Archive for the ‘Relationships’ Category

The Male Quest for Woman

And the Incidendal Drawing and Quartering of Rollo Tommasi.

Adam has recently posted a couple of somewhat interesting articles that consider the prospect of sex before marriage, fornication, and the PUA mindset in general.

The key message I personally see as most relevant in the first one is the partial quote that derives from the reading of Goldwin Smith (a 19th Century historian) by the author of the piece Adam links to, JM Smith, which he however presents only in part, and I think deserves a fuller version of it:

He [Goldwin Smith] was appalled by the prospect of women’s suffrage, correctly foreseeing that it would make democratic politics even more emotional, and that Anglo Saxon men would be to soft, silly and spineless to stop it.  He explained this as the dolorous result of gynæmania, a “disease” of the Anglo Saxon male that was characterized by a morbidly excessive craving for the good opinion of women.   The word gynæmania was first coined as a scientific name for satyriasis, or a morbidly excessive craving for carnal knowledge of women, but Smith saw that slavery to sex was becoming slavery to the female sex.

The emphasis on Anglo-Saxon is mine, and I maintain it remains the key point of the article, as it was indeed in the post by JM Smith, and indeed Golden Smith’s original work, even if Adam did not seem to focus on it particularly. So keep this point about the Anglos in mind for later, we shall return to it.

The second article can be summed up as a strong and unequivocal advice —almost an order, really— to men, to not indulge in sex before marriage; and he takes a post by Rollo Tommasi as his jumping off point. Tommasi is somewhat “revered” in PUA circles as being one of the grandfathers of the PUA movement. Personally, though I have weird hobbies, and looking at PUAs and their thirst for raping incels’ wallets was one of many such entertainments, I have never found Tommasi to be especially insightful of much of anything. And the article Adam links to is definitely of the stupidly degenerate category, although my take on things is considerably different from Adam’s in many respects.

Rollo’s post is a car-crash of bullshit and lies and simply illogical nonsense and deserves a point by point take-down even just on its own (non-existent) supposed merits. And… because… you know how I said I have weird hobbies? And typing doesn’t hurt me, I’m going to do just that right here below, between the fancy page breaks. If you don’t care (which is absolutely fine), or if you can’t hold a key point in your mind for more than 3 minutes, or are particularly pious and find vulgarity distatesful, then avert your eyes and skip the Rollo Tommasi take-down below, and scroll to the second fancy page break.

The key points by the way, so far are:

  • Anglos are weird about caring about what women think of them, and,
  • Rollo is full of shit. The detailed takedown below is for those not experienced/logical/clear-headed enough to see why Rollo is full of shit, and I am here to help! [insert sociopath smile here].

Rollo in fog-fart grey background your friendly host in standard text.

Rollo, do you think “Body Count” matters?

Absolutely. And the higher, the better. I need a girl who’s DTF (down to fuck) from the jump. For guys after 50, all that pretentious bullshit about long-term commitment should melt away to sexual expediency. It’s not about experience or some contrived want for a virgin bride. It all comes down to guys who fuck and guys who don’t. If we’re talking from the perspective of evolutionary effectiveness, women (and men) with higher body counts are effectively proven commodities in a sexual economy.

The sexually unfulfilled and deprived Rollo tells us several things right in the first paragraph:

  • He is over 50 and not married or settled down, still chasing the ever elusive “high” of some sex with a random “hottie” (but at over 50 I am fairly sure he’ll take whatever bone is thrown at him).
  • He in fact has given up on being “pair-bonded” as the PUAs call it, to one woman. He tries to cover it up with absolutely false bravado and machismo, but it is painfully obvious he is in pain from this. Whether his pain is always conscious or not is not clear yet, self-deception in people like Rollo is over 9,000 and also eleventy.

  • UPDATE: I stand corrected! He’s been married since he was 28, which means I was completely correct about his being a fraud with regard to his “experience” with bedding women, it’s literally all made up theory. And since I did not “correct” any of the subsequent points after this point, you can verify immediately that I really did not know anything about this guy besides read maybe 10 lines of his stuff over the last decade and concluding he was irrelevant, and secondly, that my dissection of his nonsense post is spot on, despite this.

  • He talks absolute nonsense with regard to “evolutionary effectiveness” because banging as many random women as possible, or, for a woman, even worse, as many guys as possible, throughout human history was only a recipe for absolute disaster and death, and the end of your genetic line. Staying together, regardless of the difficulties, and ensuring the survival of your plentiful children was the only successful strategy, and it still is. The obvious idiocy of his thinly veiled self-justification/rationalisation is clear to anyone with a functioning neurone or two.

“Oh, oh! but you say he is sexually unfulfilled and deprived, when he clearly has (or had) sex with a lot of women, you’re just bitter!”

No, young Padawan, pay attention now:

Firstly: PUAs LIE. And Lie spectacularly about their “body count” trust me on this, I looked into the subspecies of “male” that labels themselves as PUAs in some depth. Feel free to use the Search Me button on the right there. (heh… in light of my not bothering to research Rollo at all and then it turns out he was married the whole time he pretended to be a “player” this is kind of hilarious.)

Secondly: Let’s in any case ass-u-me Rollo does indeed still have regular sex with random hotties every week. Even if that were the case, considering by his own supposed “reality” he has been doing that for 30 years or so, you have to wonder… what can he possibly still be chasing? As regular readers of this blog will know, I am no stranger to the female form myself, and went through a lot of women in a short period of time after I gave up essentially on long-term relationships. And after a few years of it, I tell you, I was essentially bored of it. And no, I am not a guy with low T or lack of energy or any difficulty in securing a regular flow of pretty, usually above average intelligence, women to my bed. I assure you, my pointing this out comes from having lived that way and not any kind of misplaced envy, lack of understanding, or inexperience at the “thrill” of a new woman under me. The fact is that only a man that has yet to fill the hole in his soul can continue to behave this way, in the erroneous belief that if he just beds enough women, somehow, at some point, he will feel fulfilled. Don’t get me wrong, there is some truth to the fact that if you become able to essentially pick up women for sex almost at will, it does give you a certain… I am not even sure what to call it, but I guess… level of general life confidence would be it. But in reality it has little to do with how many women you take to bed and more with your attitude when with a woman. There are men that have this sense of confidence innate to them and only marry and stay with one woman for their entire lives, and there are men that may go through some women to realise they have it already. It’s a little like martial arts. There are guys who never take a class but in a certain circumstance will not hesitate to fight back, and there are guys who need to go training for a while to feel strong in their sense of justice, or whatever. The reality is that a man who forever chases sex with an ever growing number of women, is simply a malformed man. He is not, I assure you a self-actualised man, to borrow a Maslowian term. He is like the perennial teenager, still trying to be “cool” at 70. Or if you prefer, he’s like the Boomers, who keep insisting 80 is the new 40, or whatever. And that is no way for a grown man to be.

