Women Love to Be Used by Alpha Men

An Indian woman writes to the “expert” on The Times of India:

I am 24 years old and in love with a 31-year-old married man who has two children. I met him when I was 18 and he used to live in my neighbourhood. He forced himself on me several times before he got married. But soon after, I started loving him. He used to call me as per his sexual requirement. When I went for higher studies, he didn’t contact me even once. But, when I visited home during my holidays, he called me for the same thing.

I told him several times to talk to me about this relationship but he never bothered. I decided to cut off all contact with him when he told one of my friends that he uses me for his pleasure. Now, it’s been five years and I haven’t contacted him even once. I am now an assistant professor with a reputed college and everything else is going fine in my life but I am unable to forget him. I still love him and haven’t considered relationship with anyone else. He loves his wife and I know whatever I do, he will never realize my love for him.

Notice that —

  • He has the charisma, natural or learned, to “force himself” on her that attracts instead of repulsing her.
  • She was in her teens when he was a twenty-five year old man of marriageable age in India.
  • She is a fucktoy for him and she knows it. And that doesn’t prevent her from developing romantic feelings for him.
  • He forgets about her existence unless there is a possibility of getting sex from her.
  • He “never bothers” to give explanation to her on her inquiries about the nature their relationship.
  • He objectifies and devalues her by telling their friends that she is his bitch.

But she can’t forget him, even after five years of no contact, and loves him such that she can’t consider relationship with anyone else! This despite him being happily married with kids. That is the alpha effect at its best.

Women can’t resist being attracted to men who are psychopathic, callous and emotionally unavailable to them.

Men who treat them like garbage, so far as they have status or charisma, would win any day over white knights.

The testimony of the dark side of their sexuality is the fact that they almost never forget the alpha cads they have been pumped-and-dumped by. Here is another confession by a woman who even after fifty years suffers from the love for the man who took her virginity without giving anything in return.

Eventually, my efforts were rewarded. I was sitting in the library one day when he walked in. I felt white-hot desire and, propelled by almost insane love and longing, walked over to him. From then on, we started a sort of relationship. We would meet at parties and other functions — at which, I have to admit, he paid me scant attention. But I would interpret any little crumb of affection or interest as undying love on his part.

I soon lost my virginity to him, in his room at Henderson Hall, and thought my happiness was complete. I was so besotted that I never even noticed another young man lurking along the corridor, named Bryan Ferry.

The Christmas holidays came and I wondered how I could get through them without him. When I came back, I thought we were an item. But he was still being a very reluctant swain, and although keen enough to have sex, he never once asked me out, or even seemed to want to be seen with me.

I sort of knew it would never come right, yet, wilfully, I ignored all the warning signs. After one of our many nights of passion, more in love with him than ever, if that was possible, I saw him at the top of the steps of the Union Building and ran up to him.

Now, surely, he would return my love. But instead of flinging his arms around me, remembering the wonderful thrill of the night before, he turned away.

He never spoke to me again.

Notice the similarity? Story of women.

We advise men to keep their eyes and minds open for such confessions by women. They are aplenty on the Internet, and they inadvertently provide great lessons for men.

Follow Max Newman on Twitter or WordPress.


Ten Fashion Bloopers to Avoid for Indian Men

  1. The Backpack.  Ditch the backpack except when backpacking.  Carry your laptop etc. in a shoulder bag, preferably made of leather.


  2. Sneakers.  Ditch the sneakers except when taking part in a fitness activity.  Wear leather or suede or desert boots or, in summers, loafers or good-looking flip-flops.


  3. Canvas or Leather or Faux leather sandals.  And even more so: Sandals with socks.  They look cheap and ugly.  NRIs are somehow big fans of them.  Avoid them at all costs.


  4. Light colored jeans, especially the ones with a color gradient or some pattern.  They very rarely look good.  Buy solid dark colored ones (indigo, dark gray) instead.


  5. Not getting a haircut when it’s time.  Having overgrown hair and facial hair tells everybody that you don’t care about your appearance.  And trim your nose and chest hair.


  6. Wearing a suit jacket with sleeves which are too long, and a suit pant which has more than one “break”.


  7. Wearing a shirt which “blouses” over your body.  Either buy a “tailored-fit” or “slim-fit” shirt (depending on your body-type), or get the shirt tailored.  In India it shouldn’t cost more than a hundred rupees to get the shirt altered.


