Shy Hard 2: Shy Harder

fschmidt powiedział(a):

In my search for places to advertise the CoAlpha Brotherhood, I recently re-joined Mensa so I could post to the American Mensa forum.  I thought that Americans with slightly above average IQs should be tolerant to alternative views.  I was wrong.  All I got was insults.  But interestingly, I posted even harsher things on this same forum just four years ago and I got fairly reasonable responses.  So while American women have been horrible for some time now, it seems that it has only been very recently that American men have dropped to this level.  I have traveled widely and I have to say that modern American men are the worst in the world.  Luckily, I live in El Paso, Texas where most people are Mexican and the few Americans are the old-fashioned kind that I like.

American men today are shallow and emotionally insecure.  They are self-righteous and attack anything that they don't agree with.  But instead of attacking a position on its merits using logic and facts, they inevitably resort to personal attacks.  They cannot tolerate criticism or anything that threatens their fragile egos.  

So why have American men become so horrible?  I think one reason is that American men are the most undersexed in the world.  Even if they aren't incel, most single men get sex far less often than they would like.  The most sexually successful men in America tend to be assholes naturally, since this is what American women are attracted too.  Married men in America are often sexually deprived by their wives (which is insane, of course).  Undersexed men tend to be cranky to begin with.  But worse, such men become highly status conscious because they subconsciously understand that status is critical to mating success.  This is why they have such fragile egos and why they take the slightest criticism so personally.

A second reason that American men have become horrible is that American women prefer men who are scum to good men, and so men are effectively trained by women to become scum.  This is also subconscious.  Men naturally modify their behavior to appeal to women even if they aren't aware of the changes.

In other countries, prostitution is a reasonable option.  So men aren't nearly as undersexed.  This also applies to married men because a wife will be much less likely to withhold sex if she knows that her husband can easily get it somewhere else.  Much the same applies here in El Paso where prostitution is available just across the border and where there are plenty of Mexican women ready to take a frigid wife's place.

The only thing I don't quite understand is the timing of all this.  Why has this suddenly changed just in the last few years?  Why have the majority of American men just recently become so horrible?  Maybe someone who still lives in mainstream America has the answer.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

The average IQ is pretty low everywhere.  I don't think this guy is below average.  What makes American men unique isn't low IQ or being wrong, it is being self-righteous about these things.  And this is caused by their fragile egos that I discussed in the original post in this thread.  Can you imagine a Mexican man standing there with a sign "Consigue un cerebro, idiotas. Viva Mexico."?  No, the Mexican man has better things to do with his time, like eating, drinking, and chasing women.  Only an American man would dedicate time to insulting people and making a spectacle of himself.

How have American men suddenly turned horrible and hopeless in the course of one generation?  I could ask the same question about American women.  It's a mistake to bash American women because each sex is just half of a culture.  The whole American culture has gone down the drain.  But men are more to blame because maintaining society and culture is men's responsibility.

How does it help to bash American men here?  It doesn't.  It is purely my selfish venting.  But it does no harm either because the CoAlpha approach isn't working anyway.  Another approach is needed.

I agree that hardcore liberal atheists aren't typical Americans.  But do you think the guy in this picture is a hardcore liberal atheist?  I don't think so, but he is part of the problem.  Yes the hardcore liberal atheists created conditions that created monsters like the guy in the picture, but most Americans have become such monsters and it is too late for them.  For moral men to have any chance, we must accept defeat.  The hardcore liberal atheists have won the war.  It is time to start over on a small scale and not worry about the masses.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Drealm powiedział(a):

First, while any young man arguably loves seeing naked women, the pleasure gained from looking at naked or semi-naked women can be negated entirely by the context. What I mean by context, is the only time it's enjoyable looking at promiscuously dressed women, is if you can have them on the spot. So if a woman is a hooker or a stripper, then it's enjoyable to watch them. However, if a woman is completely unattainable, then it's mentally and physically unpleasant to look at promiscuous women. Women, out of respect for men, should dress in a way that doesn't excite men. A woman dressing provocatively and leaving a man in an unfinished state of excitement is the equivalent of a man dressing in such a way that causes a woman to have a sudden onset period. Simply put dressing provocatively and then suppressing male urges is an assault on men's sexuality.

Second, how a woman dresses directly affects a man's desires. As you can imagine, my university town, Berkeley California, is one big liberalized hypersexual runway show. I'm forced to stare at hundreds if not thousands of women a day, all of whom bring sluttiness to all new pinnacle. But in this sea of flesh, I'm sometimes struck by an anomaly. Seeing as Berkeley is also a multi-cultural haven, I sometimes have the pleasure of being startled by the sight of conservative muslim and Indian women. It's in these sightings that I've discovered something about my own human nature.

