Sunday, December 30, 2012

The Peter Pan Man Boy.


In a previous post, commentator Iangobard asked if I would make a comment on Dalrock's post about the Peter Pan Manboy.

Dalrock should be commended for putting up the data and the first thing that strikes me looking at it is just how badly the under thirties are faring in the U.S. economy. It certainly confirmed our observations from when we were there a year ago.  It's not just the home of the brave and free but also the poor. The overall impression I got from my visit to the U.S was that it was a failing nation composed of a mass of good-willed people who were being overworked and badly governed.

Be that as it may, this is not a post about economics but a post on on the existence of the manboy. From a female perspective, a manboy is a man who refuses to take on the responsibility of adulthood and engage in adult behaviour.  Now before the MRA's start invading the comment section, I want to make it perfectly clear that adult behaviour does not involve marrying some burnt-out carousel rider, rather, manning up in my lexicon means having your shit together.  For those who are retarded, start here for definitional understanding.

Dalrock's data certainly does show that, across the board, men moderately outperform women in earnings capacity.  But I think focusing on earnings capacity over simplifies things and I'd like to point readers back to Roissy's Dating Market Value Test for Men, which I think is an appropriate analytical tool to use when looking a sexual market analysis. Roissy's test is more appropriate since masculinity can't simply be reduced to one parameter.

Still, if we look at the income data, it does demonstrate that there is a severe mismatch for women of higher achievement when hypergamy is taken into account.  Now, the thing to remember is that hypergamy is relative to a woman's own status, therefore,  only the men earning the same amount or more are going to be of interest to her. (All other things being equal.)

I've pulled the following chart from Dalrock's post.


Let's assume that the median income for both sexes is somewhere between the 25-40 thousand band.

Under the influence of hypergamy, a woman from this band will find 58% of all single men (these are the men on her pay scale or above) attractive. On the other hand, the pool of available women is much larger for man since a woman's income is not as important in her attractiveness. That's almost a two to one ratio in favour of the man. The problem gets worse for women the more successful they are as there are progressively less men to satisfy their hypergamous instincts.

But income is only one of the parameters of attraction. A woman's judgement of a man is based on a multivariate analysis. Other parameters such as intelligence, status and physical attractiveness matter, and there is that intangible element of "style".

Now, let's look at educational qualification as education is a rough proxy for status and intelligence.

 Percent of U.S. Adults Ages 25-29 With a Bachelor's Degree or Higher, 1969-2009

What is there to say? There are roughly 1.5 times more bachelor qualified women to men in this age group. Now its true that men still outnumber women in the professions that require really hard thinking i.e Science and Engineering, but this is irrelevant when it comes to the dating game.  What matters in the dating game is which social class/group you belong to and an education is a qualification ticket into the middle and upper classes. An industrious redneck trucker is going to need an awful lot of money to appeal to a female sociology major, since the sociology major is going to feel that, intellectually, he is beneath her and will not appeal to her hypergamic instinct. Yeah, I know there may be exceptions but this is the rule.

Now one thing we notice from the graph is that the number of men attaining a bachelor's degree has remained approximately the same since the sixties. However, given the massive expansion in education over the last fifty years it seems that women have taken the opportunities presented to them whilst men haven't. This graph is a dreadful indictment of the modern American male. Perhaps one of the reasons that so many men are unemployed is because they're to dumb (and therefore unnatractive to women) to attain the qualifications that will give them a job.



I know many MRA types have tried to explain away the discrepancy of educational rates because of affirmative action policies by educational institutions.  And they are correct, there is discrimination, but it appears to be in favour of men. So great is the gender imbalance at some of the universities that they are now actively discriminating against women in favour of lesser qualified men.

But perhaps these men have decided to opt out of the materialist cubicle jockey lifestyle and pursue a life of travel and adventure.

Nope.

This graph shows the percentage of sexes living at home with mum.


Perhaps they're spending all their time at self improvement and doing things like hitting the gym?


Yeah, sure.

I know much is made of the fatification of womanhood by the manosphere but in the U.S. it's the men who actually have a slight edge in fatness during the mating years.

Now, for those who are retarded, pointing out male failure does not equal a support of feminism and those who can't see the distinction can simply bugger off. However, an objective man, looking at the data, can't but conclude that women have fully grasped the opportunities given to them whilst the men haven't.  The data does suggest that there are a significant group of men who fit the Manboy label.

I don't rejoice in these numbers, in fact they profoundly depress me, but what depresses me even more is the both the justification and victimhood mentality that has set in to explain this state of affairs.

97 comments:

Twenty said...

I think you're overlooking, and know you have left unaddressed, the fact that male achievement is treated as a problem to be solved by the dominant forces of the modern West.

Men excel in sport? Title IX!

Men excel in STEM? Need moar wimmin!

Men excel in business? What can we do to get more women in executive suites/on corporate boards?

And at every stage, of course, male sexuality is criminalized and stigmatized so as to derail as many high-achieving alphas as possible.

I most object to your framing of the situation as: "Look at all these opportunities that have been offered to men and women, and how women have seized them while men have not." The reality is that opportunities have been disproportionately offered to women, while burdens have been disproportionately placed on men.

This is not to excuse male failure, rather it is to say that the appropriate course of action for a man is to side-step a game that is rigged against him, aggressively pursue success in other ways, and burn his enemy's house to the ground. To the extent that men are not doing that, they need to do better. But to the extent that men aren't becoming sociology majors, they're doing the right thing.

Anonymous said...

Well, in support of Twenty's comment, here is another article from your own country, about an education system that favors girls over boys:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/sd02wu1nscoczby/Results%20prove%20education%20system%20favours%20girls%2C%20yet%20we%20do%20nothing%20|%20The%20Australian.pdf

Anonymous said...

What's your point, SP?
That men should "self-improve" so they can enter the rigged game of marriage?
That working is bad if it interferes with getting a rather useless and expensive piece of paper (the typical liberal arts degree)?
Your "living at home" chart might mean something if it wasn't for the fact that its still far easier for a woman, jobless , to shack up with a man providing nothing other than housework and probably sex, than vice-versa. Men do, after all, make up the majority of the homeless that are on the street. I'm sure it's fun being a "Peter Pan" manboy whilst living in a box.
Then, you imagine that affirmative action policies only apply to schools. They apply to workplaces as well. That's not counting the fact that the affirmative action policies "in favor" of male admittance to universities and such are only about ten years old at the oldest and are often opposed by feminists. Affirmative action is still something that largely benefits women, esp. if you are a white guy in the US. Currently girls are being favored in certain professions by the threat of "Title IX" lawsuits for unequal representation.

And yes, what Twenty has said is actually a good point. If there are professions or things that males seem to be succeeding at more than females that is taken as either evidence of discrimination or a problem to be solved.

I don't think post makes very much of a case for "male failure" actually. I think if men are dropping out, it's a good thing and women are simply going to have to suffer the results of the hypergamy and the feminist imperative being unleashed. I don't for sorry for them, and I'm not impressed by your arguments that somehow men are failing to do some duty to a larger society that spits on them and ignores their needs and desires constantly. Men, at best in this system have a duty only to OURSELVES.

Clarence


Clarence

dalrock said...

Thanks for the linkage, the kind words, and especially for the additional data.

I think this lends weight to the premise that the destruction of marriage has removed what in the past has been a powerful incentive to men to act in ways which greatly benefit society. I also think we have barely scratched the surface of the full cost this will entail.

asdf said...

Let's get down in the trenches shall we.

I've dated a lot of 20 something females. And I've seen a huge sampling of them online from a data perspective. You can't separate government from women.

Most women graduating with college degrees graduate with liberal arts degrees. Either they get a job with government, an NGO, or with a soft part of a megacorp (like HR). I can't stress how much of a factor this is. They are not proving themselves in the marketplace. If you go browsing the jobs of single 20 something women here is what you will find:

Teacher
HR personal
Social Worker
Administrative Assistant
Nurse

That is the vast majority of them. Go on a dating site and just try it.

With the possible exception of nurse (whose earnings have grown with doctors and men are actually growing as a % of nurses) these are all secondary professions. They rely heavily on government and are of dubious social purpose. Here is a post about a typical female SWPL liberal arts job:

asdf said...

An Example of SWPL Work

If you're a white person who has graduated from college, you are a little bit SWPL. Deny it all you want, but there's some things on the stuff white people like list that you do like and sometimes for the very reasons the site mocks. Being SWPL is like OCD and unlike pregnancy. You can be a little bit SWPL like how your mom might be a little bit OCD with her Christmas decorations. There is a spectrum. I like to mock SWPLs, but they do contribute to society. Many work and have kids. Through my wife's presence in the artist realm, I am exposed to many hipsters and SWPLs. One acquaintance is a huge SWPL, so much that she admits it and enjoys the SWPL site because it describes her to a T. She also has one of the most SWPL jobs I have ever heard of: government health advocate for smoking and air policy. Let's review her work to get into the mind of the SWPL and see how useless some of their work is.

This SWPL has a master's degree that she earned from a liberal college in the American northeast. She returned home to the midwest and got a job with the government. Her job is in the state health department focusing on anti-tobacco policy. She reads research on smoking cessation programs, sits at the health table at conventions, reviews data on smoking statistics, and does something called air monitoring. Air monitoring is when we taxpayers fund a credentialed soldier in the cathedral to go to a set location and use a doo-hickey gadget to monitor the air for particles and gases. This is to check them vs. prior levels of the same particles and gases. We need to know air quality to make sure people are safe and healthy. This is ridiculous considering how US emmissions of pollution, soot and 'bad' particles is down since manufacturing left for foreign lands + coal is being burnt less and less. This is her job.
Let's use her own description of what she does....

asdf said...

