The Rise of the Amateur Sex Industry

The streetwalkers move to the sidewalk as middle class, college-aged girls and older women alike take the digital screen.

Readership: All
Author’s Note: This post is a spin-off from my last post, Exploiting Online Attention (2020 December 9).  Readers may need to read this post first before continuing. This is the also the first, introductory, part of a series of related posts to come over the next few weeks, as described at the end.
Length: 3,000 words
Reading Time: 10 minutes

The Disintermediation of Sex

Prior to the rise of the internet, and particularly the user-driven, social media phase of the internet, the sex industry was mostly a seedy subculture that was gate-kept by “professionals” comprised of extremely unsavory, shifty individuals of corrupt character.  Being a participant in this industry, no matter whether one was a professional or a client, bore the popular image of being an indigent-class desperado and/or a deviant.

During this period, a woman would generally not opt to participate in the various permutations of the sex industry, from stripping to peep shows, from prostitution to pornography, unless she had fallen into dire circumstances and was completely desperate and destitute.

Today, that is no longer the case.

While the women who participate in the various aspects of the sex industry are still very much a self-selected group and a decided minority of women, it’s not nearly as small as the group was when the industry was run by the pimps, madams, strip club kingpins and pornographers. And the motivations of many in the group have changed — for many of the women, participation in the industry isn’t “survival as a last resort option”, which it often was in the days of pimps and the rest, but is a lifestyle choice based on other options available for income generation for students or office workers who are looking for supplemental income, travel, gifts and the like. In the past, these kinds of women had very low participation rates in this industry, but this is not so today — today it is a different scene, precisely because the internet has disintermediated the sex industry, which is having a spillover impact on the entire sexual marketplace (SMP).

When everything became digitized through the rise of the internet, the first impact was felt by providers of content that could be easily digitized (music, books, videos) and distributed in digital format more cheaply than traditional “hard copy” content providers could do, and without the “middleman” of book stores, record shops and video stores, all of whom took a “cut” of the profit while also controlling the distribution of the material. Next to be hit were “brick and mortar” retailers, which gradually found that their own models for logistics, distribution and product sales were being replaced by Amazon and its imitators who, again, succeeded in removing the layers of middlemen and replacing them with one consolidated middleman — Amazon itself or its lookalike site — which acted as the principal distribution source for … well, after a while, just about everything other than groceries and fresh meals. The wave of disintermediation and the creation of consolidated online “clearinghouse” middleman entities on the internet marched ruthlessly through almost all of the consumer-facing economy, from travel agencies to hotels to taxicabs.

The rise of the internet was, of course, associated with the rise of online pornography in the 1990s, which then spread to the proliferation of online porn videos in the 2000s with the growth of the availability of broadband internet. This represented the disruption of the prior distribution channels for porn, which were newsstands, erotic book and video shops, and seedy XXX theaters.

The Smartphone Changes Everything

But the true sea change came with the rise of the smartphone. The first iPhone was released in June 2007, and by 2011 or so penetration rates of smartphones were becoming substantial throughout the developed world. The smartphone was unique in that it provided high resolution, ultra-portable still and video cameras to a large number of people (eventually over a billion), which over the course of time enabled more and more people to take pictures and videos of themselves and, by virtue of the nature of the smartphone as an “always on” internet access device, to share these images and videos with people. Social media, a creation of the 2000s, found new applications with the rise of the smartphone, as platforms like Instagram became the near ubiquitous means by which people shared and viewed images of others. In the course of a literal handful of years, virtually anyone in the developed world could take pictures and videos of themselves and share them almost instantly with as many, or as few, people as they wanted.

The impact of this was nothing short of revolutionary, and the appreciation of this impact on the ever-changing minefield of male-female relations is widely overlooked or misunderstood. The effects were legion. One of the most salient, which we have addressed elsewhere, has been the rise of smartphone-based app dating from not existing at all to being the primary means by which people meet the opposite sex in less than a decade.

Another substantial effect of the rise of smartphones, however, has been the large-scale privatization and amateurization of the sex industry. The pre-smart phone internet had already begun this process, with prostitution becoming largely disintermediated by means of websites which played the role of the “Amazon of Prostitution” by providing a single middle-man, accessible by content providers (women) and consumers (men) completely in the virtual space. Virtually overnight, the seedy world of pimps and madams, while not being entirely eliminated, lost a lot of its “turf” as these Hooker Amazon sites made it possible for women to find customers and run their sex-for-money business without dealing with the creepy, organized criminal lowlifes who used to run it, often abusing the women who participated in numerous and well-documented ways.

However, prostitution still involves meeting a person in the real world by its nature, so while the rise of online prostitution marketing sites marked a change away from the seediness of the world of pimps and madams, the participation rate in prostitution as an income generation activity remains essentially limited by the typically strong resistance of many women to have sex with strangers for money in what is generally a “strictly transactional” setting — that is, one-off meetings for an hour or two in a hotel room where cash is exchanged for personal services of a sexual nature.

The real revolution here happened later, with the rise of the smartphone and the related apps that perfected the creation and dissemination of pictures and videos. These functions were very popular in general, but from the very beginning they were particularly popular with attractive women, who, with the rise of Instagram, became the pulsing core of the entire social media scene. Many women proceeded to collect hundreds of thousands of followers, in some extreme cases millions, with many men ardently following their every post — liking, commenting, complimenting, direct messaging and the like.

And so emerged the phenomenon of the “Instagram Boyfriend”, at least for as long as he could compete with the endless virtual attention stream he was facilitating

I have written elsewhere how this has made the cost to women of male attention very cheap, in relative terms, because it can be collected in large amounts at a very safe, sanitized distance — as compared with, say, catcalls while walking past a construction site. However, what few people saw coming was how this trend of women displaying themselves on sites like Instagram to garner male attention would intersect with the continually growing and innovating online sex industry.

Personally I think this came as a surprise to most people because in the public mind — in our minds — the sex industry, whether in person or online, is associated with seedy lowlife types. Most of us did not foresee how the online attention getting activity associated with apps like Instagram would effectively merge with the new online sex industry to create something essentially new, precisely because we did not see the kinds of women who participate in the former as being interested in participating in the latter. After all — they never really had before. Why would they now?

Disintermediation is an extremely powerful thing.

From Instagram to OnlyFans

In the context of the rest of the sex industry outside of prostitution itself, the rise of smartphones and social media sites gave women access to the ability to share themselves — that is, pictures and videos of their faces and bodies — with as few or as many men as they wanted, without having to go through intermediaries other than anonymous, faceless digital image clearinghouse sites which were 180- degrees different from strip club or peep show owners, never mind seedy pornographers. It didn’t take very long for a few women to agree to engage in certain “additional activities” for certain of their followers on Instagram, but the nature of these was mostly the subject of rumor and innuendo, because it was all taking place off-site, in the opaque world of private messages, texts and emails. This also made the practice mostly one that only the most brazen and adventurous of women engaged in.

That was, until the tech geeks, noticing an underserved market, came up with “an app for that”. Or rather, multiple apps, each one tailored to a specific part of the emergent amateur, “do-it-yourself” sex industry.

These apps, which include sites like OnlyFans (for Instagram women who want to “upsell” their followers to more revealing pictures and videos, for a price) and Seeking Arrangements (for women who want to become a quasi “kept woman”, a kind of paid dating service which involves sex for money but in the context of a simulated relationship rather than one-off transactional handoffs in hotel rooms), a woman no longer has to deal with the creepy sex industry as an intermediary, but can instead engage her paying followers directly and in a very sanitized, safe way.

A woman can be her own pornographer, either taking her own pictures and videos with her smartphone, or by using another Insta/OF girl to do so, or perhaps a female photographer who isn’t creepy but “empowering”, and placing these photos and videos on her own OnlyFans site in exchange for subscription fees and tips paid by her followers.

A woman can be her own strip club owner by performing strip teases on livestreams to her followers, who have all paid to view the material, while she collects real time tips — again, all without dealing with seedy real life customers in person, or having to share her tips with the staff, or dealing with coked-up coworker “dancers”.

A woman can run her own peep show as well on a cam site, which, again, is sanitized — a woman doesn’t have to deal with a peep show owner, duck seedy customers on her way to and from, or deal with the general indignity and mental trauma of a fundamentally tawdry and dehumanized environment — that is all replaced by a laptop on her own familiar bed, her lap or a small table nearby and a smartphone on a small tripod, while her customers appear merely as strings of letters in a chat stream.

In other words, the transfer to an online venue has “sanitized” the sex industry for women wholesale. While participation in the industry previously required the regular interface with the seedy underworld that ran the establishments that comprised the sex industry, as well as its seedy, in-person customers, the internet has done away with this unpleasantness, and replaced it with clean, anonymous, digital clearinghouses which are just about as inherently seedy as using Amazon is.

The digital disintermediation of the sex industry has made it possible for women to access this source of cash on their own terms rather than on the dictated terms of the seedier elements of the sex industry — the strip club owner, pimp, or pornographer — and with absolutely no risk of running afoul of the law. 

As a result, the suddenly massive world of amateur pornography on OnlyFans (which essentially has become the X-rated wing of Instagram for all intents and purposes) , the continued growth of the “sugar baby” market, pay-per-view porn cams, and the proliferation of internet-sourced “escort” activity (which is a polite euphemism for highbrow, low profile prostitution), have all grown into a substantial, and in many respects essentially new, amateur sex industry.

This is important for at least two reasons.

The first is that it is new, which means it is having new impacts on both sexes, most of which are currently “flying under the radar” and going essentially unnoticed and therefore unexamined. More women are participating in these activities than did in the immediately prior era. Many more. More men are viewing pornography than at any time in history, and more men are having “kept women” as well, because prior to the rise of “sugar baby” websites a few years ago, this activity was extremely exceptional to say the least. Many more women are viewing Instagram attention as their fundamental right, and many of the ones who attract a lot of attention but not quite enough (or not the right kind) to rise to the level of paid influencers or social media celebrities feel some pressure to monetize their attention and popularity somehow, for which the sanitized online amateur sex industry beckons. And in that cycle, some men who never “paid for porn” during the rise of internet pornography nevertheless find themselves paying for customized content that is tailor-made to their specifications by women who market this service through their Instagram feed, which links to their OnlyFans site. These impacts are fast-developing and dynamically changing behaviors in real time, and the impacts are going largely overlooked, which makes them all the more impactful.

The second is that the newly emergent amateur sex industry, and its main “on ramp”, Instagram, is having a substantial impact on the overall relationship between men and women, even apart from the industry itself. This impact had already begun with the rise of Instagram, as it cheapened the value of male attention in socio-sexual terms by making it superabundant on an epic, heretofore unavailable scale while at the same time sanitizing it by making it virtual rather than in person and inconvenient or uncomfortable for women.

But the subsequent rise of the amateur sex industry has had the impact of making relations between men and women more transactional overall. While, unlike Instagram, most women still do not participate in this activity, despite its significant and ongoing growth, the awareness that it exists, and that it is a possibility, casts a more transactional frame to male/female relations overall, both when it comes to women’s expectations of men who are not in the “sport sex” category for them, as well as men’s expectations of women sexually, as a result of them having seen many otherwise “normal everyday” women on Instagram and OF engaged in various activities.

In addition the availability of the amateur sex industry as an income source, and the growing acceptability of its use as such given how sanitized it is in comparison to the prior version of the sex industry, has increased the vetting and relationship risks men run with women in the present period. Simply put, women have opportunities they simply did not have even 5 years ago, and a growing number are capitalizing on those, either before or after relationships or marriages to men (and, I would surmise, at times even during, with or without the man’s awareness or consent).

The landscape has simply changed, substantially and quickly, in ways that men in particular need to be aware of as part of their overall understanding of the situation between men and women in the emerging society, and the new risks presented to men by these developments. As Deti wrote regarding the key shift:

“And it has been taken totally private. What used to take place in public now takes place totally and completely out of the public eye. Men can gawk at photos and video of amateur pornstars, camgirls and OF girls in the privacy of their rooms. Women can prostitute themselves more openly and more privately at the same time. What used to be legitimate “charging” for dates (take me out for dinner and you pay, take me for a night out on your dime, take me out to the museum and you pay, let’s do a weekend away and you pay) is now shady “charging” for “prostitution lite” – subscriptions to premium porn sites, camgirl sites, OF rendezvous, sugar dating, all of which can, and do, include dates and sex.”

The Path Forward

Given the context of the modern SMP that young people are in, and what’s on the table today, it’s understandable why we see the landscape of behaviors continuing to evolve.

