Post: #1

Last year - possibly buried in the epic Elliot Rodger thread sometime in May - I mentioned an increasing observation of Millennial Women growing awkward and uncomfortable about sex, despite guys saying sloots still seemed to be everywhere. I was talking about the current culture being shaped for sex-negative attitudes to become the mainstream: particularly-asexuality and female incels.

I did find myself referring back to the original post in this post from July last year though:

Quote:All the cultural signs seem to be pointing towards an oncoming shift by women into Neo-Victorian sexual prudery. I expect it to be one of the main theological splinters of feminism in the next few years - the pro-sex versus the anti-sex.

Smoke 'em while you got 'em.

This was the coming split I saw coming that would clearly-define what I've kept calling Fourth Wave Feminism, the differences I identified between them here:

Quote:Sex-positive vs sex-negative.
Community vs segregation.
Optimism vs suspicion.
Earnest vs abusive.
Physical vs online.
Collectivism vs authoritarianism.
Pacifism vs fantasies of violence.
Self-love vs self-loathing.
Libertine vs puritan.
Creating art vs curating art.
Changing the world vs controlling the world.

I've also spoken of sensing an increasing need for women to be getting their incessant need for drama in their relationships with men fulfilled by online drama / social activism. Rather than flying into a fury over their man, and thrilling in their unchecked emotions - what all women crave above all else - they're flying into fury over all men.

Returning to Australia after a couple of months away, I've noticed the shifts I was predicting. Things are happening very quickly:

---

Four recent observations:

Prostitution

There's an increasing rise in the number of articles and petitions calling for ending prostitution: a process that specifically states the decriminalising of the women involved so they can be subjected to 'holistic healing' whilst making it illegal to purchase sexual services.

Yes, even a Fleshlight is problematic, because it turns a vagina into an 'object to be used and discarded'.

As such, Feminism is now splitting between the third and fourth wavers:

Third wavers see Fourth Wavers as 'SWERFs' - (sex worker exclusive radical feminsts).

Fourth Wavers are now calling Third Wavers 'Liberal Feminists', pronouncing 'Liberal' with the same sort of disgust Traditional Right Winger would have 30 years ago.

---

Banning Adult Sites



Horse-Faced, Blotchy-Skinned Radfem Typist Crows about it in this article, offering nothing the standard Illusory-Superiority Snark I'd expect from Women who major in the Humanities, (average IQ of graduates 112 or less - as per the National Centre for Education Statistics - and since 109 is the cut-off for 'average intelligence' it's bizarre they're always consulted as experts by the media in stories involving social policies and human behaviour).

Melbourne's Ormond College takes bold position against porn, students turn to liberal feminism

Excerpt version with condescending snark removed, bar my highlight for emphasis.

Quote:In what might be deemed a radical move, The University of Melbourne's largest residential college banned access to pornography on campus. This means students at Ormond College will be blocked from accessing "adult sites" on Wi-Fi networks.

The reason for this is straightforward. As college master Dr. Rufus Black stated, pornography is exploitative and "presents women primarily as sex objects who are a means to the end of male pleasure."

... unfunny snark cut ...

While Black told Jill Stark at The Age that "allowing the college's 400 students to access porn on its network would be condoning the objectification of women," some students felt the ban limited "freedom of expression."

... unfunny snark cut ...

But, in truth, it isn't "sexual expression" that's being banned (if that's the line of argument we're going with), it's just men's "right" to access websites that sell female degradation. So "expression" is not limited in the least. No one has banned masturbation and, of course, men are still free to think about

... unfunny snark cut ...

Luckily, male students angered by the ban have liberal feminism to fall back on, so they don't need to defend their misogynist interests as such.

Here's the schism forming: fourth wave feminism is calling third-wave, sex-positive feminists who believe pornography empowers women misogynistic. As always, Leftists eventually eat each other alive.



From another article:

Quote:A majority of comments across social media also agree with the dorm's stance on porn access.

Which is not what I saw - most were far more references to 'Nanny States' - but there's a narrative to sell.

"Finally Ormond College is taking a stand against the objectification and exploitation of women. Good move, set the bar high I say," Facebook poster Louise Angwin said.