"I oversee the development and implementation of the program evaluation plan for the Tobacco Prevention and Cessation Commission and the State Tobacco Control 2015 Strategic Plan. Programs include tobacco counter-marketing, community-based prevention activities, policy, and cessation systems change. I also manage the tobacco control surveillance systems in State: the Youth Tobacco Survey and the Adult Tobacco Survey, including survey administration, data analysis, and reporting. I also work with the State Behaviorial Risk Factor Surveillance System (BRFSS) coordinator to ensure that current methods in the field of tobacco control for survey instrument development are implemented. I'm responsible for establishing and managing all program monitoring systems for contractors and grantees, such as program reporting mechanisms, to assure that contract deliverables and objectives are met. Outcomes data and metrics are then provided to TPC program staff such as Regional Program Directors and other stakeholders. I provide technical assistance and training to program staff and grantees on program evaluation procedures, and also develops tools and to assist grantees as they implement work plans. I work with academic institutions throughout the state to foster tobacco related research and evaluation in State and assist in submitting abstracts and proposals for presentations to national tobacco control and public health conferences and related meetings, as well as submissions to peer-reviewed publications. I serve as a member of TPC's leadership and management team including contributing to program planning, project management of statewide initiatives as needed, advising on evaluation and program monitoring, and facilitating staff meetings as needed."

asdf said...

Do we need her considering every cigarette pack has a health warning on it? Do we need her considering TV has anti-tobacco ads constantly telling people how many folks die a year from smoking? With the long reach of modern media + warnings on every pack, do we need a highly educated worker bee in the state apparatus working on smoking policy? No. This woman has a make work job. It's 2012 not 1950; we don't need her telling people smoking is bad. People know smoking is bad for you, and the 17-20% of the population that smokes is a combination of addicts and people who like smoking and/or nicotine. Nicotine gives me a quick rush, but I have a low tolerance (nicotine poisoning) and stay away. What marginal reduction in smoking do we get from workers like her? Close to zero if not zero. What is her purpose for the greater good? All of the information in the public sphere that she can discuss is out there already with required advertising against smoking on TV and a ban on positive cigarette ads on TV. It's a one sided argument. What does she add? Nothing.

Her use to you and I is minimal if nonexistent. Her use to the cathedral is high. If you notice in her description, she does mention monitoring certain things so that contractors and grantees meet requirements. She is a gatekeeper for government funds. Her job is to make sure certain clients of the cathedral are jumping at the right height in order to get their piece of the redistributed pie. It's not just about robbing from the productive class to give to the unproductive. It's about robbing the productive to give to the dependent to strengthen the bonds of the dependent. Through the money channel, the ideas of the cathedral spread. The bureaucracy grows and the money flows. I'd add another purpose she serves. When she is at a party of family gathering, due to her job and credentials, low information or medium information people will value her opinion on health policy. Nothing strengthened my belief in the cathedral's strength more than hearing my wife's cousin who is getting his master's in health policy repeat the same concerns and talking points about fatties costing US health care consumers as this friend. The coming anti-obesity drive will use the same avenues as anti-smoking. I doubt the PC world will fat shame tubbahs like they shamed and cursed smokers. It will be interesting. People like this SWPL will be at the vanguard though gently reminding people not to eat so much and shaking down big business + small contractors to make sure that everyone toes the line.

asdf said...

I just finished up with a year of working for the government and I can confirm that everything they do is useless. It's baby sitting for adults. These girls all get jobs that pay around $40-50k out of college to sit there and look pretty. Which is enough if you have roommates and guys pay on the dates. The Spearhead does a great job at looking at what this all means.


The Socialization of the Costs of Sex

by W.F. Price on October 19, 2012

One of the beefs the traditional left has had with US economic policy – one I happen to have as well – is the socialization of business costs (or losses) while profit remains private. Because I did some manual labor as a teen and young man, I remember feeling pretty angry about the fact that immigrant farm workers had their health care and housing subsidized by the state while I had no such benefit. This was extended to a ridiculous degree in subsequent years, with illegals getting all of the benefits of residence and state services while their employers continued to pay them low wages. As I saw it, there was a partnership between the state and private interests that served to drive wages down for natives. Unfortunately, the typical white leftist at the time was a couple generations removed from blue collar work, and tended to have a sort of class antagonism toward working-class whites (e.g. you must be a “loser” if you work with your hands), framing everything in terms of multicultural universalism, by which they justified screwing less advantaged Americans in favor of hiring cheaper foreigners.

There are plenty of other examples, and many of us are paying dearly for this in our current recession, which was created essentially by socializing business costs and thereby creating an enormously inflated bubble. It’s infuriating when you think about it, and makes me pretty pessimistic about both candidates, who both, as far as I can tell, are in league with the thieves and crooks who caused all this trouble.

However, it seems that this is a problem that goes beyond the formal business world, and has pervaded society in general to the extent that many – perhaps most – people think the government (i.e. taxpayers) should bear the costs of their life choices.

The example most in the news today is the demands for subsidized abortion and birth control that have become a feature of the presidential campaign. You’d think that our country’s women’s top priority is getting the government to subsidize their sexual choices, whatever they may be.

Following what I was getting at yesterday, sex has always incurred some expense. Like it or not, men pay for sex (or its results) in one way or another. Traditionally, you’d pay by getting married and taking the woman on as your responsibility, or you’d pay a fee for a one-off (prostitution). If you took it without paying for it, as in adultery, rape or fornication, it was a crime, or something like that. If we were honest with ourselves, we’d have to admit that it still is a quasi crime; as the old system has been replaced with something significantly more confusing, sex crime laws have become far broader in scope and can be applied to any number of situations (such as prostitution) that used to be considered beyond the purview of the law.

asdf said...

Additionally, despite false promises of free sex from the 60s and 70s, when feminists used to get support from men by promising we’d all be getting laid for free when we had “equality,” it turned out that sex still had a lot of associated costs. Pregnancy, of course, is one of the biggest. At first, we socialized that, but then welfare reform threw the costs entirely onto fathers (not mothers, mind you). Combined with welfare reform, we had VAWA, which significantly increased the costs of marriage and cohabitation by legally handicapping men in relationships with women. So great strides have been made in restoring a heavy cost to sex, but this hasn’t been enough, because women have grown accustomed to sexual license with whomsoever they please, and the men they generally like either a) don’t have the money, or b) are desirable enough to not have to pay.

Although the latter is a bit counterintuitive (wouldn’t women desire men who pay for them?), it’s a function of female sexual psychology. Women generally use sex to ensnare the man they want (and they typically have high expectations), and then they begin to draw resources from him. It works in simple societies where people hold each other to account, but in more cosmopolitan settings it breaks down for a couple reasons. First, there are more than enough women to go around, so it’s easy to drop one and pick up another, and secondly there are other means for women to gain resources, such as jobs and welfare, and as long as those resources exist men who have no trouble procuring sex see no reason to provide for women, even if they have the means. And who can blame them? Although it’s a social catastrophe, it’s a perfectly reasonable attitude from a personal perspective, because, after all, the individual man didn’t create this mess in the first place.

asdf said...


Here’s a scenario:

A handsome young investment banker making six figures can go out to a bar and take his pick. Let’s call him Mark. Mark picks up a young woman named Amanda, she goes home with him, they have sex, and he enters her number into his phone, leaving her only a promise to call again. Perhaps he intends to do so, and perhaps not. Whatever the case, he feels no guilt or responsibility, because the woman, who happens to be in law school, also has a job at a nonprofit, and makes more hourly than the average young man in their city, so he doesn’t need to provide her with anything. Additionally, if there’s an “accident” (but in all likelihood there won’t be, because Mark is careful about these things) there’s a Planned Parenthood down the street. Not only does it provide her with birth control, but it will treat STDs and abort unwanted children resulting from her nightly excursions.

Sounds fine, so what’s the problem?

The problem is that this young woman, despite being a student and having a job, is essentially on the dole. Her nonprofit is funded in large part by state and federal grants, as is her tuition. Her sexual care at Planned Parenthood is also funded largely by taxpayers. Her life, including her sex life, is paid for by the average working Joe, but she isn’t sleeping with Joe — oh no: she’s sleeping with Mark, a guy who easily could afford to feed, clothe and insure her, but who doesn’t have to because of Joe. Although it isn’t really his fault, Mark is a freeloader.

Joe, for his part, makes do with monthly trysts with a mid-level prostitute, which he can barely afford after taxes and child support. Joe, who is an HVAC repairman, is paying for all the Amandas in his state, his ex-wife Lisa, and his hooker, who is named Elena.

Interestingly enough, Joe and Amanda have met. Joe was called in to fix the AC in her nonprofit’s office on a sweltering summer day. Because the AC was broken and the atmosphere was stifling, Amanda had unbuttoned the top part of her blouse, and poor Joe couldn’t help but look at her breasts. Amanda was furious, and called his supervisor, who apologized profusely, and when Joe got back from the job he caught hell. Fortunately, he wasn’t fired, but it sure was humiliating. Not as bad as having to deal with his ex-wife’s lawyer, but close…

I suppose we could say “life’s unfair,” and that would be entirely true. But should we make it that unfair? Should we set things up so that Joe has to support Amanda as much as Mark?

According to our nation’s single women, the answer is a resounding “YES!” Married women, however, have a significantly different take on it, for obvious reasons.

I’m not sure single women are consciously aware of how selfish they are being. I think they fully intend to find some man to support them, and think the only way they can do that is to have unfettered sex with all the Marks of the world they can get their hands on in the hopes that one of them will some day give in and marry her. The problem is that it’s a trend that reinforces itself; the more Amandas we have giving it away for free the less likely any given Mark will be to actually support any of them. The competition will escalate, desirable men will become even more reluctant to give women any financial support, and the screeching for more entitlements for single women will grow louder and louder.

It is exactly this trend that has led to the bizarre, unprecedented fixation on women’s sexual entitlements in our current election cycle. When you socialize the costs of a private activity – and sex is about as private as it gets – you create an unnatural imbalance that rewards the few at the expense of the many. You also run the risk of inflating costs to unsustainable levels, and I think that’s something young women ought to think hard about. But they won’t.

asdf said...

The HVAC guy is like my father. He does real hard work that actually makes peoples lives better. However, he has no market power. He does okay but doesn't make much money. Some men with the right connections or exceptionally high math ability join the FIRE economy and become "alphas" siphoning off from guys like my Dad's 401k. The next tier down get cubicle STEM jobs where they basically make the economy work but unless they are good looking all they have to look forward to is a carousel rider over 30 and a really shitty effective marginal tax rate. The rest either end up like HVAC guy or if they can play a guitar and have good looks they start a band and fuck carouselers. If they can't play guitar and they realize the HVAC life sucks they live in mom's basement and play videogames.

asdf said...

