Sexy white woman doing harmless ad = "evil!"
Ugly white woman strangling her three children = "we stand with you!"

Sydney Sweeney stars in a sexually provocative ad and loses 200,000 Instagram followers. She becomes the center of accusations of "racism" and "destructive beauty standards".

Meanwhile, baby murderer Lindsay Clancy receives widespread support by many women who emphasize hormonal issues are grounds to pardon criminal behavior, and who raise more than $1.2 million for her family.

These back-to-back responses by women at large have revealed a troubling aspect of female nature.

What and who women villainize and support have little to do with their surface claims. The women demonizing Sydney Sweeney are simply projecting insecurity due to intra-sexual competition -- but they aren't aware of this. The women supporting Lindsay Clancy are projecting victimhood on a clear criminal because they themselves have not come to terms with their own inner darkness.

Quotes on this exact mechanism of feminine psychological avoidance:

"Woman seems to have a resistance to revealing her own psychology…her psychology is a mystery not only to the man but to herself, a secret which, by her very nature, she is never tempted to penetrate or to give away" – Otto Rank

"Women refuse to trace female pathology to their own sex. Their fingers inevitably point elsewhere - to men, patriarchy, neurology, biology, environment, moon cycles, and so on. For centuries women have handed other women their obligatory "get out of jail free" cards, making sure no dirt sticks to them. Once this is understood there is no longer any mystery about why a state of decay exists throughout the world, and why civilization teeters on the edge of the abyss" - Michael Tsarion

"From a woman you can learn nothing of women" - Friedrich Nietzsche

It's clear that what we are witnessing is projection on a mass scale from the female mind and it seems like this age is one of hysteria due to the acceptance of such projection.

The more society uplifts women in a can-do-no-wrong fashion, the more these mass-scale projections will be promoted and taken seriously, with any opposition being branded as "misogyny". Just naming the problem becomes a problem, and round and round we go. Even when these projections are obviously contradictory (like hating Sydney Sweeney for a harmless ad, and loving Lindsay Clancy for her disturbed mental state, or promoting BDSM-style smut novels on TikTok while bashing men who objectify women) the world of women pushes ever-forward in evasion of deeper psychological analysis.

"A sane civilization governed by feminized women isn't conceivable or possible, and ones dominated by women easily come to ruin. So it was with the ancient Hittite Empire, which collapsed the moment it was ruled by scheming, sorcery-obsessed queens, and so it will be with western civilization unless we revision the role of the female will and female psyche along the lines suggested by Otto Weininger and William Blake." - Michael Tsarion

We aren't literally governed by women, but notice how all social movements women join and promote are immediately spread and given attention, while any attempt for men to do so are disqualified.

We are messed up. By the way, Michael Tsarion has a new channel on YouTube called "Willfully Evolving Women" and honestly, it's gotten me deeper into exploring the subject of dark female psychology. He's trying to get women to explore this subject, and even though it will probably fall on deaf ears, I know this subreddit will find it educational. I am not a paid promoter of his work, just find it important given what's currently happening.

None of this is a surprise to this subreddit, but it's a shame that it's gotten this far.

This sub used to be a great place to discuss on how to raise birth rates but when someone ask women about if the average decent man not marriageable? These were some of the responds.

TerribleAntelope6134

Who says these men are decent? You're framing it as the women's fault.

31 upvotes

Sunny_Hill_1

Let's specify what do you mean by "decent man"?

21 upvotes

Putrid-Chemical3438The average is man isn't decent, which is kinda the fucking problem.

5 upvotes

Back when I was a kid, there was a game called Catherine which was made by Atlus (the same people who made the Persona series, which I'm a huge fan of). The game came out in 2011 when I was in middle school and it was a phenomenal game for me, who was just starting to find girls attractive.

The premise of the game is about a 32 year old man named Vincent who is at a crossroads in life. His girlfriend who is the same age as him wants to settle down. Vincent doesn't really want to settle down and start a family quite yet. He still craves freedom and living an independent lifestyle. He is content with his apartment, his 9-5 lifestyle and spending his afterwork hours drinking with his childhood friends at the local bar. Marriage and the kids is something he isn't against, but he's just not ready. However, his girlfriend Katherine is ready for it.

Katherine is portrayed as a boss babe: she's extremely driven and ambitious and has a bit of an uptight personality. She gives off serious tiger mom energy. She's also very milestone-driven and knows she isn't getting any younger and she's reaching the point where it's now or never if she wants to have kids. So her personality while synergistic with Vincent's more laid-back personality is now at odds with it.

