Jonathon Last Reads Steve Sailer, Plus James Burke’s Predictions

What do James Burke, from the old PBS series “Connections” and Jonathon Last of the Weekly Standard, have in common? They are both looking at the “trap” of technology that the entire modern world has found itself in:

Jonathon Last from the Weekly Standard has some good observations culled from Steve Sailer, Heartiste/Roissy, (and myself). Full article here. Take-aways: the Gender Gap and Hispanic Gap is less than the Marriage Gap. White Women are two thirds of Single Women. Obama took +16 for Single Men and +36 for Single Women. Most White women have the “life of Julia” where they have one kid, not married, at the mid-thirties and depend on the government for everything. Single voters increased by six points, while Hispanic voters increased only 1 point.

As I noted well, a long time ago, the marriage rate for Whites is declining. Last confirms that with this quote:

Teixera noted that 47 percent of all women are now unmarried, up from 38 percent in 1970. “Their current size in the voter pool​—​more than a quarter of eligible voters​—​is nearly the size of white evangelical Protestants, who are perhaps the GOP’s largest base group,” he writes. “And since the current growth rate of the population of unmarried women is relatively high (double that of married women), the proportion of unmarried women in the voting pool should continue to increase.” In the medium run, he’s almost certainly correct.

How did we get to an America where half of the adult population isn’t married and somewhere between 10 percent and 15 percent of the population don’t get married for the first time until they’re approaching retirement?

Last goes on to note the end of religion, and birth control, being the over-arching stories of single White women (and men too). Last notes studies predicting up to a quarter of East Asian women will remain single, and a third will remain childless.

Now, you might ask yourself, have women suddenly stopped liking sex? Or kids? Or is it just the revulsion of women against Beta Males, that accounts for the massive epidemic all across the West and Asia, of singleton rejection of marriage and kids? And is it the comparatively greater supply of Alpha males, among Black and Hispanic men, that accounts for greater fertility?

Women are not just baby machines. Fertility is a function of age in a woman. A woman having her first kid at age 20, is far more likely to have three kids (above replacement, population grows) than a woman at age 35 (one kid only, population halves constantly). Marriage is similar for women. Women are not just marriage machines either.

Few commentators think about what a woman gives up when she gets married, and what she gives up when she has a kid. Particularly at a young age, which is required to keep populations stable, let alone growing.

A woman who has a kid at age 20, is making a bet that she will want to keep on having kids with her current partner. And since Beta Male provision is devalued, both with free government support, welfare, TANF, WIC, SNAP, EBTs, and other acronyms, and reduced Beta Male earnings (comparable to their female peers anyway), the genetic value of having a Beta Male kid is devalued. Women, in times of plenty and little hardship or scarcity, tend to pick the most Alpha of Alpha males as the fathers of their kids. What woman wants a kid at age 20, when she could be out pursuing Alpha males? Maybe even having an illegitimate kid with him? Its not just the “Gold Digging” thing, indeed that generally does not apply. Women are NOT seeking to just have a kid by a rich guy. But rather, superior adapted genes from natural, dynamic Alpha males who intimidate other men and have charisma. Such men, charismatic, desired by other women (they can often be neer-do-well drug dealer/users, indie musicians, layabouts etc) are in short supply. Few women would drag themselves down with a kid by a boring Beta Male — their son might be a similarly boring Beta Male. How would that do for propagating a woman’s genes?

Marriage at an early age is similarly, a value-destroyer for women. Even if she divorces, she’s less valuable than a woman who never married, in snagging an Alpha, the goal of every woman. After all, there are few barriers to getting married. Even gays can marry. Even 16 year old girls can marry 50 year old men. If they want to. Marriage costs, almost nothing. Cohabitation versus marriage is merely a piece of paper, that costs very little to acquire.

Women just don’t want to get married. To BETA MALES. At least. True they dream of weddings. To Alpha Males. A great big party for them. But a lifetime marriage to a boring, faithful, dependable, ickily unsexy Beta Male? No way!