Try to understand just how far the culture talked about in the Spearhead piece goes. A speaker at this years Democratic convention was Sandra Fluke. Sandra Fluke got her degree in "Feminist, Gender, & Sexuality Studies" and was still in school at 30. She was invited to be a speaker at the democratic convention because she wanted the government to pay for her birth control. A woman with no accomplishments in live addressed the nation asking for free condoms. That is America. That is our culture. Men are subsidizing unproductive women in every single facet of their lives.

But yeah, men are just a bunch of loser failures who deserve it according to you.

GK Chesterton said...

I also appreciate the data, but we have to ask then, why are men suddenly acting this way? It isn't a historical norm, so what theories could explain this? Now I'm not MRA in the sense that "womenz kips us down", but something strange is going on.

I think a "soft" conspiracy is going on. That is a, conspiracy that happens not due to any planning but because ideologies align.

Christianity proposes that women are of equal worth even if they don't have equal authority. The West I think has had a hard time digesting that. We've played around with various concepts that are good in small doses but dangerous when swallowed whole. Think romantic love (good but not everything), feminism (just terrible), and some others.

By the 1920's men had begun to feel that technological advancement and the "break" with religion allowed for a new state to exist. Post WWI and WWII many of our male leaders were disgusted with themselves. So we, as we always do, made something new. We (men) inverted society despite all sorts of warnings that it was a bad idea.

This was a combination from the 20's on of cads (women broken from their roles are whores...whoohoo!) and nice guys who just wanted to help out women.

Nor have we stopped. "White Knights" as such are a silly name that smears something honorable, but we are in a predicament now. There are a lot of men who are pushing the status quo because it is "fair" even though it makes everyone miserable. They do it for all the right reasons, but get all the wrong results.

Young men, emotional rational beings that they are have discovered:
1.) Doing work is hard
2.) Doing work is not needed in a welfare state
3.) Doing work is dangerous
4.) If you are a cad women work for you...

And have dropped out in enough of a percentage to really screw up society further. Note your graph doesn't indicate that many "Peter Pans". The college gap isn't near as bad as the pay gap, which women still complain about, but it is enough.

In fact what we know from the "Bell Curve" should tell us that some percentage is inescapable. More men are geniuses than women, but we also have more dolts. So dolts + pans + hypergamy + feminism + demise of marriage makes for a very unstable marriage market and an unstable society.

What to do? This is where I part ways with you. I do not hate traditionalists, I believe in Chesterton's democracy of the dead. God exists (that is there is an infinite "final" goal), so we can improve, but we don't have to repeat mistakes of the past. The modern system is a sort of paganism writ large with polygamy, temple prostitution, and enslaved women who work for loser men.

The current state uses both carrot and stick to make sure men "behave" by feeding them if they are louts and crushing them if they are accomplished. We do this because we want to be nice or we are vile beasts. There's very few in the center.

Anonymous said...

Fail asdf.

Read the post again.

Anonymous said...

asdf has favored us with an excellent set of ideas.

asdf, if you start your own blog, I will definitely subscribe to it.

Obviously, I'm a different Anon than the one above.

Johnycomelately said...

This has more to do with macro economic realities than anything else.

Economic growth hasn't matched increased labor participation rates and government growth. Add to that immigration, globalization and the transfer of male jobs overseas and you get a recipe for reduced male labor participation.

On top of that the US is in a debt deflation period which only exacerbates the situation.

Voxday pretty much has the topic down pat.
http://wnd.com/2010/01/121559/

David Foster said...

The conveyor-belt approach to education, combined with runaway credentialism, has done great harm. Most people are not well-suited to sitting in classroom, replaying whatever they are told by their teachers/professors, for 16 to (increasingly) 20 years, and doing so scarcely promotes emotional maturity. As Peter Drucker observed, when you are in school it's always about your "potential" rather than your true performance and value to others.

Higher education in the US has sold itself not primarily in terms of the inherent value of learning ("learn stuff because it's interesting) nor in terms of the needed skills for careers ("learn X because you will need it for your job") but in terms of the economic value of the credential ("get a DEGREE and make more money".) It's all about the piece of paper.

Inevitably, then, the holders of degrees tend to arrogate high status to themselves, irrespective of the true value of the degree. The woman with the undergraduate sociology degree (and with no knowledge of literature or history, not to mention math or science) will look down on the successful redneck trucker who employs 10 people and is a voracious reader. The behavior is very much like that of the impoverished English aristocrat, circa 1840, who looks down on the successful manufacturer because she has a family lineage that he lacks.

asdf said...

David Foster,

Yes, they are very useless. Let's take the HR personal at my gov job. When I interviewed she could not even tell me what the health or retirement benefits for the job were. When I left she screwed up the forms to roll over my pension. These things are like her entire job and are absurdly easy, and she can't do them.

This person got hired because they have a college degree is BS from podunk U. They start at $40-50k but get their step raises every year and the occasional promotion as people retire. In the long run she can be earning $60-70k to do nothing all day. That is more then a lot of hard working honest men earn. And the situation wouldn't change much if she was in a private megacorp vs government.

At just $60,000/year this person would earn more then 81% of Americans. And that doesn't even count the benefits. For a job whose only qualification is showing up.

An HVAC tech, who does real work, starts at $25k/year. Most end up around the $40-50k mark after certification. The absolute top of the ladder is the engineers and then maybe you make $75k after many year of experience and training.

People need to get real about the economy and how it works.

TDOM said...

What you leave out of your analysis is perhaps more important than what you include. You appear to be cherry-picking data from the very references you cite. Your citation of the study on gender imbalance in college favoring men is somewhat misleading. The authors of that study state that they found no significant male preference at institutions that were traditionally coed or male-only. This is the vast majority of colleges and universities in the US. They only found preference towards males in schools that were traditionally female. Thus to conclude that the researchers found a preference for admitting men over women would be wrong. Next, the article from the Christian Science Monitor suggests that the reason why men don’t go to college at the same rate as women is that they don’t receive the same kind of help in K-12 and the public education system and the focus needs to shift towards preparing boys for college.
You also call this imbalance “male failure.” But according to your own analysis men go to college at approximately the same rate as they did in the 1960s. Thus if men are failing today, they must have been failing back then. That they haven’t improved is not failure, especially if you consider the focus and emphasis of the public education system on preparing girls for college. Further, men have traditionally been able to find well-paying jobs without attending college. So for many men, college was unnecessary. Not so for women who tend to shy away from high-risk and manual labor. While this has been changing for quite some time, school counselors have failed to adequately address the issue with boys while continuing to focus on getting girls into college prep courses. There has also been an intense effort made to push girls into careers once dominated by men such as STEM with no equivalent focus to get men interested in careers traditionally dominated by women such as elementary education and nursing. Title IX has frequently been used to eliminate male advantage in the education system, but is almost never used to eliminate male disadvantage. This has widened the gap between men and women.
Your effort to discredit the idea that men and boys are discriminated against by the education system will have to do better than to rely on favoritism in admissions policies at a handful of colleges that have traditionally been female.

ray said...

I know many MRA types have tried to explain away the discrepancy of educational rates because of affirmative action policies by educational institutions. And they are correct, there is discrimination, but it appears to be in favour of men. So great is the gender imbalance at some of the universities that they are now actively discriminating against women in favour of lesser qualified men.


what a load of crap

colleges have POURED gender-favoritism "scholarships" onto females for FIFTY years now in amerika, as well as dumbing-down colleges so the Grrls can beat the Boys

obviously youve never actually ATTENDED a college here in the United Sisterhood of Amerika, because if you had, you would find an atmosphere of pervasive hatred against all things masculine -- fully funded and supported by the administration and government



"Perhaps one of the reasons that so many men are unemployed is because they're to dumb (and therefore unnatractive to women) to attain the qualifications that will give them a job."


in that grammatical context, the word "to" needs another "o"

guess Dumb is as Dumb writes, eh?

amerika wages absolute war on boys and men for 50 years, forcing them from education and employment with every method possible, and your brilliant conlcusion is that males are "to dumb"

you sound very much like a product of Der Matriarchy yourself!

GK Chesterton said...

I'll also have to agree that this:
"I know many MRA types have tried to explain away the discrepancy of educational rates because of affirmative action policies by educational institutions. And they are correct, there is discrimination, but it appears to be in favour of men. So great is the gender imbalance at some of the universities that they are now actively discriminating against women in favour of lesser qualified men. "

Was just plain bad. As a white guy going to school was so expensive...I didn't. I still got a job as an engineer (the field I work in didn't require certification...though that is now changing) and convinced people for many years to look the other way. I was very successful and made plenty of money. And yes, as certification creeps into my field I went back and finished the degree.

The women I know? They went to school for practically nothing and majored in crap. There were scholarships that had sex (and or race) triggers up the wazoo. In fact to this day I remember blowing a girl away in presentation in HS, getting a B and her getting an A. When I challenged this, the teacher admitted my work was better but that the girl in question needed the grade, "to get more scholarships." Sexism at its finest.

What made me different from say an upstream Clarence of this world is that I felt the best revenge was success. So I succeeded. I also was religious, which meant I couldn't depend on one night stands. So I built up myself and am quite happy now.

Christendom and its attendant religion is sadly ill right now and our reversing the current rot in the Academy is going to take some time. It will happen, with or without Western Civilization, but I realize it is a long project.

For the Clarence's of the world, yes, some of us find men dropping out to be terrible. Without men civilization stops. Dropping out doesn't do anything but insure a collapse and a miserable old age (if a possibly fun early and middle age). Dropping out corrupts society and screws with _me_. So pardon that some of us being "ra-ra" with the androsphere find this MGTOW nonsense a terrible idea.

I'd rather not see my children and grandchildren running around broken buildings because some knuckleheads decided they were going to be selfish and take everyone down with them. To hell with that you pansies. I'll support a soft reset back to the direction of true progress, but if you sit on your ass expect me to fight you tooth and nail. And your crushed feelings be damned.

Anonymous said...

G.K:
Then get to work "big boy" and start pushing back against the shit like some of the MRA's are trying to do.
Seriously, some guy that can't be bothered to help with men's problems wants me to protect his ass or his grandchildrens or any of that in his old age?
Right now I'm in this for nothing but me and mine. I owe the larger society little or nothing, though I do *unlike those here* try to help other men from time to time and support male causes.

So until you are a full fledged MRA escuse me but I could care less.

Clarence

Anonymous said...

I'd rather not see my children and grandchildren running around broken buildings because some knuckleheads decided they were going to be selfish and take everyone down with them. To hell with that you pansies. I'll support a soft reset back to the direction of true progress, but if you sit on your ass expect me to fight you tooth and nail.

