More coomer cope for how it’s acceptable for you to have sex with as many women as possible, even raping and stealing women from other men, but how women having sex is destructive to society. Pro tip: if you’re having sex with a woman, that means she’s having sex too. In healthy societies, people are held to equal standards and both sides view sex as something that can be beautiful or can ruin your life. If you’re having sex with women you don’t want children with you’re just as bad as the birth control using, baby aborting liberal whores you claim to hate so much. You’ll go on and on about accountability for women, but don’t want accountability for yourself. Same as claiming to want a hierarchy except when it comes to competing with women who you believe should be relegated to the bottom of the totem pole regardless of their intellect or work ethic or talents. Natural roles no longer exist in this modern society. You are no more naturally suited to be a lawyer, a doctor, or an accountant than a woman is. Your whole purpose with putting women back into subjugation is to gain control over women again. The fact that you post such idiotic drivel while believing that you are superior to all women just shows you to be nothing more than an entitled narcissist not deserving of any woman or any position of power or authority.
Will Knowland’s response to your essay so a schooling, summed up here:
“if men can get sex too easily, their primary motive for contributing to civilisation is removed. Why bother subjecting yourself to rigorous education and training for years to get a job that functions as a proxy to signal your ability to provide and therefore gain sexual access if you can already get sex without all that? Free love, baby.”
I think you need to be less blunt for example you don't tell a girl that you are going to have a concubine as well as her. You wait until it becomes an issue and then if your frame holds she will stay if not you need to hold better frame. So you should avoid using terms like submissive and replaced it with Caring, dutiful and understanting. Terms like place should be replaced with position, role and calling. These alternative terms should hopeful have less of an emotional reaction on women and other people in the matrix.
This is why females rule. You placate which automatically demonstrates you are stepping in her frame. You've been brought up to believe that this is the "optimal" way. No it's not. Everything you've been lead to assume is not the way in reality. Using softer language and being more receptive is a silly approach because once you let that door open a little, it swings open. The slippery slope is not a fallacy. You maintain your frame at all times, she'll try to break it down which is her test of seeing whether you're the right man, and then that's the moment of truth for whether you wither and fall or you stand tall. She might not like what you have to say but she will respect you and respect for a woman is the greatest attraction cue.
Wherever you see a black pill, first look for its exceptions. There are lesser-seeming men with strong Christian marriages. What makes them so? Strong frame, an education on the nature of women. Learn game, learn to handle your woman. This is something you can do.
>It is ridiculous to suggest that men are ruined for marriage in the same way women are if they have had many sexual partners.
In both genders having 5 or more sex partners lowers your marriage happiness by 10% (70 --> 60) compared to people with 1 sex partner / life.
Maybe women do not care about man's high body count, but that does not change anything. Who cares what they think.
>It is only in recent history that men and women would settle with people their own age.
In most of our written history the gap between a bride and a groom was 3 years. That's not a lot. Unless you want to larp as some pagan barbarian or Muslim, of course.
>Feminism has destroyed male-female relationships that have lasted for thousands of years
Can we please not glorify pre-Gratianus form of marriage? It is bad reductionism to assume everything was same from first civilizations to "sterilization of marriage" in 20th century. We white people are quite distinct from others due to our history of relationships since Middle Ages.
Women absolutely care about whether their partner is a whore or not. Men can catch STDs, some of which don’t have symptoms in men, such as HPV. Plus most women want a partner who has similar values to themselves. If a man treats sex as a transaction with other women, what makes sex with me any more than a transaction?
Well, the foundation of all societies, communities, and empires is the relationship between men and women. Without children, they will all die out. Currently, our value system in the west has been co-opted by the feminists. Men do need to be men again and stop looking to equalize. We are different (in a good way). But, it is going to make most of the females' and beta males' heart a flutter. Will Men do what is necessary? Eventually, when the civilization falls and survival is at stake, masculine males will roar again.
I think the best approach (as horrible as it sounds; brace yourself) is to just let women remain on Onlyfans. That provides a good supply for conquest by Alphas, meanwhile, women who are married can be expected to loyal to their husbands. While the alphas are out conquering the Onlyfans prostitutes to build up experience in order to eventually settle down and create strong marriages.
