeed, the availability of viable alternatives makes oral contraceptives and their associated increased health risks one of pure convenience and choice. Since they are not required to prevent pregnancy, the proper statistical comparison is against the general population.

Second, the risk break-even for oral contraceptives compared to pregnancy is 2 to 10 years—taking the pill for as little as two years is similar in health risk to having a single pregnancy.^[4] Even ignoring the first point, correcting for the average fertility rate of women and the number of years on oral contraceptives suggests that the adjusted lifetime risk to women on the pill is equal to or greater than the lifetime risks from pregnancy. Consider, Abbey Parkes, pictured above, who started on the pill at age 14 and was dead at 20. During that time on the pill she experienced roughly the risk of a pregnancy, without reaping any of the health benefits associated with pregnancy or experiencing the joys of marriage and motherhood.

Third, as we saw with breast cancer and abortion, the risk of harm is significantly greater than merely the risk of death. Surviving a negative health event is still a bad thing. The risk of dying compared to the general population is lower than the overall risk of non-death negative health events. Taking oral contraceptives not only threatens death, but also your quality of life.

In summary, we confirm once again that feminism leads to more unnecessary suffering and death in the name of the almighty orgasm. Being on oral contraceptives unnecessarily increases a woman’s risk of death and other negative health effects.

UPDATE: This post has been corrected to eliminate incorrect/unclear statistical inferences.

---

^[1] Division of Reproductive Health, National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. February 26, 2019. https://www.cdc.gov/reproductivehealth/maternalinfanthealth/pregnancy-relatedmortality.htm

^[2] Keenan, L., Kerr, T., Duane, M., & Van Gundy, K. (2018). Systematic Review of Hormonal Contraception and Risk of Venous Thrombosis. The Linacre Quarterly, 85(4), 470–477. https://doi.org/10.1177/0024363918816683

^[3] Peter Kovacs. “Oral Contraceptives and the Risk for Venous Thromboembolism.” Medscape. Oct 09, 2009 (referencing: van Hylckama Vlieg A, Helmerhorst FM, Vandenbroucke JP, Doggen CJ, Rosendaal FR, “The Venous Thrombotic Risk of Oral Contraceptives, Effects of Oestrogen Dose and Progestogen Type: Results of the MEGA Case-Control Study”, The British Medical Journal (BMJ) 2009 339:b2921).

^[4] This is an estimate: pill use and pregnancy have different and varied side effects. Age plays a factor as well. It is also for comparison only: as per the first point, all real risk is relative to the general population.

Down below, Jason refers us to this character who calls himself “Coach Corey Wayne.”

Off topic, but someone sent me a “coach corey wayne” video about MGTOW. Never heard of this guy. Wish I hadn’t. If I ever meet him face to face, I will pull his skull through his large intestines.

This particular video actually reminds me of another simp, Dr. Nerdlove, who wrote a similar article back in 2012.

What truths to these men teach us?

The last technique I’ve used is to ignore her flaking out. I make other plans for the day and put her out of mind… until the day after. The day after the aborted date, I’ll either call – especially if I know I’m likely to get her voice mail – or send a text profusely apologizing for having forgotten that we were supposed to get together. After I give whatever bullshit excuse comes to mind – long night and overslept, got caught up by a deadline, something fairly minor – I’ll insist that I need to take her out in order to make it up to her. Again: this reframes the situation to where she is the offended party and feeling as though she’s owed something in recompense… especially if it’s being treated to a nice dinner.

When some useless cunt rudely wastes your time, you should reward her with an expensive night out at your expense. That sounds logical.

Do you gentlemen have any thoughts on this nonsense? Shout in the comments.

Somewhere as the fires died in the late 1990’s there seemed to crop up out of nowhere some people with “good intentions” that were giving men advice on how to date women, convince women to get horizontal with them, and to be that all around ‘life of the party’ guy that all people wanted to be around. You would be viewed with envy by fellow men; and women would just find you so desirable you could form your very own personal harem. Of course, when you decided to “settle down” you would have the best choice of the top women to make a family with. 

