← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Marcus Porcius Cato

Thread 7810

Thread ID: 7810 | Posts: 20 | Started: 2003-07-03

Wayback Archive

Marcus Porcius Cato [OP]

2003-07-03 02:49 | User Profile

I found this bit of perceptive social analysis on VNN. This should be of interest to all you young fellers less than enamored of the barren, embittered, self absorbed semen ashtrays masquerading as women in any mid to large sized metropolis in the US. As for the ladies who may be reading this, don't let this happen to you (or your daughters)!

Analyzing the "Sex and the City" Woman Women: A Psychological Sketch Part 3b

by John Allington

Loaded: 7/2/2003

Myth: High achieving, college educated women have a difficult time finding husbands because of shortages of compatible males. This view was given a big boost recently by Barbara Dafoe Whitehead’s book, Why There Are No Good Men Left.

Reality: The book and its premises are confused nonsense. These women may be having a hard time finding a mate, but then children often have a tough time deciding what toy they want in Toys ‘R’ Us. This doesn't imply shortages of either toys or Good Men—but does perhaps provide a glimpse into the psychology behind the female notion of scarcity.

I dislike anecdotes because they tend to be unreliable, but this one is a bit different. Unlike Whitehead, who merely interviewed some whiny thirty-something women, I actually did some research on this topic. Having recently become single, I decided to try my luck on one of those online dating sites—in fact the biggest one. There were lots of pictures of attractive, college educated women on this popular site. Since I happen to be in the middle of the corresponding demographic group that supposedly contains ‘shortages’ of eligible males for ‘high-achieving’ females, it sounded like a good way for a busy guy who works in a male-dominated field to meet a compatible woman.

Think again! What I found was a collection of shallow, rude, spoiled females who claimed to want contradictory things. Because of my poor initial success and instead of blaming others, I assumed that the problem was with my approach. Perhaps my profile was poor or my messages were written badly.

So I decided to conduct a little experiment to determine if my approach was the problem and if so, how I could improve it. I constructed 4 or 5 bogus female profiles which I then posted on the site. I used slightly modified face shots of some lingerie models and a couple of pictures of more average women from a Russian mail order bride internet site. I riddled these bogus profiles with all the standard narrative clichés taken from real profiles in other cities, in an attempt to make them culturally and demographically similar. I also constructed some bogus male profiles to see if women ever initiate contact. I made these male profiles to be more enticing than my original profile. I was careful to make all of these profiles sound plausible and not “too good to be true.” The bogus profiles were all in their late twenties or early thirties, had bachelors or masters degrees and worked at professional-type jobs.

My experiment provided the following information and conclusions:

· The bogus female profile that received the most responses from men was one of the Russian women, not one of the lingerie models. This surprised me! The Russian woman had long, light brown hair, green eyes and was in no way glamorous—just presentable. I conclude that men aren’t looking for glamour so much as they are looking for an attractive version of the girl next door.

· Twice as many men as women in the 25-35 year old college-educated demographic group were posted on the site. Those lopsided numbers tend to dispel Whitehead’s basic thesis. In addition, there were apparently lots of additional men who subscribed to the site but who concealed their profiles. Maybe those men were married or maybe they thought that they would have better luck in contacting women if the women hadn’t read their profile in advance—i.e. they would be perceived as more “mysterious.”

· I was surprised to learn that a significant percentage of women who posted profiles didn’t even subscribe to the site. These sites typically allow individuals to post profiles for free but pay to be able to send or reply to messages. Therefore, these women probably figured that if their perfect ‘soulmate’ wrote to them, then they would pay the $25 in order to reply to him. In the mean time, they would just waste a lot of the male subscribers’ time.

· In a metropolitan area of several million people, an attractive woman in the 25-35 year old age group with a college education and no children will receive between 100 - 200 messages in the two weeks after she posts her ad. About half of those messages will not be from demographically compatible men. For example, some will come from different cities from guys searching the whole country. However, between one-quarter to one-half of the messages will be decent, thoughtful replies by successful, local, demographically compatible men. Doctors, computer engineers, an airline pilot, business owners, college professors and other professionals responded to my cliché-filled, bogus ads.