Even so, none of this is good for men. It goes without saying that no man should be visiting prostitutes of any sort, or sugar babies, or viewing internet porn, including OnlyFans or anything like that. To begin with, it’s obviously all very immoral and fundamentally soul corrupting to do so. And even leaving that aside, the online sex culture gives guys even less incentive to make the kinds of changes in their lives that can help with actual relationships with women outside the virtual space. However, even for men who abstain from participation in this problematic new area, the impact remains, due to the impact these developments are having on male-female relations overall.

Simply put, the impact of these social changes on the behaviors of young men and women, and the SMP in general, is taking place in real time, and no-one is really discussing it.

Until now. 

Over the next couple of weeks, this blog will feature a series of posts by Jack and me relating to aspects of these developments in the socio-sexual marketplace, including a detailed dive into a particularly spectacular example of the new risks being presented to men, and an assessment of potential takeaways for men facing this challenging new environment. So stay tuned — more is soon to come on this emerging new development in the seemingly ever-shifting landscape of male-female relations in the current era.

Related

This entry was posted in Female Power, Internet Dating Sites, Models of Failure. Bookmark the permalink.

150 Responses to The Rise of the Amateur Sex Industry

  1. Sharkly says:

    “During this period, a woman would generally not opt to participate in the various permutations of the sex industry, from stripping to peep shows, from prostitution to pornography, unless she had fallen into dire circumstances and was completely desperate and destitute.”

    I think you’re giving those volunteers too many excusing assumptions. I don’t necessarily think the participants were usually forced into anything. Back when pimps and madams could go to jail or be shot they likely wouldn’t want somebody working for them who didn’t want to be part of their sex business. That seems like the old Hollywood motif, that every hooker had a heart of gold. I’ve heard that most “dancers” have “daddy issues”, not that they’re poor. The church used to know how to even shut down the excuses of claiming to be “desperate and destitute.”

    Liked by 3 people

    • Sharkly says:

      I think it was mainly uninhibited or improperly inhibited women, who were left by others to make their own bad decisions, choosing to ignore all the risks to get “easy money” and male validation. The claims of desperation were likely usually an emotional sop hiding the fact that they were often just unwilling or too proud to go back to the family they once stormed out on.

      At one point I had some interaction feeding some homeless folks, and most of them were choosing to be homeless rather than go reconnect back with their families. A rough life for sure, but they chose it. One guy I met was college educated and quite brilliant, but living on the freezing streets begging, and still not interested in “getting back on his feet”, through any of the many available programs.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. Elspeth says:

    You said the sex industry used to be comprised of: extremely unsavory, shifty individuals of corrupt character. 

    You then said that this is no longer the case, an assertion with which I strongly disagree.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      No, I said it was “gate-kept” by such persons.

      The very first sentence: “Prior to the rise of the internet, and particularly the user-driven, social media phase of the internet, the sex industry was mostly a seedy subculture that was gate-kept by “professionals” comprised of extremely unsavory, shifty individuals of corrupt character.”

      That “gate-keeping” is what has gone away, and that’s the entire point of the article (and I don’t think I hid the point).

      Like

  3. thedeti says:

    It’s a lot more transactional now. A lot more. As I wrote at the other piece in a comment there, things have “changed from “my sex for your commitment” to “depictions/facsimiles of my sex for your cash”.

    And for men too, it used to be “I’ll commit to you/marry you if you will have sex with me.” That is now “I’ll give you money if you will have sex with me.” You don’t need to marry or commit anything. You just have to be willing to part with some money. It’s like going to a strip club except you’re spending more money and getting more but spending less time.

    This is an eye opener for a lot of men, because men would think women wouldn’t “do this” – wouldn’t have sex with men they don’t know very well for money. Well, when you think about it, why wouldn’t they? In the late 1980s to 2000 during hookup culture, they were willing to have sex with men they didn’t know very well in exchange for some fun, some really hot sex, attention and validation, and maybe “girlfriend” or “friends with benefits” status. More and more younger women figured they’d keep doing this, only with less attractive men, but for a lot of money they would never otherwise have.

    It’s a “boon” for men, because they get to have sex with women they would never otherwise have access to. The only way for most older men to have sex with young women is to pay them to do it. Women are perfectly willing to do it, too.

    Women don’t have to promise or commit anything other than time and temporary access to their bodies. They get benefits of commitment (access to money, perks, dates, all expense paid vacations to exotic destinations, free entertainment/drinks/meals) but no burdens (fidelity, accountability to a husband, relationship maintenance and care, childbearing and child rearing, homemaking, “respect him in all things”). She is doing less than she’d have to do with a “serious boyfriend”, fiance or husband. She gets more out of it than being an FB or a friend with benefits. She can always leave the life, get married, and have kids, as if none of it had ever happened.

    Men don’t have to do anything except have enough discretionary income to spend on this activity. Most young single men can scrape together enough spare money for an OF or a low rent sugar baby. They get the benefits (no strings attached sex) with no burdens (provisioning, protecting, fatherhood, necessity to earn 500% of what you need, self-tethering to high paying career, relationship maintenance and care, “love her as Christ loved the church and gave Himself up for her). He’s spending less than he would have to do with a fiancee or wife. He doesn’t have to support her or tolerate her emotional episodes. All he needs is sufficient money. He gets access to more attractive women than he could get if he offers only commitment and “wife status”.

    But we’re finding out what’s really important to the sexes. For women, it’s money — easy money, lots of it, without having to marry a beta and be accountable to him. All she has to do is give up some time and rent out her body, for less time and commitment than a boyfriend or husband. For men, it’s sex — no strings attached, on tap, with more attractive women than he can attract on his own power. All he has to do is give up some money, for less responsibility and more freedom than he would have with a girlfriend or wife.

    Liked by 3 people

    • thedeti says:

      All of this is causing, or at least encouraging, normalization of sex work as a legitimate income producing activity/lifestyle choice.

      It is also exposing everyone’s double standards on sex work. It’s “ok” for women to engage in sex work. It’s bad for anyone to judge or exploit sex workers, because they’re just out there trying to work. But it’s beyond horrible for men to use sex workers’ services. Men who patronize sex workers are the lowest of the low, have no value as men, and are horrid, base human beings.

      Liked by 2 people

  4. RP McMurphy says:

    I wrote about this a bit recently from a different angle, but mainly why prostitution or sex work or whatever you want to call it, will never be seen as honest/acceptable behavior. Women are now trying to reframe this, esp the ones on OnlyFans, etc, but the fact is no one is going to respect a woman who’s selling pictures of her vagina to random bros on the internet. https://redpilldad.blog/2020/12/22/why-prostitution-will-always-be-a-shameful-job-including-onlyfans/

    Liked by 4 people

    • Jack says:

      RPMcMurphy wrote,

      “…prostitution or sex work or whatever you want to call it, will never be seen as honest/acceptable behavior. Women are now trying to reframe this, esp the ones on OnlyFans, etc., but the fact is no one is going to respect a woman who’s selling pictures of her vagina to random bros on the internet.”

      Marriage minded men would totally agree with this statement. Men who are only focused on sex wouldn’t care as much.
      Younger women who have engaged in online sex might later have a pre-wall epiphany and decide they want to get married. At that point, they’ll be scrambling to wipe the web clean from all digital evidence of their lurid past.
      Older women (30+) who go into it might not care too much about getting found out.
      Overall, no amount of whitewashing is going to make any kind of prostitution respectable. But this alone would not discourage attention hungry wimmin from getting on screen, especially if the income is sufficient to live off of comfortably. How many thieves rob the bank just to say, “I pulled off that heist!” Some of them might brag if it was deftly executed, but the real motivation is greed (and sometimes power).

      Liked by 1 person

  5. thedeti says:

    Instagram/Only Fans/Sugar dating is also having enormous impacts on the rest of society at large, just as conventional prostitution and pre-internet pornography did. (Warning: Explicit language ahead)

    1) Psychiatrist David Reuben’s Book “Everything You Always Wanted to Know about Sex (but were afraid to ask)” (No kidding, that really is the title) came out in 1969. Most of the information in there is obsolete, and some of it has been questioned by later mental health practitioners. But one of the things he wrote stuck with me: In post WWII/pre-sexual revolution America, most men went to prostitutes for fellatio, because their wives/fiancees/girlfriends wouldn’t do it. Up to the release of the pornographic film “Deep Throat” in the mid 1970s, fellatio was something that “polite” women just did not do. Or, at least, they didn’t talk about it. Fellatio was something that only low class women, prostitutes, and porn actresses did.

    This attitude among women whittled away but was still common among a substantial minority of women in the American midwest up to the late 1980s. They would do almost everything else, including P in V intercourse, but they would not perform fellatio. “Nice girls” in the American midwest in the late 1980s didn’t do this. Or at least, didnt’ talk about it. They were on the Pill and perfectly willing to go “all the way”, particularly if they really really liked you. But fellatio was out of the question.

    Presently, it is the rare woman who will not do this, or has not done it. Nearly every woman under the age of 55 has learned how to do it and has done it. Most people trace this back to Deep Throat and the fact that men wanted their women to do this for them. Girls teach each other how to do it. Multiple articles have been written in women’s magazines on fellatio technique. There are websites and subreddits where this is talked about in graphic detail. You can watch technique “how to” videos on pornographic websites. Fellatio is talked about in film, in popular culture, and in media, in tones both serious and comedic. The internet has proliferated this. Sexual technique in general is talked about frequently and discussed, on websites, on subreddits, in online publications.

    All this is true regarding anal sex, but to a somewhat lesser extent, I think. But nonetheless, the demand for anal, and the numbers of women willing to do it, is growing. This is in large part because of depictions of anal sex in pornography, that more women are willing to do it on camera (because it pays more), and that more men are want to do it or try it.

    2) Pornography has affected women’s overall physical appearance. There is great emphasis on what I’ve called “the pornstar look”: heavy makeup, sculpted eyebrows, heavy eyeliner and shadowing, perfectly manicured fingernails, and lipstick/lip accentuation. Women want bigger breasts, curvy butts, cheekbone structure, and plump lips. Women want to eliminate crows feet and forehead creases, We’ve long had breast implants. We now have implants for the cheeks, jaw, and chin. We now have butt implants. We now have botox injections for lips and wrinkles. Of course we have the $300 manicure/pedicure, in which a majority of women now indulge themselves, for anything from the French manicure to fake nails of all shapes, lengths, and colors. All of this can be traced back to porn actress appearance and beauty standards.

    Maybe the most prominent effect is on women’s pubic hair grooming. Women wax, shave, and trim. Almost all women do some form of girlscaping. It was the rare woman in the late 1980s who was doing anything with pubic hair other than occasional trimming. This can also be traced to what porn actresses were doing with their pubic hair grooming (mostly waxing and removal of all body hair below the waist). Shaving pubic hair has become the poor girl’s waxing – it can be done as often as necessary and it’s much less expensive and less painful than waxing.

    Continued….

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      John Derbyshire blames the French.

      “the French f— with their mouths and fight with their feet”

      https://www.johnderbyshire.com/Opinions/Culture/fellatio.html

      By the late 1980s it was portrayed as normal among spouses (e.g. depicted in the middle-class family comedy “Parenthood” starring Steve Martin).

      Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        The transition appears to have happened earlier among alpha males. See here: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/mantle-piece/

        It’s not clear whether what he says there really happened, or whether he was just making an ironic joke, but either way, that was the 1970s when he wrote the letter, and he had played from 1951-1968.

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        Nova:

        Yeah. I can believe Mickey Mantle was able to get a girl to fellate him in the 1950s, given his looks, fame, and status. Joe Lunchpail wasn’t. Carl ClaimsAdjuster wasn’t. And they certainly weren’t getting fellatio from their wives.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        Deti — Right. It was a sign of alpha status, first, and then became more broadly spread. I think the same is happening now, as you point out in your post, with various other things that are depicted in today’s porn that are slowly wending their way into actual bedrooms — alphas first, due to leverage, and then slowly seeping everywhere else over time.

        Liked by 2 people

  6. thedeti says:

    Pornographic beauty standards have led to almost comic exaggeration of feminine body traits. Breasts need to be shapely, and at least bigger than average. Cleavage is routinely shown in most modern dress. There is enormous emphasis on butts (J.Lo, Iggy Azalea, common porn culture, and IG photo technique). Butts have to be curvy with waist-hip ratios down to like .50. Fake eyelashes are ridiculously large and accentuated. About the only thing that’s gotten smaller about women is their hair.

    3) So it is with the amateur sex industry. Most women will not become Instathots. Most women will never become cam girls or Only Fans girls. Most women will not get into sugar dating. But we are already seeing a lot of effect on the culture at large. But there, the effect of the amateur sex industry is less on appearance and more on the way men and women deal with each other.