These methods are not new. Throughout history there have been writings and musings about “what works” when trying to date, court, woo, wallow and win the love or the endearment of women. Myths, legends, stories and practical advice to men have been throughout the ages and cultures for men trying to navigate this dilemma of “what do women want in a man?”

The question is eternal as recorded history, and by no means never has been an easy one to answer. What works for one man, may not work for another. What one woman says and purports, another woman may have a very different outlook of what she expects in a man. 

Even in the distant past, the then new “Playboy” magazine in the 1950’s was giving excellent style, music and advice to men about women. Though we all know that no one read the articles, everyone claimed they did. It did become a funny joke of sorts over the ensuring decades about this magazine. Kind of the same thing highbrow liberals and conservatives purported in the 1970’s “Oh, no. I don’t ever watch TV…..except for PBS, MASH, and 60 Minutes.” 

Popular culture in the USA during the early Cold-War-era from television, and movies always gave us the story about a couple that was “meant to be” and somehow had to get the advice of the fool, a biddy old grandmother, a buffoon character who could never get love himself but somehow just had the right insight for the hero of the show in order for him to change, be attractive and win the heroines affections. Some stories were just plain entertaining. Some were sad, but all had a sense of “believability” in them. We, the viewing public in general knew how to separate fact from fiction and enjoy these mediums for what they were.

I won’t go into a detailed history of who started this, or who deserves the “credit” for what is now called “game”, nor will I go into what “game” is because if you are reading this, you have some general ideas of what it is or isn’t. Anything I say it is, will be met with howls of  protest from advocates and detractors alike. I will state why I won’t play, and purport that women like you or they don’t. If women don’t, there really is nothing you can do in this modern world. If women do, game I suppose can help you become more of a douche-bag that you probably already are.

With that said, even these cretins who promote, live and drink this nonsense called “game” today can’t even agree with each other of what it is, or what it should be or what it isn’t. It has become a cult, like christianity and their never-ending sectarian debates over what jesus said and what he really meant, or what certain words mean and don’t mean. Game is like Amway sales and other pyramid schemes as well. The fervent believers will twist their boxer-shorts into a bundle about the foolproof merits of game, trying to keep growing that base of the pyramid, just like progressive liberals “if you could only just see plainly how it works, and just give it a chance….you eyes will be opened……” They seem to be more concerned of having you accept it, rather than debate if it works. Like christianity, they claim they are making disciples, and equipping and helping men, but for the most part they are just claiming how “right” they think they are. 

They throw this boatload and minstrel show called “game” and its proven, foolproof results on men and then belittle the same men when it does not meet expectations or promises. They use shaming language, sneers and jeers. They heap insults and sarcastic slaps upon these men. Now, when they were trying to convince you of its merits, they were your “best buddy” and friend. It mirrors any cult today. If you dare question any of its supposed foolproof methods, they become a very hateful insulting angry group of bullies. There is something very evil in groupthink in these kinds of matters. Like Communism, company culture at Apple or other cults. A supposed band of brotherhood, welcoming and foolproof solutions to a very imperfect world full of fools. You try to leave? You don’t like? You disagree on any holy doctrine they may have? 

You’re the dirtiest of traitors to men, you’re worse than Hitler…..or some other insult….and in “game” they pull their best insult “you’re actually a woman” and there was “no hope for you anyway”

Now, many will say “Well Jason / Lastmod…I disagree, you see I was a simp, and a chump but I watched some podcasts, read a book or two and now I am ladies man / banging nines and tens all nite / all day. It works.”

My reply is, well….that’s great, so what did you have to begin with? You see to make “game” on this superficial level work you had to have something to begin with. Were you just a tad shy, but you had exceptional verbal and communication skills? Were you always attractive but just a tad awkward? Were you always above average in looks, but just needed a new hairstyle, or some better fashion sense for your personality? Did you have actual interests aside from the “Star Trek” TV shows? Did you need to hit the gym a little and firm up? 

