StonerWithABoner brought this article to our attention written by a dominatrix who thinks that the reason why men aren’t lining up to be abused by her is because of misogyny and the mythical “patriarchy”. The reality is that most men have no interest in being abused by women, being pissed on by women, or being ass raped by women. That’s not because of misogyny. It’s common sense. Any man claiming to want to engage in that sort of thing needs psychological help not abusive feminism.
But why is the author of that article trying to convince men that they really want that sort of thing? It is because she is a sexual predator preying on vulnerable men and using feminism to justify her abuse and sadism. While we know that there are men (really manginas) that go to dominatrixes to be abused, how come we never hear about this type of thing with the genders reversed? Where are the male dominators doing the same things to women? They don’t exist because any such man would be arrested for abuse.
There’s also another aspect of this we need to consider, how this relates to the reserves. Men in the reserves aren’t getting that much action from women until a woman needs him to clean up her life. This creates a fertile ground for predators like the author of the linked article. It reminds me of something I saw on a dating advice forum several years ago. On that dating advice forum was a man who wasn’t a virgin, but might as well have been. He disappeared for a while, but came back. While he vanished, he got involved with something involving small penis humiliation. What happened was that he was so desperate for any kind of sexual contact, he got involved with in small penis humiliation just so he could be “sexual” for a while. Chances are he didn’t even have a small penis, but he was willing to be humiliated and abused just for a little sexual contact. Reading what he wrote about the women he was involved with was as disturbing as the linked article. He was even banned from the forum because they didn’t want to attract porn. Unfortunately, this was pre-MGTOW so there wasn’t any real help for him.
This is why MGTOW is so important. There are a lot of female predators out there whether they’re financial predators or sexual predators. They’re all dangerous.
I always knew that Dr.
Nerdlove Manginalove should also be called Dr. Hypocrisy. It’s pretty obvious, but the Scott Aaronson situation has provided some spectacular examples on how deep Dr. Manginalove’s hypocrisy goes.
Manginalove attacks Scott Aaronson because Aaronson wanted examples of behavior that is guaranteed not to be sexual harassment and not cause women to think he’s creepy. There’s a big problem with Manginalove’s attack. Manginalove actually tried to answer this problem back in March of last year.
It gets worse than that. Scott Alexander had written in support of Scott Aaronson and called Amanda Marcotte a “vogon spy in a skin suit. Manginalove attacked Alexander for that, accusing Alexander of slagging on Marcotte’s appearance, but that’s not what Alexander meant. And Manginalove knows this since he has used the phrase, “alien in a human suit”.
Manginalove is a liar and a hypocrite. This proves it. He changes his positions on a day to day basis. The only consistent position he holds is, “women good, men bad”. You can’t trust Manginalove to give you dating advice. He will tell you one thing one day and tell you the opposite the next day depending on what man he is attacking that day.
Manginalove is not interested in helping you gets dates or a relationship with a woman. His dating advice is a cover to generate traffic for his website by attacking men.
There’s this professor at MIT, Scott Aaronson. On his personal blog, he talked about how feminist rhetoric scared him from dating women for a long time. It was causing him so much trouble that he was seriously considering castration as a solution. Yes, castration. He got over it, sort of. He says that he is on board with “97% of feminism”. Even though he fixed the problem of feminism preventing him from dating, he internalized their misandry. In other words, he’s a mangina suffering from Stockholm Syndrome.
Feminists found out about Scott Aaronson’s past dating woes and used it to attack him. Some of the worst came from Amanda Marcotte who outright lied about what Scott Aaronson said. The comments are just as bad. Many of them say that it’s a good thing that Aaronson isn’t getting laid because he’s such a misogynist. They’re invoking the feminist time machine on a man who agrees with 97% of feminism. This alone shows how absurd the idea that being a good feminist means getting laid.
One problem is here is that women weren’t rejecting Scott Aaronson. He had internalized misandry from feminists so he never approached women. Women never had the opportunity to reject him for being a supposed misogynist.
However, there’s another problem. Feminists attacking Scott Aarsonson accuse him of failing to get laid at the present time. That isn’t true. Scott Aaronson has gotten laid, plenty of times I’m sure. That’s because he is married. The feminist time machine didn’t just crash on Scott Aaronson. It collapsed in on itself. Scott Aaronson isn’t supposed to be getting laid according to feminists, but he is. According to feminists women were rejecting Scott Aaronson because of his misogyny, yet women never had the opportunity because he was too busy trying to be a good feminist by avoiding women.
Scott Aaronson’s life story doesn’t even fit the pattern of the feminist time machine. Yet, feminists are trying to force his life story into it. This proves that it doesn’t matter what a man’s actual life story is to feminists. Feminists will accuse a man of failing to get laid because he’s a misogynist even if he is choosing to not to try to get laid or is actually getting laid. Feminists are so invested in the Just World Fallacy of the feminist time machine that they can’t see when a man such as Scott Aaronson is actually getting laid.
Something I have been meaning to start talking about is the Christian dating advice industry, but I haven’t gotten around to it until now. What finally got me to start writing about it was a pair of articles by Milo Yiannopoulos about MGTOW. Both of those articles had a good number of comments (although it’s now buried in thousands of comments) where tradcons would try and convince MGTOW that there were plenty of “good women” in churches. This is not true, and Christian dating advice isn’t true either. Just because something is “Christian” does not mean its any better than the non-Christian equivalent if it involves women.
