The “Men’s Rights Movement” should be called the “Beta Power Movement”

Because they’re all weak betas and can’t change with the changing sexual landscape.

Here’s a few recent quotes from The Rational Male blog:

“I remembered then an older man I had done some peer counseling with while in college and how this man had essentially striven his entire life to please and content his ex-wife and his now second wife of more than 30 years.”

That’s fuckin’ sad.

“This is why I say men are the True Romantics, because the overwhelming majority will devote a lifetime to the effort of actualizing a belief in a male-idealized love to find fulfillment in a woman and for that woman.”

That’s really fuckin’ sad.

“As soon as I would ‘fall in love’ I would slowly drop those activities, I’d focus on being a good bf, I would focus on providing and ‘being what she wanted’ what I thought she wanted, better said.”

That’s beyond fuckin’ sad.

“Is this what Rollo means when he says our response to women is a conditioning, and that the sadness we get from Red Pill truth is the result of behaving and believing something that is not really our nature, but the result of having someone else’s behaviors and beliefs installed into us?”

No, here’s why you feel so “sad” when you realize that chicks dig jerks: You realize that you’re a big fuckin’ pansy and you always will be. You’re a momma’s boy and you’ve just realized there ain’t no more mommas for you. That’s what’s making you “sad,” bud. You’ve realized that your boring beta self ain’t gonna cut it, and at the same time you’ve realized that you are incapable of being anything else.

Hey, nothing wrong with that. But just go. Don’t bitch about it. Don’t whine about it. Just… go.

People think I dislike men or that I’m against male empowerment. I’m not. There’s a “Dad’s Legal Center” or whatever it’s called not far from my office and I presume it’s a law firm which fights legal battles for men. That’s great and I fully support that. I think the world needs more of those, in fact. What I like about it is that those guys are actually doing something to effect change and help other guys out.

Not so, the MRA dorks. What I can’t stand are pathetic little whiners who go on and on about how “women these days just can’t understand” what wonderful and sweet dudes they are. Because chicks don’t find them desirable, therefore chicks (and society, and politics, and the media, etc) are all BAD. It’s not the dude himself, no. Of course not. It’s the rest of the world.

Admittedly, these loons would have had a better time getting laid in 1950 and before. Then, women had to look past shitty, boring, whiner personalities and go for the money — ie, the provider males. As long as these dudes could earn a buck, they could be as annoying as they naturally are and they’d still get at least a bit of action.

Look, it’s fine to wake up one day and realize you’re a weak-ass chump. Lots of guys do it. The key difference is that you should start effecting change at a rather rapid pace once that realization has dick-slapped you across the face. If you’re still a bitter beta a year later, or heaven forbid 2, 3, 5, 10 years later… you ain’t ever gonna change. You are a permanent beta chump living in a world that no longer has any respect or need for beta chumps.

If that’s the case, quit blogging. Quit whining. Accept yourself and move to Alaska to be alone and enjoy the beautiful scenery there. I’m waiting for the day when MGTOW truly and permanently GTOW rather than just threaten to.

Just admit you’re a wimp, Rollo Tomassi

Though I link to some here, I rarely read MRA blogs like Rational Male and Heartiste because I simply can’t stand all the pathetic whining. It embarrasses me. But sometimes when I’m in a masochistic mood I’ll read a page or two.

Here’s one that made me laugh:

http://therationalmale.com/2014/05/18/the-real-nice/

His theory is that, if it weren’t for all the mean women out there who like bad boys, all (or most) guys would be sweet and wonderful and enjoy providing for women and writing poetry and buying them flowers and shit.

In short, if women would only let them, men would naturally be as caring and thoroughly pussified as, no doubt, Rollo Tomassi himself is.

“With the notable exceptions of natural born Alphas, I believe most men would overwhelmingly default to being compassionate, empathic souls, steeped in romantic notions of chivalry, dedication and honor.”

Bahahah that’s ridiculous. I have no interest in chivalry, dedication or honor and I never have. That doesn’t make me a “natural born alpha,” it makes me a natural born asshole. How many chump-ass motherfuckers would naturally gravitate to “romantic notions of chivalry?” Fucking castrated ones, is who.