    One effect is that sex is everywhere, and nowhere, at the same time. Schrodinger’s Sex Culture, if you will. Sex is talked about all the time, but according to surveys, even younger people are having less of it than even GenX did. Sex is widely available and has never been so easy to get, yet increasing numbers of men cannot access women at all, not even for interaction and conventional dating, much less sex. Even if younger people are having less sex, virtually all women have had premarital sex. The transactional sex culture has become an entire underground culture, that more and more people are at least dabbling in, much like the rise of the Carousel in the 1970s.

    Sex is much more transactional. it’s always been the case that women expect to get something in return for sex. Used to be women would accept commitment, fidelity, a date, a free night out, and a man’s undivided attention where he dances like a monkey for her. Now? That’s not anywhere good enough. She wants cash and gifts, and she wants them now. Friend with benefits isn’t good enough. It’s not enough that you’re her friend. You’re now required to “pay” for her time with money and gifts.

    It’s always been the case that men were in it for the sex. Used to be that men would play the game and at least go through the motions. Used to be that men would dance the dance, run some Game, and show her a good time in exchange for at least a good chance that sex will happen at the end of the night. Whatever he has to do to get sex, that’s what he’ll do. Now? Men’s response to the current state of affairs has been to either (1) demand sex, right now, or move on to the next woman; or (2) drop out altogether. The men who “dropped out” have an alternative now, which is to use OF (one step above conventional porn), get an escort, or get a sugar baby. He’s still doing whatever he has to do to get sex. Now, men get sex either by being so attractive as to be irresistible to a large swath of women; or offering up immediate cash on the barrelhead. Either way, he gets sex right now, no strings attached.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      Deti —

      Good observations! A few notes in response …

      One effect is that sex is everywhere, and nowhere, at the same time. Schrodinger’s Sex Culture, if you will.

      Yes, I have also noted this seeming paradox. The culture is becoming increasingly sanitized of actual sexual interactions and banter between live persons while the culture, as a whole, is marinating in raunchy sex at the same time. Again, I point to the rise of the virtual as a main reason for this. Something similar has, of course, happened with social interaction in general: people not speaking to people in public, not knowing their neighbors, but interacting with a large number of people virtually, on the internet, in their “tribes of choice”. The internet is having very significant changes on human life, on the margins, and it’s showing up in various ways. The impact on social life has been substantial, and in the realm of sex it has virtualized sex, to a significant degree, because the rise of the various apps and so on has made new possibilities for interaction possible for men (not just the standard porn, but now OF with its customized/tailored/personal content, interacting with cam girls, sugar babies and so on), and new avenues for gathering attention and male resources possible for women (same thing from the other side of the table). Meeting people for dating has become largely virtual as well, as we know, and this has had massive impacts, too, like excluding people who do not look very good in pictures from many dating opportunities, especially men. The internet-ization of everything is proceeding apace, and the changes are rippling through the culture faster than people can notice or assess them — it is no different in the areas of sex and men/women and we are foolish to think otherwise, in my opinion.

      More generally, pornography represents a manifestation of the movement of sex away from always having a procreative element towards being primarily about shared pleasure and, if desired, the potential bonding that comes through that. Porn, of course, ditches the latter element, but under the new sex rev regime, the latter element was always opt-in, just as the pregnancy element was. All you are left with is the pleasure principle, and porn caters precisely to this.

      Yet with the internetification of porn, the impacts become more complex and wide-reaching. It’s correct that sexual behaviors and appearance expectations have been shaped, for both sexes — expectations about musculature of men have similarly increased almost cartoonishly, as have penis sizes, and black men have become fetishized via porn in a way that is reflected in the popular culture by such phenomena, just to take the most well-known example, as the Kardashian/Jenner crew, which just happens to feature a family of 6 white women, virtually all of whom are exclusively involved with black men, and so on.

      But the impact is even broader than this, in odd ways as well. The desire to look like porn stars has fueled the development of technologies, especially surgeries and related techniques, to keep pace, and these are being deployed in a much larger number of women than in previous eras. At the same time, the demand from women to retain this kind of “porn-worthy” appearance until much later in life than was ever really desired or expected by either sex has fueled the rise of fitness and nutritional regimes, alongside the surgical and other medical techniques, to produce a crop of top tier appearance women in the 40-60 age range that literally never existed in the history of the human species. There simply were not women who looked like Elizabeth Hurley and Kate Beckinsale do today at their ages in the past — the “older attractive women” of the recent past — you can find their pictures on Google — like Sophia Loren or Elizabeth Taylor and so on simply did not look like this because they couldn’t, the tech/training/nutrition regimens/etc didn’t exist, and the average women didn’t aspire to it as well — again, because there was nothing to aspire to, since the techniques that are available now did not exist then. This has now “trickled down” from women like Hurley and Beckinsale, who are both genetically gifted as well, to the “average” attractive woman who is not genetically gifted in the same way, but can still “looksmax” her way to her substantial benefit all the way into her 50s with some effort and targeted expenditures. This, in turn, is changing their expectations of their own marriages, their husbands, their dating prospects outside of marriages, and, in some cases, even their earnings possibilities in industries that would pay for their appearances.

      Similarly, as the rise of the gay movement was a direct consequence of the separation of heterosexual sex and procreation (which made gay sex and straight sex essentially the same thing culturally), the rise of the porn-driven beauty procedures/treatments/techniques and fitness/dietary regimens has given rise to the transgender movement, as growing numbers of young men, in particular, can use these same techniques and regimens to look more convincingly female, in a sexualized way, than has ever before been possible in human history. The fact that there is a slew of young “trans women” who simply look more feminine than any of these folks ever did in the past no matter how hard they tried has gone a long way to sway attitudes towards trans people just enough to make things that were unthinkable even a few short years ago — like trans women competing in women’s sports, or trans boys using girls locker and rest roomos — mainstream today.

      And, in fact, the impact is even deeper than that. One of the porn world’s “dirty little secrets” is that areas like transgender erotica have, for a number of years now, and before the rise of the trans movement to the forefront of discourse, been among the leading growth areas of porn itself. More and more people have been viewing, and that means getting aroused by, transgender images, which means images of these “new, improved young trans women” than in the past, and this has also undoubtedly impacted overall attitudes towards trans persons, in particular among young people who are internet porn natives, having grown up with internet porn. The impact here is similar to the popularity of homosexual porn, especially homosexual porn depicting females, prior to the rise of gay rights, and how this softened attitudes over the course of a generation, especially among women themselves, who became solidly pro-gay in the wake of the rise of porn. So the impact of these developments can be traced even to political and cultural movements that no-one is even thinking of when looking at porn, because people can’t connect the dots properly — the old paradigm of the harmless stack of playboys in Uncle Bob’s garage pretty much dominates the brains of most people over 45 when it comes to the topic of porn, and the mere suggestion of any broader impact gets a dismissive hand wave, if that.

      Liked by 5 people

      • Elspeth says:

        Yes, I have also noted this seeming paradox. The culture is becoming increasingly sanitized of actual sexual interactions and banter between live persons while the culture, as a whole, is marinating in raunchy sex at the same time. Again, I point to the rise of the virtual as a main reason for this. Something similar has, of course, happened with social interaction in general: people not speaking to people in public, not knowing their neighbors, but interacting with a large number of people virtually, on the internet, in their “tribes of choice”. The internet is having very significant changes on human life, on the margins, and it’s showing up in various ways.

        It’s true that younger people (including non Christians) are having far, far less sex than GenX’ers had. The often parroted manosphere meme of young women slutting it up is true, but in my experience, it’s a we bit out of date. That experience shews extremely heavily toward the young women who moved away to go to college. The ones who stay at home? Not so much, if ever.

        I see it among the ones who graduated with our kids. Making it to 22, 23 years old without ever having been on a date. Ever, and these are not fat or ugly young women. Our girls have two Christian classmates who finally found their first boyfriends when they were 23 and 24. They were happy to settle in with the first guy they ever dated.

        Both are Christian girls, and the more principled one (who lived at home like our daughters did) is with a Catholic guy. They’re already debating and bickering about how they’ll raise their kids. They should really not do this (I’m concerned for her), but the thought they will NEVER find anyone else is keeping them trying to make their way to the altar soon. The other one, a less principled Christian, is living with her boyfriend. Again, just happy to finally have found someone.

        But there is something Nova said up there that is very true on a macro scale, about the way the virtual has destroyed what very little was left of anything resembling community. One of the things I am very grateful for is a husband who is highly social (in-person social, having never made even one friend online). His influence has made me keep my real life friendships active and connected. 8-10 years ago, when our kids were younger, I made some online friendships just because I was “stuck” at home so much. But the vast majority of our interactions are with real, live people. I have him to thank for that.

        Generally, women are the more social creatures (the more extroverted, for lack of a better word since I don’t really believe in that anymore), but rather than find ways to foster community relationships in a which includes husbands and families, women tend to be zealous for “me time” and “girls time” and all of that. Separate sex spheres definitely have their place, but not at the expense of family integrated community.

        Is it any wonder that sex has gone the way of community in its outworking and expression?

        Liked by 2 people

      • thedeti says:

        The culture is becoming increasingly sanitized of actual sexual interactions and banter between live persons while the culture, as a whole, is marinating in raunchy sex at the same time.

        Yes. You and I have been discussing this back and forth for a while. This is an increasing trend. Nearly all male-female romantic interaction (meeting, talking, dating, spending time together) increasingly is not done in public. Men and women don’t meet or interact in public. They increasingly don’t get introduced in the real world. The first place most men and women meet each other is online. If men and women meet in the real world, for a time, the majority of their interactions take place online, by text or message – not even with their voices. So these are people getting to know each other through electronic pixels and not through real time interaction.

        Men and women actually see each other in public places less and less. They don’t spend time in bars or restaurants or public areas. They spend time together in person behind closed doors, in apartments, homes, and hotel rooms. Almost none of their relationship takes place in public. I think that most of the reason for the very private nature of this is that things move to sex very rapidly. Sex is now one of the first things new romantic interests do with each other, mainly to see if things with this person “work out” and you are “compatible”, and you obviously can’t have sex in public, at least not yet. People know this is how it works – introductions are made, you meet in person, you have sex very, very soon, and you decide from there whether you like this person enough to keep seeing him/her. You don’t want to appear in public with a series of someones with whom things didn’t work out, because you could look like a jerk, a slut, or a loser reject who can’t make anything work.

        If she’s a sugar baby, you’re meeting her for the first time at a hotel bar. If you like each other well enough, you get a room and you have sex with her in exchange for a few Benjamins. The point of the sugar baby interaction is not getting to know each other; it’s to conduct a financial transaction which must of necessity take place out of the public eye.

        Even if it is a conventional dating scenario, you don’t necessarily want people to see you in public, because “what if it doesn’t work out” and then you feel you have to explain it to others. Or as above, you look like a jerk, a slut, or a loser.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Elspeth says:

        If that is true of most relationships, things are worse than I thought. No real dates?

        Our family truly lives in a bubble. For better or worse.

        Liked by 3 people

      • thedeti says:

        rise of fitness and nutritional regimes, alongside the surgical and other medical techniques, to produce a crop of top tier appearance women in the 40-60 age range that literally never existed in the history of the human species.

        Along these same lines, there’s never been a time in history with a large number of unmarried women between ages 30 and 60, and who are active SMP participants. It has created a new SMP subcategory.

        It used to be, for a very long time in American history, that almost all women in this broad age range were married. Almost all of them had homes and children to take care of, and most of them had at least part time jobs. This was true regardless of race, station, education level, and socioeconomic status.

        These women – most women – were off the market. They got married, they got pregnant, they had children, they got overly occupied with the business of life. They just were not part of the sexual market place. Sure, a lot of these women had affairs, but it was not done overtly, and they were not broadcasting their desire to have extramarital sex. And, yes, some of these women got divorced. But most of those women were off the market too, due to stigma, religious pressure to avoid remarriage and extramarital sex (because in the eyes of the church, a divorced woman was not free to remarry or have sex with other men).

        Most women in the 30-60 age range weren’t out there dating like 21 year old coeds. They weren’t out there advertising their availability for dating. They were off the market. They were not part of any large sexual marketplace, at all.

        Currently, and for about the last 15 to 20 years, the SMP has been literally flooded with middle aged women in the age range of 35 to 50. Some of them are never married Sex And The City urban career women types, some are never marrieds for whom nothing ever worked out. Most of them are divorced with kids, and a lot of them have kids still living at home, They are not very young, but not senior citizens either, and a large percentage of them are still physically attractive because of all the factors you mentioned.

        They can and do compete in the SMP. They’re out there dating like they did before their first marriages, as they did in their early 20s. Their only dating frame of reference is from that time period when the world was their oyster, so they still think they have the same power now. They find out the only way most of them can gin up interest is to offer sex very quickly. Some are happy to do so; after all, women like sex and intimacy too. Most get frustrated with male sexual demands and the low quality of men on offer. They can’t find their hunky millionaire handyman, of course.