While Christian dating advice has its own unique quirks, most of the differences between Christian dating advice and regular dating advice are cosmetic. The “go to church” dating advice is a good example of this. It’s equivalent to feminist dating advice which says you should date feminists, “red pill” dating advice that says you should date “red pill” women, etc. None of the women in any of these groups are any different. They’re all the same. I can tell you from personal experience that single women in church are the same types of single women you will find outside of church. They’re desperate to get married because either they have kids, are otherwise divorced, or are otherwise “former” sluts whose looks are starting to fade. It’s the reserves problem, but churches are worse because the single women there are actively trying to mine the reserves even more so than outside of church.
You might think that because Christianity says no sex until marriage, that would mitigate the problem. It does not. No sex until marriage only applies to men. Women in church are given a pass for all their sexual sins because the church teaches that fornication is that man’s fault because of “male headship”. It’s worse than that because the men Christian women fornicate with aren’t in church. The single men in church are all part of the reserves so they aren’t getting any. Since men get blamed for women’s sexual sins in churches, it’s the men in the reserves that are getting attacked from the pulpit for sins that women and men outside of church commit. These men are doing the time, but don’t get the benefit of doing the crime/sin. It’s a really perverse form of the gay virgin player rapist problem. “Male headship” is also an excuse for churches to blame men and only men for divorce. The divorce rate in churches is practically the same outside of church proving again that women are all the same.
Churches are as feminist as anything else in our gynocentric and gynocratic society. They’re a misandrist institution. They’re aren’t going to produce dating advice that’s fundamentally different from the rest of the dating advice industry. Christian dating advice is a scam like almost all other dating advice.
There’s more to the Christian dating advice industry than I have covered here. I will be covering that in future blog entries.
Comments are closed since this post is a copy of a page. Comment on the page here.
We have talked about how Anita Sarkeesian is involved with online marketing scams. It turns out she’s worse than that. Anita Sarkeesian is connected to the dating advice industry. Sarkeesian worked with a man named Bart Baggett. Baggett was listed as an author on a PUA directory since he wrote books on how to get laid using NLP, neuro-linguistic programming. NLP is pseudoscience and a scam.
I’m both surprised and not surprised by this. I’m surprised that Sarkeesian would so obviously be proof of everything I have been saying for a long time. On the other hand, Anita Sarkeesian is involved in online marketing scams so it’s not surprising she would be involved with people engaging in dating advice scams. After all, there is sort of a common link between the dating advice industry, feminism, and the war on gamers. Dating advice is used as a ideological scam to trick men into joining up with various ideologies from feminism to misandrist forms of Christianity. Anything that is an alternative to dating advice (and dating in general) is the enemy of the dating advice industry and anyone trying to use dating advice as a form of recruitment. Thus, M(H)RAs and MGTOW are obvious enemies of the dating advice industry and anyone that uses dating advice to recruit men. In this context, video games are similar to the M(H)RM and MGTOW. This makes the dating advice industry, feminism, and anyone else invested in the MDAD (Misandrist Dating Advice Distraction) allies against video games. Connections between the dating advice industry to feminism and other misandrist groups should be expected so if Anita Sarkeesian wasn’t a connection, it would be someone else.
There’s a hashtag called #NeverKissAGamer that got started by some mangina opposed to #GamerGate. Looking at the tweets for it, #NeverKissAGamer has been turned into a joke which makes sense because it is a joke.
When I first heard of it, my first thought was, “how are women going to not kiss me more than they do now?” It’s not like women can kiss me less than zero times. It’s an impotent threat.
You may say that while it is true for me, most gamers aren’t kissless virgins so it wouldn’t be an impotent threat for them. The fact is that it is an impotent threat to them as well. Most people don’t make dating, sex, and relationship decisions based on politics and ideology. And when they do, they don’t do it long term. This is an impotent threat even for a gamer that has a harem of women.
A central fallacy of dating advice, or even just dating, sex, and relationship issues in general, that most people engage in is deriving their ideas on the subject from their preferred political ideology and not observation and scientific testing. This is true in the so called manosphere, on Dr. Manginalove’s website, feminist websites, etc. (This is a subject I will discuss more at some point in the future.) Thus, all these groups think that they can make threats to men denying them dating, sex, & relationships based on their political ideology. Since people almost never base their dating/sex/relationship lives on a political agenda, such threats are impotent.
At the Dickless Man Project there is a lament that Elliot Rodger is no longer a member of The Reserves. The article isn’t phrased in that manner but that is its message.
Despite what the Dickless Man Project says, giving it time would not have made things “better” for him. Would there have been women who eventually would have faked interest in him for his wealth and/or ability to provide? Would he have been able to lose his virginity eventually like the examples in the Dickless Man Project article? Probably, yes, but so what? It’s not an improvement to be pursued by desperate STD ridden “former” sluts especially if they have kids who only want you for what you have. While all of the examples in the Dickless Man Project may be “happy” now (although it’s likely their wives don’t have sex with them anymore), they won’t be so happy when their wives surprise them with a divorce. And it’s a guarantee that will happen once their wives have sucked them dry.
What the men in the Dickless Man Project article went through was the same thing Steve Carell’s character in The 40 Year Old Virgin did albeit younger. Catherine Keener’s character got everything, and Steve Carell’s character got nothing. Yet, we are expected to believe this is a good thing. The whole movie is propaganda for keeping men in the reserves.
At least Elliot Rodger didn’t reenact The 40 Year Old Virgin movie and stayed out of the reserves.