Turnabout is fair play.

Parents at a Northern California high school are outraged that the time honored tradition of hooking up with varsity athletes has been turned into something dirty.  According to the Piedmont Patch:

What has apparently been an open secret at Piedmont High School for several years — the existence of a “Fantasy Slut League” where male varsity athletes amass “points” for sexual activity with female students — became public Friday when the school district issued a notice to parents of PHS students.

Casual sex is serious business, and this kind of thinking is exactly what is putting women’s sacred path to marriage in jeopardy.  Still, I have an idea for the beleaguered alpha chasers at Piedmont High.  Turn the tables on them!  As Vox Day points out in his current post, women are eager to expand the definition of slut to include promiscuous men.  Now is the time to take advantage of this new wave in male slut shaming.  The alphas at Piedmont High won’t know what hit them!

All the alpha chasers have to do is form a fantasy slut league of their own.  Then they can lure unsuspecting alphas into having sex with them, and document the sordid details while celebrating their conquests!

When the moxie and equality filled ladies of Piedmont High implement this strategy, they can take a page out of the playbook of another group of high school men who had a similar club two years ago:

Those boys broke up into teams — one was dubbed “the Southside Slampigs” — and organized an “opening day” party where the mission was to hook up with as many unsuspecting draftees as possible, the Times reported.

See also:  Slut!

This entry was posted in Choice Addiction, Satire. Bookmark the permalink.

82 Responses to Turnabout is fair play.

  1. aneroidocean says:

    I read through the links you posted. I don’t see where parents are outraged that the slut league had been “turned into something dirty” but instead only found parent’s commenting that they’re surprised that the school isn’t launching an investigation. Maybe I’m missing something?

  2. Ecclesiastes says:

    Can you imagine the ‘dance card’, for the highest point value girls? She has got to know that she can leverage that rating into serious cash and prizes, without even actually having to put out!

    Oh then there would be the extortion afterwards for the faked f*ck.

    The mind boggles at the opportunities.

  3. Miserman says:

    From the ‘outraged’ article:

    Because the school does not have details on those involved in or victimized by the fantasy league, officials are focusing on “education and understanding moving forward” versus discipline for past actions …

    In other words, they can’t very well punish just the guys and excuse the girls because that might seem a little unfair, at least to the parents of the guys (except in those families who have a daughter). To everyone else, punishing just the guys would be an act full of “understanding” for those “victimized.”

    So intead of punishing anyone, they decide to educate and “move forward.” Education is pretty useless here as those “involved … or victimized” are pretty educated in what they want. The Alpha’s want sex and the sluts want to give it them. The birds and the bees.

    Reading, writing, and arithmetic can wait.

  4. @aneroidocean
    Yes you’re missing something. The outrage is not that there is lots of casual sex going on, but rather that it is being documented and turned into a sport.

  5. Looking Glass says:

    This story pops up about once a year. So many high school girls will sex up the local Alphas quite easily. Though it depends a bit on the area. The upper class areas are generally better at keeping it quiet.

  6. Clarence says:

    Keep that Andrea Alpine away from your children, esp. male ones.

  7. sunshinemary says:

    As Vox Day points out in his current post, women are eager to expand the definition of slut to include promiscuous men. Now is the time to take advantage of this new wave in male slut shaming.

    Someone in the Vox Day comment thread said using “slut” for men is only a badge of honor and that the correct term to shame a skirt-chasing young man is “p-ssy hound”. I don’t know, but I thought that was pretty funny.

  8. Ecclesiastes says:

    I ran with a smart crowd. The girls I knew in junior high verses testosterone addled jocks? There would have been nothing left of the football team’s second string except patent leather scraps of wallets.

  9. Retrenched says:

    @ SSM

    Nah, that’s not gonna work. You can’t shame promiscuous men in the same way that promiscuous women can be shamed.

    For a guy, getting laid is an achievement; for a girl, it’s simply a matter of showing up and saying ‘yes’.

    The “double standard” will die the day that the average guy can get laid as easily as the average girl, and not a moment before.

  10. Ecclesiastes says:

    You guys don’t remember high school at all, do you?

  11. okrahead says:

    Is it too late to try out for the team?

  12. Lord Valtrex says:

    The sound like strong, empowered young men.

