Category Archives: Jailbait

One of the Worst Accusations So Far Is Leveled at Drumpf

Here.

Multiple sources too. Multiple people who attended these parties said that Trump regularly had sex with 14-17 year old girls (jailbaits or JB’s) there. It’s not common to have witnesses in a statutory rape case. More like he said, she said.

What I love about this is that these rightwing morons have been some of the worst at abusing the pedophile label for men having sex with JB’s.

Of course it isn’t pedophilia. It’s perfectly normal behavior for a human male. It’s not pathological in the slightest, unlike true pedophilia. Human males have been doing this since the beginning of our race, and no one cared up until now.

However, society hates it and has made it illegal, and honestly seeing how easy it is for these rich men to manipulate these JB’s, I would not mind seeing these girls protected in some way myself. A JB is simply going to be overwhelmed by some rich guy throwing money and a plate of cocaine in her face. It’s a classic case of an adult man abusing his power differential over a JB.

There is a clause making such manipulation illegal in most European states that have lowered the age of consent. None of these countries are having serious problems with men in droves screwing JB’s.

JB’s mostly screw teenage boys and very young men. JB’s screwing older men is a lot less common. The fact that everyone thinks this behavior is as common as weeds is the result of a moral panic about this behavior.

So now all these rightwing morons who have been self-righteously throwing the book at guys screwing JB’s and tarring them with the pedophile label are going to have to look in the mirror at their Fuhrer Drumpf being a what they call a pedophile. I wonder how they will rationalize this? I am hoping they might develop a saner definition of adult-JB sex, but I have not gotten my hopes up.

Spin away, Trumpers, spin away!

26 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Law, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Political Science, Politics, Republicans, Sex, US Politics

Civil Suit Filed against Donald Trump for Repeatedly Raping a 13 Year Old Girl

Of all of the sexual misbehavior cases being leveled at Trump, possibly the worst of all is a civil case being pursued against Trump by a woman who claims he raped her in the company of hebephile (((Jeffrey Epstein))), now known as the Billionaire Pedophile for having had sex with possibly hundreds of underage mostly teenage girls. He seems to have liked them under 16, maybe 14-15 or so.

This girl claims that she went to one of (((Epstein’s))) parties and Trump was there. These parties were arranged by (((Epstein’s))) partner in crime, a woman who procured teenage girls for (((Epstein))), inviting them to his mansion to give (((Epstein))) massages and to parties where (((Epstein))) would have sex with underage teenage girls.

On four separate occasions, Trump was also at the party, and he forced himself on this 13 year old girl four separate times. The last time was a violent rape where he tied her to the bed and raped her while she protested loudly. When he was done, he slapped her in the face and told he not to tell anyone or she would end up like Maria, a 12 year old girl who had been at some of the parties who the girl had not seen in a while. The presumption was that Trump had had this girl disappeared or possibly even killed somehow. Later (((Epstein))) also raped this same 13 year old girl. When he was done, he punched her hard in the face, furiously yelling that it was he who should have taken her virginity, not Trump. He also threatened her not to talk and told her he could have her whole family killed if she talked.

The woman who procured the girls for (((Epstein))) says she witnessed all four times when Trump forced himself on the girl, including the last time when he forcibly raped her. The woman also witnessed (((Epstein))) and Trump both having sex with the girl and the 12 year old Maria at once. They also forced the girls to perform lesbian sex in front of the men for their entertainment. So the procurer backs up everything the accuser claims Trump did to her including raping her four times, once forcibly.

The fact that the procurer witnessed all of these acts and backs up the woman’s charges 100% is very disturbing and implies to me that could well be something to this case. The incidents in the case occurred 21 years ago in 1995, and the statute of limitations on whatever crimes occurred there are up, so the woman has had to pursue the case civilly. There is also a statute of limitations claim in the civil case which I do not understand, as I thought civil cases had not statutes of limitations.

Anyway this case is unbelievably damning, and it’s hard to understand how it’s been kept out the media for so long. This is one of the most explosive charges ever against a Presidential candidate in a long time.

14 Comments

Filed under Girls, Jailbait, Law, Politics, Republicans, Sex, US Politics

Game/PUA: New Radio Show with Me Up

Here is a new radio show with me. Daryl Basarab and I discuss the whole Alpha/Beta/Omega thing. We have some differences of opinion on it, but overall, it’s a great discussion.

Daryl Basarab: I disagree with “Game theory” because different PUA’s use completely different game. Robert Lindsay befriends females and slowly sneaks up on them romantically while Return of Kings advises you to do the opposite. Here’s my take: It’s not as much the motus operandi as the amount of time you devote to it. If you talk to a bunch of women in clubs and bars, eventually you’re going to find women who want to engage in sexual acts. Is it really worth the time investment? I answer that question with no.

In the radio program, I made my point that prostitution if done on street corners is a good value. If you make $40k a year, that’s about $20 bucks an hour. If you spend five hours in a club, you’ve clearly exceeded the $20 bucks on the corner.

Lots of talk about PUA/Game stuff if you are into that, especially something I call Friendzone Game, which is something I came up with. This is basically a Game to run when you are more or less friendzoned by a woman so you can take it out of the Friendzone and into sex/relationship, etc.

We also discuss what Alpha/Beta/Omega, etc. are all about. Basarab thinks they have more to do with Status, Money, Power, etc., but I opt more for Looks and pure Game. So yes, Donald Trump got women via Status, Money, Power and Fame, but he’s also good-looking, and I imagine he has some insanely killer Game too.

People who become Alpha simply by running into a lot of money, such as Omegas like Bill Gates becoming Alpha simply by becoming rich and famous are not real pure Alphas in my opinion. Those are what you might call Artificial Alphas. You take all that money away, and that guy is back to being an Omega again.