In a funny way, the Onlyfans prostitutes are doing a service to society. We don't really need to get rid of anything - we just need to subvert the culture and create a new frame on which society views things. Onlyfans girls are servicing the men who will become alphas, who will then go on and marry the girls who want to go steady. Meanwhile, we actively encourage women to go steady - but the sluts who want money will still be sluts, and we shouldn't limit that. The latter is because leftist energy is inspired to react to conservative energy, which gets wasted trying to push against the animalistic nature that lives in all humans to varying degrees. Many women are simply naturally promiscuous, I think, just as many men are alphas. But clearly, the stable women need to be cultivated as well - the problem is the lack of stable women, not the over abundance of sluts, necessarily.
The answer often lies in contradiction, and the reason there is political gridlock, is because ideologues become stubborn and cannot see that.
I think stubborness in the left is what has caused them to expose themselves as tyrannical in recent years. And because of that, the reaction is growing. Stubborness might encourage zealotry, but it also doesn't help to form the new ideas that allow for necessary social evolution that can avoid a repetition of history.
References to the nature of women, frame, and PUA talking points. I like this, but I disagree with some points. I think the war brides concept is funny, and it would work. But it hurts our goal a bit. Or it at least is uncharacteristic of our circles. That "crack a few eggs to make an omelet" idea, in particular, is the point I find issues with. It's one of the reasons we have ashes of civilization. Given the nature of hypergamy, and our circle's current issue with women, it is still something we should look into. I'd almost say it's integral we learn this.
References to the nature of women, frame, and PUA talking points. I like this, but I disagree with some points. I think the war brides concept is funny, and it would work. But it hurts our goal a bit. Or it at least is uncharacteristic of our circles. That "crack a few eggs to make an omelet" idea, in particular, is the point I find issues with. It's one of the reasons we have ashes of civilization. Given the nature of hypergamy, and our circle's current issue with women, it is still something we should look into. I'd almost say it's integral we learn this.
The OP already made a point about how men shouldn't cheat on their wives, if the wife puts out.
The alpha energy can go haywire of course - some alphas are lazy enough to quit their job when their boss tries to humble them, and just want to get into bar fights and die young.
Civilization succeeds when it properly channels alpha energy.
More coomer cope for how it’s acceptable for you to have sex with as many women as possible, even raping and stealing women from other men, but how women having sex is destructive to society. Pro tip: if you’re having sex with a woman, that means she’s having sex too. In healthy societies, people are held to equal standards and both sides view sex as something that can be beautiful or can ruin your life. If you’re having sex with women you don’t want children with you’re just as bad as the birth control using, baby aborting liberal whores you claim to hate so much. You’ll go on and on about accountability for women, but don’t want accountability for yourself. Same as claiming to want a hierarchy except when it comes to competing with women who you believe should be relegated to the bottom of the totem pole regardless of their intellect or work ethic or talents. Natural roles no longer exist in this modern society. You are no more naturally suited to be a lawyer, a doctor, or an accountant than a woman is. Your whole purpose with putting women back into subjugation is to gain control over women again. The fact that you post such idiotic drivel while believing that you are superior to all women just shows you to be nothing more than an entitled narcissist not deserving of any woman or any position of power or authority.
Damn who let a chick in here?
Apparently you since you don’t have any privacy settings. You should look into that so the world doesn’t have to be exposed to this stupidity.
Will Knowland’s response to your essay so a schooling, summed up here:
“if men can get sex too easily, their primary motive for contributing to civilisation is removed. Why bother subjecting yourself to rigorous education and training for years to get a job that functions as a proxy to signal your ability to provide and therefore gain sexual access if you can already get sex without all that? Free love, baby.”
https://knowlandknows.substack.com/p/the-religious-right-and-feminism?s=r
I think you need to be less blunt for example you don't tell a girl that you are going to have a concubine as well as her. You wait until it becomes an issue and then if your frame holds she will stay if not you need to hold better frame. So you should avoid using terms like submissive and replaced it with Caring, dutiful and understanting. Terms like place should be replaced with position, role and calling. These alternative terms should hopeful have less of an emotional reaction on women and other people in the matrix.
This is why females rule. You placate which automatically demonstrates you are stepping in her frame. You've been brought up to believe that this is the "optimal" way. No it's not. Everything you've been lead to assume is not the way in reality. Using softer language and being more receptive is a silly approach because once you let that door open a little, it swings open. The slippery slope is not a fallacy. You maintain your frame at all times, she'll try to break it down which is her test of seeing whether you're the right man, and then that's the moment of truth for whether you wither and fall or you stand tall. She might not like what you have to say but she will respect you and respect for a woman is the greatest attraction cue.
