');
The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
Guardian: the Dangerous Rise of Men Who Won’t Date Woke Women
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
    List of Bookmarks

      From Refinery 29:

      The Dangerous Rise Of Men Who Won’t Date “Woke” Women
      VICKY SPRATT
      LAST UPDATED 21 JANUARY 2020, 8:43

      The word “irrespective” means saying or doing something without taking anything else into account. For example: “Irrespective of the fact that the cost of living has jumped, putting pressure on many people, the government ploughed on with Brexit and argued that there would be no real economic impact.”

      So it is fitting that white man of the moment, Laurence Fox – who appeared on the BBC’s Question Time programme and told a BAME audience member that Meghan Markle has not been on the receiving end of racism before subsequently appearing on the cover of The Sunday Times to tell the world that he does not “date woke women” and then displaying an appalling understanding of history by calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous” – has “irrespective” tattooed on his arm.

      Did you hear that at the back, ladies? Laurence Fox – who you perhaps only knew as Billie Piper’s ex-husband because you’ve never seen Lewis (what?) – does not date “woke” women who he believes are being taught that they are “victims”, irrespective of whether they are right or not. He thinks that it’s “institutionally racist” to tell the story of the First World War in a racially diverse way, irrespective of the fact that Sikh soldiers absolutely fought for Britain. And he also doesn’t believe in white privilege, irrespective of the fact that he works in a painfully undiverse industry, was privately educated and comes from a wealthy acting family which is nothing short of a dynasty.

      Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.

      Fox is denying racism and sexism, irrespective of whether or not they exist. It’s nothing short of gaslighting. It’s all very Donald Trump.

      … I could use data to prove how wrong he is; I could express concern for his mental health (after all, who really enjoys arguing on Twitter?); I could make jokes about his behaviour. But all of that would be to seriously miss the point.

      There’s nothing funny about the things Fox – or Wokey McWokeface as he now wants to be known – is saying. It’s also not particularly sad. It’s dangerous. He is just one very privileged man, and as a result of said privilege, has been given a platform. And he has used that platform to legitimise a bigger backlash against diversity and progress which is unfolding every single day in less public corners of the internet.

      But let’s get to the important question: What kind of society maximizes my chance of ever being Mrs. Laurence Fox? Not that’s I’d take his name, of course, because I’m devoted to my brand, Vicky Spratt, but you know …

      Not wanting to date “woke” women, far from being laughable, is actually one of the more insidious aspects of it. Spend an afternoon on any major dating app and you’ll come across (generally white) men saying openly sexist and misogynistic things. …

      In fact, as I was writing this, a dear friend sent me a screenshot of a guy she’s just matched with who describes Jordan B Peterson as his “dream dinner guest”. Yes, the same Jordan B Peterson who thinks that white privilege is a “Marxist lie” and wants millennials to drop their obsession with “social justice”.

       

      I, meanwhile, recently had to block someone who after matching with me launched into a vile rant about how women are “evil”, “only want sex” and treat men as though they are “disposable”. When I asked him if he hated women he replied that he had “only moderate disdain” for us before asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough”.

      The reactionary influence of these ideas doesn’t stop at dating, though. As the campaign group Hope Not Hate reported last year, a hostility towards feminism is feeding directly into far-right movements online.


      All of this, of course, speaks not only to the presence of the very active online communities of anti-feminist incels but to the prevalence of the hideous and incorrect ideas they promote. It doesn’t take magical thinking to see how men are radicalised by anti-feminism. As the saying goes: “When you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.”
      ADVERTISEMENT

      The reactionary influence of these ideas doesn’t stop at dating, though. As the campaign group Hope Not Hate reported last year, a hostility towards feminism is feeding directly into far-right movements online. They found that a third of young British people today believe that feminism is marginalising or demonising men and warned that these beliefs were a “slip road” to other far-right ideas.
      This isn’t just speculation. We know that the number of far-right referrals to the British government’s deradicalisation scheme Prevent has dramatically increased recently. In the year from 2017/18 they jumped by 36%, while referrals for Islamism actually decreased by 14%.
      Right now, Laurence Fox, whether he realises it or not, has just landed the biggest part of his life. He is legitimising hatred and division. And yet he cannot be completely unaware of the role he plays; he has spoken about being “radicalised” himself on YouTube.
      Last year he released an album called A Grief Observed which is largely about his acrimonious split from Piper. When The Times interviewed him about it he turned up wearing a pro-Donald Trump MAGA (Make America Great Again) cap and said it was a “social experiment”. He then told the interviewer that he spent a lot of his time watching YouTube interviews which had “totally radicalised” him and caused him to embark on a “crusade against woke culture and political correctness.” He wanted, he said, to call one of the songs “Me Too” but was prevented by his record label.
      ADVERTISEMENT

      Fox is a case in point that what might start as playing devil’s advocate by wandering the streets in a MAGA cap to provoke “hipsters” can quickly turn into something more sinister.
      The far right itself can be difficult to pin down because it isn’t exactly a coherent global movement with a concrete set of ideas. It largely exists online, in Facebook groups, as Twitter accounts, on YouTube and anonymous message boards such as 8chan. But every now and then, their bile spills out dangerously into the offline world.
      In 2016 the Labour MP Jo Cox was murdered by far-right terrorist Thomas Mair who, 25 years before he killed her, told a far-right magazine that the “white race” faced a long and very bloody struggle. And it was 8chan that hosted the manifestos of three mass shooters who killed scores of people last year: the El Paso shooter (who left 20 people dead and many more wounded only a couple of weeks ago), the Poway shooter (who opened fire at a synagogue in California last April) and the Christchurch shooter (who killed 51 people at two mosques in New Zealand last March).

      Laurence Fox, whether he realises it or not, has just landed the biggest part of his life. He is legitimising hatred and division. And yet he cannot be completely unaware of the role he plays; he has spoken about being ‘radicalised’ himself on YouTube.


      Susan Faludi wrote about the link between violence, anger and anti-feminism prophetically in her book Backlash: The Undeclared War Against American Women back in 1991. Long before the turbulent times which have seen the rise to power of two male caricatures – Donald Trump to the office of US president and the accession of Boris Johnson as our prime minister – she warned:
      ADVERTISEMENT

      “When an attack on home soil causes cultural paroxysms that have nothing to do with the attack, when we respond to real threats to our nation by distrusting ourselves with imagined threats to femininity and family life, when we invest our leaders with a cartoon masculinity and require of them bluster in lieu of a capacity for rational calculation, and when we blame our frailty in ‘fifth column’ feminists – in short, when we base our security on a mythical male strength that can only increase itself against a mythical female weakness – we should know that we are exhibiting the symptoms of a lethal, albeit curable, cultural affliction.”
      She added: “When the enemy has no face, society will invent one.” For men like Fox, who feel they have been wronged somehow, that they are missing out on opportunities because, for once in history, they are being given to other people, women and people of colour become the enemy.

      When the enemy has no face, society will invent one.

      SUSAN FALUDI, BACKLASH: THE UNDECLARED WAR AGAINST AMERICAN WOMEN

      You can see it in the abuse and threats received by women MPs and in the wildly different treatment of Meghan Markle and Kate Middleton. While Middleton, who generally keeps herself to herself and says little, has become a pinup heroine for traditionalists, Markle, who has spoken openly about sexism and racism, trying to use her platform for good, has been – quite literally – driven out of the country, condemned for being an outspoken snowflake.
      Make no mistake, the far right is already capitalising on Fox’s words, gassing him up and turning him into an icon. He has added to their backlash and given it oxygen. Every time he is invited onto a TV or radio show to talk about it, that oxygen will cause the backlash to burn hotter and faster, irrespective of whether we’re watching or not. It’s important not to trivialise this anti-woke, anti-women backlash. In the end, it’s only by paying attention to it that we can understand it and do something about it.

       
      Hide 231 CommentsLeave a Comment
      Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
      Trim Comments?
      1. Impressive, industrial quality, projection.

        • Replies: @Bard of Bumperstickers
        We mustn't disregard the rise of men - as well as trans-exclusionary radical dykes (TERDs) - who refuse to date men in dresses. Legislation is needed, apparently.

        The irony is that when this period of societal madness has passed into history's dustbin, the woke will be regarded as lockstep zombie lemmings . . .
      2. Oh, I don’t doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        • Agree: S. Anonyia
        • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.
         
        You're thinking is so last century. (Don't feel bad. We understand.) The problem now is that too many "woke" (God I hate that term) people, politically Left people, are intolerant. They cannot be compatible with anyone who does not at least pretend to think as they do.

        And your first paragraph is right, or at least that was true in the past. The difference now is that she might accuse you of rape later or otherwise make your life a living hell. It used to be fun. No wonder men are avoiding them.
        , @Eric Novak
        Really, you'd support a wife who accepts the alderman's push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter's attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy? These are like Monday Night Football to you?
        , @silviosilver

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.
         
        It's not so much a criterion, just something to be wary of. 90% of girls I meet these days subscribe to some level of wokeness. But not all of them take it particularly seriously (or even understand it), so that's okay. I've met some who are textbook SJW levels of woke, and there's no way in hell I'd want to be around someone like that for more than one night. Whereas if they're more or less just paying lip service to woke conventions, then I can still be myself and not worry about saying something "racist" - if a girl likes you, there's a lot she'll excuse away to herself about your behavior.
        , @Kronos
        Before, religious denomination was a huge factor. But now it’s political party.
        , @SFG
        Shared values are a thing in dating, always have been, particularly long-term. Used to be religion, as Kronos says, now it's part.

        Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they're a huge risk.

        One of my big problems was that my overintellectual personality plays better with liberals than conservatives. I suppose I should start lifting?
        , @Anonymous

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?
         
        It isn’t always the particulars so much as the attitudes which lead them to believe in the particulars. I’m not especially against basic feminism. The problem with hardcore feminists is that they believe that the woman is “always right” and never lies and in the notion that the male/female relationship is inherently antagonistic rather than symbiotic. A woman who comes into a relationship with that kind of attitude isn’t likely to make a good mate. Hardcore feminism poisons male/female relationships.

        Apparently it’s incredibly common on dating apps for women to include the line “swipe left if you voted for Trump.” And then there were the famous Vietnam protest signs that “women say yes to men who say no” (i.e., to military service). So it’s laughable that the complaint of this article is that some random conservative says he won’t don’t leftists.
        , @Homeschooling Mom in NY
        Politics is a good proxy for general decision making. When you are raising a family, there are some (many?) things you just can’t agree to disagree. The choices are mutually exclusive. One has to lose. Do we homeschool? Vaccinate? Are we OK with Junior being gay? How much media is OK?
        , @Ian Smith
        It is bizarre how many militant feminist women dig the bdsm and even rape fantasies.
        , @c matt
        A conservative gal may agree to disagree, but have you ever known a feminist to do so? I have not. Perhaps your experience is better than mine.

        Anyhow, political viewpoint is a pretty darn good marker for compatibility. But, like you say, if your just out for a one night stand, you can always fake your wokeness for an evening. Anything more long term will just bring The Troubles.
        , @AnotherDad

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.
         
        You've got to be kidding.

        I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?
         
        How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        Seriously for a young man who wants a good family life--anything akin to what was routinely on offer in the before time--rejecting work politics isn't just a nice to have, it's the starting point.
        , @guest
        We're not talking politics as such, but wokeness specifically. Which so far as it exists beyond passing fashion is a big red flag.

        Politics like entertainment or sports fandom is one thing. But politics also can be a key to who one is.

        Also, agreeing to disagree often results in suppression of belief in favor of a perverse form of manners. Which I believe is one reason nonsense like feminism and SJWism have been allowed to flourish. Because regular folk privatize their politics and stop indoctrinating and proselytizing.
        , @RichardTaylor

        everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed
         
        Anyone ever seen an attractive feminist? Beyond that, I suspect this is a bit of an urban legend. Proceed with caution. Because if you ever make money later on, she'll reframe the issue to sue you.

        I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?
         
        You can't be serious. I think you are failing to understand this is not the Boomer politics of old, say like tax rates. This is more RACIAL and involves a basic loyalty or disloyalty to your own people. They are proud to be disloyal. They want White men who denigrate their own identity.
        , @Nate7383
        I can't agree to disagree with my mate because I need to be able to have respect for her. If I can't have an intelligent conversation with her because she's a flake, it will never work. No matter how well I get along with them for other reasons, I don't want to be thinking in the back of my mind, "Man is she stupid. Whatever, just smile and nod." That's not a relationship.

        Political views shouldn't be at a sports level. Granted I acknowledge your point, that their's no changing anything. It should be an expression of something deeper. My political views which I am passionate about come from my strong morals. Stealing is wrong, therefore socialism is wrong. While everyone agrees with the first, only an idiot would not see the correlation between the two. My philosophy is, if people aren't hurting you, then leave them alone. How do I agree to disagree, with that? So I humbly leave them alone and let them live their life in peace, while their philosophy is that they are so smart they have a right to run my life and turn me into a slave to fund their lives, and their little pat themselves on the back, feel good pet projects.. It seems a little easier for them to agree to disagree, than it does for me. I leave them alone and I'm their play thing. Nope, I'm not going to make that compromise. It's like a woman is getting raped and she says, "Stop, you have no right to do this to me." The rapist says, "Well, now lets try to be civil. I understand that people are different, and I don't want to fight about this. We'll just have to agree to disagree."

        I want a partner that has deep morals. I can't stand shallow surface people. I can even forgive to a certain extent people that lack the mental capacity to understand complex issues, and are easy prey for the political system to manipulate. But I still wouldn't want to spend my life with one of them.

        Sports teams, sure. I'll agree to disagree. Ice cream flavors, pizza toppings, what should we watch tonight? Yeah, whatever. I won't think less of them as a person. I think that as a white male you are guilty for the sins of your ancestors and you should submit to me in all things as payment for the crimes they committed, you racist, sexist, pig. And I will agree to have sex with you, but if I change my mind afterwards, or you ever cross me, you will also be a rapist. Hmm, well shoot. I guess I don't really see it that way, but I'd hate to sound disagreeable. OK, I yield. Lets just get back to the things that actually matter. Now I've got to go fix the car, and the leaky roof, plow the driveway, figure out why that breaker's been blowing, and all that other stuff that I have to do, not because I'm a man of course, but because you conveniently don't know how to. Then I'll come in cook dinner, clean the house, wash the dishes and do the laundry, and raise the kids, because it would be to sexist for me to expect you to do those things. And you're clearly already too busy liking Bernie memes on Facebook and shaving your head because your rainbow hair wasn't extreme enough. Your mission to change the world is obviously more important.

        But hey, it's just politics. Packers vs Bears, tomato tomato. No biggie. Sounds like a great life. You can do what you like. But hopefully you better understand why some people use politics as a major criterion for dating.

        And if a girl had no political views whatsoever. And they just stay out of it entirely. I would have no problem with that. Just not their thing, but they aren't participating in robbing me. I can fully respect them.
      3. How about the rise of dangerous Wokes?

        Florida Man Murders Pro-Trump Boss, Places American Flag Next To Body: Affidavit

        https://www.zerohedge.com/political/florida-man-murders-pro-trump-boss-places-american-flag-next-body-affidavit

        A Florida construction worker has been arrested on suspicion of killing his childhood friend and boss – a Trump supporter, during an argument which may have erupted over politics, according to Orange County Sheriff’s Detective Fabian Ramirez.

        Yeah…the baizuo are going to be a real f’ing problem….

      4. More deep analysis today from Refinery 29:

        “No Capricorns Allowed”: A Deep Dive Into Zodiac Hate

        The nerve of them to post this on the verge of Chinese New Year.

        Their zodiac goes by revolutions rather than rotations. Steve is a Dog, as is Donald Trump: “Lovely, honest, prudent”

        https://www.chinahighlights.com/travelguide/chinese-zodiac/

        • Replies: @Altai
        https://swipelife.tinder.com/post/zodiac-sign-stereotypes

        Gen Z bringing zodiac compatibility back.

        http://www.mtv.com/news/3143126/horoscopes-zodiac-love-compatibility-millennials-gen-z/
      5. For about 24 months after the election every 2nd woman’s online profile said to swipe left if you voted for Trump.

        But otherwise, why do they care? I thought the only guys with these feelings were entitled incels and or potential rapists?

        • Replies: @Anonymous

        For about 24 months after the election every 2nd woman’s online profile said to swipe left if you voted for Trump.
         
        So is that still a thing? Is it somewhat less common, a lot less common, or what?

        If it’s less common it’d be interesting to know why. Just a general waning of post-election passion? Did all the anti-Trump women find partners? Or did large numbers of them come to the realization that they were shutting out a lot of good men?
      6. “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        “ asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough””

        Now that is a neg!

        • Replies: @Anon

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!
         
        Not to be confused with the excellent 2010 French miniseries, Carlos, about Carlos the Jackal. The full five-and-a-half-hour version is great. It goes super-naturalistic is having everyone speaking in the language they would actually have spoken, e.g. Japanese Red Army Faction members speaking Japanese.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_(miniseries)

        The real life Carlos sued the producers from his French prison cell, calling it full of lies. "Showing hysterical men waving submachine guns and threatening people is completely ridiculous," he insisted. "Things didn't happen like that. These were professionals, commandos of a very high standard."
        , @Hamlet's Ghost
        Agreed! Along with Godfathers I & II, about as close to a perfect movie as it gets.
        , @Pericles


        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

         
        Real name of Carlos the Jackal: Ilich Ramírez Sánchez. A committed Venezuelan Marxist-Leninist, etc etc.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_the_Jackal
        , @AnotherDad

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”
         
        And his dad is James Fox who's had a long career, but whom i remember from childhood as the British pilot in "Those Magnificent Men and Their Flying Machines". (Just looked Fox's bio up to see if that was his dad.)

        (Btw, doesn't re-view well. I'd remembered it as funny and fun in 1965. And it was fun for my kids when they were little. But you can't watch it again or it's just stupid. In contrast, Blake Edwards' "The Great Race"--with more embedded adult humor--holds up better upon re-watching. (And who isn't smitten by the young Natalie Wood.) My kids probably watched it three or four times over the years.)

        Another Mom and I are watching Victoria--the Victorian age as soap opera--and i enjoy Fox's Palmerston. When he's on, he steals the show.

        This whole idea that people should pay any attention to the opinions of people who are ... actors! ... is just bizarre. But good to hear the guy has gotten based.
      7. This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn’t date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren’t compatible, and act accordingly. Especially if the dislike is mutual.

        This makes me wonder if maybe a lot of the Woke assumed it would help them get laid? And are now facing the realization that maybe it’s actually off putting in the real world? Just a thought

        • Replies: @Forbes

        And are now facing the realization that maybe it’s actually off putting in the real world
         
        It's definitely off-putting in the real world.
        , @AnotherDad

        This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn’t date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren’t compatible, and act accordingly.
         
        Excellent point, Jesse.

        Beyond the personal this pries open a couple more levels.

        1) The gist of modern feminism is
        Women are entitled to what they want. Men are not entitled to even pursue what they want. Men exist to provide goodies--modern civilization, technology, protection, support--to women.

        Women are "heroines" pursuing their desires--career achievement, "sexual experimentation" (i.e. sluthood), atheletic accomplishment, military career, divorce, eat-pray-love, political power--especially if they eschew "traditional" roles.

        Men aren't suppose to have any independent desires regarding women, mating, marriage, family. Their role is to "support women".


        2) But beyond modern feminism, this is the gist of the entire minoritarian project.
        White gentiles are not entitled to have or even want anything of their own. Not country clubs, not schools, not neighbors, not nations. And that includes their own history, their own drama as Fox is pointing out. (You must not golf without me!)

        Exactly analogous to feminism's attitude toward men, under minoritarianism white gentiles exist to provide goodies--civilized nations, looting opportunities for the middle men and rent seekers, welfare, white women--to minorities.

        And the sort of normal "Ok, we don't belong together", live-and-let-live common sense you propose sends minoritarians into fits of sputtering rage--"racism!", "xenophobia!" "white supremacy!" "white nationalism!", "Nazi!".

        But the moral hideousness of the whole minoritarian tyranny, is demonstrated by simply pointing this out: "Separate nations" or more basically "Just leave us alone! ... we aren't your slaves!"
      8. @Reg Cæsar
        More deep analysis today from Refinery 29:

        “No Capricorns Allowed”: A Deep Dive Into Zodiac Hate

        The nerve of them to post this on the verge of Chinese New Year.

        Their zodiac goes by revolutions rather than rotations. Steve is a Dog, as is Donald Trump: "Lovely, honest, prudent"

        https://www.chinahighlights.com/travelguide/chinese-zodiac/
      9. Dear old Vicky was already straight REKT by one of her own commenters:

        “The dangerous rise of men who won’t have sex with me.”

        Careful Vicki, you’re sounding like an incel.

        Reply

        Share

        45 Likes

        Actually, the comments are quite based…here’s another:

        Another entitled precocious white woman who think shes is an expert on social issues.

        You sound bitter and clearly sexist against men.

        Good luck having a life of cats.

        Reply

        Share

        28 Likes

        Those poor cats.

        Reply

        Share

        23 Likes

        • LOL: Tusk, Some Guy, Momus
        • Replies: @SunBakedSuburb
        "Good luck with a life of cats."

        Cat Ladies are a dying breed. Younger woman prefer dogs. I know how much you guys are emotionally invested in the canine, but you have to realize the female fetishization of animals has taken a darker turn into doggy wuv wuv territory.
      10. lmao. It’s like something out of a Mel Brooks parody.

        “Why won’t any of these nasty, ignorant, worthless, unwoke, evil, fossilized rapist women-haters date me?”

        Reminds me of this great clip from the underrated, cancelled-too-soon 90’s cartoon, The Critic (starts at 20:24 mark, very short, sorry I couldn’t find a shorter version):

        • Replies: @Kronos
        You might get a kick out this. I remember watching these as a kid.

        https://youtu.be/eU0JpLMJY6U
      11. Yeah, that’s been a feminist sore point for a while…

        “I’m so lonely, I need a government program to keep me company…”

        • Replies: @R.G. Camara
        Feminism leads to misery. For everyone.
        , @Spect3r
        That has nothing to do with feminism.
        I worked at a store when i was younger and many, many older people would go there daily (some of them several times a day) just so they would have someone to who to talk with.
        Loneliness in older people is very real and has nothing to do with being woke or not.
        , @AnotherDad
        I admit i'm kind of a softie and--not knowing her personal choices--i have some sympathy for this woman.

        Obviously no one has any--new--interest in a 60ish old woman. She is supposed to have built her family network providing her emotional support long, long ago. She should be married, chatting with her husband everyday, still having a tumble a couple times a week. Seeing the kids and the grandchildren regularly and sharing holidays with them.

        She may have made some poor personal choices--as she was counseled to do. But she's not a Hillary Clinton. She probably did not have anything to do with the large cultural and political changes that invaded and infested her homeland. Average people do not create the culture in which they live. They simple follow the norms the culture brings to them.

        Unfortunately for her, her nation has a common language with America and Jewish minoritarianism--and minoritarianized feminism--spread readily from America and infected Britain. Now she lives in a dystopian atomised, feminized, anti-nation and feels useless, isolated, alone.

        Welcome to your nation on minoritarianism!
      12. I’m sorry, some of these comments are pure comedy GOLD:

        Will not date or marry a modern thot who wants to abort my children because she thinks her supply chain role at an ill-fated start-up is her great life calling.

        Reply

        Share

        28 Likes

        • LOL: Moses, RadicalCenter
      13. Anon[174] • Disclaimer says:
        @Lot
        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        “ asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough””

        Now that is a neg!

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        Not to be confused with the excellent 2010 French miniseries, Carlos, about Carlos the Jackal. The full five-and-a-half-hour version is great. It goes super-naturalistic is having everyone speaking in the language they would actually have spoken, e.g. Japanese Red Army Faction members speaking Japanese.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_(miniseries)

        The real life Carlos sued the producers from his French prison cell, calling it full of lies. “Showing hysterical men waving submachine guns and threatening people is completely ridiculous,” he insisted. “Things didn’t happen like that. These were professionals, commandos of a very high standard.”

        • Agree: Lot
        • Replies: @Forbes
        Assassins with high standards--they didn't kill just anybody. Their targets were selected with extreme prejudice!
      14. The feminist cries out in pain as she strikes you.

        • Replies: @Hemid

        The feminist cries out in pain as she strikes you.
         
        As she follows you.

        Every man who's not a complete sexual loser (or, not a good religious man who finds a fine wife and keeps her) leaves a trail of "based" hoes behind him. All my old girlfriends were feminists. Half grew up to be normal women with families, and half are banned from Twitter for blasting at blue-check trannies. Small victories.
      15. This is from “the food is awful and such small portions!” school of thought.

        • Agree: R.G. Camara
        • Replies: @Rosie

        This is from “the food is awful and such small portions!” school of thought.
         
        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.
      16. Not wanting to date “woke” women, far from being laughable, is actually one of the more insidious aspects of it.

        Every “woke” publication from The Guardian to Cosmopolitan has advised women not to date “unwoke” men. Yet, for some reason, they don’t like it that the dislike is mutual!

        • Agree: fish
        • Replies: @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
        "Woke" people are any sex are insufferable. Wouldn't want to be friends with them.
      17. @Kronos
        Yeah, that’s been a feminist sore point for a while...

        https://youtu.be/Wj71G_CCAto

        “I’m so lonely, I need a government program to keep me company...”

        Feminism leads to misery. For everyone.

        • Agree: Bardon Kaldian
        • Replies: @Kronos
        Oh yes, that’s been well documented.

        https://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/040/217/f05.png
      18. @Lot
        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        “ asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough””

        Now that is a neg!

        Agreed! Along with Godfathers I & II, about as close to a perfect movie as it gets.

      19. @Jesse
        This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn't date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren't compatible, and act accordingly. Especially if the dislike is mutual.

        This makes me wonder if maybe a lot of the Woke assumed it would help them get laid? And are now facing the realization that maybe it's actually off putting in the real world? Just a thought

        And are now facing the realization that maybe it’s actually off putting in the real world

        It’s definitely off-putting in the real world.

      20. @Anon

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!
         
        Not to be confused with the excellent 2010 French miniseries, Carlos, about Carlos the Jackal. The full five-and-a-half-hour version is great. It goes super-naturalistic is having everyone speaking in the language they would actually have spoken, e.g. Japanese Red Army Faction members speaking Japanese.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_(miniseries)

        The real life Carlos sued the producers from his French prison cell, calling it full of lies. "Showing hysterical men waving submachine guns and threatening people is completely ridiculous," he insisted. "Things didn't happen like that. These were professionals, commandos of a very high standard."

        Assassins with high standards–they didn’t kill just anybody. Their targets were selected with extreme prejudice!

      21. Gen X-ers grew up in the 1980s and 1990s thinking that people at the turn of the last century were crazy to think women were “hysterical” and emotionally unstable.

        The along came social media and Internet articles where women exposed their inner thoughts. All of a sudden those ideas didn’t seem so wacky.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago. The article posted above reads like it was written from inside an insane asylum by someone who sees a completely different world than well-adjusted people.

        • Agree: Patrick in SC, theMann
        • Replies: @Rosie

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.
         
        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.
        , @SFG
        Well, specifically whiny, outspoken women. I don't think anyone ever thought that about the entire female population.
        , @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
        They'll only publish articles written bat-**** crazy individuals.
        , @Alden
        I think the media only publishes the incoherent writings of hysterical easily offended liberal women. All this stuff about hair weight men etc belongs in the lifestyle formerly known as women’s pages. Or the old fashioned Dear Abby columns.

        Essence and other black publications plus a plethora of you tube and black hair dressers wig shops etc and their moms and friends can solve any black women's hair problems. Those ramblings belong in black publications.

        So why are women’s hair styles and problems featured in the leading idiot intellectual forums of NYSlimes, Atlantic New Republic etc?

        Maybe because that’s the only thing black women are interested in??
        , @Anonymous
        That thought hit me when I saw the infamous 'Trigglypuff' video a few years ago.

        This is was what the Victorians called 'hysteria'.
      22. How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        • Replies: @Anon
        Hormones
        , @Colin Wright
        'How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?'

        It's a vicious circle. The less they get laid, the more unhappy they become.

        Seriously.
        , @Anon
        They're just unstable. Unstable women always grab the microphone, so they're overrepresented in social media. Social media gives them the attention they crave, so they never shut up.
        , @Hamlet's Ghost
        The nationwide women's march held this past weekend seems to be a permanent thing now. Feminists can now recharge their man-hate to last the rest of the year.

        I drove by the one held in my town. I didn't see most of it since I was driving in the other direction, but I did catch one grey-hair crone holding a sign that read "Think Vagina".

        It made me drive away a little faster.
        , @vhrm
        Well, we do pretty well at that over here too with our own hobby horses.
        , @Amerimutt Golems
        To add to the chorus women are fusspots (neuroticism).

        Alongside so-called minorities they are useful as writers for the Guardian whose business model hinges on selective outrage.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9200973/
      23. Does Vicky Spratt talk about her hair? Or will that be in Part II of the extended play version.