There are also what I would call “Synthetic Alphas.” These men are not really Alphas, but they can fake it pretty good. They are able to fake it good enough that it pretty much works. The old fake it til you make it thing. I’m not sure if people can tell the difference between a pure Alpha and a good faker.

Now to me, a pure Alpha is not dependent on Money, Status, Power or any of that. He’s the guy who walks into the room, and most of the women in the room think, “Oh I want that guy!” That’s the pure Alpha. And the pure Alphas don’t even need money. Many Alphas are poor and never have any money. Many others are criminals. Jails and prisons are full of Alphas. Even in to middle age, many Alphas are living in cheap apartments and driving older cars. Yet these guys still continue to date beautiful women. I would say that an Alpha could even get women if he’s homeless.

I also point out that the Alpha/Beta/Omega thing is only useful for sex and romance between males and females, and it has little other utility outside of that. I suppose even male society breaks down into Alphas, Beta, Omegas, etc. but it’s not as rigid or even as brutal as the terms that females place on us. I have not thought much about Alpha/Beta/Omega stuff with men, but I suppose there’s a possible useful theory out there.

I’m just not interested in hierarchy among men. I suppose I am sort of a Sigma in that regard.

My attitude towards my male competition is generally, “LOL. What competition? You see any competition? I don’t.” To me there’s no such thing as male competition. I’m not sure if I actually think I am better than other men so much that I think I’m hot stuff, and the other guys are simply not even in the picture. Some highly accomplished males might be on my level, but in that case, we are comrades or wingmen and not competitors. I like life better that way. I don’t want to get into the whole male hierarchy thing of bettering and one-upping other men. It seems like it just makes you always frustrated and never satisfied, and it probably gives you a heart attack in the end.

I don’t want to fight other guys anyway. I would rather have females fight over me. I have always said:

  • Betas fight over women. Alphas have females fighting over them.
  • Betas spend money to buy women’s affection. Alphas have females trying to buy their affection.
  • Betas buy women gifts. Alphas get gifts from women.
  • Betas support women. Alphas get supported by women.

Now we tend to think men like this are assholes, and they are in some ways, but that’s Alphas for you. Alphas are not very nice. It’s no accident that penitentiaries are full of them.

I would say that if females are fighting over you, you’re Alpha. If females are buying you gifts all the time, you’re Alpha. If you are living off women instead of the other way around, you’re Alpha. As you can see, Alphas turn normal male Game dynamic on its head.

Male society is dominated by males competing for women among other things. It’s all about men fighting each other for women, trying to buy women, supporting women, etc. The guy who fights off the other guys gets the woman. The guy who buys the most gifts gets the women. The guy who supports women the best gets the women.

Alphas have completely dropped out of normal male society and have turned the whole thing upside down on its head. They invert reality. It’s actually quite amazing.

I also point out that Alphas need Looks and Game usually. Looks minus Game is nearly worthless. I have known guys who were the best looking men in town who went 10-20 years without even one date. Game  minus Looks is just about worthless too. An unattractive man can have the greatest Game on Earth, and it won’t do him the slightest lick of good.

Basarab felt that there was nothing much to Game, and if you just put yourself out there enough, you would get women. He felt that men only had good Game in that they put in a tremendous amount of effort into getting women. Beyond that, he conceded that men with good Game probably had good social skills.

I argue that there is way more to Game than that, and I feel that Game is so deep and complex that you could nearly write an encyclopedia about it. Men with good Game do a lot more than put in the time, and anyway, incel forums are full of men putting in a lot of effort trying to get women forever and having no luck at all. And there’s way more to it than just good social skills. I know lots of men with good social skills who don’t have much Game at all. Their Game is pretty much zero.

The PUA sites are correct to see Game as a science to be studied like any other science.

I have always said that women are chess. It has never been easy for me to get women, and I am apparently pretty good at it. But even back when I was very good at it, it still was not easy.

Women simply don’t put out the way that men want them to. The heterosexual dating scene is not the gay male dating science. There is no guarantee of getting laid even if you go to a bar or nightclub.

If it was that easy to get hot women, why is there a whore market? There’s a whore market because women deliberately create a sex shortage and ration out sex very carefully, generally in return for love or some sort of provisioning. The whore market exists because of the economic conditions created by artificial scarcity that women have deliberately created to in essence drive up the price of pussy as high as possible.

The near-hysterical women’s rantings about “pedophilia” for men who in perfectly natural and normal fashion pursue jailbait teenage girl is also economically related – it’s related to the pussy market. Simply put, women fear the competition of jailbait teenage girls. If teenage girls were more available, more men would flock to them, and in a number of cases, JB’s would out-compete women for men. Flooding the pussy market with jailbaits serves to create an abundance of cheap pussy (as teenage girls hardly cost a nickel) and serves to in effect drive down the price of pussy that the women wish to keep as high as possible.

As I said, women are chess.

All relationships with women must be Gamed. Even your wife or girlfriend must be Gamed constantly. The only way to keep the relationship going smoothly at all is to run continuous Game on even your wife or live-in girlfriend. It is true that once you get close to a woman, you can relax your Game somewhat, but you still need to be cautious. Women are very sensitive creatures, and they get hurt and upset very easily. I have blown up whole relationships with a single sentence.

When I am with a woman, I am typically quite calculating, at least until I get very close to her. I carefully think about most things that I say or do. I am not spontaneous at all because to me spontaneity ruins relationships by causing you to say and do stupid things without thinking.

Seduction is a performance. It is a performance art. Not all men are good actors or even actors at all. Some few men are born actors, but the finest actors of all, the stars of the silver screen, are few and far between. As it is in celluloid, so it is in Game. Men with superlative Game are more common than great actors, but they are still not common. It’s a fine art and skill to be honed over a lifetime, and most men never get extremely good at it. Those few who do should be studied as one studies the greats in Acting School.

