Men, beware! The woman who just texted you “happy birthday” isn’t a nice person wishing you a “happy birthday.” She is, rather, a demoness from hell. Or at the very least a creepy “attention whore tease” who won’t let you into her pants.
According to racist shitbag “game” blogger Heartiste, any woman who texts men on special occasions “is a cocktease in digital form” trying to make sure you remain one of her “beta orbiter … cuckubines,” which is his fancy way of saying “friend.”
As he sees it, these dastardly Special Occasion Texters (SOTs) have only bad reasons to text dudes on special days. The SOT may be doing some routine “Beta Orbiter Maintainance.”
She texts birthday messages to all the beta male orbiters she has accumulated over the years, and she does this as part of a maintenance program to keep her orbiters from spinning too far out of her orbit (or, conversely, too close to her planet). … She needs those suck-ups sucking up to her emotional needs, and sometimes that requires sending a tiny sliver of romantic hope — say, a birthday text — to her cuckubines.
If she’s feeling insecure, she might be trying to reassure herself that she has a few interested men “in the wings.”
Or she might be “a wicked mindfucker who gets off stringing men betas along.”
These all kind of seem like the same reason to me, but what the heck.
In any case, Heartiste strongly urges his followers not to “chomp on her bland beta boob bait.”
Amazing alliteration, asshole!
Happily, Heartiste notes, you can totally get her back for this terrible act of hers, and possibly even lure her into your bedroom by … waiting a day before texting her back. And then being a bit of a dick about it.
Don’t move immediately to pin her down for a real date. Instead, wait a day, then reply “did u wish me happy labor day? weirdo.” Or, “you’re so cute when you stalk me”. The female SOT needs to know that you aren’t the kind of desperate guy to ask “how shiny?” when she tells you to polish her pedestal. She needs to be reminded in so many words that SHE’S the one who texted YOU, not the other way around, and this reminder of her active solicitation will reinforce the implication in her mind that you are the higher value company to keep.
Nothing screams “high value” like obsessing on the internet about how to outwit women with catty text messages.
Heartiste adds a little postscript:
PS If you want to use a SOT to open the lines of communication with a prospect, one irresistibly jerkish maneuver is to text the girl “happy bday” two weeks after her actual birthday. When she responds (and she will) that you’re two weeks late, grace her with a laconic “woops”. This is a small but powerful tactic to close the organic chaser (man)-chased (woman) gap, and thus improve your odds-to-lay.
Heartiste, I hate to break it to you, but you’re not actually the first guy to come up with the brilliant strategy of trying to get with women by being an asshole.
Naturally, Heartiste’s readers have their own, equally brilliant ideas.
Peter Pan notes that:
You can always send a SOT on the day of as well… just lace it with a slightly insulting element. For instance, deliberately get her name wrong, or say something like “Happy Birthday, grandma.” They have difficulty allowing such small things pass, and will reply to see if you were joking or not.
Oh, very clever.
themanofmystery2 offers his own “witty rejoinders.” No, that’s really what he calls them.
1. “Missed me, eh? No surprise there.”
2. “I’ve been waiting all year for you to send me that. THANK YOU!!!! 😀 😀 😀 😀 😀 XD XD XD XD XD … ”
NEXT LINE: “You’re gay.”
3. [No matter what the holiday] “Happy Grandparents Day to you!” followed by an image of Depends with the caption “I got you a gift” (Careful with this one if she’s over 30 and has a weak self image)
SuperFucker! added his two cents:
[R]eaching out and and reminding her of the anniversary of something unpleasant, like the day she accidentally ran over her dog, is another appropriate neg for a girl giving you the runaround. Do NOT remind her of something truly horrific, though. Subtlety is key.
Such subtlety.
Sometimes I wonder if any of these guys have ever even been in the same room as a woman.
Is SuperFucker trolling them? I know that these guys are dim, but I’d think that even they’d realize that accidentally running over your pet is truly horrifying. Poe’s law, I guess.