Louise's Facebook picture has a) angelic glow backlighting; b) high-grain texture; and c) selective cropping of both body AND face, and so, based upon the forum's oft-stated theories of Female Photography, you can accurately-guess that she's far less attractive than the porn stars she's bitter about not being able to compete with.

---

Lad Mag Goes Under

Feminists recently ran a campaign to force supermarkets to stop selling Lad Mag Zoo Weekly, succeeding with one of the major retailers. A couple of weeks later, the magazine has announced it's going under.

Whilst the Industry Whispers and Feminists Organisers would seem to suggest it was the hysterical campaign that struck the fatal blow, this article is interesting in both trying to paint its failure as The Inevitable March of Progress, (with The Right Side Of History Marxist implications), and the sex-negative furious invective on display.

RIP Zoo Weekly — a vile, repugnant and tasteless publication

I'd suggest reading the whole thing, so you can clearly-understand the similarity to the traditional Moral Crusaders of the past - what we Australian's have called since the 1900's 'Wowsers'.

Whilst this is the little Gay-or-Low-T? Hipster who wrote it:



...note the body language with the shoulders and legs...



His article-cum tantrum, which I'm sure he's congratulating-himself furiously for is hilarious, because it's interchangeable with the anti-pornography rants of the old white bigots of 30 years ago, such as Fred Nile and Bruce Ruxton, yet is apparently 'progress' of some sort.







The famous quote by Orwell on Leftists:

“The creatures outside looked from pig to man, and from man to pig, and from pig to man again; but already it was impossible to say which was which.”


Unfortunately, he's the Editor for an Arts Magazine in Melbourne, and, as a Creative myself, he's part of the plague of Fourth Wave Millennial Journalists who believe it is their place to Curate Art, (since they fear Creating it), with particular focus on what can and can't be said. Fuck that.

I'll side with Normal Lindsay here, and call the Typist the Wowser he is.



---

Sexually-Awkward

Australian Feminists in the media have also been doing multiple thinkpieces on Michelle Goldberg's article in the Nation, celebrating the message that Liberated Feminists (Third Wavers) are oppressing Dominance Feminists (Fourth Wavers, believes Dworkin and Catharine MacKinnon's theories that all sex is about male control over women) by labelling them SWERF's.

The Problem With Idolizing Sexual Liberation

Note this:

Quote:“The compulsion to appear ‘liberated’ [by other feminists] is a form of regulation of its own.”

As such, they're all coming clean with what I predicted last year, that Millennials Girls are increasingly-finding sex makes them feel 'judged' and 'awkward'.

Unfortunately, I can't find my original post on the subject, but somewhere a while back I discussed the rising trend for affecting made-up sexual identifications, each more increasingly-narrow and ridiculous than the last. My belief was it is a way of both avoiding sex and rationalising sexual-unattractiveness to others, since your sexuality is now so specific that it's almost impossible to find someone compatible.

From the article, my emphasis:

Quote:...a 23-year-old Seattle woman named Cara who is mortified by her barely existent sex life. She’s had sex on two occasions: a one-night stand and a threesome. But she is intensely self-conscious and finds the thought of being seen naked “cringe-inducing.” At one point, she decides that perhaps she is asexual, an idea she found “pretty empowering.” “This is my special classification, and it seemed like that’s something that would be more respected than just saying, ‘I don’t want to have sex with you.’”

The thinkpiece responses to this article are telling in themselves, but so are the comments from women. Basically: I'm relieved I'm not the only who is uncomfortable with sex.

The text from a sex-negative picture that is currently-doing the rounds:

Quote:Don’t be fooled. A new study claims to prove that people who watch porn are more likely to be feminists. All it really proves is that our modern definition of feminism really appeals to porn-sick men. (You can guess why).

I wrote in July last year how the rise in makeup shaming struck me as part of this coming wave.

Quote:Advocating sexual modesty and plain presentation + 'love me for my qualities other than beauty' = pioneer women (without the homemaking skills).

It's all leading to a Wave of Puritanism where heterosexual sex is A Bad Thing, hence the need to redefine as 'rape' any feeling of sexual violation - even being stared at. If you're looking to the link for why Fourth Wave Feminism defends Islam: I believe this is the answer. Wearing a hijab would actually make them feel less awkward and sexually-objectified.