Steve Sailer has a post that in passing notes the percentage of unmarried births among Native Born White women, is 30%, even less than Asian native born at 31%, and far below Black (at 78%) and Hispanic (at 58%). While White women are very competitive with Asians, both have massive increase (among Native Born US) from social norms of just a few decades ago. Where both were more around 10%. [Data/Graph in Sailer’s post from Pew.]

We are a nation of Singles. Because White women don’t want to get married. Not to Beta Males, anyway. Or have their kids. Can you blame them?

Women want domination, by men. Sexiness and power (the two are basically identical, see General Petraeus). On average, NE Asian women will put up with more nerdiness among their men, but even they have their limits, as the epidemic of singleton and childlessness shows in Coastal China, South Korea, and Japan. Religious women will put up with Nerdiness among men, too, even though they don’t like it either, to be “saved” for religious reasons (instead of ding what they really want to do — pursue Alpha men and sex). On average, Black women seem to have an observable AVERAGE greater desire for dominance (paging Rihanna and Chris Brown to the courtesy phone). Even putting up with abuse (paging Ike and Tina Turner!) to get it.

Last tries to argue that somehow, Republicans can urge White women to “eat their vegetables” and get married to boring, Beta Male Kitchen Bitches. That’s like marketing Brussells Sprouts Ice Cream — in the US (Japan is another matter).

Black women led the way, but White and even Asian women are following, to a new pattern of reproduction. Gone is the Nuclear Family.

Let me repeat: the NUCLEAR FAMILY IS DEAD DEAD DEAD!

There.

It just is.

Oh, a semblance of it will linger on. After the Fall of the Western Empire, the Roman Senate met in Rome for another one hundred and fifty years, debating … well nothing. Venice remains as a modern theme park for Renaissance art and architecture, ditto Florence. Neither are real cities in the way they were, rather Disneyland without Mickey Mouse. So you will have Mormons, and a few other “fringe” elements, those who were previously considered mainstream (i.e. America say, 1690-1987), retaining the Nuclear Family. The way the Colosseum and the Pantheon remain in Rome. But that is not the way most people will live their lives, in the West OR IN THE EAST EITHER.

There will be no real nuclear family. Women will have a kid, mostly in their mid thirties, by an Alpha who never is around. Male investment in society will be zero, moving to West African norms (and West African behavior). The State, will rule everything, and a cruel parody of Marx’s fantasy will take shape — “Red Princes” as in China, where nuclear families (founded on dynastic domination ala say, JFK Jr. type male status) of the controlling hereditary elite act as say, Pharoahs among an ignorant and debased populace, ever declining, ever weaker, ever less able technologically than the previous generation.

The global economy, will not ever recover to prior strength. The market economy will cease to exist as really ever part of life is run by a hereditary global elite. Everyone will be herded into Mega City One, which like that of Judge Dredd will be ever more dysfunctional and horrific. Meanwhile the countryside will be empty.

What does this have to do with “the Trigger Effect” where James Burke in “Connections” talks (from 1978!) about the technological trap that the human race finds itself in?

Simply this. It is NOT just technological networks that make humans dependent on technology, and have made us since the Egyptians and the Mesopotamians. Dependent on more and more technology, that gives us more and more power. And allows our population to grow and grow and grow. And become ever more wealthy, healthy, secure, and long-lived, each generation. [Mostly.]

It is that, with the advent of cheap contraception, the whole dependence on technological networks falls apart, disastrously.

The MEN, and it is always men (with a tiny few women and gay males) needed to keep the networks going, let alone constantly improve them, are not sexy. Not compared to what women really want, which is massive dominance. And you just can’t have massive male dominance in a society that grows ever more powerful, connected, healthy, wealthy, and long-lived.