        The point is that there’s never been a time in human history where so many middle aged women have been single and created an entirely new SMP subcategory, and are trying to compete in the overall SMP. There has never been an SMP that looked the one we have now. The main effect on society is that the market is flooded with women willing to have sex much, much more rapidly than even 30 years ago, which drives the investment prices way down. Crassly put, p*ssy has never been so easy to find, and so inexpensive. Lower prices usually means lower quality as well.

        This has all kinds of effects on these women, including mentally and emotionally. It’s mentally and emotionally draining for these women to head back into a social milieu that’s really not suited for them and that they haven’t been part of for 5, 10, 20 years. The reason it’s so draining for them is that they are getting treated like young men – mostly ignored by the men they really want, frequently rejected, if they do manage to attract attractive men they’re crassly used for their main assets ( in their case, access to their bodies for sex), and supremely frustrated by their inability to get what they want. Many many women constantly complain about what a cesspool modern dating is, the poor quality of the men on offer, the time consumption, the demands for immediate sex, and the constant failure. Middle aged women aren’t built for SMP competition; they’re built for marriage and motherhood. That said, women are having to adapt themselves so they can compete in the SMP, and it’s having a masculinizing effect on them.

        Liked by 2 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        Along these same lines, there’s never been a time in history with a large number of unmarried women between ages 30 and 60, and who are active SMP participants. It has created a new SMP subcategory.

        Yes, this is correct. It’s all new. The two factors are kind of inter-related and cause each other, I think.

        That is, the fact that women are more attractive for longer due to the various things available (which they are availing themselves of, in many cases) means that they are more likely to divorce — they think they are more likely to find a rematch because they are attractive, still get lots of male attention. This is especially the case if they are active online, even in seemingly innocuous places like Facebook and Instagram, which is basically a part of Facebook. They notice the attention, which they get because they are attractive, and this makes them more likely to divorce because they see it as more likely that they can favorably remarry/rematch. Once they do divorce it is, in fact, much harder for many of them to remarry well. They can still do it, but how well they manage depends on a lot of factors, and here the more general “life success” factors a woman has already tend to increase her chances somewhat of remarrying reasonably well at these ages (like, say, Candace Bushnell did). But for the next level down, there aren’t many quality men available for women of those ages. There are plenty of men available for sex, including, if they are attractive, younger men, but not generally the kinds of men who would be upgrades for long term partners or husbands from their ex-husbands — most of those guys at those ages are married to other women.

        So what can happen, in other words, is a repeat of the same mistake made by many in the 20s, which is mistaking male attention, overall, for male interest in marriage (to them). An attractive woman at any age, physically, attracts male attention. Marriage is another matter, however, and at those ages, the number of upgrade men for marriage is simply smaller. It isn’t nonexistent, as we can see from some women who do stick the relanding later in life. But for most women who have more average bags of tricks it isn’t that easy.

        However, I think we also need to be aware that there are increasing numbers of women who do not wish to remarry after midlife divorce — that is, at least they are not in a hurry to do so. While there is still some pressure among the upper middle female set to marry for the first time in the early 30s, the pressure to remarry is a lot less. One reason why this happens is that most of the women who are in that group and divorce end up being friends with other divorced women (the married/divorced divide among female social groups is a real one, and it persists for the most part today), and these are not women pressuring other divorced women to remarry but, to the contrary, are often spinning influence that tends towards independence and empowerment. So what you can see among women in these age ranges is, at least for a time, a kind of “second early 20s”, when they “flex” a bit in the SMP and prove it to themselves that they can still pull attractive men for sex, including younger men and so on, which is often followed by a phase where women opt for another path — whether it’s a second career, travel, unmarried companionship long term, or even opting for “The Lesbian Option” (see Elizabeth Gilbert).

        Point is, though, that when women feel more attractive at older ages due to the male attention they are getting, due to the improvements in diet/fitness/treatments that really are making them more physically attractive for longer, they feel more interested in divorcing, even if there are not serious marital problems or at least nothing more serious than the normal kinds of things that most couples deal with, because they see their possibilities of remating as being good, based on the male attention they are getting, which they always notice, and which is high. What happens after, if they do that, varies, but the motivation to jump is there.

        Liked by 3 people

  7. Scott says:

    I’m pretty much the luckiest man in the world.

    I want to throw up.

    Liked by 5 people

    • Oscar says:

      It’s called grace, brother. You received God’s unmerited favor. No need to throw up. God has offered all of us His unmerited favor. We don’t all receive it the same way, and some even reject it, but none of us deserve it.

      Rejoice, brother! Your brothers rejoice with you.

      Liked by 4 people

  8. lastmod says:

    Everyone is having sex….but no one is……

    Kind of the same as it has always been really. A few guys deemed with the proper “god given” genetics get to “have” while a wide breadth in the middle get “some” and a large swath have to settle with none…and then shamed about how they are “not real men” / must “learn game…..’cause looks-don’t-count women only want a man who is confident 😉 / or told to pray / wait on God / be told its perfectly normal to have a first date at 50…..

    Some “have” and many “have not”

    the sooner the “have-nots” realize they are on the wrong side of history, or genetics, or whatever the better they can deal with reality than again being lied to by women and their fellow “luckier” men who got their genetics / looks by the luck of the draw

    Like

  9. Scott says:

    — I have a healthy infatuation/crush on my wife

    — she feels the same way about me

    — our sex life is a fun, playful celebration of the actual, real life that we built together over the years

    The world and everything in it is stupid.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. JPF says:

    Good article and comments.

    And even leaving that aside, the online sex culture gives guys even less incentive to make the kinds of changes in their lives that can help with actual relationships with women outside the virtual space.

    I do want to point out a flaw with this idea. It has been repeated here and elsewhere. The statement above assumes that the single guys are single due to their failure to live up to what they should be. Bullshit.

    First, we need to recognize what “list of requirements” they are failing to fulfill. If your unstated, implied list of requirements is based on what women desire, but my list is based on what is commanded of men in Scripture, then we will be talking past each other, and any debate will be worthless until we codify the list of requirements.
    If a requirement is not based directly on Scripture, many Christian men will refuse to accept that requirement; and I would say, rightfully so. When these men therefore “fail” to fulfill the requirement, they are not doing so due to laziness, or due to ignorance of the requirement, but they are rather doing so out of a principled choice. Now, each choice has consequences, and refusing to be an asshole toward women per some Game advocate, or refusing to sexually use a woman prior to marriage, will limit that man’s choices, despite whether you think your choice is “holy”. I know this limitation to be true from personal experience… and I still think that my refusal was correct. Not every slut is worthy of marriage. I think that should be repeated: Not every slut is worthy of marriage. In fact, by being harlots, none are; see Deuteronomy 22.

    Second, even if we have an agreed-upon list of requirements, it still is false to state that single guys are single, due to laziness or ignorance about who they need to be. I will not claim to be a handsome, rich, domineering man… and none of these are required by Scripture. I will claim that, by age 20, I both had a firm knowledge of the Scriptures and usually lived that out (no one is sinless), including self-control, moral living, involvement with believers, etc. And despite being not completely ugly, and having a very good career, net worth, knowledge of and firmly holding to Scripture, I failed to marry; at age 20; at age 25; at age 30; at age 35; at age 40.
    I agree that it is possible that some guys cannot marry due to their own refusal to be the men commanded in Scripture. But for most men, the problem is that the fathers of women of the church refuse to train their daughters to accept a Christian man, and refuse to arrange for, and marry off, their daughter to a moral Christian man. One of the reasons I respect Scott, is his consistent self-presentation as holding to the Scriptural ideals for marriage, not only for other people, but also in his intentions for his own daughter. If more men made a serious effort toward this, the problem of late or non-existent marriages would be far less, within the church.
    The vast majority of the problem is on the side of women, not men, and no amount of self-improvement by men will fix this. I cannot fix you; I can only fix myself.

    Liked by 3 people

    • lastmod says:

      That “list” of requirements (cough…’standards / expectations’) for many women gets thrown out the door as soon as she grabs the attention of a “hot guy”

      Seen a gazillion time from behind the bar in the nightclubs a decade a ago. Seen it with female college friends back in the late 1980’s / early 1990’s……..she tells anyone what she wants in a guy……good looking guy smiles / flirts with her. Off go her panties and all these “standards”

      Exactly the same way for me with my past drug addiction. I would say one thing. Play ‘holier-than-thou” and then that line of cocaine showed up……..well, you know……..I made excuses for backtracking or not sticking to what I said. You know…..the “well, I made that choice because (insert excuse)”

      Same thing here.

      When women really want to find that decent guy….she can find him. No not easily mind you. With that said……there really isn’t any incentive of many womens’ end to change.

      With my addiction. The bottom fell out, and it got so bad, I didn’t really have a choice. My past choices made that choice for me

      Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      The statement above assumes that the single guys are single due to their failure to live up to what they should be.

      Some are. Others aren’t. Still others are married even though they don’t “live up to what they should be”.

      There’s a whole lot that’s screwed up in the fallen world, and the further our culture gets from its Christian roots, the more screwed up things will get for everyone.

      Liked by 3 people

  11. Sharkly says:

    Romans 1:25 because they exchanged the truth about God for a lie and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever! Amen. 26 For this reason God gave them up to dishonorable passions. For their women exchanged natural relations for those that are contrary to nature; 27 and the men likewise gave up natural relations with women and were consumed with passion for one another, men committing shameless acts with men and receiving in themselves the due penalty for their error.

    And here’s the proof of it coming:
    https://www.theamericanconservative.com/dreher/no-families-no-children-no-future-lgbt-30-percent-carle-c-zimmerman/
    …roughly 30 percent of American women under 25 identify as LGBT; for women over 60, that figure is less than 5 percent.

    We need to repent of worshipping women(the creature) rather than the Creator. It doesn’t end well.

    Liked by 1 person

  12. Farm Boy says:

    What is it with all of these big lips that I see in pictures the days. Is this the current fashion?

    Like

    • Novaseeker says:

      Is this the current fashion?

      It appears to be — I also don’t get it — not attractive to me at all.

      This particular person, who is a known entity in the UK, appears to have had substantial plastic surgery, resulting in said lips, which were not present prior to the procedures in question.

      Liked by 3 people

      • Elspeth says:

        The sad part about that British woman is that she was no doubt much more beautiful the way she was before.

        I have full lips, but it’s an ethnic feature and so it doesn’t look crazy on me. I also think I look light years better since I stopped chemically straightening my hair several years ago. That was not the hair I was given. I saw a blonde Asian woman once, and my then 6 year-old said, “She looks weird.” When I asked why she said, “Chinese women don’t have blonde hair”, LOL. Out of the mouths of babes.

        We women are fairly well obsessed with having what we see others have, thinking that if it looks good on her, then it’ll look good on me. Nope. God gave each of us what he wanted us to have.

        I suspect she thinks the fuller her lips, the sexier they look, for reasons I will not mention.

        Liked by 4 people

    • Jack says:

      That is the most beautiful cro-magnon I’ve ever seen. And here we were taught that they were extinct. The educational system needs to be reworked.

      Liked by 3 people

    • It is part of a fetish known as Bimbofication

      Liked by 1 person

    • SFC Ton says:

      That’s a weird looking bitch.

      Like

  13. Eric Francis Silk says:

    I suppose it was inevitable. Sex is already an unregulated marketplace, and has been for a long time. In that case why not merge it with the financial marketplace?

    On a side note, I find it interesting that our culture still worships the idea of marriage (or at least long term partnership) based on romantic love and is horrified by the idea of marrying for economic reasons. Yet acceptance is increasing for this kind of transactional sex.

    Liked by 3 people

    • feeriker says:

      I suppose it was inevitable. Sex is already an unregulated marketplace, and has been for a long time. In that case why not merge it with the financial marketplace?

      Indeed, why not? Both marketplaces are on the verge of complete implosion/meltdown.

      Like

      • Eric Francis Silk says:

        That’s very optimistic.
        “Any day now. The bubble will burst any day now”, they say.

        This isn’t going away anytime soon.

        Like

  14. feeriker says:

    Middle aged women aren’t built for SMP competition; they’re built for marriage and motherhood. That said, women are having to adapt themselves so they can compete in the SMP, and it’s having a masculinizing effect on them.

    The inevitable (I won’t go as far as to say “unimtended” or “unforeseeable”) consequences of early adoption of the feminist life script.

    Some day, when all of the noisy, squawking, stinking, shitting chickens finally come home to roost, when alcoholic, drug-addicted, mentally ill cat ladies become a society-wide epidemic, it is going to dawn on everyone, especially middle-aged women, that there were very good reason why women’s choices and freedoms were severely limited in generations past.