  13. Cautiously Pessimistic says:

    Even if men could have sex as easily as women can, it still wouldn’t be the same. For women, sex is the means to an end. For men, sex is the end of the means. Or if I may quote Fraisure, “How can men use sex to get what we want? Sex IS what we want.”

  14. Anthony says:

    By the way, Piedmont is a fairly wealthy community – it’s a mostly white and Asian enclave in Oakland. Property values are significantly higher when you cross the border because the Piedmont schools have much (much) better test scores than Oakland.

  15. Hermit says:

    “Nah, that’s not gonna work. You can’t shame promiscuous men in the same way that promiscuous women can be shamed. ”

    The context in the VD thread is that pussyhound is someone who want sex so bad he’ll sleep with anyone, even slags. I’m not familiar with the term myself. I suppose its possible because you never hear guys bragging about sleeping with warpigs.

  16. BC says:

    Because the school does not have details on those involved in or victimized by the fantasy league, officials are focusing on “education and understanding moving forward” versus discipline for past actions …

    Because the school really does not give a whit about sluts past, present and future, officials are focused on meaningless hand-wringing versus gutting varsity sports programs that are fun and bring the school recognition, scholarships and other benefits.

    Translation: Sluts will be sluts will be sluts, and alphas don’t get punished.

  17. ybm says:

    RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAYYYYYYYYYYPPPPPPPPPPPPPEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

  18. 22to28 says:

    This story brings a new meaning to “sportfuck.”

  19. William says:

    @Hermit

    Slut – woman who’s has slept with a high number of men.
    Pussyhound – man who’ll slept with any woman.

    I’m not familiar with the term either but have known men like this and they were ridiculed by their peers.
    Unless a guy is having sex with unattractive woman or sluts (sometimes), he’s seen in a positive light.

  20. zykos says:

    Shaming a men who is sleeping around is possible, but it’s a different dynamic. Shaming a hunter who kills too many preys doesn’t work the same way than shaming an obese person who buys too much food.

  21. Höllenhund says:

    The male equivalent of the slut is the beta orbiter.

  22. “The male equivalent of the slut is the beta orbiter.” Hahahaha. Want something they can’t have. Very true.

  23. Opus says:

    Not being cogniscant of your education system (and so that I may understand the full horror of it all) can someone say exactly how old these young ladies are, who are being so cruelly abused? Is there any possibility that in years to come they may receive inflated compensation from Ridgemount High for this?

  24. Miserman says:

    Perhaps ye ole single-gender education might help.

  25. Bob Wallace says:

    “using “slut” for men is only a badge of honor and that the correct term to shame a skirt-chasing young man is “p-ssy hound”.

    The older term for such men is a “cad.” I’ve known more than one. They’re cowards and ending up ruining their lives, contrary to those who have taken the Blue Pill of the worst of the Manosphere, in which they’re considered “Alphas,” a description which doesn’t apply to people but only canines, and essentially means “parent wolves.”

    “Therefore the superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be rightly spoken, so that what he says may be fulfilled to the letter. What the superior man requires is just that in his language there may be nothing inaccurate.” – Confucius

  26. Looking Glass says:

    @Opus:

    The girls would be 14 to 18, the guys 16 to 18. This is from an upper class area, so the guys will be cognizant of the statutory rape laws. No one is getting anything out of the school, as they wouldn’t have any liability.

    The only big risk, for anyone involved, is that the girls’ names get out. If the list is detailed (good bet it is), then there would be a permanent record of the exploits of the girls. Ah, Google.

  27. Anthony says:

    Opus – high school is approximately age 14 to 18. The subtext of the school’s letter is “don’t sue us” – they went to great pains to point out that this was off-campus activity that the school could have no control over, and that they were taking some steps to prevent this sort of thing from happening.

  28. Make your short life immortal, so that those to come don’t forget that you were a Man.

  29. People people,

    My little lost sheep.

    What Dalrock is getting at is that in Christian times the women would not be seen as victims any more than Eve was seen as a victim.

    In Christianity fornication is forbidden, plain and simple.

    In Christianity, tempting others via flesh is forbidden, and too, the Adams must turn away from the temptations.

    But when uncrhistian women are freely spreading their legs, and men are unable to resist, the women are not victims any more than eve was a victim of Adam.