That is WHY women HATE HATE HATE technology so much, and Hollywood like a faithful dog (or Beta Male supplicating) mirrors that hate to their key audience. Women HATE HATE HATE technology because it depends on, gives advantages to, and endlessly replicates boring, beta Male White guys. And boring Beta Male Asian guys (though less so than Whites in innovation, for cultural and ownership reasons*).

And the trap is further self-limiting, because women having independent agency have rejected massively the nuclear family, and even kids (with Beta Males) in favor of Alpha chasing. This leads to Beta Male withdrawal (we can already hear its roaring withdrawal, like a great sea vanishing) from society, angry bitterness, and a burn it all down mentality.

A society can only replicate itself, survive, if it can have kids. Today, given contraception, only sexy men (think Chris Brown, John Edwards, Charlie Sheen, Tiger Woods, Bill Clinton, General Petraeus, and Edward Cullen) need apply for the job of father. And these guys doing all the fathering means a social collapse. How likely is it for the metaphorical children of Charlie Sheen, or Chris Brown, or Tiger Woods to produce a new process for extracting bio-fuels? Or even more efficient fracking? We’ll be lucky if they can count to twenty, not using their toes and fingers. [Intelligence is as repulsive in men, for women, as it is enticing for men, in women. Intelligent men tend to be nerdy, obsessive, abstract oriented, not dominant, and lacking in verbal charisma and charm-dominance. Intelligent women tend to control their lady parts and not act on just any old urge to merge, so to speak, even when a dominant Alpha is around. Hence the gender divide on intelligence and attractiveness.]

The West and other advanced technological societies has had technology outstrip male sexiness. Hence the disastrous decline in population and nuclear family. Moreover, advanced technological societies depend on ever-better technology for dominance and power against mass quantity competitors seeking their land, resources, and yes, women.

All is not quite lost, but it will require artificial means, a way of making ordinary men as sexy as a natural Alpha. Time is running short however. As the success of NBC’s “Revolution” shows, many young women would rather kill technology and live in a land of brutal Alphas in a time and place where you die young, than live in comfort to old age surrounded by “Kitchen Bitches.” Better five minutes of Alpha than five years of Beta, as Heartiste/Roissy noted.

*Asian innovation is confined largely to Japan and South Korea, where ownership of ideas and property allows a financial incentive to innovate, as opposed to cheaply and shoddily copy things in the Princeling run China. It is noteworthy that the old social orders had to be destroyed by massive wars to allow lots of entrepreneurs to seize on ideas like a portable tape player, high-quality/low-cost cars for the masses, or compact discs.

About these ads

About whiskeysplace

Conservative blogger focusing on culture, business, technology, and how they intersect.
This entry was posted in technology. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to Jonathon Last Reads Steve Sailer, Plus James Burke’s Predictions

  1. Mike says:

    Whiskey,

    Excellent analysis, as usual. I would just like to add a few points:

    What is cause and what is effect? Has the death of the nuclear family ideal, and the consequent increase in the single woman/rejection of children and single mother/out of wedlock births a cause of, or a result of, the catastrophic increase in the size of the nanny/welfare state. The prevalence of this sort of behavior would be unthinkable without massive state subsidy/support. The imposition of a huge welfare bureaucracy/culture on a formerly self-dependent society creates a self-perpetuating feedback loop in which the consequences of the subsidized behavior increase demand for support/services, the growth of which in turn drives the growth of the dependent population. This population simply could not survive without the state. When we eventually run out of money, these people are going to be in lot of trouble. Of course, I see very little hope of our being able to turn off the spigot before total societal collapse, given that the dependency coalition will always vote for those who promise them more support. We are at critical mass now. Even “big business” will cooperate with the nanny state as it seeks to eliminate its burdensome retirement/health care obligations, in return for a modest increase in taxes. This is why big business supports Obama, and why the likes of Warren Buffett advocate a modest increase in tax rates on the rich. That’s the price they are willing to pay to be rid of the infinitely larger health care/retirement burden. Please note that Republican governors who refuse to implement the health care exchanges and Medicaid changes mandated by Obamacare are consigning themselves to political oblivion. as the 100’s of 1000’s of people who are tossed off employer health care plans panic when they have no subsidized options. These Republicans will be voted out of office before they can blink, even in supposed “Red” states, and replaced by compliant RHINO’s or Democrats.

