Feminist Epistemology, School and Other B.S.

My new semester at college just started up, and that is currently taking a lot of of my time. I am also now one of the two system administrators for AVFM, so more time is dedicated towards helping polish the server.

What this means is that updates to my YT channel and MarZ will be pretty sparse and unpredictable, but enough time will be spent on KSUM to offer updates. I also found some good candidate APIs [1][2] for evaluation for Excavator, but of course, they are having internal issues and governments can’t be expected to fix them anytime soon.

In other news, I now have a snazzy new animation to use as an introduction to future videos. After Effects is proving to be easier to use than I first thought. I’ve started production of a criticism of feminist epistemology, and am targeting Feminist Standpoint Theory. It will be done when it will be done.

Thanks for following up. Tangotronics, motherfuckers.

Sanity Update – Friedman and KSUM

Here’s what’s been going on.

  • Map the Money has advanced by virtue of Jaclyn Friedman responding with WAM!s 1023s. The attachments will be evaluated.
  • KSU Men now has drafted bylaws derived from NCFM Campus Coordinator Chris Thompson’s bylaws from Montana State University.
  • A new poster called HATE IS HATE is now available.
  • My channel segment “Fuck Your Opinion” has been retired. The originals are available for download.

Dating Economics

I live a good life and am thankful for it. So what can a woman give me?

Try as I might, the only thing I can think of is sex. This is not objectification. Sex is scarce for heterosexual men, which gives it value. Men and women want what they feel like they can’t have, but there is a point where it becomes easier to just accept that we can’t have what we want and forget about the whole thing to save energy.

When people date, people pretend to be desirable to get what they want. On top of that, cultural influences also flare up male lust one moment and shame it relentlessly the next. Nature and nurture are intertwined, so not only are men biologically programmed to fuck, they are made more excited by the mere possibility of fucking through exposure to an international cult of philogyny. Men are nurtured to amplify their nature beyond what is representative of the prudent male, then displayed as examples of what men “really are.”

Introduce philogyny to a horny and misandric culture, and men get into a price war. Men undercut each other to the point of self-destruction just so they can have a chance to rub their dicks against just ONE of the circa 3.5 billion women on this planet. Women see this desperation they helped create and get the false impression that male lust is an uncontrollable force that puts reason itself second to having an orgasm. Women, being human and therefore barterers, increase the price of sex in response to rising demand to capitalize on artificial desperation. This technique has always worked, and even the playwright Aristophanes knew it in 411 BC.

If you are an attractive woman, face it, you can have sex and praise whenever you want. All you have to do is open your legs, scream “STORE’S OPEN” and a Olympic event’s worth of flesh javelins will be flung at your cervix. Many men value sex more than themselves, and you help make sex that valuable by virtue of reflecting light. You can afford to be selective, which means men have a much bigger challenge to deal with. You want to know why “stud” and “slut” have different connotations? To us men, being a “stud” is an accomplishment. When a pizza-faced dork gets lots of pussy, it is like watching Micheal J. Fox successfully threading needles inside a running tumble dryer rolling down a hill. Watching a woman score a lot of dick is like watching the Hulk play whack-a-mole. The difference in the difficulty curve between the sexes is so blatantly obvious that you can verify it experimentally whenever you want. Just take a handsome man and a pretty woman and film them trying to seduce members of the opposite sex. Do I even need to tell you what the outcome will be?

When dicks and compliments are in abundance, women, again, being human, start to wonder what’s missing. They can’t really feel satisfied with sex and praise if they could have both whenever they want. Eating cookies three meals a day makes one sick of cookies.

Many women feel they want a relationship they feel like they have to work on, hence the decline of the “nice guy,” Nice guys take a backseat while some beefcake tattoo artist named Buckshot gets enough blowjobs to scramble every “MOM” heart he inks from then on. Countless men who don’t set out to hurt anyone are punished for their positive personalities, while the apathetic and potentially dangerous become interesting. Nice guys are lumped into the group of manipulative chronic masturbators who feel entitled to sex. This happens even if some of the “nice guys” actually are nice guys! The system rewards men thought to be playing “hard-to-get,” even if he proves to be damaging to a woman’s perspective on men as a whole. PUAs understand this, and capitalize on this specific brand of confidence, adding yet another degree of manipulation to confuse both men and women everywhere.

But some women don’t even start with the assumption that a relationship needs work. Philogynic male misandrists (AKA “manginas”) value sex to the point where nothing else matters, so some women think “Fuck it, if some guy wants to do so much for me, I’ll let him.”

To be clear, I hate the word “mangina,” but it’s nicer than “shit-eating traitor,” so I’ll go with it. Sometimes the most prominent manginas are chosen on account of them being the most devout followers of the Mother Goddess. These men are put in a position where the relationship only lasts as long as they care about their partners more than themselves, guaranteeing self-destruction.

Men are rewarded for any behavior that is either not conducive to autonomy, not conducive to mutual respect, or both. Women, wanting what they don’t have, pursue men that may not reciprocate the pleasantries formed by Disney movie ideals. As a result, women are presented a horrible picture of men while the “good ones” are lost in a growing crowd of desperate mutants no one should ever look at under a blacklight.

The dating scene makes it hard for women to tell between a guy who is being a good person and a guy who will offer her no boundaries. The growing frustration of manginas drives the price of sex higher and higher and higher, pushing women to continue associating with men who teach women harsh lessons in the worst possible ways, and leaving the prudent men with a bunch of aggravating questions like “Why is this all so complicated?”, “Why do women seem to hate me when I’ve done nothing wrong?”, “Why am I not good enough?”, and most importantly, “Why should I care?”

I for one am done pursuing women in this environment, and the women in it can enjoy their lives hallucinating about the nature of men based on their experiences with the monsters they encourage.