….you’re just bitter because you can’t get laid…

hahahaha, well, I don’t know who throws that phrase around more, angry feminazi’s or hbd/game lovin’ manospherians….

there’s the so-called shaming language, but I think even more is going on…

First, it’s an assault on one’s masculinity-purportedly a Real Man ™ should be able to go out and get sex, and if he dares complain about it on the internet, especially his inability to not only get sex but a loving relationship, he is a subhuman Nice Guy ™ piece of shit. Why do bigots like Amanda Marcotte and David Futrelle pick on incel men when they could call out the rotten behavior of Hugo Schwyzer? It’s also obvious that disagreeable guys like Roosh have to pick on sexually unsuccessful men to feel somewhat successful themselves. Oh, he’s gotten pussy, he must be better than you because he has more “notches.” Any guy with a pocket full of cash can get himself a plane ticket to a sex tourist destination and bang a 100+ prostitutes. It really isn’t a huge accomplishment. Can he do something cool like pick up a guitar and start shredding? Could he hang on a mountainbike trail? I bet he’d fall off and start crying that he is lacking energy not because he is a beta mangina but because he has started the “ketonic” phase of his paleo diet. If those Eastern European women are half as great as he claims, don’t you think he woulda found “the one” by now? Don’t you think he would’ve found a cool, sexy lady to travel with if not marry? Aren’t you getting the impression that a bigger part of his “mission” than pursuing the pleasures of the flesh is putting down low status men?

Even more interesting is when you take a look at the mess that is modern feminism. If there is a unifying belief, it would be in women’s reproductive rights. That is birth control, the ability to get an abortion if pregnancy occurs and even visiting a fertility clinic or going to a sperm bank to conceive. Ironic that a core component of feminism is when or if a woman will have children, then that same feminist tries to dismiss a man’s feelings by saying he is “bitter because he can’t get laid.” Let’s unpack this a little more. Men’s only options for birth control are condoms or a vasectomy. A woman has many more, including abortion. If you get a woman pregnant and she decides to keep the baby, you’ll be paying until the kid is 18. If she decides to abort, well it doesn’t matter what your feeling are. Her body–her choice, you’ve been paying attention, right? And in some countries, if you aren’t sure the baby is yours, you are a criminal if you try to find out.

So, if a man is complaining about his inability to get dates, he might be complaining about being able to get to the first step of having a chance at fatherhood. If a man was romantically unsuccessful in his late teens and twenties, he might find in his thirties that he is getting some attention from women his age. However, if they are divorced and have had kids with other men he might feel these women aren’t his peers. He might feel that he would like to find a younger woman who has never been married and wants to have kids. Well, just look at the shaming that will bring you. You’ll be told to stay in your own league. You’ll be told that those women deserve a second chance even though you’ve never had a first chance. Maybe this is what Rollo Tomassi refers to as the feminine imperative. Funny how you see those condescending “man up” articles. Where are the “woman up” articles? Equality, equality motherfuckers! How come you are a misogynist, if as a never married man who doesn’t have children and refuses to qualify it with “not that I know of” like a male feminist extraordinaire, you refuse to “man up” and “marry a slut.” How come you are looked down upon if you cite the statistic that divorcee’s are bad marriage prospects?

Funny how a movement that claims to be about equality will dismiss many men’s concerns with condescending phrases like “teh patriarchy hurts menz too” and “what about teh menz.” It’s pretty clear to me that feminist’s and “men” like Roosh aren’t on my side.

19 thoughts on “….you’re just bitter because you can’t get laid…

  1. Well, just look at the shaming that will bring you.


    Um, seriously? You proudly shame women for several paragraphs, just for daring to want to be mothers, and then you say THIS? Are you TRYING to be funny or what?

    You’ll be told that those women deserve a second chance even though you’ve never had a first chance

    I think we can count you out, since you obviously think you are above such women… and men too.

    you refuse to “man up” and “marry a slut.”

    Slut, huh? A woman with a child is automatically A SLUT? Wow.

    I certainly can’t improve on that formulation. Are you a feminist in disguise, trying to make the case for feminism? If so, good job.

    Keep up the good work.

    1. long story short, a woman doesn’t owe me babies and I don’t owe it to her to be a protector or provider. If another man wants to marry a divorcee, not my concern. Same as if a woman wants to marry a divorced man. And you didn’t even bother to read the link about how it is illegal to test for paternity in some countries. I’m sure you would go apeshit if the hospital made an ooopsie and gave you someone else’s child….

      but of course your boy Huggs Skeezer gets to cuckold another man and brag about it, it’s all good because an addict gets to be a dick as long as he tells teh wimminz everything they want to hear about how all non feminist men are teh oppressors….

