Tag Archives: feminism

How (almost all) women and all feminists selfishly try to force you into a traditional male role

In this article we will explore a very selfish and brutal strategy used by women and feminists, and that is using “creep shaming” as a way of emotionally shaming you into outdated gender roles.

Most of the general population primarily uses direct shaming such as “man up and be the man and make the move”, “I’m not attracted to a wuss who has to ask me for permission before he kisses me”. While such direct shaming is also a form of bullying and hurtful toward men, we will not focus on unraveling such direct-shaming in this article because it’s pretty obvious and straightforward. We will only use it as a way of contrasting creep-shaming off of it.

The much worse forms of shaming are those that are indirect and insidious, sneaky forms of manipulation. Most women have at one point or another used sneaky-indirect-shaming, and all feminists have. The reason all feminists have to use indirect shaming is because using direct shaming is too blatantly apparent, and shines light on feminist hypocrisy too brightly.

So what is indirect shaming?

Well, there are many forms, but I would say the primary form is the use of so-called “creep shaming”. This isn’t to say that creepy behaviour is good, or that one should set out to make people uncomfortable on purpose. Of course not.

Creep-shaming is where women claim that not-conforming to a gender role is “creepy”. Let me give you an example. Let’s say that you are not Ashton Kutcher, and that you have common human insecurities when you see a woman you’d like to talk to.

– You see her

– Your mind starts racing “Oh wow, should I look at her more or look away? Oh wow, should I smile or is smiling too strongly creepy, or wait, smiling too little is creepy right!??! omg omg omg what do I do? What if that guy next to her is her boyfriend, how do I approach her?”


– You have had a great conversation with a girl, and now you’re standing in private

– You realize this might be a moment to kiss her, your mind starts racing “Oh wow, do I kiss her, or wait no? Do I like crack a kissing insinuation joke, see how she reacts, and if she reacts well I THEN kiss her?! No, no no wait, maybe I should just lean in and do it anyway? My friend said men do that when they think it’s on, but this feminist online said that’s so-called kiss-rape… oh wow, what do I do”

– If this continues and you hesitate past a certain point, the women who are interested will tend to lose interest and get disappointed if you don’t “man up” and do it quickly enough (the approach or the kiss), provided again that they wanted to be kissed/approached by you. If they did not want to be approached or kissed, your wandering eyes and uncertainty makes them feel uncomfortable. Your shifting all over the place makes them feel uneasy (they feel entitled to you taking the risk and responsibility while they lazily get what they want by just existing with a vagina).

Now… let’s parse this example through direct and indirect shaming language

Women who shame you directly will say that you need to “man up” and “be the man” and “just do it” and not care about consequences. A female friend might even say “So what if she yells at you and calls you a mouth-rapist, man up and do it”. If you protest and tell your friend that you read feminists online who said this is “assault” she will shame you and tell you to listen to “real women” and not feminists. If you tell a female friend that you had asked a girl to hang out for over a dozen times and never got the courage to make the move, she (your female friend) will say you’re a wuss and you just need to do it, because girls lose interest in guys who wait so long.  If you spend all night staring at a girl, and wait so long to approach her that she loses interest, your normal female friend will say you disappointed the girl and you lost her by being such a “wuss”.

Women who shame you indirectly will say that you are “creepy” and that you’re “creeping” women out for daring to make them uncomfortable. They will describe your hesitation and not knowing when and how to make a move, or not having the courage to make the move as “rapey”. The feminist will say that you are a “rapey” “creepy” and “deceitful” man for asking to hang out with someone for over a dozen times while only “pretending to care for her non-romantically”. The feminist will say that if you stare at a woman all night and don’t approach her up to the point where the woman becomes uneasy, then you are a “creepy eye-rapist”.

Do you see what’s happening here?

1) Both strategies are designed to make you feel bad about not performing maleness

2) All of these are centered around you performing typically female behaviour

There are many more examples. For example women being lazy as they are will not approach you, but they will spend all night trying to think up ways to hover around you, accidentally brush up against you and always be in your eye-sight. If YOU did this, you would be “creepy” and “stalkerish”  or a “cowardly” “wuss” depending on the shaming mode used.

