Saturday, February 16, 2013

It's Roissy's world

The main job of social scientists appears to revolve around confirming that we're all living in it every other week:
Using data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Adolescent Health, a massive and detailed database covering 27,000 teens and young adults, she found that physical attractiveness (as rated by the person conducting the survey interview) does indeed correlate with sexual behavior--and in opposite ways for the opposite sexes:  The better-looking a man is, the more lifetime sexual partners he reports; the better-looking a woman, the fewer. Good-looking men are more likely to have had sex soon after meeting a partner; good-looking women, less likely. Good-looking women are likelier to describe their relationships as "committed"; good-looking men, less likely.
I have long pointed out that feminism is the only ideology that is less connected to observable reality than Communism.  That is why Western society, having been feminist-ridden since 1973, is unlikely to last as long as the 72 years that communism survived in the Soviet Union.

Men and women not only aren't the same, they would barely qualify as being the same species if they weren't able to breed.  Neither Game nor the results of the McClintock paper would be viable if the basic precepts of feminism were even remotely true.  If a woman asks why you're not a feminist, the correct answer is "because I don't believe in leprechauns riding unicorns down rainbows".  And if she asks why you don't think much of the intellectual capabilities of feminists, the correct answer is "Because people who structure their entire approach to life around leprechauns riding unicorns down rainbows are stupid."

22 comments:

mmaier2112 said...

Why every other week?

Note the obligatory black man with white woman pic on the link. Completely unrelated to the subject at hand, too.

Shimshon said...

Are these African or European variety unicorns?

Jestin Ernest said...

does this qualify as a "McRapey" post?

you DID say that feminists are stupid.

mmaier2112 said...

Duh, CONFIRMING it every other week, not living in it every other week.

I'll shut up now.

manboobzz said...

Feminism is more unrealistic than Communism. I like that and it's true of course.

Pepper said...

The real elephant in the living room is that the only fix to this problem is religion. The only fix to an existential problem is a spiritual one. Christianity or death. That's the reality. No amount of secularism or "liberty" or "freedom" will EVER fix this problem. Biology will fix us...thru death...

I suppose we could all convert to Islam as a fix to our demographic problem, but then we would cease to be "western" then, wouldn't we...?

Anonymous said...

Because people who structure their entire approach to life around leprechauns riding unicorns down rainbows are stupid.

Spoken like a true atheist!

Aeoli Pera said...

Are these African or European variety unicorns?

Don't do it...

Desiderius said...

"Note the obligatory black man with white woman pic on the link. Completely unrelated to the subject at hand, too."

It's cool, the white guys can just gay marry.

For the planet and stuff. Also less patriarchy.

Not to mention less competition for Dylan and Madison to get into an Ivy.

What's not to like?

Houston said...

I once met a young feminist who insisted that fairies, unicorns, etc. were real (or at least that they had existed in the distant past). She was less than pleased when I shot down this absurdity. During the unicorn conversation she wore baggy, earth tone clothing and a bored expression. The night before, she'd appeared at my apartment door wearing nothing but an oversized t-shirt (in which she looked pretty damn hot), smiling coyly and sweetly asking to borrow my phone book. The Jekyll-Hyde transformation puzzled me then. Having learned Game precepts, it's no mystery now.

Unending Improvement said...

Even Aunt Susan seems to be posting shit that supports Roissy's worldview.

jlw said...

"The better-looking a man is, the more lifetime sexual partners he reports; the better-looking a woman, the fewer."

But...but...but I thought a short, ugly, poor/miserly man just needed Game and he'd be getting laid like tile!? Are you telling me that sometimes things that we can't do anything about actually might have a bearing on outcomes w/r/t sexual conquests and that a small group of man are screwed (heh) when it comes to getting trim they, in turn, think is attractive?

You're sailing awful close to the sharp rocks of truth here, my friend. It's safer out in the sea of placid platitudes like, "there's someone for everyone" and such.

taterearl said...

So science is proving reality. That's nice for a change.

demonoid said...

@jlw "But...but...but I thought a short, ugly, poor/miserly man just needed Game and he'd be getting laid like tile!? "

You don't get it. Game restores what beta/gammatude took away. If a man's natural potential is regular HB6s and sometimes HB7s, then that's where game will take him. Which is an extraordinarily better outcome than HB4s with an occasional HB5.