  8. Wearing square-toe leather shoes, or thin-edge ones.  The Oxfords are the way to go.  And they don’t cost much more than these horrendous designs.
  9. Wearing un-ironed shirts or trousers/jeans.  Learn how to properly iron a dress shirt and pants.  There are umpteen youtube videos on these.
  10. Wearing a belt which is too long and whose edge hangs on the side.  A properly-sized belt should only extend 3-4 inches beyond the buckle.  You can cut and size the belt yourself.

The Media is Not Your Friend

From an essay reviewing the book “Addicted to Distraction” (freely available here):

We thought we would use the Web for our purposes, us conservatives, men of the Right, Traditionalists, Neoreactionaries. The Left controlled the Old Mass Media, the NYTWAPO and NBABCBS, but we would seize our chance for every man and woman jack to blog and comment and share our perspective, to go around the Gatekeepers, to form our own networks and “get our message out.”

We were wrong. We were assimilated. We continued to click on the Mass Media, to respond, respond, respond to all of the relativism and the bullshit, to “strike back” at Obama and Reid and Pelosi and Jezebel and Buzzfeed,  Slate and Salon, to the married fags and the trannies and the Slut Walkers, the beheaders and terrorists, the escaped tigers and maniacs, the Kardashians and Housewives; to the Daily Spew.

Modern mass media has transitioned from pay-to-read model to one which is more aptly called bait-to-read.  To some extent, media was always dependent on advertising.  But modern media’s sole focus is advertising.  Its primary purpose is not journalism, disseminating information, clarifying a contentious issue, factual verification, etc. but to get you to click.

To that end, modern media is (very consciously and in a calculated manner) using a set of tactics which can only be called sociopathic manipulation

  • Sensationalizing, exaggerating and distorting news
  • Creating antagonism and hostility even at the cost of social and familial harmony.  (As an example: actively promoting the factually false and immensely harmful feminist agenda of “wage gap”, “female oppression”, “rape culture”, and so on which is leading to a complete breakdown of traditional family in many societies)
  • Promoting narcissistic “self-esteem” and “self-acceptance”, not self-improvement
  • Advocating deviant lifestyles as worthy of respect, emulation and admiration (“open marriages”, tattoos, plastic surgery, drugs)
  • Pushing more and more distraction technology (latest smartphones, internet consumption devices, more and more gadgets which waste more time than they save) so that you will consume such media day and night, and generate revenue for them
  • Promoting a certain political outfit, or denigrating another, because of bias and “favors”
  • “Paid news”, especially in India
  • Ruining people’s reputation for giggles and clicks
  • Telling people that their lifestyle is boring and that only by spending more money (exotic vacations, fast cars, buying “bling” things, drinking in bars, clubbing) can they be considered cool
  • Keeping people oblivious of the real political and economic issues which impact their lives

Understand: if you consume modern media, you are their bitch.  They are using you to generate ad revenue, and in that process, they are totally willing to do anything which keeps you coming back.

While Apple and Samsung are in the business of hardware and share the blame for accelerating and cashing in on the decline, the real villains are ad-based media conglomerates: Google, Facebook, Buzzfeed, Gawker, etc.  Google and Facebook pioneered the business model that free services can be provided to the end user as long as they can be forced to watch ads.  This model is now the default model on the internet.

Due to this model, all the major websites are in a race to the bottom for attracting “views” and “clicks”.  Google and Facebook are the largest “platforms” for internet ads, and they have enabled sites like Buzzfeed and others to make use of their platform and create bottom-feeding media content.

It’s ironic that Google’s slogan all these years has been “Do no evil”.  But almost all the money Google earns is from being a middleman for the majority of ads on the internet.  Google tells websites that they can earn a lot of money (and of course, give part of it to Google) if only they have clickable content.  And to create clickable content, no stone is being left unturned.