    Liked by 3 people

    • Sharkly says:

      “… it is going to dawn on everyone, especially middle-aged women …”

      Still too optimistic I think. They don’t truly believe cause and effect, they’ve got their feelings, and their feelings will tell them that all the men they desired that didn’t serve them and help them to achieve their dreams are at fault for not recognizing and worshipping the goddess that is within them. Even though they may have moments of lucidity they will by nature constantly drift back to their prideful usurping feelings and their implacable unresolved envy of men. They didn’t get to be drug addled mentally ill cat ladies by humbly submitting to God or because they were able to correctly figure life out on their own.

      It won’t dawn on most people, what fools they have been, until they either die or see the Son of man sitting on the right hand of power, and coming in the clouds of heaven.

      Like

  15. redpillboomer says:

    “However, what few people saw coming was how this trend of women displaying themselves on sites like Instagram to garner male attention would intersect with the continually growing and innovating online sex industry”

    Believe it or not, this first got my attention by a couple of Christian women I know, both supposedly happily(?) married; and a couple of secular women I know from an educational program I participate in with them, observing their posts on Instagram. While not sexual in nature specifically in their posting, what caught my attention was the NUMBER of POSTS PER DAY they were putting up on Instagram. I’m like, “What are they doing, don’t they have better uses for their time?” Then it hit me, they are after the attention and validation–the MALE attention and validation. It dawned on me, they were addicted to al the attention and validation they were getting–like a drug. I also noticed, they got increasingly what I call, subtly provocative, with their poses and outfits. It didn’t reach slutty levels outwardly, but the innuendo was unmistakable! It didn’t take an Einstein to figure out what they were saying to the men in their sub-communications.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      Believe it or not, this first got my attention by a couple of Christian women I know, both supposedly happily(?) married….

      An Army buddy’s wife started posting yoga stuff on Instagram a few years back. She’s now an “influencer”, and according to my buddy, makes more than he does (I didn’t ask how that works), and he makes low-six-figures. Even though they aren’t believers, I still can’t imagine being comfortable with that arrangement.

      I’m sure that would get me labeled “insecure”, and a “misogynist”, and whatever else.

      Liked by 4 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        More to come on this specific phenomenon later in this series. Stay tuned.

        Liked by 2 people

      • redpillboomer says:

        “started posting yoga stuff”

        The women I referenced started with gym postings. They seemed innocent at first like, “Hey, look at me working out hard in the gym today!” Added to the workout postings were the ubiquitous ‘food shots,’ ‘girls having fun together shots,’ etc. The posts then seemingly began to increase from one here and there, to one every day, then to multiple posts during the same day. I noticed the gym clothes got tighter on the legs (spandex) and around the butt; the workout shirts sleeveless and loose fitting in the beginning, started to get smaller fitting with a little cleavage starting to show. What really did it for me were the posts at the gym evolving from general workout pics to provocatively posed shots of the chest and ass in action during squats, military press, etc. And then, Chad and Tyrone like trainers working with them personally getting into all these provocative poses. It also includes poses with them with their arms around their trainer hugging and ‘celebrating’ breakthroughs in the amount of weight they were lifting or whatever. Who the hell does that at the gym? Never seen it at the gym I go to and we have some nice looking young women there, but all seem to be focused on their workouts, most working out solo and paying the men scant attention (yes, I know everyone checks everyone else out ‘secretively,’ but that is just part of being at the gym, regular gym culture).

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I was squatting at the Orlando YMCA Aquatic Center a couple of years ago. During the midday, midweek when it’s dead – almost no one there. Some young girl in yoga pants marches over in front of the rack with one of those fixed weight little barbells and starts squatting ass out right in front of me. Lots of empty room in that gym. You’re not imagining things – they know what they’re doing.

        My brother in law had a similar sounding experience in the gym.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ Nova

        I’m not going to creep on my buddy’s wife’s Instagram page, so I don’t know what it looks like, or how many thirsty orbiters are inflating her ego. However, we know that many yoga poses are quite provocative, especially when performed by an attractive woman. That’s why women do yoga in the first place. It helps them feel sexy, desirable, and “spiritual” simultaneously.

        I’m a big fitness advocate, but a married person should reserve the benefits of fitness for his/her spouse.

        @ redpillboomer & cameron232

        There are many reasons why I prefer to work out in my garage, and you two just added to them.

        Like

  16. thedeti says:

    I’ve really threadjacked this one. One more thing to say.

    Men and women, people of all ages, will have to be agile, proactive, and immediately responsive in all areas of their lives, especially sexually and relationally. The past 30 years or so have seen rapid and deep change – changes faster and deeper than at any other time in human history.

    I learned in high school in the mid 1980s that a historian maxim is “change always happens slowly”. The history discipline might need to rethink that. Things have changed more in the past 30 years than they had in the previous 200 years. Much of this is the digital revolution. For example, in my lifetime, the way people buy and listen to music has been revolutionized 4 times: the vinyl LP to tape to CD to MP3 to iTunes/Spotify/Youtube. This is phemonenally rapid. For the years prior to the introduction of tape, the primary medium for music purchase was the vinyl LP which had been the state of the art for 30 years back to the mid 1950s.

    In 17 years, SCOTUS went from “it is NOT unconstitutional for a state to criminalize homosexual conduct” (Bowers v. Hardwick, 1986) to “it IS unconstitutional for a state to criminalize homosexual conduct” (Lawrence v. Texas, 2003). For constitutional jurisprudence, this is incredibly rapid change – a 180 degree reversal in 17 years. Supreme Court decisions just do not go 180 degrees oppositely that fast. Well, they do now, and once they do, they accelerate with lightning speed. Because in 12 years, we went from “it is unconstitutional for a state to criminalize homosexual conduct” in 2003, to “the Constitution guarantees same sex couples the fundamental right to marry” in 2015 (Obergefell v. Hodges).

    The manner of sexual interaction was

    Meet – date – date seriously – date exclusively – get engaged – have sex – get married (or the last two were sometimes flipped

    The manner of sexual interaction now is

    Meet online – meet in person – have sex – decide if you want to keep seeing each other – date – date seriously – date exclusively – get engaged/married OR break up and lather/rinse/repeat

    with all manner of permutations including polyamory, polyandry, polygyny. demisexuality, pansexuality, transgenderism, etc.

    And so everyone will need to be prepared for the next wave of change, which will be normalization of “alternative” lifestyles: polyamory, polygyny, polyandry, soft harems, gender fluidity, p3d0philia, and p3d3rasty. We are already well down the road for the first 5, and the last 2 will not be far behind.

    We live in interesting – and rapidly changing – times.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      Yes the pace of change is breathtaking. So much so, that now we almost take it for granted.

      The young certainly do. That is, they do not expect anything but constant flux in all areas of life — how we live, relate, make money, interact. They expect constant change, even constant disruptive change, in all of these areas on an ongoing basis. \

      The people of any age who thrive in this kind of environment either (1) insulate themselves from the process of constant change somehow by creating their own “arrangement” that does this, at least in some ways, and for some time (nothing is bullet-proof against this culture) or (2) fashion themselves so as to be optimized for quick adaptation to constant change — have the kinds of qualities (portable attractiveness vectors, portable abilities and skills that transcend economic and technological changes, portable personality factors that tend towards rising to the top of the froth in any context) which lend themselves to thriving in the precise circumstances where many will sink under the churn and flow of change — in doing so, they receive a double-return (at least) on their efforts precisely because the constant waves of change are swamping and crippling so many who are not so agile, a situation which redounds to the benefit of the super-adaptive.


      normalization of “alternative” lifestyles: polyamory, polygyny, polyandry, soft harems, gender fluidity, p3d0philia, and p3d3rasty. We are already well down the road for the first 5, and the last 2 will not be far behind.

      Polyamory is already mostly accepted among the younger opinion making class. It will never be a majority practice, and it seems unlikely to me that it will get the same push for “equal rights” as “LGBT” did, because there really isn’t a similar (if dishonest) “born that way” argument to be used to squeeze this into the race jurisprudence like Gay, Inc. managed to do for itself. The change here will be more social acceptance which, again, is already mostly there generationally. It’s possible we will see a push for poly marriage, but I don’t see it coming soon — most poly people don’t seem very interested in it, at least not anything like the energy there was behind LGBT, probably because they are not into traditional arrangements by definition.

      Polygyny is rampant, but simply goes undiscussed. Left Lib Robert Wright was already calling the post-sex-rev situation “de facto soft polygyny” back in the 1990s, before he was quietly told to STFU by his political fellow travelers, which he dutifully heeded, switching his lens to other topics since that time. Women don’t mind soft polygyny at all, which is why it isn’t a topic of critique. Hard polygyny, yes, that is disliked (which will also work against any momentum towards formally recognized polyamorous couples), but soft polygyny has been the dominant force in the SMP for decades now and is firmly entrenched. People just don’t use the word for it, often out of ignorance.

      Polyandry is definitely a rising star to keep an eye on. If men’s ideal is the polygynous soft harem, the female’s ideal is simultaneously having desire sex with hot alpha males while having a dutiful, loving, supportive beta male as housemate and co-parent (but not bedmate in the long term). Historically this hasn’t been realizable, pretty much at all, by women outside of hidden adulteries, because the husbands would not play along in their role. That … is changing somewhat. This is the “other side” of polyamory. When you do see poly couples in the media (in the obvious “trial balloon” articles that periodically appear at CNN’s site or elsewhere in the MSM about poly people), they are never polygynous and always poly-female — either polyandrous (W, H and W’s BF) or poly-lez (two women and a man, but the hinge in the wife, not the husband — that is, the wife has a relationship with H and LezLove, but H doesn’t have sex with L at all or, typically, with W very much). This is growing. It is small, so it shouldn’t be overstated in significance (the insta stuff we are discussing in this thread is much, much, much more significant than this is), but it is growing and therefore now is the time to become more aware of it and to observe it to see if it continues to grow. The limiting factor is obviously the willingness of men to “play ball”. With the increasing emasculation of younger generations of men becoming ever more obvious, it isn’t too much of a stretch to see this kind of thing continuing to grow on the margins. Again, something to keep an eye on.

      Soft harems, for me, are the same as soft polygyny, discussed above. Entrenched currently. The core feature of the SMP.

      Gender fluidity is also growing, as masculinity continues to be attacked and trans or “enbi” becomes more commonplace. I do not think that this will ever displace typical gender expression, but I do expect that there will be an ongoing significant minority of non-conforming gender expression, and that the people who are “normies”, in terms of gender expression, will continue to be hectored by the culture making class as yet another means of fostering division among their “lessers”.

      Liked by 1 person

      • thedeti says:

        Women don’t mind soft polygyny at all, which is why it isn’t a topic of critique. …. soft polygyny has been the dominant force in the SMP for decades now and is firmly entrenched. People just don’t use the word for it, often out of ignorance.

        I think it’s true women don’t mind soft polygyny. Some like it; but most simply don’t mind it. They don’t necessarily like it, because they’d rather have that alpha guy become an alpha bux, and have him all to herself, but know they can’t have that. I suspect most women view soft polygyny/soft harems as simple reality, as a cost of doing business. Sharing an attractive man with other women is far preferable to having an unattractive man all to oneself – at least, when she isn’t getting either man’s resources. (“Unattractive man” being any man who is not a top 20%er alpha fux or alpha bux) Her price for settling for an unattractive man is immediate, unfettered access to all his resources, for life, even if she chooses not to stay with him (as about half do).

        Soft polygyny/soft harems aren’t a topic of critique because women don’t want anyone talking publicly about it outside those in the know, the “secret society” comprised of almost all women and about 40 to 50% of men.

        Women certainly don’t talk publicly about their participation in soft polygyny because of their antislut defense, their demand that no one ever judge them for anything they do, and their need to save face and send sexual misadventures down the memory hole. This allows them to marry ignorant hapless beta buxes when they tire of or can no longer participate in soft polygyny.

        Men in the know don’t talk about women’s participation in soft polygyny because the more men who know about it, the greater the competition is, and also because they don’t want to anger or alienate the women who participate in it. Men not in the know don’t talk about it because, of course, they are purposely kept in the dark about it.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Novaseeker says:

        I suspect most women view soft polygyny/soft harems as simple reality, as a cost of doing business.

        Something like that.

        From my perspective, there are two kinds of “dating” that women engage in, similar to how we look at women’s participation in sex.

        When it comes to sex, there is “desire sex” — that is, sex women have because they are driven by pure desire/lust for sex with you — and then there is “other sex”, which can be some mix of comfort/intimacy/transactional/duty, in varying proportions and in various permutations depending on the context, life stage and so on. Idealists will point out that the ideal sex for women is both desire and intimate and comfort, or something like that, but even if this is true (which is subject to some doubt as the intensity of some elements can be dampened by the presence of certain others), it is nevertheless the case that almost no women can obtain sex that is all of these things from the same man. Hence women’s existential sex problem. It’s good to be lucky.