DO YOU SEE? Do you get what’s happening here? Do you understand how creep-shaming gets used as a way to shame men into a traditional male role. Study any major piece by any major feminist blogger on the subject of “nice guys tm” and actually STUDY the actual behaviours they’re protesting. You will notice that 100% of them are traditionally female behaviours (i.e. passive mating strategies). This is how feminists try to shame men into the traditional male role.

The more sickening part is the cognitive dissonance created by trying to shame you away from it at and toward it at the same time. While I hate traditionalists as much as feminists – those losers are at least consistent. A traditionalist will say “you should just make the move”. A feminist is saying that you’re damned if you do, and damned if you don’t. Asking for sex is creepy, not asking for it is rapey. Being too direct is creepy, not being direct enough is creepy. Being too passive is creepy, being too active is creepy.

Pretty much the only way to not be creep-shamed by feminists is to possess telepathic skills, or have tons of experience. Now, it IS possible to be so calibrated and so experienced that you know exactly when to make exactly what move and to persist exactly how much. I’m getting close to that level, and a lot of the womanizers I know are at that level.

However, no one is born with experience. It probably takes thousands of rejections (and yes creeping out thousands of women) before you get that sort of fine calibration where you know exactly what to do “as if” you had telepathy.


Why do feminists hate nice guys, and never mention “nice girls TM”?

The most important thing to point out isn’t just that feminists hate nice guys… They hate lots of trivially negative things.

The thing that doesn’t make sense is the *disproportionate* hate leveled at nice guys.

I mean sure, feminists WILL write an article listing a set of reasons why nice guys are “not-ideal”. They will actually list things that we can admit are “flaws” (when comparing someone to perfection I mean).

Now, let’s for ignore for a second the fact that most women on this planet have these same flaws, and they are never bashed and mocked as “nice girls TM”. Let’s ignore that double standard for a second…

What’s really astounding is how disproportionate the negativity, bashing and vile hatred toward nice guys is (in proportion to) the “flaws” which are claimed as the “reason” for feminist hatred toward “nice guys tm”.

It’s so obviously over the top, that anyone with two braincells to rub together can immediately gather there must be ANOTHER (un-stated) reason for the hatred of nice guys.

I believe the leading theory is that feminists hate nice guys because they speak up about, and call women out on women’s hypocrisy and lies, and that is the number one anti-female sin one can perform.

How do we know this? Feminists only hate a nice guy after he publicly voices discontent with having been lied to by women. If feminists hate Joe for applying a passive dating strategy as claimed, how come they don’t bash Joe until and only after he complains that this strategy doesn’t work for men? (not to even mention, how come they don’t bash women, who in much larger proportion apply passive dating strategies)

The research is there too

According to the paper “Courtship Behaviors, Relationship Violence, and Breakup Persistence in College Men and Women” by Stacey L. Williams and Irene Hanson Frieze…

“[M]ales perform more approach, or regular courtship behaviors, whereas females are more likely to perform acts of surveillance, that is, attempts to make indirect contact with the love interest by way of (seeming) serendipity.”

Get that? Women are the ones more likely to engage in passive mating behavior. In fact, I’d personally say that’s all women do, being the lazy spoiled daters they are. But how come when men apply this strategy they are “broken and flawed nice guys TM” whereas feminists stay silent and all you hear is crickets on the topic of female passivity (indirect mating behaviour).

Feminists say that performing passive mating strategies is a character flaw. If you as a man are continually trying to find ways to be around a woman, hinting at interest, pretending to care about her interests etc etc… well then you are “flawed” and “deceitful” for not stating your intentions clearly and making a move.

By that same logic pretty much every woman on the planet would be deemed deceitful, even if she doesn’t take it to the extent of plausible deniability, which most women DO.