23 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Man World, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Vanity

PUA/Game: Young Women and Middle Aged Men: Some Misconceptions

Jason Y: I don’t think a guy Robert’s age or even my age (middle age) is going to meet an 18 year old girl except at a go go bar, but boy you will meet them there alright,😆 but you cannot take them home.

Actually that is not true, as a 17 year old girl trying to seduce me last year, and it got so tempting that I had to cut it off with her because I was seriously worried I was going to cave. She was relentless! I was 58 years old!

But as a middle aged man who likes young women, I would say though that at my age, it does seem like it is very, very hard to get an 18 year old girl or even a woman in her 20’s for that matter. I see women aged 18-30 all the time around here, and most of them act like, “Get the fuck away from me, creep!” For the most part, I can’t even talk to them. If I try to talk to them at all, even if they are behind a counter, and I am buying something, they shut the conversation down just like that! For the most part, they are cold.

There are a few women in their 20’s who seem to like me, but most of them, just forget it. I think most of them don’t want men our age, but there is a certain quite small group that is seriously hot for middle aged men. There’s nothing wrong with them. It’s just that this is a small percentage of women that age, and most of them are not like that.

I know a few guys in their 50’s who were able to consistently grab 18-29 year old women, but it seemed like in most cases, they were the “best of the best.” That is, they still were very good-looking for their age, and in fact, I would say they were in the top ~20% for men their age, and they had the most Killer Game you could possibly imagine.

I talked to that 17 year old girl above about this, and I had the same conversation with a couple of other women in their 20’s that I got involved with. The teenage girl and the young women both told me that the good-looking females their age were not really into middle aged men except for a few of them. They all said the same thing: “When it comes to older men, we only want the best. We want the best of the best, and we can get them merely because we are young.” They said they were not interested in 80-90% of middle-aged men who they thought were too old or not attractive.

They only wanted the top 10-20% of the men Looks or Game-wise (probably both) in any age bracket. When I asked them what they went after in middle aged men, I was surprised that they did not say Money, Status or Power. Most said that they went after Looks, but even more more important than anything else was Killer Game. Generally it was a combination of Looks and Game. So it was Game first, and then Looks not far behind. They told me, “A few middle aged men are sexy as Hell. And some are still quite good-looking for their age. These are the only ones we want. The rest are duds.”

A middle aged man with great Game and zero Looks attracts zero young females. A middle aged man with great Looks and zero Game is just not that interesting and attracts zero young females. He’s boring.

Despite the fact that Looks + Game was a necessity, the men they went after often had some sort of Status or even Fame. The men didn’t necessarily need money at all; in fact, these females told me that a lot of times, these men hardly had a nickel. But they often had some sort of Status in one way or another. Maybe they had written a book. Maybe they played in a rock band. Maybe they had traveled the world. Maybe they had run their own businesses. Maybe they had met famous people. And it was not uncommon that these men had obtained some sort of Fame, if only of the most minor sort.

The fact that they are skimming off the top 20% of middle aged men in any age bracket means that they are targeting the Alphas. In other words, teenage girls and women in their 20’s do go after middle aged men at times, but they preferentially select the Alphas. They skim the 10-20% Alphas off the top of middle aged men and forget about the other 80-90%, who are apparently duds. They also told me that they were able to snag the Alphas pretty easily simply because of their youth. Because what middle aged Alpha doesn’t want a hot 18-30 year old woman? If she looks halfway decent, he will preferentially select her merely for her age alone and for no other reason.

This actually makes sense. As I have related, I had sex with teenage girls in my teens of course, and then I continued to do so until age 21 when I quit due to fear of jail. This was in the 1970’s, and things were completely different back then. And no one much cared about 14-17 year old girls with 18-21 year old men, 15-17 year old girls with 18-29 year old men, or even 17 year old girls with men all the way up to age 40.

At some point, you would be pushing things too far, and it was just too much though.

I remember reading an article in the local paper about a 53 year old man who had been busted for screwing several 15 year old girls. They were neighborhood girls who lived nearby, and they came over to this place. He would give them drugs – pot and cocaine – and they would give him sex. I am not sure if it was a drugs for sex thing, but that sort of arrangement is pretty common even with women, not just girls.

There is some sort of a trade-off happening there, whether the females are actually trading their bodies for sex or whether something else is going on is hard to figure. Heterosexual sex is usually some sort of a transaction anyway. Each side seems to be trading something away and getting something in return. That’s just the way it works out.

The man was busted for the charge of “statutory rape” and received a 3-year sentence. This sort of a thing was a joke back in those days. I remember my parents laughing when they read about these men. They weren’t considered “pedophiles” at all, in fact, no one would ever call a man a pedophile for going after a teenage girl. That was simply unheard of.

The word used was “statutory.” It was called statutory rape and was the subject of a lot of jokes and snickering comments. Men who went down on statutory rape were not considered evil or perverts or scum or anything like that. Instead it was thought that these men were facing a severe temptation that they had simply been too weak to resist, and they had caved in. The general feeling was that these men were sort of stupid, had exercised poor judgment, should have been stronger and not so weak, and “should have known better.”

Anyway, back in the 1970’s, I ran into many cases of underage teenage girls going for men aged 18-40. But I would like to point out that most guys my age did not do this at all. It was only a select few, and they had certain characteristics. In a word, most of them were what you might call the Alphas. They not only went after the JB’s but they also completely cleaned up with women in their age bracket (18-23) – often hotties – and some of them were even grabbing older women. The older women were sometimes married, and they generally looked pretty hot. They ranged in age from 27-38. They were cleaning up with the women and the girls both.

