Category Archives: Gender Studies

Robert Stark Interviews Matt Forney about the Virginia TV Shooting


This one is a bit dated, but it should still be pretty good. And there doesn’t seem to be much ugly conservatism here. Ultimately these views are something the Alt Left could go along with.

Topics include:

Did the Media Drive Gay Black Man Vester Flanagan to Murder Two Journalists?
The Black Lives Matter movement which incites violence and has mainstream media and political support.
How the Black Lives Matter movement is biased in favor of Hillary Clinton against Bernie Sanders.
The life and psychological profile of Vester Flanagan.
How Flanagan differs from the profile of white male shooters who tend to be more socially and economically marginalized.
How We’re Now Averaging More Than One Mass Shooting Per Day.
Why mass shootings are on the rise.
How we are seeing a whole class of people pushed to the economic margins.
People with Asperger’s and how they are screwed in modern atomized society.
How bizarre subcultures such as Bronies are forming in reaction to social marginalization.
The phenomenon of young men joining ISIS.
How people will likely form new functioning communities in reaction to a broken society.
Why the Manosphere’s Fear of ‘TradCons’ is Misguided And Cowardly.
More on the Trump campaign and whether his populist stances will repudiate the stupidity of Reagan Conservatism.


Filed under Asperger's Syndrome, Autism, Blacks, Conservatism, Crime, Culture, Economics, Gender Studies, Journalism, Left, Man World, Political Science, Politics, Psychology, Race Relations, Race/Ethnicity, Republicans, Sociology, US Politics, Whites

Money Is An Absolute Necessity to Get Women

Without money, you can’t get a woman with God’s help. No money, no honey. If you are broke, you will die a virgin.


Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Northeast, Regional, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Social Problems, Sociology, Urban Studies, USA

Seeing the World through Feminist-Colored Glasses

It's a whole new way of looking at the world.

Click to enlarge. It’s a whole new way of looking at the world.


Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Humor, Radical Feminists

This Is Feminism

A picture tells a thousand words.

A picture tells a thousand words.


Filed under Feminism, Gender Studies, Humor

Women Are Crazy, Part 34,960

Watch and learn.

The video asks “Why do women love psychopaths?”| and then gives all sorts of reasons why they quite logically do so.

I beg to differ. Why do women love psychopaths, you ask? Because women are nuts, that’s why. Problem solved. Next question?


Filed under Crime, Gender Studies, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Serial Killers, Women

Reasons for Men’s Attraction to Teenage Girls

123go (a woman) writes:

Hmmm, no, sorry. This still doesn’t make sense. Growth and pregnancy don’t go together. Pregnancy stunts the growth of any animal. Even animals with indeterminate growth (grow throughout their entire lives, like snakes and crocs) will enter a cycle that stops growth so that they can become pregnant.

In human females, they start to mature faster than boys so that they can reach their max height faster, so that their body can work on widening the hips, and closing the growth plates. Even in modern day society, with girls having their first periods sooner, and growth happening faster, they’re still only seeing full sexual maturity at around or after 19 years of age, when the hips have splayed to open the birth canal.

The pelvis in both males and females doesn’t even start until they’re around 11-15, so that would preclude the ability to effectively carry a pregnancy. This would explain why teen mothers tend to need to have more c-sections in emergency situations, though more older females choose to have them done ahead of time.

Plus, according to the World Health Organization, women 19 and younger are apparently at greater risk of a wide number of adverse outcomes associated with pregnancy and delivery. The offspring they give rise to are also at a much higher risk for a number of adverse outcomes until they reach the age of two as well when compared to women 20+.

Apparently, according to fertility clinics, women 21-31 are in their prime, being the most fertile out of any age demographic, and having the best rates of health for themselves as well as their offspring. If males are looking for the best mates, would it not makes sense to then court young 20 year olds, so that you could be with them for all of their most fertile years?

Going with a younger female would mean standing the risk of stunting her development which would prevent her body from reaching full sexual maturity. It would increase her risk of dying in childbirth, increased risk of miscarriages, and the earlier the pregnancy, the worse the outcome for both the female mate, and the offspring.

Logically, if we’re looking at this scientifically, and based on the statistics, if you chose a younger mate than what was physically optimal in terms of reproduction, you would stand as a male to produce fewer offspring with such a female, and the ones that you had would apparently be weaker, more prone to preterm delivery, and other ailments. Compared to the more robust offspring that young 20 something women would give you. She would be healthy, and capable of providing more offspring soon after as well as their libido is apparently higher as well.