Assman posted a good comment over at SWAB’s too:

Here is my theory:

Feminists have a lot of innate preferences and values that don’t accord with male/female equality. They work hard to somehow fit their prejudices into feminism and somehow explain them away. What prejudices you ask?

1) A prejudice against male weakness – this is why they hate nice guys. Its not uncommon for women to hate weak men and historically its always been true that weak men have been hated by both men and women. Feminists have no good way of justifying this prejudice…hence nice guys.
2) A protective feeling toward females – this is in large part why feminism has been so incredibly successful. It has always exploited the biological desire to protect women on the part of both men and women. Notice that no protective feeling exists on the part of men. Ask yourself a question..when was the last time you felt protective of a man?
3) The view of men as lustful sexual predators and women as dainty things that need to be protected from sex – this isn’t biological…its societal. Most Christian societies have always had a problem with sex and have generally been anti-sex. There are related beliefs here like the view that men are “using” women when they have sex wit them. This explains why feminists demonize male sexuality and often try to protect women from sex with men

Asking for a date now illegal, flirting as well…


the Departments of Justice and Education have mandated a breathtakingly broad definition of sexual harassment that makes virtually every student in the United States a harasser

The letter states that “sexual harassment should be more broadly defined as ‘any unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature'” including “verbal conduct” (that is, speech). It then explicitly states that allegedly harassing expression need not even be offensive to an “objectively reasonable person of the same gender in the same situation”—if the listener takes offense to sexually related speech for any reason, no matter how irrationally or unreasonably, the speaker may be punished.

Among the forms of expression now punishable on America’s campuses by order of the federal government are: Any request for dates or any flirtation that is not welcomed by the recipient of such a request or flirtation.

Defining “any” romantic overture or sexual speech as “harassment” based purely on subjective reactions has dire implications for dating. It defines a single, unrepeated, civil request to go out on a date as “sexual harassment” even if the requester never makes the request again after learning that it was “subjectively” unwelcome.

That may effectively ban dating (since no one is a mind reader, and the whole point of asking someone out on a date is because you don’t know before asking whether they would be interested without first asking).

Continue Reading

The path that leads a boy to standing in front of a bunch of insane feminists preaching about time machines

A response to Black Pill’s fine article about the “feminist time machine”:

Thanks for this great post Black Pill. I want to illustrate how a boy would progress to being faced with the feminist-time-machine accusation.

There are five steps which will lead a boy to standing in front of feminists who want to sell him on time machines

Step 1) Young boy spends his entire youth being LIED TO by women that dating success relies on him being selfless, good, honest, decent and pleasing to women. He spends his entire youth being lied to by women in society that his mating success is ONLY correlated to his decentness as a human being

Step 2) However, as time goes on, this boy starts witnessing women dating, falling in love with and pursuing abusive men, cheating men, assholes, jerks, criminals, alcoholics, and men with all sorts of flaws


Lying through omission:On how women show interest

The commonly implied notion in female advice is the following…

– If you’re a good person, you will automagically end up in a romantic dynamic with a woman, merely by being a good enough person

– If no woman is currently in a romantic dynamic with you, this is PROOF you are a defective man and NOT GOOD enough

Now, when I say this is implied, what I mean is that the language is written so as to lie through omission. Whenever a boy asks women why girls don’t show interest in him, or googles the question. He will run into feminist blogs who say something like “The ONLY reason girls don’t show you interest, is because you’re not PLEASING enough, are defective in some way, or don’t do enough for girls as a group!!”

The part being OMMITED is that on planet earth, human females PRE-require that the MALE show interest FIRST. It doesn’t matter how attracted a woman is to you, she will not admit interest UNTIL you have invested a certain amount of risk in her. ANY advice a boy might run into FAILS to mention this and is therefore LYING through omission.