    It is a brutal paradox that the technological world that is created and sustained by beta males and hated by females has given them their power. In a true alpha world, as opposed to the fantasy/Hollywood version, these women would be back to barefoot and pregnant. In a true alpha world women would not be saving humanity and “fighting with the best of them”, as in the atrocious Walking Dead. The women would be sex toys, breeders, and agricultural laborers, as they always are in primitive alpha societies. Women only have “independent agency” because of the technological world created and sustained by the despised beta’s, where “female” i.e. non-alpha values are efficacious. Women will eventually rue the day that they despised the technology that created their independent status.

    • That’s true, the Welfare state everywhere it has appeared has destroyed birth rates and the nuclear family. And yes, post-collapse technology and otherwise, women will be just the chattel of Big Men/Chiefs.

      • Mark says:

        Your post really does help to explain otherwise inexplicable female behavior. Beta males and an advanced technological civilzation go together and if women give up one then they have to give up the other. I’m not sure, though, in their minds that they all understand the tradeoff of that for alpha males and a lower standard of living. That is probably true for a lot of them. For some of them, though, they think they can have their cake and eat it too: alpha males and a lavish welfare state to maintain their standard of living while beta males continue to toil away and pay taxes to support it.

  2. ray says:

    birth control/technology plays a role, but to chalk up the nuclear family death to rossy’s alphabeta supermarket rap is myopic

    this ignores the massive, willful deletion of the male from every aspect of life — usually employing coercion — resulting from feminism

    an unprecedented phenomenon

    forcing tens-of-millions of potentially productive and innovative males from education and employment, and shoving them into second-class citizenship, did far more than partner-selectionism to destroy the family (and the nation)

    yes birth control, birth control, but females are NO different today than they were fifty years ago in their partner selection desires — women havent changed (and neither have men) but the external determinants (govt, law, etc) have changed, from a state of general balance to one of extremist — and in fact gleeful — misandry

    these changes were not driven by mate-selection variables, nor by rossy’s theories, but by ideo-political and (anti)spiritual forces, deliberately applied

    • I think women are flexible. When support and faithful dutifulness were in short supply, and required, women selected men for that. The welfare state obliterated that comparitive advantage beta males had (they’d support/protect the women they married), and contraception allowed women to express their sexual desires unlike any other time in history.

      At no other time and place have women ever had control over their reproduction as in today. That gives them a profound freedom they never had before. The problem I have with feminism as a cause is we see the same effects: declining marriage, declining birth rates, EVERYWHERE there is a bit of money and birth control. Iran and Algeria and Tunisia have below replacement fertility, around the UK’s level of 1.7 or so. Japan and Coastal China are not exactly feminist hotbeds, but see the same types of things.

  3. Tripemaster says:

    Who or what is a beta male, Whiskey?

    You know I commented on your blog before several times earlier this year, and you responded to me too.

    Now I thought that I was a beta male. I honestly did. But then some friends told me to join a dating site, so I did, and lo and behold, I have had loads of women talking to me.

    I joined 8 days ago. I’ve now talked to about 25 women on the site, and what’s more, I am meeting a girl tomorrow for a coffee, and she’s now texting me a lot every day.

    Another woman said to me “you are tall and nice looking… you will get snapped up quickly” but said she lives too far away for it to be convenient, 100 miles away or so.

    I agree with you that women want domination, actually. It’s true that there are quite a few single mothers out there as well. But it really is questionable to what extent I am a beta male, now. I just don’t know. Is there any objective standard by which to measure what constitutes a beta male? Is the term even meaningful?