Sir Roderick marked,
and in his eyes
respect was mingled with surprise
and that stern joy that warriors feel
in foemen worthy of their steel.

By all means, GKC, fight tooth and nail.

But you probably won't get far unless you get a platoon of church-goers to back you up.

I predict that in the near future, the men who actually make plans and preparations to fight the decline will not have time to flamewar with anyone whose slogan is "enjoy the decline."

Have a look at mindweapon. There's a fellow who doesn't have time for idle chitchat. However, I expect the majority of the orthosphere would find him repulsive.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Twenty.

Women have been encouraged to get into eduction because previously they were discouraged from going to school. They started from a low base. The fact that woman's colleges are actively turning away females in preference for lower performing males says a lot.

I'm not saying men should become sociology majors but perhaps should put more effort to get into the STEM fields. Or even if they're not interested in that, just engage in a process of self-improvement. No one I notice has cared to mention anything about the BMI issue. Oh yeah, I forgot--the feminists are responsible for that one as well.

@Anon
I live in Australia and I know Australian culture. The reason why boys are under perfoming in Australian schools is because;
1) There are a lot of dumb boys.
2) Loss of "hands on vocational training" in preference to sit down academic qualifications.
3) Australian boys gain more social status by being good at sport and dumb at maths. In fact, being good at maths is social opprobrium amongst the teenage crowd here.

Nothing to do with discrimination.

@Clarence

Where did I say they should get married Clarence? Quotes please.
You're smart enough not to put words in my mouth.

They apply to workplaces as well. That's not counting the fact that the affirmative action policies "in favor" of male admittance to universities and such are only about ten years old at the oldest and are often opposed by feminists.

The fact that feminists oppose them is to be expected. The fact that these policies exist (even in a climate hostile to them) says something about male academic under-performance.

I think if men are dropping out, it's a good thing

It's one thing to hate women, its another to remain an unimproved bum. Cutting your nose off to spite your face is losing strategy. Having brains is better than being stupid. And yes, sometimes booksmarts do matter.












The Social Pathologist said...

@Dalrock

No problem.

One of the things which killed male motivation was fornication. Once fornication became legit women could ride the carousel as often as they wanted hoping to eventually land on some alpha male.

But in the old days, your reputation was determined by your ride count. Every woman wanted to get married and the way she achieved this was by keeping her reputation in tact. This severely limited the number of women available for alpha males but left lots of women available for the betas and below.

This paradoxically gave the woman more choice by making her consider beta males as suitable mates. She could then evaluate said mates on other parameters beside socio-sexual parameters and being a good provider was one of those attributes which helped secure a woman.

Men, on the other hand, who weren't that exciting, literally had a chance by being a good provider. Now they don't since the women are quite prepared to exist in the soft harem. And I woundn't just bag the feminists about this state of affairs coming to being. This guy has a lot to answer for.

asdf said...

"but perhaps should put more effort to get into the STEM fields."

80% of undergraduate CS degrees go to men. High end STEM work is an almost entirely male endeavor. I went to a specialized engineering academy for high school and the student body was 80% male.

Try again.

The Social Pathologist said...

ASDF

What your saying is;

1) women get useless degrees and are put in government jobs where they don't to any real work. The money for said work is taxed from the honest worker.

2)Rich men gain status by screwing honest workers.

The take home message I get is that male under-performance is only apparent and in reality the system is rigged against the working man which gives him the appearance of underperforming.

You know what? To a small degree you're quite correct. The system does suck. But its not like there is a whole pool of alpha males out they who have decided to opt out or who have been screwed by the system. Being fat is not because some women in a government office refuses to give you a job.

GKChesterton

I personally think the phenomenon is due to a multitude of effect.

Firstly, the Male IQ has a much wider spread than female IQ. The increases in agricultural efficiency and the loss of manufacturing jobs has left a lot of men unable to skill up.

Secondly, promiscuity. Mate selection has become far more based on "animal goods" instead of "character goods". Erotic capital is much like IQ, a genetic gift in many instances. The change in the dating culture mean that a lot of men are missing out on female attraction and this is a powerful demotivant.

Thirdly, cultural factors. Culturally, it's better to be hot than smart. So why bother about being smart.

I do not hate traditionalists, I believe in Chesterton's democracy of the dead. God exists (that is there is an infinite "final" goal), so we can improve, but we don't have to repeat mistakes of the past.

Traditionalism means that the past is right and therefore we, by default, make the same mistakes. You've got me wrong GKC. I have no problem with Traditionalism where it is right I've got a problem with Traditionalism is wrong. The democracy of the dead is not infallible.

Hedonism is not the answer but maybe Chivalry needs to be a bit more discriminating and hard arsed. Slut shaming may need to come back into vogue. There are other methods of righting wrongs without necessarily having to wade in the sewer.

@johnnycomelately.

I agree the economic changes have a lot to answer for, but the rot started well before the economic stupidity did.

@David Foster.

Very good points and I agree with most of them. Here in Australia, whilst nursing education was vocational the nurses were good but now that it is a "university degree" they've all become little professors. They've got a degree, you know! Which means that certain things and people, are beneath them. I imagine, for many of them, it includes certain classes of men.

I think "qualification inflation" is a far more serious social problem than is given. The inflation of self status seems to feed a grievance industry especially with regard to earnings. I mean, why should a sociology major get paid more than a HVAC technician? It certainly not for the economic value they give. In this regard, ASDF is right.

You're quite right in that it gives rise to the unlanded gentry syndrome. The privileges of class without the responsibilities.

@TDOM

See my previous comments.

@Ray
in that grammatical context, the word "to" needs another "o"

guess Dumb is as Dumb writes, eh?


Ah, a grammar Nazi.

I suffer from dyslexia, but what's your intellectual handicap?

@GKC

To hell with that you pansies. I'll support a soft reset back to the direction of true progress, but if you sit on your ass expect me to fight you tooth and nail. And your crushed feelings be damned.

Agreed.









Twenty said...

@SP

Are you saying that 40+ years of concerted attempts to stamp out all male achievement are irrelevant? Are you saying that increasingly feminized educational and workplace environments are irrelevant? Are you saying that the apparent disruption of a pattern of thousands of years of relative male/female performance is just due to the end of discrimination, and the fact that men are dumb? And nothing to do with the fact that said disruption is *exactly* what dominant cultural forces would like to see happen?

Well, then I guess we disagree.

I share your desire to see men resume their rightful place in society. What policy changes do you believe will bring about this happy event?

(My answer: The collapse of the welfare state will end the promotion of women and the ensnarement of male ambition in de Toqueville's "minute and uniform" network of rules. Leftism is a self-limiting disease.)

asdf said...

SP,

So your retort to the massive changes in our socio-economic system is that men are fat? Now your just getting pathetic.

BTW, for the actual #s according to the centers for disease control for 2009-2010 in the US Obesity rates were 35.5% for men and 35.8% for women. Also note that most obesity metrics simply look at mass/height, which has the effect of actually considering many men with lots of muscle mass "obese". So I fail to see this epidemic of loser fat men who aren't worthy of the women of their society.

ray said...

I suffer from dyslexia, but what's your intellectual handicap?


ah yes you couldnt have just made an error, but you are a VICTIM of Dyslexia... like the Pore Wimmins are just Victims of being held back forever by the Bad Males, otherwise they'd be equal in everything... the Bad Males who only need to Man Up and support your gynocracy, otherwise, youll cry

get set for a lot of crying then, sister, because we are NOT supporting your femterrorist bitchnation any longer

Aethelfrith said...

Dr. Pathologist:

That "reformed incel" link was extremely hard for me to read.

This entire month I had been struggling with issues at work, which upon deeper inspection, were reflective of problems I have as a person. I'll spare you my confession unless you want to see it.

The only glimmer of hope this month was that in one other area of my life (fitness) things have been looking very positive. I managed to lose 30 lbs (14 kg I think) on my own and made a conscious effort to be more social.

Then I read the blog you link (and the soul-crushing comments). I had two conflicting thoughts:

1. Too many (men/people) allow sex to be the number one determinant of happiness and satisfaction in their lives. I know some people who have pretty much learned to live with lack of sex/relationship and keep themselves happy, and uplift others.

2. On the other hand, I found myself empathizing far too much with the OP and some of the comments. I've lived more than twice as long M3 has been without sex and have been sexless the entire duration. (I hesitate to use the term "virgin" because my standards of purity are high--and I've breached them countless times). I've wanted to commit suicide more times than I can count, like many of the comments.

I've been on a roller coaster of positivity and negativity these past few months. While I've been pleased about how my physical appearance has been progressing, reading M3's post and the replies has tempted me to throw my hands up, say "fuck it" and devise plans to kill myself.

I WON'T, though. I've avoided manosphere/men's issues blogs for a weeks because honestly they depress me. What keeps me going is that if someone like Nick Vujicic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8ZuKF3dxCY
can make something of his life and get married, despite a disability that would place any man outside the SMP, I have no excuses.

Anonymous said...

Perhaps you would have a point if young men were responsible for the societal changes that made the current situation as it is. But the fact is that they have nothing to gain by maintaining the institutions that have attacked them since they were conceived.

Whether we like it or not, we have given men under the age of 30 a great deal of reason to not care about the future, and very little incentive to do anything other than become a parasite and take everything down with them.

It is easy for us to say how bad young men are at what we think they should be doing, but why would they care what we think when everything up until now we have done has been to their detriment?

I'm an outside observer, an immigrant, non anglo. I cannot see any future for the white anglosphere when its young men are hated THIS much, not only when they perform (the patriarchy) or when they don't (Peter-Pan men). I only see white anglos extinct in perhaps 100 years or less.

Young white men simply do not want to continue themselves any longer, and I can't say I blame them. The MRM gets one thing right: Misandry and fear/suspicion of males is the prevailing cultural norm of the anglosphere, and the fact that white women despise them, and they despise right back, will be to their own doom.

Anonymous said...

I think nothing proves my point better than the post that was made above mine while I was writing:

Look at this male, probably decent (although you seem to imply he is most likely a fat loser, and I'm not certain you would care if he did commit suicide) and he has no desire to continue himself.

Anglo culture will not survive a generation of its young men hated by their women, devoid of cultural and societal ties, and no desire for children. Sodini, Holmes, and Lanza are only going to get more common, and more brutal.