        When it comes to dating, I think something similar is at play (not exactly the same, of course, because dating is not sex). I think there is “desire dating” and there is “pragmatic dating”. The former are just hot guys, regardless of where it goes — would be nice if he turns out to be the love of your life and the complete alpha/comfort package, but even if he doesn’t, it’s still pretty damned hot. The latter are dates that have a purpose — looking for a guy to fill a role, whether that role is BF, husband, companion for a while, vacation tour guide, or something like that. The former is basically soft polygyny by another name. That is, “desire dating” IS soft polygyny, plain and simple. Pragmatic dating is not, because the men involved who are the targets are a different set of men, the kinds of men who do not have soft harems.

        Liked by 1 person

      • feeriker says:

        Yes the pace of change is breathtaking.

        “pace of change” = euphemism for “speed of collapse?”

        Liked by 1 person

    • Elspeth says:

      There are some young old fogies out there, but they are for all measurable intents and purposes, scattered across the land away from each other, and largely not amenable to the Internet as a way of building a life. I know they exist as I’ve met them, and it’s not just my kids.

      A friend of mine whose family is in the bubble recently said, “I’d rather my daughter (24) never get married than have sex outside of marriage in an attempt to land a man as a husband. It’s not worth is spiritually first of all, and it’s far from a solid bet.” The reality of what that meant kind of hit me for the first time; that chastity might cost that.

      I mentioned this on another thread, and I explored it further elsewhere, but we are learning that refusing to change with the times means we and our kids “miss out” on a lot. Every generation of believers has a cross to bear, though, and several have had to bear this one, where marriage was very hard to come by. And frankly, it’s the decadence and depravity of our times which make us view celibacy as the worst thing we might ever have to live through, LOL.

      The emergence of the online sex culture only serves to paper over a lack of self-control and a refusal to rise above fears and insecurities. Whether that means living life and getting out there to connect with real people in a meaningful way, or making peace with whatever limitations are our cross to bear.

      We are a culture that is literally at war with reality, and this cannot sustain itself because reality will not bend to our insanity. It can’t.

      Liked by 4 people

      • thedeti says:

        You’re not wrong. Celibacy isn’t the worst thing we might ever have to live through, but it is very difficult. It is a lot to ask of a young woman in her early 20s to abstain, because they very much want sex with attractive men. Most women can find men attractive enough, even if they’re very low betas she can get herself to “willing” for and she can use as beta bux plowhorse providers. But increasingly, more and more men are having to live as involuntary celibates, and (I suspect) more and more women are choosing to live as voluntary celibates (volcels). Male incels are such because they’re unable to attract women for one reason or another. Female volcels are such because they judge all their options as undesirable or unsuitable.

        That said, sex is central to the human experience for both men and women: For men because it is the primary way we connect to another human, and because it brings singular pleasure to us. We’re driven to have sex. The male sex drive is incredibly powerful. For us men, it’s fun, it feels good, and it connects us to the women in our lives. For women, because motherhood is central to almost all women’s desires and experience, and we all know how almost all women become mothers. Women are as driven to procreate as men are to spread the seed far and wide. Most women have at least one child, and most childless women are not so by choice.

        I doubt that a majority of men or women will live this way for the foreseeable future. Marriage is slowing down a little and is being pushed further and further down the road for more and more people, but most people are still marrying at some point. The latest charts at Dalrock pointed this out. We still don’t have a marriage strike. Most men are marrying because that’s the only way they can get sex; and most women are marrying because that’s the only way they can have the lifestyles and child(ren) they want to have.

        Most women are more than attractive enough for most men. Most women can get to “willing” and can settle for a beta provider long enough to marry and produce one or two children. Most women who can’t find men they’re attracted to will eventually settle for a beta provider, because the female drive to “nest” and reproduce is as strong and all consuming as the male drive to have as much sex as possible with as many women as possible while expending the least amount of effort possible. This is why most men will eventually marry as well – because taking a wife ostensibly means as much sex as possible as effortlessly as possible, and he is willing to compromise variety for the ‘sure thing’.

        The bottom line is, I think, that among the religious class, they will still marry. But they will have to compromise, deeply, to do so. They will also have to get past their prior sexual experiences. Most Christian men and women have already succumbed to premarital sex and there are entire false theologies to justify it. Those who haven’t will be pressured relentlessly to have premarital sex.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        “A friend of mine whose family is in the bubble recently said, “I’d rather my daughter (24) never get married than have sex outside of marriage in an attempt to land a man as a husband. It’s not worth is spiritually first of all, and it’s far from a solid bet.”

        People used to have a real simple screening criteria for young men. Is he willing to court the girl for a year (or even 6 months) without having sex with her and then marry her? If not, it’s lust not love. Girls need to be told this.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        People used to have a real simple screening criteria for young men. Is he willing to court the girl for a year (or even 6 months) without having sex with her and then marry her? If not, it’s lust not love. Girls need to be told this.

        Girls themselves don’t want that, Cameron. It’s not like the girls in question are willing to go 6-12 months without sex with their BF. They want the sex, too.

        Trust me, in this SMP (heck, even in the SMP I was in during the 1990s), if you are a guy and you DO NOT pursue sex within a certain number of dates, almost all women lose interest and move on for this reason (they will even raise it with you and tell you that they do not want to wait to have sex).

        Liked by 4 people

      • lastmod says:

        what a crock of shit

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        Cameron:

        Echoing what Nova said, the girls want the sex almost as much as the guys do. The girls will start getting suspicious, and maybe a little insulted, when a man they’re attracted to doesn’t respond in kind. I heard so many times:

        –“You never asked me out. Thought you weren’t interested.”

        –“You didn’t make any moves. I just didn’t get it.”

        –“I thought you were gay.” (really.)

        –“Don’t you like me? Did I do something wrong?”

        –“What are you waiting for?”

        and the best one, after a considerable amount of alcohol:

        –“Are you going to f*** me or what?” (really. I’m not kidding.)

        Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        You all live really high driven lives and get a lot of attention from women. Never had any of those things said to me.

        Life is really hard for you men…..so many choices and options taken or not taken. Life really is cruel.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        @deti and Nova,

        I don’t have all the answers just ideas. I know of tradish Catholic parishes where what I said works out for some people. I know of fundamentalist baptist churches where what I said works out for some people. What I described used to be how it was done and it worked for a lot of people. I think it’s what a family should do. Shelter your children and especially your daughters to a reasonable, non-kook extent and explain this to them.

        I don’t claim to have perfect solutions but what people are doing now isn’t working out too well.

        Like

      • JPF says:

        @LastMod – Never had any of those things said to me.

        I have had similar things said to me. And I have never been a hot, muscular hunk. Or rich. Or highly charismatic. I like to think I am smart, but I doubt that is a turn-on for many women.

        Not all, but some women I pursued romantically left me because I would not touch them sexually.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ Jason

        Never had any of those things said to me.

        Neither did I. So what?

        Like

  17. cameron232 says:

    “The bottom line is, I think, that among the religious class, they will still marry.”

    Don’t despair. Me and Scott and Elspeth and Oscar are the future because we’re massively outbreeding everyone else. Saw the latest numbers: TFR for Americans is now at European levels.

    Things will return to normal – it will just take some generations.

    Liked by 2 people

  18. lastmod says:

    “The male sex drive is incredibly powerful. For us men, it’s fun, it feels good, and it connects us to the women in our lives”

    connects you to the women in your lives…………

    life is just so hard for you alpha males

    Like

    • cameron232 says:

      I get commenters confused but I’m pretty sure thedeti has described himself as being like you. Pretty sure he’s not an “alpha male.”

      No one except maybe Helen Keller would describe me as an alpha male.

      Liked by 2 people

      • lastmod says:

        Read his comment I quoted putz. Sex connects “us men” to the WOMEN in our lives.

        For being a ‘low value” man like myself…….The Deti seems to have lots of sex connecting him to the WOMEN in his life.

        Total excusable alpha behavior

        Like

      • thedeti says:

        You have the right of it, Cameron. I’m not an alpha male, never have been, never claimed to be. I’m a high beta on my best day. I certainly was no alpha in college, as I had to be almost spoonfed and bashed over the head with girls’ interest in me. And I am hard monogamous.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        @lastmod – I could have written that sentence and it would be accurate (“sex connects us men to the women in our lives”) and I’ve only had sex with one woman and am nowhere near an alpha male. If he had written “sex connects a man to his women” but he didn’t. Did you assume thedeti is some sort of polygynous stud? You talk about your life and past all the time on here. Don’t you pay attention to the other commenters stories? If you did you would have realized thedeti is not a polygynous alpha male.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        Like you I get the commenters confused here….as you mentioned above.

        Most are one in the same. All the answers of how other men should live, but you know their past or choices are never, never brought into question. I have been deemed wrong on these forums over the past decade more than I can count up to.

        Yeah, I talk about my life and past here………………as does every other man.

        Reading the comments as a casual observer…..most if not all men here had plenty of chances with women. had plenty of dates. Plenty of IoI’s and plenty of options of who to ask out and who not to…..and had plenty of “yes” replies.

        I am an incel (small letter “i” incel) and over the years…….99% of you all know more about it than I do…..and I live it.

        Like

  19. Elspeth says:

    @ cameron:

    People used to have a real simple screening criteria for young men. Is he willing to court the girl for a year (or even 6 months) without having sex with her and then marry her? If not, it’s lust not love. Girls need to be told this.

    But no one is telling them this because few Christians agree with it. If I could begin to recount to you the amount of crap we take for having good, non-rebellious, chaste young women, it would shock you. Especially since we get it from well-meaning Christians. It’s one of the reasons I get frustrated when I read the words, “They are ALL having sex.” “All the parents are in on it and turning their heads.” I’ll give you a synopsis of things my husband has encountered just in the past 6 months.

    We’ve been accused of “using the Bible to justify living like Muslims [no, for real]. We don’t live in Biblical culture. We live in America, and our kids have to walk out their faith for themselves.” This even though our girls have college degrees, full time jobs, their own cars, and social lives. Just the fact that they don’t live on their own and have kept their legs shut, earns this rejoinder from a fellow Christian dad of daughters in the same age range.

    A father whose daughters have failed to meet the standard have hit my husband with the nonsense that they have been sheltered and not allowed to become adults and really be tempted, he says. That’s why they have maintained their virtue and faith. SAM has “handicapped them”. They’re not on lock down. They can leave, but they have chosen thus far, to stay here with their ogre of a dad even though they could make it on their own and have been in a position to do so for at least 3 years now.

    The biggest disappointment for me has been the realization that most Christians think we are nuts or at least terribly misguided. People actually express disdain at the fact that we have raised decent young women who deeply respect their dad. It’s seen as dysfunctional or abnormal that they haven’t rebelled and taste tested men as a rite of passage.

    I honestly think some of them that something is amiss. Never mind that our door is open, that many people visit, break bread, leave their kids here for a night out, etc. We are a very social and open family. Our girls are so outside the norm (i.e. Good Christian girls) that they must be suffering Stockholm syndrome seems to be the perception.

    To be fair not everyone thinks that. But some do, and they haven’t been particularly subtle about it.

    So I won’t be told that it’s easy for them, because the strait gate is just as Jesus said, a road on which we will find very few fellow travelers. It’s not as if what I’m asserting has no precedent.

    To the original post: The only social media my kids use is the one they have for their entrepreneurial ventures. I thought they would gravitate to it like flies when they turned 18 and their dad said it was up to them, but nope. They didn’t. I use it more than they do, although I basically post Thomas Sowell, Voddie Baucham and Walter Williams posts between pics of my culinary adventures.

    Liked by 5 people

    • cameron232 says:

      You’re doing things right. The fact that you are and that they are failing burns them so they attack you. Who cares – keep doing what you’re doing.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Oscar says:

      The biggest disappointment for me has been the realization that most Christians think we are nuts or at least terribly misguided.

      We are a peculiar people!

      Like

      • Elspeth says:

        I think a lot of Christians have been fairly well inculcated with the idea that any expectations of young women are tantamount to oppressive restrictions. Certainly that a young woman might choose limits of their own volition is anathema to lots of people.

        But there truly have been no “oppressive restrictions” on our girls since they became legal adults. That’s not how we operate because we do believe that their faith has to be their own. Thankfully, that seems to be the case in a way that it wouldn’t have been if they left home at 18. The maturity difference between them and some of their classmates that they loosely keep in touch with is marked.