        I could suffer through the entire article–it reads like some obscure form of torture…

      24. Her rant/screed reminds me of an old, Matt Groening, “Bosses from Hell” cartoon, where the boss is screaming, “How dare you duck when I throw a brick at you!”

        • Replies: @Lex
        Amy Klobuchar really said that?
      25. @Shouting Thomas
        How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        Hormones

        • Replies: @Paddy Pearse
        Hoormoans!
      26. That entire article is one giant confirmation of the Heartistian disqualification neg. Take a lesson, single dudes.

      27. @Shouting Thomas
        How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        ‘How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?’

        It’s a vicious circle. The less they get laid, the more unhappy they become.

        Seriously.

        • Replies: @nymom
        I don't think they are mad because they are not getting laid.

        I think they are mad because they can't get a husband.

        There is a difference.

        Lastly, the men most of the 'woke' women are interested in still appear to make the worse husbands.

        I happen to see one of those magazines in a doctor's office recently talking about a poll where men were rated as the best husbands according to ethnic/racial/religious backgrounds and it appears Jewish men are still rated as the best husbands and black men as the worse. I didn't see muslims rated so maybe not enough muslim woman polled.

        Just thought it was interesting.
      28. @Shouting Thomas
        How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        They’re just unstable. Unstable women always grab the microphone, so they’re overrepresented in social media. Social media gives them the attention they crave, so they never shut up.

        • Agree: HammerJack
        • Replies: @Hail

        Social media gives them the attention they crave
         
        Sydney Watson, an Australian dissident-right social media personality (70k followers) (she has been interviewed on Red Ice and is an ethnonationalist, even if she might not use that exact term), yesterday tweeted out what I think can fairly be classified as "attention seeking."

        She tweeted a picture of herself, which I'll put below the [MORE] button below. The look-at-me!-style tweet was as lightly dressed up in political rhetoric as her body was lightly dressed up in a piece of cloth. (It is Australian midsummer, but she was indoors; anyway, the pic combined with the contents of the Tweet are -- judge for yourself.)

        I don't regularly follow her, but did across the tweet somehow. She is known, recently (or maybe always, I don't know) for tweet-complaining about only finding 'soyboy' losers to date and not real men, things to that effect. Yesterday's risque-pic tweet, though, is on the next level.

        I admit to being disappointed by it, for exactly the reason you, and others, have expressed in this comment thread.

        On further reflection, I'm not so sure. There is a fine line between humanizing herself, giving unto Social Media Caesar what is Social Media Caesar's, and falling into the "attention seeker" trap. What she is doing is playing with fire, and who knows if she can handle it. (I don't believe she was "in it for attention" alone, when she started out.)

        Sydney Watson
        @SydneyLWatson

        I love it when feminists tell me I'm critical of feminism for male attention.

        Yeah, okay. You got me. Because, of course, that's the ONLY reason men might be interested in me.

        [Risque 'selfie' of herself on a bed, lightly clothed; see below]
         
        - 795 replies (almost all some degree of embarrassing; male repliers fawning over her)
        - 410 retweets
        - 6,900 likes

        (Simple thought experiment: What if she was your daughter/sister/future wife? How would you feel about her posting the below with the attached pic and getting hundreds of messages from random men who want to get to know her.)

        This is the selfie she posted:

        https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EPAwhlYXkAANFhp.jpg

        https://twitter.com/SydneyLWatson/status/1220528864092479494
      29. Is there any single standard of behavior or opinion that the modern western woman (for example, Vicky Spratt) would accept in the dating market these days? Or are men supposed to be happy with whatever crap gets thrown their way? Maybe the problem is that men started to believe that.

        Why would a regular white man date a woman who subscribes to an ideology that is built around hating white men?

        • Replies: @anon
        Is there any single standard of behavior or opinion that the modern western woman (for example, Vicky Spratt) would accept in the dating market these days?

        Yes! Fried ice. Fresh. Hot. Still frozen! Now! Right now!

        Or are men supposed to be happy with whatever crap gets thrown their way?

        Yes, that too.

        Maybe the problem is that men started to believe that.

        "My better half! My soul-mate! "

        lol

        Is there anyone more entitled than a modern woman? Anyone?
        , @Rosie

        Why would a regular white man date a woman who subscribes to an ideology that is built around hating white men?
         
        That is a rather roundabout way to judge someone, isn't it.

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.

        It seems to me the only relevant consideration is what the bachelor in question thinks of White women.
      30. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.

        You’re thinking is so last century. (Don’t feel bad. We understand.) The problem now is that too many “woke” (God I hate that term) people, politically Left people, are intolerant. They cannot be compatible with anyone who does not at least pretend to think as they do.

        And your first paragraph is right, or at least that was true in the past. The difference now is that she might accuse you of rape later or otherwise make your life a living hell. It used to be fun. No wonder men are avoiding them.

        • Agree: HammerJack
        • Replies: @nebulafox
        >You’re thinking is so last century.

        Considering how this century has gone so far for the United States, I'll take this as a sincere compliment. Added irony that I'm probably one of the youngest commentators here: I genuinely don't know anything other than the 21st Century.
      31. When I was looking for a wife, I avoided women with hyphenated last names. That to me was a tell for a woman stewed in hatred of men with rabid feminism from birth. I wonder what the divorce rate of hyphenated last name marriages is.

        • Replies: @AnotherDad

        When I was looking for a wife, I avoided women with hyphenated last names. That to me was a tell for a woman stewed in hatred of men with rabid feminism from birth. I wonder what the divorce rate of hyphenated last name marriages is.
         
        This is a good strategy--it is certainly a tell--and i'm happy it worked for you. But i think it's overbroad. I'm sure that there is some decent percentage of these women who having been raised in hypen-land, would be happy with something more traditional. (I'm guessly there's even a small percentage of their mothers who--through years of motherhood--have wised up.)

        I think the critical tell is if the girl herself wants to hyphenate. That is your tell. And what happens when you say "No effing way. If you don't want to be a wife, fine." ... that's the real reveal.
        , @Forbes
        Yes, yes--the feminist with the hyphenated last name, where the paternal heritage from both sides of her family is linked in her name. What better way to proclaim one's feminist bona fides than by celebrating paternalism!
      32. @R.G. Camara
        Feminism leads to misery. For everyone.

        Oh yes, that’s been well documented.

      33. A lot of the editorials and articles from the Guardian read like rants of fanatical Wokes. Unless the Guardian wakes up out of automatic wokeness, I plan to reach for the next page key to avoid wasting my time reading boringly predictable, deluded nonsense.

      34. @Shouting Thomas
        How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        The nationwide women’s march held this past weekend seems to be a permanent thing now. Feminists can now recharge their man-hate to last the rest of the year.

        I drove by the one held in my town. I didn’t see most of it since I was driving in the other direction, but I did catch one grey-hair crone holding a sign that read “Think Vagina”.

        It made me drive away a little faster.

        • Replies: @Neuday

        I did catch one grey-hair crone holding a sign that read “Think Vagina”.
         
        Maybe she's heard that men often think with their penises and she was exhorting her vag to do the same.

        Or perhaps she wants men to start thinking of a vagina, not knowing that men already often think of a vagina when we're not thinking of sports, food or MOA.

        Since the signholder is a grey-haired crone, I'd prefer not to ponder her abyss.
      35. anon[173] • Disclaimer says:
        @Mycale
        Is there any single standard of behavior or opinion that the modern western woman (for example, Vicky Spratt) would accept in the dating market these days? Or are men supposed to be happy with whatever crap gets thrown their way? Maybe the problem is that men started to believe that.

        Why would a regular white man date a woman who subscribes to an ideology that is built around hating white men?

        Is there any single standard of behavior or opinion that the modern western woman (for example, Vicky Spratt) would accept in the dating market these days?

        Yes! Fried ice. Fresh. Hot. Still frozen! Now! Right now!

        Or are men supposed to be happy with whatever crap gets thrown their way?

        Yes, that too.

        Maybe the problem is that men started to believe that.

        “My better half! My soul-mate! ”

        lol

        Is there anyone more entitled than a modern woman? Anyone?

        • Agree: Dtbb
      36. @Athansius
        The feminist cries out in pain as she strikes you.

        The feminist cries out in pain as she strikes you.

        As she follows you.

        Every man who’s not a complete sexual loser (or, not a good religious man who finds a fine wife and keeps her) leaves a trail of “based” hoes behind him. All my old girlfriends were feminists. Half grew up to be normal women with families, and half are banned from Twitter for blasting at blue-check trannies. Small victories.

      37. There’s identity politics, and then there’s people who have no identity beyond their politics. Even left-leaning men can see that as a red flag.

      38. Fox is a case in point that what might start as playing devil’s advocate by wandering the streets in a MAGA cap to provoke “hipsters” can quickly turn into something more sinister.

        Steve, did you catch Larry David’s tactical use of a MAGA hat as a people-repellent in the new Curb?

      39. Anonymous[208] • Disclaimer says:

        Holy crap Steve I thought the headline was one of your funny mocking parodies!

        But no. It’s self parody all the way down apparently. Use of the word *dangerous* by this writer is so dumb and over the top. Gotta be a millenial.

        I skimmed the whingeing blather. Let me summarize by quoting a famous casino operator:

        “Sad!”

      40. Only someone who’s never experienced an actual dangerous situation in their entire life would use the word DANGEROUS in that headline.

        F*CK THE MILLENIALS

        • Agree: Autochthon
        • Replies: @SFG
        She's female. Jokes aside, if she can't find a man, that's dangerous on an evolutionary level.

        So are muggers, but that's not PC...
      41. @Shouting Thomas
        How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        Well, we do pretty well at that over here too with our own hobby horses.

        • Agree: Rosie
        • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
        Outrage? Yes. Hysteria? No.
      42. @Days of Broken Arrows
        Gen X-ers grew up in the 1980s and 1990s thinking that people at the turn of the last century were crazy to think women were "hysterical" and emotionally unstable.

        The along came social media and Internet articles where women exposed their inner thoughts. All of a sudden those ideas didn't seem so wacky.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we're now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago. The article posted above reads like it was written from inside an insane asylum by someone who sees a completely different world than well-adjusted people.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.

        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.

        • Replies: @AnotherDad


        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.
         
        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.
         
        Dindu-feminism.


        Seriously Rosie ... think. DoBA's point is correct.

        Women--and in particular white women--have a package of traits from evolution that equip them to be successful in having and nurturing and raising children including the necessary community social interactions. Relative to men they are much more personally, emotionally and socially focused and more conforming. These are obviously useful traits for women to have for successful mate acquisition and child raising in the evolutionary environment ... or women would not have them.

        But that doesn't mean that same feminine trait package is ideal in every situation anymore than a bunch of traits men have relative to women are ideal in all situations.

        And to anyone who is objective--and whose value is "continuing civilization"--social media are exposing that this female trait package, unleashed, socially and politically, is very negative, and--DoBA's rough point--confirms that age old "stereotypes" have some merit.
        , @Forbes

        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.
         
        No need to go "looking" for a reason, the evidence here is in plain sight. Or are you suggesting this behavior on display should be indulged?
      43. @Mycale
        Is there any single standard of behavior or opinion that the modern western woman (for example, Vicky Spratt) would accept in the dating market these days? Or are men supposed to be happy with whatever crap gets thrown their way? Maybe the problem is that men started to believe that.

        Why would a regular white man date a woman who subscribes to an ideology that is built around hating white men?

        Why would a regular white man date a woman who subscribes to an ideology that is built around hating white men?

        That is a rather roundabout way to judge someone, isn’t it.

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.

        It seems to me the only relevant consideration is what the bachelor in question thinks of White women.

        • Disagree: YetAnotherAnon
        • LOL: Desiderius
        • Troll: HammerJack
        • Replies: @dfordoom

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.
         
        But women don't date dissident right men. Even the most loser women don't date dissident right men.

        That's what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won't have anything to do with them. They're pasty-faced incels living in Mom's basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War and how they're going to create a racially pure white ethnostate. Based on pasty-faced losers living in Mom's basement, but in their fantasies they're racial warriors. Of course in their fantasies they occasionally get to sleep with white women (who are overcome with lust at their manliness and the size of their gun collection), but only in their fantasies.
      44. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        Really, you’d support a wife who accepts the alderman’s push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter’s attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy? These are like Monday Night Football to you?

        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        "Really, you’d support a wife who accepts the alderman’s push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter’s attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy?"

        When push comes to shove most women who mouth the expected shibboleths suddenly find their inner conservative - assuming they have kids. Pay attention to what they do, not what they say. White women with children and financial options don't want to live in immigrant/black areas.

        PS - Steve, the story wasn't in the Guardian - the author's a wannabe writer for them, not a current author.
      45. @kaganovitch
        This is from "the food is awful and such small portions!" school of thought.

        This is from “the food is awful and such small portions!” school of thought.

        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.

        • Agree: Jesse
        • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer

        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.
         
        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.

        You're not helping your cause.
      46. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.

        It’s not so much a criterion, just something to be wary of. 90% of girls I meet these days subscribe to some level of wokeness. But not all of them take it particularly seriously (or even understand it), so that’s okay. I’ve met some who are textbook SJW levels of woke, and there’s no way in hell I’d want to be around someone like that for more than one night. Whereas if they’re more or less just paying lip service to woke conventions, then I can still be myself and not worry about saying something “racist” – if a girl likes you, there’s a lot she’ll excuse away to herself about your behavior.

        • Replies: @Desiderius
        I married a professor who (a) came from a traditional background and (b) had to deal with woke bullshit in her day job. It acted like an anti-woke vaccine. We call it "the agenda," and she knows exaclty what I'm talking about.

        Post-progtardism is real.
      47. I have occasionally shopped at a large sewing-supplies store. And also a large crafts store. The women shopping and working there seemed to be the antithesis of woke, hyphenated, grievance-studies-major women. If I were young, I would go there to look for a wife. A million years ago, when I WAS young, virtually all of the girls in my high school were like that. BTW, those I knew even told me I was terrific — the most important thing a woman can do for a man. I strongly suspected it wasn’t true, but it was very nice to hear.

        • Replies: @Pericles

        I have occasionally shopped at a large sewing-supplies store. And also a large crafts store. The women shopping and working there seemed to be the antithesis of woke, hyphenated, grievance-studies-major women.

         
        Don't count on it.


        The knitting community is reckoning with racism

        Fiber artists of color are taking to Instagram stories to call out instances of prejudice — and to try to shape a more inclusive future.

         
        https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/2/25/18234950/knitting-racism-instagram-stories
      48. Why won’t this yellow wallpaper stop sneering at me? And yet it keeps staring at me as if it loves me. I hate this blasted yellow wallpaper and yet I can’t stop looking at it. I bet it voted for Donald Trump.

        • LOL: Charon
        • Replies: @Stebbing Heuer
        Superb.
      49. @R.G. Camara
        lmao. It's like something out of a Mel Brooks parody.

        "Why won't any of these nasty, ignorant, worthless, unwoke, evil, fossilized rapist women-haters date me?"

        Reminds me of this great clip from the underrated, cancelled-too-soon 90's cartoon, The Critic (starts at 20:24 mark, very short, sorry I couldn't find a shorter version):

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rgUsvLYznHM

        You might get a kick out this. I remember watching these as a kid.

      50. @Lot
        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        “ asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough””

        Now that is a neg!

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        Real name of Carlos the Jackal: Ilich Ramírez Sánchez. A committed Venezuelan Marxist-Leninist, etc etc.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_the_Jackal

        • Replies: @silviosilver
        The "jackal" in The Day of the Jackal wasn't about Carlos the Jackal; it was about an assassin contracted by anti-de Gaulle French rightwingers.
      51. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        Before, religious denomination was a huge factor. But now it’s political party.

        • Replies: @nebulafox
        Yeah, I occasionally wonder how much of the character of modern politics is related to the decline of religion. People try to find alternate drives in life.

        Looks like the apple doesn't fall far from the tree here. My grandfather ended up having a similar attitude toward his eventual inter-confessional marriage. (Presbyterian marrying a Catholic: they met in postwar Germany.) He ended up signing legal notarization giving full control of religious education to my grandmother-all five kids would be raised as Catholics. Back then, this was still a pretty big deal in a lot of the US. His parents were really displeased and took a while to warm up to my grandmother, from my understand.
      52. @SafeNow
        I have occasionally shopped at a large sewing-supplies store. And also a large crafts store. The women shopping and working there seemed to be the antithesis of woke, hyphenated, grievance-studies-major women. If I were young, I would go there to look for a wife. A million years ago, when I WAS young, virtually all of the girls in my high school were like that. BTW, those I knew even told me I was terrific — the most important thing a woman can do for a man. I strongly suspected it wasn’t true, but it was very nice to hear.

        I have occasionally shopped at a large sewing-supplies store. And also a large crafts store. The women shopping and working there seemed to be the antithesis of woke, hyphenated, grievance-studies-major women.

        Don’t count on it.

        The knitting community is reckoning with racism

        Fiber artists of color are taking to Instagram stories to call out instances of prejudice — and to try to shape a more inclusive future.

        https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/2/25/18234950/knitting-racism-instagram-stories

        • Replies: @Jim bob Lassiter
        Pussy Hat knitters have to buy their yarn and needles somewhere I guess.
      53. @Pericles


        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

         
        Real name of Carlos the Jackal: Ilich Ramírez Sánchez. A committed Venezuelan Marxist-Leninist, etc etc.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlos_the_Jackal

        The “jackal” in The Day of the Jackal wasn’t about Carlos the Jackal; it was about an assassin contracted by anti-de Gaulle French rightwingers.

        • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
        • Replies: @Pericles
        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right; real terrorist is muslim, book terrorist is white (variant: book terrorist is muslim, movie terrorist is white). Also, Dallas is full of a climate of right wing hate, which obviously motivated Lee Harvey Oswald when he got back from the Soviet Union.
      54. My Filipino neighbour asked me what I thought about Meghan, Knowing that he is a regular Church attendee I told him that she was from a trashy family with drug and gambling problems. Surprisingly this satisfied him and stopped him going off on a “racist” tirade.

        • Replies: @eastkekiisawhiteguy
        you island people always looking for approval by asians I noticed BTW whats with the curly hairs on the family of leeches
      55. @Eric Novak
        Really, you'd support a wife who accepts the alderman's push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter's attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy? These are like Monday Night Football to you?

        “Really, you’d support a wife who accepts the alderman’s push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter’s attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy?”

        When push comes to shove most women who mouth the expected shibboleths suddenly find their inner conservative – assuming they have kids. Pay attention to what they do, not what they say. White women with children and financial options don’t want to live in immigrant/black areas.

        PS – Steve, the story wasn’t in the Guardian – the author’s a wannabe writer for them, not a current author.

        • Replies: @Ris_Eruwaedhiel
        I once remarked to a Jewish friend that IMO one of the reasons why Jews tend to be liberal is that they tend to be affluent and so can escape the consequences of their purported idealism. She agreed with me.
        , @jb

        Steve, the story wasn’t in the Guardian – the author’s a wannabe writer for them, not a current author.
         
        When I looked at the link I saw no obvious connection between the Guardian and Refinery 29, so thanks for the information. Steve sometimes gives in to the temptation to nutpick, i.e., to highlight the worst examples of woke nuttiness, even if the exemplars themselves are fringy and unimportant wack jobs with no following even on their own side. (Even though "nutpicking" was coined by lefty Kevin Drum, it's a very useful term that I which had more currency).

        Of course even fringe wack jobs can sometimes tell us something interesting: for example, an open Nazi would have zero chance of securing even an adjunct professorship at any college in America, while finding an open Stalinist in such a position is no huge surprise. The learning here is not that American colleges are full of Stalinists, but rather that they are full of people who have no great difficulty working side by side with Stalinists.
      56. In only tangentially related news, screen personality of television, cinema and “other media” (she co-starred with both Tommy Lee and Bret Michaels, who oddly enough will be appearing at the same venue in many cities on a heavy rock shed tour shortly) Pamela Anderson has married once again, for the fifth time, at 52, to Jon Peters, 22 years older than she.

        How many times was Liz Taylor married at 52? Anderson may well equal her record yet.

        I think that there should be a finite number of times anyone can get married, whether the marriages end in death or divorce to the other party.

        • Agree: nymom
        • Replies: @Philip Owen
        The Orthodox Church used to limit a person to three marriages.
      57. @silviosilver
        The "jackal" in The Day of the Jackal wasn't about Carlos the Jackal; it was about an assassin contracted by anti-de Gaulle French rightwingers.

        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right; real terrorist is muslim, book terrorist is white (variant: book terrorist is muslim, movie terrorist is white). Also, Dallas is full of a climate of right wing hate, which obviously motivated Lee Harvey Oswald when he got back from the Soviet Union.

        • Agree: Achmed E. Newman
        • Replies: @dfordoom

        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right
         
        But isn't Frederick Forsyth, author of the book, pretty right-wing? In fact, very right-wing?
        , @Torn and Frayed
        No, no , no. You have this totally wrong. Day of the Jackal starts with an historically accurate assassination attempt by the OAS (Organisation Armée Secrète) which was an extreme right terrorist group formed out of the humiliating loss of Algeria. In 1959, the "Generals Uprising" in Algeria led to the fall of the Fourth Republic and the extra-constitutional installation of Charles de Gaulle as President. De Gaulle eventually stabbed the Generals in the back by attempting to withdraw from Algeria and the OAS was born. The main story from Day of the Jackal is fictional and in fact the assassin is non-ideological. But having the OAS hire him is completely historically coherent.
      58. @anon
        Impressive, industrial quality, projection.

        https://i.ytimg.com/vi/06bmUQskbSg/maxresdefault.jpg

        We mustn’t disregard the rise of men – as well as trans-exclusionary radical dykes (TERDs) – who refuse to date men in dresses. Legislation is needed, apparently.

        The irony is that when this period of societal madness has passed into history’s dustbin, the woke will be regarded as lockstep zombie lemmings . . .

      59. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        Shared values are a thing in dating, always have been, particularly long-term. Used to be religion, as Kronos says, now it’s part.

        Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they’re a huge risk.

        One of my big problems was that my overintellectual personality plays better with liberals than conservatives. I suppose I should start lifting?

        • Replies: @nebulafox
        >Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they’re a huge risk.

        I learned from you: always preserve the texts proving consent. :)

        There are core values, and there are passing political fads. One is not the other. Maybe I'm more flexible than most because I know the chances of finding an available woman like myself in terms of personality or interests is negligible going forward at this point: by the time I have my life together again, those few women are going to be taken. So, if I don't want to die alone, I'm just going to have to compromise. But on principle, I still just really can't force myself to care that much over whether a woman is a Democrat or a Republican. Women have more empathy, they are also more conformist. It's just a reality of life. They are likely to be more susceptible to liberal beliefs. That's fine: if she's rational, intelligent, and sufficiently humble to understand she doesn't get everything, it can work: in real life, people are usually saner than they are on the Internet. If she's a no-kidding true-believer SJW, on the other hand, we aren't likely to be compatible on plenty of essential non-political stuff, from my experiences.

        Sometimes I feel like I either should have been born way in the future, or in a past age. I don't seem to fit into this one well at all.

        >I suppose I should start lifting?

        Yes, you should. It has tons of benefits even leaving women out of it. I personally like to treat lifting/fitness/diet as an interesting optimization challenge, not just in terms of my body, but how far I can extend my endurance for that day.
        , @SunBakedSuburb
        "false rape accusations, they're a huge risk"

        Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk. That is, if you have normal and honorable intentions. Be patient. Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice. That energy makes a dude dumb and desperate. And chix can smell male desperation from across the room. The primal drive in women is much more sophisticated than what men can muster.
      60. @Days of Broken Arrows
        Gen X-ers grew up in the 1980s and 1990s thinking that people at the turn of the last century were crazy to think women were "hysterical" and emotionally unstable.

        The along came social media and Internet articles where women exposed their inner thoughts. All of a sudden those ideas didn't seem so wacky.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we're now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago. The article posted above reads like it was written from inside an insane asylum by someone who sees a completely different world than well-adjusted people.

        Well, specifically whiny, outspoken women. I don’t think anyone ever thought that about the entire female population.

      61. @Anonymous
        Only someone who's never experienced an actual dangerous situation in their entire life would use the word DANGEROUS in that headline.

        F*CK THE MILLENIALS

        She’s female. Jokes aside, if she can’t find a man, that’s dangerous on an evolutionary level.

        So are muggers, but that’s not PC…

      62. calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”

        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        • Replies: @Steve Sailer
        I thought the inclusion of a single Sikh with a funny line in "1917" was well-handled.
        , @YetAnotherAnon
        "Why would this be incongruous?"

        Because they were in Indian Army regiments, not regular British Army ones. They might have a Brit officer or two in their regiment, but no other ranks.

        There was a whole Indian Corps at Armentieres in the first winter of the war, poor sods.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Corps_(British_India)

        https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/battles/battles-of-the-western-front-in-france-and-flanders/the-battles-of-la-bassee-armentieres-and-messines-1914/
        , @Almost Missouri
        In his WWI classic, Storm of Steel, Ernst Jünger has a chapter recounting fighting against a British Indian formation.

        Though the opposing soldiers were within earshot of one another, they could not initially see each other and the strange speech of the Indian troops gave rise to fantastic and threatening interpretations among Jünger's fellow Hannoverians.

        The Germans had the better of the ensuing battle. Jünger noted that the Indians' slighter physiques suffered more severely from the infantry fire than did the more robust Europeans.
        , @Alden
        Somewhere in those endless WWs 1&2 cemeteries there’s little temples for Hindu and Muslim Indians who fought with the English. There were even about 100,000 Chinese mercenaries who fought with the English. The colonel who recruited and led them wrote a book about them. Title, “ With the Chinks”. He admired the Chinks greatly. Nowadays he’d go to
        Prison if the PC police saw that word.

        In a few years there won’t be a single blue eyed European actor in those WWs 1&2 movies. I can’t stand them. I like Evelyn Waugh’s books about WW2, especially Basil Seal does his bit. There’s another one about the English allying with the communists in Yugoslavia.

        I’d like to see a major Dr Zhivago Gone With The Wind movie about the Jewish communists who took over E Europe and tried to grab Greece and Iran after WW2. But no white washing as in Zhivago. Just the facts of what they did 1945-1950.

        It will never happen, but I’d love to write the script.
        , @AnotherDad

        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.
         
        So Fox is off base on this. (Although--not having seen 1917--i'm guessing he's a token and probably not the only one. Blacks as well?)

        But Fox's broader point is certainly correct. British TV and film now is just larded up PC historical revisionism. Especially cramming blacks everywhere. The black Achillies thing was just the most ridiculous. (And, of course, lots of mandatory black on white coupling jammed down people's throats.)

        There clearly is a minoritarian war against the notion that there is a "British people"--a particular race and ancestry--who have their own history and built Britain or more broadly a "European people" who built the West.
        , @Joneses
        The film is about the Devonshire regiment. Even today, Devon is extremely undiverse.

        Back in 1917, the idea of a random Sikh in the regiment is unthinkable (even thirty years later there were fewer than 5,000 non-whites in the whole country).

        Fox is completely right about this incongruous anachronism.
      63. @Numinous

        calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”
         
        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        I thought the inclusion of a single Sikh with a funny line in “1917” was well-handled.

      64. I remember seeing Laurence Fox in the Patriot, which was a play about De Gaulle.

        He gave an impassioned, almost perfect performance, and I didn’t really know about his hereditary (the other members of the theatre club had to inform me about it).

        I imagine he did such a good job as De Gaulle was because the chap who played Marshall Petain seemed actually tired instead of playing a tired character.

        https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2016/mar/10/laurence-fox-c-word-heckler-the-patriotic-traitor

        Laurence Fox seems to be quite the diva and while I reserve my opinions on him for the most part (as an old-school libertarian I have an almost monomaniacal dedication to speech that I dislike and disagree); it’s good to have this fresh and emergent voice.

        It is startling though the degree to which the “Counter-Reformation” is happening against the Great Awokening. Also it’s pretty obvious that London is the epicentre of this because it is the most demographically Anglo-Saxon society on the planet (the Shires if not the London & Home Counties).

        I would also add that it seems that the drama among the Royal Family (the disgraced Prince Andrew was seen escorting HM to Church on Sunday & a few articles have been slipped in claiming that he has been a “rock” to her during the H&M crisis) is perhaps an allegory to what is happening among Progressive Liberal Circles.

        It is of course admirable to discuss Privilege in the Abstract (especially other people’s privilege) but far more difficult to give up one’s own Privilege in reality to another person. As demographics begin to tip and PoCs become more common, this is increasingly becoming a problem in elite spaces.

        • Replies: @Alden
        More like H&M non crisis was perfectly timed to cause an uproar to send Andrew’s much much worse scandal out of the news.

        The Queen’s son, Prince the honorable Andrew Herbert takes his mother to church. So sweet. So Royal. Looks more like his father every day.
      65. Anonymous[902] • Disclaimer says:
        @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?

        It isn’t always the particulars so much as the attitudes which lead them to believe in the particulars. I’m not especially against basic feminism. The problem with hardcore feminists is that they believe that the woman is “always right” and never lies and in the notion that the male/female relationship is inherently antagonistic rather than symbiotic. A woman who comes into a relationship with that kind of attitude isn’t likely to make a good mate. Hardcore feminism poisons male/female relationships.