No pal, most men would not overwhelmingly default to be nice guys, buying roses and giving foot massages. Most guys would chafe at that.

And this is yet another problem with the MRA loons. They believe that all dudes are secretly big old pussies like they are. The only guys who aren’t are “natural alphas” (whatever that is) or those guys who pretend to be jerks just so chicks will dig them.

Let me tell you, the only time I was a “nice guy” was when I was about 8, to a cute blonde girl named Nikki. And that wasn’t because I was naturally sweet, it’s because I thought that’s what girls wanted. Well, even at that young age it rapidly became clear that was a losing strategy, so I abandoned it and went back to yanking on her pigtails until she cried. Watch any group of boys and that is their natural state. Not writing fucking sonnets like Tomassi did as a child.

“Men are simply never rewarded for displays of these higher-self aspirations with genuine appreciation of women.”

No pal, men want to get pussy, drink beer, and enjoy their hobbies. Very few are pansy enough to preoccupy themselves with “genuine appreciation of women” unless they’re appreciating some perfect, natural tits. Those are worthy of genuine appreciation.

“Most guys would like nothing better than to honestly play the loving, white knight, romantic who women bemoan a lack of in the world.”

Sorry pal, you’re wrong. Only a small minority of men are that lame. And those who are, like the MRA tools, are rightfully excluded from the mating market.

Run hamster run! Deluded women trying to convince themselves that their SMV isn’t declining

In the past year or so there have been several feeble female blogger attempts to refute the fact that men age better than women.  To do that they conveniently ignore about 20,000 years of evidence, common sense, the theory of evolution, and observations by every culture in the history of mankind.  Run, Hamster, RUN!

Here’s a typical one, from some nameless broad’s blog I won’t bother naming or linking to:

Average male SMV (that is, SEXUAL market value) is NEVER above average female SMV. It isn’t how the sexes work. When it comes to sex, women, on average, are the ones with the goods, at ANY age. If male average SMV was higher than female average SMV above the age of 35, then

1)Prostitution would reverse itself – men would sell, and women buy

2)Women over 35 would have a hard time getting laid, and the only thing men over 35 would need to get laid, is to “just be there”

3)Women who get laid a lot after 35 would be considered skilled players.

That is simply not the case.

If we’re talking about raw SMV, and not MMV (marriage market value) or RMV (relationship market value), then a male 7 and a female 7, despite having the same name, do not have the same SMV. He is a 7, and she is more like a 700.

Here’s my response:

1)Prostitution would reverse itself – men would sell, and women buy

It does, dumbass.  Do you see men paying for 40+ year old women?  Um, no.  Not unless the guy is 60+.  Actually, the whole “cougar” phenomenon is women who have enough cash from their divorces “buying” younger men. How many guys walk into the local brothel and say, “Give me a middle-aged chick.” Bahahhaa.  And yet, how many “cougar cruises” go to tropical destinations where the old bitches on board pay dearly for swarthy local studs?  Yeah.

2)Women over 35 would have a hard time getting laid, and the only thing men over 35 would need to get laid, is to “just be there”

That is the case. By “hard time,” we mean that older women have to be much sluttier and do more shit for the guy. Older women have to put out fast and — if the guy is hot enough — he ain’t gonna bang her at all no matter what she does. Given my own experience, it has become easier and easier for me to bang chicks of all ages as I age. My SMV has risen a GREAT deal compared to my SMV in my early- and mid-20s.

3)Women who get laid a lot after 35 would be considered skilled players.

No they would be considered “desperate.” Basically, women who get laid a lot after 35 put out the “I’m easy” and/or “I’ll do anything for you” vibe. They make the first move, offer themselves sexually and usually offer to split the bill or pay the whole thing. They have to. Because guys don’t want to fuck old women.

If we’re talking about raw SMV, and not MMV (marriage market value) or RMV (relationship market value), then a male 7 and a female 7, despite having the same name, do not have the same SMV. He is a 7, and she is more like a 700.