Third: Remember that point about the Anglos being far more desperate in general for female approval than say, well, your average dago, spic, South American, Greek… oh look… it’s a divide between Protestant and Catholic or Orthodox religions… again. Things that make you go hmmmm, eh?

Are you starting to understand what I mean by deprived and unfulfilled yet? (It seems clear he wishes he was a “player” which he clearly is not, and never was so…)

Guys who don’t fuck spend lifetimes consoling themselves with moral high-ground narratives to explain why they don’t fuck. At least 80% of guys don’t fuck, so there’s a lot of narrative inbreeding and self-congratulatory bullshit passed around among them. This bullshit has been de rigueur for millennia, but in the social media age, it’s an obvious cope. We’re just more aware of it now.

Of course, the best narratives are the ones that make guys who don’t fuck feel good about not fucking while simultaneously making guys who do fuck feel bad about fucking. This disqualification tactic is one of the many forms of bloodless intrasexual competition tactics that 80%er men have consoled themselves with since the Middle Ages. If you can make your intrasexual rival feel guilty about fucking – because God hates fucking for any reason besides making babies – then you have a tactical advantage in the sexual economy. It works even better if you can gaslight a superior sexual rival to believe he (or she) is going to Hell if he pursues his biological imperative to his fullest potential.

Good God. Talk about gaslighting. If you take him at his word, Rollo is saying that fucking, just that, fucking, not procreating, not making children, just fucking, as many women as possible, is what makes life worthwhile. I have met men like this. Several PUAs are like this, and let me tell you, they are absolutely pathetic. They are a kind of Gollum about pussy in general. My Preciousssss they say, obsessed, salivating, masturbating furiously, whether alone or inside someone else, and that is all that their lives revolve around.

He also further blurts out obvious absolute lies, imputing 80% of men in the Middle Ages did this thing: which was about telling you that way to live (that he thinks is the epitome of existence) is a shallow, discivilisational, unfulfilling, unhealthy way to exist, and not live at all, and they did it to prevent other men from having sex with lots of women. This is complete nonsense, since most men in the middle ages got married, did not have lots of partners, and raised children with their wives, and in the Catholic world at least (which was the ONLY Christianity), most marriages lasted literally until death parted them.

According to him, the entire structure of the Catholic Church was set up so the celibate priests could get all the poonani. It’s ridiculous on its face, ahistorical, and frankly smacks of Gollum-like backward rationalisation that would make a crack whore trying to justify her habit blush with shame.

Generally, lesser men cannot openly challenge greater men (men who fuck) in physical prowess. So, more intelligent men who don’t fuck contrived forms of social gaslighting to improve their chances of reproducing. Smarter lesser men have always devised workarounds to solve their reproductive problems. It’s actually one of the strengths of our species. Nothing sparks innovation quite like a man solving his proximate need for sex and his ultimate need to reproduce. And nothing has been more expedient a tactic than convincing a greater man that he ought to disqualify himself from the sexual economy.

According to Rollo, the Gammas have been “successful” throughout the ages at getting Alpha men to not reproduce. Oh, no, sorry, to fuck, for the sake of fucking alone; reproduction be damned. Once again, anyone who has actually been successful with women over a period of some years, can tell you this is absolute bullshit, and it makes me suspect Rollo, like so many PUAs after him, is likely also full of shit about his supposed sexual prowess with women. It doesn’t matter what the Gammas do. Alphas and Sigmas (that are that way inclined, some Sigmas are not) will be with women sexually even if you imposed the death penalty for doing so. And they would still find ways to get away with it. Gammas have never been very successful at anything really, except being annoying, redundant, and getting women to avoid them like radioactive plague. And notice also that for Rollo the sole qualifier of what makes a man “great” is how high his body count is. Truly it is so pathetically ridiculous that it makes me laugh at both the stupidity of it, and Rollo’s own intrinsic amoeba-like existence. And while he wants very much to paint my view of this as some sort of “envy”, there really is absolutely zero of any such intent or reality in my perspective. It is genuinely the somewhat ironic mild amusement one gets from watching a complete fuckwit trying to be clever and spectacularly showing his ass to the world for the fuckwit he really is.

The problem is, guys who fuck are usually too preoccupied with the logistics of fucking to be bothered by the self-loathing moralism of guys who don’t fuck. At least, that’s how it’s been in a post-Sexual Revolution sexual economy. If it ain’t broke, fixing it isn’t even an afterthought. When you watched the now infamous AMOGing scene in The Wolf Of Wall Street where Leonardo Di Caprio swoops Margot Robbie from a trust fund yuppie, you’re really watching the intrasexual combat between a guy who fucks and a guy who doesn’t. It’s how human males lock horns over sexual access in rutting season. The only thing a guy who doesn’t fuck has in his arsenal is his cunning and nerve.

The emphasis is added by me to point out yet again another logical fallacy. The men who are successful with women do not preoccupy themselves with the logistics of fucking at all, beyond possibly getting their maid, sister, or slutty FWB, to change their semen-stained bedsheets from the night before, because they have a new girl coming over. Literally every man I have known that was… well… a “guy who fucks” like Rollo wants to put it, gave his interactions with women less consideration than he did his enjoyment of a film with a good friend, or his sport of choice, or reading a book he was into. The fact Rollo does not know this, again, makes me suspect he is not quite the lady-killer he presents himself as.

This is why body count only matters to guys who don’t fuck. Their moral crisis isn’t about their inability to find a virgin bride. Guys who don’t fuck couldn’t give two shits about whether a woman’s ability to pair bond with him is impaired by her body count. All they really want is the kind of sex women give to guys who do fuck but never need the ‘value added’ benefits he had to qualify for to get her to fuck him. You see, the gaslighting goes both ways – outwardly towards a sexual rival and inwardly to convince himself that his purpose is righteous. Moralizing over body count is as much about the guy wagging his finger at women as it is about their indiscriminate fucking. There’s actually nothing indiscriminate about it, but sour grapes and making your necessity a virtue are necessary to make Strategic Pluralism an unfalsifiable sexual strategy.

There is a hint of truth to this paragraph, but it is presented as the only absolute, which, as usual, is nonsense. Most men in general actually do care about body-count for any woman they would consider as a long term partner, and at times even for ones they would consider only for a temporary fling. The fact Rollo does not know this, is a clear indication that he is still at the teenager level of sexual immaturity.

Strategic Pluralism Theory

According to strategic pluralism theory (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000), men have evolved to pursue reproductive strategies that are contingent on their value in the mating market. More attractive men accrue reproductive benefits from spending more time seeking multiple mating partners and relatively less time investing in offspring (guys who fuck).

In contrast, the reproductive effort of less attractive men, who do not have the same mating opportunities (guys who don’t fuck), is better allocated to investing heavily in their mates and offspring and spending relatively less time seeking additional mates.

From a woman’s perspective, the ideal is to attract a partner who confers both long-term investment benefits and genetic benefits (true hypergamy). Not all women, however, will be able to attract long-term investing mates who also display heritable fitness cues (guys who fuck). Consequently, women face trade-offs in choosing mates because they may be forced to choose between males displaying fitness indicators or those who will assist in offspring care and be good long-term mates (Gangestad & Simpson, 2000). 