But we are not in the business of merely pointing out the problem.  We want to tell our readers how to steer clear of the worst of modern media and its distractions and vile content:

  • Delete your Facebook account.  Within ten days you will realize what a waste of time it was.  Ask yourself how much time you spend on facebook and what’s the payoff for you.  You will be surprised.
  • Google and Apple want you to see more and more ads on your phone.  Do not install “free” third-party apps unless they really help you in a tangible way.  They will almost always show you ads.  If you need it, pay a little for the app and install its ad-free version.
  • Use Mozilla Firefox with Adblock plus enabled.  More and more websites push you to install their app, and show dozens of ads when you visit them via your smartphone.  Don’t bite.  Firefox+Adblock will make internet (e.g. newspaper websites) usable again on your smartphone.  Google, with no explanation, removed support for Adblock plus from its Chrome browser on Android.  We can guess why.  (You can still use Adblock Plus on Chrome on your desktop)
  • Use DuckDuckGo as the default search engine on Firefox.  It does not track you or store your history.  And it doesn’t make any money for Google.
  • When forwarding articles to your friends (say for commentary or criticism of media tactics), use “snapshots” and not the original URL (the URL will make money for the content creator).  Read more here.
  • Refuse to get a cable or satellite TV connection.  Just say no.  There is nothing useful on TV, believe us.

Media is not your friend.  It is your exploiter, wants to keep you ignorant and sedated, and it makes you exploit your friends.  Do not allow ad-based-media to make money from your life energy, your time, and your social circle.

Take back your life.  Only you can.

The Modern Maxims, from The Illimitable Man

These two sets of maxims should be required reading for all men.

From FIfty Shades of Red:

Maxim #5

The feminine wants a guardian and the masculine wants to guard. The problem is, neither can happen without trust. The sexes have never trusted each other much, but courtesy of feminism, they have never trusted each other less.

Maxim #26

If she is with a submissive man, she prioritises her happiness. If she is with a dominant man, she prioritises his. With the dominant man, making him happy makes her happy. The submissive man’s happiness has no such effect, so she deems it irrelevant.

Maxim #37

Marriage is security for women at the expense of man’s freedom. Traditionally man was given certain powers to compensate him for the increased burden and loss of freedom. He no longer is.

Maxim #50

If you try to debate with someone whose mind prefers emotion to reason, you will engage in a grand exercise of futility that exhausts the patience. As such, do not argue with women. It is pointless. You cannot argue with feelings, you can only manipulate them.

From Fifty Shades Redder:

Maxim #57

Men control an interaction by being non-reactive. Women control an interaction by being hyper-emotional.

Maxim #67

The majority of women would rather improve their capacity to deceive than change anything non-superficial about themselves.

Maxim #90

Women play games. Women say they do not play games and hate those that do. This is part of their game.

Maxim #98

If you’re not a man who is comfortably masculine, women will emotionally abuse you until you finally learn to be masculine. Their nature, although unintended, perversely serves in much the manner that tough love does. How she hurts you will give you the impetus necessary to become a better man. It is women who drive men to the red pill.

Maxim #100

The low-value man can do no right, the high-value man can do no wrong. The higher your social market value, the less the rules apply

Breaking the Glass Ceiling, at the point of a gun

From The Tribune

The National Stock Exchange has issued notice to 260 companies, including 145 suspended firms, for their failure to comply with Sebi’s norms of appointing at least one female director on their boards.

In February 2014, Sebi had directed companies to appoint at least one female director on their boards by October 1, 2014, a deadline that was later extended to April 1, 2015.

The headline is: “Why don’t you have female directors?”

The answer in a free country, free of feminist influence, would have been: “That’s none of your business.”

But since India is not a free country, and is more and more in the clutches of toxic feminists, we expect the companies to quietly appoint a rubber-stamp female director just to appease the authorities.  The kind of respect that those female director will (not!) command can only be imagined.

Notice that they do not ask: Why don’t we have female truck drivers?  Why don’t we have female rickshaw pullers?  Why don’t we have more female prisoners?  Why don’t we have female gutter cleaners?  Why don’t we have female ATM guards?  No, all that is understandable.  But not having a female director?  That’s impossible to tolerate.

And for those female directors hired to be yes-women of their male directors, we wonder what will be the criteria for their selection?  Will it be perhaps, that they are curvy in the right places and aim to please?


In other news, check out this thread on reddit recounting (mostly) the suffering of beta Indian males in their loveless marriages.  Let these be cautionary tales for anyone considering marriage as a path to happiness.