But maybe what we should be telling them is to man-up instead?

The Social Pathologist said...

@ Ray

You're free to leave.

See ya.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Aethelfrith

Thanks for dropping by. No, Seriously.

Don't ever contemplate suicide. If you want to destroy your family and friends it's one of the best ways to do it. You've got to hang in just for them if nothing else. But more importantly, with effort you can transform your life. No seriously.

I think you need to read Roosh V, especially and Neill Strauss, they both appeared to be in the same space you were in. The whole essence of manhood is to assert yourself over the troubles that you have found yourself in. I mean Nick Vujicic is a prime example of this. He was dealt a really hard hand in life and yet refuses to yield. He may lack arms and legs but he is all balls. He refuses to take on the victim mentality.

I agree with you, that people make too much of deal about sex. It isn't everything. Love is more important. However, what M3 post showed that sex is a language of love, and that a man who is devoid of female attention feels that he is unlovable. It's the wrong way to think about things but it is a perfectly human error.

I've got to rush out now. But please, keep me up to date with your progress, and don't fall into the trap of hating women. Most of them are shit but there are some good ones. I suppose you've just gotta hold out.


Anon@7:47
Look at this male, probably decent (although you seem to imply he is most likely a fat loser, and I'm not certain you would care if he did commit suicide) and he has no desire to continue himself.

Fuck off.


David Foster said...

Social skills really *are* important in large, complex organizations (indeed in all organizations, but especially the more complicated ones), and this would be true even if there were no such thing as a government or an HR function.

To the extent that women on the average have better social-navigation skills than men (often asserted and maybe even true), this might have something to do with differential female/male success rates.

modernguy said...

Are you retarded? What do you expect?

Do you actually want more men to jump into useless social studies degrees and rack up tens of thousands of dollars in debt just so they can tell some slut who did just that that they have a college degree too?

University studies for men - STEM degrees - are difficult. To succeed at those you have to be fairly intelligent and work pretty hard. Most men are not cut out for it. What most men should be doing is learning a trade or working blue collar jobs - factory work, trucking, etc.

The real problem is that trades are looked down on - not least of all by women with useless lib arts degrees and good blue collar jobs have disappeared to China, and what little of them remain pay shit. On top of that you can stack alpha chasing and carouseling by the women these men were supposed to be looking to marry and it's pretty apparent what's going on.

Of course from your vantage point everyone is an idiot and they just need to "man up", cause like, that's what you did, or something. Why don't you just get a framed picture of yourself and masturbate to it whenever you start to feel one of these posts coming on. Your "man up" shtick is even worse than when it comes from a woman.

asdf said...

modernguy,

I believe SP got a degree in having people bitch at him (psychology) and now he gets paid money to have women bitch at him. Which as we all know if the most manly job in history.

The Social Pathologist said...

@David.

I'm not really sure that females have better social skills when it comes to organizational behaviour. In my experience, women become catty and political very quickly. I imagine that their success comes from them being credentialled, and being credentialed is a path to better paid employment.

The fact that the credentials are probably useless in real life is another issue. But many people implicitly assume that if you have a degree then you must be bright.

@Modernguy

I don't mind a bit of argy bargy on my blog nor the occasional insult directed to my intelligence.

You started off well.

Do you actually want more men to jump into useless social studies degrees and rack up tens of thousands of dollars in debt just so they can tell some slut who did just that that they have a college degree too?

Well credentials appear to the the key to getting a higher paying job. And tens of thousands of debt seems a good investment when considered over a lifetime of earnings. Not to mention the social status it confers. I agree education is expensive but it still seems to confer more benefits than disabilities.

Then you made an another intelligent point.


University studies for men - STEM degrees - are difficult. To succeed at those you have to be fairly intelligent and work pretty hard. Most men are not cut out for it. What most men should be doing is learning a trade or working blue collar jobs - factory work, trucking, etc.

Well, hard work(moral virtue) seems to be a greater determinant of success after you get into college than intelligence. No, you may not be top of your class but you will end up with a bachelors degree. More students fail their subjects by not putting the work in than by stupidity.

I don't like globalisation and I agree that there needs to be more good paying blue collar work but in the foreseeable absence of policies that will encourage this are you simply going to sit on your arse till they rock up? From the evolutionary perspective, you have to cope with the situation as it is now.

Then you make another intelligent comment.

The real problem is that trades are looked down on - not least of all by women with useless lib arts degrees and good blue collar jobs have disappeared to China, and what little of them remain pay shit. On top of that you can stack alpha chasing and carouseling by the women these men were supposed to be looking to marry and it's pretty apparent what's going on.

Yep, blue collar trades are looked down upon. My father was a metal worker and I grew up around tradesmen. The "Uptown Girl" never gave these guys a chance and perhaps one of the ways their lot could be improved is by decredentialing a lot of those useless degrees. But most of these blue collar guys that were my family friends worked their arses off to provide for their families and didn't slack off. Unlike their kids who seem to want to take it far too easy, all the while complaining how hard it is.

Then you turn into an idiot.

Of course from your vantage point everyone is an idiot and they just need to "man up",

I have mild dyslexia which gets worse when I'm tired, so occasionally misinterpret things in the combox. What's your handicap?
Where did I say everyone's an idiot. This post was a post on the existence of the Manboy, and the data suggest that there is a significant group of men who fit the criteria. ( I don't have a crayon to spell the word group in big letters for you.)

Even though the economy is shit a lot of men are doing fine. Look at the Asian groups. But that's because they come from a culture where education is valued and hard work is expected.

Now go read this post by Roosh. Note, he does seem to be quite successful operating outside of the traditional man model.

The Social Pathologist said...

@ASDF

I believe SP got a degree in having people bitch at him (psychology) and now he gets paid money to have women bitch at him. Which as we all know if the most manly job in history.

A girly snipe.

Either stick to the subject or get banned.

Anonymous said...

Social Pathologist:
What you continually miss is that few, if any manosphere commenters have anything against self-improvement. As an example, going to the gym or working out on your own (if you can't access a gym) is good for both the PUA and the MGTOW. If you are committed to being with women, learning some PUA stuff is good if you temper it with the reminder to only take what fits with your personality and you remember the legal/social implications (ever rising) of relationships with females.

What seems to be sticking in many people's craw here is that you seem to preach "self-improvement" only insofar as it relates to what benefits or turns on women. Get the four year expensive useless degree (and you can argue with this guy as to the 'worth' of these degrees : http://captaincapitalism.blogspot.com/2011/12/worthless.html) so you can impress the chicklets and maybe (in this economy its hardly guaranteed) pull in some cubicle work with a cube jockey's salary. After all the vast majority of the "liberal arts" degrees we are talking about are almost as useless as a degree in Fine Art, and Fine Art at least has personal happiness going for it(despite the "economic" value of a degree it can be worthwhile if you love that subject), whereas sociology or english or communications often bring you a job you "tolerate" at best -if you can get that job in the first place - whilst doing little or nothing to make you happy or pique your intellect, which is supposed to be the point of getting a college degree in the first place. Does this make you smarter? Does it make you happier? Will it make your hypothetically now-attracted-to-you wife any less likely to take you to the cleaners if she gets mad or bored?

And lets not forget that with the sole exception of lab-based classes (and for the very basic types of them, even) you can learn pretty much anything online now. Often for free (though you might have to get certain equipment or computer programs) or a vastly reduced cost. Intensely "hands on" types of learning are not possible ('virtual surgery' is not the same as the the real thing nor does it give you the experience), but pretty much everything else is. Except for a few professions, why get a degree? I'm certainly not against learning, but why put yourself into mountainous debt to do so?

Anyway here is what I recommend other men do:
A. Take care of your health. This includes diet and exercise.
B. Learn as much as you can online, but regardless of OTHER subjects be sure to investigate family law if you want to have a family etc, and MRA activism if you care about your place in the larger society.
C. Earn money for yourself and for those you care for and for no other reason.
D. MGTOW is a good philosophy to take. Be careful out there.

The Social Pathologist said...

What seems to be sticking in many people's craw here is that you seem to preach "self-improvement" only insofar as it relates to what benefits or turns on women.

What other type of masculinity is there. The type that turns on men?

This is exactly the same charge feminists throw at women when they are trying to be more feminine. Whenever a woman try's to make herself pretty towards men she is accused of selling out the sisterhood.

My big gripe with the manosphere at the moment is that it seems totally blind to any male faults. Instead, everything is the fault of feminists. So great is the misogyny in some parts of the manosphere that they censure anyone who doesn't get with the program.

I'm aware of the injustices done against men but I'm also aware that some men are using feminism as an excuse for their own failings. People accuse me of pushing the man-up line because I want them to marry slutty women. It's utter bullshit.

My point is that many of these men are contemptible as men to men. A lot of people do have a problem with self-improvement. It's too much effort. There is no pay off. Reading a good book is a broadening of the mind and sharpening of the intellect if nothing else. But for many guys......eh meh. You can't even have a decent discussion with some of these guys as they are like stalinist parrots. Every question is automatically spat out along party lines. When you debate facts with them they don't respond with counter arguments, but make cunty little insinuations about your motivations like ASDF.

Simony Grey was absolutely right. Most men are shit, most women are shit-it's just that that manosphere has 20/20 vision when it comes to the faults of the average women but is blind to the faults of the average man.

The whole thing about the red pill is sometimes having to face the truths that you don't want to see.

Anonymous said...

@asdf 1250 …

"Let's call him Mark."

LOL don't they call us all Marks?



-- Stig

David Foster said...

SP...women and social intelligence...one of my data points is women in business-to-business sales positions, selling expensive complex products/services where the purchase process typically involves multiple decision-makers in the prospective client company. (I don't think credentials usually have much impact on the client's buying decision.) I've known quite a few women doing this very very successfully.

Aethelfrith said...

Dr. Pathologist,

This is why I've ducked out of the manosphere for a while. Half of the men are cold blooded cynics and the other half are whiners. Actually, there may be some overlap.

Instead of complaining about what's wrong with the world, why not take initiative?

I have allowed complacency to shipwreck my life. No longer. From now on, I will live according to my values.


-----------

A few months ago, I began a "vanity" project in my free time to become a certain fictional character I admired. I admire him because he looks like a badass, is a badass, and uplifts everyone around him. Something I did not expect happened--I inspired my friends and family to get into shape.