      Feminism, pretending to be about equality then pouring on the shaming language when the bullshit gets called out…

      1. and BTW, I won’t insult you by saying your reading comprehension is awful because you are an immigrant, I’m pretty sure you are misreading me intentionally, “marry a slut” was in parenthesis, you DO know what that means….

      2. Um, why do you say Hugo is “my boy”? I defended him one time and one time only, as a fellow alcoholic who was discussing his experiences in addiction (and I would do it again), but this does not make him “my boy”…

        Every time someone like you puts an addict down for what they did before entering recovery, I am (as I have said over and over) VERY grateful that I have not been completely honest about my own experiences. In that sense, Hugo died for my sins. I thanked him for saving me from a similar fate.

        I find it unfair that people who claim mental illness get a pass, but addiction is not considered a mental illness in the same way.

        This has nothing to do with gender, but with the working definition of disability.

  2. I like the anger you have. I suspose you are a mgtow? I agree with your part abotu roosh (dont like his stuff) and some others, like i like hertise a lot, but he endless bashes mgtow, and its like ‘wtf man, we are all on the same team here. Oh, real badass you attack the guy not interested in sex…’
    Its kind of childish when they do it

    1. you can follow a MGTOW path and still be very interested in sex. Not a fan of Heartiste. He is threatened by MGTOW because his whole supposed status comes from how many “notches” he has. If a man says my value is not based on sexual success with women, then his whole status play means nothing. Similar to how feminist’s are going apeshit that they can’t control men with shaming language anymore….

  3. Speaking of reading comprehension, I never said ANYONE’s reading comprehension was bad because they were an immigrant (look it up), what I said (pay attention) was that other people privately instructed me to LAY OFF this person because THEY THOUGHT his reading comprehension was poor because he was an immigrant.

    Nice to see how careful YOUR reading comprehension is, though. 😦 Or maybe just standing shoulder-to-shoulder with another MRA? Why are you buying his version of events instead of mine? Oh, never mind, what a dumb question.

    1. First off I’m not a MRA…

      Second off, I don’t need to defend a marine, he can sure ass shit defend himself…

      Third off, I won’t defend a feminist because that is benevolent sexism and that would make me almost as bad as a subhuman Nice Guy ™ but no where near as exhalted as an abusive guy like Hugo Schwyzer.

      You’ve constantly misrepresented things I’ve said and other people have said. This is no conspiracy. You said that by not standing with the Pro-Choice crowd, I was automatically standing with the Christians as if there can be no nuance and anyone who doesn’t absolutely agree with you is evillle….

      You don’t respond to nuanced argument. You seem to prefer drama and sarcasm….

      1. I did not say you are “automatically standing with the Christians”–I do not use the term “automatically standing with–” anyone or anything… so you are wrong.

        Speaking of nuance, what I said was YOU WOULD BE PERCEIVED AS standing with the Christians. I said you would likely be POLITICALLY USED by them, and yes, you would be.

        Are you JOKING with that nuance thing? You have four times here blatantly said things about me that are untrue

        1) You said I called you misogynist and I never have and do not think that about you.

        2) You said I said someone was an immigrant and therefore had no reading comprehension, when I made it specifically clear that I was quoting what several of my correspondents said, not my own opinion.

        3) You call Hugo “my boy”–ignoring (see comment above) the entire context of my comments about him.

        4) And now, you say I said you would be “automatically standing with” (a term I have never used) Christians, and you ignore the fact that I was referring to how you would be perceived and utilized. (I do not believe ANYTHING in politics is anything remotely “automatic”–I believe in praxis for all political movements, including the pro life movement.)

        You are the one with no sense of nuance. And you are the one who has told four lies about me in short order, thus creating (gasp!) DRAMA AND SARCASM when I came here to argue various points in good faith and just have some fun. You take everything from me as very negative, even when I try winky emoticons and copious smilies. I try to be friendly and this is what I get… at least I was introduced to Martel’s blog from here, so thanks for that much. He is quite a reasonable person and I have enjoyed arguing at his blog. He is intelligent enough to argue well without having to make up shit about me.

        Basically, you just dislike feminists and decide we are bad. You want a comment section with no argument, just telling you how great you are or how much people agree with you. And hey, thats fine, so why didn’t you tell me in the first place? I would never have left a comment in the first place.

        But deliberate lies are quite unnecessary. Drama indeed.

      2. anyone who doesn’t absolutely agree with you is evillle…

        Fifth lie. I have never ONCE said that anyone who doesn’t agree with me is evil. Never a single time. EVER.

        That is some really nasty shit.

      3. evillle was meant as sarcasm, you seemed to respond best to my comments at Genderratic that were sarcastic…

        remember the ones where I talked about Jodi Arias and the SCUM manifesto….

  4. I don’t find using the n-word of “faggot” acceptable when they are in “quotes” and I don’t find “slut” acceptable in quotes either.

    What are the quotes supposed to do, magically take away the meaning of the word?

