Hey, horny “nice guys,” you know how you’re always saying nice things to girls and sometimes telling they’re pretty in hopes they decide to sleep with you? Or just gawking at them at the gym?
Turns out that this isn’t such a good thing. Not so much because, you know, staring at women like you’re a serial killer might just creep a lot of women out. But because all this attention might well turn these women into stuck-up you-know-whats, which is a major pain for the world’s horny guys.
In a post on Roosh’s Return of Kings blog with the lovely title “How Women Become Worthless,” some dude named Edward Thatch explains the deadly consequences of people being nice to pretty ladies.
These women, he writes,
start out as decent specimens, but somehow manage to find themselves on the red pill man’s pump-and-dump list. This is a bittersweet topic for me, because while I enjoy a random romp with girls who have managed to concentrate all of their worth between their legs, I’m also well aware of the many added benefits of girlfriending up a good one.
So how do these women become worthless bitches? Well, you see, there’s this thing called the Peter Principle, which suggests that people get promoted and promoted until they end up with a job that’s beyond their capabilities. (Never mind all those people out there who are actually a good fit for their jobs.)
Anyhoo, this happens to pretty ladies too!
A pretty girl posts a sexy pic on facebook and you click like.
You just promoted her.
The same girl goes to the gym, and a dozen guys stare at her like hungry wolves.
Promoted again. …
Everything that comes out of her pretty little mouth is super relevant and interesting to the guys who want to bang her.
Promoted again.
Her beta orbiters trip over themselves trying to please her just for the satisfaction of being near her.
Promotion!
The list goes on and on, but you get the idea. From the day she’s born until the day she slams into the wall in her mid-30s, she just keeps being promoted until she reaches her level of incompetence. When the day comes that she can’t live up to the position she’s trying to fill – most awesome, sexy and unique thing everrrrr – she becomes a worthless self-centered bore who ends up in my phone as “Blonde HB7 Tiny Boobs Wrist Tattoo.”
Who knew that life for women was nothing more than an endless parade of male flattery? Or that women feel empowered whenever creepy dudes blatantly ogle their bodies at the gym.
So some women end up thinking that they’re pretty. What’s the harm here? Well, you see, men suffer enormously when women think they’re even a teensy bit hotter than they “really” are. It’s much better for everyone – if by “everyone” you mean all the guys trying to sleep with them – if women hate themselves a little. Or a lot.
Unfortunately, Thatch laments, it’s men who are to blame for women thinking too highly of themselves.
We create these monsters by promoting otherwise good women far above their grade. If you’re doing this, I respectfully ask you to stop.
As it stands now, these poor overpromoted women end up hitting the proverbial wall when they hit the age of 30, or 25, or 15, or whatever, and suddenly become transformed from young hotties into old hags. And while this is, Thatch proclaims, “a hilarious version of downsizing that sends the old, fat or ugly ones to the feminist welfare line,” he also thinks this is not economically efficient.
Far better for men to handle the “sexual marketplace” in a more rational and efficient way, he concludes, “by knocking off the beta orbiting, white knighting, and supplication that keeps promoting these women to positions they cannot handle.”
Surprisingly, Thatch’s argument provokes some dissent amongst Roosh’s Neanderthal followers. Stuki, for example, points out that Facebook likes might not amount to a damn in this crazy world.
A problem with this diagnosis, is that a single pump and dump … by a perceived alpha or “hot guy”, counts for more than a million Facebook likes, as far as perception of being “promoted” goes. …
It’s not as if women don’t feel equally “promoted” by the guy trying to feel her up at the bar, just because he throws her some neg first, instead of a compliment. IOW, the solution to women being bitches, is not men becoming assholes. If being a whore had real, serious and immediate consequences, women would largely stop being whores. But as long as the only consequence is that she will “forced” to go out alone, and get her “revenge” on her “intolerant”, “sexist” and “Stepford Wife obsessed” ex, by being banged in a toilet stall by someone ostensibly (through beer goggles, if nothing else) handsomer and more “alpha” than he was, she’ll never get it. Whether Mr. Toilet Stall Banger negs her or compliments her first, doesn’t really matter.