So I don’t think, that based on the evidence, especially with the thousands of articles spewing out of every journal of medicine every year about the dangers of adolescent pregnancy, that natural selection or evolution are the reasons for so many men’s fiction on young girls. If you think about it, it doesn’t explain why so many gay men prefer very young looking boys either. Maybe it’s something psychological. Or, if we’re going the evolutionary route for porn, maybe it’s the fact that most “teen”, “Lolita”, “jailbait” pornstars, aren’t actually teens at all, but actually slim women in their 20’s, which is actually quite common.

If not that, then maybe it has to do with a power fetish being that teens, male or female are often naive. Maybe some guys get off on the idea of being “first”, or more likely, the idea of not being compared to other sexual partners because there is an assumption of “innocence” and “virginity” with teens.

There are a lot of guys out there with chips on their shoulders, so being “the biggest someone has ever seen” in their minds at least, may be a big confidence boost for them. Plus, socially, mentally, physically etc. they would stand to be more powerful than a teen, and maybe that’s a turn on. After all, some people get their kinks from tying people up and hitting them. Feeling in power during sex is a huge turn on for some people.

Maybe on the other side of things, it could be that some dudes like to re-imagine their first sexual encounter, and this is their way of recapturing that. I don’t know, I’m not a psychologist, I’m just a scientist. But I definitely don’t think that attraction to girls that young has something to do with “evolutionary means” if they’re literally less efficient at popping out healthy brats without dying, hahaha.

This makes no sense. Study after study shows that all males are maximally attracted to all females age 16+. Other studies put maximal attraction at all females age 12+.

One study found that men reacted thus:

Age 16+ = maximal attraction
Age 15 = 90% of max
Age 14 = 80% of max
Age 13 = 70% of max
Age 12 = 60% of max
Age 11 = 50% of max
Age 10 = 40% of max
Age 9 = 30% of max
Age 8 = 20% of max
Age 7 = 10% of max
6-below = 0 attraction

As you can see, a 16 or 17 year old girl and a 18 or 19 year old woman are all the same for men. And they also the same as any mature woman of any age. According to men, once a female hits 16, she is simply a woman (if we define “woman” as “mature female”) and all mature females (or women) are equally attractive to men.

And if indeed there are increasing risks of pregnancy for girls aged 13-15, with the risks increasing as the girl gets younger, then men’s decreasing attraction to them as they get younger makes sense evolutionarily. On the other hand, it is rather difficult to impregnate a girl aged 13-15, although of course it can be done.

I don’t really care if maximal attraction to females aged 16-19 makes little sense evolutionarily. It doesn’t matter. Men are maximally attracted to females in these age ranges, obviously because they are fully developed by age 16.

The commenter suggests that the reasons that a lot men are maximally attracted to teenage females is due psychological reasons or a fetish. But why would these mysterious psychological reasons effect all males equally? Any psychological response experienced by all males would be assumed to be due to biology or an inborn or instinctual reaction.

Similarly, why would 100% of all males be maximally attracted to females aged 16-19 if it were merely due to a fetish? Fetishes are individualistic sexual preferences or attachments that are formed on the basis of experiences in childhood and puberty. Why would 100% of all males go through the exact same experiences in childhood and puberty that would cause them all to develop a fetish for girls age 16-19?

That makes no sense at all.

Evolutionary features in humans need not all make complete sense. As long as the trait is not dramatically maladaptive, it will tend to stick around.

Females are simply incapable of being rational about this teenage girl thing. Al of their arguments are based on emotions, and hence they are all irrational.


Filed under Gender Studies, Girls, Health, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex

Is This Man Gay or Not?

confused male writes:

Hi, I am really confused. I identify myself as a gay male, I am still not out of the closet. I have been in love with my best Friend for about 3 years now, but I don’t know if he’s gay. I do feel a kind of gay vibe coming off from him, he does kind of act attracted to me. He does sometimes start talking about particular woman, that they are pretty or that he would want to have with that woman. I don’t know if he does that on purpose so that nobody would suspect him being gay.He also kind of likes to ”touch” me and other male friends, which make it extra confusing. He does show interest in me, but I am just not sure. About two years ago he asked me if i was gay, of course I panicked and said that I obviously wasn’t gay. We had pretty long conversations at night, normally you wouldn’t want to talk too long to a certain person if you weren’t attracted to them. Sorry for my bad English. I hoped that you maybe had some tips or if you would know if he is gay or not.

But the catch is that he had a female crush, he doesn’t talk about her anymore. But I sometimes think he made the female crush part up, so that he could make me jealous. Even though he did confess to her, but it al seemed really fishy, even the confession.

I am thinking this guy is either straight or leans straight. Never met a gay man who had a crush on a woman or who even talked about them very much or at all. He seems to at least lean straight.