    There are males that I know personally that would probably be really unattractive to almost all women, and I know for sure that I’m in a better position than them.

    Am I a beta male or not?

      • Tripemaster says:

        Right well I saw in the comments that young women today don’t want relationships, and that “the average young woman today doesn’t give a shit about that. She wants thrills, she wants a guy she can show off to her friends, she wants drugs, and she wants hot sex that gives her multiple orgasms.”

        In other words, it’s bullshit. Young women do want relationships.

        So what you’re saying is that the average young woman today likes having many sex partners in a year, partying a lot, and doesn’t like staying with one guy?

        It’s difficult to verify isn’t it?

      • Tripemaster says:

        Indeed if anything I would have said that young women don’t like sex much at all.

    • You have to be careful about the traditional Alpha male, a leader of men, and the current definition which is a guy who gets women hot and bothered. So Charlie Sheen or Justin Bieber are not leaders of men but get women and girls hot and bothered.

      Being Alpha (you might be, or not, I couldn’t say) is a function then of how many women you bed, and **can** bed. Your attractiveness level. That includes charisma and social dominance. Women of course love love love male attention on dating sites and elsewhere, the proof is in the sex so to speak. If you are Alpha, you’ll know it: you’ll have your pick of the nicest, hottest, most intelligent girls as your sex partners. If you’re Beta, you’ll know it too, you’ll get “Lets Just Be Friends” a lot and be used for emotional support by women banging other guys. Roissy/Heartiste’s site is probably the best for self-assessment (he has plenty of links) and I’d be the last person to be able to tell you (you’re the best, likely).

      Note: not all Alpha males play the field. Some just get the best girl they can and keep her happy. And being Alpha, those girls are pretty special: smart and hot.

    • let it burn says:

      if you have to ask, you’re not alpha.

    • Tripemaster,,a few cyber photos and text communications are not enough to convey decisively your hierarchical male status. You mention “tall and good-looking” which are only indicators of Alpha status, but hardly conclusive determinants. All this Alpha and Beta crap is really only discernible in real life environments where all facets of behavior, physical and social, are observable, and over a period of time in different situations. Online dating is the most oblique form mate selection going which is really why women fall for it so readily.

  4. Tripemaster says:

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/sex/sexual-health-and-advice/8958520/Average-man-has-9-sexual-partners-in-lifetime-women-have-4.html

    I’m only 25 and I’ve already had 8 or 9, I am just angry that I haven’t made it 30, 40 or 50 by this stage in my life, feels like I’ve wasted a lot of time not actively searching for girls :-(

  5. Matt Strictland says:

    And not a few years after they get that, they’ll end up virtually powerless slaves of a lot of pissed off Beta’s now turned septic. Rights, Freedom? Not for women.

    As to the technology issue, its deeper than women. Note I don’t watch

    A lot of men, Betas like me included know that modern technology is becoming a threat to the entire human species. A few mistakes in a gene lab some place could starve the most of humanity to death, a few mistakes with nukes can and has rendered good land uninhabitable for a duration of centuries, a little effort and a little technological convergence and the elite can create a world that makes the Hunger Games look like paradise .

    You get the drill, machines are taking away means ability to earn, to have a purpose and very possibly our fertility and our future. All that efficiency means that more than half of say Germans or Spaniards can’t afford to have kids and our social limits (the irresistible force of .our own nature) makes technological, distributive solutions unworkable.

    All that tech that Beta geeks like me use and maintain and understand is a great danger and the fantasy where it all goes away and people matter is a very appealing one even for us, where being a Beta means you don’t socially dominate not that you can’t fight

  6. IA says:

    The biggest, bad-assed alphas were Christians from “in hoc signo vinces” of the emperor Constantine to Eisenhower who ordered his top generals and aides to watch Demille’s Crusades before D-day. Can you image Obama having a dream of the cross? Or watching the Crusades during Benghazi?

    The crisis is existential.