Note that Stuki here apparently thinks he’s somehow not already an asshole.
VargisBitch takes issue, a little bit, with the term “worthless.”
They are not worthless but … western women reach a point of uselessness. They have value in the beginning but at that time, they dont use that value for anything serious other that getting pumped left and right, attention whoring etc, you know, the sex and the city dream..after many years of this they are just beyond rescue, their self insteem is inflated beyond any reasonable level…plus they are getting rather old. So yea, at that exact moment, they become wortless. But they still have no reason to panic, there are hordes of horny bluepill men, who didnt get sex during THEIR prime , to pick the sorry remains..
When you understand the dynamics behind this, you are a redpill man.
Most commenters seem to agree, though, with the broad outlines of Thatch’s, er, analysis. Madvillain complains that there are even a few “white knights” to be found even in the manly world of the manosphere.
While there are almost no white night panderers in the manosphere, when a commenter comes along with the user name like “”just a girl”, or “SunshineMary”, guys will breath in that pussy scent wafting from the female name on their computer monitor and congregate around her, demonstrating their alpha intelligence by explaining the ways of the world to the cute little lamb.
Hammer, meanwhile, fantasizes about putting fat ladies in camps.
You can’t just haul off all the worthless ones and put them in some adjacent zone to live in. Instead you have to step into every relationship with a girl knowing she’s going to lie at some point, that she’ll try to manipulate to gain the upperhand, that she will try to contribute very little if anything and that she will start acting difficult at some point along the way, and for what? I honestly don’t know how men have tolerated the crap women throw at them for so long. …
I never thought I’d say this but maybe a benevolent dictator would be good for a while. A red pill dictator, who would put all the fatties into one zone, we’ll call it the Fat Zone, another can be called the Fem Zone for feminists, all manner of zones so that they could live among their ilk. Want join the Athletic Zone where people are in reasonable good shape? Lose weight, stop eating. Want to join the Equal Zone where men and women are treated equal where men do not give most of the social, economic and legal benefits to women? Sign a contract stating such explicitly. Want to join the Man Zone where the men make the rules and rule the roost? Sign on the dotted line gals. Everyone can get what they truly want. Maybe it won’t be perfect but I sure as hell would prefer it.
Turbo the Drycleaner, who apparently is too manly to bother with the shift key, doesn’t think that technology is the issue here.
beta males are no new invention and have existed, in large numbers, since time began. they are not going away. just because online dating and facebook have immortalized their hamfisted attempts at getting poosy dosnt mean it didnt happen before. girls would get all sorts of looks, gifts, and marrage proposals way back when that fed their egos. you could say that because they are now online, a woman can have constant access to validation but thats not a whole lot diffrent than living in a rural area, as many used to, and seeing the same orbiters every day.
Days of Broken Arrows disagrees:
White knighting was less a problem before the Internet age. You could only stare at a woman so long and most Betas didn’t just walk up to strange women and compliment them.
But nowadays, Facebook and Instagram are major ego-stroking devices for women. Someone needs to do a post called “NEVER like a woman’s Facebook photo.” The massive amount of orbiters on FB makes me ill.
One day in 1955, Rosa Parks refused to give up her seat on the bus for a white man, and helped to usher in a civil rights revolution. Could Days of Broken Arrows’ brave refusal to “like” women’s Facebook pictures usher in a similar revolution, this time for men who are so terribly bruised and oppressed by women with self-esteem?
Who’s the suspected radfem? :
Yes I did, Argenti. And the answer was and still is……………NEITHER. I am male FYI.
And CWS, that’s a mighty spiffy haircut.
Only the cool cats, you mean. Your cat is a total square, Cassandra.
Twist of the century.