So just as Oscar Wilde said, “Women always want the best,” apparently that’s also true for teenage girls and women in their 20’s going after middle aged men. And it looks like we see the 80-20 rule once again. Of those teenage girls and women in their 20’s chasing middle aged men, 80% of these young females are chasing only 20% of the middle aged men, if that. 80-20 all over again. It might even be 10% because there are so few desirable men in that category. Maybe it’s even 80-10! Those poor incels, they can’t win for losing. It’s as if the whole game is rigged from the start.

The feminist/SJW Lie: First of all, I do not think that men should chase underage teenage girls. But the feminists and SJW’s over at Reddit Blue Pill and We Hunted the Mammoth say continuously that older men who go after teenage girls are losers who can’t get a woman their own age because they are so lame they can’t get laid with God’s help. Women their age are disgusted with them as they are totally Omega and undesirable, so these total losers go for the easy pickings, which is teenage girls.

However, my experience has shown me that this is not true at all. An older man who is so Omega and has such poor Game that he can’t attract a woman his own age to save his life is not going to be able to go after the “easy pickings” – the teenage girls. Because they simply are not easy pickings who go for any older man – Alphas, Betas and even Omegas – not caring as long as he is older.

And if anything, teenage girls are even more selective and preferential about men than women in their 20’s. Yes, women in their 20’s tend to go for the Alphas, but the truth is that a lot of them end up having sex with Betas quite a bit, and it’s not uncommon for them to even bed an Omega. Women in their 20’s are less selective than teenage girls!

And with women in their 30’s, the selectivity declines even more as they jump off the Alpha Carousel and start looking for a Beta to settle down with and have kids and a family.

Women in their 40’s are dealing with declining looks and a seriously diminishing pool of middle aged men, many of whom are already burning out into overweight, obesity, poor health, mental illness, alcoholism or addiction, chronic disease, massive baggage, jail and prison records, sketch job histories, seriously declining looks, or even embarrassing poverty.

Women in their 40’s often complain that there are no good men and that the pool of decent men their age is very small compared to the number of women chasing them. The Three S’s: Straight, Sane and Solvent, is supposedly all these women ask for, and while it’s easy to find middle aged men with at least one S, it’s not easy at all to find men with all three. At least one of those S’s is often missing. So women in their 40’s are less selective still!

Moving on into the 50’s, most women’s looks have so badly crashed that many of them look to me like wild animals who escaped from the zoo. I would date them except that I find bestiality immoral. That sounds sexist and evil, but I have told this to women in their 50’s who still had their looks, and they told me it was the same with men their age, and that most men in their 50’s looked like complete crap with trainwrecked looks. And they all laughed and said most men in their 50’s also look like wild animals.

Further, with men in their 50’s, we are dealing with some serious potency issues. Figures are hard to come by, but quite a few men in their 50’s have problems with erections. Actually I wold say they all do sooner or later in the decade, but that’s just an opinion. I have had women in their 40’s chat me up, and within the first hour drop the bombshell, “Sooooooooo, are you impotent?” as if it would be perfectly normal if I said yes. I could not believe that they would ask me that so quickly, but I suppose it’s a pretty serious issue with women dating men in their 50’s.

So the feminists and SJW’s are wrong again. Teenage girls are not easy pickings for men because most teenage girls only want Alphas. If you can’t get a woman your own age, the Hell if you can get a teenage girl. That would be even harder! And females seem to get progressively less and less selective as they age. The younger the female is, the more she preferentially selects for “Alpha” types. Hence you hear about women in their 20’s becoming part of the harems of Alphas or “riding the Alpha Cock Carousel” as the saying goes.

By the time they are in their 30’s, some say women are “post-Wall.” That means they hit a Looks Wall at age 30 where their looks start to go down rapidly after that.

I don’t agree with that, but then I even find women in their 50’s attractive nowadays because I have had to adjust my standards in order to discover the beauty and charms of older women. It was not that hard to do. I just told myself that I was going to try to find women that age attractive and started to look for attractive things about them and learn to be attracted to them, and after a while, I did. But I already sort of liked them anyway. Anyway, in their 30’s, women are even less selective.

The feminists have got it all wrong. Teenage girls and women in their 20’s are not easy pickings. At least the hot ones aren’t. They’re actually the hardest ones of all to get! And as women slowly age, it becomes easier and easier for a non-Alpha man to get one. In fact, the easiest women of all to get may well be women in their 40’s who are dealing with a serious Man Shortage.

17 Comments

Filed under Cultural Marxists, Feminism, Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Law, Little or None, Man World, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Psychology, Romantic Relationships, Sex, Women

PUA/Game: Warning to Men – Teenage Girls Are Dangerous!

Women of all ages hardly look at me at all anymore which of course is due to aging. Most young women are just not into men my age. And I hardly blame them. They say that they do not find us attractive. This makes perfect sense to me and I do not begrudge them for feeling this way. However, even women in their 40’s do not seem all that interested. The overall effect seems to be that almost no one finds me attractive. Of course some women and even teenage girls find me attractive. Actually teenage girls stare at me all the time, and women in their 20’s to 30’s almost never do. I don’t get it.

I even had what must have been an 18 year old girl go into robot/hypnotized/blank stare mode at me the idea. That’s always a good sign. It means you turn her on. It doesn’t necessarily mean she’s going to have sex with you, but it means that a part of her would like to have sex with you. More properly, she is fantasizing about having sex with you in a way. Now whether she is really going to act on that feeling is another matter. People must understand that females probably get turned on by good-looking men on a regular basis, the vast majority of whom they never have sex with. So does that mean your average woman wants to have sex with all of them? Of course not. But women fantasize too. Looking and doing are completely different things.

A year ago, I had a 17 year old girl (only a couple of months short of 18, so she was just barely illegal) after me. She was anywhere from beautiful to cute depending on who you talk to. Before anyone freaks out, let me point out that she had a 100% body of an adult woman. For all intents and purposes, she was a woman. She wasn’t really a girl at all in any real sense if you take girl to mean “little girl.”