· In my demographic group, the ‘high-achieving’ women simply didn’t initiate contact. This supports my belief that women are reactive rather than proactive. The other possibility is that they read this book because they’re not inclined to think for themselves. This rule book for chicks was—get ready—written by a Jewish woman. Jewish radical feminism alienated women from men and now other Jews step in to profit from it by writing ‘rule’ books, making meeting even tougher.

· There are a surprising number of lonely, successful men—and by extension, I suppose—lonely women out there. This is clearly not related to a lack of effort on the part of men—who are wasting tons of time trying to get the attention of these women.

· Everybody seems very busy with their jobs, working out, socializing with their friends, etc. The successful men appear to be cynical and frustrated; the successful women appear to be jaded and suspicious.

· Because of the anonymous nature of the online dating site, the women felt free to exhibit high levels of incivility. There exists a messaging function that allows men and women to “instant message” each other in real time. Probably three quarters of the women whom I attempted to “instant message” rejected the conversation when I tried to initiate it. Of the one quarter who did accept the conversation, all but one—after reading my profile while chatting—exited the conversation. Their exit was not preceded by a “gotta go,” or “sorry not interested.” They would just close their message box in the middle of the conversation with no explanation.

· Whitehead asserted that young, single women are too busy making their mark on society, to find a mate. Well, isn’t it funny how men who built space ships, designed computers and conquered the Western Hemisphere somehow made the time to find mates and have children? These women, busy making their “mark on society,” certainly seem to have enough free time to clog up the shopping malls. Anyhow, I uncovered no indication that any of these internet dating site women were on the verge of discovering a cure for cancer or anything of similar importance. Most were just slightly above average IQ types with typical, 40-hour-per-week cubicle jobs. Many were teachers and obviously have a lot of free time during summers.

· After an absence of many months, I revisited my former dating-turned-research project. About 10 – 20 percent of the women who were on the site 5 – 6 months ago still had their profiles posted and active! Imagine a semi-attractive female having hundreds of demographically compatible guys writing to her over the span of 5 – 6 months and not one of them will satisfy her requirements! Yeah, there are no good men left… What precisely, would a man be called, if he had hundreds of attractive, quality women pursuing him and he found none of them to be acceptable? He’d be called a fool. Yet we are supposed to feel sorry for women in the identical situation. Social historians document their alleged plight in fuzzy narratives.

· Whitehead’s contention that for men, timing of marriage is rather incidental, is largely untrue. While it’s true that men can marry women 20 years younger, such marriages are rare. I’ve only seen this common in one place before—at an expensive overseas resort frequented by rich men and their ‘trophy’ wives. Most men and women need to be within a reasonably narrow age band in order for them to relate to each other. In theory, a 39 year old bachelor can court a 21 year old woman, but unless he’s got a great deal going for him, the 21 year old woman just isn’t going to be interested in him and he is going to have a tough time relating to someone almost a generation younger. The ads I studied indicated most women were looking for men (at most) five years older. A few would consider a ten year age difference. The latter group of women appeared to be looking more for financial security. In any event and despite the propaganda to the contrary, there are more high-achieving males than females in nearly every age group. So Whitehead’s claims don’t pass a second grade math test. She assumes that unlike the so-called ‘high achieving’ women, ‘high achieving’ men aren’t choosy and will look to marry the first female who comes along. She fails to acknowledge that there is a difference between the woman a man will f*ck and the one he’ll marry. That so many newspapers and magazines took her book seriously shows just how retarded and isolated from reality our New York print media with its Jewish cultural milieu has become. Those people have little understanding of how things actually work in ‘flyover’ country.

In retrospect, none of this should have come as a surprise to me. Sometimes you have to waste a lot of time to discover the obvious. Unlike a man, a young attractive woman is hit on all the time. She can’t go to the grocery store, park, shopping mall or even to work without guys periodically hitting on her. The only variables are the when and where, not if. So why would she have to put an ad online unless she is maladjusted, jaded or a bitch?