        I know “oppressive restrictions”. No girl raised in my father’s house was going to be dating any man because he was not the type to turn a blind eye to the obvious. He just assumed that the worst would happen and cock blocked until we individually made the decision to leave home, pay our way, and live by our own rules. My sister was 17 when she left, a very short time after graduating high school She’s a lot older than me, and that was in the 70s. I was 21 when I decided I couldn’t take it anymore. That was early1993. 18 months later I was married.

        What we are seeing is a near complete generation of young millennials (including many of the men) raised in churches we respect, who are all about nonsense. Not a few are into all this protesting nonsense also. Yes, the boys too.

        Like

    • feeriker says:

      Elspeth, is this your church that’s giving you and your husband a hard time about raising sexually pure children? If so, then … well, don’t take this the wrong way, but maybe it’s time to look for another church, or seek out like-minded families you know and start your own fellowship together.

      Like

      • Elspeth says:

        @ Farm Boy: BLM//social justice protests are the nonsense to which I refer. And I’ll add that these are white, MC young people. I don’t have a single younger relative, male or female, who could be bothered with it

        Is “work or prison” oppressive? Could be. Depends on the context. I don’t think men working to provide is oppressive anymore than I think women bearing children and working in the home is oppressive.

        @freeriker:

        No, not at our church. Well, we have heard things from people at our church, but not just there. Extended family, casual acquaintances, Christian neighbors in our very typical neighborhood.

        Generally speaking, there are few Christians we have encountered ANYWHERE that don’t have a pretty strong disagreement with the fact that our young adult daughters are still at home. It’s just not done!

        To be fair, we do have a wonderful circle of like-minded friends in the part time school our younger kids attend. They are a respite and a blessing..

        Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        @Elspeth,

        I have encountered similar things among conservative Catholics (not so much the radtrads) online. I suggested that it probably isn’t a good idea to send daughters to a big state university (I mentioned U. of F.) because they’re rather like brothels and from the reaction I got you’d think that I was advocating chaining women up in the basement, beating them and forcing them to marry their 50 year old uncle. This reaction was from from women and white knight men.

        Then I quoted the catechism of the council of Trent and they mostly shut up.

        Liked by 2 people

  20. lastmod says:

    I’ll say it again:

    All of you dad’s with daughters will never:

    let your daughter marry the boy next door unless he is in the upper 10% of men
    tell your daughter no about a career, work, or future education
    let a young man marry your daughter UNLESS he has a stem degree is 3.5 to 4.5 years older, a “leader” in church, above average looking and he will BEND to YOUR authority in all matters.

    Most of you men would be a royal pain in the ass to your future sons-in-law by going by the comments here over the past decade

    Like

    • Oscar says:

      I’ll say it again:

      And you’ll be wrong again. Which, of course, you’re free to do.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        I’ll say it again. No young man in who is courting your daughter will ever be ready enough, holy enough, set-apart enough, career driven enough, will be able to bench press enough, stalk more game, catch more fish, be handsome, educated, or deemed a good enough leader for your daughter at the age of 22, 23, 25, or 19

        then…..it will be “men are all cucks, beta and weak…what’s wrong with men today”

        and the circle will begin again. None of you were 100% ready when you married. Notta one of you

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        I’d prefer the young man is normal looking (a great looking man is more likely to cheat). I don’t care how much he bench presses (if it’s a lot of weight he’s more likely to cheat). I hope he believes in Jesus and lifelong marriage and is willing to work hard and is responsible with money. I hope he is kind to women and children.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ Jason

        I’ll say it again.

        You can “say it” as many times as you want. You’re still wrong.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        How am I wrong? If I were a young man, and I tried to date your of age daughter, you would tell her “no”

        How do I know? By your statements over the years directeed at me. Any young man who was 19, didn’t have a good provision, didn’t think like you exactly, agree with you exactly who tried to date your daughter would be gently threatened by you. Then you would say “where are all the solid real men today?”

        You would never allow any young man a chance….no matter how “holy” he was.

        Like

    • Oscar says:

      How am I wrong?

      Here’s how you’re wrong.

      let your daughter marry the boy next door unless he is in the upper 10% of men

      I don’t even know what “the upper 10% of men” means.

      let a young man marry your daughter UNLESS he has a stem degree

      Wrong. No STEM degree required. As I’ve already stated, I’d be happy to give my daughter in marriage to a Godly tradesman.

      is 3.5 to 4.5 years older

      Wrong. I told my daughters that a 10 year age difference is fine.

      a “leader” in church

      Wrong. He won’t meet the qualifications of an elder listed in Timothy and Titus until long after they’re married, so it makes no sense to expect him to be an elder before they’re married.

      above average looking

      Wrong. Obesity is out, because obesity is a choice that reveals character. But other than that, If my daughter loves him, I don’t care what he looks like.

      and he will BEND to YOUR authority in all matters.

      Wrong. I have no authority over another man’s household. Once she’s married, she’s under her husband’s authority, not mine, and that’s what I’ve told my daughters in our Bible studies many, many times over the years.

      You’re wrong, Jason. In multiple different ways. No matter how many times you “say it again”, you’re still wrong.

      Liked by 2 people

      • lastmod says:

        Nah……when that time comes….believe me…no man is gonna be good enough. In fact I know it.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        Nah……when that time comes….believe me…no man is gonna be good enough. In fact I know it.

        That’s some impressive mind-reading. What am I thinking right now?

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        What are you thinking?

        “I’ll bet this cute retort will shut him up”

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        What are you thinking?

        “I’ll bet this cute retort will shut him up”

        Nope. Wrong again. Maybe your mind reading skills are rusty. Would you like to try again?

        Liked by 1 person

  21. Scott says:

    A year? Yikes

    Courtship should be like 4 months

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      I don’t know how long it should be – some of the Tradish Catholic parishes like FSSP ones require 6 months.

      Like

      • lastmod says:

        My parents married in an Episcopal church. They decided on marriage three months after dating. They were required six months of counseling before marriage. This was early 1965 for them. Today they’ll marry you to your horse or yourself if you want with no counseling.

        One today probably would have better chances with a local justice at the civic center than a church

        Like

    • JPF says:

      Yeah, that idea of wanting even 6 months seems foolish. Why should we want this?
      – Are the couple so immature that it’ll take that long for them to learn to get along with each other?
      – Are we hoping that with enough temptation, that the couple will fail to exercise sexual self-control, and then we can feel better about our own immorality?
      – Are we hoping that the young man has a weak sex drive? If he can go a year with the woman he supposedly desires for a year and not want sex with her, then why the hell is he marrying her? And same for her lack of desire for him? So we want weak marriages then….

      My wife and I “failed” to make it to two months without marriage. And I am very grateful for that. I wanted marriage… not endless dating that might, maybe, if I played my cards right, eventually result in a permanent marriage.

      Like

      • cameron232 says:

        No the idea is to screen out players who will bang them and bolt.

        If they can’t wait 6 months and they bang and end up getting married then while that’s sin it will probably be a better outcome than bang-and-bolt.

        Like

      • Joe2 says:

        The purpose is to due your best to learn whether the future wife has some personality disorders which she tries to keep under control until after the wedding. It’s better to learn and see the red flags that she is a psycho before the wedding so it can be called off rather than experiencing her abnormal behaviors after the wedding.

        Liked by 3 people

  22. Farm Boy says:

    Today they’ll marry you to your horse or yourself if you want with no counseling.

    To be honest. I am thinking counseling might be pointless in those cases

    Like

    • JPF says:

      I am thinking counseling might be pointless.
      fify

      Apologies to Scott for the generalization. I do accept that some counseling can be very helpful. But not the counseling that requires a couple to wait an extra 6 months before starting their marriage.
      Most church marriage counseling I have seen is either worthless, or directly contrary to Scripture, in example if not clearly in the words.

      Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Psychological counseling and church counseling are very different. As they should be.

        Liked by 1 person

      • feeriker says:

        Most of the churches I’ve attended didn’t even offer pre-marital counseling, probably because almost no marriages ever took place in the church. I’ve remarked before that when churches conduct more memorial services in any given year than they perform weddings, it’s a very, very bad omen for the church’s future.

        Liked by 2 people

  23. Farm Boy says:

    No young man in who is courting your daughter will ever be ready enough, holy enough, set-apart enough, career driven enough

    It wasn’t always this way. I have heard many accounts of it being different up to around 1960.

    https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2020/12/20/a-fella-of-potential/

    Liked by 1 person

    • cameron232 says:

      The point of the comment you quoted is that those of us here with daughters will only accept an alpha male who is holier than Jesus and has a great career as a potential son-in-law. Additionally, we all counsel that unattractive men can all get a hot chick for marriage if only they learn game and that their disappointments are all their own fault for failing to man up. Also, we’re almost all alpha males that have to beat chicks off with a stick.

      That accurately describes the authors (Jack, Nova, Scott) and nearly all the male commenters.

      Like

      • Farm Boy says:

        It is mostly true these days that the daughters (and often their fathers, alpha or not) want well developed men for their daughters to marry.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        Yeah. that pretty much sums it up cameron. Thank you.
        Your future son-in-laws are gonna be brutalized by you ‘real men’ here. He will have to ask you to use the bathroom instead of his wife (your daughter). He will have to live in the shadow of you……no man will be patriarchal enough for your daughter(s). Read the comments and all the man-o-sphere stuff from the past ten years. No young man is going to match one grain of what has been purported.

        Like

      • Farm Boy says:

        AS it should mock it in most cases

        Actually no. Many incel fellas are (or would have been with some encouragement) fine enough husbands. But unleashed hypergamy has put the kibosh on this group through no fault of their own.

        Perhaps the group that unleashed the hypergamy that caused these problems should be the target of mockery

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Ok Jason, but you’re talking to a particular group of men (and a woman) at a particular site. I don’t think 99% of the people here are like my sarcastic caricature.

        I told you before that I suspect a lot of anonymous manosphere commenters are lying and full of shit.

        You’re a guy, you grew up with guys. Guys self inflate. Guys love to make themselves sound like studs, etc.

        Like

      • lastmod says:

        All the guys I knew in college were not “studs” per say, but they were getting sex Getting dates. and hanging out with women. Much better looking than me. During my IBM years, everyone was married. I was on average twelve years younger than most of my tech group (which was about 1000 people in my division), and if they were not married…they were living with a gal, divorced and dating / living with / or on their second marriage. Much better looking than me.

        In christianity, saw very little “holiness” concerning matters of dating and sex. In fact, if you were from a popular family (ie attractive) their teenage kids pretty much could do whatever they wanted sex wise with their fellow teens. Men who were divorced and good looking dated very frequently. Anyone else got the “holiness speeches” and all that other crap. No bolts of lightening struck anyone down ever in the church for this. Throughout history. Notta one. In fact, these “confident” men and women “who just couldn’t help themselves” were rewarded by god even more.

        I agree there is a tad of BS on here……and maybe a bit more because this is a christian forum, should be expected…….but nah, most of the men here are WAY above average looking, and have much more intellect, prowness, skills, abilities and potentials than me. That has been proven

        With that said, I will never forgive the damage done by “game” and “red pilled biblical christianity” to me. My job is now to call this out as gently (yeah I know……working on that) as I can. If I had spent my late thirties and early forties with the mindset I have NOW instead of this “jesus wants me to serve” BS I probably could have AT LEAST found one of those “he’ll do” women and at least had a chance to lead, help, grow and love.

        No…..I listened to Dalrock and others. Stiffled me, and then mocked my failures. My mistake.

        Like

  24. Farm Boy says:

    I think a lot of Christians have been fairly well inculcated with the idea that any expectations of young women are tantamount to oppressive restrictions.

    So how about the guys? Is “work or prison” oppression?

    Liked by 2 people

  25. Farm Boy says:

    I am an incel (small letter “i” incel) and over the years…….99% of you all know more about it than I do…..and I live it.

    Oddly enough, society doesn’t care about this. Rather it mocks It. This situation can’t be good for the health of society

    Like

    • lastmod says:

      AS it should mock it in most cases. The incel groups on the Internet are no better than the christian man-o-sphere. They both talk about women non-stop. The Incels can’t get any, while the man-o-sphere has a hot wife, gets hit on everyday and has had tons of opportunities and experience before they met said hot wife

      this cursed “inceldom” that I live in and have to deal with, even at my age…………..

      the real ironic thing is many folks in this sphere seem to have the ability (or gall) to lecture me about this group, or people who are incel….and they themselves have NEVER had to live it….

      Like

  26. Farm Boy says:

    What we are seeing is a near complete generation of young millennials (including many of the men) raised in churches we respect, who are all about nonsense. Not a few are into all this protesting nonsense also. Yes, the boys too.

    What precisely is the nonsense?

    Like

  27. Farm Boy says:

    If I could begin to recount to you the amount of crap we take for having good, non-rebellious, chaste young women, it would shock you.