She was not underdeveloped in any way, shape or form. Her body was a bit different in that way that girls age 16-18 can be. At that age, many of them are thin but still have all of the perfect curves of a woman. On the other hand, their hips have not completely widened to point necessary to optimally carry a baby (this occurs at age ~19-20). So the effect is something that you do not see often in adult women, a beautiful female with outrageous curves who still has a quite thin body. I am not trying to be ephebephile here and I love older women’s bodies too, but that “thin body with perfect curves” is in some ways one of the best female body shapes of all. Unfortunately, it is usually wasted on females that are basically untouchable.

She kept saying she wanted to hang out with me, and my attitude was, “Sure, why not?” But she wanted me to hold her hand and put my arm around her when we were out in public, and I was really worried about that.

I used to take her around town anyway for coffee and whatnot. I got quite a few outraged stares an more than a few people acted like they wanted to hit me. Some acted like they were going to call the police on us. Every time I pointed that out to the girl, she laughed and said, “Good, let’s piss some more people off.” She was actually getting off on the fact that people were acting like they were going to beat me up for being with her. She thought it was hilarious. She kept trying to up the ante, saying, “Here, hold my hand, that will make them even more mad,” but I was too freaked out to do so. I wasn’t usually scared, but I was terrified to hold her hand or put my arm around her.

Although these are pretty innocent acts, it’s quite possible you could go down on child molestation charges even for something and inconsequential as that. There is a very ugly law in California called “annoying or molesting a child” that cops use frequently to bust me on very little cause. There are defense attorneys who specialize in getting men off of this specific charge. The crime has nothing to do with molesting a minor. If you did that, they would hit you with another charge.

Instead it is an insane “anti-grooming law” which means you can pretty much get arrested for so much as talking to an underage teenage girl. I recall one case where a man was arrested for having a conversation with two 15 year old girls, both runaways, in a pet store. I have no idea what they were talking about. The man said they were just talking. Well someone called the cops and he got arrested. I am thinking maybe if you held hands with a teenage girl or put your arm around her, you might go down on this stupid anti-grooming law.

Even if you don’t go down on that, there are some other moronic laws like corrupting the morals of a minor and contributing to the delinquency of a minor that you could go down on.

In fact, I was a bit worried about going down on this anti-grooming law just for hanging around this little hottie, but I doubt if they will arresting you just for associating with a teenage girl as long as you don’t do anything. I even had her over a few times. But she kept trying to seduce me. I kept telling her, “I can’t touch you. I can’t touch you,” and she kept laughing and saying, “Yes you can.” She was totally egging me on. I told her I could go to prison and she kept saying, “No one is going to find out.”

After a while of this, I had to diassasociate from her because it was just getting too scary and further, I was starting to get seriously tempted and I was worried that I might cave and give her the dicking she wanted. Everyone acts like some man with a barely underage girt is some sort of a predator scum, but this girl came after me all the way. She befriended me and asked me for my number and then started bugging me to hang out with her. I mean she was a little seductress all the way.

These idiots say that these hot young thing never try to seduce men, but oh yes they do! And I have read other experiences along these lines from other men. Kids grow up fast these days and 17 going on 30 is not unusual at all. I think a lot of men going down on bonking teenage girls are probably being overtly seduced by these girls. Some probably resist for a while, but at some point they just cave, give in and say, “The Hell with it. I’m going to do this little hottie! I won’t get caught and I don’t care if I do!” Of course he does care if he gets caught. And probably a lot of the time, the guy gets turned in by someone. I know that in a huge percentage of cases, the girl refuses to cooperate with the prosecution and tries to get the system to drop the charges, but they usually don’t do it. I’m not completely opposed to these laws but who exactly got harmed when the “victim” insists she was not a victim urges the system to let her “attacker” or “rapist” go.

What was funny was that even with all the hate looks we got, women started checking me out a lot more just by being with her. Instead massive SMV boost, even though I guess I was a “creepy pedophile.” And the local high school girls at the coffee shop we went to were literally in awe of me when they saw me with her and a lot acted like they would like to take her place.

I ended up playing Wise Older Man with her, but I end up doing this with most women in their 20’s that I date lately. Most women in their 20’s haven’t figured out life as well as you think. She was almost literally in awe of me like I was some sort of a God and I have heard that this is often the case even with women in their 20’s and middle aged men. They almost worship you like you are a statue. It’s pretty good for your ego. Hugo Schwyzer recently made the argument that middle aged men should stop dating younger women because they are in awe of us and almost worship us and they don’t put many demands on us. Whereas a lot of middle aged men say that dating women their age is like interviewing for a job. Schwyzer is correct that older women are a lot more demanding of us. Schwyzer says that by dating young women, we are avoiding the crucial tasks of learning how to deal with women our own age who will be a lot less tolerant of our bullshit and who, yes, will place a lot more demand on us. Schwyzer says we are copping out by chasing young things and not dealing with the realities of life.

I will say though that I have dated women around age 50 recently and I am not afraid of them, nor do I think they are unattractive. I have no preference for younger women and I do not believe that women “hit the wall” and become unattractive at age 30 either. It’s disgusting the way a lot of us older men say that women our own age or even in their 30’s are not attractive. Hell, the guy who is saying is about as attractive as the women he is calling ugly. So it’s pretty unfair. I love older women and in fact I love women of all ages from 18 up to over 50. They’re all great and in different ways too.

In closing, I would just say that not only middle aged men but even men in their 20’s and 30’s need to exercise serious caution around underage teenage girls. The main truth here seems to be not only, “A lot of these (16-17 year old) teenage girls are fuckable!*” but also that, “Teenage girls are dangerous!” You need to be very careful around them. It’s like playing with dynamite.