---

The fascinating part of this, is though I've been predicting it, the truth is being revealed far more quickly and the signs are accelerating. These events have all happened in the last few days, (much like how Roosh has observed how quickly the media narrative is crumbling). There's a wave of sexual repression and censorship looming over Australia, and it'll be interesting to see what happens.

I suspect within two years Sexually-Empowered Pop Sluts will be passé: I'd mentioned a while ago that Lorde struck me as the first sign that a grunge-style sea change away from the values of Modern Pop's Conspicuous Consumption and Sexual Hedonism might be happening.

Post: #2

This is not natural. It is contrived. Where are the super secret meetings where all this bullshit is being hatched?

Post: #3

ROK material there. Some edits may be required and expansion on a few ideas like flying into a fury over all men. But you remind me of 2wyked posts which were impressive. Hell the Differences you mentioned probably could be made into a article if you felt like it.

Post: #4

The old prudery at least had the virtue of being linked to belief in the family. This is just pure civilisational death.

Post: #5

(09-18-2015 10:15 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ...note the body language with the shoulders and legs...

Every single time.

Why do they stand like this? Is it just a symptom of having extremely low-T?

Post: #6

(09-18-2015 10:28 PM)rpg Wrote:  This is not natural. It is contrived. Where are the super secret meetings where all this bullshit is being hatched?

Three step process:

1. Schooling
2. University
3. Positions of influence

They're primed to believe in Equality and Diversity before they even hit University. There, those in positions to strengthen the narrative (media, social work, education, psychology) are taught there is no such thing as objectivity and that their work should reflect their politics because it's for the greater good.

The Leftists control both public and private schools via Mushroom-Haired 40's-something Leftist women, particularly Lesbians. They're drawn to any organisation that can offer them power over other people, then start enacting their beliefs that everything needs to be 'fair'. There were four Obvious Lesbian Leftist Teachers in my High School, and that was the early-80's. They were controlling the curriculum even back then.

Even the Catholic Schools and Churches have been subverted by these women. They're such an easily identifiable type, I can't believe they're always so successful at subversion. The moment the hair goes above the chin, the institution will become Leftist.

Obvious examples:











Australian's first Female Anglican Bishop in 2008:



Hell, here's the deputy leader of the Labor Party, Tanya Plibersek, exactly the stereotype I mean. Our new Prime Minister's Question Time, and she instantly-derails the conversation by accusing him of Mansplaining.



Pictured with Lesbian Senate Opposition Leader, Penny Wong.



Of course, she brags about her feminism, usual, when it was a choice between ensuring her own political safety or defending ex-PM Julia Gillard in the name of the Glorious Sisterhood That Would End All Wars If They Ran The World, what happened?



Now she's done the public mea culpa about letting her down, so expect to see more of this, particularly as she's been strongly-pushing for Labor to support same-sex marriage, stating her position was "fundamental to my politics".

These women only exist to destabilise for their own interests. As such, in any future post-collapse society I was in charge of, these organisational positions would be under high scrutiny, and the moment one of these women poked her head up and started talking about 'equality', she'd be banished. They serve no useful function. She'd always take the side of our enemies over us anyway, she might as well go live with them.

Post: #7

(09-18-2015 11:05 PM)iop890 Wrote:  

(09-18-2015 10:15 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  ...note the body language with the shoulders and legs...

Every single time.

Why do they stand like this? Is it just a symptom of having extremely low-T?

They stand that way because the jeans are so skinny and the rise non existant they need to penis tuck.

Here is a demonstration of the common NYC hipster penis tuck:

Post: #8

I will read your entire article later - (too sleepy now) - but I wanted to share a small anecdote that confirms your suspicions.

I was in the parking lot of a convenience store when I saw this woman's outfit. It was quite pretty, with a 1950's sort of feel, complete with bright red stockings on thin, pretty legs. Business-like skirt, with a short-sleeved top that revealed arm tattoos (uh oh). Looking at her face, I saw a bob cut and a look of utter disgust and disdain when my eyes met twenty-something face.

I wanted to open with, "Lady, the thing you're always worrying will happen to you? That ain't going to happen to you. It might happen to a much prettier chick, or a much happier chick, or a healthier chick - but not to you." But I know better than to flirt with those types of women.