        Apparently it’s incredibly common on dating apps for women to include the line “swipe left if you voted for Trump.” And then there were the famous Vietnam protest signs that “women say yes to men who say no” (i.e., to military service). So it’s laughable that the complaint of this article is that some random conservative says he won’t don’t leftists.

        • Replies: @dfordoom

        Apparently it’s incredibly common on dating apps for women to include the line “swipe left if you voted for Trump.”
         
        If a woman is going to lecture you on the wickedness of your voting behaviour it's highly likely she'll lecture you about racism, homophobia, global warming and countless other subjects. Your life will be one long nightmare.

        These days the number one factor in choosing a mate has to be political compatibility. Because these days everything is political.
      66. Anonymous[902] • Disclaimer says:
        @Altai
        For about 24 months after the election every 2nd woman's online profile said to swipe left if you voted for Trump.

        But otherwise, why do they care? I thought the only guys with these feelings were entitled incels and or potential rapists?

        For about 24 months after the election every 2nd woman’s online profile said to swipe left if you voted for Trump.

        So is that still a thing? Is it somewhat less common, a lot less common, or what?

        If it’s less common it’d be interesting to know why. Just a general waning of post-election passion? Did all the anti-Trump women find partners? Or did large numbers of them come to the realization that they were shutting out a lot of good men?

      67. @Colin Wright
        'How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?'

        It's a vicious circle. The less they get laid, the more unhappy they become.

        Seriously.

        I don’t think they are mad because they are not getting laid.

        I think they are mad because they can’t get a husband.

        There is a difference.

        Lastly, the men most of the ‘woke’ women are interested in still appear to make the worse husbands.

        I happen to see one of those magazines in a doctor’s office recently talking about a poll where men were rated as the best husbands according to ethnic/racial/religious backgrounds and it appears Jewish men are still rated as the best husbands and black men as the worse. I didn’t see muslims rated so maybe not enough muslim woman polled.

        Just thought it was interesting.

      68. On the horizon: a movement for Spinster Positivity.

        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        "On the horizon: a movement for Spinster Positivity"

        It sort-of exists, in the form of Gateway Women, a site (and meetups, local groups etc) for women who are childless and never wanted to end up that way. Founded by an attractive Brit called Jody Day.

        Some of the members are tragic medical cases where they couldn't physically have kids (imagine having a hysterectomy at 19, for example), but the majority are ladies who went for higher education, then THE CAREER ('plenty of time for marriage and babies') and fun (maybe an abortion) and travel, until the clock started to run down, IVF failed, and they end up like the founder:

        "It was February 2009 and, at 44-and-a-half, she had left a bad long-term relationship and moved into a grotty London flat. “I was standing by the window, watching the rain make dusty tracks down the glass, when the traffic in the street below seemed to go silent, as if I’d put it on ‘mute’. In that moment, I became acutely aware of myself, almost as if I were an observer of the scene from outside my body. And then it came to me: it’s over. I’m never going to have a baby.”"
         
        https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/oct/02/the-desire-to-have-a-child-never-goes-away-how-the-involuntarily-childless-are-forming-a-new-movement

        Now a lot of these women have partners, but the point of her organisation is to help women to come to terms with their state and make the best of a bad job. Praiseworthy, but my one grouch is that she should devote at least some of her time and undoubted skills to telling women a few more facts of life about fertility. It's not too difficult to get pregnant at 39 when you've already had 3 kids in the last 10 years, not so if you've never had one.
      69. @Rosie

        Why would a regular white man date a woman who subscribes to an ideology that is built around hating white men?
         
        That is a rather roundabout way to judge someone, isn't it.

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.

        It seems to me the only relevant consideration is what the bachelor in question thinks of White women.

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.

        But women don’t date dissident right men. Even the most loser women don’t date dissident right men.

        That’s what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won’t have anything to do with them. They’re pasty-faced incels living in Mom’s basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War and how they’re going to create a racially pure white ethnostate. Based on pasty-faced losers living in Mom’s basement, but in their fantasies they’re racial warriors. Of course in their fantasies they occasionally get to sleep with white women (who are overcome with lust at their manliness and the size of their gun collection), but only in their fantasies.

        • Replies: @Rosie

        That’s what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won’t have anything to do with them.
         
        It's kind of pathetic when you think about it. Anyway, I got: 1 troll, 1 lol, and 1 disagree, and only one substantive reply, from you.
        , @YetAnotherAnon
        " They’re pasty-faced incels living in Mom’s basement and in between downloading porn ..."

        That is a most original critique which has never been made before. Are you by any chance the lovechild of Corvinus and Tiny Duck?
        , @Anonymous

        That’s what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won’t have anything to do with them. They’re pasty-faced incels living in Mom’s basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War
         
        The “dissident right” just happened to get Trump elected. We’re more likely to be married than the general white population and, on average, have more kids. And we’re less likely to be living in mama’s basement. Thanks for playing. Now move along.
      70. Women will tend to be worried by any signs of rising male assertiveness.

        And it is the most attractive men who will tend to be most assertive in matters of romance, which is doubly worrying for women.

      71. @Pericles
        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right; real terrorist is muslim, book terrorist is white (variant: book terrorist is muslim, movie terrorist is white). Also, Dallas is full of a climate of right wing hate, which obviously motivated Lee Harvey Oswald when he got back from the Soviet Union.

        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right

        But isn’t Frederick Forsyth, author of the book, pretty right-wing? In fact, very right-wing?

        • Replies: @Pericles
        Perhaps compared to other journalists, but from what I can see at Wikipedia Forsyth politically seems like a fairly standard center-right Boomer ("... In 2003, he criticised "gay-bashers in the churches" in The Guardian newspaper ... In 2016, he said he was giving up writing thrillers because his wife had told him he was too old to travel to dangerous places.") Though maybe one without a lot of colonial guilt? (Klaxon sounds.)
      72. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        Politics is a good proxy for general decision making. When you are raising a family, there are some (many?) things you just can’t agree to disagree. The choices are mutually exclusive. One has to lose. Do we homeschool? Vaccinate? Are we OK with Junior being gay? How much media is OK?

        • Replies: @Nate7383
        Exactly. It's easy to agree to disagree when you're 20 and life's a party. Once you live together, and start taking on responsibility together, start building a life together, everything changes.
      73. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        It is bizarre how many militant feminist women dig the bdsm and even rape fantasies.

      74. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        A conservative gal may agree to disagree, but have you ever known a feminist to do so? I have not. Perhaps your experience is better than mine.

        Anyhow, political viewpoint is a pretty darn good marker for compatibility. But, like you say, if your just out for a one night stand, you can always fake your wokeness for an evening. Anything more long term will just bring The Troubles.

      75. @Numinous

        calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”
         
        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        “Why would this be incongruous?”

        Because they were in Indian Army regiments, not regular British Army ones. They might have a Brit officer or two in their regiment, but no other ranks.

        There was a whole Indian Corps at Armentieres in the first winter of the war, poor sods.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I_Corps_(British_India)

        https://www.longlongtrail.co.uk/battles/battles-of-the-western-front-in-france-and-flanders/the-battles-of-la-bassee-armentieres-and-messines-1914/

      76. It’s cute when feminists think that their opinion matters.

        Also, just knew that Rosie wouldn’t be able to resist. With all issues female-related her feminist views are just precious.

      77. Would somebody please mail her a vibrator so she would at least have a chance to calm down a little?

        In the meantime, does it ever occur to anybody under 30 anymore that pleasantness goes a long way?

      78. If you are a man, especially a White man, be very careful out there. Those few women who are truly unbalanced and full of bitterness and envy now have tools to totally wreck your life.

        Post material under anonymous names. Be careful about “speaking your mind” like you were living under a regime of free speech (it’s gone). You don’t have to be a hermit, just bring some awareness to the situation and try not to give ammunition to those who live to ruin your life.

      79. @Hamlet's Ghost
        The nationwide women's march held this past weekend seems to be a permanent thing now. Feminists can now recharge their man-hate to last the rest of the year.

        I drove by the one held in my town. I didn't see most of it since I was driving in the other direction, but I did catch one grey-hair crone holding a sign that read "Think Vagina".

        It made me drive away a little faster.

        I did catch one grey-hair crone holding a sign that read “Think Vagina”.

        Maybe she’s heard that men often think with their penises and she was exhorting her vag to do the same.

        Or perhaps she wants men to start thinking of a vagina, not knowing that men already often think of a vagina when we’re not thinking of sports, food or MOA.

        Since the signholder is a grey-haired crone, I’d prefer not to ponder her abyss.

      80. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.

        You’ve got to be kidding.

        I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?

        How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        Seriously for a young man who wants a good family life–anything akin to what was routinely on offer in the before time–rejecting work politics isn’t just a nice to have, it’s the starting point.

        • Agree: BB753
        • Replies: @nebulafox
        >You’ve got to be kidding.

        No, I am not. I have more important criterion in my future wife than her theoretical position on Ukraine or the right tax code. Will she make a good partner? Is she frugal? Is she intelligent? Is she honest? Will I want her to be the mother of my children, potentially?

        For the record, I don't consider not forcing your boy to transition into being a girl to be a matter of politics: I consider that a matter of basic sanity, in keeping with my position that wokeness is another example of post-Christian godless religions. Thankfully, most people are sane hypocrites: they do not make that the center of their lives and will be far more concerned with finding a good partner, and if they start having kids, doing what is in the budding family's interests.

        >How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That's part of the problem of the modern age. Those who define themselves through politics typically have nothing better to define themselves as, and wouldn't make a good candidate as a mate anyway.
      81. @Rosie

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.
         
        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.

        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.

        Dindu-feminism.

        Seriously Rosie … think. DoBA’s point is correct.

        Women–and in particular white women–have a package of traits from evolution that equip them to be successful in having and nurturing and raising children including the necessary community social interactions. Relative to men they are much more personally, emotionally and socially focused and more conforming. These are obviously useful traits for women to have for successful mate acquisition and child raising in the evolutionary environment … or women would not have them.

        But that doesn’t mean that same feminine trait package is ideal in every situation anymore than a bunch of traits men have relative to women are ideal in all situations.

        And to anyone who is objective–and whose value is “continuing civilization”–social media are exposing that this female trait package, unleashed, socially and politically, is very negative, and–DoBA’s rough point–confirms that age old “stereotypes” have some merit.

        • Replies: @anon
        Dindu-feminism.

        lol! Nice.

        But futile. Reason has no effect on her. Because she's just a emo-troll, always trying to take over a comment thread and make it all about her.

        https://media.makeameme.org/created/time-wasters-time.jpg
      82. @Kronos
        Yeah, that’s been a feminist sore point for a while...

        https://youtu.be/Wj71G_CCAto

        “I’m so lonely, I need a government program to keep me company...”

        That has nothing to do with feminism.
        I worked at a store when i was younger and many, many older people would go there daily (some of them several times a day) just so they would have someone to who to talk with.
        Loneliness in older people is very real and has nothing to do with being woke or not.

        • Replies: @Kronos
        Fair enough, but judging from her apartment and clothing she’s fairly well to do. She appears to be in good physical health and not confined to a restricted living space for life-supporting machinery. (I’d be very lonely if attached to an iron-lung and my only company was a part time nurse that changed by poop bag daily.) But I’m willing to guess she’s a (or was) a career woman who willingly forsaken marriage and kids for personal satisfaction from job employment. With the coming mass retirement of 1/3 of Baby Boomers who can afford to retire, this is going to be a fairly common occurrence. Some will join quilt clubs or cat meet-ups and with the occasional “Bring your cat to quilt club Day!” It’s the fact that this commercial was aimed at an certain kind of lonely person. Not your old grandma who’s bedridden and can only speak in Greek.


        https://youtu.be/1_qzwTWwHmI

        https://lilyincanada.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/willywonka_013pyxurz.jpg
        , @JMcG
        I agree. One of the greatest kindnesses is to engage with the lonely. I have an aunt who can be unpleasant, but her friends and most of her family are gone. I make a point to spend time with her and call her. It must be pure hell to not see a friendly face for days on end.
      83. @James N. Kennett

        Not wanting to date “woke” women, far from being laughable, is actually one of the more insidious aspects of it.
         
        Every "woke" publication from The Guardian to Cosmopolitan has advised women not to date "unwoke" men. Yet, for some reason, they don't like it that the dislike is mutual!

        “Woke” people are any sex are insufferable. Wouldn’t want to be friends with them.

      84. @Days of Broken Arrows
        Gen X-ers grew up in the 1980s and 1990s thinking that people at the turn of the last century were crazy to think women were "hysterical" and emotionally unstable.

        The along came social media and Internet articles where women exposed their inner thoughts. All of a sudden those ideas didn't seem so wacky.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we're now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago. The article posted above reads like it was written from inside an insane asylum by someone who sees a completely different world than well-adjusted people.

        They’ll only publish articles written bat-**** crazy individuals.

      85. @YetAnotherAnon
        "Really, you’d support a wife who accepts the alderman’s push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter’s attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy?"

        When push comes to shove most women who mouth the expected shibboleths suddenly find their inner conservative - assuming they have kids. Pay attention to what they do, not what they say. White women with children and financial options don't want to live in immigrant/black areas.

        PS - Steve, the story wasn't in the Guardian - the author's a wannabe writer for them, not a current author.

        I once remarked to a Jewish friend that IMO one of the reasons why Jews tend to be liberal is that they tend to be affluent and so can escape the consequences of their purported idealism. She agreed with me.

      86. @AnotherDad


        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.
         
        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.
         
        Dindu-feminism.


        Seriously Rosie ... think. DoBA's point is correct.

        Women--and in particular white women--have a package of traits from evolution that equip them to be successful in having and nurturing and raising children including the necessary community social interactions. Relative to men they are much more personally, emotionally and socially focused and more conforming. These are obviously useful traits for women to have for successful mate acquisition and child raising in the evolutionary environment ... or women would not have them.

        But that doesn't mean that same feminine trait package is ideal in every situation anymore than a bunch of traits men have relative to women are ideal in all situations.

        And to anyone who is objective--and whose value is "continuing civilization"--social media are exposing that this female trait package, unleashed, socially and politically, is very negative, and--DoBA's rough point--confirms that age old "stereotypes" have some merit.

        Dindu-feminism.

        lol! Nice.

        But futile. Reason has no effect on her. Because she’s just a emo-troll, always trying to take over a comment thread and make it all about her.

      87. She’s not bad looking, but she’s probably hitting the wall or something.

      88. @Numinous

        calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”
         
        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        In his WWI classic, Storm of Steel, Ernst Jünger has a chapter recounting fighting against a British Indian formation.

        Though the opposing soldiers were within earshot of one another, they could not initially see each other and the strange speech of the Indian troops gave rise to fantastic and threatening interpretations among Jünger’s fellow Hannoverians.

        The Germans had the better of the ensuing battle. Jünger noted that the Indians’ slighter physiques suffered more severely from the infantry fire than did the more robust Europeans.

      89. @Numinous

        calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”
         
        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        Somewhere in those endless WWs 1&2 cemeteries there’s little temples for Hindu and Muslim Indians who fought with the English. There were even about 100,000 Chinese mercenaries who fought with the English. The colonel who recruited and led them wrote a book about them. Title, “ With the Chinks”. He admired the Chinks greatly. Nowadays he’d go to
        Prison if the PC police saw that word.

        In a few years there won’t be a single blue eyed European actor in those WWs 1&2 movies. I can’t stand them. I like Evelyn Waugh’s books about WW2, especially Basil Seal does his bit. There’s another one about the English allying with the communists in Yugoslavia.

        I’d like to see a major Dr Zhivago Gone With The Wind movie about the Jewish communists who took over E Europe and tried to grab Greece and Iran after WW2. But no white washing as in Zhivago. Just the facts of what they did 1945-1950.

        It will never happen, but I’d love to write the script.

        • Agree: JMcG
      90. @7GWTXsP99EwNJh561JaW
        When I was looking for a wife, I avoided women with hyphenated last names. That to me was a tell for a woman stewed in hatred of men with rabid feminism from birth. I wonder what the divorce rate of hyphenated last name marriages is.

        When I was looking for a wife, I avoided women with hyphenated last names. That to me was a tell for a woman stewed in hatred of men with rabid feminism from birth. I wonder what the divorce rate of hyphenated last name marriages is.

        This is a good strategy–it is certainly a tell–and i’m happy it worked for you. But i think it’s overbroad. I’m sure that there is some decent percentage of these women who having been raised in hypen-land, would be happy with something more traditional. (I’m guessly there’s even a small percentage of their mothers who–through years of motherhood–have wised up.)

        I think the critical tell is if the girl herself wants to hyphenate. That is your tell. And what happens when you say “No effing way. If you don’t want to be a wife, fine.” … that’s the real reveal.

      91. Shorter Spratt: That bastard Laurence Fox gives me the tingle, and I hate myself (and you) for it.

      92. @YetAnotherAnon
        "Really, you’d support a wife who accepts the alderman’s push for ending zoning restrictions on multi-unit housing in order to put up a ten-story subsidized apartment complex in your neighborhood? Would you accept her encouragement of your daughter’s attachment to a girl who wants to be a boy?"

        When push comes to shove most women who mouth the expected shibboleths suddenly find their inner conservative - assuming they have kids. Pay attention to what they do, not what they say. White women with children and financial options don't want to live in immigrant/black areas.

        PS - Steve, the story wasn't in the Guardian - the author's a wannabe writer for them, not a current author.

        Steve, the story wasn’t in the Guardian – the author’s a wannabe writer for them, not a current author.

        When I looked at the link I saw no obvious connection between the Guardian and Refinery 29, so thanks for the information. Steve sometimes gives in to the temptation to nutpick, i.e., to highlight the worst examples of woke nuttiness, even if the exemplars themselves are fringy and unimportant wack jobs with no following even on their own side. (Even though “nutpicking” was coined by lefty Kevin Drum, it’s a very useful term that I which had more currency).

        Of course even fringe wack jobs can sometimes tell us something interesting: for example, an open Nazi would have zero chance of securing even an adjunct professorship at any college in America, while finding an open Stalinist in such a position is no huge surprise. The learning here is not that American colleges are full of Stalinists, but rather that they are full of people who have no great difficulty working side by side with Stalinists.

      93. @Jesse
        This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn't date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren't compatible, and act accordingly. Especially if the dislike is mutual.

        This makes me wonder if maybe a lot of the Woke assumed it would help them get laid? And are now facing the realization that maybe it's actually off putting in the real world? Just a thought

        This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn’t date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren’t compatible, and act accordingly.

        Excellent point, Jesse.

        Beyond the personal this pries open a couple more levels.

        1) The gist of modern feminism is
        Women are entitled to what they want. Men are not entitled to even pursue what they want. Men exist to provide goodies–modern civilization, technology, protection, support–to women.

        Women are “heroines” pursuing their desires–career achievement, “sexual experimentation” (i.e. sluthood), atheletic accomplishment, military career, divorce, eat-pray-love, political power–especially if they eschew “traditional” roles.

        Men aren’t suppose to have any independent desires regarding women, mating, marriage, family. Their role is to “support women”.

        2) But beyond modern feminism, this is the gist of the entire minoritarian project.
        White gentiles are not entitled to have or even want anything of their own. Not country clubs, not schools, not neighbors, not nations. And that includes their own history, their own drama as Fox is pointing out. (You must not golf without me!)

        Exactly analogous to feminism’s attitude toward men, under minoritarianism white gentiles exist to provide goodies–civilized nations, looting opportunities for the middle men and rent seekers, welfare, white women–to minorities.

        And the sort of normal “Ok, we don’t belong together”, live-and-let-live common sense you propose sends minoritarians into fits of sputtering rage–“racism!”, “xenophobia!” “white supremacy!” “white nationalism!”, “Nazi!”.

        But the moral hideousness of the whole minoritarian tyranny, is demonstrated by simply pointing this out: “Separate nations” or more basically “Just leave us alone! … we aren’t your slaves!”

        • Replies: @Sako
        Yup. And when confronted with all of this, the wokester always reaches for the same predictable, rote, stock phrase this Guardianista did:

        When you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

        Didn’t you just know that was coming? Couldn’t you just feel her cliché-packed, ideology-crammed NPC brain building towards that inevitable climax? This is the standard witless, meaningless slogan they all use reach for, instinctively, to shut down actual thought in themselves and others...

        When you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

        ...repeated ad nauseam. Translation: “Yes, we’re going to take everything you have, we’re going to leave you with nothing, and we have a clear conscience about that because YOU ARE PRIVILEGED. Even if you grew up in a trailer park and I grew up in the lap of luxury, if you are white and male, YOU ARE MORE PRIVILEGED THAN ME.”
        , @Lockean Proviso
        I'm so old that I remember when the left criticized imperialists for drawing the map in Africa to form multi-tribal countries that ignored tribal and ethnic need for self-determination in separate nations.
      94. @Rosie

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we’re now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago.
         
        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.

        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.

        No need to go “looking” for a reason, the evidence here is in plain sight. Or are you suggesting this behavior on display should be indulged?

        • Replies: @Autochthon
        You doubtless already know, but, for the benefit of any new reader: anyone who notices any negative trait in any female (or, heaven forfend, statistically prevalent in most females) is, according to Rosie, by definition a he-man woman-hater incapable of mating or reproducing.

        It's not unlike how, among the more common, irrational and irresponsible Negroes, any rational, responsible Negro (such as Cosby, Thomas, Chapelle, Rock, McGruder, et al.) observing or arguing that Negroes have agency and responsibility for their own situations is a simpering "Uncle Tom."

        (Yes, yes; I realise it turns out Cosby was not nearly as responsible one would have thought, but he was still right about this topic.)
      95. displaying an appalling understanding of history by calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”

        I just saw this film yesterday and that struck me as contrived as well. Wouldn’t Sikhs have served in Sikh units during WWI? There were also a number of blacks sprinkled in here and there. Maybe there were a significant number of black citizens of Britain by this time but wouldn’t blacks from the colonies have served in colonial, all-black, units?

        • Replies: @JMcG
        In short, yes. Units of the Indian army (British officers, Indian other ranks) were used on the Western front early in the war. They suffered greatly in the European winter and weren’t used once the Territorials and Kitchener’s men arrived in large numbers. Certainly they were gone from the Western front by 1917.
        I can’t say that there were zero Sikhs in line infantry units on the Western front, but I’ve never seen or heard of any.
      96. @7GWTXsP99EwNJh561JaW
        When I was looking for a wife, I avoided women with hyphenated last names. That to me was a tell for a woman stewed in hatred of men with rabid feminism from birth. I wonder what the divorce rate of hyphenated last name marriages is.

        Yes, yes–the feminist with the hyphenated last name, where the paternal heritage from both sides of her family is linked in her name. What better way to proclaim one’s feminist bona fides than by celebrating paternalism!

      97. The link is on refinery29, not theguardian.com. How does Sailer justify attributing the article to The Guardian?

      98. @vhrm
        Well, we do pretty well at that over here too with our own hobby horses.

        Outrage? Yes. Hysteria? No.

      99. @Days of Broken Arrows
        Gen X-ers grew up in the 1980s and 1990s thinking that people at the turn of the last century were crazy to think women were "hysterical" and emotionally unstable.

        The along came social media and Internet articles where women exposed their inner thoughts. All of a sudden those ideas didn't seem so wacky.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we're now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago. The article posted above reads like it was written from inside an insane asylum by someone who sees a completely different world than well-adjusted people.

        I think the media only publishes the incoherent writings of hysterical easily offended liberal women. All this stuff about hair weight men etc belongs in the lifestyle formerly known as women’s pages. Or the old fashioned Dear Abby columns.

        Essence and other black publications plus a plethora of you tube and black hair dressers wig shops etc and their moms and friends can solve any black women’s hair problems. Those ramblings belong in black publications.

        So why are women’s hair styles and problems featured in the leading idiot intellectual forums of NYSlimes, Atlantic New Republic etc?

        Maybe because that’s the only thing black women are interested in??

      100. @Lot
        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        An underrated classic, and actually about far right terrorism!

        “ asking me whether I didn’t want to date him because I’m actually “pretty rough””

        Now that is a neg!

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”

        And his dad is James Fox who’s had a long career, but whom i remember from childhood as the British pilot in “Those Magnificent Men and Their Flying Machines”. (Just looked Fox’s bio up to see if that was his dad.)

        (Btw, doesn’t re-view well. I’d remembered it as funny and fun in 1965. And it was fun for my kids when they were little. But you can’t watch it again or it’s just stupid. In contrast, Blake Edwards’ “The Great Race”–with more embedded adult humor–holds up better upon re-watching. (And who isn’t smitten by the young Natalie Wood.) My kids probably watched it three or four times over the years.)

        Another Mom and I are watching Victoria–the Victorian age as soap opera–and i enjoy Fox’s Palmerston. When he’s on, he steals the show.

        This whole idea that people should pay any attention to the opinions of people who are … actors! … is just bizarre. But good to hear the guy has gotten based.

        • Replies: @Lot
        I’ve been watching Victoria as it’s released, it’s been surprisingly adult and conservative and a treat each episode.

        “I enjoy Fox’s Palmerston When he’s on, he steals the show.”

        His wife does as well later on.
        , @The Last Real Calvinist

        Another Mom and I are watching Victoria–the Victorian age as soap opera–and i enjoy Fox’s Palmerston. When he’s on, he steals the show.

         
        Yes, agreed -- we Calvinists have enjoyed Victoria, especially Seasons 1 and 2. Season 3 takes a dip in quality (too much screen time devoted to Princess Feodora), but the scenes with Fox as Lord Palmerston are usually compelling.

        We've also just started in watching the 'Inspector Lewis' series (having no fresh Endeavours to watch at the moment). Lawrence Fox plays Lewis's sergeant/bagman/sidekick, and at least in the first couple of episodes, he's very good. He has considerable screen presence.
      101. @silviosilver

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.
         
        It's not so much a criterion, just something to be wary of. 90% of girls I meet these days subscribe to some level of wokeness. But not all of them take it particularly seriously (or even understand it), so that's okay. I've met some who are textbook SJW levels of woke, and there's no way in hell I'd want to be around someone like that for more than one night. Whereas if they're more or less just paying lip service to woke conventions, then I can still be myself and not worry about saying something "racist" - if a girl likes you, there's a lot she'll excuse away to herself about your behavior.

        I married a professor who (a) came from a traditional background and (b) had to deal with woke bullshit in her day job. It acted like an anti-woke vaccine. We call it “the agenda,” and she knows exaclty what I’m talking about.

        Post-progtardism is real.

      102. You can always tell a liberal couple. The woman swaggers and struts. The man tries to look all meek, mild and caring about global warming, rain forest and their dumkopf causes.

      103. @Numinous

        calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”
         
        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        So Fox is off base on this. (Although–not having seen 1917–i’m guessing he’s a token and probably not the only one. Blacks as well?)

        But Fox’s broader point is certainly correct. British TV and film now is just larded up PC historical revisionism. Especially cramming blacks everywhere. The black Achillies thing was just the most ridiculous. (And, of course, lots of mandatory black on white coupling jammed down people’s throats.)

        There clearly is a minoritarian war against the notion that there is a “British people”–a particular race and ancestry–who have their own history and built Britain or more broadly a “European people” who built the West.

      104. @AnotherDad

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.
         
        You've got to be kidding.

        I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?
         
        How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        Seriously for a young man who wants a good family life--anything akin to what was routinely on offer in the before time--rejecting work politics isn't just a nice to have, it's the starting point.

        >You’ve got to be kidding.

        No, I am not. I have more important criterion in my future wife than her theoretical position on Ukraine or the right tax code. Will she make a good partner? Is she frugal? Is she intelligent? Is she honest? Will I want her to be the mother of my children, potentially?

        For the record, I don’t consider not forcing your boy to transition into being a girl to be a matter of politics: I consider that a matter of basic sanity, in keeping with my position that wokeness is another example of post-Christian godless religions. Thankfully, most people are sane hypocrites: they do not make that the center of their lives and will be far more concerned with finding a good partner, and if they start having kids, doing what is in the budding family’s interests.

        >How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That’s part of the problem of the modern age. Those who define themselves through politics typically have nothing better to define themselves as, and wouldn’t make a good candidate as a mate anyway.

        • Replies: @Joe Stalin
        "When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That’s part of the problem of the modern age. Those who define themselves through politics typically have nothing better to define themselves as, and wouldn’t make a good candidate as a mate anyway."

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CKvBvWb0Wzg

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2D3XbDry-ds

        https://youtu.be/CgBJLyqBpg0
        , @AnotherDad

        No, I am not. I have more important criterion in my future wife than her theoretical position on Ukraine or the right tax code.
         
        That's a narrow vision of "politics".


        For the record, I don’t consider not forcing your boy to transition into being a girl to be a matter of politics: I consider that a matter of basic sanity, ...
         
        You're defining away the most important part of modern political conflict--minoritarianism--as not politics.

        When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That’s part of the problem of the modern age.
         
        Agreed. But it nonetheless has happened.

        Politics in the West now is between people who are "sane" and want to live in a sane Western nation ... and those who have bought into minoritarianism and believe all manner of crazy stuff.