I would like to thank you for not perving on this probably straight male with endless persterings for sex was so many gay men to do straight men. You showed a lot of self-restraint and decency here. Also it is quite interesting that a gay man and a straight man can be such good friends, but I had a couple of friends who were gay. Catch was they were not out of the closet yet so there was no way to tell. Further they were suppressing their homosexual interests so well that you could not pick that up.

Have you asked him what his sexual orientation is?

What are you afraid of? If you come out to him, he will end the friendship? You might even be able to continue this very interesting friendship after you come out, after all, you have been a gay man and a straight man who were best friends for 3 years, which is rather unusual.

I doubt if he is very gay at all, but a lot of basically straight young men do indeed play for the other team somewhat when they are young anyway. I have a feeling that if you make a play for him, it will not work out right.

There are probably straight men who like to put their hands on other men, though it is a bit weird. If one of my straight leaning friends liked to put his hands on me, I might wonder if he had some bisexual tendencies. In other words,. I have a feeling that this guy is either a 100-0 like most men or at most he is a 90-10 or and 80-20. These types are very common in the straight male population.

100-0: Maximum heterosexual, minimum homosexual
90-10: Maximum heterosexual, incidental homosexual
80-20: Maximum heterosexual, significant homosexual
70-30: Maximum heterosexual, strong homosexual
60-40: Maximum heterosexual, very strong strong homosexual
50-50: Maximum heterosexual, maximal homosexual
40-60: Maximum homosexual, very strong heterosexual
30-70: Maximum homosexual, strong heterosexual
20-80: Maximum homosexual, significant heterosexual
10-90: Maximum homosexual, incidental heterosexual

As far as having long talks deep into the night, I used to do that with some of my male friends. I used to go over to their house every night where one guy worked on his model railroad track and I would hang out with him in his garage until it was time to go home around 9 or 10. And with another guy, I used to go over to his house almost every night where we would watch TV, usually basketball games,. with as bunch of other guys. We  would often smoke pot too. Once again, I would go home at 10 or so. With another guy, we would go out together, often ice skating, and then come home and have these long wild talks out in front of his house where we talked about everything under the sun. These talks would go on until 1 or 2 AM.

So what I am saying is that in deep straight male friendships, there can be long talks in to the night, and it doesn’t necessarily mean much.

There can also be some sexual attraction between straight male friends. I have seen this before. I am not sure whether these guys are 90-1o’ or 80-20’s who are not covering it up well (some seriously bisexual straight-leaning men can suppress their homosexual side very well) or whether these are 100-0’s who are expressing what I call “leakage.” Leakage is based on the idea that sexual feelings are simply energy – sexual energy. And energy wants to go some-lace. It doesn’t like to be bottled up. So if you bottle4 it up or perhaps for other reasons, sometimes it seemed like when I was with another straight man. Tis often happens when you are alone with another guy – I remember with one very macho guy we were up lately at night doing the most cocaine I have ever done in a night and I started getting these vibes from him. I ignored them, as I figured it was just leakage. With young men, when they are deprived of women for long periods of time, they get a lot of sexual energy bottled up. And this energy wants to come out, so it fills up the body and then begins “leaking” out. When sexual energy leaks out, it seeks whatever objects are nearby to fasten onto. If you are a straight man with a lot of bottled up leakage coming out and you are around a bunch of guys, it will leak out and attach itself to the men around ou even if you are straight and that energy is programmed to be attracted to females.

I do not know if you are aware of this, but two straight men can form very deep and passionate relationships. I mean very deep friendships that border on love. The only thing missing is sexual attraction a a phobia about gay sex. I have had some male best friends who I felt so deeply for that it did seem a type of love, but different from familial lover of the lover you feel for a woman. I remember on e guy who I used to think, “You know what? If I were gay, I think I would fuck this guy. That’s how close I feel towards him.”

But I had no sexual interest in him, and anyway both of us are quite straight with a serious phobia about gay sex such that there could never be anything sexual between us. I don’t even fantasize about men and never have. In fact, with these deep straight male friendships, it often seems that one of the things that makes it so deep is that you refrain from having sex with each other. You just take that off the table and pour all that excess energy into pure platonic friendship. I used to think that having sex with these guys even one time would ruin everything.

I guess my feeling is that this guy is a 100-0 or at most a 90-10 or 80-20  (probably more likely the other two). I do not have any more advice to give you. Maybe the commenters can give you some better advice.


Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Homosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex

“Women Don’t Care about Looks, They Care More about Personality”

How many times have you heard that BS. Let us look at just one image that shows how false that is.