Our society creates high expectations among all of its members. But among no group are expectations as high as among young, educated women. They expect that at some point a man will support or subsidize their lifestyle, so they are free to spend virtually their entire incomes on themselves in the present. They travel and expect to be entertained. They want a career. They want a baby (but often at some point in the distant future). And they want to be the center of some man’s attention. But what are they willing to give? What is expected of them? What is their responsibility? How will they contribute? These questions are considered inappropriate. The longer these women are single, the more accustomed they become to having no responsibility outside of their ‘career’ and caring for their ubiquitous cat. They live exactly how and where they want with no non-economic compromises. A series of men at six month to one year intervals fund their weekly entertainment and occasionally pay for their travel to tropical destinations.

Does this sound like the training ground for a submissive—or even compromising—wife? The feminists talk about what these women ‘have to offer.’ The fact is, their most important attribute—their fertility—wanes after age 27. That they’ve been to Italy twice, know a little French and have 45 pairs of shoes doesn’t change that fact. This fertility is their primary link to the future. Other than that, these women offer upper middle class snobbery, expectations for expensive travel and female luxuries, and habits evolved outside of the need for compromise. A woman who displays a willingness to postpone or forgo her biological imperative (children) and postpone establishing a lasting, monogamous relationship with a man for a middle class wage and her employer’s benefit is someone who clearly lacks an appreciation for life’s “big picture.” Indeed, she has been programmed by society to subordinate her own evolutionary interests to support the short-term production and consumption imperatives of corporate America. Her altruistic tendencies have been redirected towards ends not in her own long term best interest.

So what’s the point of this essay? Just more gratuitous bitchin’ about women, right? No. I’m assuming that many of my readers are males in their early twenties: You readers need to understand that your opportunities to find a mate will not improve as you age. You will be choosing from a shrinking pool of available women. As you age, you may have a lot more money which you reason will compensate for your age, but you will also be a lot busier. Your job will put additional expectations on you for longer hours, more duties and maybe business travel. You may become a manager, which will require yet more time. As your obligations and responsibilities increase, your energy level will decline. So, say you spend your twenties screwing off, having a good time, relishing your independence. You buy an SUV or a sports car. You acquire some expensive hobbies. You focus on your ‘career.’ You buy a house and fix it up. You put in a hot tub—or whatever. And now, in your late twenties or early thirties, you want to settle down. And what awaits you? The type of women described above: a high-maintenance, unpleasant, jaded, desperate, neurotic pain in the ass. She will be your reward for your hard work. She’ll want a 30K wedding and to boss you around like you’re an incompetent accessory. She’ll be a leftover, past her prime, the one the other guys said ‘no thanks’ to. Enjoy!

The happiest couples I know are young. They got married in or just after college. They now have two or three children. The women are intelligent, educated, well-adjusted house wives. They take care of the home front while their husbands, whom I work with, can more closely focus on their demanding jobs (notice I didn’t say ‘careers’). These couples’ lives are orderly and prosperous. There is an effective division of labor that reduces stress on all involved and provides a home environment in which children will flourish. They eat real food, not drive-through fare. Their children will never see the inside of a day care center. Many will also never see the inside of a public school classroom. The sophisticated, materialistic, urban Jews and their media tell you this family type is a relic. They mock it. Well, these Jews and their media are lying to you. It takes 60-70K per year in a moderately priced city to be very comfortable. It can be done. It’s down the street from me. But you have to find the right woman to make it work. And I’m telling you that type of woman marries way before she reaches the age of 30. So if you’re still in college, you will probably never find a better environment in which to meet a potential wife. And I don’t think I need to tell you that this type of women isn’t hanging out with the lesbians at the campus ‘Woman’s Center’ or majoring in English Literature, decoding phallocentic passages in Shakespeare. Nor does she yearn to be like the insufferable, mediocre bore, Carrie, in Sex and the City.

So turn off the damn computer and go find a nice, normal, well-adjusted woman in her early twenties who wants to do something truly radical. You know, marry and have children. Don’t be afraid of it! It is what life is all about. The suckers are the ones who never have children. When they die, nothing will remain in this world of them, no matter how important their ‘career.’

JOHN ALLINGTON

Franco

2003-07-03 03:00 | User Profile

Today's women [most of them] are Debbie DayCareCenters and Sally ICanVotes. Fembots on parade.

Franco cries when he thinks about the female vote. :(

Feminism = Marxism = brought by Jews.