        Sure there are plenty of young women who are not particularly political and will assent to all sorts of contemporary nonsense--simply because they haven't thought about it critically or are ignorant or stupid. Some of them can be brought around to more sensible views.

        But why would any man want to marry a woman who is politically hostile to a sane, healthy future for his children and posterity?
      105. @SFG
        Shared values are a thing in dating, always have been, particularly long-term. Used to be religion, as Kronos says, now it's part.

        Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they're a huge risk.

        One of my big problems was that my overintellectual personality plays better with liberals than conservatives. I suppose I should start lifting?

        >Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they’re a huge risk.

        I learned from you: always preserve the texts proving consent. 🙂

        There are core values, and there are passing political fads. One is not the other. Maybe I’m more flexible than most because I know the chances of finding an available woman like myself in terms of personality or interests is negligible going forward at this point: by the time I have my life together again, those few women are going to be taken. So, if I don’t want to die alone, I’m just going to have to compromise. But on principle, I still just really can’t force myself to care that much over whether a woman is a Democrat or a Republican. Women have more empathy, they are also more conformist. It’s just a reality of life. They are likely to be more susceptible to liberal beliefs. That’s fine: if she’s rational, intelligent, and sufficiently humble to understand she doesn’t get everything, it can work: in real life, people are usually saner than they are on the Internet. If she’s a no-kidding true-believer SJW, on the other hand, we aren’t likely to be compatible on plenty of essential non-political stuff, from my experiences.

        Sometimes I feel like I either should have been born way in the future, or in a past age. I don’t seem to fit into this one well at all.

        >I suppose I should start lifting?

        Yes, you should. It has tons of benefits even leaving women out of it. I personally like to treat lifting/fitness/diet as an interesting optimization challenge, not just in terms of my body, but how far I can extend my endurance for that day.

        • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

        if she’s rational, intelligent, and sufficiently humble to understand she doesn’t get everything
         
        This is just too precious.
        , @SunBakedSuburb
        "if I don't want to die alone"

        Dying alone is preferable than lying in the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones. I don't want people to see the fear on my face as I drift away into whatever awaits.
      106. @nebulafox
        >You’ve got to be kidding.

        No, I am not. I have more important criterion in my future wife than her theoretical position on Ukraine or the right tax code. Will she make a good partner? Is she frugal? Is she intelligent? Is she honest? Will I want her to be the mother of my children, potentially?

        For the record, I don't consider not forcing your boy to transition into being a girl to be a matter of politics: I consider that a matter of basic sanity, in keeping with my position that wokeness is another example of post-Christian godless religions. Thankfully, most people are sane hypocrites: they do not make that the center of their lives and will be far more concerned with finding a good partner, and if they start having kids, doing what is in the budding family's interests.

        >How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That's part of the problem of the modern age. Those who define themselves through politics typically have nothing better to define themselves as, and wouldn't make a good candidate as a mate anyway.

        “When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That’s part of the problem of the modern age. Those who define themselves through politics typically have nothing better to define themselves as, and wouldn’t make a good candidate as a mate anyway.”

      107. @Shouting Thomas
        How does anybody keep themselves in such a state of relentless outrage and hysteria?

        To add to the chorus women are fusspots (neuroticism).

        Alongside so-called minorities they are useful as writers for the Guardian whose business model hinges on selective outrage.

        https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9200973/

      108. @Buzz Mohawk

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate.
         
        You're thinking is so last century. (Don't feel bad. We understand.) The problem now is that too many "woke" (God I hate that term) people, politically Left people, are intolerant. They cannot be compatible with anyone who does not at least pretend to think as they do.

        And your first paragraph is right, or at least that was true in the past. The difference now is that she might accuse you of rape later or otherwise make your life a living hell. It used to be fun. No wonder men are avoiding them.

        >You’re thinking is so last century.

        Considering how this century has gone so far for the United States, I’ll take this as a sincere compliment. Added irony that I’m probably one of the youngest commentators here: I genuinely don’t know anything other than the 21st Century.

        • Replies: @Buzz Mohawk
        You deserve a lot of credit. Nice to have you here.

        I'm more worried for you and other young people than for my wife and myself. Please don't believe all the blame leveled here by some against "boomers." As a late one, I can tell you that many of us were never part of the nonsense. It is, like so many things, a construct built up by the mainstream media over the years.

        Whatever happened then was as much of a sham project as the stuff going on now. That is in fact why everything now is very, very familiar to me. "There is nothing new under the sun," at least since then for me.
      109. @Pericles

        I have occasionally shopped at a large sewing-supplies store. And also a large crafts store. The women shopping and working there seemed to be the antithesis of woke, hyphenated, grievance-studies-major women.

         
        Don't count on it.


        The knitting community is reckoning with racism

        Fiber artists of color are taking to Instagram stories to call out instances of prejudice — and to try to shape a more inclusive future.

         
        https://www.vox.com/the-goods/2019/2/25/18234950/knitting-racism-instagram-stories

        Pussy Hat knitters have to buy their yarn and needles somewhere I guess.

      110. Hell hath no fury…….

      111. @The Wild Geese Howard
        Dear old Vicky was already straight REKT by one of her own commenters:

        "The dangerous rise of men who won't have sex with me."

        Careful Vicki, you're sounding like an incel.

        Reply

        Share

        45 Likes

         
        Actually, the comments are quite based...here's another:

        Another entitled precocious white woman who think shes is an expert on social issues.

        You sound bitter and clearly sexist against men.

        Good luck having a life of cats.

        Reply

        Share

        28 Likes

        Those poor cats.

        Reply

        Share

        23 Likes
         

        “Good luck with a life of cats.”

        Cat Ladies are a dying breed. Younger woman prefer dogs. I know how much you guys are emotionally invested in the canine, but you have to realize the female fetishization of animals has taken a darker turn into doggy wuv wuv territory.

        • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

        Cat Ladies are a dying breed. Younger woman prefer dogs.
         
        Any young woman that owns a rescued pitbull or pitbull mix is obviously a massive red flag and hard pass.
      112. @nebulafox
        >Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they’re a huge risk.

        I learned from you: always preserve the texts proving consent. :)

        There are core values, and there are passing political fads. One is not the other. Maybe I'm more flexible than most because I know the chances of finding an available woman like myself in terms of personality or interests is negligible going forward at this point: by the time I have my life together again, those few women are going to be taken. So, if I don't want to die alone, I'm just going to have to compromise. But on principle, I still just really can't force myself to care that much over whether a woman is a Democrat or a Republican. Women have more empathy, they are also more conformist. It's just a reality of life. They are likely to be more susceptible to liberal beliefs. That's fine: if she's rational, intelligent, and sufficiently humble to understand she doesn't get everything, it can work: in real life, people are usually saner than they are on the Internet. If she's a no-kidding true-believer SJW, on the other hand, we aren't likely to be compatible on plenty of essential non-political stuff, from my experiences.

        Sometimes I feel like I either should have been born way in the future, or in a past age. I don't seem to fit into this one well at all.

        >I suppose I should start lifting?

        Yes, you should. It has tons of benefits even leaving women out of it. I personally like to treat lifting/fitness/diet as an interesting optimization challenge, not just in terms of my body, but how far I can extend my endurance for that day.

        if she’s rational, intelligent, and sufficiently humble to understand she doesn’t get everything

        This is just too precious.

        • Agree: RichardTaylor
        • LOL: Kronos
      113. @nebulafox
        >Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they’re a huge risk.

        I learned from you: always preserve the texts proving consent. :)

        There are core values, and there are passing political fads. One is not the other. Maybe I'm more flexible than most because I know the chances of finding an available woman like myself in terms of personality or interests is negligible going forward at this point: by the time I have my life together again, those few women are going to be taken. So, if I don't want to die alone, I'm just going to have to compromise. But on principle, I still just really can't force myself to care that much over whether a woman is a Democrat or a Republican. Women have more empathy, they are also more conformist. It's just a reality of life. They are likely to be more susceptible to liberal beliefs. That's fine: if she's rational, intelligent, and sufficiently humble to understand she doesn't get everything, it can work: in real life, people are usually saner than they are on the Internet. If she's a no-kidding true-believer SJW, on the other hand, we aren't likely to be compatible on plenty of essential non-political stuff, from my experiences.

        Sometimes I feel like I either should have been born way in the future, or in a past age. I don't seem to fit into this one well at all.

        >I suppose I should start lifting?

        Yes, you should. It has tons of benefits even leaving women out of it. I personally like to treat lifting/fitness/diet as an interesting optimization challenge, not just in terms of my body, but how far I can extend my endurance for that day.

        “if I don’t want to die alone”

        Dying alone is preferable than lying in the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones. I don’t want people to see the fear on my face as I drift away into whatever awaits.

        • Replies: @nebulafox
        TBH, I'm an asocial **** who probably wouldn't mind that. But hell, why not see what's out there first?
        , @JMcG
        Then become brave.
        , @Jenner Ickham Errican

        the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones
         
        At that moment, Do not fear Death. Instead, think of the disturbing prank opportunities. Bug out your eyes, zombie moaning, pull down the IV unit, etc. Even if you can’t do any of those things, you’ll be laughing on the inside just thinking about it.
      114. @SunBakedSuburb
        "if I don't want to die alone"

        Dying alone is preferable than lying in the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones. I don't want people to see the fear on my face as I drift away into whatever awaits.

        TBH, I’m an asocial **** who probably wouldn’t mind that. But hell, why not see what’s out there first?

      115. @SFG
        Shared values are a thing in dating, always have been, particularly long-term. Used to be religion, as Kronos says, now it's part.

        Also, as Buzz Mohawk says, now that they believe false rape accusations, they're a huge risk.

        One of my big problems was that my overintellectual personality plays better with liberals than conservatives. I suppose I should start lifting?

        “false rape accusations, they’re a huge risk”

        Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk. That is, if you have normal and honorable intentions. Be patient. Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice. That energy makes a dude dumb and desperate. And chix can smell male desperation from across the room. The primal drive in women is much more sophisticated than what men can muster.

        • Replies: @silviosilver

        Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice.
         
        As if it's that simple to tell if she's "troubled" from a brief interaction.

        Did Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction give Michael Douglas any inkling of what he's in store for?
        , @Nate7383
        "Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk."

        That was his whole point. Dating woke women is not smart selection of women. They are too high risk, so he is being smart and not selecting them. Woke women are into the false rape accusations. Not selecting them seems like a smart criterion.
        , @David Davenport
        Be patient. Masturbate instead ...

        No, that's wrong. Don't do that.

        Genesis 38:8-10 ESV / 31 helpful votes

        Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.
      116. @Kronos
        Before, religious denomination was a huge factor. But now it’s political party.

        Yeah, I occasionally wonder how much of the character of modern politics is related to the decline of religion. People try to find alternate drives in life.

        Looks like the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree here. My grandfather ended up having a similar attitude toward his eventual inter-confessional marriage. (Presbyterian marrying a Catholic: they met in postwar Germany.) He ended up signing legal notarization giving full control of religious education to my grandmother-all five kids would be raised as Catholics. Back then, this was still a pretty big deal in a lot of the US. His parents were really displeased and took a while to warm up to my grandmother, from my understand.

        • Replies: @RichardTaylor
        I'd put it this way: would you expect a Jewish girl to marry someone who was anti-Semitic?

        Or a woman to marry a man who expected her to "police" other women for their privilege and make amends for centuries of abuse to men. That would be dangerous for her. But that is what "woke" politics are all about toward Whites and men. Proceed with caution.
      117. @nebulafox
        >You’re thinking is so last century.

        Considering how this century has gone so far for the United States, I'll take this as a sincere compliment. Added irony that I'm probably one of the youngest commentators here: I genuinely don't know anything other than the 21st Century.

        You deserve a lot of credit. Nice to have you here.

        I’m more worried for you and other young people than for my wife and myself. Please don’t believe all the blame leveled here by some against “boomers.” As a late one, I can tell you that many of us were never part of the nonsense. It is, like so many things, a construct built up by the mainstream media over the years.

        Whatever happened then was as much of a sham project as the stuff going on now. That is in fact why everything now is very, very familiar to me. “There is nothing new under the sun,” at least since then for me.

      118. @Kronos
        Oh yes, that’s been well documented.

        https://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/facebook/001/040/217/f05.png

        Superb. Thank you.

      119. @SunBakedSuburb
        "Good luck with a life of cats."

        Cat Ladies are a dying breed. Younger woman prefer dogs. I know how much you guys are emotionally invested in the canine, but you have to realize the female fetishization of animals has taken a darker turn into doggy wuv wuv territory.

        Cat Ladies are a dying breed. Younger woman prefer dogs.

        Any young woman that owns a rescued pitbull or pitbull mix is obviously a massive red flag and hard pass.

        • Replies: @Known Fact
        Any young woman that owns a rescued pitbull or pitbull mix is obviously a massive red flag and hard pass.

        This might be one of the best bits of practical advice I've seen on the internet (even more crucial than my own "beware of bangs"). I'm a dog person but this pitbull thing probably correlates with the urge for open borders and who knows what else.

        I knew my wife and I were truly compatible 32 years ago -- when the first time we went to the pound to adopt a dog we walked around separately and independently picked the same one out of a hundred
      120. @Rosie

        This is from “the food is awful and such small portions!” school of thought.
         
        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.

        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.

        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.

        You’re not helping your cause.

        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it's time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.

        We can't all be perfect ;-)
        , @Rosie

        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.
         
        That's because you don't know how to read between the lines. You have to work out the logical implications of what they say, because they may not spell it out for you.

        It's a commonplace around here that women's economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates. Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing, because then they don't need a provider, so we're free to ride the "cock carousel" until a few years before menopause.

        If I may, perhaps you would be more alert to this kind of thing if it were your rights being called into question.
      121. @AnotherDad

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”
         
        And his dad is James Fox who's had a long career, but whom i remember from childhood as the British pilot in "Those Magnificent Men and Their Flying Machines". (Just looked Fox's bio up to see if that was his dad.)

        (Btw, doesn't re-view well. I'd remembered it as funny and fun in 1965. And it was fun for my kids when they were little. But you can't watch it again or it's just stupid. In contrast, Blake Edwards' "The Great Race"--with more embedded adult humor--holds up better upon re-watching. (And who isn't smitten by the young Natalie Wood.) My kids probably watched it three or four times over the years.)

        Another Mom and I are watching Victoria--the Victorian age as soap opera--and i enjoy Fox's Palmerston. When he's on, he steals the show.

        This whole idea that people should pay any attention to the opinions of people who are ... actors! ... is just bizarre. But good to hear the guy has gotten based.

        I’ve been watching Victoria as it’s released, it’s been surprisingly adult and conservative and a treat each episode.

        “I enjoy Fox’s Palmerston When he’s on, he steals the show.”

        His wife does as well later on.

      122. @The Germ Theory of Disease
        Why won't this yellow wallpaper stop sneering at me? And yet it keeps staring at me as if it loves me. I hate this blasted yellow wallpaper and yet I can't stop looking at it. I bet it voted for Donald Trump.

        Superb.

      123. @Kronos
        Yeah, that’s been a feminist sore point for a while...

        https://youtu.be/Wj71G_CCAto

        “I’m so lonely, I need a government program to keep me company...”

        I admit i’m kind of a softie and–not knowing her personal choices–i have some sympathy for this woman.

        Obviously no one has any–new–interest in a 60ish old woman. She is supposed to have built her family network providing her emotional support long, long ago. She should be married, chatting with her husband everyday, still having a tumble a couple times a week. Seeing the kids and the grandchildren regularly and sharing holidays with them.

        She may have made some poor personal choices–as she was counseled to do. But she’s not a Hillary Clinton. She probably did not have anything to do with the large cultural and political changes that invaded and infested her homeland. Average people do not create the culture in which they live. They simple follow the norms the culture brings to them.

        Unfortunately for her, her nation has a common language with America and Jewish minoritarianism–and minoritarianized feminism–spread readily from America and infected Britain. Now she lives in a dystopian atomised, feminized, anti-nation and feels useless, isolated, alone.

        Welcome to your nation on minoritarianism!

        • Replies: @Kronos

        I admit i’m kind of a softie and–not knowing her personal choices–i have some sympathy for this woman.
         
        You gotta stay strong. A great man once said “God gave men the ability to use logic while he gave women the ability to use tears.”

        -Roosh V

        https://pics.onsizzle.com/its-not-misandry-its-not-misandry-to-want-men-dead-15209441.png
      124. @Spect3r
        That has nothing to do with feminism.
        I worked at a store when i was younger and many, many older people would go there daily (some of them several times a day) just so they would have someone to who to talk with.
        Loneliness in older people is very real and has nothing to do with being woke or not.

        Fair enough, but judging from her apartment and clothing she’s fairly well to do. She appears to be in good physical health and not confined to a restricted living space for life-supporting machinery. (I’d be very lonely if attached to an iron-lung and my only company was a part time nurse that changed by poop bag daily.) But I’m willing to guess she’s a (or was) a career woman who willingly forsaken marriage and kids for personal satisfaction from job employment. With the coming mass retirement of 1/3 of Baby Boomers who can afford to retire, this is going to be a fairly common occurrence. Some will join quilt clubs or cat meet-ups and with the occasional “Bring your cat to quilt club Day!” It’s the fact that this commercial was aimed at an certain kind of lonely person. Not your old grandma who’s bedridden and can only speak in Greek.

      125. @AnotherDad

        This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn’t date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren’t compatible, and act accordingly.
         
        Excellent point, Jesse.

        Beyond the personal this pries open a couple more levels.

        1) The gist of modern feminism is
        Women are entitled to what they want. Men are not entitled to even pursue what they want. Men exist to provide goodies--modern civilization, technology, protection, support--to women.

        Women are "heroines" pursuing their desires--career achievement, "sexual experimentation" (i.e. sluthood), atheletic accomplishment, military career, divorce, eat-pray-love, political power--especially if they eschew "traditional" roles.

        Men aren't suppose to have any independent desires regarding women, mating, marriage, family. Their role is to "support women".


        2) But beyond modern feminism, this is the gist of the entire minoritarian project.
        White gentiles are not entitled to have or even want anything of their own. Not country clubs, not schools, not neighbors, not nations. And that includes their own history, their own drama as Fox is pointing out. (You must not golf without me!)

        Exactly analogous to feminism's attitude toward men, under minoritarianism white gentiles exist to provide goodies--civilized nations, looting opportunities for the middle men and rent seekers, welfare, white women--to minorities.

        And the sort of normal "Ok, we don't belong together", live-and-let-live common sense you propose sends minoritarians into fits of sputtering rage--"racism!", "xenophobia!" "white supremacy!" "white nationalism!", "Nazi!".

        But the moral hideousness of the whole minoritarian tyranny, is demonstrated by simply pointing this out: "Separate nations" or more basically "Just leave us alone! ... we aren't your slaves!"

        Yup. And when confronted with all of this, the wokester always reaches for the same predictable, rote, stock phrase this Guardianista did:

        When you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

        Didn’t you just know that was coming? Couldn’t you just feel her cliché-packed, ideology-crammed NPC brain building towards that inevitable climax? This is the standard witless, meaningless slogan they all use reach for, instinctively, to shut down actual thought in themselves and others…

        When you’re used to privilege, equality feels like oppression.

        …repeated ad nauseam. Translation: “Yes, we’re going to take everything you have, we’re going to leave you with nothing, and we have a clear conscience about that because YOU ARE PRIVILEGED. Even if you grew up in a trailer park and I grew up in the lap of luxury, if you are white and male, YOU ARE MORE PRIVILEGED THAN ME.”

      126. @Jus' Sayin'...
        Her rant/screed reminds me of an old, Matt Groening, "Bosses from Hell" cartoon, where the boss is screaming, "How dare you duck when I throw a brick at you!"

        Amy Klobuchar really said that?

        • LOL: Rob
      127. @Jonathan Silber
        On the horizon: a movement for Spinster Positivity.

        “On the horizon: a movement for Spinster Positivity”

        It sort-of exists, in the form of Gateway Women, a site (and meetups, local groups etc) for women who are childless and never wanted to end up that way. Founded by an attractive Brit called Jody Day.

        Some of the members are tragic medical cases where they couldn’t physically have kids (imagine having a hysterectomy at 19, for example), but the majority are ladies who went for higher education, then THE CAREER (‘plenty of time for marriage and babies’) and fun (maybe an abortion) and travel, until the clock started to run down, IVF failed, and they end up like the founder:

        “It was February 2009 and, at 44-and-a-half, she had left a bad long-term relationship and moved into a grotty London flat. “I was standing by the window, watching the rain make dusty tracks down the glass, when the traffic in the street below seemed to go silent, as if I’d put it on ‘mute’. In that moment, I became acutely aware of myself, almost as if I were an observer of the scene from outside my body. And then it came to me: it’s over. I’m never going to have a baby.””

        https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/oct/02/the-desire-to-have-a-child-never-goes-away-how-the-involuntarily-childless-are-forming-a-new-movement

        Now a lot of these women have partners, but the point of her organisation is to help women to come to terms with their state and make the best of a bad job. Praiseworthy, but my one grouch is that she should devote at least some of her time and undoubted skills to telling women a few more facts of life about fertility. It’s not too difficult to get pregnant at 39 when you’ve already had 3 kids in the last 10 years, not so if you’ve never had one.

        • Agree: Kronos
        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        This is the kind of person who ends up writing a sad letter to Gateway Women.

        39 is not the best time to be thinking about having your first child.

        https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/jan/17/boyfriend-dont-want-children-not-sure

        I love my boyfriend very much. We live together and get along really well. The thing is he doesn’t want children and has been open about that from the start. At the beginning, I told him I felt the same but was secretly hoping he’d change his mind. I’m still not sure if I do want kids myself. My friends think I’m just trying to convince myself that I’ll be OK without having children. I’m not so sure, but the window for me to have them is fast closing (I’m 39). What should I do?
         
        Some of the comments are like seeing evolution take place in real time, btw. Because Africans are having billions of kids (no one actually says this of course, it's "crowded world" and "overpopulation"), then educated English girls shouldn't.

        "does the world really need another human?"

        "Having children is just adding to the climate crisis. It is both irresponsible to the child and to the planet."

        "The biggest contribution you can make to minimise global warming (even more than becoming vegan) is not to have children."
      128. Did she just start an article with the equivalent of “Werbster’s defines marriage as…” Or did I die and end up in article hell?

        “an appalling understanding of history”

        Does she mean misunderstanding?

        Because he finds one Sikh character out of harmony with the rest of the movie? I don’t know whether that’s true, but I won’t gainsay a person’s subjective moviewatching experience on such grounds. Just because there were Sikh soldiers on the Western Front in WWI, if there were, we don’t have to see them. Nor do we have to see a lone black dude linger center screen for no apparent reason other than the movie just wanted one there. Or were paying ransom for making a mostly white movie.

        We have to think like that, just as we must bear affirmative action in mind. Because that’s the world we inhabit.

      129. @nebulafox
        >You’ve got to be kidding.

        No, I am not. I have more important criterion in my future wife than her theoretical position on Ukraine or the right tax code. Will she make a good partner? Is she frugal? Is she intelligent? Is she honest? Will I want her to be the mother of my children, potentially?

        For the record, I don't consider not forcing your boy to transition into being a girl to be a matter of politics: I consider that a matter of basic sanity, in keeping with my position that wokeness is another example of post-Christian godless religions. Thankfully, most people are sane hypocrites: they do not make that the center of their lives and will be far more concerned with finding a good partner, and if they start having kids, doing what is in the budding family's interests.

        >How about going through life with someone disagreeable?

        When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That's part of the problem of the modern age. Those who define themselves through politics typically have nothing better to define themselves as, and wouldn't make a good candidate as a mate anyway.

        No, I am not. I have more important criterion in my future wife than her theoretical position on Ukraine or the right tax code.

        That’s a narrow vision of “politics”.

        For the record, I don’t consider not forcing your boy to transition into being a girl to be a matter of politics: I consider that a matter of basic sanity, …

        You’re defining away the most important part of modern political conflict–minoritarianism–as not politics.

        When did politics translate into defining who you are as a human being? That’s part of the problem of the modern age.

        Agreed. But it nonetheless has happened.

        Politics in the West now is between people who are “sane” and want to live in a sane Western nation … and those who have bought into minoritarianism and believe all manner of crazy stuff.

        Sure there are plenty of young women who are not particularly political and will assent to all sorts of contemporary nonsense–simply because they haven’t thought about it critically or are ignorant or stupid. Some of them can be brought around to more sensible views.

        But why would any man want to marry a woman who is politically hostile to a sane, healthy future for his children and posterity?

        • Agree: Hail
      130. @The Wild Geese Howard

        Cat Ladies are a dying breed. Younger woman prefer dogs.
         
        Any young woman that owns a rescued pitbull or pitbull mix is obviously a massive red flag and hard pass.

        Any young woman that owns a rescued pitbull or pitbull mix is obviously a massive red flag and hard pass.

        This might be one of the best bits of practical advice I’ve seen on the internet (even more crucial than my own “beware of bangs”). I’m a dog person but this pitbull thing probably correlates with the urge for open borders and who knows what else.

        I knew my wife and I were truly compatible 32 years ago — when the first time we went to the pound to adopt a dog we walked around separately and independently picked the same one out of a hundred

        • Replies: @The Wild Geese Howard

        This might be one of the best bits of practical advice I’ve seen on the internet (even more crucial than my own “beware of bangs”).
         
        You are far too kind, my friend.

        I would only add that horse-loving women are even worse.

        Young men should know that - she will never love anything more than her horse. If you choose to pursue a relationship with a horse-loving woman, you can plan on going deeply into debt to pay for the maintenance of the horse in the finest style.

        Here endeth the lessson.
      131. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        We’re not talking politics as such, but wokeness specifically. Which so far as it exists beyond passing fashion is a big red flag.

        Politics like entertainment or sports fandom is one thing. But politics also can be a key to who one is.

        Also, agreeing to disagree often results in suppression of belief in favor of a perverse form of manners. Which I believe is one reason nonsense like feminism and SJWism have been allowed to flourish. Because regular folk privatize their politics and stop indoctrinating and proselytizing.

        • Replies: @Hail

        We’re not talking politics as such, but wokeness specifically
         
        Good point.

        There is difference between someone with whom you have to share close quarters, as at a workplace (among other possible social, quasi-social, or non-social circles, forced association by circumstance), who is [1.] on "the Left" but quiet and polite about it, and [2.] the SJW, who may not even care about politics as such but is interested in moral crusading against any handy target, often for attention.

        This latter type is generally a woman, but never anything but a malcontented minority. Often with pre-existing grievances against (in the workplace context) management or their wages or boredom (attention seekers).

        The hijacking of things by this latter type, and the inability to stop them, is a common problem in many kinds of offices today, and of course the seeping of that culture into other fields is a common theme at this blog. It's hard to see an "in-system" solution in which all can keep their dignity.
      132. @Stebbing Heuer

        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.
         
        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.

        You're not helping your cause.

        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it’s time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.

        We can’t all be perfect 😉

        • Replies: @Rosie

        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it’s time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.
         
        That's a bit of an overstatement, but it's certainly true that disagreeing with me about a matter of women's rights most likely means that, if you had your way, women would be powerless and insecure.

        If in any case I am shown to be wrong about that, I won't hesitate to admit as much.
        , @SFG
        Hey, some of them are into th...



        ...but usually not ones you would want to start a family with.
      133. Recalling the few times I could not avoid talking to a woman around my age, getting laid or not getting laid was not on the horizon: all I could think was, “Jesus Christ, why do I have to put up with this? What limbless war orphans did I molest in a previous life that getting the freaking time of day out of this skillless cow has to be so damn hard? Have I ever spoken to anyone like she talks to pretty much everybody?” But yeah the problem is men having autonomy. We will not live to see the comedically necessary conclusion: the fanny state forces men into one-sided relationships with green-haired hambeasts, and eventually the men just kill them.

      134. @dfordoom

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.
         
        But women don't date dissident right men. Even the most loser women don't date dissident right men.

        That's what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won't have anything to do with them. They're pasty-faced incels living in Mom's basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War and how they're going to create a racially pure white ethnostate. Based on pasty-faced losers living in Mom's basement, but in their fantasies they're racial warriors. Of course in their fantasies they occasionally get to sleep with white women (who are overcome with lust at their manliness and the size of their gun collection), but only in their fantasies.

        That’s what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won’t have anything to do with them.

        It’s kind of pathetic when you think about it. Anyway, I got: 1 troll, 1 lol, and 1 disagree, and only one substantive reply, from you.

      135. A Chinese man who says he was trying to cure constipation (and not reading too much into an infamous hentai game dialog screencap about rainy weather) shoved eels where they do not belong and had to have them surgically removed. The eels bit their way through his intestine and caused infections. That’s the thing about having eels up inside ya, they tend to find an entrance where they can. So as we wonder where corona came from, we must consider that it is normal in China to do insanely self-destructive things involving animals.
        https://www.foxnews.com/health/man-cure-constipation-swallowing-live-eels-emergency-surgery-report

      136. @Stebbing Heuer

        Kind of like woman-haters demanding that women be forced to marry them for a meal ticket.
         