------------------

On a happier note, I think you've read SJW's Always Lie - (which I just finished). And you've hit upon a beautiful way to hashtag-troll these idiots. Something like #WhyBeSoSexNegativeInTheHappiestPeriodInHumanHistory or #SurroundedByTheHappiestPartyEver-ScowlsInstead.

Post: #9

It was only a matter of time before they turned on their own. When there are no more targets, of course feminists will attack each other. Portraying male predators (eg all men with a healthy sexuality) as supporting sex-positive feminism was a devious attack by the 4th wavers.




Wowserism has definitely been on the rise in Australia, which spells bad news with the current sausage fest in my city. I'm seriously considering my GTFO plan now that the mining boom has ended. Maybe I'll try to land one of those gucci FIFO gigs where I get flown to Thailand for my downtime.

Post: #10

(09-18-2015 10:28 PM)rpg Wrote:  This is not natural. It is contrived. Where are the super secret meetings where all this bullshit is being hatched?

Whether via internet or in a conference room at a University, I suspect you are right: contrived. The 4th wave Feminist version of the Battle Creek Sanitarium is the last thing we need. The way the flock changes direction is swift, and a rise of sex-negative women incels is bad news. They say bed bugs are the hardest thing to get rid of, and you should probably burn your house down to make sure they are gone. If what AB is saying moves to the US, UK, and Canada, I think I'd rather take my chances with the bugs.

Post: #11

I suspect this is a second-order effect of the initial feminism. You end up with bitter evil older leftist women, who have no children to occupy them and keep their morals anchored.

Post: #12

Welcome back to the Land of the Ever Changing Leaders.
So sad to hear of the passing of Zoo magazine. I probably only buy a few issues a year, but there's nearly always been a copy on the smoko room table for much of my working life. That phaggotty anti-zoo article really shits me beyond words. The demise of this kind of magazine has nothing to do with the societal shift they are suggesting, and everything to do with technology. Zoo, People, Picture, etc were for men who frequently have short periods of time to read. Maybe he's sitting in a truck waiting to get loaded...maybe he's in the loader waiting for the next truck. There's no time to pull a novel from your back pocket and read a few paragraphs....Or there's half a dozen hi-vis-clad blokes sitting round the table for a quick lunch and conversation is a bit slow, 'til the one reading Zoo chuckles to himself then reads a joke out loud.
Their readership now all have phones that serve this purpose better than a weekly magazine ever could (except for me... my phone is rugged, outdated, and for making calls on). That's why more recent issues of Zoo have been filled with "viewa" app stuff where you can hold your screen over the pictures and watch them move or some shit... because they could see their demographic slipping away. So no Fringie boy, truck drivers and labourers are not moving towards accepting "equality"... they are looking at exactly the same content on other media.

Post: #13

(09-19-2015 02:43 AM)Phoenix Wrote:  I suspect this is a second-order effect of the initial feminism. You end up with bitter evil older leftist women, who have no children to occupy them and keep their morals anchored.

Furthermore, humans never react more violently than when confronted with the idea that they have made an irreversible mistake, and will go to great lengths to rationalise their error, usually by persuading others to make the same mistake. Since there's no way to rectify the damage, they are forced to develop coping mechanisms instead. Childless women older than 35 are the worst for this, and any young girls taking their advice seriously are setting themselves up for a miserable future.

A long time ago, I wrote a post about how ideas and ideologies evolve and are subject to the same selection pressures as a very specific type of organism - a parasite. I think it's relevant here:

(10-14-2013 04:29 PM)Ocelot Wrote:  The way I see it, ideas/ideologies evolve and spread in the same way a parasite does: the more effectively the idea spreads, the better chance it has of surviving, but it's also crucially important that the host survives. If ideologies end up in direct competition, then in the long term, all other things being equal, the better adapted one will usually triumph.

Religions like Islam and Christianity, in their own ways, confer survivability on their followers through the rules they lay down. They encourage the creation of, and protection of, strong family units and a stable society. These features, coupled with the mechanisms both religions have to ensure their spread and the retention of their followers (denying the holy spirit being an unforgivable sin in Christianity, apostasy being a capital offence under Sharia law etc.) are primarily why they have out-competed every other belief system that has ever existed. They are, if you will, symbiotic, rather than merely parasitic, ideologies.