The most straightforward prediction that follows is that women seeking short-term mates when the man’s only contribution to offspring is genetic should prefer muscularity more than women seeking long-term mates.

from Why Is Muscularity Sexy? Tests of the Fitness Indicator Hypothesis

Guys who fuck are usually typified by physique. Usually. 

All that theory says is what has been known since the dawn of time. Women want the fittest and most successful male to breed with, and those types of men have unlimited options so tend to make use of them. Also, water is wet.

Much as I despise Destiny, the guy DOES fuck. Maybe not like Justin WallerJason Momoa, or Mike Sartain, but he certainly ruts like a feral animal compared to Ben Shapiro. Guys who fuck don’t sit around comparing dick sizes or bask in the glow of the imaginings of the third-party validation they get from filling a void in their souls/egos by fucking. These are tropes that guys who don’t fuck tell themselves to explain why guys who do fuck are fucking the women they’ll eventually fuck because those women ran out of options. The concept of fucking for some ephemeral form of validation is part of that gaslighting I mentioned above. 

Here we see a rather convoluted bit of chaff-firing, self-delusion and gaslighting in order to justify and rationalise both to himself and the world, his ultimately meaningless way of existing.

He says guys who have his (supposed) lifestyle do not worry about their image which can be “true” to the extent that some men do not care how their womanising makes them look to other men (or in some cases to women too) or society in general, but they tend to be the exceptions, most Alpha types do care about the way they are perceived, and in any case, they all care at least about what women, or at least any given woman in particular, at a point in time, thinks of them, if only to get them in bed. It is also generally true that men who are successful with women do not tend to over-analyse themselves (unless they are PUAs) but the fact remains there is a deeply unfulfilled part of them, whether they realise it or not consciously, that has quite a lot to do with needing to feel loved, and paradoxically, their womanising tends to almost ensure they are ostracised from that very sensation they crave (consciously or not).

But ultimately he ends with yet another nihilist absolute. According to him, such men (as he presents himself to supposedly be) fuck for… just the orgasm I guess. They don’t do it for any self-validation, they don’t do it for love, they don’t do it for procreation, they don’t do it for long term companionship… right Rollo, nice of you to finally admit (if passively aggressively like a whiny bitch) that all people like you do, is really masturbate themselves to death, and it really makes little difference if you do it alone or with a human you empathise with about the same as you do with your no-doubt well-used fleshlight.

It’s intended to get your genetic superior to disqualify himself by contemplating his filling the void of existence with meaningless sex. Meaning plays another big role in the game of guys who don’t fuck. “Meaning” is a container word. It’s a term you can subjectively fill with anything you like. Even fucking if you’re clever about it. Meaning is intentionally ambiguous, and that’s what makes it so effective in being unfalsifiable. As a rule, gaslighting depends on unfalsifiable concepts, but meaning is one of the capstones. Any time you listen to some child on the Fresh & Fit podcast prattle on about how she’s living her truth, you’re listening to a variation of the meaningfulness horseshit.

And here Rollo doubles down on the idea that his life has no meaning. None whatsoever. All there is, is the fuck, for the sake of the fuck, the ultimately masturbationary orgasm for the sake of the orgasm itself, not any other reason. Not self-validation, not self-improvement, not marriage, not reproduction, nope, nope, nope, just the ever omnipresent “fuck”.

Do you see why I compared him, and people like him, to Gollum?

Guys who don’t fuck, like Ben Shapiro and Jordan Peterson, are actually the ones who need validation. Because soul-void fulfillment means confronting the reality that they’ll never enjoy the uninhibited feral lust their wives reserved for the men in their past who fucked. Men who never had to prove their value-added bona fides to fuck the women who would become their wives. Men who don’t fuck live lives of ceaselessly qualifying for a desire they know their wives were capable of with other men but can’t seem to provoke themselves. This is why validation is a thing for guys who don’t fuck – and women who need a Jungian term to explain why guys who do fuck won’t fuck them.

And now he takes the doubled down absolute idiocy to truly stupefying levels. According to him, the men who “fuck” are the be-all and end-all of life, the utter epitome of manly manness. Yes, there is some truth to the self-soothing half-truths and lies men and women tell themselves for not being as successful in the sexual marketplace, but what Rollo tries desperately to shove under the carpet with his tracer-firing barrage at what he considers “inferior” men is the question: What, exactly, are the men who “fuck” better for, or at, in life? And the ONLY thing Rollo keeps coming up with is the purpose of “the fuck” itself. Which is, of course, either ridiculous or nihilistic and pathetic to a suicidal degree. And we know more than one PUA has gone the suicide route too. (And as it happens, Rollo himself turns out to be one of the guys who “does not fuck”, in his own terminology, which according to him, makes him the same as Ben Shapiro. Well… I got nothing, the man is entirely a fraud whichever way you look at it.)

Guys who don’t fuck are the dutiful, loyal, supportive, and nameless husband who Rosehad children and grandchildren with, yet pined for Jack (a guy who fucks) and dropped a priceless diamond to the bottom of the sea in the final moments of her life at the end of Titanic. Hypergamy doesn’t care about the moral crises and ethical concerns of guys who don’t fuck. Validation and body count are just two heads of a conjoined twin. They haven’t gotten the memo that their 20th-century moralism-as-strategy is meaningless in a 21st-century sexual marketplace. 

Ah yes. Using Titanic as the masterpiece of philosophy that it clearly was, and making the vapid, stupid, callous, utterly self-absorbed narcissist Rose, the “heroine” of the piece, because she throws away a fortune she could have given to her progeny, in quintessential, wicked, super-boomer format, is indeed, a bold strategy, Rollo! Not a good one, valid or sensible one, but certainly “bold”. As in the same kind of “bold” that would stick his dick in a bar-cutting industrial machinery to “prove his manliness”.

Body count only matters to nameless husbands who don’t fuck. It doesn’t matter to anywoman because they would rather fuck a lot of Jacks on a sinking ship than be bothered by the purity (paternity) concerns of guys who don’t fuck. Guys who fuck don’t care about body count because they know women hate guys who don’t fuck, and those guys care about body count.

Again, it is quite obvious that Rollo protesteth too much here, as he has throughout the entire vapid, ageing PUA post.

Rollo is the male equivalent of a post-wall woman who has ridden the cock-carousel so long she is now left on the shelf. And Rollo is the post-wall “bad-boy” (assuming he ever really actually was one at all) who is left with spent cigarettes, a ruggerised fleshlight, wrinkles, and increasingly creeping despair, at the beginning of the end of a life wasted on ephemera.