        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.

        You're not helping your cause.

        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.

        That’s because you don’t know how to read between the lines. You have to work out the logical implications of what they say, because they may not spell it out for you.

        It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates. Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing, because then they don’t need a provider, so we’re free to ride the “cock carousel” until a few years before menopause.

        If I may, perhaps you would be more alert to this kind of thing if it were your rights being called into question.

        • Replies: @Lot
        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”

        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. And I think most of us have observed the problems in marriages where the woman’s career takes off and the husband’s doesn’t. It doesn’t always end in divorce, but it almost always causes serious issues. (Exceptions are often where the woman is obviously the alpha in personality from the start, and the husband is relatively good looking, secure, genial, and type-B.)


        “Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing”

        It some sense, yes. It would be better for both sexes if the gender pay ratios returned to mid-20th century levels.

        However, I don’t think right wing men generally want the government to *outlaw* equal pay for women, but rather return it to a free market. I think I can speak for them in saying we want the government to stop actively promoting this trend by:

        1. Encouraging credentialism that disproportionately benefits women.

        2. Taxing and overegulating private sector industries with high male pay to subsidize our bloated gov and gov-funded sectors, especially local governments and Big Ed, which are female dominated.

        3. Imposing quotas and affirmative action on the economy, sometimes directly and sometimes by fear of lawsuits.

        The White Sharia and Incel types are noisy beyond their numbers because of the Mom’s basement factor. You rub people the wrong way sometimes by implying this is the dominant view of conservative men.
      137. @YetAnotherAnon
        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it's time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.

        We can't all be perfect ;-)

        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it’s time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.

        That’s a bit of an overstatement, but it’s certainly true that disagreeing with me about a matter of women’s rights most likely means that, if you had your way, women would be powerless and insecure.

        If in any case I am shown to be wrong about that, I won’t hesitate to admit as much.

        • LOL: YetAnotherAnon
        • Replies: @Rosie
        And what I ought to have added:

        The world doesn't care about what you do or don't want. If the policies you endorse will lead to women being chained to sinks and bedposts, and you don't care, then you are morally responsible for that outcome. This remains the case whether you desired that outcome or not.

        https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/trash-bin-babies-indias-female-infanticide-crisis/257672/
        , @The Wild Geese Howard

        If in any case I am shown to be wrong about that, I won’t hesitate to admit as much.
         
        Oh, honey.

        Don't ever change!
      138. @SunBakedSuburb
        "false rape accusations, they're a huge risk"

        Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk. That is, if you have normal and honorable intentions. Be patient. Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice. That energy makes a dude dumb and desperate. And chix can smell male desperation from across the room. The primal drive in women is much more sophisticated than what men can muster.

        Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice.

        As if it’s that simple to tell if she’s “troubled” from a brief interaction.

        Did Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction give Michael Douglas any inkling of what he’s in store for?

        • Replies: @SFG
        Yeah, that is my big worry.

        I do love the 'demon juice' phrase though. I may use that.
        , @dfordoom

        As if it’s that simple to tell if she’s “troubled” from a brief interaction.
         
        It's usually not that difficult to tell right away. The secret is not to let lust get the better of you. Talk to her for a while before you start lusting after her. Yes, she might be really hot and she might have legs that go all the way up and everything but for God's sake talk to her first.

        And, maybe, just maybe, it isn't a good idea to jump straight into the sack with her before you figure out what makes her tick. You know there was a time when people thought it wasn't compulsory to have sex first and then get to know the person. Once you've had sex you're going to find it more difficult to do what you should have done first if you'd bothered to look for the warning signs - run away.

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you're sure he's not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.

        In my experience first impressions are always correct. After the first conversation you know if you're dealing with trouble. The women (and the men) who are trouble usually have immense difficulty in concealing their craziness or their obnoxiousness.

        I can recall a date with a very attractive very hot and apparently charming young lady. After half an hour's conversation I realised the wisest thing to do was to back slowly away without making eye contact, and then go home and burn her phone number so I'd never be tempted. Maybe I missed out on some hot sex (she was crazy enough that it probably would have been hot) but I also avoided a whole world of hurt and aggravation.
      139. @Forbes

        Only people like you who are looking for a reason to despise women.
         
        No need to go "looking" for a reason, the evidence here is in plain sight. Or are you suggesting this behavior on display should be indulged?

        You doubtless already know, but, for the benefit of any new reader: anyone who notices any negative trait in any female (or, heaven forfend, statistically prevalent in most females) is, according to Rosie, by definition a he-man woman-hater incapable of mating or reproducing.

        It’s not unlike how, among the more common, irrational and irresponsible Negroes, any rational, responsible Negro (such as Cosby, Thomas, Chapelle, Rock, McGruder, et al.) observing or arguing that Negroes have agency and responsibility for their own situations is a simpering “Uncle Tom.”

        (Yes, yes; I realise it turns out Cosby was not nearly as responsible one would have thought, but he was still right about this topic.)

        • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
      140. @dfordoom

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.
         
        But women don't date dissident right men. Even the most loser women don't date dissident right men.

        That's what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won't have anything to do with them. They're pasty-faced incels living in Mom's basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War and how they're going to create a racially pure white ethnostate. Based on pasty-faced losers living in Mom's basement, but in their fantasies they're racial warriors. Of course in their fantasies they occasionally get to sleep with white women (who are overcome with lust at their manliness and the size of their gun collection), but only in their fantasies.

        ” They’re pasty-faced incels living in Mom’s basement and in between downloading porn …”

        That is a most original critique which has never been made before. Are you by any chance the lovechild of Corvinus and Tiny Duck?

        • LOL: Patrick in SC
      141. @Rosie

        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it’s time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.
         
        That's a bit of an overstatement, but it's certainly true that disagreeing with me about a matter of women's rights most likely means that, if you had your way, women would be powerless and insecure.

        If in any case I am shown to be wrong about that, I won't hesitate to admit as much.

        And what I ought to have added:

        The world doesn’t care about what you do or don’t want. If the policies you endorse will lead to women being chained to sinks and bedposts, and you don’t care, then you are morally responsible for that outcome. This remains the case whether you desired that outcome or not.

        https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/trash-bin-babies-indias-female-infanticide-crisis/257672/

        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        Rosie logic - comments on Unz ----> Indian mums aborting their daughters.

        Before the Interwebs existed, Hindu widows were sometimes (it wasn't the rule by any means) burned alive on their husband's funeral pyre. A Scottish guy (with British soldiers) stopped it.

        "Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs"

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)

        Anyone (I don't know your views) who supports abortion as practiced now, where babies are killed because mum just doesn't fancy it (or for Muh Career like Michelle Williams) can't have any issue with abortion because you want a boy. It's funny how the "right to choose" and "every child a wanted child" goes out of the window when girls are getting the wrong end of the stick. Do they suffer more than boys when being scraped out or injected?
        , @vhrm
        Aborting / killing young girls increases the value of girls and women overall in the sexual marketplace... and yields a bunch of lonely, angry incels because there are fewer women to go around.

        It seems like a good idea to individual families but it ends up making their sons' lives harder... so it's not as pro male as it appears on the surface.
        , @nebulafox
        In China, it is common for rural bachelors made single by female infanticides to import a wife from abroad. This is nothing new: their rural Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese counterparts have been doing this for decades. Vietnam is an especially popular choice because of cultural similarities, proximity, and the resulting children being able to pass off as Japanese/Korean/Chinese. (Filipinas are also common. I suspect Indonesians would be as well if it weren't for the Islam factor.) I don't know how scalable it is going to be in China's case-suspect there are still going to be a lot of pissed off young men-but they at least do have that option.

        I don't see this working in India, though: the country just isn't affluent enough to attract foreign brides. Combine this with the other pressures brought on by overpopulation, from strained water resources (and to the northwest, they are competing with another nuclear power for that) to an economy where young people basically have to grift in order to stand any chance at getting a job, and you understand why the code wallahs are willing to put with what they do to get out.
      142. It would seem to be a good thing that progressive women are free from sexual harassment by deplorable men.

      143. @Known Fact
        Any young woman that owns a rescued pitbull or pitbull mix is obviously a massive red flag and hard pass.

        This might be one of the best bits of practical advice I've seen on the internet (even more crucial than my own "beware of bangs"). I'm a dog person but this pitbull thing probably correlates with the urge for open borders and who knows what else.

        I knew my wife and I were truly compatible 32 years ago -- when the first time we went to the pound to adopt a dog we walked around separately and independently picked the same one out of a hundred

        This might be one of the best bits of practical advice I’ve seen on the internet (even more crucial than my own “beware of bangs”).

        You are far too kind, my friend.

        I would only add that horse-loving women are even worse.

        Young men should know that – she will never love anything more than her horse. If you choose to pursue a relationship with a horse-loving woman, you can plan on going deeply into debt to pay for the maintenance of the horse in the finest style.

        Here endeth the lessson.

        • Replies: @Lagertha
        Well, most girls have their first orgasm while cantering - a little known fact that makes young women "horse crazy."

        But, agree; single women in their 30's with a pitbull, or horse, an aversion to guns, whispering "patriarchy/white privilege," during cocktails/drinks or boasting about not believing in God - list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)....are the many Red Flags that I have warned my sons about. However, one of them has a paramour who is only mildly liberal and not a raging misandrist - she knows I would never accept/like her if that was the case.
      144. @Rosie

        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it’s time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.
         
        That's a bit of an overstatement, but it's certainly true that disagreeing with me about a matter of women's rights most likely means that, if you had your way, women would be powerless and insecure.

        If in any case I am shown to be wrong about that, I won't hesitate to admit as much.

        If in any case I am shown to be wrong about that, I won’t hesitate to admit as much.

        Oh, honey.

        Don’t ever change!

        • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
        • LOL: AnotherDad
      145. @Spect3r
        That has nothing to do with feminism.
        I worked at a store when i was younger and many, many older people would go there daily (some of them several times a day) just so they would have someone to who to talk with.
        Loneliness in older people is very real and has nothing to do with being woke or not.

        I agree. One of the greatest kindnesses is to engage with the lonely. I have an aunt who can be unpleasant, but her friends and most of her family are gone. I make a point to spend time with her and call her. It must be pure hell to not see a friendly face for days on end.

        • Replies: @nebulafox
        I've been through that. Let me tell you: total isolation does mess with your brain and warp your personality, if given enough time. You begin to think and do stuff you ordinarily wouldn't think or do, and the damage can be long-lasting.n (It does not help if you are dealing with economic hard times simultaneously, as many of these people are.) It's just not what we're made for, and record numbers of human beings are experiencing it. I'm saying this as somebody who genuinely requires less socialization than most human beings and will probably be a natural loner until the day he dies.

        If you see someone who is clearly lonely, regardless of who they are, just talk to them. It can be about the most banal subject or it can only be for a few minutes on the bus or the subway or whatever: it does not matter. You will make their day. They will remember that conversation when they go to bed at night. It makes you feel like a human being again. I cannot describe what that sensation is like to someone who has never been though that. It's enough that you might even be keeping this person going for a while longer.

        (I'd advise women to mention a boyfriend/husband, though, if the lonely person is male. The sad reality in modern US culture is that men who are unused to attention from women-and that'd be these guys-have non-irrational reasons to think that a woman randomly striking up a conversation can only mean romantic interest.)
      146. @AnotherDad

        “ Laurence Fox is the nephew of Edward Fox, who played the assassin in The Day of the Jackal.”
         
        And his dad is James Fox who's had a long career, but whom i remember from childhood as the British pilot in "Those Magnificent Men and Their Flying Machines". (Just looked Fox's bio up to see if that was his dad.)

        (Btw, doesn't re-view well. I'd remembered it as funny and fun in 1965. And it was fun for my kids when they were little. But you can't watch it again or it's just stupid. In contrast, Blake Edwards' "The Great Race"--with more embedded adult humor--holds up better upon re-watching. (And who isn't smitten by the young Natalie Wood.) My kids probably watched it three or four times over the years.)

        Another Mom and I are watching Victoria--the Victorian age as soap opera--and i enjoy Fox's Palmerston. When he's on, he steals the show.

        This whole idea that people should pay any attention to the opinions of people who are ... actors! ... is just bizarre. But good to hear the guy has gotten based.

        Another Mom and I are watching Victoria–the Victorian age as soap opera–and i enjoy Fox’s Palmerston. When he’s on, he steals the show.

        Yes, agreed — we Calvinists have enjoyed Victoria, especially Seasons 1 and 2. Season 3 takes a dip in quality (too much screen time devoted to Princess Feodora), but the scenes with Fox as Lord Palmerston are usually compelling.

        We’ve also just started in watching the ‘Inspector Lewis’ series (having no fresh Endeavours to watch at the moment). Lawrence Fox plays Lewis’s sergeant/bagman/sidekick, and at least in the first couple of episodes, he’s very good. He has considerable screen presence.

      147. @PSR
        displaying an appalling understanding of history by calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”

        I just saw this film yesterday and that struck me as contrived as well. Wouldn't Sikhs have served in Sikh units during WWI? There were also a number of blacks sprinkled in here and there. Maybe there were a significant number of black citizens of Britain by this time but wouldn't blacks from the colonies have served in colonial, all-black, units?

        In short, yes. Units of the Indian army (British officers, Indian other ranks) were used on the Western front early in the war. They suffered greatly in the European winter and weren’t used once the Territorials and Kitchener’s men arrived in large numbers. Certainly they were gone from the Western front by 1917.
        I can’t say that there were zero Sikhs in line infantry units on the Western front, but I’ve never seen or heard of any.

      148. @SunBakedSuburb
        "if I don't want to die alone"

        Dying alone is preferable than lying in the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones. I don't want people to see the fear on my face as I drift away into whatever awaits.

        Then become brave.

      149. @Rosie

        I have never, ever, not once, seen that sentiment expressed anywhere by anybody.
         
        That's because you don't know how to read between the lines. You have to work out the logical implications of what they say, because they may not spell it out for you.

        It's a commonplace around here that women's economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates. Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing, because then they don't need a provider, so we're free to ride the "cock carousel" until a few years before menopause.

        If I may, perhaps you would be more alert to this kind of thing if it were your rights being called into question.

        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”

        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. And I think most of us have observed the problems in marriages where the woman’s career takes off and the husband’s doesn’t. It doesn’t always end in divorce, but it almost always causes serious issues. (Exceptions are often where the woman is obviously the alpha in personality from the start, and the husband is relatively good looking, secure, genial, and type-B.)

        “Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing”

        It some sense, yes. It would be better for both sexes if the gender pay ratios returned to mid-20th century levels.

        However, I don’t think right wing men generally want the government to *outlaw* equal pay for women, but rather return it to a free market. I think I can speak for them in saying we want the government to stop actively promoting this trend by:

        1. Encouraging credentialism that disproportionately benefits women.

        2. Taxing and overegulating private sector industries with high male pay to subsidize our bloated gov and gov-funded sectors, especially local governments and Big Ed, which are female dominated.

        3. Imposing quotas and affirmative action on the economy, sometimes directly and sometimes by fear of lawsuits.

        The White Sharia and Incel types are noisy beyond their numbers because of the Mom’s basement factor. You rub people the wrong way sometimes by implying this is the dominant view of conservative men.

        • Replies: @Rosie

        You rub people the wrong way sometimes by implying this is the dominant view of conservative men.
         
        When the incels And White Sharia freaks don't get any pushback, it is perfectly rational for me to assume those remaining silent agree with them. There are times when you have a duty to speak.


        1. Encouraging credentialism that disproportionately benefits women.

        2. Taxing and overegulating private sector industries with high male pay to subsidize our bloated gov and gov-funded sectors, especially local governments and Big Ed, which are female dominated.

        3. Imposing quotas and affirmative action on the economy, sometimes directly and sometimes by fear of lawsuits.
         
        And this is why reactionaries rub me the wrong way. Their first instinct is to point the finger at women rather than the plutocrats who outsourced our industrial base to the Third World.

        (BTW I have no opinion on whether the economy is or isn't over regulated, but if it is, there is no excuse whatsoever to pick a fight with women over it.)
        , @AnotherDad


        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”
         
        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. ...
         
        Lot this is a terrific comment end to end. Your analysis of the facts on the ground and what sort of corrections a reasonable conservative who values our ancient Anglo-Saxon liberties would like--excellent. (I think you and I agree on some pro-family-formation tax policies that would be part of the larger mix as well.)

        It's good to have the gals on here. I'm glad they are here--even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. What matters is Rosie's feelings. She really does not believe in female hypergamy--Cinderella, romance novels, and the female behavior we've all observed at least since high school be damned. (AFAIK, she does believe in the male analog: men liking young fertile women, T+A .)

        And basic logic like saying "female careerism is having negative effects on marriage and white fertility" does not imply "I want to ban female employment or careerism"--is just irrelevant. Rosie knows what you want--women chained up ... between the sink and the bedpost.

        If you didn't know better you might venture that her arguing style is very ... uh ... "feminine".
      150. @Lot
        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”

        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. And I think most of us have observed the problems in marriages where the woman’s career takes off and the husband’s doesn’t. It doesn’t always end in divorce, but it almost always causes serious issues. (Exceptions are often where the woman is obviously the alpha in personality from the start, and the husband is relatively good looking, secure, genial, and type-B.)


        “Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing”

        It some sense, yes. It would be better for both sexes if the gender pay ratios returned to mid-20th century levels.

        However, I don’t think right wing men generally want the government to *outlaw* equal pay for women, but rather return it to a free market. I think I can speak for them in saying we want the government to stop actively promoting this trend by:

        1. Encouraging credentialism that disproportionately benefits women.

        2. Taxing and overegulating private sector industries with high male pay to subsidize our bloated gov and gov-funded sectors, especially local governments and Big Ed, which are female dominated.

        3. Imposing quotas and affirmative action on the economy, sometimes directly and sometimes by fear of lawsuits.

        The White Sharia and Incel types are noisy beyond their numbers because of the Mom’s basement factor. You rub people the wrong way sometimes by implying this is the dominant view of conservative men.

        You rub people the wrong way sometimes by implying this is the dominant view of conservative men.

        When the incels And White Sharia freaks don’t get any pushback, it is perfectly rational for me to assume those remaining silent agree with them. There are times when you have a duty to speak.

        1. Encouraging credentialism that disproportionately benefits women.

        2. Taxing and overegulating private sector industries with high male pay to subsidize our bloated gov and gov-funded sectors, especially local governments and Big Ed, which are female dominated.

        3. Imposing quotas and affirmative action on the economy, sometimes directly and sometimes by fear of lawsuits.

        And this is why reactionaries rub me the wrong way. Their first instinct is to point the finger at women rather than the plutocrats who outsourced our industrial base to the Third World.

        (BTW I have no opinion on whether the economy is or isn’t over regulated, but if it is, there is no excuse whatsoever to pick a fight with women over it.)

      151. @silviosilver

        Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice.
         
        As if it's that simple to tell if she's "troubled" from a brief interaction.

        Did Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction give Michael Douglas any inkling of what he's in store for?

        Yeah, that is my big worry.

        I do love the ‘demon juice’ phrase though. I may use that.

      152. @YetAnotherAnon
        Rosie seems to have a bit of a Manichean view of us chaps. Either we agree with her or we want women to be chattel goods until it's time for them to be chained to the sink or the bedpost.

        We can't all be perfect ;-)

        Hey, some of them are into th…

        …but usually not ones you would want to start a family with.

      153. @JMcG
        I agree. One of the greatest kindnesses is to engage with the lonely. I have an aunt who can be unpleasant, but her friends and most of her family are gone. I make a point to spend time with her and call her. It must be pure hell to not see a friendly face for days on end.

        I’ve been through that. Let me tell you: total isolation does mess with your brain and warp your personality, if given enough time. You begin to think and do stuff you ordinarily wouldn’t think or do, and the damage can be long-lasting.n (It does not help if you are dealing with economic hard times simultaneously, as many of these people are.) It’s just not what we’re made for, and record numbers of human beings are experiencing it. I’m saying this as somebody who genuinely requires less socialization than most human beings and will probably be a natural loner until the day he dies.

        If you see someone who is clearly lonely, regardless of who they are, just talk to them. It can be about the most banal subject or it can only be for a few minutes on the bus or the subway or whatever: it does not matter. You will make their day. They will remember that conversation when they go to bed at night. It makes you feel like a human being again. I cannot describe what that sensation is like to someone who has never been though that. It’s enough that you might even be keeping this person going for a while longer.

        (I’d advise women to mention a boyfriend/husband, though, if the lonely person is male. The sad reality in modern US culture is that men who are unused to attention from women-and that’d be these guys-have non-irrational reasons to think that a woman randomly striking up a conversation can only mean romantic interest.)

        • Replies: @silviosilver

        If you see someone who is clearly lonely
         
        Can you really tell if someone is "clearly" lonely? Surely the fact that they're alone isn't enough to go on.
        , @Kronos

        (I’d advise women to mention a boyfriend/husband, though, if the lonely person is male. The sad reality in modern US culture is that men who are unused to attention from women-and that’d be these guys-have non-irrational reasons to think that a woman randomly striking up a conversation can only mean romantic interest.)
         
        Yeah, because this’ll happen...

        https://youtu.be/7DdF56vmapQ
      154. Most of you guys are way over-thinking this. Women are drawn to men who aren’t intimidated by them. It’s really that simple. If you’re comfortable with yourself and comfortable with them, you can take your pick.

        P.S. I like cats, they’re a lot like women.

        • Disagree: The Wild Geese Howard
      155. @nebulafox
        I've been through that. Let me tell you: total isolation does mess with your brain and warp your personality, if given enough time. You begin to think and do stuff you ordinarily wouldn't think or do, and the damage can be long-lasting.n (It does not help if you are dealing with economic hard times simultaneously, as many of these people are.) It's just not what we're made for, and record numbers of human beings are experiencing it. I'm saying this as somebody who genuinely requires less socialization than most human beings and will probably be a natural loner until the day he dies.

        If you see someone who is clearly lonely, regardless of who they are, just talk to them. It can be about the most banal subject or it can only be for a few minutes on the bus or the subway or whatever: it does not matter. You will make their day. They will remember that conversation when they go to bed at night. It makes you feel like a human being again. I cannot describe what that sensation is like to someone who has never been though that. It's enough that you might even be keeping this person going for a while longer.

        (I'd advise women to mention a boyfriend/husband, though, if the lonely person is male. The sad reality in modern US culture is that men who are unused to attention from women-and that'd be these guys-have non-irrational reasons to think that a woman randomly striking up a conversation can only mean romantic interest.)

        If you see someone who is clearly lonely

        Can you really tell if someone is “clearly” lonely? Surely the fact that they’re alone isn’t enough to go on.

      156. Spend an afternoon on any major dating app and you’ll come across…

        D’oh!

      157. Anonymous[130] • Disclaimer says:
        @dfordoom

        By that logic, it would be absurd for a woman to date a dissident Right man, since he subscribes to an ideology built around hating White women.
         
        But women don't date dissident right men. Even the most loser women don't date dissident right men.

        That's what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won't have anything to do with them. They're pasty-faced incels living in Mom's basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War and how they're going to create a racially pure white ethnostate. Based on pasty-faced losers living in Mom's basement, but in their fantasies they're racial warriors. Of course in their fantasies they occasionally get to sleep with white women (who are overcome with lust at their manliness and the size of their gun collection), but only in their fantasies.

        That’s what keeps the dissident right going. The fact that women won’t have anything to do with them. They’re pasty-faced incels living in Mom’s basement and in between downloading porn they have lots of time to indulge in their right-wing fantasies about the Coming Civil War

        The “dissident right” just happened to get Trump elected. We’re more likely to be married than the general white population and, on average, have more kids. And we’re less likely to be living in mama’s basement. Thanks for playing. Now move along.

        • Agree: Alden
      158. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed

        Anyone ever seen an attractive feminist? Beyond that, I suspect this is a bit of an urban legend. Proceed with caution. Because if you ever make money later on, she’ll reframe the issue to sue you.

        I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?

        You can’t be serious. I think you are failing to understand this is not the Boomer politics of old, say like tax rates. This is more RACIAL and involves a basic loyalty or disloyalty to your own people. They are proud to be disloyal. They want White men who denigrate their own identity.

        • Agree: Nate7383
        • Replies: @Nate7383

        @nebulafox
        everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed

        Anyone ever seen an attractive feminist? Beyond that, I suspect this is a bit of an urban legend. Proceed with caution. Because if you ever make money later on, she’ll reframe the issue to sue you.
         
        Just watch one of those consent videos where consent is needed before sitting on the same couch, then asking if it's OK to move closer, closer still... asking to kiss, asking between kisses... That's feminist sex, sounds like a real hoot!
      159. @Anonymous

        To be honest, though, I’ve never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?
         
        It isn’t always the particulars so much as the attitudes which lead them to believe in the particulars. I’m not especially against basic feminism. The problem with hardcore feminists is that they believe that the woman is “always right” and never lies and in the notion that the male/female relationship is inherently antagonistic rather than symbiotic. A woman who comes into a relationship with that kind of attitude isn’t likely to make a good mate. Hardcore feminism poisons male/female relationships.

        Apparently it’s incredibly common on dating apps for women to include the line “swipe left if you voted for Trump.” And then there were the famous Vietnam protest signs that “women say yes to men who say no” (i.e., to military service). So it’s laughable that the complaint of this article is that some random conservative says he won’t don’t leftists.

        Apparently it’s incredibly common on dating apps for women to include the line “swipe left if you voted for Trump.”

        If a woman is going to lecture you on the wickedness of your voting behaviour it’s highly likely she’ll lecture you about racism, homophobia, global warming and countless other subjects. Your life will be one long nightmare.

        These days the number one factor in choosing a mate has to be political compatibility. Because these days everything is political.

      160. @nebulafox
        Yeah, I occasionally wonder how much of the character of modern politics is related to the decline of religion. People try to find alternate drives in life.

        Looks like the apple doesn't fall far from the tree here. My grandfather ended up having a similar attitude toward his eventual inter-confessional marriage. (Presbyterian marrying a Catholic: they met in postwar Germany.) He ended up signing legal notarization giving full control of religious education to my grandmother-all five kids would be raised as Catholics. Back then, this was still a pretty big deal in a lot of the US. His parents were really displeased and took a while to warm up to my grandmother, from my understand.

        I’d put it this way: would you expect a Jewish girl to marry someone who was anti-Semitic?

        Or a woman to marry a man who expected her to “police” other women for their privilege and make amends for centuries of abuse to men. That would be dangerous for her. But that is what “woke” politics are all about toward Whites and men. Proceed with caution.

        • Agree: Nate7383
      161. @silviosilver

        Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice.
         
        As if it's that simple to tell if she's "troubled" from a brief interaction.

        Did Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction give Michael Douglas any inkling of what he's in store for?

        As if it’s that simple to tell if she’s “troubled” from a brief interaction.

        It’s usually not that difficult to tell right away. The secret is not to let lust get the better of you. Talk to her for a while before you start lusting after her. Yes, she might be really hot and she might have legs that go all the way up and everything but for God’s sake talk to her first.

        And, maybe, just maybe, it isn’t a good idea to jump straight into the sack with her before you figure out what makes her tick. You know there was a time when people thought it wasn’t compulsory to have sex first and then get to know the person. Once you’ve had sex you’re going to find it more difficult to do what you should have done first if you’d bothered to look for the warning signs – run away.

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.

        In my experience first impressions are always correct. After the first conversation you know if you’re dealing with trouble. The women (and the men) who are trouble usually have immense difficulty in concealing their craziness or their obnoxiousness.

        I can recall a date with a very attractive very hot and apparently charming young lady. After half an hour’s conversation I realised the wisest thing to do was to back slowly away without making eye contact, and then go home and burn her phone number so I’d never be tempted. Maybe I missed out on some hot sex (she was crazy enough that it probably would have been hot) but I also avoided a whole world of hurt and aggravation.

        • Replies: @AnotherDad

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.
         
        Holy cow. How about "wait until you are married".

        Casual sex isn't good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman's mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.
      162. @Xerxes the Magian
        I remember seeing Laurence Fox in the Patriot, which was a play about De Gaulle.

        He gave an impassioned, almost perfect performance, and I didn't really know about his hereditary (the other members of the theatre club had to inform me about it).

        I imagine he did such a good job as De Gaulle was because the chap who played Marshall Petain seemed actually tired instead of playing a tired character.

        https://www.theguardian.com/stage/2016/mar/10/laurence-fox-c-word-heckler-the-patriotic-traitor

        Laurence Fox seems to be quite the diva and while I reserve my opinions on him for the most part (as an old-school libertarian I have an almost monomaniacal dedication to speech that I dislike and disagree); it's good to have this fresh and emergent voice.

        It is startling though the degree to which the "Counter-Reformation" is happening against the Great Awokening. Also it's pretty obvious that London is the epicentre of this because it is the most demographically Anglo-Saxon society on the planet (the Shires if not the London & Home Counties).

        I would also add that it seems that the drama among the Royal Family (the disgraced Prince Andrew was seen escorting HM to Church on Sunday & a few articles have been slipped in claiming that he has been a "rock" to her during the H&M crisis) is perhaps an allegory to what is happening among Progressive Liberal Circles.