24 Comments

Filed under Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Law, Man World, Mass Hysterias, Moralfags, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Sex

Girls and Women, Boys and Men, and Girl-women and Boy-men

oops I did it again writes:

All objects have surface meanings and deep meanings. The deep meaning is the true meaning of what the object is.

I am fine with that, as long as it’s acknowledged that both meanings (let’s think a little about the word “meaning”, shall we? Meaning a bridge… meaning it’s a connection between our mind and the unreachable object of your knowledge; meaning is not what is at the other end of the bridge, but the bridge) are constructs of our mind, just like the verb “to be”, and the ideas of truthfulness and falsity (let’s say it: all what we can think).

Instead of to Heidegger for details on what sets girls and women apart from each other, I point you to Schopenhauer, and Hindu sapience, for some sobering humility and sense of one’s own proportions, if I say so. (Read “you” as in “you, Western civilization of the last 18 centuries”. A very plural pronoun.)

I wrote the post because I work as a mental health counselor. I have quite a few clients who get very upset at the fact that they get turned on by young teenage girls. Like age 14 or so. I was given photos of these girls to look at, and I almost fell over laughing. I told the clients, “That’s not a girl. That’s a woman! She turns you on because she looks like a woman, or in a sense, she simply is a woman.”

Why does a man get aroused by a 14 year old that looks like a woman? Because his brain looks at it and the brain thinks, “woman” because, let’s face it, the brain does not work very well by thinking, “Hey wait a minute. That is only the optical illusion of a woman. That is not a real woman because of ‘years lived’ or some weird statistic like that. Therefore she does not turn me on because I only get turned on by statistics like ‘years lived’.”

Hell no!

Your brain looks at that and if it looks like a woman, your brain screams, “Woman!” and it turns you on, just like that.

You argue for the other definition, that is she is not a woman due to her mind. In the mind, the teenage girl is not a little girl. But she is also not a woman. If you spend a lot of time around them as I have, you will see that yes, it is a woman, very, very much so, in some important ways. But in some other ways, it is still a pretty silly girl. It’s not a woman at all. So it’s neither a woman nor a girl, but something in between, or it’s both a woman and a girl at the same time.

Personally, I call them girl-women, and I call teenage boys boy-men.

I remember when we were in high school, the teachers habitually addressed as “young men” and “young women.” This felt very respectful to me, and I knew deep down inside that it was correct. It is very insulting to high school students boys and girls. It’s very demeaning, and it’s not even correct. I remember when I was 16 and 17 years old. I am not sure exactly what I felt like, but I do know that I sure didn’t feel like that boy that I had been for so many years up until maybe age 13 or so! Teenage boys are young men. Teenage girls are young women. This is the old fashioned way in which we referred to them for hundreds of years here in our country and it was not wrong.

Is it a man? Not really. “Young man” means something like “becoming a man.” The phrase young woman means something like “becoming a woman.” They are on the road, transitioning. But are they children? Hell no! For females, children are what we call “little girls.” If it’s not a little girl, it’s not a child. Period. A teenage girl is not really a little girl, though a 13 year old girl can come close. So it’s not a child. Maybe it’s not an adult either yet, but it sure as Hell isn’t a little girl for Chrissake.

Does your brain look at a 14 year old girl who looks like a woman and think, “Oh no! That doesn’t turn me on because it has the brain of a girl! It thinks like a girl, so it doesn’t turn me on.”? Hell no! The brain does not work that way. The brain doesn’t get turned on by a female or not based on how she thinks. The brain gets turned on by a female based on how she looks or appears.

1 Comment

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

TheBluePill Posts One of My Posts

Here.

You can see how much they hate me. They have posted a number of my articles, and boy do they hate my guts.

Blue Pillers are feminists and their male feminist men. They are literally the most retarded bunch of idiots on the planet. Almost nothing they say is even remotely true. They totally hate TheRedPill on Reddit and it is true that those guys are hardcore dicks, like you find on most PUA and Game sites. Don’t get me wrong, a lot of the stuff those tools say is true, but I just find them nasty, ugly and misogynistic. I will say that TheBluePill has some good critiques of TheRedPill. A lot of those redpillers are just promoting abuse. I don’t abuse the women I date and love. If the only way I can have a relationship is to abuse the woman, I guess I will date my right hand for the rest of my life.

The blue pill sucks and the red pill sucks too. The Hell with both of them! It’s like so many other things in US politics. There are two views – one more or less rightwing view and one more or less leftwing view, and they are like the two slices of bread in a shit sandwich. They’re both horrible! Not only that, but there’s pretty much nothing in between. So many things in US politics are like this: the Left is insane, the Right is evil, and there’s nothing in between! US politics is polarized in the most senseless of ways. I think it is due to the fake liberal-conservative divide and the demands for ideological purity.

Because of this Trump vs. Clinton reality of gender politics, a new concept has sprung up of ThePurplePill. These are pretty much the only sane people in the gender politics debate.

4 Comments

Filed under Conservatism, Feminism, Gender Studies, Girls, Jailbait, Liberalism, Man World, Mass Hysterias, Pedophile Mass Hysteria, Political Science, Politics, US Politics

Is It a Girl, Or Is It a Woman?

Oneaboveall writes:

I was just having this discussion a few days back.I belong to a few different political discussion boards and we were recently having a discussion on criminal penalties for men vis-a-vis women, especially where sex is concerned. I basically made a point that if I’m dealing with a 15 yr with enormous tits and/or a bubble ass, WHICH I WOULD NOT BE, that it’s really stretching things to say that I’m a sexual predator who’s attracted to children.

No kidding.

Answer to the question? You would not be a sexual predator who is attracted to children. In fact, in terms of philosophy, it is an open question whether that 15 year old female human is even a “girl” at all.

Check out Heidegger.

The names we call objects are completely arbitrary. There is an object over there, so I am going to give it a name. But the object is not the name. The name is just some “tag” that I put on the object that doesn’t necessarily have much meaning at all. It is the surface meaning of the object.