FINAL UPDATE: As I said right from the start, PUAs lie, and as it happens Rollo lied about pretty much everything concerning his supposed “ability” concerning women, and he advises men to do the exact opposite of what he himself has done, which is to stay married to one woman for 26 years. If he had been the ladykiller he presented himself as, the above vivisection would be absolutely correct, and as it happens, remains so, regarding the fictional would-be Rollo. And since he is an absolute fraud that advises others to go down a path he knows nothing about and leads to nothing good long term, one can hardly imagine anything he has to say is relevant or worthwhile. Even by his own (retarded) “measuring stick” Rollo himself is the exact guy who “does not fuck” that he so denigrates in his post. And yet he also advises against being married. So… what exactly is Rollo, what does he actually have to say that is relevant, or true, or valid?

Right, now after that vivisection, let us return to the original points, which are that:

  • Anglos are weird about caring about what women think of them, and,
  • Rollo is full of shit.

And seeing what that says about men who chase after women for sex and so on in general terms and in spiritual terms.

First of all, I think the point about Anglos being afflicted by gynæmania is a real thing. The English speaking world of the Anglos is indeed, culturally, regardless of whether British (though these are the epicentre of it) Australian, New Zealand, Canadian, or even the more Anglecised parts of America, tends to be irrelevant, as a people, they tend to be grossly united by the Protestant Zeitgeist and a kind of fear/intimidation/shyness of women in general.

Certainly none of the Catholic countries suffer from this to anywhere near the extent the English people do. And it has been this way for centuries. The writings of Italian travellers to England recounts the same view of things that we Southern European tend to have even today of the English men and the English women.

I believe in part it is due to the nefarious influence of Protestantism, as it is an invariably mechanising of humanity and the minute you do that, the first errors will be with your understanding/handling/appreciation of women, because human females are in a way the very embodiment of the chaos of humanity at its best and its worst, and any reduction at binarium pensierum (binary thinking) will invariably produce vast errors in your model of reality with respect to women. And as such they will become only more mystifying, unpredictable and dangerous for you. The other part is due to the fact that as a rule, the Anglos tend to be a logical and shy people, neither of which quality lends itself particularly well to being easy-going in relation to women, who as a rule are not logical and only pretend to be shy in the company of men, if at all.

For such men, the eventual “ability” to bed a lot of women does in fact begin to become a form of validation for them. It remains essentially a false one, but one they believe in and buy into as much as the people they try to convince around them.

These are the men that despite having slept with a hundred or even a few hundred women or more, remain nevertheless prey to their own desire for women and susceptible to how they are perceived by the women they are attracted to. They invariably appear as what the Zoomers call “cringe” to men who have the self-assuredness internally that these Anglo types seek perennially, and hardly ever find. I have known men that only had two women as sexual partners, the first was their wife and the second also their wife, after the first one died, and yet these men would have zero problem genuinely attracting almost any woman they set their eyes on, and they would do so free of the anxiety and self-doubt that plagues the supposed ladies men with hundreds of notches on their belts.

For me, discovering I was able to get women to have sex with me successfully, was not self-actualising in any way. It was more like discovering I had a natural aptitude for fencing, or skiing. A kind of pleasant surprise about something I never really gave much thought to one way or the other. And a good part of why I was successful has very much to do with the fact that that is pretty much how I treated it, not because I wanted to pose as such a person, but because I am such a person. And I cannot with certainty say what makes a man that way or not. I think at least some of it is genetic, but life experiences probably formed in childhood also has something to do with it.

And if I had to give it my best guess, I would say it is probably mostly due to whether your relationship with your parents, and primarily your father, was honest and direct and loving or not. The English sense of “logical detachment” I think is ultimately damaging to children, which is why the entire Anglosphere is a fucking mess of feral youfs with no sense, no honour, no dignity, or discipline to speak of, and increasingly illiterate at that.

The more instinctual and visceral love of an Italian father, who may well kick your ass, literally, for some small or even wrong reason, but who would unquestioningly jump into a harvesting combine to save you, is a far healthier way to be raised than the cold logic of the Anglo-Saxons. And instills in you a profound sense of self-assuredness that I think nothing else does. And that sense comes through to women like a lighthouse in the dark, whether they are aware of it or not consciously (mostly not).

I hope this explains the reason why some men, regardless of how many women they have slept with, ultimately remain on some level… uncertain. Doubtful. Unfinished. And women can in fact sense that.

Now, let us get to the concept of fornication in general and so on, which in fairness, was the topic that Adam was trying to cover, and to which, my extremely long preamble above is merely introduction to give you my context.

On Fornication

First of all, let me state unambiguously that yes, in an ideal world, the way that the Catholic Church says we should behave, both as men and women is indeed, the best and ideal way. No question. I unreseveredly agree.

That said, being as I am Catholic, and being as I lived like a heathen for at least 43 years of my time on Earth, and given that I made no attempt to resist temptations of the flesh in that time, I think I can say with some authority that:

  • We live on a world that is decidedly fallen and very far from ideal.
  • Every one of us is utterly flawed in many ways even after we see and realise and accept the truth of Catholicism.
  • Men who have yet even to see the truth of Catholicism cannot, in all likelihood, even begin to see why what are known as the sins of the flesh are even bad, never mind actual mortal sins.

So, if unmitigated fornication is the equivalent of a blind and deaf man walking towards a cliff-face, how can I possibly begin to even make him aware of this truth? The temptations of the flesh after all are not a fairy tale. They are very much real, and they certainly never felt bad or sinful to me when I indulged deeply in them, nor, do I expect they feel that way to the average 20-something or even 30-something year old male that is “finally getting some!”

And while Adam and people like him, including Catholic Priests and Bishops are absolutely correct that it is a damaging thing, it’s not as if I had not heard that sort of preaching when I was indulging deeply in fornication and then some.

And my reaction to it all was usually, something like, Eh, poor bastard isn’t getting any and he either doesn’t know what he’s missing, or maybe would like, much as the feminists, everyone to be as miserable as him.

And I expect any young man that has got this far (if any have) in this long post, is probably thinking the same thing, and they also do not have a counter-example as a reference frame. Not one they have lived certainly, because that counter example you only get once you are married, and fully committed to one woman, and she is to you too.

It sort of feels like a lie. Oh, don’t you have any fun now, boy, you just wait and just take the ONE sweet, and only that one, for the rest of your life, and trust us, it’s better this way. With all the bullshit you have ingested by age 20, and your at least seeing some of it (if you are not completely retarded) one can hardly be blamed for thinking this too is a massive lie.

And because I am Catholic, and because I have also the example of my own life, and the awesomeness of a real priest that Baptised, Confirmed and presided over my Marriage, and had the benefit of his wisdom and kindness, I also understand that fallen as we are, erroneous as we are, mistaken as we are, we are not necessarily evil or shunning God. We are just wrong. Badly, desperately, tragically, sadly, wrong, but mostly just wrong, not intentionally evil. And we are sad, weak, feel unloved and uncared for by anyone and we try, like drowning rats, to scrabble some sense of worth and love and kindness, wherever there is any illusion we might find some. And so we make mistakes.

And most of you reading this who are unmarried will be in the midst of those mistakes, and I am not here to chastise you, or rain thunder and fire and brimstone and judgement from God on your weighted and desperate heads. Far from it.