Click to enlarge. Guess what? Looks matter to women. "Creep" usually just means "unattractie guy who shows interest in me."

Click to enlarge. Guess what? Looks matter to women. “Creep” usually just means “unattractive guy who shows interest in me.”


Filed under Gender Studies, Man World, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Women

On Alain Soral


You can read his Wikipedia entry and see what he is up to. I just did, and although I don’t agree with him on everything, I would rather have guys like this running the media than our present elites which push a combination of Cultural Left + radical, pro-rich, pro-corporate, anti-people neoliberal capitalism.

That’s pretty much the worst of the Left combined with the worst of the Right. The worst of both worlds.

And the people who push this represent the elites of the entire West. Pushing back against this are people like Soral (who is still quite a Leftist despite whatever lies you hear about him), Putin and Alexander Dugin’s Eurasianism. According to the Left, all of these people are part of something called the Red-Brown Movement which is some weird mixture of Far Right and Far Left, or Socialism/Communism + Fascism, the former being the red and the latter being the brown.

It’s mostly Trotskyite idiots (the poison of the Western Left) like this guy who push the line that Putin, Dugin and Soral are fascists. I do not see a lot of evidence for it, or if they are, then I suppose I must be a fascist myself! Soral still talks like the Marxist he has always been. He was even a Marxist when he “turned far right” and joined the National Front. Reading  through his Wikipedia entry, he still seems awfully Leftist, or if he’s a Rightist, than that is the sort of Right that I could easily support.

He talks and complains about Jews too much, which I think is unnecessary, but he makes some valid points:

In France, all forms of growing communitarianism (gay, Islamic, etc.) form and strengthen through imitation of, hostility towards and opposition to Judeo-Zionist communitarianism, whose privileged status constitutes the communitarian jurisprudence by which their claims against the Republic are supported.

Here communitarianism apparently means Identity Politics as best I can tell. He says that Identity Politics blows (and it does), but all of the IP crowd really got their IP from the biggest IP’ers of them all…ta dum..the Jews!

Well, maybe. At any rate, it’s an interesting comparison. Have you ever noticed that the Jews are the only people on Earth who get to be nationalists, nay, even worse, ethnic nationalists? So the Jews get their National Socialist state over in Palestine, an ethnic nationalist state if there ever was one, but nobody else gets to have one, and if anyone tries, they are fascists and Nazis!

Well that means ethnic nationalism is fascism and Nazism, right? Ok, I will not object. But let’s follow this through here. That also means that the Jews’ sleazy ethnic nationalist project in Palestine is also…wa-la! Fascist and National Socialist, right?

Nope. Everyone else’s ethnic nationalism is fascist and Nazi, except for that of the Jews, because their ethnic nationalism somehow isn’t fascist and National Socialist like the rest! Or whatever. One reason people tire of Jews is because they are always being hypocritical and pushing blatantly unfair and contradictory lines like the above about just about everything, which is what we should expect from an ultranationalist tribe like the Jews because that’s how ultranationalists everywhere act.

As part of the debate on laïcité in French schools, Soral claimed to prefer the Muslim veil to thong underwear.

I don’t agree, but that’s pretty funny anyway.

Alain Soral has denounced communitarianism as a “poison.”

Assuming that communitarianism means IP, he is indeed correct.

To him, feminism was invented by women tiring of their role as mothers. Soral distinguishes two types of feminism: that of the “flippées” (“freaked-outs”) such as Simone de Beauvoir, and that of the “pétasses” (“bitches”) like Élisabeth Badinter. Soral claims that the most problematic inequality is not between men and women, but between rich and poor, and that feminists, who generally come from the upper classes of society, attempt to distract attention from this struggle.

Well no kidding. The Female IP project known as feminism blows, just like all IP. And he divides feminists up into the lunatics and the bitches, although I would argue that most of them are a combination of the two.

When you’re talking with a Frenchman who is a Zionist Jew, and you start to say, well maybe there are problems coming from your side, maybe you might have made a few mistakes, it’s not always the fault of other people if no-one can stand you wherever you go… because that’s basically their general history, you see… for 2,500 years, every time they settled somewhere, after about fifty years or so, they get their arses kicked. Surely something strange here ! It’s as though everyone is wrong except them. And the guy will start barking, yelling, going mad… you can’t be able to carry on with the conversation.

Oh poor Jews! They pissed people off everywhere they went, but it was never their fault! That’s right Jews, keep on blaming other people!

Jews are like the guy who gets tossed out of every bar in the city yet insists that he is doing nothing wrong, and it’s all the establishments’ fault for tossing him. Where’s there’s smoke, there’s fire. I would wager that the Jews have not spent the last two millennia not exactly trying to win friends and influence people, right?