The other IMPLIED LIE in all feminist writing and most dating advice by women (again achieved through manipulative languaging) is that you should expect hyper-expressive super-enthusiastic invitations and super-expressive and super-clear signs of interest from women. In fact it’s either outright said or at least implied that you DARING to flirt or make a move on a woman who has shown anything LESS than screaming “take me now” enthusiasm effectivelly would make you a DIRTY ROTTEN CREEP. This form of advice often uses language which IMPLIES that if you’re simply GOOD ENOUGH (not evil and disgusting) you should have a life full of women giving you these HUGE FLASHING NEON SIGNS OF “kiss me now” or “have sex with me now”… which never actually happens in the real life, where female mating plausible deniability reigns supreme.

These LIES by women are what will often lead a PERFECTLY NORMAL boy who has PLENTY of girls interested in him feeling like a complete unlovable loser, perhaps even in some cases leading to depression and suicide. Because again, the end conclusion of the IMPLIED assertions and feminine dating advice and feminist writings is “If women aren’t begging you for sex, you are a FLAWED and broken in some way dirty rotten creep”…

HE WAS NEVER TOLD that women on this planet ONLY show interest back after you show it first, risking rejection, ridicule and creep-shaming. (justin bieber excluded)


Step 3) So here is this boy who’s been told that ONLY character and personality matters in having a romantic live, yet he sees tons of men with OBJECTIVELY shitty characters and personalities dumping their 25th girlfriend. This causes cognitive dissonance. Here he is, he can’t get a a woman to “show him interest” to save his life (or at least he mistakenly believes girls are uninterested in him due to the implied lying explained above). And he is constantly working on becoming a more moral person, a better person, a harder working person, contributing more value to women’s lives. Yet he keeps witnessing men who are FAR worse in character dumping and pumping women left and right. He witnesses, what from his perspective seems like women being a lot more interested in a bunch of defective guys, and not in him (again, due to the omission-based-lie about how women show interest).


The big secret no woman dares speak of is that women as a group, only put character traits as perhaps the 4th or 5th on their list of criteria, despite lying that it’s the ONLY criteria. This is a bold-faced despicable lie. Women are just as shallow as men when it comes to the initial stages of mating… This is why a woman can spend an entire life claiming to be looking for honest, sincere, hard-working, pleasant men who don’t cheat, yet continually go from one cheating alcoholic to another. Those cheating alcoholics hit the first 4 criteria on the list, which women never speak of, they only list off their criteria starting from criterion number 5 downards… THIS IS LYING BY OMISSION.

This isn’t to say women date or prefer defective men. This is to say that a man’s character traits are a very distant criteria, despite women’s bold-faced (ommision-based) lies about it. This is why if a man of perfect character doesn’t make a move on a woman, but a more defective man does make a move, she will go with the more defective man. This is the big elephant nobody speaks of. Heck, a man of perfect character might ask a woman out, but she’d say no despite being interested, and go for the more defective man, she doesn’t even like so much SIMPLY because he was persistent and asked more than once, while the “good boy”, having been taught shameful lies, had quit on the first no.

The other elephant in the room that goes unspoken is women’s laziness in dating. They will not make a move, they will not express interest first, and they sure as heck won’t lean toward your head to initiate a kiss. And so here is this boy who has been LIED TO his entire life that all you need to do is “be good” and women will auto-magically become your girlfriends. Nobody told him that he’d have to battle female plausible deniability, and be sexually persistent and aggressive. All female-written and spoken advice is INHERENTLY dishonest because it IMPLIES that things “happen on their own”. It’s like you meet a woman, you’re a good man, and somehow it auto-magically becomes romantic if your CHARACTER is good enough.
The typical woman advice-giver DOES NOT DARE speak of the fact you have to MAKE A MOVE and get rejected a gazillion times by women to separate romantically interested women from women who are just being friendly/polite/using you for attention/unsure. No woman DARES tell you that the road to a woman ADMITTING romantic interest in you is paved with you getting rejected a ton of times until you get one that admits interest back. (please see dungone’s tiger analogy).