All objects have surface meanings and deep meanings. The deep meaning is the true meaning of what the object is. The surface meaning is the word that we stick on it to signify to us what that object is – but it could just as well be a number, series of numbers, color, shape or just about anything. The important thing is that the surface meaning of the object doesn’t necessarily have any real true meaning at all, and it doesn’t even tell us much about the true meaning of what that object is.

For instance, we look at a fully developed 15 year old female, and we put a “tag” on that object and call it “girl.” But that doesn’t necessarily define that object or even tell us much about it. In the above case, it is almost a case of giving a false meaning to something!

Now there are quite a few other societies where any 15 year old female human object would be labeled “woman,” because that is what 15 year old females are called in that society. Now, there is no way to prove which definition is correct. We cannot say for sure that our tag “girl” describes that object any better than their tag “woman.” Perhaps a 15 year old female is better defined labeled “woman” than “girl!” There is no way to prove that one tag describes the object any better than the other tag, and anyway, neither one really tries to describe the deep meaning of the object.

Now in the case of a fully developed 15 year old female with the full body of a woman, I would say that the tag “woman” is actually much more accurate than the tag “girl.”

What is the point of tagging that object “girl”?

Because she completed 15 years of life on Earth? What in God’s name does that have to do with anything and how does her 15 years on Earth tell us much of anything about her? The American would argue that she has spent 15 years on Earth, and therefore she is labeled “girl” because that is the label we give to females who have lived for 15 seasons. But what do you see when you look at that object? Do you look at her and think, “She looks like she spent 15 years on Earth, therefore I label her as ‘girl’?” Probably not.

Why not? Because we call female humans “girls” if they have a body that looks more like a girl’s body than a woman’s body. In other words, females either look like women or they look like girls. If a female looks like a woman, we tend to label her “woman,” whereas if she looks like a girl, we tend to label her as “girl.” This is actually a good way to describe female human objects – based on what they looks like. And it also starts to come close to the deep meaning of what that object actually is.

I would argue that looking at a 15 year old girl with the body of a woman and labeling that object “girl” is a very poor way to define that object. Yes, she has spent 15 years on Earth, but so what? What does that have to do with much anything? What does that tell us about this object? Not a whole lot. So tagging this 15 year old female “girl” is a label that gives a very poor surface meaning to her because it is not what she resembles. In fact, it is such a bad label that it is almost an anti-label. Not only is that 15 year old female not a girl, but she is the opposite of a girl – a woman. Or so she appears to be.

Now we could go completely against society and simply label that object “woman.” In doing so, we would say that we do not care how many years she has lived on this Earth because it appears she has lived long enough to be labeled “woman.” If she’s lived long enough to look like a woman, then there’s a good case that that is exactly what she is.

More importantly, we could look at her body and tag her “woman” based on her appearance because that is exactly what she looks like. She looks like a woman, not a girl. If  you have the body of a woman, then we are going to tag you “woman” because that is a very good definition of what you are, a surface meaning that describes your deep meaning very well.

Now, any man who sees this female will instantly think “woman” because that is what she looks like. The fact that she is only 15 years old is irrelevant. It’s not only irrelevant, it’s actually misleading because that fact tries to tell us that that object is a “girl” and not a “woman.” But that’s not what she appears to be. So labeling her as “girl” is almost a false definition, sort of like false advertising.

I would call a fully developed 15 year old female “woman” because that label describes her much better than the label “girl,” which simply feels like a false label.

If it looks like a woman, label it “woman.” If it looks like a girl, label it “girl.” That is an excellent way to categorize female humans, and it goes a long way towards describing what they are.

11 Comments

Filed under Culture, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Philosophy, Psychology, Sex

They’re Not Children, and They’re Not Adults Either

Oneaboveall writes:

I basically made a point that if I’m dealing with a 15 yr old with enormous tits and/or a bubble ass, WHICH I WOULD NOT BE, that it’s really stretching things to say that I’m a sexual predator who’s attracted to children.

A child is “someone who appears to be a child” – basically, someone 12-under. Teenagers are in an in-between category. They certainly are not children anymore, but in general, they are not really adults either.

Teenage boys are what I call “boy-men.”

I call teenage girls “girl-women.”

Because that’s exactly what they are. It’s not a man, and it’s not a boy. It’s not a girl, and it’s not a woman. Teenagers are neither children nor adults. They are in some sort of transitioning category between children and adults, some sort of murky neverland that is hard to define and get a grip on.

Oneaboveall writes:

There is a big difference between children and adolescents, but people love to throw words around.

That’s because people are idiots. Especially feminists. I believe feminism causes actual loss of IQ points, and if I were betting, I would bet that feminism causes actual loss of brain matter. It’s probably progressive too. The longer a woman is a feminist, the greater the brain shrinkage is. It’s a serious problem, almost as bad as drugs.

This is your brain on feminism. Any questions?

1 Comment

Filed under Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Radical Feminists, Scum, Sex

Is “Pedophilia” Normal in Adult Men?

I have studied a number of studies that have tested how widespread pedophilic interest is in adult males in the lab. The tests show various things. The results can be summed up below.

83% of men react strongly to adolescent girls
54% react to little girls
20% show a “pedophilic” response – strong response to little girls as strong or stronger than their reaction to adults
1% are preferential pedophiles

Men’s sexual attraction to adolescent females.

Several studies have shown that the rate is actually higher than listed above.

One study found that 100% of males react strongly to all females age 13+

Another study found that 83% of Italian military recruits reacted strongly to 13 year old girls.

Another study found that all adult men react to girls age 16-17 at the same rate as they reacted to older women. Reactions to girls age 13-15 were less but were still 70-90% of maximum.

I do not care at all if men are turned on by teenage girls because when a  man tells me he is turned on by teenage girls, to me that just means he’s normal.