I've discovered only my base urges are awakened when I see sluts. It's as though I'm operating on autopilot and anything short of sex, goes off the radar. Simply put, I cannot on a primal level get passed my sexual urges when looking at sluts. I can argue with myself intellectually all I want, but ultimately my actions will be dictated by primal urges. So I'm only able to view sluts as sexual objects. This means as far as actions go, that at best I just want to exploit them for casual sex and at worst I want to rape them.

Yet when I see conservative, modestly dressed muslim and Indian women, I'm amazed by how different I feel towards them. The only thing I want to do is help them. Yet the only thing I want to do to a slut is rape them. These muslim and Indian women are very beautiful, so it's not as though I'm not attracted to them. It's just that dress codes in both sluts and modest women operate as agents for activating different hardwired impulses in my psyche. If I extrapolate this observation to society, I think it's easy to see why in a slut society women will be more prey to rape. And why in a modestly dressed society, women will be protected, helped and nurtured. Simply put, dressing like sluts brings out murders, rapists and sadists in men. Dressing modestly brings out knights in shining armor. A society based on sluts, might as well be a pro-rapist society.

In observing women, I've come categorize women's dress codes under my own home brew system. The point of this system is to evaluate how slutty and feminist a woman is based on her clothing choices. I believe a woman's clothing choice can be categorized based on two scales. A sluttiness scale and a feminist scale. You see the problem with women's dress today isn't only that it's promiscuous, it's that today's female fashion also leans toward being either gender neutral or worst, masculine.

I've moved towards a loose idea of what defines modesty. I think the point of modest clothing is to cover up anything that excites men. The point is not to make women gender neutral, it's just to cut off all triggers that excite men. In my opinion this starts with skin coverage. The more a woman's skin is covered, the less she excites men. This is why short skirts and low cut tops are antonyms of modesty. Similarly clothing should not exaggerate a female's body shapes. This is why I still think jeans can be immodest on women, because a tight pair of jeans will accentuate a woman's legs and buttocks. High heels meet the same conflict as tight jeans, while they may not show extra skin, they accentuate a woman's legs and buttocks. Uncovered hair isn't as much an immodesty crime, but I still feel raw long hair can excite men. Long hair's affect on men can be counteracted with a scarf or veil.

Feminine clothing is easier for me to define. I don't have any fashion background, but I'd say any form of pants on a woman, even tight fitting modern day jeans, are overtly masculine. For this reason, I'd say the most basic requirement for feminine clothing is a dress. I don't know enough about fashion to define what looks feminine above a woman's waist, a dress would be the entry level requirement though.

I've come to evaluate women's clothing choices with the following labels:

1. Modest, Feminine
2. Modest, Masculine
3. Promiscuous, Feminine
4. Promiscuous, Masculine

Modest-feminine, is the ideal. I suppose modest-masculine is the next best, but modest-masculine can still apply to highly feminist women, so I'm not sure. Anything below modest-feminine, is a decline. I'd say most women in my area either promiscuous-feminine or promiscuous-masculine.

I'll show some photos for each lable to illustrate my point.


Modest, Feminine / Amish women

- Here these women are wearing dresses. But they don't expose lots of skin or accentuate female body parts.


Modest, Masculine

- The above women covers nearly every square inch of her body, so she's clearly not dressed promiscuously. However she wears pants and a very masculine sports jacket.


Promiscuous, Feminine

In this photo the woman does not wear pants or any masculine top. She's wearing a skirt, which is a feminine article, so she's clearly non-masculine. However nearly every square inch of her body is revealed and her body parts are hyper exaggerated to capture attention.


Promiscuous, Masculine

This last photo is perhaps the hardest to describe but the most common sighting. Many women these days don't exactly dress "promiscuous-feminine". They dress promiscuous, but they're lazy, so as a result of not putting any effort into their appearance, they become perpetual overly grown tomboys. The only difference being, these overgrown tomboys try combining laziness of appearance with some overtly sexual tones. I'd say "promiscuous-masculine" women differ from "promiscuous-feminine" women in that "promiscuous-feminine" women put a lot of effort into their appearance. It's just a negative kind of effort. Instead of "promiscuous-feminine" women spending hours to make themselves look feminine and respectable, they spend hours trying to look feminine and whorish. These "promiscuous-masculine" women on the other hand seem to of taken the worst of both worlds. They're lazy, so they dress in functional garb that's gender neutral or masculine. Yet they also want the attention, which "promiscuous-feminine" women garner, so they feminize their former male articles of clothing by creating things like skinny jeans.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

fschmidt powiedział(a):

Of course I agree with everything here.  Have you read my "Rape and Adultery" post?  It's too controversial to post here, but I could post it in the private forum.

Good luck finding a non-religious Northern European woman who dresses modestly.  I'm not sure if they still exist.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Drealm powiedział(a):

Yup wonderful post. That post influenced my thinking a lot. My point with writing this thread was to show a connection between how women dress and how men respond to them on a primal level. Clothing operates as agents for instigating certain primal urges in men. These aren't intellectual, well thought out, controllable urges - no they're animalistic urges. Men don't have control over these urges occurring. The best a society can do is take preventative measures, which never awaken these urges in men, or direct these urges into safe outlets like hookers.