Step 4) So after many years of this boy witnessing that women’s words don’t match their deeds, he might actually have the audacity to (gasp) dare mention it in public. He might even dare point out that (gasp) he’s dateless doing what women told him to do. He’s spent his entire life working on the things women said are the ONLY criteria in whether you get romantic interest from women or not… and yet here he is “forever alone”, while men of far worse character are dumping their 25th girlfriend

Step 5) At this point, the now-man gets accused of being a bitter entitled asshole. HOW DARE YOU THINK you’re owed dates for merely existing! YOU ENTITLED PRICK! See the REASON you don’t get dates is because women can TELEPATHICALLY SENSE you’re entitled you fucking woman-hating scum!!!! It’s all this whining you’re performing that repels women! That’s it! THE FACT that you DARE state women’s words don’t match their deeds is the REASON they don’t want to date you, you fucking entitled asshole!!!

There’s just one problem with this claim. This man was dateless for many years before he finally realized he’s being lied to by women at large. If he’s here in 2013 FOR THE FIRST TIME asking why women lie, having FIRST realized that women lie their assess off in mating, and he FIRST realized it in 2013… how can it be the reason he was dateless in 2005, back in high school?

Did the girls in his class have a time-machine? Did they dislike him in 2005, because they knew that many years later he’d dare notice women lie their fucking assess off? Obviously this is impossible. The actual truth is that he was NOT DISLIKED by girls in 2005, nor is he disliked now in 2013. In fact, he’s probably liked more than the jerks he wonders about being datefull. The actual truth is that those girls were proactively HIDING their interest from him because of a very selfish-trait of the female gender called plausible deniability. This is something the female of our species does to make sure the man invests a lot, so she can fully test his intentions before she admits her interest back.

But this boy was never told this. He was never told the only way to find out if a girl is interested in you is to continually make moves on her until she finally caves in and ADMITS she likes you romantically too. The most you can expect are hints. In fact, he spent his youth BEING LIED TO that girls will automagically fall in his lap if he’s merely a good enough person and that mating “happens on its own”. He wasn’t told that women proactivelly lie, and will go out of their way to mislead you, perhaps saying no, despite being interested, to test and see if you like them enough to ask a second time.

WARNING MISINTERPRETATION CLARIFICATION: We are not claiming nor saying that a man should persist or continue hitting on a clearly uninterested woman. When a woman DOES display clear and obvious disinterest, she is DEFINETELY honest about it, and the man should stop immediately. However, this is exceptionally rare, think the woman who folds her arms, pouts her face and turns her body away from the man.

What we do mean however, is that a woman who IS romantically interested in you, will for example sometimes turn down a first kiss attempt. She will for example say no to asking her out, despite BEING FULLY interested in you romantically BEING FREE at that time.  Most often the woman does NOT do this consciously or for a MALICIOUS reason. She’s not maliciously strategizing like “Hmmm, I’ll turn him down for his first date offer to see if he asks a second time”.

She might just not “feel” “ready” for the kiss at the exact time you attempted it, or she might not feel confident going for dinner on the specific night you asked. THE CONCIOUS PART comes in second. SHE WILL however not clarify it. SHE WILL NOT actually explain and say “Oh thank you for asking me out, I am actually romantically interested in you TOO, and am only saying no on this offer, but I’d love if you asked a second time”. THIS IS where the concious deceit part begins. She will PURPOSEFULLY leave it vague, and engage in plausible deniability. The only way to find out the truth is risk rejection.

When you GIVE HER A ROMANTIC COMPLIMENT, and she brushes it off, it MIGHT be because she’s not interested in you as more than a friend, or it might be because she got fluttered and shy she didnt’ know how to respond. The point is SHE WILL NOT tell you. She will leave everything down to plausible deniability limbo.

SHE WILL NOT come to you the next day and say “You know, the reason I didn’t respond to the compliment the other day is because I am interested too and just afraid of getting hurt. I’m actually interested in you and waiting for you to kiss me”. SHE WILL NOT DO THIS. IN FACT, she will WAIT for you to plant that kiss, BUT SHE WILL NEVER state her intentions. And the only way for you to FIND OUT for sure is by risking rejection and risk being wrong.The actual truth is that women lie in mating for many different reasons, the major one being plausible deniability. This is something we at this blog support. WE fully support women’s right to plausible deniability and mating deceit as a way to maximize their benefits in mating. Women have every right to be selfish. But so do men. And this is why we’re here. We want to point out that either both men and women have a right to be selfish, or neither one does. It’s only fair

The Feminist Time Machine: The Just World Fallacy Across All Of Time

An earlier version of this article was originally posted at The Black Pill.