Also, if I was friends with someone and they responded to my birthday text like that, I’d either assume that they were joking and have a laugh, or I’d be insulted and stop trying to get in contact with them. If they apologized and tried to work things out at a later date, I might agree to a conversation and renewed contact, depending on how deep the friendship was and how bad what they said was. I mean, if it was a juvenile retort, I’d be able to forgive that with time/an apology. If they decided to remind of something terrible that had happened in the past for no reason whatsoever, except to upset me, then I’d probably be less forgiving. In other words, these responses would have the exact opposite of the effect that they intended.
Yeah, I’m also still chewing over that whole “dead/injured pet anniversary” thing. It doesn’t say “aloof and unattainable in a sexy way” so much as “disturbingly attentive to exact unpleasant details of my life and eager to share as much as either a taunt or a cry for help.”
@alaisvex Good point, someone should check them out to see if that was for real.
These people are also apparently convinced that women are more bothered by aging (note the warning on the ‘happy birthday grandma’ bit) than they would be by being reminded of that time something genuinely bad happened.
It sounds more like something you’d hear echoing off an Alp.
If someone responded to a text of mine like that, I’d drop them like a bad habit. Fucking rude. I have much nicer friends to hang out with and possibly bang, thankyouverymuch.
What’s with these guys and thinking every shred of nice behavior on behalf of a woman is some sort of bait to get their wallets or to fuck them?
Oh, wait, I forgot. Enough projection to open a cinaplex in every major city east of the Rockies.
Lea, that GQ article… wow. Yes, it is a realistic portrayal of the redpillian scum that makes up the Misogynist Rape Apologists movement, but the dirtbag who laughed at his daughter’s rape and threatened to disown her if she reported it takes the scummy cake.
That should be investigated by the police and child services. I wonder what the responsibility of the reporter is in this case. It is inconceivable to me that a crime — on a child, of all people — should be ignored, along with her father’s inhumane threats afterwards, by adults who are privy to this information.
So evil modern women only care about men for sex and security, but a good woman knows that they should only contact their significant other for the first thing?
@Lea
I love how more and more mainstream elements are taking the piss out of the whine-o-sphere in one way or another. Good on GQ.
And as for this….drivel….Back when I was single I had a few guys try to play that sort of ‘haughty, always keep you guessing’ bullshit, and after the first time or two I got wise and just responded in kind – when I responded at all. Virtually every time, they’d go absolutely thermonuclear with rage. They’re the ultimate pathetic bully – totally willing to inflict pain but utterly unable to cope if the tables turn.
And then I found Mr GhostBird, who has more class and sex appeal in his used socks than any neg happy douchecanoe, and those interactions became, more or less, a thing of the past.
To sum up this technique: “Slutty bitch wasn’t going to sleep with me anyway so I’ll fix her wagon. Petty text messages, that’ll show HER who’s boss” This is an entirely hypothetical situation, however, because they would actually need to have a woman’s phone number in the first place.
@Lea
The GQ article showed them to be the delightful shitweasels that they are. I just wish that journalists would investigate the standard MRA talking points instead of just listing them as this writer does on the second page. It would demonstrate that the problems men face are the result of classism, racism, capitalism, toxic masculinity etc. and the fault of the eeeevil wimmin feminazis.
Reminds me of a cargo cult. Someone who doesn’t really understand the real world tries to copy some elements of it in the hopes of getting something (sex) back.
@totallyalphadudebro
Speaking of investigation, an Alison R. Tieman (seemingly the same person as one of the “Honey Badgers” featured in the GQ article), did a giant off-topic word vomit in the comments section. I didn’t have time to go through everything so I just checked out the CDC stats which she said were the most reliable. And holy shit it was hilarious. She made up a number for a metric that the report did not use. She also took the number of female rape victims and said it was the number of female perpetrators of sexual violence. Hey, it’s in a word bubble drawn over a blurry screencap of the CDC chart, so it must be true!
I specifically went through the CDC report because Tieman endorsed it, but going through this whole mess would make a lovely crowdsourced project. I screencapped everything in case she tries to weasel out by deleting her comment.
Alison Tieman’s comment: http://gqm.ag/1FqvguP
My response: http://gqm.ag/1waYJUF
@PussyPowerTantrum
An enormous thumbs up to you for calling them on their bullshit. Still, it should be the job of the reporter to do the legwork and research this stuff.