I'd say I'm more than half a year away from reaching this character's physique, but I'm steadily losing weight.

My mindset is changing. I used to worry myself to sleep about the lack of good women in the world. Now, I tell myself that once I become a badass, the women will line up for me.

asdf said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
modernguy said...

Those asian guys completing chartered accountancy degrees at university have good girls lined up for marriage, they're not hitting the clubs every weekend trying to reel some slut in for the night, hoping to "amog" the 50 other dudes there angling for ass. And the ones that have the stomach for that are a minority , the rest are jerking off to porn. Succeeding is a lot easier when you a stable, supportive family and you have good, clear prospects of your own. Those asian dudes that do have it succeed, the ones that don't have it even harder than the rest - see the guy that shot up Virginia tech. Manning up has very little to do with it.

Anonymous said...

Slumlord:

"What seems to be sticking in many people's craw here is that you seem to preach "self-improvement" only insofar as it relates to what benefits or turns on women."

"What other type of masculinity is there. The type that turns on men?"

Slumlord, you're missing the differences between why men and women improve themselves. Women improve themselves (or at least they SHOULD improve themselves) specifically for the purpose of increasing their attractiveness to men.

Men should improve themselves solely to improve their quality of life and enable them to live the lives they want. Attractiveness to women is (or used to be, and isn't really anymore) a byproduct of that self-improvement.

Another thing you're missing is that the things that used to be considered "attractive" in men (income, work ethic, social standing in a profession) aren't attraction triggers anymore for women. So the things that you're suggesting should be motivators for men to improve themselves aren't motivators. They aren't working for men to achieve the results they want (more money, better life). This is why men keep pointing out that all the incentives for men's self-improvement are being eliminated.

deti

Anonymous said...

"My big gripe with the manosphere at the moment is that it seems totally blind to any male faults. Instead, everything is the fault of feminists. So great is the misogyny in some parts of the manosphere that they censure anyone who doesn't get with the program.

"I'm aware of the injustices done against men but I'm also aware that some men are using feminism as an excuse for their own failings."

This is true of SOME men and SOME parts of the manosphere. Much of what you're seeing is full on pushback for two reasons: (1) men have heard from all quarters how everything is their fault for the better part of two generations now; and (2) feminism has the full power of society's institutions arrayed in its favor. The pushback has to be loud and obnoxious just to be heard.


deti

Dystopia Max said...

"What other type of masculinity is there. The type that turns on men?"

I'll wager that the biography of Arnold Schwarzenegger and the diary of Werner von Braun are going to appeal to two very different demographics, but both are masculine. One attracts those concerned principally with beauty, one with truth.

"This is exactly the same charge feminists throw at women when they are trying to be more feminine. Whenever a woman try's to make herself pretty towards men she is accused of selling out the sisterhood."

The 'sisterhood' doesn't actually do anything lasting or productive. The vast majority of women have accomplished far more as the wife of a man than as a drone in the herd.

Brotherhoods, on the other hand, are the guardians of civilization. You ever heard of a good movie produced by the Coen sisters?

"My big gripe with the manosphere at the moment is that it seems totally blind to any male faults."

Deal with them once the feminists are dead, institutionalized, or married off. You want military virtues in man, you deal with the realities of military propaganda.

"Instead, everything is the fault of feminists. So great is the misogyny in some parts of the manosphere that they censure anyone who doesn't get with the program."

It's almost like it's a natural human organizing strategy, isn't it? Do you talk like this at your job? Do you whine to your superiors about how your Australian psychological associations censure anyone who doesn't toe the DSM line?

"I'm aware of the injustices done against men but I'm also aware that some men are using feminism as an excuse for their own failings."

What unmanly passivity! What do I care about your 'awareness?' Why should any man care about your considered judgment when you haven't been fighting in the trenches with them?

Dystopia Max said...

"People accuse me of pushing the man-up line because I want them to marry slutty women. It's utter bullshit."

I don't care about what you WANT people to think, I care about what your advice would actually entail in real life! If you're dishonest about the results you can't complain about how we failed to read your intentions!

If you see a vale of sluts and losers, it's perfectly acceptable to say "We have gone far wrong, let us therefore change the law and society that we may go right, and I exhort you to become better people in spite of the corruptions you endured while apart. Yes, this means some men will have to marry sluts, and some women marry losers, but I guarantee that under this new system we will not break these families apart, and the next generation will get a better example set."

That would be the sort of thing a wise man might say.

"My point is that many of these men are contemptible as men to men. A lot of people do have a problem with self-improvement. It's too much effort. There is no pay off. Reading a good book is a broadening of the mind and sharpening of the intellect if nothing else. But for many guys......eh meh. You can't even have a decent discussion with some of these guys as they are like stalinist parrots. Every question is automatically spat out along party lines. When you debate facts with them they don't respond with counter arguments, but make cunty little insinuations about your motivations like ASDF."

That's because cunty insinuations about motivation are the most rewarded tactics in the world today, thanks to...drum roll please...FEMINISM, which rode those tactics to success in life against people like you! As torture becomes customary in dealing with Muslims, so female argument is used against female (or effeminate) opponents! You have failed to win the war in your generation, now those who know only the war have grown up on a battlefield stripped of noble weapons! And yet you are proud!

"Simony Grey was absolutely right. Most men are shit, most women are shit-it's just that that manosphere has 20/20 vision when it comes to the faults of the average women but is blind to the faults of the average man."

Such equalist tripe is ridiculous. Even if what you said is true, one set of shits has been imposing its will on the other set of shits with far worse consequences for the future than when we let the other set run things. The current paradigm is Feminists and Alpha Males Against Civilization, and your shallow happy-clappy equalism does not form a plan to counteract it.

"The whole thing about the red pill is sometimes having to face the truths that you don't want to see."

The whole point about the red pill is that the typical beta male message of "seeking victory through self-improvement and self-abasement" means nothing to those with power, except those who wish to use you for their own ends. Now power is not everything, but if it's distributed incorrectly, all the striving in the world is but vanity.

You want to effect change, stop whining like a staff officer and start planning like a drill sergeant.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Dystopia Max

I don't care about what you WANT people to think, I care about what your advice would actually entail in real life! If you're dishonest about the results you can't complain about how we failed to read your intentions!

I understand that reading comprehension is a big problem for some people--People just don't do subtlety. I guess if people misinterpret what I'm saying then it's my fault.

I'm glad this blog only reaches a small audience.


You want to effect change, stop whining like a staff officer and start planning like a drill sergeant.


The role of a staff officer is to see the "big picture" and think about it. As Vietnam illustrated, good drill seargants cannot compensate for bad officers. I've always thought that it is good to think before you act.

The real problem is thinking correctly. That's where the skill lays.

Why should any man care about your considered judgment when you haven't been fighting in the trenches with them?

You neither know where I have been or what I've been through or the shit that I've seen."

@Deti

Men should improve themselves solely to improve their quality of life and enable them to live the lives they want.

What you want and what you get are two different things. My message is that a lot of men would get a whole lot more if they got their shit together. The real problem with living your life as you please is that you make a mess of it.

Much of what you're seeing is full on pushback for two reasons:

Reflexive pushback is likely to be counterproductive in the end. Intelligent pushback is what is required. The real skill is knowing where to push. Some of the manosphere are pushing in the wrong direction.

Jason said...

On a different note: this is a little hokey, but I just wanted to say doctor that I’ve really enjoyed reading your blog since last year, and have appreciated the attention you gave to my (and others’) comments. I’m looking forward to future commentaries, and wish you the best this new year.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Aethelfrith

Seriously, good luck.

My mindset is changing. I used to worry myself to sleep about the lack of good women in the world.

I'd say don't even worry about the women. Concentrate on improving yourself and your mind.

You probably have qualities that the badass doesn't. On the other hand he has qualities you don't. The aim of the game is to fix up you deficiencies using the bad arse as an guide of what to fix. The aim in the end is to have a fusion product composed of the badass and yourself.

The Social Pathologist said...

@Jason.

It's appreciated.

Best Wishes for the New Year to you.

I think we're headed for "interesting times."

dalrock said...

@The Social Pathologist

What seems to be sticking in many people's craw here is that you seem to preach "self-improvement" only insofar as it relates to what benefits or turns on women.

What other type of masculinity is there. The type that turns on men?

This is exactly the same charge feminists throw at women when they are trying to be more feminine. Whenever a woman try's to make herself pretty towards men she is accused of selling out the sisterhood.

My big gripe with the manosphere at the moment is that it seems totally blind to any male faults. Instead, everything is the fault of feminists. So great is the misogyny in some parts of the manosphere that they censure anyone who doesn't get with the program.

I'm aware of the injustices done against men but I'm also aware that some men are using feminism as an excuse for their own failings. People accuse me of pushing the man-up line because I want them to marry slutty women. It's utter bullshit.

My point is that many of these men are contemptible as men to men. A lot of people do have a problem with self-improvement. It's too much effort. There is no pay off. Reading a good book is a broadening of the mind and sharpening of the intellect if nothing else. But for many guys......eh meh. You can't even have a decent discussion with some of these guys as they are like stalinist parrots. Every question is automatically spat out along party lines. When you debate facts with them they don't respond with counter arguments, but make cunty little insinuations about your motivations like ASDF.


I get the frustration at the party line business. Disagreement doesn't have to be personal. To the extent that you are a counterpoint to manosphere thinking*, you are doing us a favor. If your argument is flawed it gives us an opportunity to explain why. If it isn't flawed it gives us the opportunity to learn something new. I also have no doubts on your good faith on the man up and marry those sluts charge. I would say I have a fairly sensitive MUAMTS detector and you simply don't register. People forget that you are the arguably the source of the best data the sphere has on why one shouldn't marry a slut. The charge is simply baseless.

dalrock said...

Cont:

What I'm not sure I understand is your concern that not enough current men meet the standards of current women. Based on the astounding percent of women currently delaying marriage**, I'm guessing we would agree that a very small percentage of modern young women are suitable for marriage (20%? 40%?). Some small percentage of the women delaying marriage until their late 20s and early to mid 30s may in fact be the former nuns one of my commenters once argued, and a few may have truly been chaste while earnestly searching for a husband and simply not found him. But the vast majority were carouselers (active or unicorn variety). When I see an individual man wasting his life, my advice is to man up for his own self respect and quality of life. For some of these men this will mean outcompeting other men for the handful of worthy potential wives, and having a family is what I would want for them. But this is only a question of which men manage to marry the small percentage of worthy women, and which ones are forced to do without. So when I see the mass of women having made an ever more ridiculous list of (collective) "take it or leave it" demands of men who want to marry, I don't think "why won't today's young men man up and meet the women's demands". If women as a group have demanded more than they can get, then the situation will ultimately adjust and I see that adjustment as a good thing.