THANKS, JEWS. :angry:

M1488D

2003-07-03 03:58 | User Profile

Franco: Your avatar gives me a warm, fuzzy feeling, awww---but how come the dog's not black. Are you racist?

Robbie

2003-07-03 04:35 | User Profile

*Originally posted by M1488D@Jul 3 2003, 03:58 * ** how come the dog's not black. Are you racist? **

White is all-right, dyno-mite, and out-a-sight!!

:afro:

xmetalhead

2003-07-03 16:47 | User Profile

Excellent post Marcus. There is nothing worse than a New York City Feminist Yuppie Jewdified Woman. These rot-filled pieces of vermin dung spread their poison and disease to the unsuspecting decent women out there (who in general, are not that bright to begin with, let's face it) who succumb like mice to peanut butter to the ghastly jewish myth of materialism=joy, salvation, happiness. I've had experiences with "Carrie" type Holier-Than-Thou retards. What a waste. Too many Women are ruined, pathetic, neurotic, condescending, backbiting, insatiable, retarded, weak and just so terribly unhappy without materialistic success that it just makes me want The End to finally come.
Thanks jews!! Sorry Ladies!

Hilaire Belloc

2003-07-03 17:48 | User Profile

<>

Yes I know. I had to deal with these spoiled dumbass bitches all trhough high school. And frankly college isn't any better. I've noticed that the smarter a woman is these days, the dumber she actually is. I knew a girl who read alot of great poets and had a great interest in classical composers like Mozart. Yet whenver I tried to talk to her about these things, she insisted she only wanted to talk about "cool things". "Cool" things such as herself and her boyfriend. Thats pretty much women just talk about these days: their boyfriends. It gets boring after a while. :angry:

Marcus Porcius Cato

2003-07-03 18:09 | User Profile

[code]"Cool" things such as herself and her boyfriend. Thats pretty much women just talk about these days: their boyfriends. It gets boring after a while.[/code]

Hey Perun dude!

Would that be the slavic god of lightning and thunder? I take it you are less than enthusiastic about Czar Vladimir's "gift" at sword point to the Russian people. I have a weak spot for thunder gods, Thor in particular, but I think I'll pass on Sveti Ilija who is nothing more than the Jew bastardization of the Aryan Perun, as you probably already know.

Don't let the bastards wear you down Bro! She's probably going to marry the school's "James Dean" and live trashily ever after in Trailer Park, JewSA.

Hilaire Belloc

2003-07-03 20:46 | User Profile

<<Hey Perun dude!

Would that be the slavic god of lightning and thunder? I take it you are less than enthusiastic about Czar Vladimir's "gift" at sword point to the Russian people. I have a weak spot for thunder gods, Thor in particular, but I think I'll pass on Sveti Ilija who is nothing more than the Jew bastardization of the Aryan Perun, as you probably already know.>>

Yes Perun was the Slavic god of thunder, and the patron of the traditional warrior class of Russia. However, don't be mistaken, I am a devout Christian. I too have a fascination with pagan gods of war and thunder, but I pray to St. Michael the Archangel.

<>

Probally. Believe it or not, I have NEVER had girlfriend. Im 20 years. Partially because most women I know are yuppie sluts, plus that I'm not obsessed with having one as most young guys are today. My mind is too busy relfecting on more important issues like politics, society, religion, etc. Womens' minds seem to be too shallow to comprehend those topics. :naughty:

American women don't give any attention to me, guess I'm too much of a chivalric niceguy. I'll probally marry some Russian or Ukrainian girl. They're pretty, smart, and traditional. I got more attention from girls during 3 weeks in Russia than I did 20 years in America.

il ragno

2003-07-03 21:09 | User Profile

Joke's on you, girls. Nearly all of the 'go' signals you receive, the 'role models' offered to you, and 'lifestyle templates' you follow are the invention of MALE HOMOSEXUALS, under the approving eye and guidance of der Juden.

'Sex and the City'? The brainchild of faaabulous queers like Darren Star whose priorities in life are shopping and imbibing anonymous willies poking out of holes punched in drywall. As are most hip/jaded/egocentric 'for-women-only' cultural artifacts these days. Read it and weep: femininity is now defined by men who wish they were women. but can never be.