Soral believes that communitarianism in France could have a similar effect, if the French Republic fails to apply its prestigious 1905 Law of Separation of Church and State, which is enshrined in the French constitution. According to a recent TV interview (Direct 8 / 88 minutes), Alain Soral stated: “Today, no one was surprised to see French presidents, prime ministers and other high French political figures meet elusively with the Jewish representing body every year in Paris, meetings that go against the laws of France and send mixed signals to the Republic.”

Well no kidding. The French state France is based on strict separation of church and state known as laïcité. And then the leaders of France go off every year and meet with the heads of the French Jewish community! But that’s not a violation of laïcité now, is it? More Jewish hypocrisy. You wonder why others tire of these people.


Filed under Ethnic Nationalism, Europe, Fascism, Feminism, France, Gender Studies, Government, Jews, Left, Marxism, National Socialism, Nationalism, Nazism, Political Science, Race/Ethnicity, Regional, The Jewish Question, Trotskidiots, Useless Western Left

“Scientific” Looks Theory Is Apparently Completely Wrong

Godslayer wrote:

That’s a myth, beauty for both males and females have clearly been defined and there is a clear scientific method.

People don’t randomly cast males for chick flicks. It’s always a white guy, over 6 foot tall, with low body fat, symmetrical face, chiseled facial features.

So-called Scientific Looks Theory is apparently total nonsense.

Click to enlarge. So-called Scientific Looks Theory is apparently total nonsense.

Ok how am I doing it then?

Ok, so how do I get hot women, even hot young women? I even get models in their mid-20’s. How the Hell do I do that if I am only a 5? According to the theory, there’s no way I could do that.

Either 4 or 5 guys can get hot chicks, or their whole “scientific” Looks Theory is shot to shit.

Bottom line is beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There is no “scientific” way to determine if a male or female is attractive or not. Anyone who thinks there is is out of their heads.

For instance, those guys on that site and also the people on Lookism said that I am a 5 at best. That’s just fine. They both also said I have been a 5 all of my life. If I have been a 5 my whole life, why did I get 4-5 offers from modeling companies to be a male model. They simply approached me on the street, said, ” You look like a male model. Want to come work for us?” Do modeling companies hire male 5’s to be models?

They said my nose and my mouth both look very bad. That makes two bad features and that makes me a 5 right there. And the yellow teeth may make me a 4.

Ok so do I do it, or how have I been doing it my whole life? Also how do you explain that there are women nowadays who insist that I am a 9 or a 10? Are they delusional? And even if they are crazy, does it matter? If a woman thinks you are a 9 or a 10 and treats you like one even if she’s being antiscientific about it, what difference does it make?

Also how can you explain that quite a few women and girls since I was 17 would strongly disagree that I was a scientific 5. If humans strongly disagree with the “science” then what good is the science? It’s worthless. How do you know if you are attractive? Because people say you are? How about that?

Also on those sites they say to never go by what people tell you, instead go by the “science.” They insist that ugly men get told all the time that they are handsome? Really? I’ve never seen this in my life. Does this really happen? I have apparently been goodlooking most of my life, so I don’t know what life is like for an unattractive man. But before age 16, I was not known to be goodlooking. I do not think anyone, female or male, ever told me I was handsome or attractive. Something changed at age 16 and I started hearing girls say I was cute.

I would say that if you are a man and females and even gay men are constantly going on about how great you look, then there’s your factual evidence right there. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and the only determination of attractiveness is the opinions of others. Your own opinion is crap because it’s biased and apparently the “science” is completely wrong.

One more thing: for decades, women have been insisting that Mick Jagger is the sexiest man alive. According to this chart, Jagger is only a 6 in looks because he has “big lips.” Big lips are supposedly ugly and only thin lips are attractive. Yet many of the females who are hot for Jagger love this great big fat sexy lips. So these females are being completely anti-scientific then.

I would say that anyone believing this Scientific Looks Theory BS is overthinking this whole thing. If you’re goodlooking, you’ll know soon enough because if you look good enough, people won’t stop gushing about how good you look. If people are not going on and on about your looks or if they are telling you you look average, then you may just be average. If you look in the mirror, you should see an average looking guy. I have no idea what homely men get told. Do they get told they are homely? I’ve never lived that life, so I am not sure what they get told about their looks. But if you are a male and you look in the mirror and see a homely man, you may just be onto something.

Bottom line is they need to take this Looks “science” and put it in the trash where it belongs.


Filed under Gender Studies, Heterosexuality, Man World, Psychology, Sex