In contrast, feminism is a purely parasitic ideology. It confers a lack of survivability on its followers, in that they engage in less healthy behaviour than the average person, and have less children (or none at all). Feminists also continually attack the foundations of the society whose wealth is the sole reason they are able to exist in the first place. Some bitter, childless and ugly women then go on to teach gender studies, perhaps attempting to mould a few girls into the strong empowered womyn they dreamt of being; to live through vicariously, maybe; in reality, they spread their dysfunction to a new generation, like an ant infected by Cordyceps.

Why would such an aggressive parasite persist to the extent that it does? The reasons are complex, and largely rooted in female psychology; hell, it'd require a brand new thread to detail the spread of feminism over the last half a century. What matters is that it has infected the host cultures in the Anglosphere.

Feminism spreads like rabes. It's lethal to the host (literally, in the case of childless women), and therefore uninfected people would naturally avoid contact with it after only briefly observing the results. As a result, to continue existing, it needs an incredibly virulent spreading mechanism, which it has: the government, media and academia.

Post: #14

A big thanks for the headsup Anonymous! What you say definitely makes sense because the young women who are 19-20 are kind of a in between because they dress like Superhoes but have an inability to hold a conversation. The women being born now in SJW sensorship wonderland will probably be mean, prudish and hate dicks. Pumb and Dumb era will be coming to an end so enjoy it fellas.

Post: #15

Australia has gone to shit! I fucking HATE it here and only come back to work before I head back to the East!

It's just as bad as Canada!

Post: #16

This sentiment isn't limited to Australia, either.

Last night I watched a feminist march proceed down Granville Street, the major nightlife strip in downtown Vancouver. Amongst some of the signs I saw were anti-porn and anti-sex industry themed signs. I also saw them physically block male pedestrians attempting to cross to the other side of the street from doing so. Feminism as a whole is starting to become openly sex-negative and misandrist, it seems.

AnonymousBosch, do you see any difference between your conception of a new Fourth-Wave Feminism and old-style Second Wave Feminism? To me it seems that there's little difference between the two.

Post: #17

Yea, I have noticed this trend too with Millennial girls. They either are super sluts with a rotation (hear this word a lot from nearly all of the ones I know) of guys to fuck every night of the week, or they are like the asexual Victorian women you read about in stories who would get disgusted by any, however mild or tame, sexual behaviour. The middle ground for a healthy sexuality is rapidly disappearing.

A similar and related thing happens to their handling of alcohol as well. They either have to get shit-faced every time they drink, or do not touch any alcohol and preach to any poor soul appearing to be listening about the evils of alcohol and the superiority of being a teetotaller.

Next are the attempts to police sexuality in venues that are traditionally for hooking up or at the very least, meeting potential relationship partners. For example, many dance venues and schools here have now got Consent etiquettes up, and mother hens going around checking if every girl is OK if they are being hit on. They also complain about getting so few men to show up these days, after the peak of the late 2000s. Geez, I wonder why. Live music and cocktail venues are making up rules to police "unwanted" chatting up of female patrons, basically only the women can approach the men...

Captain Gh Wrote:What you say definitely makes sense because the young women who are 19-20 are kind of a in between because they dress like Superhoes but have an inability to hold a conversation.

I have observed and pointed out to friends that many of those sluttily dressed girls actually have very low degree of comfort with their sexuality. You can see it expressed in:

- the way they walk: very fast paced, trying to get out of view asap
- their overly defensive body language: hunched shoulders, arms folded across the front, chin down avoiding all eye contacts
- their facial expressions: tight lips, scowls, or a completely blank brain-is-shot-after-too-much-social-media-on-iphone face
- their fidgeting with the clothes: this is a classic, they'd wear for example a short skirt but constantly reach to pull it down because they feel the skirt rises up a bit as they walk.
- their positioning: at venues, they'd get out of all the prime spots for actually meeting people or being seen (in the good ol' attention whoring way); they are more likely sitting down in a booth out of view, or getting in a wagon wheel formation with their friends blocking approaches

Unless they're booty calling guys over late at night after going out, I hardly ever see them hook up with anyone, despite the Hoe uniform.