That story of the 22yo alpha chad in a sexless marriage is the most black-pilling thing I've read in a while. Bruutal
Wherever you see a black pill, first look for its exceptions. There are lesser-seeming men with strong Christian marriages. What makes them so? Strong frame, an education on the nature of women. Learn game, learn to handle your woman. This is something you can do.
>It is ridiculous to suggest that men are ruined for marriage in the same way women are if they have had many sexual partners.
In both genders having 5 or more sex partners lowers your marriage happiness by 10% (70 --> 60) compared to people with 1 sex partner / life.
Maybe women do not care about man's high body count, but that does not change anything. Who cares what they think.
>It is only in recent history that men and women would settle with people their own age.
In most of our written history the gap between a bride and a groom was 3 years. That's not a lot. Unless you want to larp as some pagan barbarian or Muslim, of course.
>Feminism has destroyed male-female relationships that have lasted for thousands of years
Can we please not glorify pre-Gratianus form of marriage? It is bad reductionism to assume everything was same from first civilizations to "sterilization of marriage" in 20th century. We white people are quite distinct from others due to our history of relationships since Middle Ages.
Women absolutely care about whether their partner is a whore or not. Men can catch STDs, some of which don’t have symptoms in men, such as HPV. Plus most women want a partner who has similar values to themselves. If a man treats sex as a transaction with other women, what makes sex with me any more than a transaction?
Well, the foundation of all societies, communities, and empires is the relationship between men and women. Without children, they will all die out. Currently, our value system in the west has been co-opted by the feminists. Men do need to be men again and stop looking to equalize. We are different (in a good way). But, it is going to make most of the females' and beta males' heart a flutter. Will Men do what is necessary? Eventually, when the civilization falls and survival is at stake, masculine males will roar again.
Man, this is a banger of an article. Great stuff Redhawk!
I think the best approach (as horrible as it sounds; brace yourself) is to just let women remain on Onlyfans. That provides a good supply for conquest by Alphas, meanwhile, women who are married can be expected to loyal to their husbands. While the alphas are out conquering the Onlyfans prostitutes to build up experience in order to eventually settle down and create strong marriages.
In a funny way, the Onlyfans prostitutes are doing a service to society. We don't really need to get rid of anything - we just need to subvert the culture and create a new frame on which society views things. Onlyfans girls are servicing the men who will become alphas, who will then go on and marry the girls who want to go steady. Meanwhile, we actively encourage women to go steady - but the sluts who want money will still be sluts, and we shouldn't limit that. The latter is because leftist energy is inspired to react to conservative energy, which gets wasted trying to push against the animalistic nature that lives in all humans to varying degrees. Many women are simply naturally promiscuous, I think, just as many men are alphas. But clearly, the stable women need to be cultivated as well - the problem is the lack of stable women, not the over abundance of sluts, necessarily.
Sluts help create alphas, like it or not.
The answer often lies in contradiction, and the reason there is political gridlock, is because ideologues become stubborn and cannot see that.
I think stubborness in the left is what has caused them to expose themselves as tyrannical in recent years. And because of that, the reaction is growing. Stubborness might encourage zealotry, but it also doesn't help to form the new ideas that allow for necessary social evolution that can avoid a repetition of history.
References to the nature of women, frame, and PUA talking points. I like this, but I disagree with some points. I think the war brides concept is funny, and it would work. But it hurts our goal a bit. Or it at least is uncharacteristic of our circles. That "crack a few eggs to make an omelet" idea, in particular, is the point I find issues with. It's one of the reasons we have ashes of civilization. Given the nature of hypergamy, and our circle's current issue with women, it is still something we should look into. I'd almost say it's integral we learn this.
References to the nature of women, frame, and PUA talking points. I like this, but I disagree with some points. I think the war brides concept is funny, and it would work. But it hurts our goal a bit. Or it at least is uncharacteristic of our circles. That "crack a few eggs to make an omelet" idea, in particular, is the point I find issues with. It's one of the reasons we have ashes of civilization. Given the nature of hypergamy, and our circle's current issue with women, it is still something we should look into. I'd almost say it's integral we learn this.
The OP already made a point about how men shouldn't cheat on their wives, if the wife puts out.
The alpha energy can go haywire of course - some alphas are lazy enough to quit their job when their boss tries to humble them, and just want to get into bar fights and die young.
Civilization succeeds when it properly channels alpha energy.