  5. One of the reasons the Alpha guys are telling men to “man up” is so that they and the woman they play the in-out with …
    get compensated for each other’s choices, courtesy of the last idiot guy.
    The last idiot guy, gets stuck with a woman who is “secondhand, damaged goods” … who leans on him and grants him misery, and stays out of the alpha’s social sphere so he doesn’t get cockblocked …
    while the alpha gets a new woman, attracted by his “callous dumping”(actually, planned – since the woman found a chump to swallow her “pitiful” story)
    So DON’T try to take a woman off an alpha’s hands out of pity.
    Maybe the reason she is with him … is also because nobody else wanted to be the last idiot guy.

    1. that’s just women and high status men using low status men-male disposability for sure.

      The only reason I would get seriously involved with a woman is if I ever want a child.

  6. Thank you so much for this post. Sucks when you feel left behind, but it sucks even more when people expect you to just “be there” and don’t give you any time to “catch up”. Really glad to see there’s some sense in people out there besides LOVE EVERYONE NO MATTER WHAT THEY DO.

    i mean we all totally should, but c’mon it’s not like everybody else loves you, and that takes a lot of energy lol

  7. men largely face rejection far more than women. Men still do much of the asking out, women generally don’t—unless you are some perceived alpha that other women are tripping over themselves to date/have sex/have a relationship with. Women will often go after what other women want; the goal of getting a man that other women desire is no exception. Regardless of his worth, a man who as a potential harem of sorts has women after him because other women value him.

    But this is not common at all. Even so-called liberated women will often expect men to initiate and face rejection. Hypergamy is a subject that comes up on many MGTOW boards and videos; women that claim they want equality can be summed up by their hypocrisy by a couple of things; desiring to get a higher status man, and expecting men to do the work gaining her approval while she has veto power. By having this choice, it shunts the onus onto men while women do not have to face the pain of rejection; they are in the driver’s seat, while men have to sink or swim. The righteousness in this dynamic is frustrating; women can be petty and nitpick about the dumbest crap in mate selection while not sharing the same level of approval winning.

    In reality, many (if not most) women take rejection worse than men. Men have to inure themselves to it; hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

    Let’s face it. Despite complaints to the contrary, even women of subpar physical looks, low-paying jobs, and other flaws can snatch a man far easier than a man in the same equivalence. Hell, even a man of higher attributes often have difficulty in dating and attracting a suitable mate. Women typically do not date/marry down as much, while men are supposed to demonstrate clemency to women that are of lesser socioeconomic status as them.

    Since women have a better time attracting men, many believe that men can pick up women with the same ease and frequency. This is nonsense; men have to prove themselves far more unless they are at the top of the heap. There are women who complain about the quality of men out there, but they are usually focusing on a narrow spectrum of men. Even a recent article stated that anyone outside of being white collar are “non-negotiable” as far as dates are concerned—they are not dating material these pseudo-elist women mentioned in the post. Nevermind that many blue collar men can make good money, but I digress.

    Looking into it further, the typical moaning and bitching often includes that men aren’t even “manning up” to improve themselves and make themselves more potentially good date/mate material. Of course, there are women who decry that men will not take up their responsibilities. When Western culture is swimming in misandry, it’s not too hard to understand why men will not “man up” in first place. When being loyal, honorable, honest, hard-working, genteel, and generous is not mutually rewarded or even outright exploited, a man seeing clearly will wise up.

    This is evident with the dating scene as well. The cards are stacked against men, and there are women who will not give up their social and personal power so easily . . . even if it harms them in the short term. They are refusing to accept that there are men who will not let their own self-respect dwindle or be used in the dating process while sweety wants to reap the rewards. If some sort of mutual equity was widespread, it would be different, but it is not the environment we observe now.

    A good friend of mine summed up things nicely, although he was speaking about the workplace when he was getting the brunt of crap jobs and lost much of his motivation when he knew it was a losing battle to hold on to his job at the time: If you don’t care, why should I. There are women out there that do not want to understand this about men, and will continue to blunder and largely blame men while living in denial about what is actually happening.

    Over the years, the shaming language loses it effect, and the women that are upset that men would rather play an X-Box in their thirties or keep their money for retirement. Women need acknowledge why this is more common rather than remaining smug and single (all the while still thinking about men at every turn). In the mating dance, even with the dating scene, it’s not being intimidated by a “strong, independent” woman that stops men from approaching/making the first move. Those same men are tired of running the gauntlet for little result, disappointed by the arbitrary whims, never being good enough, and the exhaustive and trivial lists judgmental women draw up for them. And who can blame them?

  8. When a woman says to a guy “you cant get laid”, what she is saying, quite simply is “I wouldn’t fuck you”. That’s it. That’s the content of the insult. That’s what’s supposed to cut.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s