*I have a fairly expansive personal definition of the manosphere. Basically if you are involved in the conversation, especially in a serious good faith way, you are in my mind part of the sphere. You clearly meet this criteria, so I consider you part of the sphere.

**I assume you have seen the data I've presented on this.

mdavid said...

Interesting blog post. Thanks for letting the comments run free, I find it educational in a way that many blog posts aren't - it's like a window into the culture that reads this sort of blog.

anon, But the fact is that they have nothing to gain by maintaining the institutions that have attacked them since they were conceived...Whether we like it or not, we have given men under the age of 30 a great deal of reason to not care about the future, and very little incentive to do anything other than become a parasite and take everything down with them.

I agree with this. One should keep in mind that in our personal lives we should strive for virtue and success yet never forget that the "average" man or woman is going to be just that, average. And they will respond to their environment. And if this environment is hazardous to one sex, we all will pay eventually. The only solution to his problem is for communities to set up their own standards and remove themselves (like the Mormons, for example). They don't need a manosphere.

On a related note: the reason women were not encouraged to go to school in the past is that it's bad for the culture to do so. Makes no sense to have all your smart women working rather than breeding. Sure, you make more money in the short term, but you eat your seed corn. The cultures who win are those that build structures of society that promote wealth and protect families. We are currently losing, and don't expect men who have been shafted to help in recovering anything. In fact, expect them to cheer and loot as it goes under (as Roissy says, dippn' toes poolside..).

The Social Pathologist said...

@Dalrock

Thanks.

Like you, I don't mind people disagreeing with me.

If your argument is flawed it gives us an opportunity to explain why. If it isn't flawed it gives us the opportunity to learn something new.

This is precisely my sentiment as well. I think something really important is going on here and I think its important to get it right. The only way we're going to get it right is if subject our ideas to trial by fire, but that involves debating the ideas and not the person.

I've been watching the feminine imperative debates and frankly I think they've been great. I don't agree with all your opinions on the subject (and I'll put up a post about it) but it did arise an awareness in me of a social phenomenon that I hadn't thought about before. This is what is so great about the manosphere right now--it's the only area of the Right that is doing innovative thinking.

I notice that Matt Forney has disabled his comments section because he was getting too many comments from retards. I can completely understand why, especially seeing some of the comments to my last posts, but I'd prefer a more engaging approach because every now and then does blurt out something to think about by accident. But the mudslinging, invective, obstinate stupidity and incorrect motive attribution are going to get banned because they detract from the argument.

What I'm not sure I understand is your concern that not enough current men meet the standards of current women.

No, what I'm more concerned about is that not enough men meet the standards of what I think your and my father would have considered a man. It's just that very few men are discussing the subject so the ones filling the void are women because their biological imperative is being frustrated.

Gym junkies who fall to pieces when they get a cold, alpha males (who get lots of sex) but can't hold down a job or get their finances in order. Other guys who can't make a decision. Men who defer to their women on everything. No emotional toughness. What blows me away is just how many men don't know how to use basic tools,. So many women complain to me that "they are sick of wearing the pants in the relationship". So many men are mangina's

Roissy and Roosh have hinted at this as well, so it surprises me that I'm getting so much heat on this topic. I contend that part of the reason why women are so "mobile" these days is because the average man has lost his manliness.

Now, I'm quite open to discussion as to why this is so, but there seems to be a not insubstantial faction of commentators who are totally blind to this and who do their best to make sure this discussion is not raised.

The Social Pathologist said...

@mdavid

I find it educational in a way that many blog posts aren't - it's like a window into the culture that reads this sort of blog.

I really enjoy some of the intelligent commentary and that's why I keep a lax comments policy. I've been fortunate that I've had some really insightful people comment on my blog. I think that is the best that a blog can hope for--that it becomes a space where intelligent people can converse. I'd also like it to be a blog where people who are unsure of themselves or who would like to comment can feel that they won't be ridiculed for making a comment in good faith.

One should keep in mind that in our personal lives we should strive for virtue and success yet never forget that the "average" man or woman is going to be just that, average

Well, I think this is a problem, because we've handed the cultural, political and economic power to the average, any type of rebirth in the West is going to have to happen with some sort of quasi aristocratic revival. (I'm personally in favour of letting talent rise to the top. Hereditary aristocracies have their problems--quite a few of their children are nothing more than affluent proles.)

I think our current society has incentivised disengagement by rewarding the poolside philosophy.

mdavid said...

SP, I've been fortunate that I've had some really insightful people comment on my blog.

Luck, sir, has nothing to do with it.

GK Chesterton said...


This is exactly the same charge feminists throw at women when they are trying to be more feminine. Whenever a woman try's to make herself pretty towards men she is accused of selling out the sisterhood.

My big gripe with the manosphere at the moment is that it seems totally blind to any male faults. Instead, everything is the fault of feminists. So great is the misogyny in some parts of the manosphere that they censure anyone who doesn't get with the program.


In large part I agree with you (especially with the feminist charge) but I think part of my frustration with the manosphere is that it is inconsistent in its frustration with men.

For example we have "White Knights" who are universally vilified while PUA's, who are _just_ as disruptive to the system, get back handed praise at the best and laudatory comments at the worst.

That's a very big problem.

Hereditary aristocracies have their problems--quite a few of their children are nothing more than affluent proles.)

I prefer an aristocracy that realizes its an accident than an aristocracy that believes it belongs there. Here, here for hereditary aristocracies! I actually think Gene Wolfe's comments that the Texas (and I would assume Australian) rancher is just as much a medieval lord as any that has existed. To which I'll add that he passes things down to his son. He rules with an iron fist. He's also often not nearly as wealthy as people expect. He's likely to go broke and disappear if he's a complete ass.

Anyways keep it up as I see both you and the "Moderate Darlock" as hope for a way forward.

Aethelfrith said...

You wanted an update, here's today's:

I punched a hole in my door.

Yes, it was unproductive. Yes, it means I have a door that, some time down the line I'll have to replace. Yes, my hand hurts (it's only a few scratches).

But would you rather I hit a person?

I am not proud of what I did. But when I was doing my morning constitutional I was looking at cars and trucks driving down the road and thinking, "Maybe I'll use that one to end my life". So I chose the lesser of two evils.

I can change. I can be a better person. My exercise and weight loss is steady. But the same time I can't run away from the effects of the accumulated 27 years of my life, nor can I deal with the fact that my best years are behind me.

I want to quit my job, in fact, I have enough money stored away that I can live off it for almost a year. But if I wasn't already working, I'd be unemployable.

See Job 7:16

Anonymous said...

It seems that the situation described in the article can be ascribed to the sense of futility which has taken root in America. I think it will come to resemble the Soviet Union more & more, not only as regards politics, but as regards the characteristics of the people as well. The pervasive hopelessness which causes so many Russian men to give up & escape the misery by reaching for a bottle of vodka will do much the same in the U.S.

Anonymous said...

kqlok [url=http://www.im-mulberrybags.co.uk]mulberry handbags[/url] arylaa http://www.im-mulberrybags.co.uk lkvtb [url=http://www.im-mulberryoutlet.co.uk]mulberry handbags[/url] adypuf http://www.im-mulberryoutlet.co.uk tajvg [url=http://www.pay-mulberrybags.co.uk]mulberry outlet[/url] nyeoav http://www.pay-mulberrybags.co.uk rqki [url=http://www.online-mulberry.co.uk]mulberry outlet[/url] vueesc http://www.online-mulberry.co.uk rebio [url=http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com]mulberry bags[/url] zmynvo http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com hnbaz [url=http://www.onlinecelinebags.com]mulberry outlet online[/url] ffjzdi http://www.onlinecelinebags.com pinc

Anonymous said...

urbkc [url=http://www.celinebagnamey.com]celine bags[/url] bexgj http://www.celinebagnamey.com cxlv [url=http://www.celineluggagetotename.com]celine handbags[/url] qlmuh http://www.celineluggagetotename.com bfvc [url=http://www.pickcelinehandbags.com]celine handbags[/url] bjcmx http://www.pickcelinehandbags.com aviid [url=http://www.savecelinebags.com]cheap celine bags[/url] whxhf http://www.savecelinebags.com vygwn [url=http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com]cheap celine bag[/url] ijyyf http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com kjgez [url=http://www.onlinecelinebags.com]celine bags[/url] vfjpk http://www.onlinecelinebags.com plwz

Anonymous said...

ykuay [url=http://www.celinebagnamey.com]celine bag[/url] ytwzi http://www.celinebagnamey.com hvcf [url=http://www.celineluggagetotename.com]celine handbags[/url] hjoov http://www.celineluggagetotename.com wihi [url=http://www.pickcelinehandbags.com]celine bag[/url] mrcqx http://www.pickcelinehandbags.com aqtno [url=http://www.savecelinebags.com]cheap celine bags[/url] gojed http://www.savecelinebags.com zchqw [url=http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com]cheap celine bag[/url] gtbwx http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com qthqk [url=http://www.onlinecelinebags.com]celine bag[/url] sxnop http://www.onlinecelinebags.com rpie

Anonymous said...

fxzxg [url=http://www.celinebagnamey.com]celine bags[/url] tcojq http://www.celinebagnamey.com gtgo [url=http://www.celineluggagetotename.com]celine handbags[/url] nupqv http://www.celineluggagetotename.com ypsn [url=http://www.pickcelinehandbags.com]celine handbags[/url] homcs http://www.pickcelinehandbags.com diqpi [url=http://www.savecelinebags.com]celine handbags[/url] otnlf http://www.savecelinebags.com uutkp [url=http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com]celine bag[/url] lwtwd http://www.goodcelinehandbags.com mgybt [url=http://www.onlinecelinebags.com]celine bags[/url] imkzr http://www.onlinecelinebags.com bdwo

Anonymous said...