Me! I is the evol Radical Feminist.
My cat stubbornly resists my attempts to introduce her to a life of debauchery.
@Katz
Looks like AVFP’s picked up its first sexist comment, on the “pick-up agriculture” comic :
Very young cats rarely respond to cat nip. When they are a few months old most do. Some dramatically and others not so much. Nearly all cats respond to valerian root.
Lowquacks, I know, I’ve got comment moderation on. (Didn’t see any reason not to let that one through, though.)
Soooomeone doesn’t know how biology works! Protip: menopause doesn’t mean you’ve literally run out of eggs. For starters.
Someone not Demarcq, when’d he answer the question before just now? I was distracted by things like keeping a fire going and petting a kitteh and having a clown loach try to eat my hand (I’m apparently tasty, I’ve never had a loach nibble on me before, it was adorable!)
Demarcq — you’re complaining about women complaining, please grow a sense of irony and get back to us!
As we established in the other thread, that’s only true once someone observes your genitals. Until then you have Schrodinger’s Dick.
For the love of all that’s good please don’t ask him to prove it.
Except that gender =/= genitals. Like, at all.
“Until then you have Schrodinger’s Dick.”
*standing ovation* That’s so getting texted to the not-an-ex!
Schrödinger’s dangly bits for gender neutrality?
Except that gender =/= genitals. Like, at all.
Of course! But somehow both things work to determine whether you have a “real” job or not. ;p
Schrodinger’s Junk?
lowquacks — that’s kind of why I love it though, wtf my genitals are is the business of me and anyone with permission to access said genitals. It’s moot to anyone’s application of pronouns and gender. Wtf do I have in my pants? Schrödinger’s dick unless you’ve been granted access to find out. (As in, none of your business and since you can’t know without looking, just use the pronouns you’ve been asked to use)
You’re right of course, but that’s *why* I love it. Am I making any sense?
“And Shiraz: I am aware that women have sex for pleasure and not just to have babies and that plenty of women don’t actually want to have babies(though I’m quite certain such women are less than 50% of the human female population). But that doesn’t change the fact that sexual selection is driven by instinct and emotional response, regardless of whether or not any individual may want offspring and quite often without regard for the consequences of sex.”
You’re certain it’s less than 50 percent of the population? Hmmm. Umm, citation please?
I don’t understand your statement, “…that doesn’t change the facet the sexual selection is driven by instinct and emotional response…”
None of your previous posts hinted at the realization of instinct and emotional response — because bio-truth is king! According to your previous posts. Sexual selection? Define what you mean by that. I’m guessing that you’re implying that men choose women based on what they look like and women choose men based on…I dunno, explain what you mean. It’s very difficult to have sex with someone you are not physically attracted to. I say this as a women.
I go by instinct and emotional response and a million other things. What on earth are you trying to imply? That my preferences don’t count, because I’m not a man?
Bagelsan — the not-an-ex and I are already using dangly bits, but junk works just as well, probably better for the rest of the world not already using dangly bits.
Duh, he means women’s instinctive attraction to money, which evolved back when our cave-dwelling ancestors had both printed money and coins, distributed by The Cave Mint.
Attractiveness is a social construct yes, but wow do you have no idea what a social construct is. If you actually understood it, you would already understand that there’s a socially developed idea of what is “attractive” and then there’s personal variation, which means people are individuals and find different things attractive, some of which vary widely from the social construct. There is no objective definition of “attractive” and a single individual may be attractive to one person and not another for about a billion reasons. Many of which, btw, have little to do with the person’s appearance. There is no universal or equal level involved here, because peoples is peoples and they have different needs and desires.
How do you know that? I know about 5 women out of the 50 or so that I know who actively wanted kids. I realize you have no earthly idea how stats and sampling and data actually work, but still, citation needed.
Sexual attraction may operate on instinct and emotion (often but not always) but sex does not always do so. People who are not MRAs often think about their choices rather than assuming if their dick vibrates they are entitled to fuck whatever is making it vibrate no matter what the other person wants.