        It is of course admirable to discuss Privilege in the Abstract (especially other people's privilege) but far more difficult to give up one's own Privilege in reality to another person. As demographics begin to tip and PoCs become more common, this is increasingly becoming a problem in elite spaces.

        More like H&M non crisis was perfectly timed to cause an uproar to send Andrew’s much much worse scandal out of the news.

        The Queen’s son, Prince the honorable Andrew Herbert takes his mother to church. So sweet. So Royal. Looks more like his father every day.

      163. @nebulafox
        I've been through that. Let me tell you: total isolation does mess with your brain and warp your personality, if given enough time. You begin to think and do stuff you ordinarily wouldn't think or do, and the damage can be long-lasting.n (It does not help if you are dealing with economic hard times simultaneously, as many of these people are.) It's just not what we're made for, and record numbers of human beings are experiencing it. I'm saying this as somebody who genuinely requires less socialization than most human beings and will probably be a natural loner until the day he dies.

        If you see someone who is clearly lonely, regardless of who they are, just talk to them. It can be about the most banal subject or it can only be for a few minutes on the bus or the subway or whatever: it does not matter. You will make their day. They will remember that conversation when they go to bed at night. It makes you feel like a human being again. I cannot describe what that sensation is like to someone who has never been though that. It's enough that you might even be keeping this person going for a while longer.

        (I'd advise women to mention a boyfriend/husband, though, if the lonely person is male. The sad reality in modern US culture is that men who are unused to attention from women-and that'd be these guys-have non-irrational reasons to think that a woman randomly striking up a conversation can only mean romantic interest.)

        (I’d advise women to mention a boyfriend/husband, though, if the lonely person is male. The sad reality in modern US culture is that men who are unused to attention from women-and that’d be these guys-have non-irrational reasons to think that a woman randomly striking up a conversation can only mean romantic interest.)

        Yeah, because this’ll happen…

      164. @SunBakedSuburb
        "if I don't want to die alone"

        Dying alone is preferable than lying in the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones. I don't want people to see the fear on my face as I drift away into whatever awaits.

        the proverbial death bed, surrounded by the so-called loved ones

        At that moment, Do not fear Death. Instead, think of the disturbing prank opportunities. Bug out your eyes, zombie moaning, pull down the IV unit, etc. Even if you can’t do any of those things, you’ll be laughing on the inside just thinking about it.

      165. @AnotherDad
        I admit i'm kind of a softie and--not knowing her personal choices--i have some sympathy for this woman.

        Obviously no one has any--new--interest in a 60ish old woman. She is supposed to have built her family network providing her emotional support long, long ago. She should be married, chatting with her husband everyday, still having a tumble a couple times a week. Seeing the kids and the grandchildren regularly and sharing holidays with them.

        She may have made some poor personal choices--as she was counseled to do. But she's not a Hillary Clinton. She probably did not have anything to do with the large cultural and political changes that invaded and infested her homeland. Average people do not create the culture in which they live. They simple follow the norms the culture brings to them.

        Unfortunately for her, her nation has a common language with America and Jewish minoritarianism--and minoritarianized feminism--spread readily from America and infected Britain. Now she lives in a dystopian atomised, feminized, anti-nation and feels useless, isolated, alone.

        Welcome to your nation on minoritarianism!

        I admit i’m kind of a softie and–not knowing her personal choices–i have some sympathy for this woman.

        You gotta stay strong. A great man once said “God gave men the ability to use logic while he gave women the ability to use tears.”

        -Roosh V

        • Agree: Nate7383
      166. @Pericles
        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right; real terrorist is muslim, book terrorist is white (variant: book terrorist is muslim, movie terrorist is white). Also, Dallas is full of a climate of right wing hate, which obviously motivated Lee Harvey Oswald when he got back from the Soviet Union.

        No, no , no. You have this totally wrong. Day of the Jackal starts with an historically accurate assassination attempt by the OAS (Organisation Armée Secrète) which was an extreme right terrorist group formed out of the humiliating loss of Algeria. In 1959, the “Generals Uprising” in Algeria led to the fall of the Fourth Republic and the extra-constitutional installation of Charles de Gaulle as President. De Gaulle eventually stabbed the Generals in the back by attempting to withdraw from Algeria and the OAS was born. The main story from Day of the Jackal is fictional and in fact the assassin is non-ideological. But having the OAS hire him is completely historically coherent.

        • Replies: @Old Palo Altan
        Correct. I long for the day when the French army pulls off something similar and then for once doesn't get betrayed by its chosen strongman.

        The French Right does not play around. I knew two young Frenchman who lived and worked cheek by jowl, and in a reasonably friendly fashion, despite the fact that they were both well aware that the grandfather of one had been assassinated at the direct order of the grandfather if the other.

        And Algeria was the cause.
        , @Pericles
        OK, OK. I see that Wikipedia even claims the Guardian (left) named Carlos (left) the Jackal (centrist). If so I got it backwards yet the phenomenon above recurs.

        Perhaps DoJ is a film best viewed in a theatre in Marseilles, so that afterwards one can walk out into the night and think of what might have been.
      167. @Rosie
        And what I ought to have added:

        The world doesn't care about what you do or don't want. If the policies you endorse will lead to women being chained to sinks and bedposts, and you don't care, then you are morally responsible for that outcome. This remains the case whether you desired that outcome or not.

        https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/trash-bin-babies-indias-female-infanticide-crisis/257672/

        Rosie logic – comments on Unz —-> Indian mums aborting their daughters.

        Before the Interwebs existed, Hindu widows were sometimes (it wasn’t the rule by any means) burned alive on their husband’s funeral pyre. A Scottish guy (with British soldiers) stopped it.

        “Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs”

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)

        Anyone (I don’t know your views) who supports abortion as practiced now, where babies are killed because mum just doesn’t fancy it (or for Muh Career like Michelle Williams) can’t have any issue with abortion because you want a boy. It’s funny how the “right to choose” and “every child a wanted child” goes out of the window when girls are getting the wrong end of the stick. Do they suffer more than boys when being scraped out or injected?

        • Replies: @Rosie

        A Scottish guy (with British soldiers) stopped it.
         
        Relevance?

        Unz logic: It's ok for me to be a jerk because other men are even bigger jerks, and White men sometimes tell them to stop.

        Seriously, is that your argument?


        Rosie logic – comments on Unz —-> Indian mums aborting their daughters.
         
        It's consummately rational to look at societies that have the kinds of policies our resident Unz misogynists have and see what kinds of consequences one might expect.

        Women are so debased and powerless in these places that their own mothers see no point in their continued existence. The result is misery for everyone, as females become scarce commodities and men live without hope of ever finding wives.

        Now that people don't believe in God, surely you're not stupid enough to believe that a normal, healthy sex ratio would be expected in a society where men hold all the power and all the wealth.
      168. @YetAnotherAnon
        "On the horizon: a movement for Spinster Positivity"

        It sort-of exists, in the form of Gateway Women, a site (and meetups, local groups etc) for women who are childless and never wanted to end up that way. Founded by an attractive Brit called Jody Day.

        Some of the members are tragic medical cases where they couldn't physically have kids (imagine having a hysterectomy at 19, for example), but the majority are ladies who went for higher education, then THE CAREER ('plenty of time for marriage and babies') and fun (maybe an abortion) and travel, until the clock started to run down, IVF failed, and they end up like the founder:

        "It was February 2009 and, at 44-and-a-half, she had left a bad long-term relationship and moved into a grotty London flat. “I was standing by the window, watching the rain make dusty tracks down the glass, when the traffic in the street below seemed to go silent, as if I’d put it on ‘mute’. In that moment, I became acutely aware of myself, almost as if I were an observer of the scene from outside my body. And then it came to me: it’s over. I’m never going to have a baby.”"
         
        https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2017/oct/02/the-desire-to-have-a-child-never-goes-away-how-the-involuntarily-childless-are-forming-a-new-movement

        Now a lot of these women have partners, but the point of her organisation is to help women to come to terms with their state and make the best of a bad job. Praiseworthy, but my one grouch is that she should devote at least some of her time and undoubted skills to telling women a few more facts of life about fertility. It's not too difficult to get pregnant at 39 when you've already had 3 kids in the last 10 years, not so if you've never had one.

        This is the kind of person who ends up writing a sad letter to Gateway Women.

        39 is not the best time to be thinking about having your first child.

        https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2020/jan/17/boyfriend-dont-want-children-not-sure

        I love my boyfriend very much. We live together and get along really well. The thing is he doesn’t want children and has been open about that from the start. At the beginning, I told him I felt the same but was secretly hoping he’d change his mind. I’m still not sure if I do want kids myself. My friends think I’m just trying to convince myself that I’ll be OK without having children. I’m not so sure, but the window for me to have them is fast closing (I’m 39). What should I do?

        Some of the comments are like seeing evolution take place in real time, btw. Because Africans are having billions of kids (no one actually says this of course, it’s “crowded world” and “overpopulation”), then educated English girls shouldn’t.

        “does the world really need another human?”

        “Having children is just adding to the climate crisis. It is both irresponsible to the child and to the planet.”

        “The biggest contribution you can make to minimise global warming (even more than becoming vegan) is not to have children.”

      169. @donvonburg
        In only tangentially related news, screen personality of television, cinema and "other media" (she co-starred with both Tommy Lee and Bret Michaels, who oddly enough will be appearing at the same venue in many cities on a heavy rock shed tour shortly) Pamela Anderson has married once again, for the fifth time, at 52, to Jon Peters, 22 years older than she.

        How many times was Liz Taylor married at 52? Anderson may well equal her record yet.

        I think that there should be a finite number of times anyone can get married, whether the marriages end in death or divorce to the other party.

        The Orthodox Church used to limit a person to three marriages.

        • Replies: @donvonburg
        The Orthodox have some good ideas. Most religions have at least one good idea, in the sense that it is something that serves a purpose.

        Three is probably a good limit. Anyone can make one mistake, and I do not believe that practically speaking people should be expected to throw their lives away in a bad marriage.

        Consider the case of Johnny and June Carter Cash. They were both married to someone else, but it would be a hardened person indeed to say that theirs was a marriage forever sinful and wrong. Johnny took care of his first wife, she was well provided for, and Johnny and June had several good decades together. Sinatra was a different case, although he also took good care of his first wife: Ava Gardner was a Jezebel and Mia Farrow was way too different in age, and Sinatra was notoriously promiscuous throughout his life until he became impotent. People who know him were not shocked when Farrow claimed that he could have sired her son Ronan, although it would have been at about the time he was known to have been put out of the 'game'.

        Most good churches are pretty careful about marrying someone who has had one divorce and quite skeptical about the person with two. At some point, they'll be told to go to the courthouse and have a civil ceremony, because the church doesn't want anything to do with this.

        Pam Anderson has a good body, but she also has the mind of a turnip. I haven't heard much about her kids but given that both she and Tommy Lee are basically dim bulbs, I wouldn't much hold out hope for them.
      170. @nebulafox
        Oh, I don't doubt a lot of men will DATE woke women: everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed. Marrying them is another story.

        To be honest, though, I've never understood people who place political criterion as a major factor in selecting a mate. I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree? Especially consider that it is really more like pro sports than anything else now: 99% of Americans have no practical influence on how this country is governed.

        I can’t agree to disagree with my mate because I need to be able to have respect for her. If I can’t have an intelligent conversation with her because she’s a flake, it will never work. No matter how well I get along with them for other reasons, I don’t want to be thinking in the back of my mind, “Man is she stupid. Whatever, just smile and nod.” That’s not a relationship.

        Political views shouldn’t be at a sports level. Granted I acknowledge your point, that their’s no changing anything. It should be an expression of something deeper. My political views which I am passionate about come from my strong morals. Stealing is wrong, therefore socialism is wrong. While everyone agrees with the first, only an idiot would not see the correlation between the two. My philosophy is, if people aren’t hurting you, then leave them alone. How do I agree to disagree, with that? So I humbly leave them alone and let them live their life in peace, while their philosophy is that they are so smart they have a right to run my life and turn me into a slave to fund their lives, and their little pat themselves on the back, feel good pet projects.. It seems a little easier for them to agree to disagree, than it does for me. I leave them alone and I’m their play thing. Nope, I’m not going to make that compromise. It’s like a woman is getting raped and she says, “Stop, you have no right to do this to me.” The rapist says, “Well, now lets try to be civil. I understand that people are different, and I don’t want to fight about this. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.”

        I want a partner that has deep morals. I can’t stand shallow surface people. I can even forgive to a certain extent people that lack the mental capacity to understand complex issues, and are easy prey for the political system to manipulate. But I still wouldn’t want to spend my life with one of them.

        Sports teams, sure. I’ll agree to disagree. Ice cream flavors, pizza toppings, what should we watch tonight? Yeah, whatever. I won’t think less of them as a person. I think that as a white male you are guilty for the sins of your ancestors and you should submit to me in all things as payment for the crimes they committed, you racist, sexist, pig. And I will agree to have sex with you, but if I change my mind afterwards, or you ever cross me, you will also be a rapist. Hmm, well shoot. I guess I don’t really see it that way, but I’d hate to sound disagreeable. OK, I yield. Lets just get back to the things that actually matter. Now I’ve got to go fix the car, and the leaky roof, plow the driveway, figure out why that breaker’s been blowing, and all that other stuff that I have to do, not because I’m a man of course, but because you conveniently don’t know how to. Then I’ll come in cook dinner, clean the house, wash the dishes and do the laundry, and raise the kids, because it would be to sexist for me to expect you to do those things. And you’re clearly already too busy liking Bernie memes on Facebook and shaving your head because your rainbow hair wasn’t extreme enough. Your mission to change the world is obviously more important.

        But hey, it’s just politics. Packers vs Bears, tomato tomato. No biggie. Sounds like a great life. You can do what you like. But hopefully you better understand why some people use politics as a major criterion for dating.

        And if a girl had no political views whatsoever. And they just stay out of it entirely. I would have no problem with that. Just not their thing, but they aren’t participating in robbing me. I can fully respect them.

      171. @SunBakedSuburb
        "false rape accusations, they're a huge risk"

        Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk. That is, if you have normal and honorable intentions. Be patient. Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice. That energy makes a dude dumb and desperate. And chix can smell male desperation from across the room. The primal drive in women is much more sophisticated than what men can muster.

        “Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk.”

        That was his whole point. Dating woke women is not smart selection of women. They are too high risk, so he is being smart and not selecting them. Woke women are into the false rape accusations. Not selecting them seems like a smart criterion.

      172. @Homeschooling Mom in NY
        Politics is a good proxy for general decision making. When you are raising a family, there are some (many?) things you just can’t agree to disagree. The choices are mutually exclusive. One has to lose. Do we homeschool? Vaccinate? Are we OK with Junior being gay? How much media is OK?

        Exactly. It’s easy to agree to disagree when you’re 20 and life’s a party. Once you live together, and start taking on responsibility together, start building a life together, everything changes.

      173. @jim jones
        My Filipino neighbour asked me what I thought about Meghan, Knowing that he is a regular Church attendee I told him that she was from a trashy family with drug and gambling problems. Surprisingly this satisfied him and stopped him going off on a "racist" tirade.

        you island people always looking for approval by asians I noticed BTW whats with the curly hairs on the family of leeches

      174. @AnotherDad

        This is weird. Most people, male and female, would take someone saying they wouldn’t date someone from (X) group with a shrug, and maybe make a mental note that maybe group (X) and group (Y) aren’t compatible, and act accordingly.
         
        Excellent point, Jesse.

        Beyond the personal this pries open a couple more levels.

        1) The gist of modern feminism is
        Women are entitled to what they want. Men are not entitled to even pursue what they want. Men exist to provide goodies--modern civilization, technology, protection, support--to women.

        Women are "heroines" pursuing their desires--career achievement, "sexual experimentation" (i.e. sluthood), atheletic accomplishment, military career, divorce, eat-pray-love, political power--especially if they eschew "traditional" roles.

        Men aren't suppose to have any independent desires regarding women, mating, marriage, family. Their role is to "support women".


        2) But beyond modern feminism, this is the gist of the entire minoritarian project.
        White gentiles are not entitled to have or even want anything of their own. Not country clubs, not schools, not neighbors, not nations. And that includes their own history, their own drama as Fox is pointing out. (You must not golf without me!)

        Exactly analogous to feminism's attitude toward men, under minoritarianism white gentiles exist to provide goodies--civilized nations, looting opportunities for the middle men and rent seekers, welfare, white women--to minorities.

        And the sort of normal "Ok, we don't belong together", live-and-let-live common sense you propose sends minoritarians into fits of sputtering rage--"racism!", "xenophobia!" "white supremacy!" "white nationalism!", "Nazi!".

        But the moral hideousness of the whole minoritarian tyranny, is demonstrated by simply pointing this out: "Separate nations" or more basically "Just leave us alone! ... we aren't your slaves!"

        I’m so old that I remember when the left criticized imperialists for drawing the map in Africa to form multi-tribal countries that ignored tribal and ethnic need for self-determination in separate nations.

      175. @Torn and Frayed
        No, no , no. You have this totally wrong. Day of the Jackal starts with an historically accurate assassination attempt by the OAS (Organisation Armée Secrète) which was an extreme right terrorist group formed out of the humiliating loss of Algeria. In 1959, the "Generals Uprising" in Algeria led to the fall of the Fourth Republic and the extra-constitutional installation of Charles de Gaulle as President. De Gaulle eventually stabbed the Generals in the back by attempting to withdraw from Algeria and the OAS was born. The main story from Day of the Jackal is fictional and in fact the assassin is non-ideological. But having the OAS hire him is completely historically coherent.

        Correct. I long for the day when the French army pulls off something similar and then for once doesn’t get betrayed by its chosen strongman.

        The French Right does not play around. I knew two young Frenchman who lived and worked cheek by jowl, and in a reasonably friendly fashion, despite the fact that they were both well aware that the grandfather of one had been assassinated at the direct order of the grandfather if the other.

        And Algeria was the cause.

        • Replies: @Anonymous
        Many people regret the courage of de Gaulle's chauffeur and the hydropneumatic suspension of his Citroen limousine on that day.
      176. @guest
        We're not talking politics as such, but wokeness specifically. Which so far as it exists beyond passing fashion is a big red flag.

        Politics like entertainment or sports fandom is one thing. But politics also can be a key to who one is.

        Also, agreeing to disagree often results in suppression of belief in favor of a perverse form of manners. Which I believe is one reason nonsense like feminism and SJWism have been allowed to flourish. Because regular folk privatize their politics and stop indoctrinating and proselytizing.

        We’re not talking politics as such, but wokeness specifically

        Good point.

        There is difference between someone with whom you have to share close quarters, as at a workplace (among other possible social, quasi-social, or non-social circles, forced association by circumstance), who is [1.] on “the Left” but quiet and polite about it, and [2.] the SJW, who may not even care about politics as such but is interested in moral crusading against any handy target, often for attention.

        This latter type is generally a woman, but never anything but a malcontented minority. Often with pre-existing grievances against (in the workplace context) management or their wages or boredom (attention seekers).

        The hijacking of things by this latter type, and the inability to stop them, is a common problem in many kinds of offices today, and of course the seeping of that culture into other fields is a common theme at this blog. It’s hard to see an “in-system” solution in which all can keep their dignity.

      177. I’ve always found women to be extremely malleable when it comes to politics. As soon as she meets a stable guy the politics often gets tossed out the window or suppressed. I’ve seen this with my college daughter and her beau, she was into Hillary for a while and now shes bragging about his Duramax truck and the gun range.

        • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
        • Replies: @dfordoom

        I’ve always found women to be extremely malleable when it comes to politics. As soon as she meets a stable guy the politics often gets tossed out the window or suppressed.
         
        That can happen, if the guy has a strong enough personality.

        Years ago I had a friend (a lesbian feminist female friend) who used to say that in every relationship one person is the hammer and one person is the anvil. You just better make damned sure you're the hammer.

        If you're in a relationship with a woman this is something you need to remember. If you're not the hammer, she will be. These days a lot of men either choose to be the anvil, or they don't think it's important (because equality) and pretty soon they discover that they've become the anvil anyway.

        My friend was of course speaking in purely psychological terms, as I am.
        , @nebulafox
        I've noticed that when a woman is really into you, she'll excuse and rationalize a lot of your behavior, way beyond petty comments her friends wouldn't approve of.

        That, and motherhood *really* tends to change things for them, even moreso than fatherhood does for men. The degree to which they will fight ruthlessly for the perceived interests of their children, come hell or high water, is truly amazing. (Other people's children is a different story, aka, SWPL-ism in a nutshell.)
      178. @Anon
        They're just unstable. Unstable women always grab the microphone, so they're overrepresented in social media. Social media gives them the attention they crave, so they never shut up.

        Social media gives them the attention they crave

        Sydney Watson, an Australian dissident-right social media personality (70k followers) (she has been interviewed on Red Ice and is an ethnonationalist, even if she might not use that exact term), yesterday tweeted out what I think can fairly be classified as “attention seeking.”

        She tweeted a picture of herself, which I’ll put below the [MORE] button below. The look-at-me!-style tweet was as lightly dressed up in political rhetoric as her body was lightly dressed up in a piece of cloth. (It is Australian midsummer, but she was indoors; anyway, the pic combined with the contents of the Tweet are — judge for yourself.)

        I don’t regularly follow her, but did across the tweet somehow. She is known, recently (or maybe always, I don’t know) for tweet-complaining about only finding ‘soyboy’ losers to date and not real men, things to that effect. Yesterday’s risque-pic tweet, though, is on the next level.

        I admit to being disappointed by it, for exactly the reason you, and others, have expressed in this comment thread.

        On further reflection, I’m not so sure. There is a fine line between humanizing herself, giving unto Social Media Caesar what is Social Media Caesar’s, and falling into the “attention seeker” trap. What she is doing is playing with fire, and who knows if she can handle it. (I don’t believe she was “in it for attention” alone, when she started out.)

        Sydney Watson
        @SydneyLWatson

        I love it when feminists tell me I’m critical of feminism for male attention.

        Yeah, okay. You got me. Because, of course, that’s the ONLY reason men might be interested in me.

        [Risque ‘selfie’ of herself on a bed, lightly clothed; see below]

        – 795 replies (almost all some degree of embarrassing; male repliers fawning over her)
        – 410 retweets
        – 6,900 likes

        (Simple thought experiment: What if she was your daughter/sister/future wife? How would you feel about her posting the below with the attached pic and getting hundreds of messages from random men who want to get to know her.)

        This is the selfie she posted:

        [MORE]

        • Replies: @dfordoom

        Simple thought experiment: What if she was your daughter/sister/future wife? How would you feel about her posting the below with the attached pic
         
        She's fully clothed. She's being playfully sexy. Because, you know, she's a woman and women like doing that.

        I loathe the selfie/smartphone/twitter culture but it's pretty much a G-rated picture.

        And she's enjoying herself thinking about feminist heads exploding.

        You go girl.
      179. The word “irrespective” means saying or doing something without taking anything else into account.

        At the risk of splitting hairs, this is not what “irrespective” actually means, and her context is off base which she uses it:
        https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/irrespective-of
        https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/irrespective

        This is common for all of the woke generation with an axe to grind. It’s as dumb as the Antifa morons not understanding that fascism and national socialism are only “right wing” if you are a Marxist/communist.
        The word needed for her example, is “regardless”:
        https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/english/regardless
        https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/regardless

        Splitting hairs, I know, but the proper use of irrespective changes the context of Fox’s comment, and renders her diatribe meaningless. Does she pretend to be edumacated?

      180. @Rosie
        And what I ought to have added:

        The world doesn't care about what you do or don't want. If the policies you endorse will lead to women being chained to sinks and bedposts, and you don't care, then you are morally responsible for that outcome. This remains the case whether you desired that outcome or not.

        https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/trash-bin-babies-indias-female-infanticide-crisis/257672/

        Aborting / killing young girls increases the value of girls and women overall in the sexual marketplace… and yields a bunch of lonely, angry incels because there are fewer women to go around.

        It seems like a good idea to individual families but it ends up making their sons’ lives harder… so it’s not as pro male as it appears on the surface.

        • Replies: @Rosie

        Aborting / killing young girls increases the value of girls and women overall in the sexual marketplace… and yields a bunch of lonely, angry incels because there are fewer women to go around.

        It seems like a good idea to individual families but it ends up making their sons’ lives harder… so it’s not as pro male as it appears on the surface.
         
        You're right that it's terrible for men, but it's no better for women. Human trafficking is a huge problem in India. Girls are also poached from neighboring Nepal, birthplace of the Buddha, both for forced marriage and brothel prostitution. The lack of women creates a huge market for this.
      181. @The Wild Geese Howard

        This might be one of the best bits of practical advice I’ve seen on the internet (even more crucial than my own “beware of bangs”).
         
        You are far too kind, my friend.

        I would only add that horse-loving women are even worse.

        Young men should know that - she will never love anything more than her horse. If you choose to pursue a relationship with a horse-loving woman, you can plan on going deeply into debt to pay for the maintenance of the horse in the finest style.

        Here endeth the lessson.

        Well, most girls have their first orgasm while cantering – a little known fact that makes young women “horse crazy.”

        But, agree; single women in their 30’s with a pitbull, or horse, an aversion to guns, whispering “patriarchy/white privilege,” during cocktails/drinks or boasting about not believing in God – list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)….are the many Red Flags that I have warned my sons about. However, one of them has a paramour who is only mildly liberal and not a raging misandrist – she knows I would never accept/like her if that was the case.

        • Replies: @Hail

        boasting about not believing in God
         
        I have a hard time imagining this in practice.

        Someone doing this would be essentially religiously attacking a person; "You believe in God? Hah! That is so stupid; I am so much smarter...".

        That sounds like a sociopath, or a bad drunk.
        , @AnotherDad

        list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)
         
        Don't be such a wallflower Lagertha ... give us the list. You likely have some items i've missed. I'll point my son at it.
      182. @Old Palo Altan
        Correct. I long for the day when the French army pulls off something similar and then for once doesn't get betrayed by its chosen strongman.

        The French Right does not play around. I knew two young Frenchman who lived and worked cheek by jowl, and in a reasonably friendly fashion, despite the fact that they were both well aware that the grandfather of one had been assassinated at the direct order of the grandfather if the other.

        And Algeria was the cause.

        Many people regret the courage of de Gaulle’s chauffeur and the hydropneumatic suspension of his Citroen limousine on that day.

      183. @Lot
        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”

        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. And I think most of us have observed the problems in marriages where the woman’s career takes off and the husband’s doesn’t. It doesn’t always end in divorce, but it almost always causes serious issues. (Exceptions are often where the woman is obviously the alpha in personality from the start, and the husband is relatively good looking, secure, genial, and type-B.)


        “Ergo, women having economic opportunities is a bad thing”

        It some sense, yes. It would be better for both sexes if the gender pay ratios returned to mid-20th century levels.

        However, I don’t think right wing men generally want the government to *outlaw* equal pay for women, but rather return it to a free market. I think I can speak for them in saying we want the government to stop actively promoting this trend by:

        1. Encouraging credentialism that disproportionately benefits women.

        2. Taxing and overegulating private sector industries with high male pay to subsidize our bloated gov and gov-funded sectors, especially local governments and Big Ed, which are female dominated.

        3. Imposing quotas and affirmative action on the economy, sometimes directly and sometimes by fear of lawsuits.

        The White Sharia and Incel types are noisy beyond their numbers because of the Mom’s basement factor. You rub people the wrong way sometimes by implying this is the dominant view of conservative men.

        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”

        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. …

        Lot this is a terrific comment end to end. Your analysis of the facts on the ground and what sort of corrections a reasonable conservative who values our ancient Anglo-Saxon liberties would like–excellent. (I think you and I agree on some pro-family-formation tax policies that would be part of the larger mix as well.)

        It’s good to have the gals on here. I’m glad they are here–even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. What matters is Rosie’s feelings. She really does not believe in female hypergamy–Cinderella, romance novels, and the female behavior we’ve all observed at least since high school be damned. (AFAIK, she does believe in the male analog: men liking young fertile women, T+A .)

        And basic logic like saying “female careerism is having negative effects on marriage and white fertility” does not imply “I want to ban female employment or careerism”–is just irrelevant. Rosie knows what you want–women chained up … between the sink and the bedpost.

        If you didn’t know better you might venture that her arguing style is very … uh … “feminine”.

        • Replies: @Lot
        Thanks for the kind word.

        “ It’s good to have the gals on here. I’m glad they are here–even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. ”

        I also like her and hope the “far right” tries harder to avoid sausage festdom. Steve does his part here by taking a hard line on profanity and racial slurs while otherwise moderating with a light touch.

        Rosie’s unfortunately now stuck in a cycle of showing she’s easy to bait, and then getting trolled.

        She says we don’t push back at the White Sharia and Incel crowd. That’s just not true. I don’t push back at obvious jokes, but I’ve told Whiskey many times he’s nuts and his “white woman all want dark meat” thing is both factually wrong and offensive.
        , @Rosie

        If you didn’t know better you might venture that her arguing style is very … uh … “feminine”.
         
        Aw Schucks! I think that's the first time anyone around here has called me "feminine"! I suppose I'll take it as a compliment.