That’s not “game” that’s just basic upkeep of being a well-rounded person. You can and have been able to get all this information from mens magazines dating back to the 1940’s in the USA…..and probably before then. Brushing your teeth is not “game” its basic hygiene. Women like a guy who has nice teeth, and fresh breath. If a young man doesn’t know that by the time he is a teenager, he has worse problems than finding a girlfriend. These webpages in “game” even talk about taking a shower and brushing your teeth. “Oh, you can’t get a girlfriend? You just need to shower bro!”

Even a hardcore “game” advocate wants to be with a woman who has some interests, and has some depth to them. These men don’t want a woodchuck girlfriend who only cares about her hair color or nail color. The actual deep concepts of “game” basically purport that all women think, act and behave exactly alike. No variance. From the virginal church girl, to the skankiest hooker down on lower Fulton Street in Fresno, California all behave the same:

Attraction isn’t a choice for them. They are just attracted to male dominance, leadership and confidence, it’s what they want and any guy can get this, and have this. 

The problem lies in the fact. FACT. That we are not peg boards. Women and men can and do make good and bad decisions. Women, just as much as men are attracted to “good looking” people. I recall that stupid, but funny scene in that teen movie “The Breakfast Club” (1985) when the “rebel / alpha” guy (Judd Nelson) asks “teen dream” (Molly Ringwald) about if she would “date a guy who elephantitus of the balls……but he had a great personality, a cool car, lots of confidence….” And, of course the “teen dream” couldn’t do this. 

Yet “game” tells us, that women just want confidence. Ask one- hundred women on the street what the word “confidence” means, you’ll get a hundred answers…..sure some similar, but all a shade different unique to that girl in question. Also add that “game” assumes a woman can never change. She is what she is. What she liked in a man at eighteen is what she will like at forty-five. 

This open ended word called “confidence” now gets muscled up and twisted in “game” blogs, web-pages, and podcasts to mean nothing or everything. It’s being a boss. It’s being a leader with never clearly defining what being a leader means, and the responsibility being one entails. I am just about fifty years old. I have met very few actual leaders at work in any job over the decades. None in church and have not really been inspired to strive to be like most men who claim how much of a leader they are. Even on that silly PUA show with Mystery a decade or so back……the only men who did get dates and improve? They were better looking or came into that show “above average” looking anyway. 

I won’t play this “game” and the rules are made by women. They set the field, men perform, strut and show what they have. Ironic isn’t it? This “game” claiming to make men into “men” has them behaving like women during a runway show or pageant.

Shhhh….but don’t tell anyone, especially the “game” advocates, they get really angry when you laugh at their folly. They are like the classic schoolyard bully….the can dish out the insults, the threats, the toughness…..but throw it back on them? They can’t take it. 

Game over

When this character rambles on all stream-of-consciousness like, he ends up condemning himself. There are numerous examples, but this one at 31:35 is particularly humorous.

If you know how to apply the things that I cheat… er… teach

Thanks again to Jason for turning me on to this ham-fisted PUA.

I enjoy getting feedback on articles, publicly or privately, good or bad.

Someone noted that my last article could be interpreted as motivated by envy or ressentiment. I can dig that, and I thought I should probably expound.

My understanding of Roosh’ life includes at least one advanced degree in either zoology or biology, which means he’s probably at least one standard deviation brighter than I am (I studied math and physics in undergrad because that was the way I could get out of taking any life science courses – no shit). I also understand Roosh to have been offered a 6-figure job by some biochem or pharmaceutical company right out of uni. That certainly beats my story.

So, Roosh is brainier than Boxer. He’s also (objectively speaking) a better and funnier essayist. While I know I can get as much sex as I want with women who meet my standards, probability suggests that the author of Bang Yugoslavia has fucked way more 8s and 9s than I have.

No arguments on any of the above points from me.

What bothers me about Roosh’s life — and by extension, the lives of all the “game” gurus — is not their real or perceived superiority to me. It is rather the presupposition that they are superior to me simply for fucking lots of skank-ho wimminz.

Roosh had a biochem M.S. and a 6-figure job as a guy in his early 20s. Now he’s a 40-something old man. What has he done in the interim? The answer, of course, is nothing. He has no real-world achievements, other than doing a bunch of stuff that even a mediocrity like myself can manage.