I was one of you. I walked your path deeper and longer in the swamp of godless life than most. So, young man, if you will, after this very long set of words, take a seat near my camp-fire and let me tell you a story and may it help you navigate your own swamp, and may it be shallow and brief.

So you are fornicating. So you may even like a girl you are with and be boyfriend and girlfriend, and you may even be thinking how it would be nice if it will last. Or maybe you’re so infatuated with the sensations of sex that a new girl every week or every day or two, or whatever, is intoxicating and draining all your thoughts and actions, wallet and testicles. Whatever the case may be, listen to this and think it over:

What do you want for your life? What do you want to think about your life when you are 99 years old and on your rocking chair and you can see the grim reaper finally walking towards you? And you’re fine with it and smile at him even, recognising that this supposedly terrible and fearful boogeyman is nothing more than a tired and misunderstood boatman, taking you across the veil (or the river Styx if you prefer).

Do you think you will be pleased reminiscing over your 287 sexual conquests, aided by your printed out spreadsheet in large letter format, because your eyes are no longer what they used to be? Playing out the sex tapes on the projector of your study to remember better what you did or felt or what they did? Or who they even were? Do you think that will warm your heart as you face the final journey?

Or your sporting achievements?

Or your financial ones, absent children and grandchildren to leave it to?

Tell me, young man, what do you think will make you able to face the final boatman with serenity and peace?

I’ll tell you what it is for me now and what I hope it will be for me at 105, but I say only 105 because I started late, otherwise 99 would be perfectly acceptable to me too. And yes, I know I’d be lucky to get there.

It is the idea of my children grown up and married and with children of their own, and doing well, and if God grants me the energy and the fortune to do so, the idea of leaving them as much as I possibly can, to make their lives and those of their children good ones.

It is the idea of watching my grandchildren and possibly even my great-grandchildren (hence 105!) running around nearby, screaming and making noise and playing joyfully and laughing full belly-laughs and thinking my sons and daughters and their wives and husbands are good women and men who will be with them to the end of their days and help them raise the next lot of joyous Crusaders for God, Truth and Justice, as my family line has done since the literal original First Crusade.

Now you may have a different religion from me (because you’re still young and stupid, heh, heh, heh) but I don’t think it changes the equation. I don’t think it changes it at all.

And here is what else I think. I think if what I just told you is NOT what inspires you, is abhorrent to you in some way, then I hope very much it’s only because, as I said, you’re young, and really fucking stupid, and you have bought in to a lot of Boomer-era lies, And I sincerely hope you grow out of your mental retardation.

And if not, if that is who you really are, then fuck you. I hope you die young and rid the world of another noxious creature that only spoils the Earth and everything on it. And I’m not talking about climate change, you fuckwit.

Now, if you get the impression that I am a kind of bastard for an old man, I would say, fuck you at the “old man” I can probably still kick your ass at 54 if you are in your twenties, depending on some factors, but that aside, yeah, I am not the most pleasant human being. I don’t like humans much because mostly they are weak, and because they are weak they lie. And they lie a lot. They lie to themselves first and then to everyone else around them. And the lies cause the harm. They cause ALL the harm. Which is as the god of this world wants it. Because this Earth is under the dominion of Satan. And no, young man, I don’t give a shit if you think “The Devil” is a superstition. He is more real than the heart-attack all the poor imbeciles that took the genetic serum are probably facing in the not too distant future.

Oh, and this is just a side note, but listen up: The Earth is NOT Flat!

And if you think it is you are a stupid bastard and I really don’t care what happens to you and with a level of stupidity that high it is definitely a better thing if you do not pass on those retarded genes at all.

Back to my story, now.

So, if you agree with me so far, then you also must realise that you get that kind of old-age satisfaction only if you make children and raise them well. And this means finding and marrying a woman that will also want to be with you until one or both of you die and raise children together. No matter what difficulties you will both face. No matter if you are so fucking stupid one day to fuck your secretary, or hire a prostitute, or become a heavy drinker, or make a bad business decision and lose your shirt. And conversely, no matter if she is so fucking stupid to spread her legs for the sexy postman, or her co-worker, or the neighbour, or she becomes a heavy drinker, or more worried about what the neighbours think of you and her than looking after her husband and children, or she splashes out on stupid shit and drives you to the brink of bankruptcy.

So is it easy to find such a woman? No.

Is it easy to stay married to such a woman, delightful as she might be? No.

Will you come across things in life that will hurt you in ways you never imagined, and that would seem to make leaving her a better option? Yes.

More than once? In all likelihood, yes.

And will she come across such things? Yes, without shadow of a doubt, and probably even more often than you.

And if you are thinking right now, Well Old Man, this is a really rosy picture you’re painting for me, what the fuck do you want me to do, and is the light at then of the tunnel also an oncoming train?

I say this to you:

Firstly fuck you twice for the Old Man again, you wet behind the ears know-nothing. Secondly, it’s not rosy. It’s just how it is, so you know what you’re facing. Forewarned is forearmed as they say. What I want you to do is immaterial. It’s what you want to do, or not do, that matters. Realise whether you pick something, or pick nothing, you’re still picking something. So choose, and choose consciously, because at least then you got no one to blame but yourself.

Oh, and yeah, in the end, the light at the end of the tunnel is always an oncoming train. Sometimes it’s got a boatman riding up front. Smile and run at it, because fuck the train. Live like a man and die like one too if need be.

So now you might be thinking, Ok Old Man, so how do I find such a woman?

And I say to you, firstly, fuck you three times for the Old man. Secondly, unless you have uncommon good luck, unless God for some reason decides to send you an Angel in disguise as a human woman, most likely, you cannot find such a woman walking the Earth today.

Young man stares blankly at me.

You have to build her.

Young man says: What?

You have to build her, boy. You find one that is as close as you can find to a finished product, and I sincerely advise you to find one that is in your category of looks. If you are a 7 don’t try and stay with a 9. You’ll be so worried about keeping her that you will fuck up a myriad things and she will end up fucking your “best friend”, the neighbour, your boss, her boss, and if you did marry her, she will take the kids and your house too when she inevitably divorces you.

Take your time in your courtship. Learn who she is and pay attention to what she does and how she acts in various situations and feel free to almost totally ignore whatever she says she is like. You can really only go badly wrong if you believe her when she describes all her good qualities. Pay her words no mind. Observe her actions instead.

If you feel you have enough to work with (at least 51% good is a minimum) then begin to go about leading by example. Do NOT request of her efforts or sacrifices you are not willing to exceed. And yes, some things are not comparable on a like for like basis, because she is a woman and you are a man, you can no more give birth or breastfeed your child than she can write the alphabet in the snow when urinating, and don’t think the one is equivalent in value to the other, but realise that as a general rule, women can provide three things to a man:

  • Enthusiastic sex
  • Loving, admiring, agreeable, respectful companionship
  • The easing of his life (cooking, cleaning, raising children)

And a man generally provides three things for a woman:

  • Financial betterment (home, comfort, security)
  • Protection (from everything ranging from a violent intruder to changing a tire, to reassuring her about her anxieties and worries)
  • Loving, protective, respectful, appreciative companionship

So do your part and gently show her the way, so she feels better about herself, as women invariably do when they begin to act in accordance with their God-given, biological imperatives, that have been subverted by lies for the last hundred plus years or so.