Those "sharp rocks of truth" you alluded to are puncturing your own hull. Game is a way of achieving one's true potential SMV, whatever that may be. The "truth" is that any man who moves up a couple levels on the SMV is going to feel damned good about it. I don't need to be a millionaire to feel good about lifting myself out of poverty into a good middle-class income.

jlw said...

I think I do get it. However, I agree with nearly everything you say, Demonoid. It's refreshing to see a proponent of game give the true picture. Game indeed is a way of achieving one's true potential SMV, whatever that may be. I'm on board with that.

For a small group, however, their potential SMV actually is 0-2. Game won't raise it. Now, since reality is assortive mating based on SMV, some will settle for the HB1-2s they can get and some will choose to go without.

Many game proponents suggest everybody - no matter how low their true SMV - will get the HB5-10s. And that's a lie. VD doesn't subscribe to the lie. Neither do the social scientists he cites above. That's also refreshing.

realmatt said...

Why is there a picture of a white woman being accosted by a negroid in that article?

I'm really getting sick of this propaganda bullshit pushing the black men/white women image onto everyone.

I've never seen an ad of a white man with a black woman, an Asian woman, a black man with an asian, etc..just black guy/white girl.

Or a white girl standing in the middle of a strapping black man and a balding little pitiful nebbish white dweeb. It's really pissing me off.

Kiwi the Geek said...

I'm a little confused. How does this fit with the trend of hot 20-somethings riding the carousel?

Ari said...

Could you please give a succinct definition of feminism? I was challenged to do so when I commented that the simile "ugly as a feminist" should be in common usage. I just brushed the challenge aside, but I would be interested in your take.

Unending Improvement said...

Kiwi, as Heartiste himself debated, it isn't exactly the hot girls who are riding the carousel.

The hot girls are the ones who can lock down a good looking guy.

Also, there are probably more good looking girls than guys, although that's only due to the standards held by both sexes. It would make some sort of mathematical sense at least.

realmatt said...

The REAL HOT ones are not bed hopping, at least not as much. The 8 - 10's who look like they could be print or fashion models, or who might be those models already, are not behaving in that manner, typically. It's the 8's and down who are doing it.

And really, the average club slut is not exactly a sight to behold. Depending on where you live, half of them look like drag queens with their manjaws. The Jersey Shore type..

Those are the pigs ruining society. Just as there's hardly a difference between the face of a black man and the face of a black woman, throw a wig on a NY Italian 22 yr old man and he could be one of those gross made up skanks flashing their hideous scabby vaginas all over the dance floor.

The head cheerleader dates the quarterback all through high school. She isn't blowing the offensive line at the party after every game. She's on the arm of the king. She doesn't need to do that.

tz said...

'When we stop believing in God, we do not then believe in nothing, we believe in anything.' - Chesterton paraphrase.

Feminism is a degenerate paganism worse than the thuggies in India, and more fatal, both to the innocent and to the self.

I do not believe in Darwin, but do believe in adaptation, and the STDs understand Game better than humans do. Syphilis more than prudes created the Victorian era. As antibiotics and antivirals lose their effectiveness we are asking for a repeat.

Glaxo, Pfizer, and the rest were the original viral marketers. And they would like more viri.

(This goes back to my observation that alpha/beta/gamma/delta/omega/sigma don't correlate at all with morality, but are like the psychological tests - introvert v.s. extrovert, think v.s. feel, etc. where each has strengths and weaknesses).

A good operational definition of feminism is someone who thinks women should 1. be judged by male standards, e.g. of success, and 2. considers any deficiency the result of oppression or discrimination.

Tradition held the two greatest virtues of women was their virginity and when they became mothers - nurturing life from conception (and implantation) until the baby is weaned off milk. But that was when children really had transcendent, infinite value, so large families were the norm.

They were at service at the altar of the hearth, the temple of the home.

Today they have voluntarily become mice in the rat-race.

Stingray said...

Men and women not only aren't the same, they would barely qualify as being the same species if they weren't able to breed.

I wrote about this concept myself this week. Men and women are too different to be equal.

Post a Comment

NO ANONYMOUS COMMENTS.

Post a Comment