But it ain't like we men aren't as equally brain-fogged by propaganda every minute of every day. Worst mistake I ever made was getting divorced 20 years ago - from a wonderful girl - because I felt my 'freedom' encroached upon. Of course, I was young and very very dumb - and highly susceptible to Rabinowitz's Rules of Order like every other 20-year-old - back then.

Maybe that's a ray of hope though. Nothing brings on racial & cultural awakening like buying Hyman's line of sh*t whole hog, and living to bitterly regret it. I figure a whole lot of ladies are about due. (But who will save the kids? For every ex-lemmming who awakes with a start, two more teenagers are trapped in the web....)

Frederick William I

2003-07-03 21:15 | User Profile

You know this is a very good article, I'm surprised it is a VNN article. BTW, is VNN going neocon? The original article didn't use the "J" word once! Franco, you've been spending too much time over here - you're neglecting the home front :lol:

Edana

2003-07-03 21:20 | User Profile

The cultural propaganda memes targetting both men and women glorify "independence" from and a disgusted, shallow, cynical, selfish view of the opposite sex and relationships. Divided, conquered.

il ragno

2003-07-03 21:28 | User Profile

**BTW, is VNN going neocon? The original article didn't use the "J" word once! **

"Jew" or "Jewish" appears six times in the text.

Eendracht Maakt Mag

2003-07-03 21:32 | User Profile

perun, check your private messages.

Hilaire Belloc

2003-07-03 21:33 | User Profile

<>

"Like Heroin, it gives a good high, but imbibed too deeply, it kills." To use Pat Buchanan's phrase.

We see this death in the rising divorce rates, which are tearing families apart. Studies have shown the importance of the nuclear family has on the development of children. Children need both a father and a mother. Not just a mother, or two mothers, or a mother and a horse(I'm sure some idiot somewhere is experimenting with that possibility).

Thank god I lived in a traditional nuclear family. Thank god also that my mother was traditional and taught me traditional values. :rolleyes:

Marcus Porcius Cato

2003-07-03 22:16 | User Profile

**You know this is a very good article, I'm surprised it is a VNN article. BTW, is VNN going neocon? The original article didn't use the "J" word once! Franco, you've been spending too much time over here - you're neglecting the home front **

A wise guy, ey? Whoop woo woo woo woo woo woo wooooooh! Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk Nyuk!

Yes, I know, I know. They were a bunch of vaudevillitzim, but I like low brow comedy - that's why I always await the demented ravings of our house Ustashi with bated breath, Oy!

Frederick William I

2003-07-03 22:22 | User Profile

*Originally posted by il ragno@Jul 3 2003, 21:28 * ** "Jew" or "Jewish" appears six times in the text. **

OK, you got me. Although 5 usages in this 2600 word article were buried in 2 sentences in the middle of paragraphs. Nothing in the title, intro, or conclusion.

Canny Sammy writes more directly it seems to me. :D

Hilaire Belloc

2003-07-03 22:28 | User Profile

**perun, check your private messages. **

Yes I have. I deleted the dirty jokes and apologized for them.

il ragno

2003-07-04 00:06 | User Profile

BTW, is VNN going neocon? The original article didn't use the "J" word once!

[color=purple]"Jew" or "Jewish" appears six times in the text. [/color]

**OK, you got me. Although 5 usages in this 2600 word article were buried in 2 sentences in the middle of paragraphs. Nothing in the title, intro, or conclusion.

Canny Sammy writes more directly it seems to me. **

There's no satisfying you Linderbashers. Even when you're proven wrong, you dig in your heels, stick your fingers in your ears and pretend it didn't happen or doesn't matter.

Then you resume chiding everyone who's ever bookmarked VNN as wildly irrational.

Frederick William I

2003-07-04 00:16 | User Profile

Originally posted by il ragno@Jul 4 2003, 00:06 * Then you resume chiding everyone who's ever bookmarked VNN as wildly irrational.*

You're being wildly irrational :lol:

Robbie

2003-07-04 00:24 | User Profile

Well not only is VNN bookmarked on my computer, I've been a fan of VNN long before it became de rigeur to critique it over here. No, I don't consider myself irrational.