That’s about it, boy.

And if you are still wondering where this puts you in the fornication scale, well, to not put too fine a point on it, according to the Church, until you marry and commit, your fornication is going to send you to Hell. So I would hurry up and get to finding that woman as quick, yet also as careful, as you can. And try not to get hit by a bus until you get married to her and repent and foreswear your heathen and fornicating ways, you miserable sinner.

And if you have any brains at all, about now, young man, you might be having a little smile at the apparently hypocritical, arrogant, bastard, old man in front of you.

And fuck you four times for the Old Man.

    Sex Robots with AI: Feminists most impacted.

    You may be too young to remember the absurd Feminist war cry that came out in either the 1980s or 1990s, I forget, that said:

    “Women need men, like fish need a bicycle.”

    And yet, here we are today…

    It looks like it’s women that need men more than men may need women.

    Now, don’t get me wrong, I have always ignored anyone with even a hint of feminism in their make-up with studious and amused indifference, except to entertain myself by at times simply saying something that would instantly turn their heads into IEDs as well as also make it obvious to everyone present they were bitter, insane, harpies that no one wanted to have sex with, and that was the primary cause of their “feminism” (mental instability) to begin with.

    If you doubt me, just go look at images of the “luminaries” of radical feminism. Start with Andrea Dworkin. Before you do, make sure you have an empty stomach. The dry heaves will stop after about an hour.

    But the point is that men, left to their own devices, will find or create a solution to almost any problem. Again, I am certainly not advocating for sex robots, far from it, but the reality is that a LOT of potentially perfectly suitable males that in the past would have got married and had children and had a happy and meaningful life, will in fact go down this hellish route, and they will do so in larger numbers than you expect, because the hard reality is that while men have, over the last couple of hundred years, overcome extremely large aspects of what one might call their “primitive” biological wiring, to become more tolerant and tractable, women, if anything, have only increased their solipsism, and intractability in general.

    The future belongs to those women who embrace their femininity while doing the necessary violence upon their own base instincts to begin to act logically, honourably (a concept that is at best nebulous for the females of the species) and reliably, to a degree that makes men take notice.

    Women who embody such qualities and look reasonably attractive will literally have the pick of quality men, who, rare though they may be, are usually always in more plentiful supply than the aforementioned type of woman.

    I have been observing this trend since about age 16 and the last almost 40 years have done nothing to dissuade me from the idea that I am correct about this required next step in human evolution. The only question is whether women will catch up before we go extinct.

    As I said, the future belongs to evolved, feminine women; or possibly, albeit briefly, to sex robots with agreeable AIs.

      What all women should already know

      And especially the younger ones, really should understand this from a young age. He puts it in a very nice and digestible way that MIGHT get some women to actually listen to the whole 10 minutes.

      This one on the other hand, the conclusion regarding women apologising and why they should, is solid gold advice. And some women probably need it tattooed on their forehead so they see it every time they look in a mirror.

      I do not know this guy and only came across the first video as a result of a comment on gab from TrevorGoodchild which was synthesised more along the way I tend to present this stuff when I do:

      The point is that as a general rule, since a very early age, I learnt that presenting information in a synthesised, or boiled down form was (and is) an excellent filter for gauging the general intelligence of the person receiving it. And because stupid people absolutely surround me at all times in pretty much every setting, and as they are unbearably tiresome, boring and often also irritating, their getting “offended” and then leaving me mostly alone after a few encounters is a feature, not a bug.

      I read somewhere, long ago, that warrior souls never lose their fire, but as they get older wiser they may tend to burn at a lower temperature. My personal experience is that there is no drop off in intensity overall, really, perhaps in fact an increase, but… the frequency of the smouldering and flare-ups changes. I ignore or only smoulder a little at the smaller stuff, but some of the things that matter to me, I am more ready to go to absolute war for than before. And not as a simple flare-up, but as a relentless, steel-melting, sustained, furnace level.

      I mention this because, in the various discussions I have had and written about here concerning community, it is obvious that my natural/instinctive misanthropy is not the best way to build a solid group of people. As I mentioned before, I am not general material. I’m more special ops small team commander material. But given I don’t seem to have any generals around me, a certain level of “normal” human interactions is useful to try and if not master (I simply am not built in such a way I will ever want to do so) at least learn the basics of.

      Intimate relationships have invariably been the thing I cared the most about and given my aspieness and IQ, also the things that have caused me both the best highs and the lowest lows.

      Aside the fact that women will generally not take any good advice from pretty much anyone anyway, and if they do it will be from a random stranger before it’s their husband, brother, father or other man that actually cares about them, but will generally jump at the chance to take some “advice” from their female friend (or other women in general) that will tell them to get a nice haircut to be “hotter”, the fact remains that given how the female brain works (for the aspies out there… I use the term loosely!) regardless of how good the information you present to them might be, women are pretty much incapable of simply processing the dialectic facts.

      Prove to them with scientific evidence done on humans for 100 years that has all been verified that eating X amount of dark chocolate a week is good for you in simple, cold, hard facts, shooting down all their objections from cosmopolitan magazine, Cadbury adverts, their idiot doctor, their gay friend Charlie, and all her fat friends with blue hair, and she will ignore it.

      Let her best friend tell her in hushed and conspiratorial tones that she just tried this new “chocolate” that is made from “sterilised” dogshit, and she will wolf-down a bar of it just to prove she’s “with it”.

      At the lower end of the female scale of intelligence, it is literally not too different from communicating with your pet dog. It matters little what you say, as long as it’s in soothing, calming tones, or happy excited ones.

      Oh, yes, yes, I know, the feminists are climbing the walls on that one: “How dare he! Comparing women to dogs!” Well, no, I am not. For one, dogs are far more loyal than women (men too to be fair). And said feminists, throughout my life, have invariably completely lost their shit whenever I actually spoke to them precisely the way I would to a man. While very rarely has a man lost his shit with me for being brutally direct.

      All this long introduction, simply to say that it probably pays to find a nicer, easier way to get your point across without needing to water it down, nor feel you’re being deceitful, since, after all, presenting the information in a way that it is received more easily, is simply a skill, like any other.

      And as a bonus, since that ship has pretty much sailed for me at about age 16, and given that I don’t give a rat’s ass about being labelled whatever the gynocracy is going to label me, you could probably do worse than directing women you care about to these two videos, and feel free to tell them to “Look at what videos this chauvinist pig has on his blog! Ha, ha, so funny!” Well, ok, maybe don’t do that unless you’re a metrosexual male feminist, but you get what I mean. It will be quite interesting to see what they say (if anything) after viewing the total 15 minutes or so both videos come to.

        What Next?