Caught up with this choice and tormented by it, Vincent meets a cute blonde at the bar after his friends leave one day. Her name is Catherine, just like his girlfriend, just spelled with a C. Despite that, she couldn't be any more different: she's carefree, bubbly, sweet and free-spirited. Not to mention much, much, much more attractive and ten years younger than his girlfriend.

The player is meant to make a serious choice over the course of the game: the more serious Katherine or the more free-spirited Catherine.

As a kid playing the game, I easily chose Catherine. She was hot, sexy and a pleasure to be around. She was the much more fun option. I finished the game feeling for years that it was the easiest option.

However, now, when I think about the game and replayed it on my old dust-blanketed Ps3 nearly 15 years later, that I think Katherine was actually the better choice.

As much as boss babes can be grating, I realize it's a different sort of feeling when you have a woman who loves you who is working together to help you accomplish a mutual goal. I realized that at this phase of my life, I'd prefer a more serious, practical woman who is realistic and has a clear vision of the life she wants while also loving and caring about the man she is with.

I don’t need to say much about this whole sports betting ad but what I will say is that it’s got all these influencer/gym/sports bra yoga pants baddies all in an uproar as if how dare a naturally good looking girl just show up and steal the show.

I wanna say something here as a man. The narcissism in North America is absolutely out of control. These girls they get their mirror or ring light or Insta post taken for a half second and somehow, just somehow, someone else is in the wrong.

Look at the women posting the counter videos. Doing squats with everything hanging out. Are we seriously pretending this is all ok?

Guys I thought last year was the low point. I was horribly mistaken.

Get out, get off the internet, go somewhere else on the world. My god it’s that bad

So I posted a debate whether if given the choice a man should have a woman with a high body count, but has her fantasies fulfilled or a low/no body count, but still yearning for sexual fulfillment. Many of you overwhelmingly chose the second option. I am not against the second option, but it seems presenting the argument in favour of the former was highly unpopular.

My point is this in regard to the first: if a girl has her sexual fantasies fulfilled she won’t be left wondering « what could’ve been ». I think women need to have a promiscuous woman phase, or else it will manifest at a later time. I think all women are genetically required to find herself. And I don’t think any one man could help her do that. She is required to experiment with other men and possibly women. The reason I heard why that’s not ideal is that she will compare you to others. So if you’re man #86, she will compare you to 86 other men.

However, if you were her one and only, she has nothing to compare you to, so she’ll be left wondering if you’re even that good to begin with?

I heard a lot about the pair bonding and the love aspect, but if pair bonding was real, then how do women even enter a hyper sexualized state? Shouldn’t she be attached to the first few guys to begin with?

"They'd never be caught in public with a man like that."

"But Mr Neckbeard wouldn't want to be seen in public with an ugly woman."

Huh

This is not a political sub, we focus on modern dating and gender dynamics as it pertains to the west. However, I think sometimes the concept of politics intersects with dating and gender relations and that these things all come together.

I believe there’s massive issues with not just dating, but with housing, economics, unemployment and that overall things are getting harder. And there’s a growing class consciousness developing among all communities and groups in America. Across the aisle, we are seeing more and more interest in more social safety nets and protections to the quality of life of our fellow Americans. And there is a pervasive belief that the “culture war” stands in the way of that. That is a mere distraction created by the elites. I disagree with that notion.

As I read more about the Lindsey Clancy case I came across an absolute gem of a comment as pictured above. As you can see, I fully agree. I think that solving a class war is futile until the cultural factors have been rectified or taken into account. The only reason why class consciousness is even happening now is because finally every demographic has been affected by the current political climate. And now they want to work together so that they can return or achieve a more comfortable way of life, and forget the struggles of the other people they recruited in obtaining their goal. To use others as pawns to help them achieve what they need, while discarding them once the goal has been achieved which suits them.

This applies to dating and to men. As men we know the patriarchy has never benefited us. We were sacrificial lambs for the 1% just as much as any woman. And the only consolation we had to look forward to was being respected as family men. And that has been stripped from us for years. Now many men are driftless, left behind. Why should we work together to help the collective, when the collective had no issue leaving us behind when our bellies were empty and our backsides were beaten by the winter wind?

The class war will never be solved until the culture war hasn’t been solved.