Rather than concentrate on his career, and achieve excellence in his field, Roosh decided to drop out, wander around the world like some postmodern hobo, and screw lots of wimminz. Roosh did some writing, while he was living the hobo life. Jack London and Jack Kerouac did this, and they wrote about it too, but their writings were also funny and insightful. Instead of dedicating himself to writing meaningful stuff, Roosh wrote solely about screwing wimminz. I’ve read a couple of Roosh books. There is no substance there.

Having abandoned his grandparents’ honorable faith (Muslim or Christian it doesn’t matter) and having abandoned the degrees and career, Roosh is a 40-something old man, with nothing to show for his life. Not only do I not envy Roosh, I am compelled to feel sorry for him.

I am down for having sex with skanks myself, and don’t make any pretense of virtue, but I decided (many years ago) to take the advice of Epicurus, and make these indulgences a special-occasion thing, for weekends and holidays. Spending all day in the brothel makes sex become a chore, and while the master knew this, Roosh is apparently only now finding it out. I think that’s a pity, and I hope none of my readers follow him down his path. It’s a way to uselessness and nihilism.

For several months, people have brought up Roosh V. and his turn toward faith. I don’t remember anyone writing an article about this, so I figured I would do so now.

For those who don’t know, Roosh V. is one of the godfathers of “game,” and he has the distinction of encouraging the cad known as Roissy to start a blog of his own. Last spring, Roosh V. unpublished such classics as Bang Poland before announcing that he was not going to allow any more ribald discussion on his forum…

Assuming that he’s being honest about his motivations, rather than cynically self-censoring to avoid the SJW mob, I can’t criticize him.

While I wish him well in his new lifestyle, there are a few things to point out. The first is that what Roosh is doing is by no means unprecedented.

A great many men eventually realize the emptiness embodied in a hedonistic lifestyle. Rather than dial back the pleasure-seeking, they often implode into marriage or male-feminism.

Basing one’s life and lifestyle around screwing lots of women is to make a film, with a finite budget, filled with glossy shots and wild effects which never work, because they are compositionally forced. There is no substance to such an existence.

The pattern seems to follow a predictable course, and at some point, the “game” guru looks about himself to realize he sits in a castle in the sky, which only he can see. Thus, the moment came when Roosh realized that all his real-world achievements were limited to a dozen poorly written pornographic books, which only attracted fat autists on the internet. The only thing left to do, at such an inflection point, is abandonment of the delusion.

Unfortunately, he doesn’t seem to be strong enough to ghost out and have fun with his life. He’s addicted to the dopamine rush of internet fame. Thus he is busy reinventing himself as some sort of matchmaker.

And there we have the end of the cycle.

I think Roosh, and “game” gurus in general, operate under the misconception that we MGTOW brothers don’t have the skills to compete with them. This is a mistake. I just fucked a decent looking skank this morning. I could fuck another one within 48 hours, if I wanted to. Roosh and the “game” promoters haven’t got any secret, occult knowledge that is missing from our lives.

The differences between us are subtle, but they do exist. MGTOW use a different (though related) epistemic cycle to interpret the world. Around here, we don’t feel obligated to a society which stacks the deck so brutally against us, and even if we can Bang Nicaragua, we generally don’t. Life is short, and sex is an important but minor part of it.

It seems that kooky Joe Biden is sliding into that dark night of nutcase obscurity, with more rapidity than I could predict. Taking his place is none other than Elizabeth Warren, better known as Fauxcahontas.

Warren is a clever attorney who advanced her career by smearing herself with red shoe polish, pretending to be a first nations / native american. In reality, she’s as white as I am.

After her redface scam played out, she began pretending to be some radical leftish reformer who was going to stand up for working families. She has been running this con ever since. In reality, Elizabeth Warren is the democrat version of Ted Cruz: a degenerate insider pretending to be a maverick.

If anyone is thinking of voting for this old bag, I would like to personally posit a more authentic candidate. Don’t vote Fauxcahontas. Vote Smokohantas instead!