tzhngg http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com utypvg http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com ihcqwm http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com mcpzwq http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com tcjomi http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com uyhaai [url=http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton handbags[/url] qdsew [url=http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] amjqr [url=http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com]mont blanc pens[/url] hrvxv [url=http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] gmhyoq [url=http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] objf

Anonymous said...

macpad http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com mxjbaz http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com wnxuku http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com nvjnrl http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com lqitzj http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com rixsyd [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton handbags[/url] yacop [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose outlet[/url] dzenf [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc pens[/url] nrhhv [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]dr dre beats[/url] tulksp [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] qukc

Anonymous said...

tlpnan http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com tvtvxs http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com wuuflt http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com ltwemm http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com jnrbim http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com ufjloi [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] vyafj [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] lsoxw [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc[/url] xdtsq [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]beats by dre[/url] arvmzg [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] mjtt

Anonymous said...

djwbeo http://www.mocanadagoosejackets.com xvpuvo http://icheapbeatsbyddre.com ryxxpz http://www.mocanadagooseoutlet.com zijhwe http://socheapbeatsbydree.com xfvpye [url=http://www.mocanadagoosejackets.com]canada goose outlet[/url] kxupy [url=http://icheapbeatsbyddre.com]dr dre beats[/url] nfvhzv [url=http://www.mocanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] jcpfl [url=http://socheapbeatsbydree.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] nneyrd [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton bags[/url] cpstyi [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] ehpm

Anonymous said...

hyiudo http://www.mocanadagoosejackets.com eentbn http://icheapbeatsbyddre.com bvgqni http://www.mocanadagooseoutlet.com odtkqk http://socheapbeatsbydree.com uhubzc [url=http://www.mocanadagoosejackets.com]canada goose jacket[/url] jtjck [url=http://icheapbeatsbyddre.com]beats by dre[/url] ubumdf [url=http://www.mocanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] nwtlg [url=http://socheapbeatsbydree.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] hhawfm [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] mbmpky [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] nggp

Anonymous said...

hibxxq http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com scnpyb http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com akkkeb http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com epcwdw http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com knkcko http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com jlzogc [url=http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] xsjhf [url=http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] dcovv [url=http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com]mont blanc pens[/url] glcsu [url=http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com]dr dre beats[/url] xohyxc [url=http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] nycu

Anonymous said...

laqmmh http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com icsmwb http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com fcfazg http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com tbzxll http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com pdsezd http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com jpjdwp [url=http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] bdbui [url=http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] ovqfu [url=http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com]cheap mont blanc[/url] qoxic [url=http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] qkltou [url=http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton bags[/url] nxoa

Anonymous said...

rhcmkn http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com ovewce http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com zzxjwh http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com nmgjie http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com aebyve http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com pvufcy [url=http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] qlsmd [url=http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] kdncd [url=http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com]mont blanc[/url] seeos [url=http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] mllfap [url=http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] tnqy

Anonymous said...

gaihsq http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com ghhqch http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com bwdpwd http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com cimevn http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com joblrz http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com csskns [url=http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] ootcl [url=http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] hxynr [url=http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com]cheap mont blanc[/url] mcmep [url=http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com]beats by dre[/url] emabyt [url=http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] mboh

Anonymous said...

tcyibz http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com tzlfeo http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com vlhbgv http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com cultuv http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com rfntzk http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com duroke [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] lgdhu [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] dychm [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc pens[/url] pkpds [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]beats by dre[/url] dgsxiy [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] vuyu

Anonymous said...

ixcplt http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com vmyqzr http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com apppwm http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com sjemih http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com gsuoyl http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com ltcqpi [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] tetmd [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose outlet[/url] hmkra [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]cheap mont blanc[/url] pegkb [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]beats by dre[/url] jckdwa [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] gjwd

Anonymous said...

imlzck http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com krhlhg http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com lvqklh http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com vigivb http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com nzjhny http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com yylnek [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton handbags[/url] hkmnn [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] evfqg [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc[/url] wcvpo [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]dr dre beats[/url] kjqqup [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton bags[/url] fynq

Anonymous said...

ypppvm http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com vyrfya http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com iwpowg http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com xjiagr http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com kczcdr http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com ugpevr [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] aacya [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] xwdyl [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc[/url] yilpf [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] svybda [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] qdsr

Anonymous said...

scqvwh http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com zgcmvo http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com zcavqz http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com ilbvcj http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com fwafnt http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com hfqmir [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] qrbcs [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] ugbdb [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc[/url] zaqrh [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]beats by dre[/url] crfiec [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] wlev

Anonymous said...

jkqakm http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com gtumsq http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com xqdhrj http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com ltdohs http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com tfgyje http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com rtromo [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton handbags[/url] tgtdj [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] cqtuq [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]cheap mont blanc[/url] rrhhy [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]beats by dre[/url] dsfsgq [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] ymlv

Anonymous said...

lgpafu http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com unlosk http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com vhlctc http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com osyfbs http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com fjlkxc http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com xadaon [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] yfyva [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] emrua [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc pens[/url] binpo [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] qetzhe [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] fmhg

Anonymous said...

gahnnb http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com nsdxac http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com iojvkx http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com ayzvhd http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com cvitvx http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com nxekms [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] fcuam [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] jxzow [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc[/url] alekd [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] thtfaw [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton bags[/url] iiwy

Anonymous said...

wxkxfx http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com hqxoik http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com lxaski http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com ecqclg http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com zeirnn http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com sknpov [url=http://pa-louisvuittoncheap.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] tphkx [url=http://www.mccanadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose jacket[/url] anpmj [url=http://www.sale-cheapmontblanc.com]mont blanc[/url] isghq [url=http://cheaperbeatssbydre.com]cheap beats by dre[/url] xfzflm [url=http://palouisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton bags[/url] vxoo

Anonymous said...

tsfclt http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com kzksnc http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com wqwvlc http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com eczsbc http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com kfistp http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com wklvzx [url=http://au-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton outlet[/url] nfscq [url=http://www.hots-canadagooseoutlet.com]canada goose[/url] zjnpy [url=http://www.montblanc-sale-us.com]cheap mont blanc[/url] jidrf [url=http://cheaperbeatsbyydre.com]dr dre beats[/url] ueylxg [url=http://fox-louisvuittonoutlet.com]louis vuitton sale[/url] xsxj

Anonymous said...

bilntm http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html lzrwlm http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html ktmbad http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html mdyoeb http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html sbbkso http://capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html vywnxy [url=http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html]louis vuitton bags[/url] qdffj [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html]louis vuitton bags[/url] tjxri [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html]louis vuitton outlet[/url] fdxsm [url=http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html]air max[/url] eipqjb [url=http://capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html]air max[/url] kwsr

Anonymous said...

ztguce http://www.capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html uwdbhq http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html kfjevh http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html xdigyo http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html ruahwe http://www.oceancityseafood.com/cheapnikeshoesb.html onjtnb [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html]air max shoes[/url] nasxk [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html]louis vuitton bags[/url] zvwmkc [url=http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html]nike air max[/url] exfha [url=http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html]cheap nike shoes[/url] noisve [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/cheapnikeshoesb.html]air max shoes[/url] himq

Anonymous said...

dxujpm http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html iwfxkl http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html pcsovb http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html cecleq http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html zdzqjo http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html afyqmc [url=http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html]celine bags[/url] actqw [url=http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html]nike air max[/url] ruuvc [url=http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html]louis vuitton handbags[/url] rszty [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html]cheap nike shoes[/url] dhhbpi [url=http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html]cheap nike shoes[/url] nnuo

Anonymous said...

vgdkyt http://www.capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html mqzxeb http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html qtesxx http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html zywcum http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html exqglc http://www.oceancityseafood.com/cheapnikeshoesb.html fwlpgf [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html]air max shoes[/url] cwyah [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html]louis vuitton bags[/url] tjzogv [url=http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html]air max shoes[/url] vtlln [url=http://chancemccann.com/nikeairmaxb.html]cheap nike shoes[/url] dupgpw [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/cheapnikeshoesb.html]air max shoes[/url] rmpe

Anonymous said...

cbnxnc http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html athjpc http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html jdpcny http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html ecpfpd http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html ccfvdx http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html zidocg [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html]louis vuitton sale[/url] ddqwb [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html]cheap air max[/url] rmwlk [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html]louis vuitton handbags[/url] hzxgs [url=http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html]cheap nike shoes[/url] jxbnji [url=http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html]celine bag[/url] rema

Anonymous said...

rjggjh http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html bsqeng http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html gprlyh http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html eknipw http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html htdnrz http://capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html xolzqv [url=http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html]louis vuitton bags[/url] mcajz [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html]louis vuitton outlet[/url] mndcu [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html]louis vuitton sale[/url] hzpvi [url=http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html]nike air max[/url] bqgoxt [url=http://capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html]air max[/url] usui

Anonymous said...

ldijfx http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html frhhxc http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html bcobpj http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html utjrzo http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html phcluw http://capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html eiosdj [url=http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html]louis vuitton sale[/url] cypdp [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/louisVuittonOutlet.html]louis vuitton bags[/url] romtn [url=http://www.oceancityseafood.com/louisVuittonOutletb.html]louis vuitton sale[/url] ssqzi [url=http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html]nike air max[/url] afbdut [url=http://capeMayLinen.com/cheapnikeshoes.html]air max[/url] gvkv

Anonymous said...

ikfcdt http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html zsdqpd http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html pddzxb http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html eoolop http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html imugke http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html jkleqs [url=http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html]celine handbags[/url] prpui [url=http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html]cheap air max[/url] dmioh [url=http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html]louis vuitton sale[/url] nikrw [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html]nike air max[/url] saenfv [url=http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html]cheap nike shoes[/url] ssyp

Anonymous said...

owsxuj http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html wxybev http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html olpcwb http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html bwnuop http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html xrekjl http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html bsppgo [url=http://www.chancemccann.com/celinebag.html]celine bags[/url] gjeki [url=http://maryhelverson.com/nikeairmaxcheap.html]nike air max[/url] suokb [url=http://www.capemaycitypolice.com/louisVuittonHandbags.html]louis vuitton sale[/url] tjngb [url=http://www.capeMayLinen.com/nikeairmax.html]air max[/url] cpeovy [url=http://maryhelverson.com/cheapnikeshoesc.html]air max shoes[/url] vtsy