        There are three paths I can go down with respect to the next book I write.

        NAZI MOON (linked) is now available at least in the US and CANADA and should be available soon in other countries too.

        Do you Prefer I next write:

        View Results

        Loading ... Loading ...

        I have been asked to do the relationship book by friends and men in general for years; at least 20 of them. I resisted the impulse* for at least a couple of decades, primarily because, as one of my alter egos/nicknames —given to me by friends in Italy over 20 years ago— said in one of the graphic novels he appears in: “Any man that says he has understood all there is to know about women, is either a liar or insane.” And it’s close enough to the truth in some ways. Nevertheless, I feel that after two divorces, a lot of women in between, and finally a proper Catholic marriage, not to mention 4 children I fathered, I have probably made —and persevered!— and (one hopes), learnt enough that it is probably acceptable to pass on a few pointers to younger men; at least on those issues I feel I have now got enough experience to retroactively note when I did the right thing (regardless of outcome), and when I did the wrong thing (again, regardless of outcome). I mention this, because as I say, there have been a lot of people asking me for this for a long time.

        With regard to my non-fiction, each book I have written so far, is really mostly a compilation of my theories and conclusions formed with many years of experience.

        The Face on Mars was the result of a lifelong interest in Astronomy from very early childhood. I understood what a light-year was at age four, thanks to an uncle who was, and remains, a total geek to this day. He also sent me a telescope in my early teens, with which I observed the mountains of the moon, and how the moon itself moved. I also saw Haley’s comet with it, from our home in Africa at the time. And to this day the concepts I put forth in that book were then, and for the most part continue to remain today, unique. Some have badly plagiarised aspects of it (hello Graham Hancock) but the overall main issue had not been understood by anyone I am aware of before I saw it. And most remain totally ignorant of it, despite the predictions and theories I made back in 1995, playing out as correct in the intervening time. The update in 2014 also added a new dimension to the reality of my ideas, which is partly expanded on a lot more in my fiction work.

        Systema was similarly, a book I wrote after I had personally spend decades in the martial arts world. And I wanted to demystify a LOT of the nonsense that goes with many martial art “concepts” and their related egos, and which —in particular— seemed to have a vortex of “mystic ninjas” concerning the Russian system. Which is an impression many martial artists might have if they have not experience of it firsthand. By merely watching YouTube videos or hearing “fantastic” stories of almost magical ability, they are most likely going to assume it is some woo-woo nonsensical “martial art”. That thought is disabused within minutes of confronting any of the top exponents of it. Unfortunately, as always, along with the really good practitioners, there were also a lot of “mystic ninjas” and some of the practitioners did nothing to demystify the situation, so I did it. I have been doing martial arts since I was a very small child, thanks to my dad, so I had pretty extensive knowledge of it before I put hand-to-keyboard after almost four decades of it.

        Reclaiming the Catholic Church was in some ways the “odd man out” because I had a road to Damascus Event in 2013 and the book came out in 2020, that is, only 7 years later. However, I had been reading different books on all the main religions, mysticism, “spiritual” and even New Age stuff, again, since my teens, and literally infiltrating various cults as a hobby, in order to see if anyone had anything that was demonstrably true, real, or worthwhile. I had settled on a basic Zen-Agnosticism, with a clear understanding there must be an intelligence behind creation (the math, astronomy, biology and physics, as well as logic, pretty much confirms it many, many, many times over) but no sense of a God as such that was specifically interested in us mere mortals, much less me specifically. That changed in a radical, unexpected and utterly surprising way, that while “subjective” in the sense that I cannot prove it to anyone else, was absolutely objective and very much so for me. The other part that helped was that because the Catholic Church has ALL of its rules and dogmas written down, it was fairly easy to follow the thread of its history and see the astonishing truth it is founded on. As it was, to see that the current inhabitants of the Vatican are, without putting too fine a point on it, flat out Satanists.

        BELIEVE! Instead, published a year before RTCC, was a much smaller work, putting out my new, or updated, basic outline philosophy. For those who have read both books, you will notice that BELIEVE! is not even a fifth of the size of RTCC, at just under 100 pages, and is a lot more open with respect to overall views and concepts. RTCC was the follow up that basically said, “OK, so that’s sort of where I am with respect to religion as a whole (BELIEVE!) now let’s take a look at this one path that I state is the best one I can see so far, and in this book, (RTCC), I went full autist, covering every aspect of Sedevacantism (i.e. the actual, current, only Catholicism left) and demonstrating it in a manner that no one has so far even attempted to refute, much less succeeded. The result is that RTCC is the foundation on which BELIVE! is really sitting on, which is probably why even if a much smaller and less detailed book, BELIEVE! has resulted in now over 100 people converting to Sedevacantist Catholicism (aka simply: Catholicism).

        The reason I point all this out, is because in these last two non-fiction books, it becomes obvious that even my overall looser and more generic ideas, as expressed in BELIEVE!, for example, clearly have had a lot of genuinely positive effects on people who read them. And we know it was this that sparked the results, because BELIEVE! came first, and yet, even without all the details (presented in RTCC), it had a serious impact on people’s lives.

        I see a LOT of confusion, struggles and heartache among young men today concerning intimate relationships and finding the right woman.

        I literally get questions, emails, or messages on the topic to a frequency that is starting to become hard to keep up with. And as anyone that reads my blog knows, I have a rather low opinions of PUAs, and would very much hate to be mistaken for one. That said, I know for a demonstrable fact that my advice benefits these younger men, because they are getting married, having babies, and resolving issues they had for many years of their lives. I have literally had everything from friends, neighbours and even strangers, asking for advice, on an ad hoc basis, to hypnosis sessions with people that were under clinical care as supposedly paranoid schizophrenics under medication that went on to stop the medication (yes with doctor approval and full knowledge of my sessions with them) and go on to have a productive life with a functioning relationship, when prior they were 29 year old virgins. And I have been doing this for at least 15 years, with positive results.

        So, perhaps, there is some utility in putting together some of the baseline concepts concerning male-female interactions and so on.

        The other options (SF saga continuation) or YA SF books are, respectively, more a divertimento for myself and, a less fun, but I think helpful addition to the current dearth of adventure stories for boys mostly. I am not aware of anything like the Hardy Boys and so on coming along anytime recently, which is why Castalia House is doing well printing old classics. I would not enjoy writing such books as much as my own adult Science Fiction, but it would not be too difficult to do and they should be able to be produced fairly quickly. Although, I am not likely to be acclaimed as a children’s author anytime soon, or even long after I am dust, so the effort might not be worth it.

        Anyway, I’d appreciate your thoughts on the matter, so please feel free to leave comments after you vote, thanks. 

        * Vox, on this post, referring to someone else, Taleb, in this case, said something that holds true for most of us. Personally I have always genuinely tried to resist the temptation, and often people have been quite “deflated” when trying to make me their “guru”, when, after being asked something I know little or nothing about or at least I don’t feel qualified to take a stand on, I simply say “I have no idea”. Some were quite insistent nevertheless and I always consciously dissuaded that, as I explained in some detail in my book Systema: The Russian Martial System.