Many, many people, in fact, may feel a sexual attraction to a person and do absolutely nothing about it, because we are capable of thought. And women, having vastly more to risk in having sex with a man, are far, far more likely to think about the consequences and risks before having sex, especially with someone they do not know very well.
Hi, usual lurker here, and while I know it’s not a good idea to feed the trolls, I… I just had to address this fail by Demarq, because it physically hurt me. Like, I have bruises from this comment.
“If a woman makes a mistake and sleeps with a man who is carrying genes that result in a child that has traits which confer a disadvantage(chronic illness, early death, lifelong disability,etc) then she is pretty much to raise and care for this kid however long both of them are alive together.”
You know they could easily abandon the child if it was sickly or a burden on the family, right? Or if the kid is so sickly, they’ll die anyway, so the hypothetical couple can try again and hope for a healthier child. Or adopt a healthier child, and teach it, therefore STILL passing on their traits, successfully adding to humanity.
“Keep in mind that men and women have been having choosing their partners long before child support( and civilization ). A man can father children well into his 80s and can potentially father 1000s of a children. Even if a woman got started in her teens and tried to have as many babies as her body would allow, she’d be lucky to pop out 20(or more). ”
Okay, just because a baby is born, it does not mean said baby will make it to adulthood successfully. Or go on to reproduce successfully during adulthood. Which means a guy could easily have 1000 babies, but because of his neglect, he could still become a biological dead end, while a dude who only had one child but stuck around to make sure said child would make it to adulthood could end up with thousands of progeny in only a few generations. Both are reproductive strategies that humans could use (because yanno, having just one is evolutionary stagnation right away)
HOWEVER, humans are not solitary creatures, and therefore live in mutually beneficial groups ( be it families or tribes or villages or cities or nations).Therefore a man who likes to bang and run, wouldn’t be able to run away IN a small community, but AWAY from one, meaning that while he would get better chances at reproduction, he’d also be generally less healthy, as he would lack the steady flow of resources a community offers and have to deal with harsh environments..
Also, if the guy is just reproducing wit hone night stands, what are the chances he manages to get a woman on her fertile days? A guy that sticks around is more likely to hit the fertile period and actually get a woman pregnant in the first place.
“If a man makes a bad choice of woman, he can simply run off and find another woman to knock up. ”
What stops a woman from doing the same? If there’s a kid, a woman could easily leave it with the father (considering he contributed about 50% of it’s genetics). It would still be reproductively beneficial for the father to raise his kid rather than let it die, so there should be an instinct for that, no?
“Have you people forgotten about the female biological clock?”
How about the male biological clock? sperm count decreases over time, and the body decays over time, meaning it’d be harder to find potential mates, no matter said man’s strategy. And who’s going to help this guy SURVIVE even, anyway? No young woman would bother with such an old sac when there are younger and more beneficial candidates. You know what would help though? A mate, community, or CHILDREN to care for him. Again, decent reproductive strategy, horrible survival strategy.
” A woman is born with all the egg cells she will have in her entire life.”
Which is several million. And it’s not like all the millions of sperm a man produces are all used in reproduction. Most of them die anyway. And there’s no way a man can fuck millions of people anyway. So. JUST SAYIN.
And all the stuff I mentioned above? IRRELEVANT IN MODERN SOCIETY. after 10,000 years of civilization (IF NOT MORE), social structures and human behavior have changed. Most people actively avoid getting pregnant until it’s convenient for them, because they have other priorities. There are medically safe ways to get rid of a pregnancy. One night stands are a REALLY shitty way of reproducing nowadays, and making this a primary mating strategy virtually guarantees you being a genetic dead end. So basically, you’re being evolved away, as nature intended.
GOOD RIDDANCE.
Oh gosh, I accidentally double period-ed, I am so sorry, I will go flog myself now.