Post: #18

(09-19-2015 03:09 PM)HighSpeed_LowDrag Wrote:  AnonymousBosch, do you see any difference between your conception of a new Fourth-Wave Feminism and old-style Second Wave Feminism? To me it seems that there's little difference between the two.

Interesting point, mate. Let me think on this and I'll write my thoughts a bit later. Didn't get a lot of sleep last night.

Post: #19

(09-19-2015 07:49 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  Yea, I have noticed this trend too with Millennial girls. They either are super sluts with a rotation (hear this word a lot from nearly all of the ones I know) of guys to fuck every night of the week, or they are like the asexual Victorian women you read about in stories who would get disgusted by any, however mild or tame, sexual behaviour. The middle ground for a healthy sexuality is rapidly disappearing.

A similar and related thing happens to their handling of alcohol as well. They either have to get shit-faced every time they drink, or do not touch any alcohol and preach to any poor soul appearing to be listening about the evils of alcohol and the superiority of being a teetotaller.

Next are the attempts to police sexuality in venues that are traditionally for hooking up or at the very least, meeting potential relationship partners. For example, many dance venues and schools here have now got Consent etiquettes up, and mother hens going around checking if every girl is OK if they are being hit on. They also complain about getting so few men to show up these days, after the peak of the late 2000s. Geez, I wonder why. Live music and cocktail venues are making up rules to police "unwanted" chatting up of female patrons, basically only the women can approach the men...

Captain Gh Wrote:What you say definitely makes sense because the young women who are 19-20 are kind of a in between because they dress like Superhoes but have an inability to hold a conversation.

I have observed and pointed out to friends that many of those sluttily dressed girls actually have very low degree of comfort with their sexuality. You can see it expressed in:

- the way they walk: very fast paced, trying to get out of view asap
- their overly defensive body language: hunched shoulders, arms folded across the front, chin down avoiding all eye contacts
- their facial expressions: tight lips, scowls, or a completely blank brain-is-shot-after-too-much-social-media-on-iphone face
- their fidgeting with the clothes: this is a classic, they'd wear for example a short skirt but constantly reach to pull it down because they feel the skirt rises up a bit as they walk.
- their positioning: at venues, they'd get out of all the prime spots for actually meeting people or being seen (in the good ol' attention whoring way); they are more likely sitting down in a booth out of view, or getting in a wagon wheel formation with their friends blocking approaches

Unless they're booty calling guys over late at night after going out, I hardly ever see them hook up with anyone, despite the Hoe uniform.

They are showing off for their girlfriends. Everything revolves around the bitch pack. They are not putting 2 and 2 together to figure out why this is why they dont have a guy. Girls are natural cockblocks to each other. Their lesbian overlords are overjoyed with all that cockblock going on!

Post: #20

This is a great point, AB.

It is almost as if modern feminism is, at its core, anti-life, anti-joy, anti-sex.

It is a deeply nihilistic and destructive doctrine that is born of the neuroses and self-hatreds of embittered, marginalized women who, in previous eras, would have been rightly forced to serve out their days sitting on the back porch, wiping the drool from their hateful lips as they watch the world pass them by.

My take on all these "waves" of feminism is this.

Don't think too much about these alleged waves. There is only one wave. And that is the Tide of Evil.

It's like that scene in The Exorcist, where Father Kharis tries to explain to to Father Merrin that the demon has "several" personalities.

"As I see it", says Kharis, "the demon has manifested several distinct personalities..."

Merrin cuts him short, wise in the ways of evil.

"No," he says, "there is only one."

So remember that. There is only one evil, regardless of how it may present itself to the world.

One, and only one. That is all you need to know.

.

Post: #21

(09-19-2015 07:49 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  - their fidgeting with the clothes: this is a classic, they'd wear for example a short skirt but constantly reach to pull it down because they feel the skirt rises up a bit as they walk.

All your observations ring true with mine.

I saw four early 20-somethings walking ahead of me yesterday on their way to the pub all in-sprayed on dresses, barely-balancing on their heels. All of them fidgeted and adjusted their short hemlines entire way, none of them comfortable or confident.