    (oops I may have just given a feminist a dissertation topic: The Victimization of Eve Who Was Oppressed and Date Raped by Adam)

  30. Opus says:

    I am indebted to both Looking Glass and Anthony for advising me that girls as young as 14 chase men. I am truly shocked, as they should clearly be in the bosom of their one-parent family playing with their dolls. These girls are clearly children, incapable of sexual desire, and, being abused by males are in urgent need of financial compensation.

    Perhaps it is not big news on your side of the Pond but a similar matter has not merely dominated the British Press for the last few weeks but the fall-out is beginning to spread (scalps are being taken) – and thus I was keen to ascertain exactly how young these girls were before commenting further. This is what you have all been missing:

    Some forty or so years after the events in question it has emerged that a celebrity beloved of everyone including The Crown who twice saw fit to award him medals, allowed himself to be seduced by girls of High School age – you can see these girls for yourself if you click on You Tube and search for ‘Top of the Pops’. You will recognise these poor innocent children by their micro-mini-skirts and swaying hips. These girls – now nearly of retirement age are now demanding compensation from the BBC for allowing their lives to be ruined by being allowed into the presence of Sir Saville O.B.E. There is of course absolutely no evidence in support of any of the accusations and Sir Saville himself is unable to comment as he has gone to meet his maker. I was truly shaken by the allegations: The Daily Express for example headlined a photo of Sir Saville reclining on a couch with a young lady draped all over him with big smiles on both their faces and with the headline ‘Seconds after this was taken Sir Saville ATTACKED this poor innocent young victim’, though how exactly one ATTACKS from a prone position is something I am still having trouble understanding. All this came to light when another T.V. presenter hardly younger than Sir Saville revealed these allegations. The fact that this woman (for so she is) almost certainly never had a single young man throwing himself at her, despite her almost equal fame, cannot of course have any baring on what looks to me like vindictive jealousy on the part of the unpleasant Ms Rantzen, the woman who previously shafted Canadian Bernard Braden and indeed just about anyone else that she could on her consumer affairs programme wherein the BBC frequently ended up paying compensation for Libel. The only further light I can shed on this disgraceful state of affairs is that the only time I saw Sir Saville (in the queue at the BBC canteen at their Bush House premises – the home of The BBC World Service) when he was slightly infront of me – and easily recognisable by reason of the fact that he was the only person in the queue whose long hair was coloured pink on one side and green on the other – he did not appear to assault anyone not least your correspondent. It is now forgotten that Sir Saville, a bachelor, proposed marriage to and was publicly rejected by Miss Pickety Witch. Had she accepted him these sordid revelations may never have come to light.

  31. gdgm+ says:

    Wasn’t this OP also the theme of the “Duke lacrosse men PowerPoint thesis” woman?

  32. beta_plus says:

    @Hollenhund

    Yep. In the arena of the bar/nightclub, Women’s currency is sex. Men’s is attention.

    Sometimes I want to scream at certain guys at the bar to not be “attention sluts”. I love how Captain Capitalism says to give away one of highest forms of attention currency – ballroom dancing – only very reluctantly.

  33. I once had an interesting conversation in a sociology class about the power of words. In all earnestness I asked the teacher – a black woman – why it was socially acceptable for black men to refer to each other as ‘Niggas’, use the term in rap lyrics, etc. yet when a white person uses the term it’s the highest form of offense? Even my asking this was uncomfortable for the caucasians in the class, but I tried to put it in as-matter-of-fact a way as I could.

    She told me that repeated derogatory epithets become imbued with a sense of power after being used for so long. This isn’t unique to just one marginalized culture, you can find examples across many societies, ethnicities and social groups. What happens is that a particular collective of people, rather than allowing a hurtful derogatory term to define them, embrace that term as a uniting title for their particular group. In adopting that term as representative of themselves they effectively make it powerless by redefining it. What had been a term of derision is now an expression of pride.

    Furthermore, once that particular group assumes ownership of that epithet as their unifying classification, they make anyone else’s use of the term offensive. Thus blacks can acceptably refer to themselves as ‘Niggas’, gays can refer to themselves as ‘Fags’ and now ‘Sluts’ have a reassociative pride in using the term amongst themselves – however, if any outside group uses the term, and particularly the one which originated it, not only is it offensive, it constitutes hate-speech.