Soon:
“Women who breathe are wicked mindfuckers trying to trick you with the rhythmic movement of their chest. Respond accordingly: Stop breathing around them.”
I’m assuming ‘cuckubine’ is a way of saying ‘If I know her I own her, so sleeping with another man – you know, who actually asked her out and acted attractive- is CHEATING ON ME!’
However, my autocorrect seems to think it’s a misspelling of ‘chucks inevitable’.
This, I suspect, is the moment in history where AI displayed proved itself capable of understanding human social dynamics better than a human being. (Or at least than a PUA.) Thanks, redpillers: you have finally enabled the rise of the machines. The true Matrix will soon be upon us.
@Hugger. I KNOW. That’s like… Like… I don’t even… “Not something truly horrific” *Error error does not compute*
I admit “cockubine” would actually be pretty clever (granted, this is coming from someone who finds the word “himbo” delightful), but “cuckubine” is really awkward and would be confusing for most people. The only time I’ve heard ‘cuckold’ in a modern context outside the manosphere and fetishist porn was in the movie Crazy Stupid Love, and that movie played it for laughs that Steve Carell wouldn’t stop using this obscure, old-fashioned word. “Cuckubine” doesn’t even make sense, since ‘cuckold’ is supposed to be the husband that gets cheated on and ‘concubine’ would be the equivalent of the ‘mistress’.
Also, I’m pretty sure he means “natural” in the biotruthiness sense, but holy heartbreak, Batman, that is a beautifully wrong use of the word “organic”.
You know what, if someone wished me a happy birthday on the wrong day, I’d just respond “Thanks, although it was actually *real date*”. I mean, I’ve wished people happy birthday on the wrong day, and it was an honest mistake, so I’d assume the same thing was the case if I was on the receiving end. I don’t know what Roosh would suggest as way of reply in that case? Probably something like “I knew the date, I just didn’t have time to text you until today” or something, but that just sounds plain weird, since texting takes five seconds; not as if you’re “high value”. Even saying “I knew the date, I just couldn’t be bothered to text you on the actual date” would be such a strange thing to say (but you can be bothered today? Why?) that it almost puts the one saying it more into weirdo territory than straight-out asshole territory.
@alaisvex “Is SuperFucker trolling them? I know that these guys are dim, but I’d think that even they’d realize that accidentally running over your pet is truly horrifying. Poe’s law, I guess. ”
I’m not so sure, a remarkable lack of empathy seems to be commonplace among this lot. I wouln’t be surprised if he thought killing a beloved pet wasn’t all that horrifying. After all, pets are the ultimate misandry, you spend time and money on them, clean up after them, and they don’t even give you sex. And if you did have sex with your pet, you wouldn’t be able to brag about it and score manpoints.
Article by GQ. Comments by QQ.
I guess if you have friends and girls that like you, and you’d not only rather be alone but also hated for being a creepy bully than PUA advice would be helpful.
Or you could paint a swastika on your forehead and step on a puppy.
Both are effective in that sense. But they’re less effective for getting girls, or anyone to like you.
Off topic, but behold this gloriously MRA screencap:
@srhbutts touted this on Twitter as “the most #gamergate screencap you’ll ever see”, but the someone in the comments pointed out there’s still a chance Jordan Owen will make a video of himself reading it in the tub at some point.
For some reason the funniest part of the GQ article to me was their love of American Beauty and the belief that it’s an MRA movie and Kevin Spacey’s character is supposed to be a hero.
Reactionaries always think that if a piece of media is about a white guy, said white must be a complete and total hero whose actions we are supposed to unquestionably agree with.
These are the same guys who are Breaking Bad fans but didn’t get the show or the character of Walter at all.
@AmandaChing: frankly, I’m shocked they haven’t officially abbreviated it as OTL.
Calling it now, it’s only a matter of time before they start suggesting rape anniversary texts.
@WWTH: Lester Burnham’s name is a deliberate anagram of “Humbert Learns.” (Angela “Hayes” is a reference to Dolores/Lolita “Haze.”) He’s literally intended to be a pedophile who realizes his behavior is shitty, and Humbert Humbert himself was hated by his creator on account of just how awful he was, brilliance with puns notwithstanding.