    No, it wouldn’t shock me. It is a “crabs in a bucket” thing, where the others try to drag you down to their level. Deep down, they know their position is BS, so they can hardly help themselves from trying to drag others down.

    In fact, lots of people, deep down know that many of their positions are wrong, but keep them anyway. Probably this doesn’t help their mental health.

    Liked by 3 people

  28. Farm Boy says:

    Shelter your children and especially your daughters to a reasonable, non-kook extent and explain this to them.

    I don’t claim to have perfect solutions but what people are doing now isn’t working out too well.

    That last part is key I do think. One might suggest that an adequate solution might be found down this one path, while the common path taken by many offers no solution

    Like

    • cameron232 says:

      Well I see different responses. Some black pill amounts to “that won’t work.” It sounds like “don’t bother telling your daughter to wait for marriage because the urge to screw is just too much for her.” No one seems to offer a solution. I guess we can just bitch about how much women are sluts and suck ass.

      Like

  29. Farm Boy says:

    Trust me, in this SMP (heck, even in the SMP I was in during the 1990s), if you are a guy and you DO NOT pursue sex within a certain number of dates, almost all women lose interest and move on for this reason (they will even raise it with you and tell you that they do not want to wait to have sex).

    Notice that SMP and not MMP is being mentioned. Long ago, they were kinda sorta somewhat the same. No longer. This is a bit of a problem.

    https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2020/12/13/divergence/

    Liked by 1 person

    • lastmod says:

      life is so tough for all these ‘real men’ back in the 1990’s……a guy NOT pursing sex, and woman losing interest……..life is indeed unfair 😉

      Like

    • Novaseeker says:

      Notice that SMP and not MMP is being mentioned. Long ago, they were kinda sorta somewhat the same. No longer. This is a bit of a problem.

      Agreed. There are two separate markets. On the specific point I was writing about, I do not think the two markets operated that differently — at least in the MMP I was participating in, also in 1990s, most women were not interested in waiting until being married to have sex (of course, most of them also would have had sex in the SMP already by the time they were looking in the MMP as well).

      Like

  30. lastmod says:

    “Actually no. Many incel fellas are (or would have been with some encouragement) fine enough husbands. But unleashed hypergamy has put the kibosh on this group through no fault of their own.

    Perhaps the group that unleashed the hypergamy that caused these problems should be the target of mockery”

    I left the “Incel forums” over a decade ago. Why you wonder?????

    Too many of them honestly believe that the age of consent should be lowered to 12 or thereabouts. Most believe the government should PAY them to get prostitutes. A solid bunch of them really believe that if they had a wife, they would have ZERO problems (99% then would find something or someone else to blame for their other problems). Most justify “incel rage” and the people who got killed, or hurt, or maimed in said rage “deserved it”

    I had no time for that.

    Sure, a few guys there honestly are okay…..and the ones who are incel (small letter “i”) eventaully leave and just have to “deal” with the effing unfair looks that “god” blessed them with or endure in silence, solitude. These are not violent types….just guys who were just born with a better genetics might have been good fathers, husbands….but these men are not allowed this.

    Much of the blame really lies in Game / PUA / Rollo and their ilk. These men were told n sold a false bill of goods and then mocked for their failures at it.

    Like

  31. Farm Boy says:

    While not sexual in nature specifically in their posting, what caught my attention was the NUMBER of POSTS PER DAY they were putting up on Instagram. I’m like, “What are they doing, don’t they have better uses for their time?” Then it hit me, they are after the attention and validation–the MALE attention and validation. It dawned on me, they were addicted to al the attention and validation they were getting–like a drug

    How gratifying is a cheap validation? Perhaps a good number of cheap validations add up. Probably they have no idea what they are doing. It “just happens”

    Liked by 1 person

    • Novaseeker says:

      Eh, I think it’s very validating once the numbers add up. These girls love having lots of eyeballs on them, in a safe/distant way that they can completely control and is totally not creepy like being checked out by some rando creep in person. Once they have tens of thousands and beyond numbers of followers and hundreds of likes and many comments within a couple of hours of posting a picture … it’s really, really validating.

      They love the validation. I think men very much do not understand this, because it isn’t in our wiring to anything like the degree it is in them.

      One of the follow-on posts in this month’s series will be addressing a specific case of precisely this in some significant detail, tracing the very process that the comment you’re quoting describes over the course of a few years.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Farm Boy says:

        One might suggest that a large number of cheap validations make one some type of whore…

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        Indeed …. and Instagram has created a large amount of these, because it aggregates these small cheap validations together to make them more powerful, and therefore more enticing.

        The internet’s power of aggregation is the flipside of its power of disintermediation. Both are game-changers, with impacts that ripple, and are rippling right now, through the culture.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Farm Boy says:

        These girls love having lots of eyeballs on them, in a safe/distant way that they can completely control and is totally not creepy like being checked out by some rando creep in person

        I suppose that they might feel safer, but they are still being checked out by what they consider to be rando creeps.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Novaseeker says:

        I suppose that they might feel safer, but they are still being checked out by what they consider to be rando creeps.

        Yes, but that doesn’t appear to be an issue where these guys are not actually seen. If it were an issue, we wouldn’t see the massive participation rates in this activity by women that we do. Yes, it makes no sense to us, probably because this kind of attention isn’t generally craved by us as men. But obviously it’s a big thing for women, as even a cursory glance at Instagram quickly reveals.

        Liked by 1 person

      • redpillboomer says:

        “These girls love having lots of eyeballs on them, in a safe/distant way that they can completely control and is totally not creepy like being checked out by some rando creep in person.”

        Lots of eyeballs….safe/distant way…that they can completely control….Agree. It gives them the ‘best of both worlds,’ loads of attention with a way to keep most men, including the ‘creeps,’ at arms length; yet still present virtually to provide one thing, and one thing only: attention/validation. It also seems to be a way to filter the men. From the posts of the two married Christian women I know personally, occasionally it would seem that some guy made it out of the virtual world and showed up in the woman’s physical world. You’d see this in the posts–lot’s of selfies at the gym, food pics, girls out together on the town dining, shopping pics, etc. No guys…Then suddenly a pic, with a guy in it. I don’t mean just the pics of the Chad and Tyrone gym trainers posing at the gym with them, but some guy riding down the street in the woman’s car with them–singing a song together or doing something or other together while riding down the highway. Knowing these women, and their husbands, my first thought was, “Who is THAT guy with her?” Next thought was, “Whoa, where’s hubby right now? Is he even aware of the existence of this dude? AND…Where does this go next, if anywhere?” It just struck me as very disconcerting in a ‘Danger Will Robinson’ sort of way.

        Liked by 1 person

  32. Farm Boy says:

    I left the “Incel forums” over a decade ago. Why you wonder?????

    I have never been to the incel forums. Perhaps they attract the worst people. The “incel issue”, on the other hand, has roots in poor societal decisions.

    Perhaps some the less savory people that one might find on these incel forums might have been “better men” by whatever standard you choose, if they were not nudged down the path that they took

    Liked by 1 person

  33. lastmod says:

    “Perhaps some the less savory people that one might find on these incel forums might have been “better men” by whatever standard you choose, if they were not nudged down the path that they took”

    A leading answer to your preceived / accepted outcome by your standard.

    Most incels were not “nudged” down a path. There was not other path to go. They, like all of us are on a boat in stream that flows……..the Incels’ stream shifted into an upcurrent, and no matter what they do they can’t seem to move……..or they barely keep from going over the falls into mental / emotional oblivion……..

    Everyone else is standing on the shore at the campfire, laughing, drinking beer, enjoying life with a special someone yelling at them “Aw….come on, you’re just not trying!!!!!” and calling this encouragement. They also are laughing, talking with their friends on the shore, pointing and laughing at the futility of them……

    Nevermind the stream they were in at least was going with the current

    Like

    • Farm Boy says:

      Yes, for most it was a strong nudge. One more aspect of society choosing to make this effectively public policy

      It is telling that many consider this to be a feature, not a bug. Though, those who think this way may change their minds if there is a collapse. Or maybe they won’t, as they seem to have no clue

      Like

  34. lastmod says:

    Public policy? Farmboy come on here! You’re on a “real man” forum here. These men NEED incels around. If public policy was indeed changed and / or mandated all the men here would be demanding the government has “no right” to do this

    Like

    • Farm Boy says:

      It is not called “public policy”, though that is what it amounts to. In the 1960’s and 1970’s it was called “women’s liberation”. It was given the green light by all of the “correct thinking people”. If you pointed out the implications of this, it was said that there was something wrong with you, a most chilling effect. Furthermore, at the time, there was no place to publish your objections (no “polite” magazine or newspaper would touch them). Then there was the fact that any objections would have an “intellectual” feel to them, making it difficult to compete with the emotional appeal of “womens’s liberation”.

      So we get a public policy change, with no means to object, or even inform as to what actually just happened

      Liked by 1 person

      • lastmod says:

        The public policy change you speak of concerning incels will never happen. The men here in this forum and others like them would stop it, squelch it, and not “allow” it.

        The “correct thinking people” concerning incels (and their other tagalongs like MGTOW and other similar / related movements) have already cornered the discussion.

        “If we just ended feminism, all these losers would at least get a chance at marriage, get to have sex and be fathers”

        The “we” is never defined, well…..it is, but the burden is on the incel. “Stand up, be a man, and stop these feminists!!!!” is what they are told. “We can’t do it because of all the cucks (you incels) and soy boys (you incels). If you guys just learned Game, moved out of the basement, got a real job and improved yourself and got confidence feminism would be toppled.”

        There was nothing intellectual about the counter arguments in the 1970’s against feminism. The men in here BENEFITED greatly from feminism. They got to have much more sex than their fathers’ generation did. The gap between those who had interest from women and the ones that didn’t widened ten fold……and I am sure all these men getting more were “concerned” about the ones who were not (sarcasm). These genetically luckier men got to reap many of the benefits of experimentation, sex, dating, learning “female nature” BEACUSE of feminism and then had the audacity to lecture this growing crowd of incels with belittling, books, podcasts that were supposed to “help” them but it made the incel look creepier, stranger, more awkward and silly. These men then shamed them. This really got going around 2010 or thereabouts.

        Incel rage targets mostly MEN. Not women. No man in the sphere who purports game and its ten thousand variations / PUA / the Rollo Rational Male bullshit on incels has a clue about this scene and very peculiar (but growing plight).

        Including you. Men like you and others seem to know “exactly” what caused this, and when you go fifty years without any female attention….maybe you can relate a bit. Get it 🙂

        My inceldom at least is in check. I hate it, but I also “undertands” that I lost here. Acceptance helped more than any book, lecture from a man who won the lottery, or pastor, or christian.

        If you believe that the men in this room care about the “incel plight” you are wrong. Not that they should care, many incels are beyond hope. Many are damaged beyond saving and reclaiming for marriage or dating……and besides….there are no “good women left” This crowd will tell you this themselves.

        Where does this leave many incels? Bitter frustrated. Locked out and down….and still told “you’re just not trying”

        Like

  35. lastmod says:

    Even the christian forums need “incels” in their churches to run ministry, do the dirty work inside the church community to be told “there, there jesus loves you….its a blessing to be single, burn with passion, be frustrated sexually, and sad that you cannot find a wife! did you know there is no marriage in heaven? Besisdes….god doesn’t promise you anything…so be joyful!”

    Hence why the faith is failing in attracting these men to “red pill christianity” or the faith in general.

    Hypergamy can be blamed….but this hypergamy was kicked up by, enabled and muscled up by most men in these types of forums if truth be told

    Like

  36. Pingback: Why is the online amateur sex industry attractive to women? | Σ Frame

  37. Pingback: Why is the online amateur sex industry attractive to men? | Σ Frame

  38. Lexet Blog says:

    Demolition man (movie) predicted the future

    Liked by 1 person

  39. Pingback: The Economics of the New Amateur Sex Industry | Σ Frame

  40. Pingback: The Learning Psychology of Women who Participate in the Online Amateur Sex Industry | Σ Frame

  41. Pingback: Now she’s directing her own pro motion! | Σ Frame

  42. Pingback: The Slow Train Wreck — a Cautionary Tale | Σ Frame

  43. Pingback: The Addictive Nature of the Online Amateur Sex Industry | Σ Frame

  44. Pingback: A Christian Whore Of Babylon | Gunner Q

  45. Pingback: Revealing the motives behind unconcealed sex and nakedness | Σ Frame

  46. Pingback: The Train Wreck – Speculative causes, influences, and alternate outcomes | Σ Frame

  47. Pingback: The Centrality of Sex in Western Culture | Σ Frame

  48. Pingback: What Hitting Bottom will look like | Σ Frame

  49. Pingback: The Lopsided Liberalized Mating Market | Σ Frame

  50. Pingback: The Future of Intersexual Relationships is Transactional | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s