You wish honey.  You take two looks-matched 50 year olds — man and woman — and the man will have FAR more mating opportunities than the woman.  Don’t want to believe me?  Wait around a little.

I’m no fan of the manosphere — that much should be clear by now. But the idea that women have a high SMV after the age of 35, 40, 45… that’s utter bullshit. Anybody with even the smallest shred of common sense and the slightest inkling to actually observe the world around them can see that’s a lie.

And, as far as men go, 90% of the time their SMV rises as they age until they’re late 40s or so. Only the hunkiest and laziest of guys have higher SMV at the age of 25 than they do at 35. Guys who perhaps didn’t age well or didn’t work hard enough to make something of themselves. Yeah, if you’re a hot 25 year old dude working in a garage, you’re going to have higher SMV than a past-his-prime 40 year old dude working in a garage. But the average guy who has gained money and status and has kept his looks to a reasonable degree will be pulling more tail at the age of 40 than he did at 25.

To think otherwise is to delude yourself. I hate people who delude themselves. It’s an embarrassment to everyone. Both the men’s right’s movement and the crazy feminist bloggers are kooky beyond belief.

Roissy/Heartiste’s fascination with the end of the world

So it seems that pretty much every post that’s been up on Roissy’s-slash-Heartiste’s blog the past couple of years has been about the “end of days.”  Yes it’s couched in sociology and so-forth, but it’s definitely there.  I’m talking about his oddly self-righteous lamentations about how culture today is going down the drain because betas can’t get laid.

In his/their current installment, he/it/they/whatever writes about some blogger who posts silly shit written by his “wigger” relative, named Bennett.  Bennett writes texts with standard Swingers/Tao-of-Steve advice for banging chicks, like don’t be a pussy, don’t be too sensitive, don’t be too eager, etc.

Then of course Roissy/Heartiste slants it to his bizarre Chicken Little scare-tactic and says:

“A culture teeming with shameless Bennetts and dotted with islands of antagonistic SWPLs and tribalistic snarkers is a doomed culture, too far gone to resuscitate. Stick a fork in it, it’s done.”

As if the concept of women mating with unsophisticated bad-boys and leaving respectable nice guys dry is a new one and one which somehow suggests that the “culture” is “doomed.”   This blogger obviously doesn’t know his history.

As an aside, I would strongly, strongly suggest that everybody start studying history, like right now.  Listen to podcasts, read shit, watch History Channel shows, etc.  You need to know this stuff or you won’t understand how mankind has changed not one iota since the dawn of time.  And if you aren’t able to understand that, and you don’t know how your own actions fit into this eternal unchanging, you won’t be able to predict the future.  And if you aren’t able to predict the future, you won’t be able to position yourself to best benefit from mankind’s ceaseless shenanigans, and you will be just another one of the billions of people who are surprised by the world’s daily occurrences and always find themselves at the tail-end of humanity’s OODA loop.

Ok, anyway, all Chateau Heartiste would have had to do would be read some things from, say, before 1990.  He could have read about the ancient Roman gladiators who were about as brutal and uneducated as anyone in human history but who pulled aristocratic pussy like flies to shit; more recently he could read Lady Chatterley’s Lover or Gone with the Wind which display high-class broads falling for low-class guys and antagonistic assholes, respectively.

Intellectual beta herbs have never pulled tail, and that’s why they’ve traveled the world, not only to pursue their intellectual curiosity but also to pursue native pussy, the likes of which they could never get at home because those women were too busy fucking the 17th century’s version of Outlaw Biker Guy.

If our culture is in a decline, it’s been declining for the past million years or so.

Come on guys, wise up, read your history.  Every generation thinks (and secretly hopes) it’s the last.  It never is.  Human nature goes on, unceasing, unchanging.  Don’t make the mistake of thinking you’re — we’re — special.

EDIT: If you want a good place to start learning about history, search for Dan Carlin’s “Hardcore History” podcast on iTunes.  It’s fantastic.