          Sex and Relationship Lies

          The largest battleground for human happiness and misery is in the field of romantic relationship between a man and woman.

          If you just listen to the first 7 minutes of this podcast on it, the lady in it identifies really quite well the basic issues facing young people today and what I found particularly useful is that she indicates, as does the guy doing the podcast, the specific fact that it is the general zeitgeist of the world to present things as if love itself is not part of the equation any longer. They refer to recent movies, Barbie and apparently Snow White and how the main woke actress in Snow White, Rachel Ziegler, says:

          “She’s not going to be saved by the Prince, she’s not going to be dreaming about true love, she’s dreaming about becoming the leader she knows she can be. The Prince in the original movie stalked her.”

          Imagine, someone from the hypokrite class thinking this way about the classic story of Snow White. The word hypokrite of course, was the original term for actors in Ancient Greece. You can see why it’s relevant to study the classic, and etymology, yes? Actors in classical times were essentially thought of as basically prostitutes. And while the glorification of whores is also nothing new (The temple prostitutes used to get paid to have sex with any man that donated to the temple and were held in high esteem by mostly Babylonian/Sumerian people, while the Greek Herodotus, in his Histories referred to the practice of forced prostitition at least once as “foul”.

          The foulest Babylonian custom is that which compels every woman of the land to sit in the temple of Aphrodite and have intercourse with some stranger at least once in her life. 

          As pretty much the entire #metoo movement proved, thinking most actors and actresses are essentially highly paid prostitutes is really about the size of it. And in fact, having met a few actresses and also a few prostitutes in my life, generally, a highly paid whore who makes no pretence of being anything other than what she is, in my experience of conversing with such people, are far more honest and interesting than those who fancy themselves as artists that should be venerated. And if you doubt, me look up the term “yachting” when used in the context of famous actresses, fashion models and so on. Having worked as close protection for some wealthy people from all around the world, I can tell you that some world-recognised names of women that literally everyone knows, have, in fact, been bought an paid for to have sex with, like any common prostitute. It just cost more. And while I have no personal experience in the matter, if I had to bet on it I would bet that the more expensive famous whores probably performed worse than the cheaper unknown ones.

          But I digress. The point is that the famous people a lot of young people look up to are essentially spouting the narrative they are paid to vomit out of the orifices they use to make their money.

          And that narrative, as the man and woman in the podcast state, is that love makes you weak, is some kind of outdated, or outmoded way of being, removes choice and fun from your life, causes unnecessary suffering and is no good at all. And it is a narrative being pushed, as the lady correctly identifies, primarily by people who are undesirable to the opposite sex.

          I have been saying for years that I have yet to meet a beautiful woman that is reasonably normal (i.e. hasn’t suffered some genuinely dramatically traumatising event) that is in any way a feminist. Pretty women pretty much can get a LOT of what they want primarily by playing to their straights and those are the feminine qualities. And if they are really smart, they will use those to snatch a quality man who has masculine qualities.

          The blue-haired manatees that scream feminism, and the incel-gargoyles that become MGTOW types, along with a few others that are internally as repulsive as the aforementioned generally are externally, are essentially deeply miserable human wreckage and as they say, misery loves company, so they try to drag everyone else down to their level of despair.

          The narrative is so pervasive and so prevalent in literally every aspect of life that you don’t even realise in how many multitudes of ways it is pushed on you and at you throughout every single day. If you read my last blog post before this one, perhaps, you might begin to become more aware of how insidiously the lies about reality and ESPECIALLY about relations between men and women are inculcated in you by subterfuge, stealth, unstated assumptions (one of the biggest culprits and methods), and so on.

          Reality all around you is narrated and presented in a twisted manner in order to make you think that the current narrative of feminism-über-alles and being a strongly independent woman and an asexual automaton male, are the pinnacle one should strive for. That is, when they are not pushing the idea you should sexually mutilate yourself in order to become a tragic parody of the opposite sex.

          So you bet, there are a lot of unhappy young men and women, unfulfilled in any relationship they attempt to get into and so on. Even if one of them has actually seen through most of the fog, finding a partner that has too, or that at least is amenable to being shown the way through the lies is difficult. It requires patience, skill, intelligence, and genuine research that does not collapse into embittered despair.

          I have mentioned these type of things over the years a lot, both on this blog and on my Youtube channel, so search through it and see the videos on the topic too, and pluck what you can from it, but in just a few key sentences, as a starting point, please try to keep this in mind:

          • Male and female brains are physically and structurally different. That has an effect.
          • Male and female hormones and the female cycle of hormones are wildly different and this affects everything.
          • Women are far more swayed by their emotions and hormones than men are, generally speaking, and as a result less likely to be objective overall. Their biology demands a certain level of “selfishness” that has served humanity well in the survival of the species. Just like male biology has a tendency to be more logical and objective and (at least until fairly recently) be more prone to self-sacrifice for the sake of his family, has also served the survival of the species well.
          • Yes technology has made our survival far more likely than it used to, but our biology remains essentially the same and the answer is not to try and modify our biology to suit the machines, but rather to alter the machines to suit our biology. This last point has literally not been understood by any one of the myriad “relationship” experts you see all over the internet and seminars and books. Which should tell you how useful a lot of their other advice is (which they generally demand money for). Well, you read it here first. For free.

          Above all, a lifelong marriage for the purpose of raising multiple children in a loving, strong, family, with emphasis on overcoming hardship and sticking by your blood whenever you can, with the ethics that Catholicism has, —that is, the original real Catholicism (sedevacantism now), which includes Just War and the Death Penalty, as well as the DUTY to defend innocents, yes even with violence, yes even with pre-emptive violence— produces the genuinely happiest life you can possibly imagine.

          I stumbled into it by never giving up my fight against perceived nonsense from childhood until my late 30s. the Boomer zeitgeist did a lot of damage to my generation (and your too), but I sincerely hope you throw off the mental shackles I got rid of mostly by brutish (yet correct) animal instinct (at least at first) by conscious understanding and reasoned contemplation of reality and truth.

          March on brothers and sisters; and win.

          UPDATE:

          Lest you think I am unkind… let me be clear, that even though you may be a gargoyle, it’s up to you what TYPE of Gargoyle you make yourself into.

          The Loser, Omega, Poor-me, Gargoyle-Incel:

          The “Red-Pilled” All-women-are-bitches, MGTOW Incel-Gargoyle:

          Or… The…

          I’m a Gargoyle! And I kick all the ass! NON-Incel Gargoyle:

          PS: Please ignore the demonic undertones, Gargoyles are traditionally representative of demonic beings, while the unfortunates that look like them are not necessarily evil any more than anyone else is. I hope the images illustrate the point I am trying to make in a sufficiently obvious manner. You can’t help some of the cards you are dealt. But you have absolute authority in how you play them.

            All content of this web-site is copyrighted by G. Filotto 2009 to present day.
            Website maintained by mindseed design