There is a fallacy called The Just World Fallacy where it is believed that “human actions eventually yield morally fair and fitting consequences, so that, ultimately, noble actions are duly rewarded and evil actions are duly punished”.  It should be obvious why the Just World Fallacy is a logical fallacy.  If it wasn’t then homeless people deserve to be homeless, rape victims deserved to be raped, etc.  Thus it’s very disturbing how often the Just World Fallacy is used in dating advice.

The Just World Fallacy is a common fallacy in dating advice because dating advice fails pretty easily.  Rather than admit that their advice was a failure, purveyors of dating advice will attack the men who tried to use their dating advice.  The attacks on these men will include everything from accusations of “entitlement” to “misogyny”.  The idea is that the dating advice wasn’t wrong or a scam, but the men using it were so odious to women that the men deserved to be rejected by women.  Why this is a logical fallacy is obvious.  Just because a woman rejects a man doesn’t mean that he’s defective, guilty of “entitlement”, or guilty of “misogyny”.  Saying that men who get rejected by women must have something wrong with them is like saying homeless people are homeless because something is defective about them.  Both concepts are wrong.

The Just World Fallacy can only go so far in defending dating advice from men discovering it’s a scam.  Even if a man actually is “entitled” or a “misogynist” now (even though that’s unlikely), that wasn’t the case most of the time he was rejected by women.  Even if said man accepts the Just World Fallacy as true with respect to dating advice, the problem is that man will realize that he still got rejected when he shouldn’t have.  This creates a problem for the purveyors of dating advice so they will end up invoking a variant of the Just World Fallacy across all of time called, the Feminist Time machine.

What happens with the feminist time machine is that a man who realizes that according to the Just World Fallacy should have not been rejected by women in the past will be accused of being “entitled” and/or a “misogynist” in the past even though he didn’t realize it.  The feminist time machine says that women could practically see into the future to know that a man would be an “entitled misogynist” in the future so women preemptively rejected him and were right to do so.  (This is similar to the plot of the short story and move, Minority Report.)  This turns the Just World Fallacy into the Just All of Space and Time Fallacy.

The problem with the feminist time machine is that it is a paradox.  The only way it can be made to make sense is if women were intentionally trying to turn a man into a misogynist.  Since that is absurd, the feminist time machine is also absurd, but despite being a fallacy it will be used to attack men whose only crime is being unlucky with women.

Selfish And Happy

[This is our first post on mating selfishness from one of our founding authors, it’s a very fine read]

I used to believe that you should “treat women right” and court them for as long as they desire, not make any moves on them until it is absolutely clear that your advances are welcome, and then if you are lucky enough to correctly guess all of her idiosyncrasies and accommodate them, well then you might even get to have sex with her!

It was with this mindset that I tried to find a girlfriend in high school. The first girl I ever asked out was super-friendly and pleasant with me. I invited her to hang out at the beach, she said she was “busy.” I knew I was rejected and it was painful. I went to the beach with my friends instead and guess who I run into?

The next girl I asked out, it was a similar story. Like many guys asking a girl out was pretty nerve-wrecking. I had to gather courage and prepare for days before I could do it. It was the kind of anxiety people get before speaking in public. The rejections I received were emotionally devastating, but I knew it was my role and so I accepted it.

Finally my senior year of high school I managed to find a girl who accepted my pedesatlizng and she became my girlfriend. The funny thing is that unlike the first two girls she behaved totally neutral towards me before I asked her out. Not hostile, but not particularly welcoming either. Nothing that could be interpreted as a sign of romantic interest.