        It’s good to have the gals on here. I’m glad they are here–even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. What matters is Rosie’s feelings. She really does not believe in female hypergamy–Cinderella, romance novels, and the female behavior we’ve all observed at least since high school be damned. (AFAIK, she does believe in the male analog: men liking young fertile women, T+A .)
         
        You're confused. I don't accept your version of the facts. That doesn't mean I don't care about facts.

        Now, about "female hypergamy":

        Yes, we fantasize about Prince Charming. I have never denied this. What I deny is that female hypergamy, to the extent, such a thing can be said to exist, is any more responsible for the decline of marriage than what you correctly call "the male analog" (men insisting on pursuing women who are out of their league).

        I don't deny the claim that women prefer higher status mates when they can get them, but I do reject the claim that women refuse to settle for less. And the facts are on my side, not yours.

        And basic logic like saying “female careerism is having negative effects on marriage and white fertility” does not imply “I want to ban female employment or careerism”–is just irrelevant.
         
        You're just bringing it up apropos of nothing, then? That maybe true for you, but I doubt it is true for most.

        Now, about "female careerism." I still haven't seen any evidence, despite my repeated requests for same, that careerist women, rather than commitment-shy men, are gumming up the marriage works.

        And please, spare me the sob story about "divorce rape."
      184. @dfordoom

        As if it’s that simple to tell if she’s “troubled” from a brief interaction.
         
        It's usually not that difficult to tell right away. The secret is not to let lust get the better of you. Talk to her for a while before you start lusting after her. Yes, she might be really hot and she might have legs that go all the way up and everything but for God's sake talk to her first.

        And, maybe, just maybe, it isn't a good idea to jump straight into the sack with her before you figure out what makes her tick. You know there was a time when people thought it wasn't compulsory to have sex first and then get to know the person. Once you've had sex you're going to find it more difficult to do what you should have done first if you'd bothered to look for the warning signs - run away.

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you're sure he's not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.

        In my experience first impressions are always correct. After the first conversation you know if you're dealing with trouble. The women (and the men) who are trouble usually have immense difficulty in concealing their craziness or their obnoxiousness.

        I can recall a date with a very attractive very hot and apparently charming young lady. After half an hour's conversation I realised the wisest thing to do was to back slowly away without making eye contact, and then go home and burn her phone number so I'd never be tempted. Maybe I missed out on some hot sex (she was crazy enough that it probably would have been hot) but I also avoided a whole world of hurt and aggravation.

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.

        Holy cow. How about “wait until you are married”.

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman’s mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        • Replies: @nebulafox
        >Holy cow. How about “wait until you are married”.

        Yeah, good luck with that.
        , @dfordoom

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman’s mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.
         
        Possibly true, but it wasn't what we were talking about. I was merely talking about getting an idea of what a person is like before going to bed with them, rather than after going to bed with them as many people seem to do.

        I was assuming we lived in the real world where pre-marital sex, however heinous you might think it, happens. If it's going to happen, at least take some very basic precautions to preserve your sanity.

        How about “wait until you are married”.
         
        A fine idea I'm sure but that train left the station about 60 years ago. You're not going to get that toothpaste back in the tube. The best we can hope for is for people to exercise the very small amount of restraint involved in spending enough time talking to the person first to establish that they're not about to leap into bed with a psycho or a crazed harridan.
        , @Lagertha
        I agree that it is worse for women, however, it is good for young women (and men) to know what sex is and do it a few times/a few years before they marry - some relationships don't work, and ultimately, one will. The emotional part overwhelming the physical attraction is the long-sought harmony.

        I told my sons that casual sex is not good, but not the end-of-the-world, or shameful. However, not every HS kid is told about the mechanics of sex. I was lucky: I found a great book (illustrations that were amazing) that describes everything, to give to my sons - their dad did not feel up to talking about sex at their youngish age. This book made the rounds in town.

        Part of the problem with Millennials & Gen Z is that no one, absolutely no one talks to them about the plumbing, mechanics, propulsion of sex, the nuts and bolts. So, there is a lot of disappointment, embarrassment and fear over performance for both parties which can carry on for a lifetime. I consider myself lucky that I tangled with a master of his domain at 22 (he was 23) who taught me everything, but most importantly, to not be inhibited.

        OK, gotta go watch TV!
        , @Rosie

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman’s mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.
         
        If premarital sex is harmful, it should be criminalized and subject to constitutional requirements of equal protection and due process of law.

        Maybe if men have to face the music, they'll at least learn to keep their mouths shut. I suspect they won't importune women for sex as much either. I figure at least half the fun is bragging to your friends about how you secured and then betrayed someone's, to their great detriment according to your own premises.
        , @dfordoom

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women.
         
        You'd need to prove that casual sex actually is harmful. I understand that you disapprove it and I respect your right to disapprove of it, but before you start trying to persuade others to your point of view you need to prove that your point of view is valid.

        You'd also need to prove that casual sex really is much more harmful to women.

        You may well be correct, but I'd like to see some evidence. Until then I'll maintain a healthy scepticism but if you can come up with some real evidence I'll listen.

        The New Puritanism on the Dissident Right seems to be driven partly by a desire to return to Christian morality, and the problem with that is that Christians are a minority who do not have the right to impose their moral views on non-Christians. But I fear that the Dissident Right New Puritanism is driven mostly by anger and resentment towards women, and by the same factors that fuelled the Old Puritanism - fear of women, fear of female sexuality and fear and guilt about their own desires to have sex with women.

        I'm not convinced that premarital sex is necessarily harmful but I am pretty sure that Puritanism is harmful. It always has been in the past.
      185. @Lagertha
        Well, most girls have their first orgasm while cantering - a little known fact that makes young women "horse crazy."

        But, agree; single women in their 30's with a pitbull, or horse, an aversion to guns, whispering "patriarchy/white privilege," during cocktails/drinks or boasting about not believing in God - list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)....are the many Red Flags that I have warned my sons about. However, one of them has a paramour who is only mildly liberal and not a raging misandrist - she knows I would never accept/like her if that was the case.

        boasting about not believing in God

        I have a hard time imagining this in practice.

        Someone doing this would be essentially religiously attacking a person; “You believe in God? Hah! That is so stupid; I am so much smarter…”.

        That sounds like a sociopath, or a bad drunk.

        • Replies: @Lagertha
        Millennial women are very, very angry, and they love to brag about not being religious. I am around a lot of this age group. It is a type of hysteria, and, I honestly don't know the solution to this. I am just trying to protect my sons and persuade them to avoid these types of women at all costs.
      186. @Lagertha
        Well, most girls have their first orgasm while cantering - a little known fact that makes young women "horse crazy."

        But, agree; single women in their 30's with a pitbull, or horse, an aversion to guns, whispering "patriarchy/white privilege," during cocktails/drinks or boasting about not believing in God - list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)....are the many Red Flags that I have warned my sons about. However, one of them has a paramour who is only mildly liberal and not a raging misandrist - she knows I would never accept/like her if that was the case.

        list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)

        Don’t be such a wallflower Lagertha … give us the list. You likely have some items i’ve missed. I’ll point my son at it.

        • Replies: @Lagertha
        ok, might not get to it tonight....but, love yah, darlin'.

        Tomorrow is more likely, as I have to watch some TV now, & cuddle with another one of my dying dogs. But, I guarantee, this list is good, and for any of you who are widowers or divorced, it might be a refresher course - I am all about living your life as long as you can with a companion - no one should be alone.

        Because I am not fond of women (most of you know this) and, I have sons (who are surrounded by 80% SJW/20% normal, healthy women), I want them to avoid the really awful women if they choose to marry an American (I prefer Baltic women & Japanese for them)...but mothers can't always get what they want for their children!
      187. @Days of Broken Arrows
        Gen X-ers grew up in the 1980s and 1990s thinking that people at the turn of the last century were crazy to think women were "hysterical" and emotionally unstable.

        The along came social media and Internet articles where women exposed their inner thoughts. All of a sudden those ideas didn't seem so wacky.

        Women might be winning various battles with hashtag activism and articles like this. But the cumulative effect is that we're now starting to view women them like people did 100 years ago. The article posted above reads like it was written from inside an insane asylum by someone who sees a completely different world than well-adjusted people.

        That thought hit me when I saw the infamous ‘Trigglypuff’ video a few years ago.

        This is was what the Victorians called ‘hysteria’.

      188. @Linden Arden
        I've always found women to be extremely malleable when it comes to politics. As soon as she meets a stable guy the politics often gets tossed out the window or suppressed. I've seen this with my college daughter and her beau, she was into Hillary for a while and now shes bragging about his Duramax truck and the gun range.

        I’ve always found women to be extremely malleable when it comes to politics. As soon as she meets a stable guy the politics often gets tossed out the window or suppressed.

        That can happen, if the guy has a strong enough personality.

        Years ago I had a friend (a lesbian feminist female friend) who used to say that in every relationship one person is the hammer and one person is the anvil. You just better make damned sure you’re the hammer.

        If you’re in a relationship with a woman this is something you need to remember. If you’re not the hammer, she will be. These days a lot of men either choose to be the anvil, or they don’t think it’s important (because equality) and pretty soon they discover that they’ve become the anvil anyway.

        My friend was of course speaking in purely psychological terms, as I am.

      189. @Rosie
        And what I ought to have added:

        The world doesn't care about what you do or don't want. If the policies you endorse will lead to women being chained to sinks and bedposts, and you don't care, then you are morally responsible for that outcome. This remains the case whether you desired that outcome or not.

        https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/05/trash-bin-babies-indias-female-infanticide-crisis/257672/

        In China, it is common for rural bachelors made single by female infanticides to import a wife from abroad. This is nothing new: their rural Japanese, Korean and Taiwanese counterparts have been doing this for decades. Vietnam is an especially popular choice because of cultural similarities, proximity, and the resulting children being able to pass off as Japanese/Korean/Chinese. (Filipinas are also common. I suspect Indonesians would be as well if it weren’t for the Islam factor.) I don’t know how scalable it is going to be in China’s case-suspect there are still going to be a lot of pissed off young men-but they at least do have that option.

        I don’t see this working in India, though: the country just isn’t affluent enough to attract foreign brides. Combine this with the other pressures brought on by overpopulation, from strained water resources (and to the northwest, they are competing with another nuclear power for that) to an economy where young people basically have to grift in order to stand any chance at getting a job, and you understand why the code wallahs are willing to put with what they do to get out.

      190. @Hail

        Social media gives them the attention they crave
         
        Sydney Watson, an Australian dissident-right social media personality (70k followers) (she has been interviewed on Red Ice and is an ethnonationalist, even if she might not use that exact term), yesterday tweeted out what I think can fairly be classified as "attention seeking."

        She tweeted a picture of herself, which I'll put below the [MORE] button below. The look-at-me!-style tweet was as lightly dressed up in political rhetoric as her body was lightly dressed up in a piece of cloth. (It is Australian midsummer, but she was indoors; anyway, the pic combined with the contents of the Tweet are -- judge for yourself.)

        I don't regularly follow her, but did across the tweet somehow. She is known, recently (or maybe always, I don't know) for tweet-complaining about only finding 'soyboy' losers to date and not real men, things to that effect. Yesterday's risque-pic tweet, though, is on the next level.

        I admit to being disappointed by it, for exactly the reason you, and others, have expressed in this comment thread.

        On further reflection, I'm not so sure. There is a fine line between humanizing herself, giving unto Social Media Caesar what is Social Media Caesar's, and falling into the "attention seeker" trap. What she is doing is playing with fire, and who knows if she can handle it. (I don't believe she was "in it for attention" alone, when she started out.)

        Sydney Watson
        @SydneyLWatson

        I love it when feminists tell me I'm critical of feminism for male attention.

        Yeah, okay. You got me. Because, of course, that's the ONLY reason men might be interested in me.

        [Risque 'selfie' of herself on a bed, lightly clothed; see below]
         
        - 795 replies (almost all some degree of embarrassing; male repliers fawning over her)
        - 410 retweets
        - 6,900 likes

        (Simple thought experiment: What if she was your daughter/sister/future wife? How would you feel about her posting the below with the attached pic and getting hundreds of messages from random men who want to get to know her.)

        This is the selfie she posted:

        https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EPAwhlYXkAANFhp.jpg

        https://twitter.com/SydneyLWatson/status/1220528864092479494

        Simple thought experiment: What if she was your daughter/sister/future wife? How would you feel about her posting the below with the attached pic

        She’s fully clothed. She’s being playfully sexy. Because, you know, she’s a woman and women like doing that.

        I loathe the selfie/smartphone/twitter culture but it’s pretty much a G-rated picture.

        And she’s enjoying herself thinking about feminist heads exploding.

        You go girl.

        • Agree: Lot
        • Replies: @Lot
        The most objectionable part of that photo is her excessive piercings, including what appears to be a bar under her shoulder skin. Hurts her purely physically attractiveness only a little, and might increase it for other men.

        Badly damages her ability to get a high status husband.
      191. @AnotherDad

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.
         
        Holy cow. How about "wait until you are married".

        Casual sex isn't good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman's mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        >Holy cow. How about “wait until you are married”.

        Yeah, good luck with that.

      192. @Linden Arden
        I've always found women to be extremely malleable when it comes to politics. As soon as she meets a stable guy the politics often gets tossed out the window or suppressed. I've seen this with my college daughter and her beau, she was into Hillary for a while and now shes bragging about his Duramax truck and the gun range.

        I’ve noticed that when a woman is really into you, she’ll excuse and rationalize a lot of your behavior, way beyond petty comments her friends wouldn’t approve of.

        That, and motherhood *really* tends to change things for them, even moreso than fatherhood does for men. The degree to which they will fight ruthlessly for the perceived interests of their children, come hell or high water, is truly amazing. (Other people’s children is a different story, aka, SWPL-ism in a nutshell.)

        • Replies: @Corn
        “That, and motherhood *really* tends to change things for them, even moreso than fatherhood does for men. The degree to which they will fight ruthlessly for the perceived interests of their children, come hell or high water, is truly amazing.”

        That reminds me of a comment posted at Z Man’s blog a few months ago. Commenter lives in a middle class neighborhood with some Jews. Jews belong to the Ellis Island cult... no immigration is bad immigration. Central Americans start mowing the lawns? Eh, someone has to do it. Wages falling for the blue collar folks? Well, times they are a changin’!

        Little Rajiv and Chang start outscoring their kids in school? Suddenly you had a neighborhood of Jewish borderhawks.
      193. @AnotherDad

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.
         
        Holy cow. How about "wait until you are married".

        Casual sex isn't good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman's mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman’s mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        Possibly true, but it wasn’t what we were talking about. I was merely talking about getting an idea of what a person is like before going to bed with them, rather than after going to bed with them as many people seem to do.

        I was assuming we lived in the real world where pre-marital sex, however heinous you might think it, happens. If it’s going to happen, at least take some very basic precautions to preserve your sanity.

        How about “wait until you are married”.

        A fine idea I’m sure but that train left the station about 60 years ago. You’re not going to get that toothpaste back in the tube. The best we can hope for is for people to exercise the very small amount of restraint involved in spending enough time talking to the person first to establish that they’re not about to leap into bed with a psycho or a crazed harridan.

      194. @AnotherDad

        list is long (I can give the younger dudes, here, my complete list)
         
        Don't be such a wallflower Lagertha ... give us the list. You likely have some items i've missed. I'll point my son at it.

        ok, might not get to it tonight….but, love yah, darlin’.

        Tomorrow is more likely, as I have to watch some TV now, & cuddle with another one of my dying dogs. But, I guarantee, this list is good, and for any of you who are widowers or divorced, it might be a refresher course – I am all about living your life as long as you can with a companion – no one should be alone.

        Because I am not fond of women (most of you know this) and, I have sons (who are surrounded by 80% SJW/20% normal, healthy women), I want them to avoid the really awful women if they choose to marry an American (I prefer Baltic women & Japanese for them)…but mothers can’t always get what they want for their children!

      195. @AnotherDad

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.
         
        Holy cow. How about "wait until you are married".

        Casual sex isn't good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman's mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        I agree that it is worse for women, however, it is good for young women (and men) to know what sex is and do it a few times/a few years before they marry – some relationships don’t work, and ultimately, one will. The emotional part overwhelming the physical attraction is the long-sought harmony.

        I told my sons that casual sex is not good, but not the end-of-the-world, or shameful. However, not every HS kid is told about the mechanics of sex. I was lucky: I found a great book (illustrations that were amazing) that describes everything, to give to my sons – their dad did not feel up to talking about sex at their youngish age. This book made the rounds in town.

        Part of the problem with Millennials & Gen Z is that no one, absolutely no one talks to them about the plumbing, mechanics, propulsion of sex, the nuts and bolts. So, there is a lot of disappointment, embarrassment and fear over performance for both parties which can carry on for a lifetime. I consider myself lucky that I tangled with a master of his domain at 22 (he was 23) who taught me everything, but most importantly, to not be inhibited.

        OK, gotta go watch TV!

        • Replies: @dfordoom

        I told my sons that casual sex is not good, but not the end-of-the-world, or shameful.
         
        That seems pretty sensible.

        I'm dismayed by the rise of Puritanism in some sections of the dissident right.
      196. @Hail

        boasting about not believing in God
         
        I have a hard time imagining this in practice.

        Someone doing this would be essentially religiously attacking a person; "You believe in God? Hah! That is so stupid; I am so much smarter...".

        That sounds like a sociopath, or a bad drunk.

        Millennial women are very, very angry, and they love to brag about not being religious. I am around a lot of this age group. It is a type of hysteria, and, I honestly don’t know the solution to this. I am just trying to protect my sons and persuade them to avoid these types of women at all costs.

        • Replies: @Hail

        Millennial women are very, very angry
         
        Unfortunately, many are.

        One wonders why, considering how easy they have life in many ways. (I think I know why. They secretly want a more traditional arrangement but are stuck in the career-money-education hamster wheel.)

        One wonders why but one dares not ask or engage at all. What happens if you do? In most casual situations, walking away is possible, but when it's not, the situation is frankly dangerous, socially or financially: At work, one is almost best advised (as a few people in this long comment thread have) to not engage at all, as it is a lose-lose for a straight white male.

        The kind of woman (I'd say we have to using girl to denote their maturity level) you're talking about will find a way to escalate, make you the villain, make a likely-successful bid for sympathy from others around. "See how oppressed I am by Straight White Men."

        I wonder how many white men in the past five years (say) have been fired, or not promoted, or not hired at all, due specifically to SJW activism-drama.
        , @Lagertha
        will answer tmrw...
      197. @Lagertha
        Millennial women are very, very angry, and they love to brag about not being religious. I am around a lot of this age group. It is a type of hysteria, and, I honestly don't know the solution to this. I am just trying to protect my sons and persuade them to avoid these types of women at all costs.

        Millennial women are very, very angry

        Unfortunately, many are.

        One wonders why, considering how easy they have life in many ways. (I think I know why. They secretly want a more traditional arrangement but are stuck in the career-money-education hamster wheel.)

        One wonders why but one dares not ask or engage at all. What happens if you do? In most casual situations, walking away is possible, but when it’s not, the situation is frankly dangerous, socially or financially: At work, one is almost best advised (as a few people in this long comment thread have) to not engage at all, as it is a lose-lose for a straight white male.

        The kind of woman (I’d say we have to using girl to denote their maturity level) you’re talking about will find a way to escalate, make you the villain, make a likely-successful bid for sympathy from others around. “See how oppressed I am by Straight White Men.”

        I wonder how many white men in the past five years (say) have been fired, or not promoted, or not hired at all, due specifically to SJW activism-drama.

      198. @nebulafox
        I've noticed that when a woman is really into you, she'll excuse and rationalize a lot of your behavior, way beyond petty comments her friends wouldn't approve of.

        That, and motherhood *really* tends to change things for them, even moreso than fatherhood does for men. The degree to which they will fight ruthlessly for the perceived interests of their children, come hell or high water, is truly amazing. (Other people's children is a different story, aka, SWPL-ism in a nutshell.)

        “That, and motherhood *really* tends to change things for them, even moreso than fatherhood does for men. The degree to which they will fight ruthlessly for the perceived interests of their children, come hell or high water, is truly amazing.”

        That reminds me of a comment posted at Z Man’s blog a few months ago. Commenter lives in a middle class neighborhood with some Jews. Jews belong to the Ellis Island cult… no immigration is bad immigration. Central Americans start mowing the lawns? Eh, someone has to do it. Wages falling for the blue collar folks? Well, times they are a changin’!

        Little Rajiv and Chang start outscoring their kids in school? Suddenly you had a neighborhood of Jewish borderhawks.

      199. @dfordoom

        Simple thought experiment: What if she was your daughter/sister/future wife? How would you feel about her posting the below with the attached pic
         
        She's fully clothed. She's being playfully sexy. Because, you know, she's a woman and women like doing that.

        I loathe the selfie/smartphone/twitter culture but it's pretty much a G-rated picture.

        And she's enjoying herself thinking about feminist heads exploding.

        You go girl.

        The most objectionable part of that photo is her excessive piercings, including what appears to be a bar under her shoulder skin. Hurts her purely physically attractiveness only a little, and might increase it for other men.

        Badly damages her ability to get a high status husband.

      200. @YetAnotherAnon
        Rosie logic - comments on Unz ----> Indian mums aborting their daughters.

        Before the Interwebs existed, Hindu widows were sometimes (it wasn't the rule by any means) burned alive on their husband's funeral pyre. A Scottish guy (with British soldiers) stopped it.

        "Be it so. This burning of widows is your custom; prepare the funeral pile. But my nation has also a custom. When men burn women alive we hang them, and confiscate all their property. My carpenters shall therefore erect gibbets on which to hang all concerned when the widow is consumed. Let us all act according to national customs"

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sati_(practice)

        Anyone (I don't know your views) who supports abortion as practiced now, where babies are killed because mum just doesn't fancy it (or for Muh Career like Michelle Williams) can't have any issue with abortion because you want a boy. It's funny how the "right to choose" and "every child a wanted child" goes out of the window when girls are getting the wrong end of the stick. Do they suffer more than boys when being scraped out or injected?

        A Scottish guy (with British soldiers) stopped it.

        Relevance?

        Unz logic: It’s ok for me to be a jerk because other men are even bigger jerks, and White men sometimes tell them to stop.

        Seriously, is that your argument?

        Rosie logic – comments on Unz —-> Indian mums aborting their daughters.

        It’s consummately rational to look at societies that have the kinds of policies our resident Unz misogynists have and see what kinds of consequences one might expect.

        Women are so debased and powerless in these places that their own mothers see no point in their continued existence. The result is misery for everyone, as females become scarce commodities and men live without hope of ever finding wives.

        Now that people don’t believe in God, surely you’re not stupid enough to believe that a normal, healthy sex ratio would be expected in a society where men hold all the power and all the wealth.

        • Replies: @Nate7383
        It's easy to assume that these societies abort girls because they are sexist. And really they are, but not in the way you think. I'm not sure about India, but China's abortion of girls was caused by discrimination against men. In China men are required by law to support their parents as they get older, women are not. Parents can literally sue their sons, but not daughters, if they fail to maintain a high enough standard of living for their parents, even if it's detrimental to their son's standard of living. Since they were only allowed to have one child they would abort girls for another chance at a Chinese pension (a son). Having laws forcing men to do something that women are not forced to do is sexist and discriminatory against men. They are basically legally enslaved by their parents. Women have the privilege of not being financially enslaved to their parents by law. So if both of these overreaching government policies didn't exist in the first place then the girls would not have been aborted at a higher rate. Or if the women were discriminated against equally, then it would not have happened either.

        I don't know the details, but I'm willing to bet that something similar is occurring in India. Just assuming that these societies don't respect women doesn't really get to the bottom of the true causes to these issues. It is ironic that discrimination against men leads to discrimination against women. But that's the real cause. And there certainly are others. Now that China has overturned their one child policy it will likely start to reverse the abortion ratio. But not entirely due to the male enslavement laws.
      201. @vhrm
        Aborting / killing young girls increases the value of girls and women overall in the sexual marketplace... and yields a bunch of lonely, angry incels because there are fewer women to go around.

        It seems like a good idea to individual families but it ends up making their sons' lives harder... so it's not as pro male as it appears on the surface.

        Aborting / killing young girls increases the value of girls and women overall in the sexual marketplace… and yields a bunch of lonely, angry incels because there are fewer women to go around.

        It seems like a good idea to individual families but it ends up making their sons’ lives harder… so it’s not as pro male as it appears on the surface.

        You’re right that it’s terrible for men, but it’s no better for women. Human trafficking is a huge problem in India. Girls are also poached from neighboring Nepal, birthplace of the Buddha, both for forced marriage and brothel prostitution. The lack of women creates a huge market for this.

      202. @AnotherDad


        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”
         
        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. ...
         
        Lot this is a terrific comment end to end. Your analysis of the facts on the ground and what sort of corrections a reasonable conservative who values our ancient Anglo-Saxon liberties would like--excellent. (I think you and I agree on some pro-family-formation tax policies that would be part of the larger mix as well.)

        It's good to have the gals on here. I'm glad they are here--even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. What matters is Rosie's feelings. She really does not believe in female hypergamy--Cinderella, romance novels, and the female behavior we've all observed at least since high school be damned. (AFAIK, she does believe in the male analog: men liking young fertile women, T+A .)

        And basic logic like saying "female careerism is having negative effects on marriage and white fertility" does not imply "I want to ban female employment or careerism"--is just irrelevant. Rosie knows what you want--women chained up ... between the sink and the bedpost.

        If you didn't know better you might venture that her arguing style is very ... uh ... "feminine".

        Thanks for the kind word.

        “ It’s good to have the gals on here. I’m glad they are here–even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. ”

        I also like her and hope the “far right” tries harder to avoid sausage festdom. Steve does his part here by taking a hard line on profanity and racial slurs while otherwise moderating with a light touch.

        Rosie’s unfortunately now stuck in a cycle of showing she’s easy to bait, and then getting trolled.

        She says we don’t push back at the White Sharia and Incel crowd. That’s just not true. I don’t push back at obvious jokes, but I’ve told Whiskey many times he’s nuts and his “white woman all want dark meat” thing is both factually wrong and offensive.

        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        "Rosie’s unfortunately now stuck in a cycle of showing she’s easy to bait, and then getting trolled."

        Either that, or she's a much better-executed version of Corvinus. That thought has only just occurred to me, but there's some evidence to support it. A female Corvinus would trade on natural gallantry and the desire to have the distaff side 'on board' (or alternatively for the site not so be such a sausagefest).

        A man writing some of the stuff Rosie writes (e.g. if you disagree me on feminism you'll take us all straight back to some imagined nightmare state for women) would get ripped unmercifully, and then ignored if they persisted. At the other extreme, the same would happen to a man who advocated for a change to a Gorean world where women were only good for two things (although something like that world did actually exist when Genghis and Tamurlane were around).

        People are nice to Rosie.

        Just a theory.

        Btw, where's my favourite Finnish-extraction commenter lady, Lagertha? Hope she's OK.
      203. @AnotherDad


        “It’s a commonplace around here that women’s economic independence is responsible for declining marriage rates.”
         
        This is true as a factual matter, good or bad. Go ahead and ask women in polls: they don’t like dating and really don’t like marrying men with lower incomes and substantially lower education. ...
         
        Lot this is a terrific comment end to end. Your analysis of the facts on the ground and what sort of corrections a reasonable conservative who values our ancient Anglo-Saxon liberties would like--excellent. (I think you and I agree on some pro-family-formation tax policies that would be part of the larger mix as well.)

        It's good to have the gals on here. I'm glad they are here--even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. What matters is Rosie's feelings. She really does not believe in female hypergamy--Cinderella, romance novels, and the female behavior we've all observed at least since high school be damned. (AFAIK, she does believe in the male analog: men liking young fertile women, T+A .)

        And basic logic like saying "female careerism is having negative effects on marriage and white fertility" does not imply "I want to ban female employment or careerism"--is just irrelevant. Rosie knows what you want--women chained up ... between the sink and the bedpost.

        If you didn't know better you might venture that her arguing style is very ... uh ... "feminine".

        If you didn’t know better you might venture that her arguing style is very … uh … “feminine”.

        Aw Schucks! I think that’s the first time anyone around here has called me “feminine”! I suppose I’ll take it as a compliment.

        It’s good to have the gals on here. I’m glad they are here–even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. What matters is Rosie’s feelings. She really does not believe in female hypergamy–Cinderella, romance novels, and the female behavior we’ve all observed at least since high school be damned. (AFAIK, she does believe in the male analog: men liking young fertile women, T+A .)

        You’re confused. I don’t accept your version of the facts. That doesn’t mean I don’t care about facts.

        Now, about “female hypergamy”:

        Yes, we fantasize about Prince Charming. I have never denied this. What I deny is that female hypergamy, to the extent, such a thing can be said to exist, is any more responsible for the decline of marriage than what you correctly call “the male analog” (men insisting on pursuing women who are out of their league).

        I don’t deny the claim that women prefer higher status mates when they can get them, but I do reject the claim that women refuse to settle for less. And the facts are on my side, not yours.