You notice that feminists have a real problem with this idea that men are turned on by teenage girls.

Men with sexual attraction to little girls.

Next comes attraction to little girls, a time bomb of a discussion. But even this study found that 53% of normal men are physically aroused by little girls. I am sure that is shocking to most people. However, I have seen other studies in which much higher percentages were reported.

Two reported that all men were attracted to little girls. In one group, the men were aroused by females aged 7-12 and in the other to females age 2-12.

Another study found that 90% of men were turned on by girls age 2-12.

I am not sure if the two studies simply aggregated that 2-12 group together and tallied up the group as a whole or if they found that men were attracted to girls at every age of that group. I find it stunning that men would be turned on by very little girls, but anything is possible.

The one study that broke little girls down by age found men attracted to girls aged 7-12 but no attraction below age 7, which is logical to me. The attraction to girls age 7-12 ranged from 10-60%, with declining attraction as the girls got younger. This also seems logical to me. I find the idea that men are attracted to girls age 7-12 understandable, but I can’t stomach the idea that normal men are attracted to girls age 2-6. That’s just crazy. Normal men are not babyfuckers.

Men with both strong sexual attraction to mature females and strong or pedophilic attraction to little girls.

Now we come to the most shocking realization of all, that anywhere from 20-26% of all men test “pedophilic” in the lab. That means that they are as attracted to little girls just as much or more than they are attracted to mature females. That is a very high level of attaction to little girls; in fact, it is as high as the attraction that actual preferential pedophiles experience.

One wonders why 20-25% of all men are not seeking out child porn or molesting children. I assume that if you are maximally or highly attracted to mature females, even if you are turned on by little girls at a high level, you would probably just ignore or even suppress your attraction to little girls and simply focus on mature females instead. You would do this because attraction to little girls, not to mention having sex with them, is seen as anywhere from societally unacceptable to say the least to a criminal act of the worst sort.

Men with preferential pedophilic sexual attraction to little girls.

And here we find a critical difference: the difference between a preferential pedophile and a man with a mere pedophilic response. The difference is that the former is not turned on by mature females at all, while the latter is strongly to maximally attracted to them. The preferential pedophile is a man who is very turned on by little girls but has little to no interest in mature females. So the only way he can fulfill his sexual orientation is by committing a crime.

Preferential pedophiles are dangerous for this very reason. This is because the only thing the gets them off is little girls, and mature females do nothing for them. In order to fulfill his sexual desires, the preferential pedophile has to have sex with a little girl, a serious crime. And preferential pedophiles are much more likely than men with both strong pedophilic and mature attractions to be seriously wrapped up in fantasies about sex with little girls to the point where they are fantasizing about sex with little girls and masturbating to those fantasies a good part of their time.

In a word, the preferential pedophile is simply obsessed with having sex with little girls. The other 20-26% of men who react similar to pedophiles in regard to little girls have the advantage of being highly attracted to mature females also. Therefore, they can just blow off their antisocial pedophilic attaction and focus on the socially acceptable attraction to mature females.

This study found that 1% of men were preferential pedophiles. Another study found .1% or 1 in 1000 men were pedophiles. I am not sure which figure is correct, but it would probably not surprise me if 1% of all men were actual preferential pedophiles. Nevertheless, that is a shocking figure to behold. That means 1 million preferential pedophiles in the US alone. That means 340 preferential pedophiles in my small city alone.

A few conclusions:

All or almost all men are attracted to teenage girls. Such attraction is natural, normal and healthy. There is nothing wrong with it. It’s not sick or evil or pedophilic or any of those things, and anyone who says it is is either insane or retarded or both.

53-100% of all men are attracted to little girls but generally at a level substantially lower than their attraction to mature females. Therefore, being attracted to little girls, at least on a minor level, is completely normal in adult males. Even the low figure of 53% is still a majority, and one definition of normal is something that is done by a majority of the population. I would say it is completely normal to be attracted to little girls at a low level, but if you feel that way, it is probably not something you want to focus on or even think about much as there are much more pro-social ways to meet your sexual needs.

20-26% of all men are attracted to little girls at the same or greater level than mature females. That is, 1/4 – 1/5 of all men have a strong pedophilic response. Therefore, if someone comes to me and tells me that little girls turn them on, I am not necessarily concerned. What I would want to know is if mature females turn him on also.

There is a 95-96% chance that a man who is turned on by little girls is attracted to mature females just as much or at least very strongly. I would simply urge such a man to focus on his desires for mature females and preferably ignore or even suppress his desires for little girls, which are – let’s face it- -, antisocial. If you have two strong desires, one antisocial and one pro-social, why not substitute the pro-social one for the antisocial one?

The last conclusion, that 1% of men are preferential pedophiles, is shocking, but we will need to deal with it nonetheless. First of all, if preferential pedophilia is really that common, then we need to stop all of the pedophile witch-hunts and looking for pedophiles hiding under every bed. The truth is they’re everywhere. If they’re everywhere, we can’t exactly spend all of our time running around hysterically persecuting all of them, and if there are 1 million of them in the country, we cannot well put them all in jail or prison either.

These men need to set up an ongoing relationship with a therapist, the goal of which would be to try to keep them from offending. There are other ways for preferential pedophiles to satisfy their needs than molesting a little girl. Unfortunately one of those ways is via the use of child pornography, the use of which is nearly as illegal as molesting a girl. Given that the use of child pornography is very high among preferential pedophiles, this leaves us with a conundrum. We want to prosecute possession of child porn, but we can’t exactly put 1 million men in prison for doing so.

I have no solutions to these conundrums right now, but they should give you something to think about.

15 Comments

Filed under Child Porn, Crime, Gender Studies, Girls, Heterosexuality, Jailbait, Lolitas, Man World, Pedophilia, Pornography, Psychology, Sex