That was my first lesson: some girls will be nice and pleasant and will do things that seem to indicate interest, but when you make moves on them, they will flat out reject you and may even act appalled that you would dare think they were ever interested. “I only think of you as a friend!” This has been confirmed in my own dating experience since, and in the dating experience of my friends.

That is not to say that some girls who act interested are in fact interested and some girls who act disinterested are in fact disinterested. For the average guy who doesn’t have an unusually high amount of experience with women it’s a guessing game, which is fine, except men are expected to be mind readers and to be able to perfectly discern the signals of the particular special snowflake they’re dealing with. In addition, some girls act interested in order to mislead and get romantic attention from you, the female equivalent of a guy leading a girl on in order to get sex.

Now back to my first girlfriend. Yeah I was getting laid, which is a big deal for a horny male teenager, but my whole goddamn life revolved around accommodating her moods and whims. My parents and my brother hated her, but I defended her non-existent honor with fervor. You couldn’t tell me shit. Whatever she wanted was right!

My overly-accommodating behavior stemmed for the idea that women’s feelings, desires, and needs are more important than men’s. But why should that be? I think there is a biological component to it. I believe it’s wired into most men’s brains to please women, but that’s not the whole story. Feminist ideology and our culture at large exploits this innate male predisposition and forces men into specific, female-approved dating roles.

Feminists don’t like traditional gender roles and I couldn’t agree more. As a man I reject my traditional role as provider and accommodater of women’s desires. Your job in life and dating need not be woman-pleasing. Feel free to reject any and all expectations that don’t suit YOUR goals and YOUR desires. Since women rarely ask guys out, you are already doing more than your fair share in dating just by asking her out. So since you are kind of forced to do that, focus on getting what YOU want out of the relationship.

For example, I reject the idea of going on elaborate dates. The most I do is coffee or a walk in the park. No dinners at my expense. I try to make sex happen ASAP and if it doesn’t happen after 3 dates (give or take), I am done with that girl. Once we’re having sex, I keep the relationship primarily about sex and a little bit of companionship because that is all I want.

I am not there to entertain her or romance her. That is not what *I* want. I don’t plan any special dates or anything of the sort. I have a friend who drives his girlfriend to and from work every morning. He doesn’t want to, but he feels he has to. Well it’s too bad he feels that way. He’d be a lot happier if he didn’t.

Actually lately I don’t bother with any dates at all. Occasionally I invite girls over to my place and if they don’t want to come over, that’s fine. I haven’t gotten laid once in the past year. Do I feel like loser? Nope. I might have in the past, but not anymore. Whether you’re getting laid or have a girlfriend is not a measure of your manhood or a reflection on you as a person. Porn is a fine substitute. That’s why feminists and many women rally against it so hard. (Not because it “exploits” women).

It may sound like my message to men is to be selfish. That is exactly my message. Don’t feel bad about it. If you step back for a moment and evaluate the situation, you may notice that we are just matching the selfishness of women. You’re just leveling the playing field and there isn’t a damn thing wrong with that. I am not saying you should conduct your affairs with women in the particular way that I do mine. Rather I encourage you to be honest with yourself about your needs and desires, prioritize what it is that YOU want, and don’t compromise.

Ever since I have adopted this selfish approach to dating, I have been immeasurably happier. It has liberating to shed all responsibilities that have been placed on me without my consent. For the man frustrated with his dating life, I hope this will help you see the root of your frustrations. It’s not you, it’s them! Or at the very least, it’s you AND them. I suggest you ease up on yourself stop blaming yourself for your “dating failures.” It takes two to tango and presently it’s mostly men on the dancefloor.

Women have a right to be Selfish in Mating, but so do men


The Selfish Gene
The Selfish Gene (Photo credit: Wikipedia)


There is currently a feminist-lead attack on men which is full of double-standards and double and triple binds.

The main idea in this trend is to imply and sometimes outright promote the double-standard that men aren’t allowed to be selfish in dating, whereas this is a god-given human right for women.

On this blog it is our contention to promote the idea of equality. Either both men and women have a right to be selfish, or neither one does.