One had an open-backed dress, and, when she glanced back and saw me, her body language just closed down entirely: slumped, narrow shoulders / head down / eyes at ground. Fair enough - I'm a scary-looking bastard - but as they crossed the road at the lights, a Muslim woman in Burka and her small children crossed their path you could see the self-conscious shame in all the girls.

I think they dress like this because their Narcissist Self-Construct requires they think of themselves as a Hot and Sexy Bitch, but the body language I observe increasingly-shows that many young women are hugely-uncomfortable with the reality of looking that way in public.

The high school girls aren't - they know their sexuality gives them power. I think the shame happens after young women become sexually-active and realise the expectations of sex guaranteeing a woman can choose to turn it into a relationship if she so desires it is false.

Post: #22

The over-reaching progressive agenda by those who control it is depopulation through the destruction of the family unit. I talked about it at my lectures this summer and will be writing about it extensively on my blog in the next few months, but short version is that cultural (feminism, egalitarianism, mass immigration) and biological (abortion, birth control) mechanisms are currently being used to limit reproduction in target groups to achieve stability and order for the elite. The program has been in effect for whites for a generation and is now getting started in super fertile Africa to control their population using experimental new methods like vaccines and birth control chips (look at what Bill Gates is up to lately).

Sex positive culture from feminism lowered reproduction greatly from the traditional family unit, but if people are still having sex, reproduction is still taking place, which is an unacceptable outcome. The next stage was to either make people fear having sex or ashamed of it. This is already occurring in the West because of rape hysteria and women being programmed to see all men as misogynists and abusers, so what naturally must stem from that is sex negative propaganda that you've observed. In must end up being sex puritanism but without the reproduction. As a bonus, this eradicates even casual bonds between the opposite sexes, so people will now be dependent on virtual relationships that are controlled by large systems that monitor your communications and emotional needs.

Have you noticed how MGTOW groups always get a pass while us, MRA's, and PUA's are constantly attacked? Now ask yourself what MGTOW's promote and if it conflicts with a zero reproduction model. It's for this reason that I believe MGTOW will become be boosted by the establishment and serve as a vehicle to fight with us. We must be on the lookup for anti-sex subversives.

Last comment I wanted to make is that sex negativism will probably coincide with a doubling down of the environmentalism narrative that states Earth is overpopulated and "there are already enough humans out there." There will be active shaming efforts on people who express desires to have children. If your observation is correct, which I believe it is since it fits the model, this will put the nail in the coffin in the fertility of the West. The European migrant crisis, to flood sterile lands with fecund third world people at this specific junction in the gender wars and weakening of the narrative, is not an accident. Like I said in my video the other day, things are about to get very weird.

Post: #23

(09-19-2015 08:35 PM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(09-19-2015 07:49 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  - their fidgeting with the clothes: this is a classic, they'd wear for example a short skirt but constantly reach to pull it down because they feel the skirt rises up a bit as they walk.

All your observations ring true with mine.

I saw four early 20-somethings walking ahead of me yesterday on their way to the pub all in-sprayed on dresses, barely-balancing on their heels. All of them fidgeted and adjusted their short hemlines entire way, none of them comfortable or confident.

One had an open-backed dress, and, when she glanced back and saw me, her body language just closed down entirely: slumped, narrow shoulders / head down / eyes at ground. Fair enough - I'm a scary-looking bastard - but as they crossed the road at the lights, a Muslim woman in Burka and her small children crossed their path you could see the self-conscious shame in all the girls.

I think they dress like this because their Narcissist Self-Construct requires they think of themselves as a Hot and Sexy Bitch, but the body language I observe increasingly-shows that many young women are hugely-uncomfortable with the reality of looking that way in public.

The high school girls aren't - they know their sexuality gives them power. I think the shame happens after young women become sexually-active and realise the expectations of sex guaranteeing a woman can choose to turn it into a relationship if she so desires it is false.

The uncomfortableness with looking sexy is a very Australian thing, though - I'm your age and have seen it since the 80s. The Aussie girl all dressed up in short skirt but looking like she'd be more relaxed drinking a stubbie at home or taking the rotty for a walk. Slumped shoulders, masculine walk, nervous gestures, too many Australian women just don't know how to pull off a sophisticated look and never have.

Post: #24

I've noticed in recent months girls are developing incredible prudishness. Looking at the Ormund in Melbourne it is a far cry from my university college only a few years where being the sluttiest was something they were proud of. Universities are becoming about pretending to be a wild child, going out is a mission to pretend they're having a good time getting drunk enough to not feel awkward.
Whereas formerly friends would laugh at each other fucking around they are enforcing strict no sex policies around their friends.

I'm 23 and I think roughly mark the delineation between when most girls stopped being so open about sex, the 19 year olds of today are so incredibly awkward and a surprising number are still virgins.

This seems to be rubbing off on younger men too, of course there are the cads around still but most men are significantly less interested in sex than 5 years ago and are happy to join in with the shaming of men -and white knighting of women- who have sex.

Post: #25

(09-19-2015 10:42 AM)easternwomenrule Wrote:  Australia has gone to shit! I fucking HATE it here and only come back to work before I head back to the East!

It's just as bad as Canada!

Funny you say that...I have a 19 year old cousin, and I am 31. Here I will do a simple compare-and-contrast activity to show him at 19 vs. me at 19.

Me at 19:

- Wanted to fuck everything that moved.
- All me (and my same-age friends) talked about was sex and girls.
- Jacked off every day, but still fucked girls.
- Physically fit and active.
- Lifetime Notch count at age 19 - 10-15 (I didn't hit my stride until my mid twenties).
- Had an 20-year-old girlfriend who I saw on weekends. Fucked her 3-4 times a day, did all sorts of nasty shit (she especially loved anal, sex in public places and swallowing, she'd basically do anything I wanted).

Him at 19:

- Presumably wants to fuck everything that moves, but I can't tell.
- Never once broached the topic of sex or girls without prompt - like it was a 'no no topic!'
- Jacks off every day (his father told me), doesn't get laid.
- Physically fit and active.
- Lifetime Notch count - 1
- Had a 17 year old girlfriend. Says he only fucked her a 'handful of times' in the year they were together. He was visibly uncomfortable when I asked if she let him put it in her ass.

Now granted - I had pretty-much 100% autonomy at 19; my parents just divorced, my Dad was always working, my mom was off in her own world with her alpha fux, I had a job and I had a car and I had my own money so I could do whatever I wanted. My cousin lives at home with a father (my uncle) who basically runs his house like a dictator (for the record, I think my uncle is the shit, hilarious guy). He has a car, he has a job, he has money, but he also has parents who act like parents...unlike me (and my sister - who was going through her slut phase at around this same time), who's parents basically treated us as afterthoughts.

...But I see the kid - and no I wouldn't say he's handsome, but he's 6'3 240 and jacked, way bigger than I ever was, and he's 19 - he should be talking about and constantly trying to chop girls. Instead, when I tell him some of the stories I've accumulated in China and ask him about his ex and if she did nasty shit, he acts like he's above it all...WTF!?

His exact words when asked about his girlfriend were 'It wasn't like that...'. Beg pardon? You're 18, she's 17...what exactly is it 'like' then? You aren't Romeo and Juliet here.

I don't know where the culprit lies and I haven't seen a high-school sex-ed curriculum these days (aside from Kathleen Wynne wanting to raise a generation of trannies and rug munchers of course, curriculum co-authored by a known pedophile). If I had to guess? When I was in school and it was sex-ed class, the prevailing tone of the teacher was 'We know you're going to be doing it soon and we know we can't stop you from doing it, but we just want you to know of the risks and will tell you how to keep safe'. It wouldn't shock me at all if this has morphed into 'Sex should only happen between two people who care about and love each other - it can be a man and a woman, two men, two women, a tranny and a woman or a man and an animal, but they HAVE to love each other first because sex is a BIG DEAL!'

Kids are being taught that sex is important, but only degenerates and 'bad people' enjoy it just for the sake of it. I remember university (ten years ago for me) being full of girls who seemed 'nice' but who with a little coaxing and a few drinks at the bar weren't at all against you taking them home and banging them even if they knew you'd never be their boyfriend - many young girls are still like this, but now they like older men (good for us), but as has been highlighted - some young girls have no concept or idea about sex.