The Hypergamous Desi Slut

Though the video is educational on its own, the desi over-covered bimbo at 2:17 really takes the cake for being the drunk slut leading a tall white man to a private place to … erm… read her a book.  All other girls are at least white and attractive.  Heh.

Her father must be so proud of her.

We surmise that after this prank video surfaced, she banged a black man just to get over her shame.

Vandana Shiva is a fraud (continued)

In our last post, we cited a few essays which illustrate the pseudo-scientific claims and credentials of Vandana Shiva.

The Genetic Literacy Project has many articles on her antics.

Not many people know that Vandana Shiva was married to a distinguished scientist, Jayanta Bandopadhyaya.  They got divorced and their marital dispute reached the Supreme Court.  The Supreme Court, in Vandana Shiva v. Jayanta Bandopadhyay AIR 199 SC 1149, held that the mother, as much as the father, can be considered a natural guardian of the child.  One presumes there was a custody battle, but information is sorely lacking about the circumstances of their divorce and later litigation.

Interestingly, Jayanta B, her ex-husband wrote many scholarly articles debunking her propaganda.  One of the foremost claims to fame for Vandana Shiva has been her association with the so-called Chipko movement.  Jayanta B systemetically demolishes the various ecofeminist and feminist claims about that movement in his paper: Chipko movement: Of floated myths and flouted realities.

Some excerpts:

Documented evidences from the movement sources do not indicate any influences of the brand of thinking known as ‘deep ecology’. … On 24 June 1973, the first successful resistance to forest felling at the Mandal forests was based on economics and aimed at obtaining higher allotment of trees for felling to the Dasholi Gram Swarajya Sangh (DGSS), a local Gandhian organisation. On 26 March 1974, the more vociferous yet nonviolent resistance at the Reni forests was triggered off by the news of auction of some local forests for felling to a sports-goods company from the plains. The contract system for forest felling allowed rich contractors from the plains make large profits from fellings in the mountain forests.

In the early literature on Chipko no serious questions were raised about the movement being based on gender conflict. There was no lack of recognition of the fact the issue of forests in the Garhwal and Kumaon Himalaya touches the women much more intensely, than the men. The presence of large number of women in the forest action at Reni, and the largescale participation of the village women have led to some analysts claiming Chipko to be a ‘women’s movement’. Guha (1989) has answered these questions in a substantive manner showing the location of Chipko in the tradition of social movements of the region. However, inspite of that, Shiva (1992), identified Chipko as ‘a women’s movement’, though no activist woman from the movement has made any such claim.

In a magazine Sanctuary, Shiva (1992) declared that ‘one Gaura Devi’ led a group of village women to hug trees. A number of researchers had discussed the Reni action with Gaura Devi. However, there is no documented support to the claim of Shiva. She was neuther present at the spot in Reni, nor she refers to any discussion with Gaura Devi. There has been a media created confusion on the issue of who embraced the trees in Chipko Movement. This has also disturbed the activists of the movement. The spreading of misinformation is taken to comical heights by a Malaysian journalist Fong (1996) who, in an article in The Star wrote that :

“Her (Vandana Shiva’s) name is synonymous with the Chipko Movement (Chipko means embrace) in India, an active anti-logging movement in the 70s and early 80s. To stem environmental destruction, Vandana (Shiva) led thousands of women to embrace (literally) the trees in the Himalayan mountains in their bid to stop logging activities.”

In the characteristic style of sensationalist journalism, Fong (1996) does not provide any date, place, forest area, or villages associated with the incidence he reports. Nor he mentions one name out of the thousands of women that Shiva, reportedly, had led somewhere in the Himalayan mountains. The activists of the Chipko movement were, on one hand, amused at the totally comical nature of Fong’s claim. On the other hand, in a letter of protest to the editor of The Star, they wrote (Jardhari et al. 1996):

“The interview is based on false claims of Vandana Shiva and has angered many… The real activists are so simple that they do not know why Vandana Shiva is reportedly publishing wrong claims about Chipko in the foreign press.  We should all stand up against this new green exploitation of the people’s simplicity and courage by clever, greedy and selfish persons like Vandana Shiva.