While these urges are powerful they're also easily tamable. Since clothing operates as agents for creating urges, clothing just needs to be switched. Clothing is such a simple yet powerful influencing factor on men. When a woman dresses respectably men aren't inclined to sexualize her. At least in observing my own subliminal behavior, it's almost as though a chivalry light switch turns on when seeing a modestly dressed woman. Yet when I see a slut, it's lights out and I turn into an animal.

It's for this reason that I think men in ultra conservative communities are less sexually repressed. Even men in Amish society fare better than us, because they're not bombarded with sexuality they cannot have. All of their women dress in clothing that cancels out male urges and promotes chivalry.

I think you should repost your rape and adultery post in the private section if you're comfortable with it.
I'm not dead set on northern European women. After all I am a quarter Mexican, so if I sought out a Mexican woman, I'd still be maintaining 25% homogeneity as opposed to 50% homogeneity. The difference would be my appearance would make the homogeneity gap look larger than it is.

I too, am not sure northern European women of my liking still exist. I'm likely digging for dinosaurs. I know that Devlin said in one of his essays that the Scandinavia's are even worst than America. I think it's easy to form idealistic goals based on zero life experience. In my case, acquiring more life experience means traveling. My estimation is that any non-feminist woman is infinitely better than even a same race 100% homogeneous feminist woman. I see it as a very likely possibility that my niche standards will melt once I encounter non-feminist women from other races

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

fschmidt powiedział(a):

One other obvious point is that women's dress shows the hypocrisy of feminism because feminists claim that women don't want to be treated like sex objects but in feminist societies women dress like sex objects.  The reason for this is because in promiscuous societies, women want to attract the worst men and dress to do this.  They dress to attract sexually aggressive men, not to attract a husband.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Drealm powiedział(a):

Exactly!

In a feminist society women's bodies are more comodified and objectified. In a feminist society women are more likely to be raped. In a feminist society women are more like to be assaulted and murdered. In a feminist society women are infinitely devalued to pieces of meat. Feminists create a perfect storm for endangering women.

Under a patriarchal society a woman can still be valued for other things such as motherhood, spirituality, home making, retaining culture, ect. Both men and women have better competing chances under patriarchy. Feminism only benefits a minority of women, for a short length of time, under extremely phenomenal and temporary circumstances.

Under a feminist culture, an ugly women has to compete solely on looks. Whereas under patriarchy she can gain a man's attention for other attributes, which she may excel in. Under a feminist society we have a brave new world like situation, where any women over thirty infinitely loses value and is thrown in the trash for scavengers to pick at.

Under a patriarchal society, a more sophisticated system of value ensures value through all stages of a woman's life. In a woman's early stages she's valued for beauty. In her middle stages she's valued for motherhood and in her closing stages she's valued as a grandmother. A feminist culture cuts out the middle and ending stages and tries infinitely extending the beginning stage. This is not possible though, all women eventually become valueless under feminism. Under patriarchy all women gradually increase in value and are provided a place of status as they age. It's similar to wine aging.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Scorpious powiedział(a):

Wow. Damn? I don't know. I think the way those amish women are dressed is a bit extreme. On the other hand, women on my university campus are now wearing pants that literally show the inner parts of their ass cheeks, like in the image below. And no, it's no exaggeration, they actually wear pants like this:



It seems like every year women wear less, and less, and less. And it does betray a sluttiness (toward alpha males, not me, of course). But then again it's something I can fap to, so I dunno. Usually I'm so burned out by masturbating anyways that seeing them in this provocative clothing doesn't faze me.

What gets me is, why can't they dress in clothing that, you know, actually makes them look pretty? I think ripped t-shirts and jean shorts just look slutty and trashy. If they were really interested in attracting quality men you'd think they'd wear something more along the lines of this more often:

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...

Drealm powiedział(a):

Do you find it pleasant or unpleasant to have uncalled for urges provoked by slutware? I personally feel it's an assault on my sexuality, because I cannot fulfill my needs. Any pleasure gained from free voyership is canceled out by unfulfilled needs. It's a soft form of blue ball torture. I prefer being around modestly dressed women, because these urges disappear and I can just concentrate on my daily life.

Ripped t-shirts and jean shorts do make women look slutty. But what's often overlooked is another more accepted yet possibly worst problem. These articles, while being slutty, are also masculine.

The woman below undoubtedly represents everything I hate. However there's one saving grace about her, in spite of my dislike towards her, she's slutty in a feminine way. The problem is most women these days can't even pull that off. They've lost their femininity all together, so they're the worst of both worlds. They're not modest and they're not feminine. Their laziness has given way to this popularized tomboy look, which is both slutty and masculine.

Kliknij, aby rozwinąć...