    This redefinition, this reappropriation of the term ‘Slut’ is precisely what’s taking place in feminization. ‘Cunt’ is still the highest term of offense (here in the USA anyway), but not only is ‘Slut’ a new term of empowerment in media and in a social context, but the redefinition of its derogatory use for men (the originating group) is already being established as a new reversal of the term.

  34. The Continental Op says:

    No matter what words you use to describe blacks, and they co-opt them (Negro, Colored, Black, African-American, what is next??), they are still blacks. You can play with the words all day, but the essence is the same. The same it true of sluts. And we darn well know it.

  35. Martian Bachelor says:

    Then they can lure unsuspecting alphas into having sex with them, and document the sordid details while celebrating their conquests! (OP)

    Dalrock, you finally stumbled into the truth: A woman chases a man until she lets him catch her.

    I couldn’t help noticing that, sans the plurals in the quoted sentence, it sounds just like Bristol Palin’s heroic Queen of the Trashy Single Moms brand!

  36. Joseph of Jackson says:

    @Rollo

    Interesting. I had never thought of it this way. So if we take over a term like “Man-Boy” or something similar, we can then turn it into a form of hate speech when they use it?

  37. Possibly, given enough time and significance to the term.

  38. Höllenhund says:

    No, because men aren’t good at being useful, pitied victims.

  39. Höllenhund says:

    Re: 12:35 pm

    That’s an interesting explanation, Rollo, but I think the truth is more simple. With respect to the redefinition of “slut”:

    I hope you do realize that it wasn’t the “embarrassment” of slut-shaming, but the concrete consequences of acquiring the label, that made women afraid of the label. Slut-shaming worked because sluts suffered. Nobody cared for them, nobody married them, they were physically isolated or even cast out of society. Sluttishness will decrease when sluts are no longer fed. Then slut-shaming will be a powerful tool again. Until then it’s just pointless nagging that will get the shamer shamed for being “judgmental”. Judging only makes sense when there is a punishment attached to the crime.

    traditionalchristianity.wordpress.com/2011/08/09/a-model-of-the-collapse-argentina-2001/#comment-16547

    There’s a parallel with the word “nigger”. There are no longer any concrete, harmful consequences of getting called a “nigger”. Nobody will lynch you, nobody will take away your welfare checks, nobody will torch your shack, no cop will beat you to death. Of course blacks are no longer afraid of the label.

  40. Miserman says:

    @GBFM

    (oops I may have just given a feminist a dissertation topic: The Victimization of Eve Who Was Oppressed and Date Raped by Adam)

    Too late. Lilith Fair, Rock Camp for Girls, and Mark Driscoll.

  41. BC says:

    Opus: “I am indebted to both Looking Glass and Anthony for advising me that girls as young as 14 chase men. I am truly shocked, as they should clearly be in the bosom of their one-parent family playing with their dolls. These girls are clearly children, incapable of sexual desire, and, being abused by males are in urgent need of financial compensation.”

    Well played, sir. Well played.

  42. William says:

    @ Höllenhund

    There is punishment still attached to being a slut, the biggest one being that she’s considered “damaged” by men seeking relationships.
    The fact that woman want to redefine or do away with the term, means that they fear the consequences of being labeled a slut.

    If you don’t have a problem with being judged, you don’t call people out for judging you

  43. 22to28 says:

    You can be sure: if it was girls challenging each other to get down and dirty with certain high value males, it would be the boys that would some how be painted as the villains. I’m not entirely sure how, but they would be.

  44. Pingback: Father Knows Best: Roast Pork Edition « Patriactionary

  45. mean1gene says:

    I heard about this on a local conservative leaning radio talk show here in L.A. And the hosts were really emphasing that no matter how “clean cut” a high school boy is you can’t trust them. I think they said not a single one of them. At first I was A little annoyed, then I realized that they were giving them cover. If all the high school boys are duche bags, then the girls really not at fault in any way.

  46. William says:

    @ 22to28
    They’d say the girls doing the pressuring did it because they were pressured by boys to have sex themselves.

  47. Höllenhund says:

    That sounds reasonable, William, but that punishment is too long-term and not concrete enough to be a deterrent, plus it isn’t even ensured, because sluts can indeed find men seeking relationships, but they usually don’t find those men attractive.

    Alte, whom I don’t normally agree with but quoted above, observed that women don’t care about shaming in the way men do, because they have no honour to protect. Thus they avoid certain behaviors only if the consequences are very swift and concrete.

  48. Doc says:

    This just shows that women do not mind “being” sluts, they just don’t want people to “think of them AS sluts” – and such a points-system would prove that they are. Guys have been doing this forever – one young lady (I use the term loosely) in college was upset that I didn’t take her up on her offer and when pressed my only comment was – “I don’t dry myself with dirty towels, why would I want a public-utility like you?” Now, I’m very forgiving of a woman’s number of sexual encounters, since I want to bed her quickly without a lot of work, and that is good. But when you are dealing with a teen that you know has banged the entire football team in last two months? No Thanks, I really do not need it THAT badly…

    “girls would be 14 to 18, the guys 16 to 18.”

    Many states have asinine laws where as long as there is an age gap not larger than X (usually 2 years), and neither is older than Y (usually 18) all is well. Of course this gives rise to the situation where she is 16, and you’ve been banging her out several times a week for the last couple of years, and you turn 18 and now it’s illegal! I was in that situation long long ago, and the young lady was royally POed, of course so was I but I had older women to fall back on for release, she didn’t – of course that took about a day for her to rectify. She seemed to think it would bother me that she was banging so many guys – it didn’t. She was now off limits, and no piece of tail is worth years of my life. That was probably my first introduction, that guys get screwed by the laws… So it’s best to have “a string of pearls” when it comes to women – so you always have several to pull from.

  49. sunshinemary says:

    Off Topic
    Christianity Today has a review up today of Hanna Rosin’s book “The End of Men and the Rise of Women” in its Hermeneutics section. Do you suppose they gave it a bad review, probably 0 out of 5 stars? Christianity Today bills itself as a “global Christian media ministry”, so they couldn’t possibly extol the virtues of such a hate-filled unbiblical work as Rosin’s book, right? Ha.

    You have to create a free account to comment on their website, in case you have anything you want to say to CT on this issue.

  50. ybm says:

    “I can’t celebrate a new world in which one sex has to suffer for the other sex to succeed. Of course, this is how the world has been since its beginning. ”

    And the Churchian feminist reveals herself.

    It was never about equal rights, never about ‘respect’.

    It was about getting some control, and some fucking revenge while we are at it.

    You go girl.

  51. deti says:

    SSM:

    On CT’s review of “The ENd of Men”. It’s fascinating that a mainstream Christian publication can only say that it hopes one gender doesn’t have to excel at the expense of the other.

    Katelyn Beaty of CT says it’s great women can work and have kids. It’s great women can “leave abusive marriages without having to beg or become prostitutes”. (Well, I suppose, if your sole reference for that claim is the “I Dreamed a Dream” song from Les Miserables. This hasn’t been the case in America in decades.)

    This is more evidence that mainstream Christianity is feminist through and through. No mention of the fact that women instigate most divorces and that many are frivolous “I’m not haaaaappy” divorces. No mention of crushing alimony and child support payments. No mention of the fact that God hates divorce (in a Christian publication, no less). One paragraph on the effect of all this on men.

  52. Höllenhund says:

    “I can’t celebrate a new world in which one sex has to suffer for the other sex to succeed. Of course, this is how the world has been since its beginning. ”

    And the Churchian feminist reveals herself.

    LOL. Color me shocked.

    This sentiment is actually common among beta useful idiots and supposedly non-feminist women – not to mention feminists, of course. Just visit any gynocentric blog and see for yourself. Just one example from Slutting Up Smart:

    “But I also don’t want it to come at the expense of women. I just cannot believe that for a man or woman to be treated fairly, the opposite sex has to suffer. Going back to the days where my lot in life was firmly attached to a man that happened to be in my village or small town is also not an option. We can do better.”

    hookingupsmart.com/2012/03/29/politics-and-feminism/is-the-end-of-hypergamy-near/comment-page-6/#comment-114885

    Again, this sentiment is common. They always sing the same tune: “Yeah, feminism has kinda sorta been harmful. We need to find new common ground between men and women, in harmony, with both genders addressing these problems together in a mutually beneficial way. It just cannot come at the expense of one gender. It’d be grossly unfair. We need to be positive, productive, without disempowering either gender.”

    Needless to say, it’s all BS. All of it. What they actually mean is this:

    “The feminine primacy, gynocentrism, gynonormativity and women’s legal privileges must all be defended. We cannot have a world where one gender has to suffer – as long as it’s women.”

    The simple fact is this: once you adopt the Marxist mentality of interest groups, power struggle and competition, it’s nothing else but a zero-sum game. It’s the classic question by Lenin: Who? Whom? There are two sides, and one side has to lose for the other to win. As we can see, even Christians believe this crap. The victory of Marxism has apparently been complete.

    “Female nature” is a fatal plague upon humanity.

  53. sunshinemary says:

    The Hermeneutics reviewer writes:

    Instead of heralding personal choice—that foundational tenet of feminism—for a woman to figure out what success and fulfillment mean for her, Rosin seems to want every woman to carve their way up to the top—in others words, to look like her.

    This reviewer, a woman, is one of the managing editors of Christianity Today (she takes care to point out that most of the others are men so that we will know about her Specialness). Her complaint against Rosin’s evil book? That it doesn’t celebrate a woman’s “personal choice” enough.

    Christo-feminism is not as bad as secular feminism. It is worse. At least with a secular feminist you know what you are getting; a hard-boiled careerist. With a Christo-feminist you are getting Ms. Wait-a-minute-while-I-choose-if-I-want-to-be-a-boy-or-a-girl-today. She can’t make up her mind, and what’s awesome is she doesn’t have to! She is figuring out what success and fulfillment mean to her. ‘Cause it’s all about her. ‘Cause it’s always about her. Move over, Jesus, there’s a new god wearing a Jesus mask and his name is Personal Choice!

    Sorry for hijacking this thread. I’m done now. Carry on.

  54. an observer says:

    Deti,

    The article reflects the sad state of contemporary christianity. So many men have left the church when they see the hypocrisy, the blatant double standards and the false teaching.

  55. an observer says:

    Ssm,

    Emotion-dominated behaviour used to be condemned. Now it is celebrated. Clearly, we’re not in Kansas, anymore.

    Old diagnosis: Freudian hysteria
    Current diagnosis: strong, independent woman
    Actual diagnosis: hamsterbation

  56. Opus says:

    O/T

    I bring you news that The University of Man (who awarded Dalrock a Honorary Degree) have ended their blog – I hope it had nothing to do with my making fun of the fact that Prof Mentu came from Texas. I was only joking.

  57. Joseph of Jackson says:

    I wish guys in the manosphere would leave their blogs up for a bit so we could get info from them. I’m going to miss Mentu.

  58. deti says:

    Bye mentu and ashur.

  59. 22to28 says:

    I’m not sure why they felt the need to take down the site. I’m sure that they may have had worries about their writings being linked to their real life personae, but its a pity that they didn’t let the existing writings stand for a little while to allow their fans to copy their favourite posts. There were so many articles that I appreciated of theirs. I’ll have to see if I can track them down on an archive site.

  60. an observer says:

    Uoms rss feed still shows text of the articles.

  61. ballista74 says:

    That’s highly unfortunate news. Hopefully they will be able to contribute again in some shape or form. Well wishes to Ashur and Mentu on their future travels.

  62. Cane Caldo says:

    @22to28

    I’m sure that they may have had worries about their writings being linked to their real life personae, but its a pity that they didn’t let the existing writings stand for a little while to allow their fans to copy their favourite posts.

    I would be surprised if that had anything to do with it.

    I was wondering if something happened, or was realized, at the PUA meet-up hosted by Roosh, and attended by Mentu.

  63. imnobody says:

    It’s a sad tradition: the first one was Eternal Bachelor. Recently InMalaFide and the University of Man.

    One day everything is normal and the following day, the site is down and no archive is left. I have always wondered why this is so.

  64. 22to28 says:

    @imnobody

    Manosphere bloggers operate in a dangerous place. They have a message that would be viewed by many as crude, sexist, revolting and far-right. They attempt to remain anonymous, almost to a man. But to contribute as effectively as possible, it is tempting to include certain details that could put a target on their back. I’m sure that in the beginning, with only a few hits per day, there is relatively little worry that comes with sharing little bits and pieces about oneself. But when a blog gets up to close to a million hits, what once seemed to be of little concern probably factors into a lot of daily stress, worrying, wondering if something written months before could suddenly expose them. Will a spurned ex or former target put the pieces together and ruin their profession career and embarrass them, their family and friends?

    @Dalrock

    It’s probably a lot of pressure to live with. What do you think Dalrock? Are you going to suddenly up and leave us one day? Should I be copying all your posts to my hard-drive? Do you worry about your name becoming public someday in connection with your blog?

  65. William says:

    @ Höllenhund
    Woman who don’t want to be in relationships with unattractive men don’t do it, while the sluts themselves try to either erase their past or make being a slut a positive thing.

    The only way most people won’t do certain acts is if there’s a consequence behind it, we need woman who’ll act the same way weather people are watching or not.

  66. an observer says:

    Vale UOM. You shall be missed,

  67. Miserman says:

    22to28,

    Manosphere bloggers operate in a dangerous place.

    While doing my undergrad studies, I wrote anti-feminist articles for the school newspaper. In my naivety, I did not realize just what I was getting into. After one article was published, a guy walked up to me and was genuinely afraid for my safety and warned me not to go out at night. While nothing ever occured, I look back and see that challenging feminism is indeed a dangerous pursuit.

    Hell hath no fury like a feminist exposed …

  68. Höllenhund says:

    As time passes, I have more respect for the Manosphere bloggers who can keep their sites running for more than, say, 3 or 4 years. Most blogs don’t make it that far.

  69. imnobody says:

    @22to28

    You are right. Time to find a blog backup tool.

  70. Clarence says:

    Opus failed to mention something:
    Sir Saville is being accused of several other things , not just after slutty 15 + year olds.
    He’s being accused publically by two men of raping them when they were boys -one was 9 at the time, and he’s also apparently being accused of messing with children and/or teens at some child psychiatric hospital where he was a volunteer for a long time. I’ll admit that if it was just mid-teen and older girls or guys I’d defend him all the way as that was perfectly legal in Britain most of that time frame – and I’d put this all down to hypocritical, politically motivated hysteria. But there are some pretty disgusting accusations out there, and so honest investigations need to be done.

  71. codebeard says:

    RIP UMan :(

    Anyone have an offline copy of the articles? I had some of them bookmarked to read but I hadn’t got around to it yet.

  72. Opus says:

    @Clarence

    Even if every accusation that has been made against Sir Jimmy is true, what (I ask rhetorically) is the point of attempting to investigate the accusations, long after his death, when he would thus have no opportunity to rebut the allegations, true or false, bad or otherwise. I feel quite sure that if I were to draw the attention of the local police to similar assaults against myself where the perpetrator was long gone I would be told to stop wasting police time.

    One has to look at who started the rumour which like all calumny spreads faster than wild-fire and attempt to ascertain what that person (in this case a rabid aging bitch not unlike the late Betty Freidan) gains thereby. Anyway the latest is that it is now being suggested that there was inside none less than 10 Downing Street itself a paedophile ring involving no less a personage than the Prime Minister himself (though they do not say which one). Not that these sort of claims are anything new and certainly H.M. Government’s extraordinary efforts to protect certain Doctors from Rothley- a protection they do not afford all whose daughters mysteriously disappear – tends to lead one to suppose such rumours may have foundation. I suspect however this is merely an opportunity for lower-decks sentimentality of the sort we last witnessed on the death of the Princess of Wails.

    (My apologies if this is all too boring or incomprehensible for Americans.)

  73. cynical optimist says:

    Is there anyway that someone can find contact the U of Man and put the writings in an archive as such a true shame to let some informative writings go to waste….. either that or DETI fills the vacume..

  74. Joseph of Jackson says:

    @Dalrock

    Can you get in touch with Mentu and get a copy of his posts? I will host the site as an archive if you can.

  75. Dalrock, please check your email, sir.

    and RIP UMan. They were fun to read

  76. cynical optimist says:

    Can you get in touch with Mentu and get a copy of his posts? I will host the site as an archive if you can.

    I’ll second that

  77. Martian Bachelor says:

    “While nothing ever occurred, I look back and see that challenging feminism is indeed a dangerous pursuit.” (Miserman)

    Almroth Wright alluded to the ancient nature of this problem in a book a century ago:

    “…the influence of women has caused man to leave unsaid many things which he ought to have said.

    “Especially in two respects has woman restricted the discussion:

    “She has … stifled discussion by placing her taboo upon anything seriously unflattering being said about her in public.

    “With respect to the restriction that nothing which might offend woman’s amour propre [self love] shall be said in public, it may be pointed out that, while it was perfectly proper and equitable that no evil (and, as Pericles proposed, also no good) should be said of woman in public so long as she confined herself to the domestic sphere, the action of that section of women who have sought to effect an entrance into public life, has now brought down upon woman, as one of the penalties, the abrogation of that convention.” (emphasis mine)

    One can understand why Pericles was proposing what he was then proposing: There’s nothing so obnoxious as a guy in the public sphere you’re trying to do business with who’s going on and on about what a great wife/SO/gf/sister/daughter he supposedly has. In the limit, it devolves into a pointless bragging contest, because there’s no proof, there’s no accounting for taste, and it doesn’t really matter anyway. Bully for you, your wife or daughter is a precious snowflake. Yea, right.

    Feminism to this day still wants to impose the one-sided female flattery only rule on everyone, that we must follow the approved fem-religion which attributes the worst characteristics of the worst men to all men, (e.g., “All men are potential rapists”), while at the same time denying any but the best characteristics of the best women to all women (e.g., “Every girl can be an astronaut like Sally Ride if we just Title 9 everything STEM-y”). The convention devolves into an Orwellian reality where one is only allowed to talk about how wonderful women are (or could be), and how horrible men are (or can be).

    It has to be either both or neither in order to be equitable.

  78. While doing my undergrad studies, I wrote anti-feminist articles for the school newspaper. In my naivety, I did not realize just what I was getting into. After one article was published, a guy walked up to me and was genuinely afraid for my safety and warned me not to go out at night. While nothing ever occured, I look back and see that challenging feminism is indeed a dangerous pursuit.

    Hell hath no fury like a feminist exposed …
    —————————————————–

    This happened to me in 1983. I was photographed sitting in the picture window of a town bar (college town in OH) with buddies mid afternoon in springtime holding cards up rating the girls walking by, 1-10 scale on looks. It make front page of campus paper. We were roundly excoriated. So I wrote in to the editor and titled my letter “girls are really stupid, I have proof”

    I wrote that :

    I had a small dog (I did, it was a prop for getting girls). This dog, while walking across campus, would get girls to stop. One girl said to me that my dog looked like an Ewok. I exclaimed, “see, ewoks don’t even exist, hence, girls are stupid”……the whole thing was (in case not obvious) sarcasm on my part.

    I was referred by the university to attend a gender sensitivity meeting, and I was compelled to do so…that was in flipping 1983!

  79. ray says:

    GBFM — My little lost sheep.

    not yours. careful

    Sunshine at three-one-nine:

    good comment and even better attitude

  80. 22to28 says:

    @empathologicalism

    I won’t go into detail, because too much information could be used to link my online identity to my real life one, something that, given my current job position (lets just say, I work with teens and am responsible for their welfare and mentorship) I’m not eager to see happen, but I had a similar university newspaper writing experience.

    After spending a semester writing some genuinely funny articles, I managed to slip a clearly ridiculous article past the editors that poked fun at the fact that men must just about always pursue women if they want a relationship. It was offensive if you took it serious, which no reasonable, thinking person would, so you can imagine the reaction (mounds and mounds of hate mail).

    Still, it was connected with my first manosphere themed thinking, the first murmurings of red-pill mentality within me. The sense that something just wasn’t right and women were getting away with murder.

    There were many young men come to me and thank me. They got the point of my article and wanted me to know that they no longer felt so alone. One freshman who stood out told me a story of being accused of stalking a girl and essentially assumed guilty without opportunity to defend himself. My article, even as a completely preposterous piece, was a breath of fresh air to him.

    I’ll never regret writing it. I’ll also never forget that women can’t take a joke. Ever.

  81. Pingback: LIGFY: The End Of October And UMan | Society of Amateur Gentlemen

  82. Ybm says:

    Re: this gamer nonsense exposed to real life shows how silly it really is…

    http://aaronsleazy.blogspot.ca/2012/10/guest-post-uber-alpha-manosphere.html?m=1

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s