        And basic logic like saying “female careerism is having negative effects on marriage and white fertility” does not imply “I want to ban female employment or careerism”–is just irrelevant.

        You’re just bringing it up apropos of nothing, then? That maybe true for you, but I doubt it is true for most.

        Now, about “female careerism.” I still haven’t seen any evidence, despite my repeated requests for same, that careerist women, rather than commitment-shy men, are gumming up the marriage works.

        And please, spare me the sob story about “divorce rape.”

      204. @AnotherDad

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.
         
        Holy cow. How about "wait until you are married".

        Casual sex isn't good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman's mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman’s mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        If premarital sex is harmful, it should be criminalized and subject to constitutional requirements of equal protection and due process of law.

        Maybe if men have to face the music, they’ll at least learn to keep their mouths shut. I suspect they won’t importune women for sex as much either. I figure at least half the fun is bragging to your friends about how you secured and then betrayed someone’s, to their great detriment according to your own premises.

        • Replies: @Rosie
        BTW, if premarital sex is so terrible for women's ability to bond, why is at that divorce risk is lowest when the partners are nearing thirty when they get married? Anybody know?

        https://ifstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/2006-101.png
      205. @Rosie

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman’s mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.
         
        If premarital sex is harmful, it should be criminalized and subject to constitutional requirements of equal protection and due process of law.

        Maybe if men have to face the music, they'll at least learn to keep their mouths shut. I suspect they won't importune women for sex as much either. I figure at least half the fun is bragging to your friends about how you secured and then betrayed someone's, to their great detriment according to your own premises.

        BTW, if premarital sex is so terrible for women’s ability to bond, why is at that divorce risk is lowest when the partners are nearing thirty when they get married? Anybody know?

        • Replies: @Nate7383
        Just because women are older doesn't necessarily mean more sex and sleeping around. Nor does youth necessarily mean that we should presume that they were virgins or only had a few partners. If you look for charts that compare the number of sexual partners prior to marriage to divorce rates, the correlation is completely clear with virgins having by far the lowest rates. Closely followed by women that only had one partner... and so on. The results are the same with men although slightly less correlated.

        I'm sure age of marriage is no doubt an important factor in divorce rates. But that doesn't mean it's the only one.
      206. @Lot
        Thanks for the kind word.

        “ It’s good to have the gals on here. I’m glad they are here–even Rosie. But the problem whenever Rosie gets wound up is that facts are irrelevant. ”

        I also like her and hope the “far right” tries harder to avoid sausage festdom. Steve does his part here by taking a hard line on profanity and racial slurs while otherwise moderating with a light touch.

        Rosie’s unfortunately now stuck in a cycle of showing she’s easy to bait, and then getting trolled.

        She says we don’t push back at the White Sharia and Incel crowd. That’s just not true. I don’t push back at obvious jokes, but I’ve told Whiskey many times he’s nuts and his “white woman all want dark meat” thing is both factually wrong and offensive.

        “Rosie’s unfortunately now stuck in a cycle of showing she’s easy to bait, and then getting trolled.”

        Either that, or she’s a much better-executed version of Corvinus. That thought has only just occurred to me, but there’s some evidence to support it. A female Corvinus would trade on natural gallantry and the desire to have the distaff side ‘on board’ (or alternatively for the site not so be such a sausagefest).

        A man writing some of the stuff Rosie writes (e.g. if you disagree me on feminism you’ll take us all straight back to some imagined nightmare state for women) would get ripped unmercifully, and then ignored if they persisted. At the other extreme, the same would happen to a man who advocated for a change to a Gorean world where women were only good for two things (although something like that world did actually exist when Genghis and Tamurlane were around).

        People are nice to Rosie.

        Just a theory.

        Btw, where’s my favourite Finnish-extraction commenter lady, Lagertha? Hope she’s OK.

        • Replies: @Rosie

        A man writing some of the stuff Rosie writes (e.g. if you disagree me on feminism you’ll take us all straight back to some imagined nightmare state for women)
         
        Groans.

        What is so complicated about this for you, YetAnotherAnon?

        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure women's well-being, or would be very harmful to women, as the case, may be.

        I don't like to argue about feminism, because noone will tell me what it means. I like to talk about policies and their reasonably foreseeable consequences. If you think I am being alarmist, fine. Tell me why. It's ridiculous to pretend that policies don't have consequences, and that they could be gravely harmful to women.
      207. @Lagertha
        I agree that it is worse for women, however, it is good for young women (and men) to know what sex is and do it a few times/a few years before they marry - some relationships don't work, and ultimately, one will. The emotional part overwhelming the physical attraction is the long-sought harmony.

        I told my sons that casual sex is not good, but not the end-of-the-world, or shameful. However, not every HS kid is told about the mechanics of sex. I was lucky: I found a great book (illustrations that were amazing) that describes everything, to give to my sons - their dad did not feel up to talking about sex at their youngish age. This book made the rounds in town.

        Part of the problem with Millennials & Gen Z is that no one, absolutely no one talks to them about the plumbing, mechanics, propulsion of sex, the nuts and bolts. So, there is a lot of disappointment, embarrassment and fear over performance for both parties which can carry on for a lifetime. I consider myself lucky that I tangled with a master of his domain at 22 (he was 23) who taught me everything, but most importantly, to not be inhibited.

        OK, gotta go watch TV!

        I told my sons that casual sex is not good, but not the end-of-the-world, or shameful.

        That seems pretty sensible.

        I’m dismayed by the rise of Puritanism in some sections of the dissident right.

        • Replies: @Lagertha
        Puritanism is dead, Whatever you mention, may not be valid. Young people know when to lie...it is the beauty and provenance of youth, today - 'shit happens,' is a popular term, for instance.
      208. @YetAnotherAnon
        "Rosie’s unfortunately now stuck in a cycle of showing she’s easy to bait, and then getting trolled."

        Either that, or she's a much better-executed version of Corvinus. That thought has only just occurred to me, but there's some evidence to support it. A female Corvinus would trade on natural gallantry and the desire to have the distaff side 'on board' (or alternatively for the site not so be such a sausagefest).

        A man writing some of the stuff Rosie writes (e.g. if you disagree me on feminism you'll take us all straight back to some imagined nightmare state for women) would get ripped unmercifully, and then ignored if they persisted. At the other extreme, the same would happen to a man who advocated for a change to a Gorean world where women were only good for two things (although something like that world did actually exist when Genghis and Tamurlane were around).

        People are nice to Rosie.

        Just a theory.

        Btw, where's my favourite Finnish-extraction commenter lady, Lagertha? Hope she's OK.

        A man writing some of the stuff Rosie writes (e.g. if you disagree me on feminism you’ll take us all straight back to some imagined nightmare state for women)

        Groans.

        What is so complicated about this for you, YetAnotherAnon?

        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure women’s well-being, or would be very harmful to women, as the case, may be.

        I don’t like to argue about feminism, because noone will tell me what it means. I like to talk about policies and their reasonably foreseeable consequences. If you think I am being alarmist, fine. Tell me why. It’s ridiculous to pretend that policies don’t have consequences, and that they could be gravely harmful to women.

        • Replies: @anon
        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure women’s well-being, or would be very harmful to women, as the case, may be.

        Ingroup preference on display. Simple word replacement makes this totally clear.

        "When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure black’s well-being, or would be very harmful to black people, as the case, may be."

        "When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure Muslim’s well-being, or would be very harmful to Muslims, as the case, may be."

        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure Jew's well-being, or would be very harmful to Jews, as the case, may be."

        This is tribalism. "Screw the rest of you, my group gets goodies!". This is the short-sighted mindset that is steadily destroying the civilization Rosie and her sisters rely on for their safety. This is the "gimme-gimme" mindset that has led to laws and policies that actively harm everyone in the long run, but benefit women in the short run. Like divorce laws that convert the family from a civilizational building block into a child-support subunit of the state; great fun for the 30-something divorcee who isn't haaaapy with the Beta she settled for, but not so great for the kids she's supposed to nurture, and can be deadly for the man disposed of. Divorced men are 4x more likely to suicide. Unlike divorced women who have no increased risk of suicide at all. Not a surprise, since women file 70% of divorces.

        It is Female chauvanism, no different in outcome than what the pink-hats screech in their marches.

        Or maybe just clever trolling after all. Either way it is a tribal mindset that is bad for the country.
      209. @dfordoom

        I told my sons that casual sex is not good, but not the end-of-the-world, or shameful.
         
        That seems pretty sensible.

        I'm dismayed by the rise of Puritanism in some sections of the dissident right.

        Puritanism is dead, Whatever you mention, may not be valid. Young people know when to lie…it is the beauty and provenance of youth, today – ‘shit happens,’ is a popular term, for instance.

      210. @Lagertha
        Millennial women are very, very angry, and they love to brag about not being religious. I am around a lot of this age group. It is a type of hysteria, and, I honestly don't know the solution to this. I am just trying to protect my sons and persuade them to avoid these types of women at all costs.

        will answer tmrw…

      211. @AnotherDad

        Incidentally exactly the same rules apply for women. Wait until you’re sure he’s not a fruitcake or a weirdo before you jump into bed with him.
         
        Holy cow. How about "wait until you are married".

        Casual sex isn't good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women. Men and women really are not the same. And both in terms of what happens to a woman's mate value and her sexual bonding to husband are much more degraded by pre-marital sex.

        Casual sex isn’t good for either sex of a civilized race. But casual sex is at least 10x, maybe 100x worse for women.

        You’d need to prove that casual sex actually is harmful. I understand that you disapprove it and I respect your right to disapprove of it, but before you start trying to persuade others to your point of view you need to prove that your point of view is valid.

        You’d also need to prove that casual sex really is much more harmful to women.

        You may well be correct, but I’d like to see some evidence. Until then I’ll maintain a healthy scepticism but if you can come up with some real evidence I’ll listen.

        The New Puritanism on the Dissident Right seems to be driven partly by a desire to return to Christian morality, and the problem with that is that Christians are a minority who do not have the right to impose their moral views on non-Christians. But I fear that the Dissident Right New Puritanism is driven mostly by anger and resentment towards women, and by the same factors that fuelled the Old Puritanism – fear of women, fear of female sexuality and fear and guilt about their own desires to have sex with women.

        I’m not convinced that premarital sex is necessarily harmful but I am pretty sure that Puritanism is harmful. It always has been in the past.

      212. @Numinous

        calling the inclusion of a Sikh soldier in Sam Mendes’ film 1917 “incongruous”
         
        Why would this be incongruous? About a million Indians fought for the Allies, both in the trenches and in the Middle East. A good chunk of them were Sikhs.

        The film is about the Devonshire regiment. Even today, Devon is extremely undiverse.

        Back in 1917, the idea of a random Sikh in the regiment is unthinkable (even thirty years later there were fewer than 5,000 non-whites in the whole country).

        Fox is completely right about this incongruous anachronism.

      213. @Torn and Frayed
        No, no , no. You have this totally wrong. Day of the Jackal starts with an historically accurate assassination attempt by the OAS (Organisation Armée Secrète) which was an extreme right terrorist group formed out of the humiliating loss of Algeria. In 1959, the "Generals Uprising" in Algeria led to the fall of the Fourth Republic and the extra-constitutional installation of Charles de Gaulle as President. De Gaulle eventually stabbed the Generals in the back by attempting to withdraw from Algeria and the OAS was born. The main story from Day of the Jackal is fictional and in fact the assassin is non-ideological. But having the OAS hire him is completely historically coherent.

        OK, OK. I see that Wikipedia even claims the Guardian (left) named Carlos (left) the Jackal (centrist). If so I got it backwards yet the phenomenon above recurs.

        Perhaps DoJ is a film best viewed in a theatre in Marseilles, so that afterwards one can walk out into the night and think of what might have been.

      214. @dfordoom

        The process seems kind of familiar. Real criminal is marxist-leninist, book criminal is far right
         
        But isn't Frederick Forsyth, author of the book, pretty right-wing? In fact, very right-wing?

        Perhaps compared to other journalists, but from what I can see at Wikipedia Forsyth politically seems like a fairly standard center-right Boomer (“… In 2003, he criticised “gay-bashers in the churches” in The Guardian newspaper … In 2016, he said he was giving up writing thrillers because his wife had told him he was too old to travel to dangerous places.”) Though maybe one without a lot of colonial guilt? (Klaxon sounds.)

      215. @SunBakedSuburb
        "false rape accusations, they're a huge risk"

        Lookit, if you are smart in your selection of women this would never be a risk. That is, if you have normal and honorable intentions. Be patient. Masturbate instead of finding a troubled woman who would be willing to be a one night receptacle for your demon juice. That energy makes a dude dumb and desperate. And chix can smell male desperation from across the room. The primal drive in women is much more sophisticated than what men can muster.

        Be patient. Masturbate instead …

        No, that’s wrong. Don’t do that.

        Genesis 38:8-10 ESV / 31 helpful votes

        Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

        • Replies: @dfordoom


        Be patient. Masturbate instead …
         
        No, that’s wrong. Don’t do that.

        Genesis 38:8-10 ESV / 31 helpful votes

        Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.
         
        So the solution for sex-starved men is to have sex with their sisters-in-law?

        Christian morality is so much better than what we have today. Masturbation is wicked. Incest is moral.
      216. @David Davenport
        Be patient. Masturbate instead ...

        No, that's wrong. Don't do that.

        Genesis 38:8-10 ESV / 31 helpful votes

        Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother's wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

        Be patient. Masturbate instead …

        No, that’s wrong. Don’t do that.

        Genesis 38:8-10 ESV / 31 helpful votes

        Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.

        So the solution for sex-starved men is to have sex with their sisters-in-law?

        Christian morality is so much better than what we have today. Masturbation is wicked. Incest is moral.

        • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
        No one seems to be getting the point here. Onan was presumably slain for not giving his widowed sister-in-law children to inherit her late husband's property, not for spilling his seed on the ground - that was merely the method by which Onan avoided giving her kids.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levirate_marriage#Judaism

        If God killed everyone who spilled their seed outside the vagina, most males would die in their teens.
      217. “but in their fantasies they’re racial warriors.”

        The percentage of men that would actually sit around thinking that is so small that it’s effectively zero. There might be a 1000 people in the entire country that think of themselves as race warriors. Maybe there’s even 10,000 that would join the KKK, neo-Nazi movements. They are such a fringe elements that it barely exists. They are anything but the norm. No one gives a crap about race. Liberals are the true racist that can’t stop talking about it, or thinking in terms of anything but. Racism had been dead for 50 years, until it was revived by people such as yourself. You are truly out of touch with reality, if you believe that’s what the majority of white men are sitting around fantasizing about. Being, “racial warriors.” Give me a break. You may only be able to see the world in terms of a race. But you’re projecting that on to everyone else. Race is a non issue. As a white male that works in construction, with tons of different people, 99% male, and 70% white. I’ve never come across a man that refused to work with any other race, or a woman. I’ve worked with 1000’s of people, and never came across an actual racists. And if men are truly all racists, there would have been no reason to hide it. It’s a complete delusion in your fantasy world. You don’t know enough about actual men to have any idea what we’re fantasizing about. Nobody wants to exterminate other races.

        • Replies: @dfordoom

        Racism had been dead for 50 years, until it was revived by people such as yourself. You are truly out of touch with reality, if you believe that’s what the majority of white men are sitting around fantasizing about. Being, “racial warriors.” Give me a break. You may only be able to see the world in terms of a race.
         
        Go back and read what I actually wrote. That's exactly the point I was making. I was talking about dissident rightists, not white men in general. Dissident rightists (a minority so small as to be statistically unmeasurable) fantasise about being race warriors because they're obsessed with race.

        The other 99% of white men have zero interest in being race warriors. I'm with the 99% on this issue. I think race is an irrelevant distraction.
      218. @Rosie
        BTW, if premarital sex is so terrible for women's ability to bond, why is at that divorce risk is lowest when the partners are nearing thirty when they get married? Anybody know?

        https://ifstudies.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/2006-101.png

        Just because women are older doesn’t necessarily mean more sex and sleeping around. Nor does youth necessarily mean that we should presume that they were virgins or only had a few partners. If you look for charts that compare the number of sexual partners prior to marriage to divorce rates, the correlation is completely clear with virgins having by far the lowest rates. Closely followed by women that only had one partner… and so on. The results are the same with men although slightly less correlated.

        I’m sure age of marriage is no doubt an important factor in divorce rates. But that doesn’t mean it’s the only one.

      219. @Rosie

        A Scottish guy (with British soldiers) stopped it.
         
        Relevance?

        Unz logic: It's ok for me to be a jerk because other men are even bigger jerks, and White men sometimes tell them to stop.

        Seriously, is that your argument?


        Rosie logic – comments on Unz —-> Indian mums aborting their daughters.
         
        It's consummately rational to look at societies that have the kinds of policies our resident Unz misogynists have and see what kinds of consequences one might expect.

        Women are so debased and powerless in these places that their own mothers see no point in their continued existence. The result is misery for everyone, as females become scarce commodities and men live without hope of ever finding wives.

        Now that people don't believe in God, surely you're not stupid enough to believe that a normal, healthy sex ratio would be expected in a society where men hold all the power and all the wealth.

        It’s easy to assume that these societies abort girls because they are sexist. And really they are, but not in the way you think. I’m not sure about India, but China’s abortion of girls was caused by discrimination against men. In China men are required by law to support their parents as they get older, women are not. Parents can literally sue their sons, but not daughters, if they fail to maintain a high enough standard of living for their parents, even if it’s detrimental to their son’s standard of living. Since they were only allowed to have one child they would abort girls for another chance at a Chinese pension (a son). Having laws forcing men to do something that women are not forced to do is sexist and discriminatory against men. They are basically legally enslaved by their parents. Women have the privilege of not being financially enslaved to their parents by law. So if both of these overreaching government policies didn’t exist in the first place then the girls would not have been aborted at a higher rate. Or if the women were discriminated against equally, then it would not have happened either.

        I don’t know the details, but I’m willing to bet that something similar is occurring in India. Just assuming that these societies don’t respect women doesn’t really get to the bottom of the true causes to these issues. It is ironic that discrimination against men leads to discrimination against women. But that’s the real cause. And there certainly are others. Now that China has overturned their one child policy it will likely start to reverse the abortion ratio. But not entirely due to the male enslavement laws.

      220. anon[515] • Disclaimer says:
        @Rosie

        A man writing some of the stuff Rosie writes (e.g. if you disagree me on feminism you’ll take us all straight back to some imagined nightmare state for women)
         
        Groans.

        What is so complicated about this for you, YetAnotherAnon?

        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure women's well-being, or would be very harmful to women, as the case, may be.

        I don't like to argue about feminism, because noone will tell me what it means. I like to talk about policies and their reasonably foreseeable consequences. If you think I am being alarmist, fine. Tell me why. It's ridiculous to pretend that policies don't have consequences, and that they could be gravely harmful to women.

        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure women’s well-being, or would be very harmful to women, as the case, may be.

        Ingroup preference on display. Simple word replacement makes this totally clear.

        “When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure black’s well-being, or would be very harmful to black people, as the case, may be.”

        “When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure Muslim’s well-being, or would be very harmful to Muslims, as the case, may be.”

        When I argue for or against a particular policy proposition, it is because I believe it is necessary to secure Jew’s well-being, or would be very harmful to Jews, as the case, may be.”

        This is tribalism. “Screw the rest of you, my group gets goodies!”. This is the short-sighted mindset that is steadily destroying the civilization Rosie and her sisters rely on for their safety. This is the “gimme-gimme” mindset that has led to laws and policies that actively harm everyone in the long run, but benefit women in the short run. Like divorce laws that convert the family from a civilizational building block into a child-support subunit of the state; great fun for the 30-something divorcee who isn’t haaaapy with the Beta she settled for, but not so great for the kids she’s supposed to nurture, and can be deadly for the man disposed of. Divorced men are 4x more likely to suicide. Unlike divorced women who have no increased risk of suicide at all. Not a surprise, since women file 70% of divorces.

        It is Female chauvanism, no different in outcome than what the pink-hats screech in their marches.

        Or maybe just clever trolling after all. Either way it is a tribal mindset that is bad for the country.

      221. @Nate7383
        "but in their fantasies they’re racial warriors."

        The percentage of men that would actually sit around thinking that is so small that it's effectively zero. There might be a 1000 people in the entire country that think of themselves as race warriors. Maybe there's even 10,000 that would join the KKK, neo-Nazi movements. They are such a fringe elements that it barely exists. They are anything but the norm. No one gives a crap about race. Liberals are the true racist that can't stop talking about it, or thinking in terms of anything but. Racism had been dead for 50 years, until it was revived by people such as yourself. You are truly out of touch with reality, if you believe that's what the majority of white men are sitting around fantasizing about. Being, "racial warriors." Give me a break. You may only be able to see the world in terms of a race. But you're projecting that on to everyone else. Race is a non issue. As a white male that works in construction, with tons of different people, 99% male, and 70% white. I've never come across a man that refused to work with any other race, or a woman. I've worked with 1000's of people, and never came across an actual racists. And if men are truly all racists, there would have been no reason to hide it. It's a complete delusion in your fantasy world. You don't know enough about actual men to have any idea what we're fantasizing about. Nobody wants to exterminate other races.

        Racism had been dead for 50 years, until it was revived by people such as yourself. You are truly out of touch with reality, if you believe that’s what the majority of white men are sitting around fantasizing about. Being, “racial warriors.” Give me a break. You may only be able to see the world in terms of a race.

        Go back and read what I actually wrote. That’s exactly the point I was making. I was talking about dissident rightists, not white men in general. Dissident rightists (a minority so small as to be statistically unmeasurable) fantasise about being race warriors because they’re obsessed with race.

        The other 99% of white men have zero interest in being race warriors. I’m with the 99% on this issue. I think race is an irrelevant distraction.

        • Replies: @Nate7383
        Sorry, my mistake. I actually got mixed up thinking that was a comment Rosie made, when I saw the @Rosie at the top out of the corner of my eye. And I combined it with everything she had written before.

        So yes, I guess we made the same point.
      222. @RichardTaylor

        everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed
         
        Anyone ever seen an attractive feminist? Beyond that, I suspect this is a bit of an urban legend. Proceed with caution. Because if you ever make money later on, she'll reframe the issue to sue you.

        I suppose on an absolute basics level, it could be useful to detect compatibility, but beyond that, whatever happened to agreeing to disagree?
         
        You can't be serious. I think you are failing to understand this is not the Boomer politics of old, say like tax rates. This is more RACIAL and involves a basic loyalty or disloyalty to your own people. They are proud to be disloyal. They want White men who denigrate their own identity.


        everybody seems to agree that the super feminist chicks tend to be a real submissive hoot to have in bed

        Anyone ever seen an attractive feminist? Beyond that, I suspect this is a bit of an urban legend. Proceed with caution. Because if you ever make money later on, she’ll reframe the issue to sue you.

        Just watch one of those consent videos where consent is needed before sitting on the same couch, then asking if it’s OK to move closer, closer still… asking to kiss, asking between kisses… That’s feminist sex, sounds like a real hoot!

      223. @dfordoom

        Racism had been dead for 50 years, until it was revived by people such as yourself. You are truly out of touch with reality, if you believe that’s what the majority of white men are sitting around fantasizing about. Being, “racial warriors.” Give me a break. You may only be able to see the world in terms of a race.
         
        Go back and read what I actually wrote. That's exactly the point I was making. I was talking about dissident rightists, not white men in general. Dissident rightists (a minority so small as to be statistically unmeasurable) fantasise about being race warriors because they're obsessed with race.

        The other 99% of white men have zero interest in being race warriors. I'm with the 99% on this issue. I think race is an irrelevant distraction.

        Sorry, my mistake. I actually got mixed up thinking that was a comment Rosie made, when I saw the at the top out of the corner of my eye. And I combined it with everything she had written before.

        So yes, I guess we made the same point.

      224. @dfordoom


        Be patient. Masturbate instead …
         
        No, that’s wrong. Don’t do that.

        Genesis 38:8-10 ESV / 31 helpful votes

        Then Judah said to Onan, “Go in to your brother’s wife and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother.” But Onan knew that the offspring would not be his. So whenever he went in to his brother’s wife he would waste the semen on the ground, so as not to give offspring to his brother. And what he did was wicked in the sight of the Lord, and he put him to death also.
         
        So the solution for sex-starved men is to have sex with their sisters-in-law?

        Christian morality is so much better than what we have today. Masturbation is wicked. Incest is moral.

        No one seems to be getting the point here. Onan was presumably slain for not giving his widowed sister-in-law children to inherit her late husband’s property, not for spilling his seed on the ground – that was merely the method by which Onan avoided giving her kids.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levirate_marriage#Judaism

        If God killed everyone who spilled their seed outside the vagina, most males would die in their teens.

        • Replies: @donvonburg

        No one seems to be getting the point here. Onan was presumably slain for not giving his widowed sister-in-law children to inherit her late husband’s property, not for spilling his seed on the ground – that was merely the method by which Onan avoided giving her kids.
         
        Right. If Onan sired a child by her, the child was his brother's heir and got the inheritance, and would provide for the widow in her old age. A childless woman was often condemned to poverty in her old age. Her children, particularly her sons, were her retirement plan. Onan would get the inheritance if she did not have a child, so he took his pleasure with her but pulled out and ejaculated on the ground.

        Of course, we know now that coitus interruptus doesn't work very well, (it's better than nothing) but it's the intent that counts. There is legitimate debate as to whether Onan was an allegorical figure or an actual one, but the story's purpose is simple and clear. God hates those who take advantage of widows, of the less fortunate, and those who use other people for their own devious ends.

        The story is not meant to be prurient. Particularly in the Old Testament, sex is discussed bluntly because it is an integral part of the human experience. We are given rules for it, and they get more strict as we go from Genesis through the rest of the Torah (the first five books), through the major and minor prophets and in the New Testament. Probably no man who ever lived, with the possible exception of Genghis Khan, had sex with as many different women than Solomon, but it did not make him happy. He had 700 wives and 300 concubines, if he serviced one a night every night without fail, it would take him longer than the presidency of John Fitzgerald Kennedy to make the rounds. (No one takes the claims of Wilt Chamberlain seriously.)
      225. @Philip Owen
        The Orthodox Church used to limit a person to three marriages.

        The Orthodox have some good ideas. Most religions have at least one good idea, in the sense that it is something that serves a purpose.

        Three is probably a good limit. Anyone can make one mistake, and I do not believe that practically speaking people should be expected to throw their lives away in a bad marriage.

        Consider the case of Johnny and June Carter Cash. They were both married to someone else, but it would be a hardened person indeed to say that theirs was a marriage forever sinful and wrong. Johnny took care of his first wife, she was well provided for, and Johnny and June had several good decades together. Sinatra was a different case, although he also took good care of his first wife: Ava Gardner was a Jezebel and Mia Farrow was way too different in age, and Sinatra was notoriously promiscuous throughout his life until he became impotent. People who know him were not shocked when Farrow claimed that he could have sired her son Ronan, although it would have been at about the time he was known to have been put out of the ‘game’.

        Most good churches are pretty careful about marrying someone who has had one divorce and quite skeptical about the person with two. At some point, they’ll be told to go to the courthouse and have a civil ceremony, because the church doesn’t want anything to do with this.

        Pam Anderson has a good body, but she also has the mind of a turnip. I haven’t heard much about her kids but given that both she and Tommy Lee are basically dim bulbs, I wouldn’t much hold out hope for them.

      226. @YetAnotherAnon
        No one seems to be getting the point here. Onan was presumably slain for not giving his widowed sister-in-law children to inherit her late husband's property, not for spilling his seed on the ground - that was merely the method by which Onan avoided giving her kids.

        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levirate_marriage#Judaism

        If God killed everyone who spilled their seed outside the vagina, most males would die in their teens.

        No one seems to be getting the point here. Onan was presumably slain for not giving his widowed sister-in-law children to inherit her late husband’s property, not for spilling his seed on the ground – that was merely the method by which Onan avoided giving her kids.

        Right. If Onan sired a child by her, the child was his brother’s heir and got the inheritance, and would provide for the widow in her old age. A childless woman was often condemned to poverty in her old age. Her children, particularly her sons, were her retirement plan. Onan would get the inheritance if she did not have a child, so he took his pleasure with her but pulled out and ejaculated on the ground.

        Of course, we know now that coitus interruptus doesn’t work very well, (it’s better than nothing) but it’s the intent that counts. There is legitimate debate as to whether Onan was an allegorical figure or an actual one, but the story’s purpose is simple and clear. God hates those who take advantage of widows, of the less fortunate, and those who use other people for their own devious ends.

        The story is not meant to be prurient. Particularly in the Old Testament, sex is discussed bluntly because it is an integral part of the human experience. We are given rules for it, and they get more strict as we go from Genesis through the rest of the Torah (the first five books), through the major and minor prophets and in the New Testament. Probably no man who ever lived, with the possible exception of Genghis Khan, had sex with as many different women than Solomon, but it did not make him happy. He had 700 wives and 300 concubines, if he serviced one a night every night without fail, it would take him longer than the presidency of John Fitzgerald Kennedy to make the rounds. (No one takes the claims of Wilt Chamberlain seriously.)

      Comments are closed.

      Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS