How Does The Raging Culture War Predict Our Sexual Future?

As I near the age when men traditionally begin families, I have become more pensive and observant. Many ideas that I once held have evolved, or sometimes completely reversed.  After observing, discussing, experiencing, and researching various severe failings and perverse ideologies and the general depravity of Western liberal democracies, which are declared to be the pinnacle of civilization, I pose the question: Where are we headed, and what will the future look like?



We are at a very dangerous time. Between financial insolvency, moral weakness, social instability, destruction of the traditional family, and political corruption, the West is almost certainly facing decline, having outlived its period of dominance that most major civilizations pass through. If the West has not already crossed the Rubicon, then it is dangerously close to the point of no return.

While incremental marginal changes are possible, the hardest thing to change is the general trend, and the trend is for fewer freedoms, less economic opportunity, a weaker currency, a declining moral compass, more hypergamy, slut acceptance, and the pervasiveness of masculine, tattooed up, large, bossy women. It will be difficult, if not impossible to reverse these trends. However, let’s consider where we are heading.

Women And Society


Throughout the entirety of human history, women have formed one half of the family unit. As man became civilized, he developed rituals and rules and routines which typically involved taking a life partner, as many other species in nature do. While I’m not convinced that humans are 100% biologically hardwired to accept pair bonding, the entirety of history would support this idea. While there were always cases on the fringes of promiscuity, premarital sex, and infidelity, it was also the rule throughout much if not all of this history, that families consisted of a man at the helm, and a younger, smaller, virginal, and submissive woman, who became the bearer of children, provided and cared for the family, and supported the husband, and was sexually restricted to only that man.

With the majority of marriages failing, we are literally destroying these natural structures. Families are no longer possible for the majority of people in the west, at least not without trying multiple times and dealing with the financial, emotional, and psychological damage that comes with failed marriage, divorce, and a lack of permanent pair-bonding. If the trends of feminism continue, society faces a future with loud, shrill, fat, manly, neon colored, sexualized women full of shrapnel and graffiti. What does this mean?

Valueless Sex


If it feels good, do it

Imagine a world where sex is completely valueless. I don’t mean unenjoyable—biological and instinctual programming built in to every one of us guarantees some level of sex drive and a pleasurable outcome to orgasm. But imagine a world where there was no plane to sex other than physical stimulation. No emotional component. No mental challenge. No sense of personal connection or intimacy. No sense of discrimination or “specialness.” No love. Sex would be freely offered daily with the same amount of thought given to a head nod and hello when passing someone on the street.

Upon first glance, some of you would no doubt say this sounds like a good bargain. If sex became more easily attainable, men could stop being frustrated with women and all the games we engage in to try to receive some pleasure from them. But consider this more deeply. Look at the end game. Fast forward not one generation, or two, but ten or twenty.

Already it is a common practice for pre-teens to exchange sexual photos of their bodies, if not engage in full sexual acts before leaving middle school. In high school many girls learn basic sex skills and by college they are so free and loose with their bodies that they become physically aged and degraded, not to mention losing the ability to pair bond with a life partner.

If you meet a 25-year-old woman today, she has likely performed more degrading and perverse sex acts than a married woman of a generation or two prior completed in her entire lifetime. If we consider the cases of sexting, camwhoring, slutification, Dubai-whoring, pre-marital sex, lack of shame or self confidence, and project a few generations in the future, we have a very scary society.

Future Projection


Our future society, if it does not collapse, would likely have sexual intercourse offered so freely and easily that it would be rendered valueless.  Remember, in 2016 women are already pulling out a telephone, swiping their finger across it a few times, and then waiting for a stranger to come over to their place and bang them. The ease and ubiquitousness of sex in the future will be orders of magnitude greater.

While this could be enjoyable in the short run, perhaps even for a number of years, where does this hollow and empty interaction lead? Women lose the ability to pair bond after taking multiple sexual partners. In the future, as girls become sexually used up, perhaps before even reaching their teenage years, and sex is reduced to a mere pleasure seeking action, ideas such as beauty, commitment, pride, and loyalty become meaningless for both sexes.

Why be loyal to a woman when you have a steady supply of vaginas? Why marry and commit to a man when it is more fun to focus on your career while hopping over the carousel?

Indeed, what do the sexes even mean at that point? Will we see an increase in trannies and gay sex and things that even today are too taboo?  Bestiality? If it’s only about the physical orgasm, then it seems these would do the job as well. Forming a family will be impossible. Even today, the only thing keeping the majority of reproduction going is the hard-wired biological drive of women that encourages them to conceive.

The majority of new births are already out-of-wedlock bastards. If it wasn’t for this biological drive, forcing single women to desire to reproduce, there would be far, far fewer births in the minority of households that have a traditional marriage. If this trend continues, I predict either the biological drive will change (things like technology can supersede this hard-wired drive—indeed smart phones can be as addictive as drugs or sex), and human reproduction will come to a standstill, or we will see a replacement of the family as the basic social unit, as the single mother becomes the dominant social form. The latter would likely lead to a matriarchal system where the government, forced to provide things a husband typically would, must rely on the labors of men to obtain resources needed to replace the missing husbands.

This may sound like a crazy idea, or an unlikely scenario, but if one rationally considers where the end of the long road we are heading on will lead, it is not a pretty place. The bottom line is that if women do not have their actions and behaviors controlled by men, then it is no exaggeration to say that we are facing the end of civilized society. Masculinity is the natural state of affairs throughout history. We are only attempting to reset things to their natural order, before feminism literally turns us until animals again.

Read More: 20 Signs That We’re Not Living In A Patriarchy

216 thoughts on “How Does The Raging Culture War Predict Our Sexual Future?”

  1. In your future prospective of 10 to 20 generations down the line you’re ignoring one quite possible and terrifying prospect – The unstoppable raging tide of Islam due to cucks and shitlibs just bending over, no time to even bite the pillow, cause Mohammed rapefugee is going in dry.

    1. While I certainly have no time for Islam or any religious fundamentalism, part of me wonders if we would not be way better off if the Islamic influence helped usher in a return to traditional gender roles.

      1. Its a double edged sword, but I suppose I’m personally biased due to the stories I’ve heard of what happened to my christian family who lived in the middle east. You don’t just lose shitlibbery and feminized men, you lose civilization as we currently understand it. Alexandria was called the Paris of the middle east in the 50s, now its a filthy shithole overrun with Arab Muslim peasants.

        1. This is correct. Basically, this would require either conversion or execution and afterwards life would be much like it is in, ya know, every other country run by the muz….1% of the people would be filthy rich and collecting patek phillipes and ferraris. 9% would be well to do clerics and the other 90% would be those filthy, over crowded, disgusting fucks that, were they not so dangerous to our way of life, we would be giving charity to.
          There is a reason that no muslim country has ever produced a single thing worth noting. Any scientific, architectural, philosophical, etc. etc. etc. advancement was done under the auspices of the Roman empire and since its fall there hasn’t been a single muslim to do anything of note with the exception of Moooohamid El-Clampett who found a bunch of liquid dinosaur under a pile of shit in the middle east.

        2. The kin folk said Mooooohamid move away from there. California’s the place you ought to be!

        3. Actually, many scholars are starting to contribute muslims to the discovery of Algebra. The word Algebra is derived from Al-Jabr. Also, if I am not mistaken Hospital and many surgical innovations was learned from their writings.

        4. This is correct. It’s not that Muslims are stupid. It is that when in power they are incredibly cruel towards intellectual curiosity. The Muslims who made strides in mathematics and in philosophy and in architecture did so because Greek and then Roman rule created an atmosphere where that was possible. There were some c
          Great Muslim mathematicians in Persia prior to the Muslim conquest. The problem is, once these shitheads get any kind of power they start beheading people who have new ideas

        5. Ok, I agree with that, it just in your comment you said that they never had any innovations worth noting. I just wanted to put out there that their culture has contributed something to modern society.

        6. To clarify: I meant that a Muslim nation has never produced anything. I am sure there are plenty of bright Muslims at MIT and elsewhere now and in history, but never under the repressive and intellectually stifling control that Muslims institute as soon as they are given power

        7. Um… last time I check the Arabs were a muslim nation, and they had pretty important innovations. Yes, under the current situation of the muslim state of affairs I don’t expect to see anything new now, so I agree with you on the present state of the muslims I just disagree with you when you say “in history” or compare them to other Ancient civilizations.

        8. The sad truth is that most of those intellectual Muslims were all wiped out when Genghis Khan came riding through the fertile crescent. It was a slaughter house that Saddam Hussein was still blaming for the problems of Iraq (when he was alive). This does not let current Muslims off the hook for failing as a culture and people to regroup and bring themselves back up, but it does explain a lot when a whole empire/culture has its intellectual elites decimated and warlords take over. The devastation of the Mongols was absolute… entire cities and all living occupants, human or animal, razed to the ground as a lesson in non-compliance. There is a reason why guys like Saddam and Ghadaffi were in power… that is who took over from the original elites of the Golden age. Again, that does not justifiy or condone anything, but it is interesting to contemplate as we wonder why The West is slowly destroying itself. Just look to the elites.

        9. Under which entrenched Muslim regime did an an Arab even figure out how to wipe his own ass. All the work done by great Muslim thinkers were done in places where Greeks and Roman’s laid the foundation.
          As soon as Muslims have any power they shut down any form of learning that might lead somewhere productive.
          Yes, some Arabs have been influential. Mostly in conquered territories where they weren’t allowed self governance and were forced to abide by a rule of law set down by civilized people. Maybe, maybe on the cusp of when they were first allowed self rule one or two snuck in. However, without being govened by Alexander (like his namesake city Kandahar) or some other European dynasty civilizing these barbarians, they few geniuses that are born slip through the cracks because they are never educated or wind up being killed

        10. Yes, as Alluded to in a post below, Kandahar was a city of great learning when it’s namesake. Alexander the Great, had a say in what went on. But give the sand people self governance for 2 generations and they are basically return to the state of nature.
          emperialism is shouted down by people as being so terrible, but empires from Ceaser straight through to when European countries raced to civilize the Caribbean have been bringing knowledge and culture to places in the world that would still be shitting on themselves if not for the influence of their colonial masters

        11. I don’t really make judgements as to “better” or “worse” as each society has its pros and cons. But I do view the Muslim world as about 500 years behind the western liberal democracies.

        12. It is true. I honestly believe that the religion is a huge problem. Catholics learned their lesson and stopped persecuting people like Galileo years ago and the church has been a huge supporter of art and literature (even when they were more medical) and the Vatican even has its own scientific laboratories and astronomers.
          The Jews have been teaching their children to question even the Torah since forever. The very heart of Judaism is to ask questions.
          Of the three major monotheistic religions which have shaped the world 2/3 have created the greatest of intellectual endeavors over the last 1500 years and 1/3 is still backwards, beheading anyone who questions rule of law and is basically working on the level of a bonobo.
          Earlier than that it was the Greeks and the Romans who made the world progress…mostly while putting these barbarians to the sword. Once they fell in line they were allowed to prosper and some of them turned out to be very smart, but as soon as they had political power that all went to shit

        13. as I noted in another post…in another article…if we ‘hated’ white Men hadn’t left Europe, the rest of the planet would be, at best, a bunch of Bronze Age civilizations where your only hope in life was to NOT get selected to be sacrificed in the temple by the priest-kings

        14. All this is true, but if you believe in cycles (check out the Theory of Generations by Strauss) then it only makes sense that Islam 1,300 years after its founding (founded around 700) would be having basically the same way that Christianity did 1,300 years after its founding (the Middle Ages).
          The majority of developments in the Christian world started occurring in the 1500s+. Islam is just approaching that time in its history.
          Also, taking a further step back, the purpose of both Christianity and Islam has the same basic goals in mind. There is a reason these religions exist, and while one can argue that Islam may be currently more “backward” or bad, one could also argue Islam is more successful at fulfilling its goals than Christianity is in 2016 (stability of the family, marital happiness, etc.)
          Are we to conclude that for some reason, there is a fundamental failure of Islam that makes it categorically flawed as compared to other religions, ie Christianity? Or are we to conclude that the same head chopping that occurred during the Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, and the Dark Ages is a parallel to what is occurring today in Islam?

        15. Strauss is a bag of human excrement. However, that doesn’t mean he is always wrong and in this case he happens tongue right. The problem is, it is far more complicated than that. There is younger sibling / victim mentality at play as well.

        16. This isn’t entirely right. There were many advances in the middle east before the rise of Islam. The Assyrians were at one point the most advanced civilization from a social, economic and scientific standpoint. Often times things that were attributed to Rome or Greece discovery was already discovered or invented there. But I digress, this was like 2000 BC-600 BC. Further on, anything that was considered an advancement in the shit hole of the middle east (post 700 AD) was attributed to Islam, despite often times the scientist/doctor/philosopher being religiously Christian or ethnically Assyrian/Persian/Armenian etc.

        17. “Islam may be currently more ‘backward’ or bad, one could also argue Islam is more successful at fulfilling its goals than Christianity is in 2016 (stability of the family, marital happiness, etc.)”
          Those aren’t the goals of either religion. The goal of Christianity is salvation through Christ so as to inherit eternal life, and maybe to preach the Gospel and make some converts along the way. Marriage and the family life isn’t even a required path much less the goal.
          The goal of Islam is to bring the entire world under the rule of Islam, as long as that agenda is being advanced, anything else goes (any method) because that’s what really pleases their god.
          The way you describe religion is what secularists think the purpose of religion is, and why, therefore, all religions are the same to them and should be treated the same.

        18. I mentioned, in another post here, ethnic Persians prior to Muslim conquest. I may have over stated (though not by a heck of a lot). The real heart of the issue is that it was never under Muslim rule

      2. If Hillary wins the 2016 election, I say bring on the Islamic caliphate. It will be the only way to restore patriarchy, and the return will be permanent. No more feminism, no more gay rights, no more transgender BS.

        1. Islam is like a roided dickless rat trying to imitate real manhood. That is how islamic patriarchy is to Christian Patriarchy.

        2. Christian patriarchy in the west is dead, and it doesn’t look like it’s ever coming back. I don’t want an Islamic caliphate if we can possibly avoid it, but barring a Trump win there aren’t many options.

  2. “While I’m not convinced that humans are 100% biologically hardwired to accept pair bonding, the entirety of history would support this idea.”
    Humans are not hard wired for very much. Our nature includes rampant promiscuous sex within the range of desired outcomes.
    Civilization is the story of us using our higher minds to fight our baser natures.
    Property rights conflict with our desire to take what we like, marriage conflicts with our desire to shag who we like. These and other concessions help us form civilizations, and the benefits outweigh the costs.
    We’ve had it so good in the West for so long that we’ve forgotten:
    1. Our civilization is good (and other arrangements are much, much worse)
    2. Our civilization is fragile
    The liberal leftoid lives in a fantasy world where somehow we (for the sake of argument) import savages with a hostile worldview, and yet he assumes that all the comfort and security he currently enjoys will continue unimpeded.

    1. Yes – part of Western civilization was an implicit agreement to allocate women equally through marriage in order to get full participation in civil life.

      1. Well said. Base word of ‘civilization’ is ‘civil’. That is also used in ‘civilized’.
        When women are not in ready supply or guaranteed…you get the Middle East. An angry, sexually frustrated band of animals that will kill you over nothing. Just look at prisons with no “conjugal visits”. Complete madhouses.
        That is what is happening to America. Women are allowed to fuck who they want….which as we are all aware will be the top 20% of men. This causes a shortage for the lower 80%. And they are incentive to end marriages….so no guarantee for the lower 80%. Hence why America has become such a violent place. Just look at the black population. In the past…marriage was held high for them. They were living the great life with the mom, kids, and grandmother that would cook good ass food and the grandfather that was funny as shit. Now, they have the highest single mother rate and the highest crime rate….anyone who can’t see the trend is blind.

        1. Walter Williams and others make it very clear that the black community was far stronger dealing with vicious racism than it has become with the compassion of the state. The state does not know compassion, it’s welfare has always been about breaking people. From the dawn of time the state breaks people by making them dependent. Breaks families. Breaks all allegiances to anything else but the state.
          The fedgov first targeted the native north american population, then it moved on to blacks, then lower class whites, now it’s moving against anyone left standing. The idea best I can tell is to break society and then rebuild it in a manner more acceptable to the state and those who control it.
          We are never supposed to look at what the state has done to society, but the problems there are with violence today are IMO attributable to many things the state has done to society. From the changes you point out with regards to men and women but also the medical and pharmaceutical cartels and more. We are just supposed to be ‘strong’ and deal with it. Not everyone is that strong. Some people break. The mass shootings are well below a six sigma rate, outlying reactions to the stresses imposed on society. Remove the stresses and they will go away. Instead it’s made about guns. The guns have always been there. We need to look at the variables that have changed.

    2. Reminds me of the quote “civilization is like a thin crust over a volcano” the left believes or more likely gains power through the belief that the crust is much thicker than it is and that the volcano is a myth. Reality can only be denied so long before it reasserts itself.

      1. I try to tell people this all the time. Most people, especially liberals, think progess is inherently linear. It’s not and it doesn’t take a whole lot to make a civilization crumble.

        1. The whole idea of “progress” is a myth. China, one of the oldest civilizations in the world, has developed a theory of ages, in which basically abundance follows misery and vice-versa (misery bringing war and abundance bringing first the higher achievments, and then decadency).
          The same idea of historical cycles was embraced and even deified by the Maya and Aztec peoples. Even our Roman and Greek cultural ancestors saw it as more truthful.
          “Progess” as it is discussed nowadays is nothing more than our own fascination with the improvements the Industrial Revolution brought (and even this era is now clearly over in most parts of the West).

        2. I must say I’m as dubious of the concept of “cycles” to history as the progessive scripture of progress’s linearity.
          If you look at a dog and cat from a very great distance, they look the same. Doesn’t mean they are other than in the most basic ways. Suggesting there’s a cycle to history suggests inevitability. Were that so, generations of men that we now respect and admire died essentially for nothing, despite all of their writings and inventions that expose their faith in a better world.
          Cyclical views of history never seem to show up when a civilisation is growing – has anyone ever wondered why?
          People who believe in cycles of history are tools of the elites, because such people always believe they’re on the cusp of a change and always believe shit is about to go south and they’re in that part of the cycle where it’s about to get exciting or better than them. The elites love that sort of thinking because it’s thinking that paralyses you into inaction: why fight or try to change things if the collapse is just round the corner and the elites will get theirs when it happens? Is it any surprise that heavily hierarchical societies such as the Mayans, Aztecs, and Chinese supported the idea of cycles – because it helped their elites keep the money and the power where it was?
          Civilisation is always tenuous and can always fall back into the abyss quickly. no fucking cycle required. A good resistant plague brings about chaos in under a year; the Spanish Flu killed 5% of the whole planet’s human population in 18 months. There’s no bloody cycle to that, it’s just a predator akin to floods, fires, crop failure, that men have always had to contend with. It’s our duty as men to hold it together and if necessary fight those changes that pessimists would call “inevitable”.

        3. I completely disagree with your aproach. One thing you are right: cycles are not concentric or even overlapping, as it would be impossible by the simple chaos of biological entities, geographical circumstances and the superior dynamics of culture, politics and/or religion.
          But noone is talking about that. We are focusing in excentric cycles, which are defined by the evolving ethos (called zeitgeist), each one branding a new age. Example: everyone knew America was on the rise when “Manifest Destiny” was proposed by O’Sullivan and others. Example 2: Pyrrhus understanding he had no future after the Battle of Asculum.
          It’s funny you say the theory of cycles is a tool of the elites. I say it is the opposite. It was Francis Fukuyama and his “death of History” who better embodied the ideal of a (in my view dystopic) future where nations, cultures and religions would be swallowed in a gigantical globalized pseudodemocratic (liberal democratic, SJW) “big brother”.
          You say a man loses his purpose when facing the ephemeral nature of his existance within a historical cycle. That is false! Major achievments are kept in memory and use, and our legacy is not endangered if our age is over. Rome fell, but latin languages are still spoken, and Cicero is still a good reading. But where is the Roman emperor now? Probably, you would identify him as either the Pope or Obama, but let’s face it, they are not “evolutions” of Caesar, only his reflex in a different historical cycle.
          Moreover, the perception that cycles are indeed active can work for anyone who wants to change history. The Aztecs believed they were living their last days when the Conquistadors arrived. And indeed they were. Many lives were saved by that (and I won’t discuss the end results). But that belief worked against their elites, as it had worked before in favour of the Muslims when expanding and so on.
          In conclusion, a cyclical history (which can be proved) seems more useful and thruthful than a static one (like Fukuyama thought of it) or a “progressive” one, which always seems the right tool for any SJW to say “how is it possible that we are in 2016 and there are still ______ (men/families/patriarchy/Donald Trump/nations/”racism”, etc)”. As I said so many times, would anyone prove there is a definitive direction humanity has ever walked through for more than 10 generations? I doubt it.

        4. And “Cyclical views of history never seem to show up when a civilisation is growing – has anyone ever wondered why?”
          Come on! I had a better idea of your general knowledge… Would you tell me why would Saddam Hussein rebuild ziggurats, why would italians go back to Vitruvius in the 1500s or even why would the Jews always migrate to the same land, and rebuild the same temple that gets toppled over and over again? Why would Austrians, Russians, Turks and the Papacy fight for the title of Roman Emperor, the double-headed eagle? Ahaha the whole Washington DC, with the obelisk, the Congress, the White House… Napoleon Bonaparte, Mussolini, Stalin, Chiang Kai-shek…

        5. Nah elites don’t want us to accept the ‘inevitability of things’ otherwise they wouldn’t make any money.

      2. I think it is more likely the latter: the left not only believes that the existence of volcano is a myth, but that telling people to tread carefully on this thin crust lying over it is actually bad for society.

      3. Leftists in general, like feminists in particular, believed and believe that they can change their own behavior to take advantage of circumstances without causing any other changes. It didn’t occur to feminists in the 1950s that if they altered their behavior men would too and liberals don’t believe the savages will change to better use the situation.

    3. Are you saying not all people from third world shitholes are going to embrace western democracy and values?! Impossible!

    4. its funny how quickly equalists will resort to “naturalistic fallacies” when it suits their beliefs

  3. The West will never recover. In order to embrace one’s maturity and wisdom, a man must be willing to acknowledge and accept the fact that the Western hemisphere is gone. As I have mentioned on many occasions, the West has died on an economic, political and social scale and the degradation has spiralled out of control.
    While this decline was growing on a gradual level, from the expansion of the welfare state to policies and legislation being made in favor of women, it was perhaps most noticable after 2008 when the financial crash had occured. It was around this time that the cultural decline of civilization had accelerated to an all time high and I believe that we had reached the point of no return. When the financial markets had crashed, everything had started to collapse and one must realise that the economic crash of 2008, corrolates with everything that we are witnessing now.
    When men were starting to lose their jobs and livelihoods, I believe that feminism had started to reach an all time high, where more women were remaining in the workforce than men and there is empirical evidence to support this fact if one chooses to research it. Furthermore, as well as the reversal of traditional gender roles such as women being the breadwinner and men being the trophy husbands and stay at home dads, there was also a decline in pop culture. For example, we are now witnessing a rise in promiscuity behavior on the rise with all of these social media applications being used to encourage it. Also notice how fat acceptance is now being considered as the norm, with fat models now being embraced in fashion shows. I believe that all of this has helped to accelerate the deteriorations of our standards while increasing the levels of anti intellectualism.
    Examining the pop culture even further, notice how good music has died, and everything mainstream is now perhaps at its worst level, where satanism is incorporated in the music videos of the modern day garbage pop music, along with hideous electronic dance music being forced into every song of every genre including rock. This was also the time where television and movies started to decline in quality, where everything is now focussed on dark subject matters and negative ideals, where people seem to enjoy watching gore, zombies, empowered females and declining masculine characters. Not to mention the fact, that around this time, we see the rise of the metrosexual and hipster culture, where men are now staring to dress up and behave like effeminate women, along with the general public becoming disconnected from reality and attached to their smartphones all day.
    The West has fallen to an all time low, and I believe that it is going to decline even further, especially with what is now happening in regards to the central banks and the slow down of the economy. Even as times are starting to become tough, one must learn to make the best of his situation and to never reject his values of self respect.

  4. I think we have to accept that traditional marriages are not compatible with human biology. For the vast majority of our history on this planet extreme hypergamy has been the rule.
    Studies of DNA show a that, among our hunter-gatherer ancestors, roughly 80 percent of all women reproduced successfully.
    Only 40 percent of men managed the same. (in some periods the difference where much greater in favor of the female sex)
    In the golden age of the beta male, around the 1950-60s, men and women where on par with only 10 percent og each gender failing to have children.
    Almost everyone got to reproduce, which is very much unnatural.
    If you wonder where all the degenerate SJW of the “1968 hippie” generation came from look no further!
    What we witness now is simply human nature reasserting itself, much like an abandoned village gradually being reclaimed by nature.

    1. Studies of DNA show a that, among our hunter-gatherer ancestors, roughly 80 percent of all women reproduced successfully.
      Only 40 percent of men managed the same. (in some periods the difference where much greater in favor of the female sex)

      In ancient times, that was not because females rejected the 60% of males, it was because roughly 60% of males died either in battle or petty fights (dueling was common until the end of the 19th century…

      1. It was both I think, including sperm competition:)
        Plus we are talking about the vast majority of human history here, civilization is a very new thing after all.

        1. Death in prehistoric times was even more certain to be violent than in civilization. Hunter gatherer men are more prone to die violently either in the hunt or through fights. There is your sperm war :). The peaceful savage is a myth.

        2. Fighting within the group was not that common from what I`ve read. (more between groups)
          However my main point was that you had a “survival of the fittest” scenario, both in the fight for survival, sperm competition and hypergamy.
          It`s interesting that the human male has a much longer penis than what is technically required for breading. (at least twice as long as most other primates)
          Hard to explain that without involving hypergamy and sexual selection.

        3. I understand what you said, my main point was that you were wrong in reference to the nature “reasserting itself” more like social engineering doing its wonders since betas from 200 or so years ago would in most instances beat to a bloody pulp most of todays “alphas”. I will believe nature is reasserting itself when duelling becomes fashionable and violence in our lives returns with a vengeance.
          Life in the “state of nature” is brutish and short for most. In that Hobbes was really accurate but since that’s what the ladies want…

        4. Duelling was a cultural thing and a part of “modern” civilization.
          I’m talking about hunter gatherers.
          There is no indication they where duelling and fighting much amongst themselves.
          The sophistication and also longevity (if you exclude high child mortality rates) of hunter gatherers have usually been ignored by men of civilization. Probably due to both ignorance and arrogance.

        5. Sorry to burst your bubble but hunter and gatherer lifestyles were by far much more violent than civilization ones. You can find it here if you wish:
          There are many other books and articles on the topic but my point (and Hobbes by the way) still stands, life was brutish and short in the “state of nature”. The only thing pre-civilized people had better than us was their physique but the tradeoff meant not only constant strife and a pretty short life expectancy if you are male and not a chieftain and even then many chieftains died horrible deaths in battle (or due to a drunken enraged mate).

        6. By the way dueling was an expression of our barbaric past. The only thing that changed was that in civilization we added ceremonies and rules to make things tidier (note: I am in favor of dueling).

        7. Again, you refer more to early civilization and agrarian societies, not Paleolithic peoples.
          The comradery among men in hunter gatherer groups are very strong, its basically like a big family.
          The fighting they were involved in would mainly be between rival groups and not so much duelling for mating rights. (You see this more amongst simpler primates.)
          Check out some of the studies of recent or current hunter gatherers, like the kitavans, the Hadza etc.

  5. I agree in part with the thrush of the article, however, I think if you examine our own cultural histories you´ll find that our ancestors we´re just as likely to be engaged in the modern proclivities the article references. I think with the exception of the middle classes in Victorian Britain and the same class in America around the same period, humanity has never lived in a state of sexual purity, and this “impurity” to use a religious term is an integral fiber, for good and ill, of who we are. You could describe game just as much as sex texting as part of this downward trend, however, it´s only by rolling in the mud that we can make real choices that have a transcendental value that work against our natural instincts. This is why you need transgression and “sin” in our world.

  6. We are literally turning into primitive animals again. Dancing is a great example. Just compare how people danced 100-200 years ago and today. It is just mindless ass shaking like a mating ritual between two (or more) apes.
    We are cursed to have an animal an a human mind. It is impossible for both of them to be free.
    I like how Rousseau pointed out that civilization forced us to control our needs, it made us unfree to do want we want.
    But the ability to control your needs is a new freedom. It frees you from your animal instincts to really do what YOU want to do.
    When we sacrificed a part of our freedom and overcame our instincts in favor for a greater idea like civilization, we truly became human.
    Most western people don´t cherish greater ideas. They are just acting on feelings and needs and will sacrifice everything to do that. Even the civilization that keeps them alive. They are beyond reason, have no sense of the greater good and no foresight.
    They are like apes. Actually less than an ape. A monkey is at least smart enough to work with others and does not destroy the very thing that keeps him alive.

    1. I usually call them children, as I see their behaviour as the logical result of unstructured, overprotective and utopical upbringing. Apes have a sense for self-preservation of the individual and the tribe that westerners lost almost entirely.

  7. In fact, humans are naturally polygamous, or polyamorous.
    We know from genetic evidence that for every procreating male, there were two procreating females. In other words, every man had on average two women.
    Marriage, and the entire concept of one man-one woman, is a historical aberration and unnatural.

    1. Hey, it sure seemed to work for thousands of years, and helped create the greatest civilization in the history of mankind.

        1. Polygamy causes intense male sexual competition distracting from producive labor. While monogamy also selects for altruistic loyal men.
          In the long term the latter is conducive to civilization.

        2. But it also breeds weakness. In a society where only the best men breed, the next generation will be even better.

        3. It might actually be having one too few.
          Women are on average more social creatures than men. That’s why they turn their husband into a “girlfriend” (who they then lose sexual interest in). With two women they can chat away with eachother, leaving the man to be a man.

      1. And said civilization is being dragged down by its own success. If it doesn’t endure it doesn’t matter.

        1. I wrote a very long reply, but decided to post it elsewhere. Please head over to the recent article on Aristotles first principles if you want to see it.

    2. “In other words, every man had on average two women.”
      Every man that were getting poon had 2 women on average. Those guys not getting any became genetically extinct.

      1. Yes, that’s what “on average” means.
        40% of males procreated. The rest did not. And that is the natural order of the world.

      2. Warfare, calamities, starvation and disease had a tendancy to keep the population, particulary men, culled.

      1. Don’t understand the question?
        But since we are here, I’ll just drop a note that the reason we think girl on girl is hot, but fags are not, might have something to do with out poly past. Same for the rumor that girls are naturally bi.

        1. Are women naturally polygamous? I would tend to agree that men are. However, as posted elsewhere, civilization is imposing some rules and limits on our natural desires in order to create a “civil” society. Otherwise we just jerk off and eat and shit all the time.’
          Edit: There was a post elsewhere here stating that women are naturally monogamous because it ensures their children will be taken care of by the father. Makes sense to me.

  8. I have thought about this long and hard, running many possible scenarios that may occur.
    This is what I believe to be the most likely outcome:
    (please comment if you think I am too pessimistic, or even not enough)
    After years swiping right on tinder, the majority of women will chose to focus on their career, the endless supply of sex and male attention. Eventually they will realise, either consciously or subconsciously) that they have nobody to grow old with or to look after or love them. If they did have children within single motherdom or post divorce, the neglect they showed their children will be repaid by neglect. These women will grow bitter and sour; and few will refuse to accept responsibility for their actions. What I have seen from women who have chosen this path seemingly drag many more hapless young women down the same path.
    Beta men will be taken for a ride and will become increasingly isolated. Due to lack of social skills and the poor understanding of masculinity will turn to porn, technology and MGTOW movements for sanctuary. The divide between men and women grow. The shrinking pool of competition in the alpha group means alphas with less scruples will obtain increasing access and power over the increasing supply of promiscuous females. They will have no reason to get married. As female standards and egos grow ever higher, women begin to only accept suitors of 9 or higher for marriage, regardless of their own SMV (because they managed to sleep with one once), also due to increasing materialism expect higher amounts of resources. There will be very few men that will want to get married, or even attempt self improvement via such movements like neomasculinity. This particular social subset will sadly be the world’s only hope to stop biological armageddon.
    Boys will be increasingly feminized and girls masculinized leading to a worsening of society. Collectivism will force children within traditional family units to assimilate into left wing progressive organizations leading to loss of control within family units.
    The decreasing birth rates resulting from over use of birth control and lack of nuclear families will lead to social or economic disorder. The countries which turn to immigration will destroy their own culture. First world cultures will denigrate into developing nations seemingly overnight. Those whose borders will be closed will face economic destruction due to welfare systems being overwhelmed by not only an aging population, but an entitled aging population with no family support.
    I see no hope for society. But I will do my own part to fight it. I will defend my wife, my future children, my culture, my masculinity and my family’s morality with my life. I hope you all do as well.

    1. I read your post really quickly, but it looks like you and I are on the exact same page. Exact.

      1. Agreed. It’s not that unbelievable to those who are taking notice. Stay safe. Be wise.

      1. You will have to be explicit with “Red Pill” I know neomasculinists and MGTOW’s use it extremely differently.

    2. Agreed, except for the part about a shortage of births–I see nothing but overflowing births coming from the lower, degenerate classes. I have some experience with government subsidized housing. Every girl age 15+ has multiple children, often 4 or more. It’s more a question of excess children beyond the parents’ means of supporting them, being supported by the state. The shrinking productive class must now support teen mothers and single parent households everywhere. As this trend continues, the monetary burden continues. Eventually, something breaks.

    3. In fact, one of “conspiracy theories” speaks about oversexualization to diminish value of nuclear family or as a mean to minimalise reproduction.

    4. Sobering. But you assumed that the west is in isolation when it is not.
      Since nature abhors a vacuum, the widespread absence of masculinity in the west will invite the invaders from the more masculine third world societies. These invaders will come in different ways–through immigration, warfare, illegal border crossing, and most subtly through their ideologies (aka religions and new age nonsense).
      They will pillage everything, including the thirsty women, with reckless abandon, and proceed to breed like there is no tomorrow, while adamantly refusing to embrace the values of the degenerate west. The west will become the wild, wild west once again.
      Meanwhile, another superpower will emerge (again, because nature cannot tolerate a vacuum). As with all emerging superpowers, its rise will be announced with death and destruction, and with untold upheavals in the old order. The west will make tenuous attempts to exert its former authority, but will quickly realize that, like the shorn and powerless Samson of old, it lacks the will and the power to do so.
      But all this will happen gradually and at various paces in different areas. Nothing will be sudden, and that is why the pain will be felt much more.
      After all this, the irrepressible masculine authority will once again exert itself. The sad thing, though, is that we’d all be long gone at that time.

      1. “we’d all be long gone at that time”
        Not necessarily. The boomercucks who were paid off to put us in this situation, probably.

        1. It took almost 50 years to get us to this stage, and we are not yet at rock bottom. That will probably take additional 20-30 years.
          The rock-bottom itself will probably take another 20-30 years, before recovery begins. Before recovery goes mainstream, it might take additional 20 years.

        2. It is certainly gonna be a terrible time for our kids…
          Equally I am not looking forward to being euthanized in my old age for the “collective good”.

        3. I suspect you’re right. It’s popular to predict an ‘end-time spark’ imminently (economic collapse, race riots, etc), but there’s a lot of inertia baked into the system, which could keep it staggering along in a deteriorating way for a few more decades. The elites will attempt to manage the decline. I would agree that the Restoration won’t kick in for 2-3 generations. I wish we could start tomorrow but we still have to go through more decline and collapse…and the bootstrapping out of that will be lengthy and difficult.

      2. The superpower you speak of will be world governance. It won’t be Islam.
        Even scarier.

  9. Bestiality, pedophelia/incest and necrophilia will all be legalized within 2030 in at least one Western country due to feminist policies. I have foreseen this for 40 years and Swedens LUF has actually now proposed this. No need to say, perhaps, that LUF is a liberal and feminist organization. Female nature, which goes for sex as well, has no borders or ability to calculate consequences, so when female nature is put in power things fuck up.
    Laugh, hate me or think whatever you want. I am still seeing that my vision is coming true. LUF is just one pointer.

    1. Women always say if they ran the world wars would never occur. Then watch feminists attacking people counter demonstrating them. Watch the videos of the women running Planned Parenthood selling dead baby parts. The woman who cut the head off a four year old and walked around is just more news worthy but this happens all the time. I think people are sick of actual racists and sexists (BLM, feminists) calling normal people racists and claiming false crimes and having nothing happen to them.

      1. Wars would occur but instead of guns and poison gas and attack choppers, it would be all social ostracism and humiliation.

        1. If only feminists were that pacifist. Take a look at some of the meetup threats…

        2. That was their White Knights…or a handful that knew they could say, go and slap us in public and knew even the cops wont intervene. They are only so brave in public areas when they know folk will ‘step in’ to prevent escalation…if a woman tried to crash a meeting of men away from the public eye and threaten violence she’d get slapped and told to sit down & shut up or leave.

      2. Women *are* running Europe, and it’s headed straight for another continental war at the scale of WW2.

    2. …and keep in mind at some point soon, scientists will find ways to directly stimulate the pleasure center of the brain…combine that with virtual reality (or even images directly sent to the cerebral cortex) and why even bother to have sex? Just ‘download’ as much as you want. Why bother with ‘game’ or even the physical exertion for sex when you can attain a mindblowing orgasm at the press of a button?

    3. “Bestiality, pedophelia/incest and necrophilia will all be legalized within 2030… Swedens LUF has actually now proposed this.”
      All the Swedish women, over the age of eleven, are going to be taken by Muslims; and all those Swedish socialists are going to need a date somehow.

    4. You may be correct. That will happen if feminism does not triumph.
      However, if feminism triumphs you will see something else.
      All women are sacred, like temple prostitutes.
      All men are criminals, or about about to be criminals, and are completely controlled by white knights and women by the criminal injustice system.
      Anything you as a man do to upset or displease a woman gets you jail time.
      There are no more liberties, freedoms, or dangers, due to total security provided by the police state. They see all.

  10. There are a number of things going on in Western Society, from a public policy perspective, that I have pointed out, in past, on my ROK posts. Much of which, have a number of key, predictable, outcomes:
    1) The economic system in the USA is set up as a “Rent Seeking” platform for those that control the majority of its wealth, PERIOD. To believe any differently is nothing more than mental gymnastics, used to justify why we are strongly coerced to live the way we do. (note, many simply call these people the “Elite”, but lets face facts, they think they OWN us, like indentured servants, so, I refer to them as the “Owners of Capital” in my below posts)
    The “Owners of Capital” want wage slaves DEAD before turning 60. Best case scenario for them, is for someone to work 60+ hour work weeks from ages 16-60, put all of their money into a 401K, cars & home mortgage, neglecting to go to the doctor for decades and then suddenly drop dead of a heart attack; all before they can drain their 401K’s and start using earned social security & medicare benefits.
    Due to the way our current economic system works, we CLEARLY have too many people being born and not enough desire on the behalf of the “owners of capital” to employ them for the sake of having a stable and safe civilization. In the United States, for example, its clear that the “owners of capital” have chosen NOT to employ people on a large scale, preferring “tent cities” and “jailing the homeless”, INSTEAD of providing more “make-work employment” arrangements.
    Up to the 1940 a person could get just about any job with an 8th grade education, but today you need a BA or Masters for entry level. Why?
    Because the government & big business figured out a long time ago that populations would certainly increase over time, but due to technology advancements, the availability of jobs would not expand to meet that population growth. There is a DEFINITE reason they don’t want people dropping out of high school and then at the same time, encourage those same high school graduates to attend junior college, then a 4 year university and finally a Masters degree or PhD. Government strong-arms this concept because it DECREASES the amount of people looking for full-time employment at the SAME TIME, chasing after jobs in a market that CANNOT provide employment for everyone whom is looking, able to perform, qualified for and willing to work.
    Look at it this way, when people could get a job with an 8th grade education, they went out and did it as soon as possible (opportunity cost). Then jobs got scarcer and the minimum requirement became a high school diploma, adding 4 more years of people NOT Looking for jobs within their cohort. Then jobs got even scarcer and the minimum became a 2 or 4 year college degree, adding an additional 2-4 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their cohort. Now jobs are really scarce and may require a Masters or PHD, adding an additional 2-7 years of people NOT looking for jobs within their cohort. Basically due to the way the economy has been structured TODAY, we are looking at young people within their cohort whom are NOT looking for full-time, career type, employment for 4-15 YEARS, beyond K-12, all while they finish more school!
    This has been done ON PURPOSE, to keep the number people seeking employment lower. In 1920 after 8th grade everyone who was able, went out to look for work and typically found it. That’s simply NOT possible today under any circumstances. Easily accessed welfare will soon add another 1-3 years of people within a cohort, to those “not seeking employment”. Note this will NOT be to the specific detriment of society, but as a means to continue to mask the illusion that jobs and upward mobility are still available. So, if someone gets a graduate degree and collects 1-3 years of welfare on top of than, that’s ONE less person competing for scarce jobs. The extra years of welfare are then acting in the same way to the larger economy, as the previously increased minimum education levels for employment. The real goal is decreasing the number of able-bodied applicants out on the job market at the same time, but also not decreasing the supply of “potential workers” who’s mere existence drive wages down for EVERYBODY. Keep in mind this cohort of people “not pursuing full-time employment” also includes those in Prison, Government pensioners/SSI and the disabled on government assistance. The reality is if everyone needed to go out and “get a job” or “start their own business” TODAY, as many “capitalists” and “entrepreneurs” suggest these days, we would ALL be making 0.25 cents a day. THIS RACE TO THE BOTTOM EFFECTS THE SELF EMPLOYED WAGES AS WELL.
    The “owners of capital” have already decided, FOR US REGULAR PEOPLE, that there are going to be LESS jobs available in the NEAR future, due to increased automation and modern corporate labor, cost-cutting, strategies. These measures eventually will affect and include ALL contract work, ALL self-employment opportunities and ALL small businesses, NOT JUST payroll laborers. Its easier to “pay less” or “nothing at all” to contracted or indentured “labor” when there is another willing laborer/slave, waiting in the wings, to do the work for less or nothing at all. In the past when there wasn’t enough money to go around to pay both wages & PROFITS, the “owners of capital” simply brought in more indentured servant immigrants (Irish, Italians, Chinese, etc) or flat out used slave labor (Blacks, Native Americans, domestic prisoners, POW’s, etc). The only difference between now and then is the “owners of capital” can’t LEGALLY have slaves or indentured servants. The mechanisms today that replaces slaves and indentured servants are the following: longer than needed formal education for basic employment, off-shoring of labor, forced retirement, prisoners and welfare
    The largest “recorded” wage increase to happen in history, for non-land owing, wage-laborers, post the introduction of fiat currency, was after the black death pandemic, in the 14th century, especially in post-pandemic England
    But, how was that possible?
    Because “the owners of capital”, post the black-death-pandemic, still needed wage-laborers, but there was a HUGE shortage of able bodied people. So, in order for ANY work to get done, they had to pay the peasants and other undesirables, more money, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE. This principle is still at work today, when you take the time to recognize that sizable portions of the population are actively discouraged from participating in the full-time labor market. This is easily done, by throwing people in prison, forcing them to attend formal school longer and allowing more people to claim themselves as disabled or collect long/short term welfare
    After the Black Death ran its course, in the 14th century, a Peasants Revolt was triggered by the “Statute of Labourers 1351”. By 1381, the sustained wage growth for non-land owing, wage-laborers was rising so quickly that the English parliament, a few decades post the Black-Death, under King Edward III, introduced the “Statute of Labourers 1351”. This statute was used by the “Owners of Capital”, as an artificial means to drive down the wages of non-land owning peasants. Despite market conditions signalling the need for increased wages The Statute of Laborers; 1351 (“Statutes of the Realm,” vol. i. p. 307.)
    Think about that for a minute, the MARKET signaled that wages should have been higher, due to actual labor shortages caused by the Black Death, but the “owners of capital” still didn’t want to pay it, so they wrote a law saying why they didn’t have to conform to demands of the market. That’s where we are today, a form of Neo-feudalism, driven by Fascist ideology and practices. Remember the USA a former “slave owning nation”, that fought “tooth & nail” to maintain the legal right to own slaves; even turning indentured servants, whom by contract, were set to be released in 7 years, into indefinite slaves through legal loopholes.

    1. 2) The “Owners of Capital Class” are betting on the Singularity, Cell Regeneration, Mind-clones and AI to provide their creature comforts in the future. “Smartphone Addiction” is just a small piece of the overall strategy that will eventually give them total control over the masses, through the mandatory use of evasive tech. Most tech being developed today is bad for regular people whom are not part of the true “Owners of Capital Class” and its really unfortunate that regular people do not see the scientists that are creating this tech and the financiers supporting their R&D, as TRUE economic adversaries.
      Tech can be used VERY effectively, to further the indentured servitude of the remaining middle and lower classes.
      But, how is that possible, a regular person may ask?
      Remember when cell phones were actually fun?
      I do, the phone was a huge and needed to be carried in a bag, BUT my boss NEVER called me on it, after what was considered typical work hours and certainly never to ask me to do more work while I was at home. Compare that to today, when a cell phone in your pocket can spontaneously generate more work to be done outside of the office, simply because someone higher up than you had a random thought at midnight.
      Here is a second example, when my parents were in school in the 1950’s and 60’s they were told: no one would have to work in the future, that everything would be done by robots and they would, in turn, have increased free time used for creating, making art, learning and helping others…
      We all know how that turned out, mass layoffs, outsourcing due to cheaper communication tech and increased workload for those domestic laborers that remained gainfully employed within USA based corporations.
      The Singularity, Cell regeneration, Mind-Clones Cyborg Implants and Artificial Intelligence are essentially the same lie, that was told to our parents, just rehashed for a 21st century audience.
      I think its funny when regular people get excited about future tech like the Singularity, AI, Robotics, etc. Do people really think when these things finally become real, functioning, working designs, applicable to industry, that we the “peons”, will somehow ALL get a Data from Start Trek or a C-3PO from Star Wars, to help us at home, at the job site or in the office, etc?
      In reality, we are going to get a David 8 as depicted in the Prometheus/Aliens films or the Robot Probation officer seen in the Elysium movie. These automatons are going to take away jobs and make unethical policing and policy enforcement, both easier and cheaper, for the true “Owners of Capital”. Since they won’t be paying a salary to the robot worker, the savings will instead be pumped into legal fees and political lobbying, resulting in an overall good ROI for the corporations/governments and a full blown, loss of liberty, for everyone else.
      Whom goes to jail when an AI Robot or Mind Clone pulls your arm out of the socket? Will it be considered “negligence by the human that lost the arm”, a matter for a “civil suit” only, perhaps “not a criminal act”, to be adjudicated in a arbitration setting?
      I personally at this point are willing to live with 1980’s +/- era tech, if it means, I am more free and can continue to earn money to live off.
      Elysium Probation Officer photo:
      Introducing David 8 webpage:
      In the words of David 8: “I can do almost anything that could possibly be asked of me, including things that my human counterparts might find distressing or unethical”
      We are approaching an era where the “Owners of Capital Class” will not need laborers of any kind to live a life of comfort. But, our civilization is not quite there yet, technology-wise, so the “Owners of capital” need to “keep people calm and unsuspecting” until the trigger can be pulled decisively without consequence.
      So, what are the possible scenarios that regular folks will experience, during this “interim period”, while the technology needed to create the Singularity, Cell Regeneration, Mind-clones and AI, is maturing?
      The “Owners of Capital Class” will simply extract the little remaining labor wages from the lower classes, by decree, through the implementation of a cashless system. Consumers will not have choices in the future because purchases will be mandatory in some way. Policies structured like Obamacare should have taught us ALL how these kinds of scenarios will play out. Obamacare is merely the test run of how to implement future legislated purchases on a large scale. “Click-Wrap Agreements” coupled with a “cashless society” will make that transition easier for the “Owners of Capital Class” to force on the general populace.
      What do I mean exactly?
      Many forget that we now live in what “could” be considered a fascist country, with oligopolies running it behind the scenes. What usually results, is a situation where the “owners of capital”, can and will “legislate” mandatory purchases in the future, if revenue does not match their expectations or projections (for the good of the nation of course, i.e., Too-Big-to-Fail).
      So for example, if someone chooses not to buy unneeded goods or services, they will simply pay a “penalty” at tax time or some scheme involving a “negative interest rate”. The “owners of capital” have, at this point, run out of consumer goods that they can “strongly coerce” people to buy, in order to go to work, such as, gasoline, internet connection, car insurance, bus/subway fare, cell phones, suits/uniforms, soap, deodorant, razors, etc. We are approaching a day when they will simply make it law that you have to buy goods, in certain quantities before tax season (again, just like the current Obamacare that can be coupled Flexible Spending Accounts), except one day we will have an FSA to be used for ALL goods and services, and you can bet those accounts will be “use-it or lose-it”. Also, since you won’t be able to own things like the new “digital cars”, that are currently being developed, nor will you own the current “digital media” being rented on Hulu, Netflix, etc., means that likely, in the future, you could be billed for “damage to the vehicle or product” from the “real owners” of that vehicle or product at any time.
      Regular People will not be allowed to be frugal in the future because the”Owners of Capital Class” can choose, AT ANY TIME to, take close to the same amount of lost revenue back, when a person tries to save money by reducing purchases, in the form of “tax penalties” or other method (cashless, digital currency, negative interest rate, instant credit to cover shortfalls and deductions from bank accounts, ALL DONE whenever the “Owners of Capital Class” see fit). A cashless society, dominated by “click-wrap agreements” is the easiest way to structure “forced purchases” into the larger economy. Another scenario that regular people will face in the future, is when someone chooses “not to buy” and then doesn’t have the proper “proof of purchase” coupon, etc, to prove they bought these items, in the required quantities, when tax fillings come due. I can guarantee that the IRS or some other agency will have some way to calculate the amount “you should have purchased” (kinda sounds like college FASFA aid forms, in reverse, doesn’t it?). People will also have to pay a monthly fee to keep their digital money in the bank and there won’t be any alternative way to store it, without paying the monthly fee. This process will result in an instant, predictable, revenue generator for public companies, that the stock market will then feed off.
      Note, bartering used as a circumvention method has been suggested before, but the IRS already has a plan and system in place to deal with it somewhat. They will tax bartering, by an estimate, the same way they do for restaurant servers receiving tips. There will likely be HUGE penalties for barter and I will bet EVERYONE will automatically be assumed to have “bartered” some amount over the year at tax time (perhaps an estimated $500 in barter per year, that is taxed whether the person in question did any actual bartering or not). The most likely outcome though, is that one day, bartering will simply be deemed an illegal activity (likely a Felony). I don’t recall “bartering” being a named constitutional right anywhere.
      Look at solar roof panels, as another example, many local governments are taxing people for installing them because they reduce dependence on local utilities, which in turn, drives down privatized revenue being collected by the contract companies hired to run the utilities.
      Young people don’t understand that this tech, that they are addicted to, can be used VERY effectively, to further their indentured servitude. Millennial’s and the generation after them, falsely believe tech will save and unite them, when in reality it was designed by “corporate committee” to do just the opposite. The only way to prevent that shift, is for Millennial’s to immediately STOP buying such tech, opposing the development of said tech and discouraging others from buying and using it, even if it means using physical force. But, they will NEVER do this because they have “drank the Kool-aid” and are to a certain extent addicted to technology. Think about it, I’m seeing commercials for ordering pizza on a smartphone app, but whats the point, really? To appease Millennial’s? Perhaps. But, did this consuming cohort of fools take the time to think about whether it is really more convenient to type an order in on an app, as opposed to calling the order in on a phone? No they didn’t AND by using the smartphone app to place a FOOD ORDER instead of a phone, the pizza seller can then become a data broker making money by selling customer info, instead of making money by providing a quality food product.
      Then there is the issue of behavioral “data simulations” being conducted on citizens by corporations and government, eventually, to be used for revenue projections. I can guarantee that some people will not be able to be “simulated”, due to high levels of inaccuracy in the data that exists on file and is collected on them regularly. Some simple examples would be homeless people, old people that don’t use credit or the internet, and low wage earners functioning solely on cash, whom use cell phones or have utility bill etc on a relatives account, which their name is not on (I have a relative that does all of the above and couch surfs, there’s no way a simulation would know anything about him because he has virtually no digital footprint).
      Th rub is when these “behavioral simulations” becomes a real part of business revenue projections, directly influencing tax revenue projections and collection methods. These people that “cannot be simulated” will be labeled criminals and put on some kind of supervised probation and forced to adapt habits that can be tracked digitally. I can GUARANTEE this will happen. As I stated above, Millennial’s are likely the easiest to simulate already because they have already given away the keys to the castle and have no intention of taking those keys back.
      Right now most Americans are expected to and are coerced by employment requirements to buy/finance a car, buy/finance education, buy/finance healthcare, buy/finance insurance and eventually buy/finance a home of some kind.
      What do you think the “Owners of Capital Class” will do when “life-extension tech”, “self-driving cars”, “robot AI home workers”, “AI networked appliances” or “cyborg implants” become viable commercial products?
      They will simply coerce people to buy it, even if the recipient doesn’t want to have the procedure done and the methods used to coerce the general populace in the United States, will not require any additional lobbying or law changes on the behalf of the “Owners of Capital”.
      Imagine a world where life-extension tech is sold and financed to regular people, over long repayment periods, to people that don’t have the ability to pay for it, in cash, up front, similar to a cars, higher education or home mortgages.
      Want to opt-out? Sure you have the “choice” to do anything you want, we are a “free country” after all.
      Imagine the unfolding of the following fictional scenarios, resulting from a person “choosing” to NOT have the life-extension procedure:
      Do you want health insurance? Sorry, but we don’t insure people whom have not had the “life-extension” procedure. However, there is another provider which we can refer you to that will, but that company has both a high deductible and high premium, so as to reduce the coverage risk of your shorter life span, to the provider.
      Want to get a job? Sorry, but we don’t hire people whom do not have “cyborg-implants”, they cost more to insure and are un-insurable in some cases. We don’t consider this discrimination, however, because its no different than requiring you to have a car or a driver license for employment with our firm. Especially with the Supreme Court declaring that those refusing the “cyborg-implants” procedure are not considered disabled, nor are a protected class.
      Do you need a credit card or a business loan? Sorry, but we have to charge you a higher interest rate because our actuaries have found that people whom have not had the “life-extension” procedure are a higher risk, have higher unemployment rates and have lower profit margins, due to a shorter life expectancy.
      Do you need a bank account or cell/internet/communication service plan? Sorry, but we don’t open accounts to people whom have not had the “cyborg-implant” procedure, they cost significantly more to service, due to not being plugged directly into the system.
      Again, as I said above, this mandatory purchase strategy will not be limited to ” life-extension tech”. Just replace the word “life-extension procedure”, in my above example, with the word “self-driving car”, “robot AI home worker”, “AI networked appliances”, “Cell Regeneration” or “cyborg implant” and the result is the same for the regular person.
      Last, “Private Cities” owned by corporations, will be exempt from labor and civil laws. The rally to create these cities will be done in order to lower human labor costs before the Singularity, Mind-clone and AI tech fully take over, rendering regular people back to the old indenture servant system that used to exist in the USA.
      Want to get a job in a “Private City”? Sorry, but we don’t hire people whom have not financed the life-extension procedure and/or do not have an AI car or Robot home worker”.
      In a “Private City” the “Owners of Capital Class” can make ANY RULES THEY WANT, without “due process” or pesky “labor laws” getting in the way.
      All of the above also does not include fact that employers will require people working for them to hold bank accounts with negative interest rates and it won’t matter if the person is paid by on 1099 or has a W-2.
      Do you want to get paid in a cashless society? If so, you will need to have an open and active “negative interest” bank account.
      In the USA the government has the power to simply make certain actions illegal on a whim because unlike Europe, we have no real consumer, civil or labor protections. This also doesn’t account for the private banks just outright refusing to give you your money, on bank run day, requiring you to attempt to press charges against them or suing, in hopes of successfully gaining access to your funds in the far future.
      If, bank runs become a possible reality, the private banks will know well in advance and will have taken all the physical cash out of the local bank locations, before the public becomes aware. The government will also make carrying cash over a certain amount illegal, say something like, no more than $100 physical cash on your person, inside residences, private storage, vehicles or business locations.
      In summary, I suspect that the “Owners of Capital Class” in the USA will “legislate purchases”, little by little, then do a surprise unloading of the negative interest polices on existing accounts. Regular people won’t see it coming and this situation will hit them like a ton of bricks, with no alternatives to fall back on.
      All sounds swell, don’t it!
      First, AI is going to make regular people jobless
      Second, it is going to steal what few liberties and freedoms they have left
      Third, it will make human life valueless to the true “Owners of Capital”, many of whom are Closeted Fascists

      1. 3) Modern Humans have been on earth for approximately 200,000 years, civilization has existed for 6,000 years and the “society” that we live in today, which has rules that we are FORCED to follow, is a little over 200 years old. What this means, is that MANY of the people whom we THINK are Alphas today, may in fact, NOT be Alphas at all. Simply put, the last 200+ years has given LEGAL advantages to crafty, backstabbing, two-faced, Betas, whom gain undeserved Alpha status, due to LEGAL protection from PHYSICAL retaliation, whereas in the previous 199,800 years of “mans existence”, these guys would have been the “follower” or quickly dispatched through physical retaliation.
        If you have any doubts, just think of people like Steve Jobs or Mark Zuckerberg. Could either of these schmucks have lead men and convinced them to give their lives for a mere “personal conviction”? Like say, ALEXANDER THE GREAT or HANNIBAL? Of course not, BUT, people like these guys are given a type of “Alpha Status” today because they are allowed act TOUGH, without any real threat of losing their heads or getting Tarred & Feathered by disgruntled peasants.
        I’ll clarify further, “Appointed Pseudo Alphas”, are winning in America because the “unspoken rules” and “legal system” have been designed to prevent “aggressive retaliation” by disgruntled underlings. Think back to the early Teamsters tactics that were used against stubborn business owners and how you don’t see similar tactics being applied any longer. Once you recognize the overt influence of “undue physical & legal protection” by government, it becomes easy to understand why “Appointed Pseudo Alphas” rule today. Note, its not because of superior leadership, nor because of any amount of endowed masculinity. It is because these “Appointed Pseudo Alphas” are receiving undue legal protection, that keeps the hordes of frustrated Betas from ripping these “leaders”, limb from limb. The current batch of successful business leaders, that we see today, would have been beaten within an inch of their lives during the times of the Teamsters or Tarred & Feathered, right in front of their factories, in earlier times.
        In Tribal and Chieftain level societies, the males that accumulated the most wealth and children were neither the “most fierce” nor the “most “timid”. “Successful leaders” in those times tended to fall somewhere in the middle, the main reason being that the “most fierce” warriors typically died in the hunt or battle because they could not temper when to be “bold” versus “when to hold back”. Also, on the flip side, it should be obvious why the “most timid” didn’t accumulate any wealth or children in a world based on hand-to-hand battles and hunts.
        In today’s world we have set up a legal system that solely rewards the “most fierce” warriors (whom are not always true Alphas according to nature) and it is contributing to our eventual downfall. In the past, when mortality rates were high, due to living in a dangerous environment, these were the LAST people that a tribe wanted running ANYTHING. Today, these types of people get to go to the front of the line for leadership roles. Remember, just because they are “bold” and “fierce”, in a safe, OFFICE setting, doesn’t make them a real ALPHA, in the world of nature.
        If you need a modern example, look no further than the post-war years, after WWII. Who do you think returned back to the USA, alive, after the war? Was it the foolhardy? Was it the yellow bellies? OR the ones whom could properly weigh the situation and take PROPER action? The answer should be obvious because not coincidentally, that was a period of stable employment and high wages for EVERYONE. With that said, it should safe to assume that it was the most “balanced people” returning alive from the war that became “captains of industry” in the post-war years. The “foolhardy” and “yellow bellies” likley died on the battlefield or returned home too physically and/or mentally damaged to function in civilian leadership roles.
        Culturally we have had a big shift in the USA, where those given “appointed authority” seems to be trumping those that have “natural authority” more often than not. Make no mistake, the “winners” that we are seeing and hearing about day-to-day, are “Appointed Pseudo Alphas” at best. Since the early 2000’s I see MORE and MORE spineless Beta types easily surpassing people with stronger personalities and leadership ability, both in personal life and professional life. However, at one time, in the not so distant past, people displaying “natural authority and leadership” would have EASILY been the first choice of BOTH women and corporations and put in charge of most things, due to simply having REAL leadership qualities.
        What exactly do I mean and how did we get here?
        Well, it starts in K-12 education, where certain kids are publicly punished for being natural leaders and Beta Types are rewarded with leadership positions for being “yes men” and “yes women”. Other kids see this and then begin to develop an indoctrinated aversion to kids that have natural leadership, for fear of getting in trouble, by simply being around or associated with them. This mindset then gets extended into the workplace where “appointed authority” is the rule, with no exceptions being made for “natural authority” to usurp the direction of poorly run projects, useless conversations or bad policies. Once people get past a certain age, their “profiles” and “resume” begin to carry much more weight than their actual “endowed masculinity”. Sure, women don’t pine over Manginas when they meet them in the flesh, but they will pine over a “hidden mangina” with a perfectly crafted okcupid or Tinder profile.
        Do real Alpha types still clean up? Of course they do, but a LOT of “hidden betas” are getting FAR more than their share, of both “first looks” and “last looks”, than they would have received in the previous 50 years (heck, even the last 6,000 years of civilizations existence for than matter). These days, this situation applies to both the career track and the surface preferences of females.
        Note, its not specifically that women standards have risen (we all know they have not), its that women keep on adding to the list of “non essential” traits that their potential partners and hook-ups must have, at minimum. So while going over that “non essential” list of traits, women unknowing eliminate what they ACTUALLY want and end up with something that they are ultimately dissatisfied with, an “Appointed Pseudo Alphas”. This exact same scenario goes for employers as well.
        I always use the old comedy film “Revenge of the Nerds”, from 1984, as an example of where we are as a society today.
        When the JOCKS were in charge of the “Greek Council”, parties raged, un-PC behavior was tolerated and everyone was having a really good time, with few harsh consequences for bad behavior (hence the term, “boys will be boys”). As we all know now, in hindsight, when the JOCKS were in charge, people earned good wages, nobody was micromanaged (use your best judgement was a common phrase), people didn’t get fired on a whim and life in general was good.
        Then one day the NERDS gained control of the “Greek Council” and parties started sucking, people had to kowtow to PC behavior (so as not to offend anyone), EVERYONE became micromanaged (i.e. Lean) and people started having less fun in EVERY aspect of life, while consequences for uncouth behaviors were jacked up to the highest degree (i.e. zero tolerance).
        So I ask, was “life” better for EVERYONE, under the rule of the JOCKS or better today under the rule of the NERDS, whom are nothing more than “Pseudo Alphas” with “appointed authority”?
        Long live the “Betas of Nature” wielding “Appointed Authority”, I guess, to our own civilizations demise, I might add.

        1. Your comment is exactly how I view modern society. I have always believed that there are a plethora of betas who are loved by women for whatever reason they choose and that became a standard for what is “exciting and desireable” for women.
          Just look around at all the women that date completely dweeby looking guys. It might be the case that they are genuine people, but most likely not. I agree with what you said about how they sell out on what they truly want unknowingly and end up dating men who are undesirable. But its never the woman’s fault who has almost complete control over who she dates. Its always MEN who have to change.
          I’d like to think im an alpha. Im not the strongest guy, or smartest, or best looking. But I am above average in all of those categories. Yet the problem I encounter is I cannot attract women. I had one serious relationship for about 2.5 years but since then its been incredibly difficult. For the longest time it really upset me to put in time, be genuine, funny and interesting only to be surpassed by someone who is the complete opposite. It doesnt upset me anymore because I simply do not care.
          I dont know what its like to talk my way into someone’s pants. Its not my MO and im not a very good liar. But it seems like anything thats fake or psuedo as you suggest is extremely desirable. And I havent exactly figured out why that is. It seems in the short term, the foolhardy tools have it figured out how to work a landscape that is geared toward crowning them alphas, while the true alphas suffer and get falsely labeled when women realize these psuedo alphas are a complete crock.
          Anyways after ranting Id like to reiterate I really enjoyed this comment. It really resonates with me!

    2. They don’t want wageslaves to die at 60. They extract some of the greatest amounts of wealth if they allow them to wallow in disease and finally die a slow death in the hospital a bit later, say at age 68, just barely tapping into retirement funds, but still enough to extract a few hundred thousand (yes, that is the typical number) in last minute health care before death.

      1. also, old people are “place holders” to horde capital away from younger folks. In an ideal world, younger people would easily be able to capitalize on the “4 hour work week” and lead a virtuous life. the elite want to funnel a good chunk of cash to seniors in order to prevent the younger generations from rising up.

    3. Nice post.
      Ive been saying for years the push for everyone to go to college is to stagger entry into the workforce.

  11. This is an excellent article and I am glad to see younger guys starting to look a little further down the road.
    Sadly… I think I can sum up the answer for you in four words.
    You can’t fix stupid.
    Hence… Russia. I have been doing a lot of thinking on this lately. I love my country, but it is not what it once was. Socially, economically, politically, culturally.
    Instead of asking the question… how can we reverse this before its too late, you need to contemplate… maybe it is too late and its time to abandon ship.
    A raging house fire that is CLEARY going to consume the whole building, is not the time to be a hero and say “We can save it!!!!”
    It’s like Homer Simpson chasing after that roasted pig… and Lisa (girls/women) are the cause/problem… Bart (boys/men) are blamed… Homer still believes it can be saved (the negotiation phase, after anger, in response to death)… only to realize that the pig (western culture/society) is not just airborne… it’s gone.
    When we men decide to rebuild society and civilization… do you want to get your hands dirty and look for help in the stupid people who burned the house down in the first place? Or move to a country that did not allow the fire to even start?
    Gay Adoptions Banned By Russian President
    ‘Leave children alone’ – Putin on gay rights in Russia
    Govt decides to ban GMO food production in Russia – deputy PM
    Putin wants Russia to become world’s organic food superpower but first hopes to clip Turkey’s wings
    Vladimir Putin calls on Russian families to have three children
    “I am convinced that the norm in Russia should become a family with three children.” ~ Vladimir Putin

    1. From where I come from, even though in all times, the element of the stupid always reigned, men gathered to take a stance. The only problem is that in past times, men could see what they were up against, now we need to look a little deeper, in our political & local leaders, as well as our families and selves. The cloak and dagger, sword and shield type of legionary war between good and evil, has risen up a notch, to an intellectual, cultural and spiritual level. From a laymen point of view, future prospects are looking grim, but from a realistic point of view, history has proven grim looking situations to come out with a positive result. So before you declare the war as good as over, remember that we still have our guts, our brains, our little piece of the internet and our brothers. What we need to do here is unite and not just in mind or expressions nor desires but in ACTION. I’ve been yapping about this ideal since I read ROK for the first time 3 years ago. What’s missing here is ACTION, ACTION, ACTION ! I’ll throw my 20 bucks :
      1. Carefully analyze the threats.
      2. Identify each threat and appoint a counter measure.
      3. Unite when shit hits the fan.
      4. Repeat.
      It ain’t that hard, all we need is just some, ahem, balls.
      Cheers !
      I hope all of you reading my above ranting will feel your guts turning inside out because you lack the courage to write that article, start that blog, write that book, open the subject that you know inside that will open the crippled mind of the listener and reader.
      May God see our poor efforts of trying to live the lives as we should.

      1. I agree. But looked what happened when the ROK readership tried to meetup once in real life. Just once!
        This is why I am going through some serious life decision questioning right now.
        How many of us are there? How many of us can really effect change?
        How many of THEM are there? How likely is it that at THIS POINT, change, is possible?
        We are talking about rolling back over 50+ years of feminist indoctrination over three generations, with each generation only getting more and more programmed.
        You can’t fix stupid.
        Just look at the response the stupids have to the rise of Trump. It is off the scale!
        For Those Rushing To Move To Canada Under “President Trump”, A Few Warnings
        “The same report said that the Immigration Canada web site (one of the most boring sites on the planet) was blown because of excessive access. (Source: “Canada Searches Up 1000%,” Zerohedge, March 2, 2016.)
        If Trump wins, all the stupids are going to flood my country! I am in a good place now so to speak. Middle of butt-fuck nowhere, lots of land and fresh water. But I still think about my future and the more I look at the REALITY on the ground… the more I am thinking… four week on-the-ground exploration of a country with sane people is in my future.

        1. Hey, if they’re all going to try to get into Canada if Trump is elected, you should try to get into the States. It’s a win-win.

        2. Pull yourself together and don’t lose sight of the objective, which is to live a high moral life and start a family. I can only imagine the political problems there in the US but believe me son, in Romania the situation is fucking beyond worse. Let me put up you up to date: Romania was a once prosperous country with cultural and resource riches, and as a any good piece of action, everybody wanted a piece. So therefor Hungary, Serbia, Bulgaria wanted our teritories but they wouldn’t count for shit if they weren’t backed up by Russia. Now, Russia always spouted that Romania is actually Russian teritory so therefor war as always near the border. They couldn’t conquer us by war, because romanians become fucking crazy when it comes to war, so they invited our neighbors to start a rant. Afterwards they introduced agents and broke off a piece of the country ( Moldova ) and they also introduced agents in Senat, Parlament and Gvment institutions of Romania. They supported any enemy of Romania to lower moral, quality of life, culture, everything. They fucking killed everything. I’m not saying that western culture was innocent, but destruction of culture came from the East and destruction of family, came from the West. We have mafia clans in Romania, formed entirely by gypsies, who steal, rape and kill with no consequences and I am not talking no bullshit. Every time a young cop would arrest one of those criminals, said criminal was protected from prosecution with all costs, because he enforced foreign policy. Only since 1 year ago with the forming of the National Direction of Anticorruption ( DNA ) did some of those agents got prosecuted but of course their real orders did not yet surface – once that happens war with Russia will be a matter of fact. Anyway, most morons of Europe that are unaware of history say that America is pushing us into a war with Russia, where as Russia had declare war on Romania and not just her since 1989. They killed our president, they enforced the gipsy mafia, they introduced covert agents to destroy our culture. What I’m trying to say here that trying to be a model for masculine virtue in Romania, is dangerous. Try to be civilized with the wrong people, and you take a beating. Romania is currently destroyed, but at the same time, people are waking up and are asking questions ( even though it’s already too late ). So don’t despair, get a hold of yourself, the red pill has many levels to it and it takes time for you to become that which you already know you are but can’t quite give it a form, a masculine man. That’s our objective.

        3. How much of that destruction of Romania was wrought by remnants of the USSR, the usual Bolshevik suspects?
          It is very difficult for us Americans to get straight info on Russia, its culture, whether or not its still run by jews, etc…
          I am considering the move myself, but am very conflicted on the subject.

        4. I’ve absolutely been thinking the same. But I don’t see having to completely leave the West until about 10 years. I just haven’t figured out where to go yet. Russia is cool, and I like Putin, but I’m tired of freezing my balls off, I want to go somewhere where the weather is hot, the women are hotter, and doesn’t have the divorce laws prepared to rape you at any turn.

        5. You can move anywhere you like as long as you adapt to the place and quickly, I might add. I don’t know if the Bolshevik factor is the only guilty element but for sure the MO is theirs. They killed our president, they ordered the media to manipulate the people to start spontaneous riots, they ordered the military ( Romanian military ) to open fire on the people ( stating they were actually terrorists ), they organized a ,,temporary tribunal and execution squadron” to trial and execute the president and his wife ( Ceausescu ). They empowered the gypsies to start mafia clans, with protection and information from the very institutions that were made to protect the citizens. Romania’s executioner is Russia, the gateway of destruction is named Ion Iliescu ( Covert FSB/ KGB ), the hammer and sickle are the infiltrated state agencies and the element of execution are the undercover agents, gypsy clans, and parlament members. It is well known now that Romania’s most influential and notorious political party ( PSD = Social Democratic Party ) is being governed by none other than the above mentioned character. Now, did I mention that the PSD party are a majority in Romanian Parliament ? Did you know that all legal initiatives ( all new legislations/ laws ) are initiated by them ? Romania is momentarily a conquered soviet state since 89 but without armies, just agents. The intelligence agencies already know this, but they’ve taken the battle under ground. It’s God’s blessing that we now have a new president, and that Romania still exists. Romania is now like a wilderbeast at which lions, tigers and hienes have been eating away since 89. Romania is not yet declared dead, but she is fighting for her life. At the presidential elections in 2014, the PSD also had a candidate for office. Let me just say that if that guy ( V. Ponta – former prime minister ) would have been elected in office, Romania would have been official history.

        6. Okay, I agree, the feminist morons have thirst for drama and confrontation. ROK is looking at the problem wrongly here. Instead of ,,INTERNATIONAL ROK MEET-UP FUCK THE FEMINISTS AND THE SYSTEM FUCK YEAH” kind of approach, we could use more subtle and covert terms like ,,Chess Games Meetings” or ,,Conference on Green Life”, etc, etc. We need to plow through and use plain boredom against the morons. For example, when they hear about ,,Global Warming” their brains shut down and say ,,Yeah man, it’s fucked up” and they go on about their lives, they don’t debate simple, boring narratives. The human mind of the urban zombies is easy to use now. Whenever I see someone trying to listen to my conversation I switch the subject to something that is being known as ,,common knowledge” and their brain just says ,,I already know about this, I don’t want to hear about it” – their interest shuts down and my conversation is secure. Give it a minute and think about it. We need to take another shot at the meet-ups.

        7. I am not advocating not meeting up… I am asking you to truly contemplate the reality of the strategy you have outlined to actually be able to do so! Seriously… think about it. Western heterosexual men are being reduced to meeting like Christians did in pagan Rome… in complete secrecy… out of fear of being thrown to the lions (SJWs) of the colosseum (western liberal/homosexual society).
          You can’t fix stupid.
          Believe me… my brain is having a very hard time trying to accept this as the new reality for heterosexual men in the west. And in accepting the new reality, being confronted with having to make an actual decision about my future, not just ignore and pretend it will go away or get better in time.
          I don’t want to hide. I don’t want to meet other men of like mind in secret with secret handshakes and rules for conversation that keep our true discussions off limits and out of the spotlight of the deluded masses for fear of REAL social and economic consequences (if not outright jail time).
          Maybe some guys can live that way, but I am having an increasingly hard time doing so.
          God willing, I am going to spend 4 weeks in Russia this year and see for myself the reality of living in a different country. A country where you and I would not have to have this conversation because it is understood to be insane!
          Tell a Russian that the Swedish Liberal Youth Party passed a resolution to condone necrophilia and incest, and they will respond instinctively and reflexively with abject horror and disgust.
          Tell my sister’s liberal husband… and his response is “I would never do it.” To which I then had to ask him… “Are we actually having this conversation?” with him never really “getting it”… that we were actually talking about the state legalizing sex with dead people and one’s siblings/offspring.
          You can’t fix stupid. Short of outright revolution Christian Rome style, nothing is going to fix the mess the west finds itself in. And I am still having a hard time accepting this as a real possibility at this point… the time for stopping or changing what is, may have already been past many years ago.

        8. The world is being rolled downhill on purpose. There still are organisations that opose the narrative. Orthodox Church, Adventist Church, Baptist Church ( Catholic Church is being sabotaged from inside ) and perhaps many more. From those hundreds of men attending those churches there must be some men that raise society’s problems and discuss them openly – I’m sure that those people would be more than open to discuss our common concerns.
          For the moment, it’s about marketing. The jooos elite agenda is to destroy the culture but they only do it by giving voice ( NGO media coverage and legislation initiatives included ) only to the ones that fit their agenda – i.e. Feminists, lesbians, necros, werid gays etc.
          J3w No.1 : – So, Goldstein, how do we go about to decrease the population ?
          J3w No.2: – Well, Bernadowski, I would give those feminists we read about last week a ton of money so they can start their own NGO, we can talk to Jeulzberger to give them publicity and make them notorious, by making them notorious we’ll call Senator Gieberman and say – Hey Giebes, how’s it hanging brah’ ? Yo, man, make a legislation initiative ( LAW ) to pass. Check out the NY Times where the feminists say they want equal rights. Also how about them gay rights ? Ah? I know, I’m a genius. Okay have fun with the goy secretaries we’ve sent.
          And that’s how genocide and cultural murder through legislation is done, my friend.
          I know, it’s fucked up. But hey, it’s real.

        9. Ah, I see you have done some reading in your spare time. LOL You know what else is real and not fucked up?
          People waking up.
          We are living in a time of the single largest global awakening.
          ALL of human history that we have come to believe to be true is now not only questioned (and openly as ROK is an example of), but truth is coming to light.
          Hence Trump.
          Hence panic.
          The future won’t be pretty, it may not even be inevitable, but it most certainly won’t be what was.
          The end is coming, and “they” know it.

        10. People maybe waking up but that process is a daily one. In order to be ,,awaken” you need to be informed. There lies the problem, these motherfuckers change the rules as they play the game.
          The GOYIM KNOW !!! Call Turkey, open the borders let the islamists come !
          hihihih !

        11. Stupid can be fixed with 2 punches to the stomach and 2 to the head. The subject just needs to open his mind. Female stupidness is the chimera here. Can not be fixed.

    2. Putin is by far this generations most skillful statesman. I’m wondering what comes next? Gold base currencies? He’s already set things in motion with many countries now trading outside of the US Dollar. The New Silk Road, a massive multi-lane highway, and fast train rail lines that is suppose to run through central Asia could have an enormous impact of what have been some of the poorest societies and economies such as all those “stan” countries. Not to mention incredibly enriching for both China and Russia.

  12. Women don’t lose their ability to bond with promiscuity. Just search at online dating sites for women in their 30s and more, like okcupid for example. Full of women tired of players, looking for longterm partners, hoping to create a familiy. Opportunistic women after they hit the wall, yes, but they want to settle and bond.
    Let’s be honest, it’s we. We never had the ability to bond with a promiscuous woman, and the question is, should we?
    I don’t think so.
    Problem is, all this women are going to start getting very angry with us, because they never blame theirselves for their own bad decisions. We have to stick to our beliefs and don’t try to complain or justify our choices. We don’t like to settle with promiscuous women, so what? It’s a preference, I don’t have to justify that.

    1. You don’t like to settle with promiscuous women, but what would you do with a virgin girlfriend? My guess is you wouldn’t be too happy waiting a year or more for sex because she wants to be a virgin bride, when there are so many women you could sleep with on the first or second date.

      1. I waited through two years of chaperoned dating to get to my virgin bride. Eight years later I see it was an excellent investment. Of course she was a slim young woman (25 at our wedding) from the outer provinces of the Philippines.

        1. That’s great, I wish all the best to both of you. In the fall I’m starting at a Christian college where chaperoned dating is the only dating there is (the rulebook says no physical contact of any kind is allowed between the sexes, on or off campus, but I’ve heard they look the other way on hand-holding and you can get away with a bit of kissing off campus if you’re chaperon is on the more liberal side) and from what I’ve heard it’s quite a feat to make it to graduation without a wedding date.

      2. Yes, you are right. I wouldn’t be happy waiting a year or more for sex.
        Although, I don’t think that either you are a virgin or you are a whore. It’s not that extreme.There are lots of options in between.
        I wouldn’t mind settling for a woman who loved a man and had sex with him, or 2 or 3 before you if she is a little bit older. I mean, I’m reasonable, I would understand. But it would hurt to love a woman who fucked random people on tinder, bouncers, drug dealers or whatever… It’s like what you got doesn’t worth anything, you know what I mean?
        Anyway, I’m not pretending that promiscuous women are bad persons we have to shame, they do their choices and I do mine. That’s it.

        1. Promiscuous women were no trusted to bear legitimate offspring which was part of the reason why chastity is so prized.

        2. That makes sense, even as a woman I know being with a man would feel more special and like it meant something to him if I was his first or at least one of a small number. But I’m also not looking for advice on how to get more men into bed with me/get them there faster. I think you would need a different kind of game to make it to the altar with a “good girl” than to make it to bed with a slut, and it seems there is a lot more of the latter advice than the former in the manosphere. But then I’m given to understand there are a lot more of the latter type of girl than the former these days.

      3. If I found the right girl and she was still a virgin, I’d be freaking ecstatic after she agreed to marry me. There is more to marriage than sex.

    2. Promiscuous women past their prime want to be married not to bond, but just to have that title of being married. She won’t love her husband. He’s just some simp that she can tolerate. She would still desire that alpha cock, but won’t have the SMV to get one.

      1. the real problem is that she can only tolerate him for a limited time. Then she will divorce rape him and live off the alimony, chilamony, and forced transfer of assets. She may even go through a couple of barely tolerable betas before she gives up on men entirely (i.e. can no longer attract a host).

        1. When she can no longer attract a new host is when she becomes that annoying, full blown feminist that redefine men cat calling attractive women as rape so no other women can enjoy it.

    3. You can’t take at face value what women (at any age) write on their online dating profiles. They usually say they aren’t looking for hook-ups, because they don’t want somebody from work to accidentally find their profile and embarrass them. But almost all are DTF by 2nd date if they find the man attractive. Trust me on that, I’m more average than alpha, and I have seen women put up the front on the profile and the 1st date, just to go nuts by 2nd date. It will happen to you, and then you will be like holy fuck, women say one thing and do another.

      1. The fact women want sex doesn’t prove they don’t want the men they have sex with to commit and settle with them. Of course they like sex, bur that doesn’t mean they don’t want to bond. Specially when they are on the wrong side of 30.
        Trust me you too, women are afraid to say they want to have sex with you, because they think they will lose the option to have you in the future.
        They don’t lie because they are manipulative liars, well, not everyone, only some of them. They lie because they are scared of being alone.

        1. Which is worse though (like would you rather have a 20-year-old with 10 previous partners or a 30-year-old with none? Or split the difference and have a 25-year-old with 5 partners?)?

    4. There’s a difference between “bonding” and “shit, I’m past the wall so I better find a meal-ticket to support my low income self.” The first is love, the second is prostitution.

  13. Society is to far gone. There is no fixing it. There is only chaos and more stupidity coming our way. Look out for yourself and the people you care about, which for me isn’t to many.

  14. indeed smart phones can be as addictive as drugs or sex

    I’m not sure that either smartphones or sex are addictive. But anyway, all we are seeing is the rational response to the new incentive structure provided by democracy. Women are rewarded for having children out of wedlock or divorcing their husbands. So what do we expect them to do?

    1. Expect them to have decency and morals? LOL! Like that will ever happen? They’ll go to church just to appear they have morals, but never practice the teachings.

    2. Even if a conservative came out and said that we’re handing out too much to welfare queens, the individual and their party would immediately lose votes at any election. Additionally, if the individual came to power and cut the handouts to these women, we’d see such an increase in crime that it wouldn’t even be funny. I highly doubt there’s any solution.

  15. “The majority of new births are already out-of-wedlock bastards.” <–In the US this is true, but considering that black out of wedlock births is close to 80% or something I suspect that number drags the US average up a bit.

    1. On top of living in a changing culture–for the worse–I want to punch in the face the idiot who coined the term “millennial.”

  16. When our allegedly ignorant ancestors shamed sluts, shunned bastards and made their daughters marry as virgins, it turns out that they had good reasons for doing so: Women’s premarital sexual adventures damage them for forming stable relationships with men in marriage.

    1. For the same reason they shamed lazy men. In both cases they become a burden on society.

      1. True. With feminism rising, most men don’t have full-time careers anymore or gave up altogether because ladies are happy to baby them now.

    2. Shunned Bastards? Why is it their fault? I could see shunning sluts, but why bastards?

      1. In ‘older’ societies it was felt that children should pay for the crimes of the parent.

        1. Do you have an example of that? In fact to the contrary there have been plenty of “bastard” royalty (example: William the bastard)

      2. Well accepted bastards could turn out successful and then reward their promiscuous mothers in the long term. By keeping them in hardship, that process became more difficult and only admirable bastards could escape their mothers’ perpetual damnation.
        It was good because it meant the artificial selection of capable people among the social “rubbish”.

        1. Or a better method would be to, you know, teach women not to be slutty and men not have sex with sluts…

        2. It was a part of it.
          “Justice” is an empty word for me and for history. You never correct bad things with good deeds (Jesus would disagree, but He ended up murdered). You just use evil against evil. You turn out increasing the amount of evil, of course.
          Gandhi said: “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.” -> It’s true. However, if you don’t take the eye of the criminal in the first place, he will eventually take everybody’s eyes. And that is why Justice is not an absolute idea, but a mere agreement in the edge of a slippery slope.

        3. A) Creating justice is still a good deed B) What does teaching boys good values when it comes to women have to do with “justice”

        4. A) Yes, but “good” only in an unilateral sense (which can be the collective, the victim’s or even the offender’s; usually, in equalitarian societies, the collective side is protected).
          B) Your point with “Why is it their fault? I could see shunning sluts, but why bastards?” was of a judicial/moral nature. You can’t make “fault” work without appealing to “justice”, as it is a subsidiary value.

        5. You can’t teach men not to have sex with sluts anymore than you can teach a woman to not be attracted to high status men. It’s in our DNA/nature. What you can do is shame men who have sex with sluts (which we do to an extreme degree) and encourage women not to be sluts (which we absolutely do not; we encourage women to spread the pussy around as much as possible, as long as it’s not for cash, only for prizes).

        6. “What you can do is shame men who have sex with sluts” Well back in the old days, if you try to have sex someones daughter, they would kick your ass.

      3. Because
        1) The shunning was not that bad, but was real
        2) It reduced the number of bastards
        3) What we have now is worse, go back to shunning bastards.

        1. Bastard-shunning also discouraged women from marrying bastards and perpetuating their genes.

        2. “1) The shunning was not that bad, but was real” No it wasn’t real. For what ever reason people in the late modern era seem to have a false belief that pre 1970’s people were WAY more draconian than they actually were.
          “2) It reduced the number of bastards” Do you think women before having sex think “what if this results in pregnancy and my baby gets shunned?” No, they don’t you idiot.
          “3) What we have now is worse, go back to shunning bastards.” Yep, go back to something that never happened.

    3. Ive seen this charts many times, and it still disturbs me every time one of you guys post it.

      1. I’m with you on that. Add in the fact that we still have significant immigration; the next generation in the US will me majority out of wedlock children and immigrants. Or, put another way, people who’ve been here for at least a generation and born into a stable family will be the minority.
        The only thing I can concentrate is “getting mine”. Thinking about what’s going to happen to those who are less fortunate (IE, born from about 2010 onward) is too fucking depressing.

        1. Its had a great effect of wiping out families with a history(and the expectations that come with it) in the US, hasnt it?

        2. This is one reason I don’t get all the anti-immigrant stuff. I hear you, I am live for the moment look out for me only. But if one thinks about America in 50 years, what would you prefer? Seeing our current trends continue? Or having some traditional, conservative, family oriented Asians and Latinos start families here? They may not look like me, but they act much more like me than the feminist freaks.

        3. Yeah, the anti immigrant stuff is getting a little ridiculous. I don’t think we’ve thought the whole argument through. If we say no to all immigration, then another country doing the same thing would be just as valid. Which means no more waking up with some random Asian, Latin, or Eastern European in a t shirt cooking us breakfast on one of our expat trips!

    4. Right on. Look at this shit. If you don’t want out of wedlock children and the all the problems that go along with it, in terms of mental illness and criminality, etc., then you create societal norms which punish it. That’s all mean and bad and not the bastard’s fault, but what would you rather have? A fucking unstable society where 40 percent (and rising) of kids are born out of wedlock, or a healthy society where a small number of sluts and their bastard children are shunned? Civilizational collapse or women facing the consequences of their actions by not being allocated resources or celebrated for getting knocked up without being married? There’s pain either way, but it’s a matter of which pain is preferable. So which is preferable, the pain of a lesser amount of bastard children who are shunned, or the pain many many bastard children experience by being raised in dysfunctional homes, along with the pain they cause society?

      1. About one third of 1940’s and 1950’s brides walked preggars down the aisle. “Shotgun” marriages were reviled and repudiated in the 1960’s as a source of misery and discontent mostly for men, but also for women and children “trapped” in them.

    5. Look at that drop after just ONE partner…
      Marrying a modern woman is absolutely stupid. Even if she doesn’t leave you, she will never respect you because you don’t measure up to that football team that got to pass her prime age self around.

      1. This also shows the complete bullshit that women in their late 20’s settle for the nerds because they have “matured” after learning from their youthful follies that the cool boys don’t make good husband material. No, these women would still have their fun with the cool guys, if they could; but past the Wall they can’t attract those kinds of men, especially in competition with younger women.

      2. That’s a good point. The difference between zero to one partner is roughly the same difference as one partner and slut (20+). Virginity is of primal importance.

  17. I read the other day that Bernie Sanders thinks the pharmaceutical industry – Big Pharma – has gotten out of control, and if we elected him Socialist President he would put it under better regulation.
    Yet Sanders supports women’s right to ingest artificial hormones, produced by Big Pharma, so that these women can sabotage their natural fertility cycle and engage in sterile and alienating sexual encounters with men who have no intention of marrying the women and forming families with them.
    Women’s bodies and minds didn’t evolve to handle this kind of abuse. No wonder so many women these days suffer from depression, anxiety, eating disorders, hostility, loss of sexual interest and early menopause.
    Sanders must know this connection between hormonal contraception and women’s ruined lives on some level, but he can’t speak out about Big Pharma’s role in this because he needs feminists’ support. Better to criticize Big Pharma for making AIDS drugs too expensive because Sanders needs the gay degenerate vote as well.

      1. Yeah, well, a lot of “unbankable” things have happened in American politics lately. The Overton Window has shifted so much that we could have a Sanders-like President in the 2020’s.

        1. People who are following the leftist/SJW trend now can always grow out of it. In that same window, you will have a substantial portion of the populace moving to the right.

        2. Sanders has proved to the Democrats that they can be openly atheistic, openly redistributionist, openly degenerate and still get votes, but the man himself cannot win. The powers-that-be have chosen Hillary as the 2016 Dem nominee.

        3. They way I see it, Bernie has already ‘won’ because he went from being a punchline to the face of the values of millennial voters…they want the government to be mom & dad from cradle to the grave. The long march to socialism has started, the only way to stop it is to show that prosperity is the alternative, but the path to that is blocked for many at this point.

    1. I can argue the same about medicines that treat erectile dysfunction. Maybe men aren’t meant to be overly active sexually, the key word here is overtly. Yet, as I have pointed out in the past, these meds such as Viagra aren’t being marketed as much to the men with said problem as more to the women of those men. And as you mentioned, female hormones are being marketed aggressively. Coincidence, or just speculation on my part.

      1. Partially true (men in their later years, 70’s+ aren’t really built for much sex anymore). But also the fatpocolapse is a major contributor here. I couldn’t talk my dick into a fucking blowjob from the cows most of my friends are married to, let alone fucking them.
        If you’ve ever been with a woman you don’t find attractive, you’ll know that the dick don’t lie.
        Put these men with “ED” in bed with a hot ass 20 year old, I suspect the vast majority of the “ED” cases will disappear.
        Fucking fat women is really what’s not in our nature; it’s not that being overly sexually active is a problem.

        1. It’s also an overtly sexualized culture we live in now. I suspect even people who encourage or are practicing sexual abstinence are doing it not for other benefits, whether realistic or not, but because once they get married, they get to “make love”, whatever that means.
          As for way older men not being built for sex, that us mostly true. Of course there are exceptions. Take the example of Dr. Julio Iglesias Sr., father to Spanish crooner Julio Iglesias Jr and grandfather to Enrique Iglesias. The man managed to get his woman pregnant at 89. And she was 42 already so that made it extra exceptional. Of course the downside was, he died about a year and a half later, in December 2005. Even had he lived longer, I couldn’t see him playing catch with his son. And yet, this is what modern culture is pushing. It truly doesn’t seem to go with how humans have operated for millennia. Although quite honestly, I wouldn’t mind being 90 and having a hot college girl take care of me.

        2. i agree and consequently, I truly believe that fat women are at the root of the downfall of our society. and I’m 100% dead serious about that.

        3. Just to point out to any that are curious that Viagra is an extremely powerful drug and not to be treated lightly, despite popular culture treating it as “a bit of a larf” . A fraction of a fraction of a tablet will do. The author above is absolutely correct. A lot of erectile dysfunction is due to boredom or unattractive partners.

  18. Millennial females are the first generation to grow up with unlimited access to porn 24/7, and the ability to order sex on their phone like getting pizza delivered, and over-the-counter abortion pills. Half were raised by single moms who divorced their father after 7 years, and believe that marriage is optional. They are the result of 2 generations raised on feminist values. By the 3rd generation, females with notch count of 100 partners will be normalized, polyamory will be normalized, the term beta male will be synonymous with cuckcold in the dictionary.

    1. Feminists will write articles about how great it is to raise children (especially boys) without a ‘male’ influence around. “Acting Masculine” will be an insult, males will be told its perfectly healthy to ‘experiment’ with group sex and bisexuality. Weaker, more soft spoken males will be encouraged to ‘get some hormones’ and ‘be one of the girls’ , “Mans work” will be an insult to signify mindless manual labor.

      1. When the feminist horns go on in the media proclaiming the virtues of single whores raising boys or the state usurping the authority of parents, we all need to buckle down and brush up on our heckling routines. We all need to be ready to roll with slams and rotten veggies when a femguru hits the stage. Look at the mobs that were mobilized against Roosh. If Melissa Harris Perry were to speak at a local campus for example, she should be met with mobs of detractors before she even leaves the airport.

  19. If we understood that humans are intrinsically depraved by nature, and virtue consists in putting our natural tendencies in check, we’ll begin to understand why granting anyone everything they want is never good for them or for society. That is why feminism, with its incessant demands, can only lead society to the deepest parts of hell.
    Only God can make us good; we are naturally evil beyond description.

    1. feminism is keeping everything I want (beautiful women) in check by supplying and encouraging obese oompaloompahs from sea to shining sea. so by your statement, feminism is doing good for our society.

      1. Exactly what the author was trying to address: feminism and its “rewards” may feel good for a short time; but the repercussions are very destructive to the individual and to society.
        Hint: find out where debauchery took the almighty Rome.

    2. “we are naturally evil beyond description”
      Speak for yourself. I don’t believe in any silly jew god stories, and at the age of 32 I don’t have a single victim. Not that I’m perfect.
      That attitude enables the truly evil to run roughshod over the rest of us.

  20. Are You Tired of Social Justice Warriors, Feminists, or Cultural Marxism? Join an Exciting Online Study!  Are you a male?
     Are you at least 17 years old?
     Are you worried about the current state of politically correct culture?
    If you answered YES to these questions, please participate in on our study of social attitudes and online behaviors. Please refer to the link below for more information:

  21. Neoplatonist St. Augustine rightfully suggested a dualistic relationship of our “lower selves” (figuratively and literally” and our “higher selves”. In Platonic terms: the mind and body. We are animal beings at the core, but because we are endowed with the gift of reasons and cognition, we can formulate “right” and “wrong”. Our true advantage is the causality we come to realize that “right” is what is in tune to nature (our “lower self’s” instincts) with guidance by our moral agency (“higher self”). Basically: sex between man and woman: good. Sex between man and man and woman and woman: bad. Woman with instinct to procreate and keep species alive, instead has sex with many: bad.
    The left and their elitist masters represent the lower self unchained. They desire this knowing that it will ultimately destroy us.

  22. “But imagine a world where there was no plane to sex other than physical stimulation. No emotional component. No mental challenge. No sense of personal connection or intimacy.”
    This immediately brought to mind what I see a lot on OKCupid. The predominance of “polyamorous” types. Seemingly mostly from California.
    It is as if they were avoiding the challenges and difficulty of maintaining a real relationship. It is that whole, “gotta feel good all the time” mentality. They try to avoid the trials and tribulations that make a real relationship strong.
    It is unrealistic and simple minded. That la-la land mindset is why we are in such trouble now.

  23. To understand where things are going we must examine what has occurred in the past. When previous attempts failed to engineer society it became apparent that what exists must first be destroyed to rebuild it so it will be as desired. By creating greater and greater idiots and attacking the family those who wish to engineer society will get what they desire. People will be considered too incompetent to make their own decisions and that decision making will pass to the state. The raising of children if not only available to licensed parents will be done by the state. A state controlled by the social engineers.
    What I state here isn’t a remarkable or a unique insight. It is a theme from science fiction in the 20th century that attempted to predict the trends from what was known then. The failed attempts of the early 20th century. They’ve simply changed forms but the goals are no different. People went to sleep but the social engineers have been working.

  24. Fuck feminism for believing that a woman should be promiscuous and have no social judgement for it. Women are hardwired by nature to seek few partners because the least amount of partners guarantees a greater likelihood that they will be protected and cared for by the father of their children. In my psychology course many surveys were taken about what both women and med valued in partners. Overall, women have a much stronger tendency towards those who can provide for them and has masculine personality traits that prove the ability protect them. There was such a shit show from the class feminists, but studies prove them wrong time and time again. In today’s age, people forget the reason why virginal marriages and chastity is so highly valued in women, because it plays to the already preexisting biological tendencies of both men and women. Although, I don’t think waiting until marriage is for everyone, a women should not date someone she wouldn’t marry. People seem to be more about having a quick sexual relationship, not a loving one for life, and it really doesn’t help anyone.

    1. Whether someone ‘waits’ for marriage before sex with their partner is a moot point. Families recognized by the creator should stay as invisible to the radar of the state as they can if they are to survive currently. ‘Legal marriage’ and ‘pair bonding/family’ are two separate things. The same ‘state’ that stamps a marriage certificate then uses it as a homing beacon to target the family. Also legally married folks make the mistake of resting on a false sense of security that they’re set and safe. They get lazy eye and partners stray and wander. But the renegade family/clan remains primed and ready to fend off threats to the structural integrity of the unit whereas legally married families who lean on church or state to resolve matters will find their trusted authorities are empowered to specifically dismember the unions of families. I mention ‘church’ with people like this witch in mind. I wouldn’t let any of my younger tribe near her:
      The flakey bitch did the black widow on the man and then with the diocese help, she is pedestalized as a survivor of a train wreck that she instigated. The bitch figuratively ‘drove her kids into the lake while strapped into the dodge caravan’ or she ‘drowned the demons in the tub’. Sound familiar? Every wylie bitch gets a little itchy to ‘eat a baby’ at least once in a blue moon. Stupid cocky women preachers are no different obviously. Just once I wish I could shoot burkas out of my wrist like spiderman. I’d go around campuses ”thonk” ”thonk” ”thonk”. And absolutely I’d get that preacher lady bitch ”kaa-WHOONK”!! I’d give her a checkered or a red paisley one and a big padded one at that. Or better yet:
      ”ooh-la-la” . . ‘Ginger and Maryanne’ a-la 21st century!! Pre covenant Israelite women dressed like that too you know.
      The autonomous family/clan is in peril and under attack. The solidarity of a greater tribe are its core families. They are the supporting pillars. The state’s demolishing of the family units will result in a levelling or ‘strip malling’ of the previous architecture of the preceding civilization. Alliegance to tribe must override patronage to the state. The state’s imposing of ‘state husbandry’ on its peoples is a fragile vice much reliant on technology.

  25. “Why be loyal to a woman when you have a steady supply of vaginas?”
    Yeah, right. How many men can make that claim?
    The fact is that in the kind of society you describe, and to which we are heading with accelerating velocity, fewer and fewer men will be having more and more sex. The rest will be on the hook for socialized support of these bastard spawn. Look for a LOT more Elliot Rodgers, George Sodinis, Adam Lanzas, et al.

    1. Very few can make that claim, but still play game and yearn for a fresh challenge over what they’ve got. Is this new? Nope. What is new is that women walk when they get tired of him being tired of her provided they have the financial resources to do so.

    2. So Adam Lanza (allegedly) shot 2 dozen kids and teachers not because he was batshit crazy but because he couldn’t get laid? Duly noted. And as for the rest of your observation, there’s always ugly chicks. They all look the same in the dark (or is that upside down)?

  26. We are already there in the West. I spend allot of time in the East where I notice the ‘Feminism poison’ poisoning every country in the world. I notice it more in cities compare to the country where these slutty women don’t understand why they are so unhappy…
    Eastern people don’t really like westerners cause its destroying their families and country!

  27. Hi Max, you on the right track here. Let me show you a few truths hidden within.
    “women do not have their actions and behaviors controlled by men,”
    Women DO have their actions and behaviros controlled by men. It was like this in the middle ages and it is like this today.
    But there is a difference. In the old days, it was the top male in the household. More often than not, it was an alpha male. Women behave well under an alpha.
    Today women are mostly controlled by the goverment. Yes thats right; i am saying the goverment did replace the traditional alpha male. This sux in more than one way and we will get to it in a minute.
    Now first, let us look at the beast itself. What IS the goverment?
    There are many ways to answer this question. To me, the goverment is the collective of beta males. Think about the “grey men” or a legion of clerks who do their job 9-5 every day for 40 years. THAT is what the goverment is all about. The DMV worker.
    These guys are horrible leaders for women. Under their control women get fat, ugly, short haired and dildo addicted. They are also horrible leaders of nations. Insolvency looming. Wars lost. Immigrants to replace the homelander-babies not born to name a few of the problems they created.
    Solution: If you dont like it where you live -> move your ass to a better place. It is as simple as that.

    1. Actually I think women have the capacity to behave under dominion of the Alpha. Alphas are special and need to learn righteousness otherwise they’re destined to become like Bart Simpsons and become exceedingly mischievous or rogue. The order is in their hands. They must be wise.
      Anyone who tames animals knows that the loyal dog, for example’, is only putting on an act to please their master. As soon as that thoroughbred you have at the dog show hears the howl of a real wild wolf, that’s when he disobeys and turns. The real pack leader just usurped your authority away. Tame german shepherds can also turn after years of loyalty when they are in the presence of their real pack leader. Dogs have a genetic pack mentality just as humans have a tribal coding. I’ve heard of a tiny pommeranian suddenly snarling at his owner like a wild rabid skunk when wolves would roam outside and howl nearby. ”It’s like little fifi forgot who we were. He stared at us like a wild animal ready to fight or flee.”
      Here in the west, I believe we have a lot more alphas than can be accounted for. Many males have had their alpha suppressed medically at a young age, by circumcision, or by a dominant or feminized mother or a single mother who teaches her young the rule of ‘state husbandry’. State husbandry competes with tribal alphas. The state war against the family unit is as old as the famed ‘battle of the sexes’ in nature. Dig deep in your pockets western man. Your alpha never dies. The age of man nears.

  28. It’s pretty obvious where this ends.
    The men, on whom any economic organization above the level of subsistence farming depends, drop out of the formal economy, and stop working and paying taxes into a system out of which they get no benefit whatsoever, not even sexual satisfaction.
    (Given complete freedom of choice, women always prefer Arab and African savages. Someone with a huge cock not above treating women like the cum dumpsters they are in bed and beating the crap out of them if they misbehave outside it.)
    The industrial civilization that makes the sisterhood’s self-indulgence possible collapses. What remains is easy picking for the first invader smart enough to see to it that womenfolk behave.
    The trouble with feminism is that sooner or later you run out of daddy’s money.

  29. Are You Tired of Social Justice Warriors, Feminists, Cultural Marxism? Join an Exciting Online Study!
     Are you a male?
     Are you at least 17 years old?
     Are you worried about the current state of politically correct culture?
    If you answered YES to these questions, please help the cause and participate in on our study of social attitudes and online behaviors. Please refer to the link below for more information:

  30. This is classic RoK click B8. But having stated the obvious, Roscoe (who BTW is quite handsome; looks like a young Ryan O’Neal) overlooks the 500lb gorilla, to wit, this moral and societal breakdown is indicative of late-stage capitalism. You can run from the dialectic but you can’t hide.

  31. A bit of evolutionary biology about our species. Firstly, the concept that woman are virginal, submissive and loyal is simply not how they operate. Not because they are sluts or tramps but they are hard wired to procure the attention and protection of the alpha male. An alpha male is a bit like a movie star – they only have the spotlight for a short time before someone knocks them off their pedastool and takes the place. Naturally and logically a female looking for attention and protection will migrate towards the next alpha male. So on and So on – in this situation it is likely that in a wild situation a human female will produce offspring from a series of alpha males as has been detected in excavations of stone age family groups and is commonly seen in other primates. An alpha male would probably have more than one female in his harem but a female will go through a succession of alpha males throughout her lifespan.
    No big suprises there but here is where it gets interesting. What about the non-alpha males or perhaps the ones competing to become the alpha male. Well, modern DNA testing has rung up some rather alarming statistics. Firstly, DNA testings of family units from as little as 100 years ago and up to 1200 years ago has shown that 25% of all offspring born to a family are not the biological offspring of the father within the family. Given the large size of family units, this equates to at least 1/4 of the children are not biologically the males.
    How is it possible – simply put, a female will copulate outside of her “marriage” and produce offspring with other men as a way to make sure her gene pool as spread amongst a variety of men and this gives diversity to her offspring. If it is in her best interest to stay with the alpha male she will simply pass off the offspring as his and this will protect the offspring. Younger, more robust males will attempt to copulate with as many females as possible to spread their genes and they will do it on the sly to avoid confrontation with the alpha male. No matter how much the alpha male attempts to protect his harem, it only takes a minute or so behind his back for two people to copulate.
    Biologically, woman are NOT loyal to one man, they are not virginal and if they appear to be so, it is to protect their own interest – this explains why they may lie about previous sexual partners or act submissive – By acting submissive a woman will lul the alpha male into a false sense of security.
    Of course, modern DNA testing has served to highlight just how many woman have passed off another mans child as his own. (Jerry Springer anyone)
    Men now preen themselves to appeal to woman, to make themselves look sexy they get waxed, tanned, go the gym to get fit, dress fashionably, spray aftershave upon themselves, all in an attempt to appear as the alpha male. Young woman are exposed to a constant supply of alpha males and as such have gone into a “rapid cycling” from one alpha male to the next. Is it any suprise that they jump into bed with a different man every week.
    Woman are not these delicate flowers, virginal and pure or contrarily, they are not whores who screw anything. They are something in the middle and just like you and I, they have animalistic tendencies that reflect in civilized social behavior. Although the ideal of a submissive, younger and virginal wife is a fantasy for most men, the biology does not support it. If you do marry a younger virgin, chances are she will have moved on to the next alpha male while you are in your wheel chair – the best you can hope for is that perhaps one of her offspring is at least yours.
    Very sobering thought.

    1. “They are something in the middle and just like you and I, they have animalistic tendencies that reflect in civilized social behavior”
      Yeah , except that they lie about it and would never agree that they have those animalistic tendencies. It is this lying and refusal from them to see their true nature that most baffles me. Most truly think they are delicate flowers whose shit don’t stink.

    2. “that 25% of all offspring born to a family are not the biological offspring of the father”
      This happens mostly to BETA males. ALphas do not have to worry much about this at all. Why? The alpha man has great genes first – he makes a great father for her children. Often he also has money, fame, protection but this comes second. Dead poor criminals who are alpha as fuck are a good example.
      On the other hand the beta male has bad to average genes. Women dont want his children, so they do not find him attractive. He has to compensate this disability with money, protection. Many women will at some point accept this deal and marry Mr. beta. If she can snag some young alpha DNA at the side and have Mr. beta schlub raise the alpha kid, even better for her.

  32. Goodness — I wish I had come of age in the 1950s or 1960s, well-aware of my proper role in society and properly-educated in how to go about fulfilling said role. The part my gender has played in the devaluation of family life and disintegration of traditional gender roles is heartbreaking. 🙁

  33. The ironic thing about our current predicament is that feminism is enabled by technology, democracy, and liberty. All of which are the result of the masculine spirit doing what it does best: creation. Without civilization, the feminine would be restricted to its proper place where it can do no harm.
    I’m not advocating for the destruction of civilization as a solution, but this is an important observation to make. What we ought to take away from this is that man must consciously foster and preserve his masculinity. We need to have institutions and cathedrals created for the sole purpose of worshiping and the preserving the masculine spirit.
    If we fail to do this, the author is right in his prediction that we will either become extinct or civilization will collapse. Fortunately or unfortunately, there isn’t much of a difference between the two for men like us.

Comments are closed.