  7. Mike says:

    A pretty good guide to the crack up of the West, or maybe more generally, the crack up of the industrialized world. Civilization (as we’ve known it) may have hit a roadblock called the birth control pill.

    • Matt Strictland says:

      Feminism does play a part as does the pill but the real issue is automation technology. Put simply because of machine efficiency there is not enough remunerative work for men alone much less men and women both.

      This means even if we could fix family courts and reign in hypergamy, it won’t matter. As much as 50% of young people have no means to get any income . C.F like everywhere

      This means men can’t attract a mate (Its made worse by more demanding women, granted) can’t afford to start a life and as the pill (and condoms and diaphragms and IUD’s and sooner or later RISUG) is there, the number of auto-pilot babies has dried up.

      Babies aren’t free (they cost up to 10K per year for 18-22 years in the US) and the exact people who are best to keep society operating, decently smart, responsible, with at least some reasoning and impulse control stop having kids they can’t afford. Its the moral and ethical thing to do for them

      What society has to do is get work or income for people, lots of it so that anyone willing to put in the hours and get the schooling can reach what is generally considered middle class by average folks in his nation and have stable income . If this is combined with an anti Non Western immigration policy and divorce reform in time the birth rate will rise.

      However all of the various governments live in a mental space that does not understand people being capable of basically sound decisions and of having the ability to control fertility. They tend to on a subconscious level see their better citizens as superstitious rutting animals giving them free livestock to use.

      Thats not the case and even the people that are like that, while they can’t maintain civilization , even they are coming around. As Devils Advocate put it “The supply of suckers is drying up”

      A note as well, the notion of getting rid of social services and retirement to spur births has come up. It won’t work. As we have seen in Asia This pushes up savings and people delay and reduce having children instead, putting the money into savings. Also we need higher tier jobs for young people. Getting rid of retirement means slower advances and a less prosperous spending population and a bigger global pool of money. Its too deflationary since no one will be able to buy anyone else’s surplus production as the US has for Japan and China

      Now how we fix this is above my pay grade. I do know that Neo-Liberalism and Internationalism have to go first though.

  8. GB says:

    Here’s a summary of “Connections”:

    “Little did Og the caveman know that one day his beating on a log would one day lead to . . . THE ATOMIC BOMB!”

    “Little did these medieval sword smiths realize that their efforts would one day lead to . . . THE ATOMIC BOMB!”

    “Little did Alexander Graham Bell realize his efforts would one day lead to . . . THE ATOMIC BOMB!”

    • Yes, but at the time the nuclear age was still young, only thirty years old or so, and many were convinced from WWI that a nuclear annihilation was upon them. You have to understand, WWI then was as distant to them as say, Elvis is to us now. That is to say, there were plenty of people still around who personally had experienced it and many knew those who were the pitiful few survivors of it. Nukes then were what poison gas and the machine gun was to people in the 1930’s.

      • Toddy Cat says:

        Yes, that’s true, and guys Janes Burke’s age were the ones who were really worked up about it. Guys my age (born 1959) grew up with the bomb, and most of us figured that no one would be stupid enough to actually start a nuclear war, but if someone did, there wasn’t damn-all we could do about it, so why worry? In the meantime, that was no excuse for letting the Commies take over the world. But guys like Burke could remember the world before the bomb, and it seemed inevitable to them that the world was about to end. Strange how kids from my generation turned out to be more right than all the “wise Men” and sages preaching “Better Red than Dead”. As Billy Joel put it “Cold War kids are hard to kill…”

  9. anon says:

    Whiskey is a 35 year old virgin.

  10. Patr333x says:

    Whiskey, even by your usual standards, this is a great post. To me, the problem is that society wants beta male productivity without having to acknowledge those beta males.

    • Wilbur J Huffnagel says:

      Fundamental human nature is to seek out benefit without cost, and cry rivers of tears when that cost rears its ugly head.

  11. fakeemail says:

    “White women don’t want to get married. Not to Beta Males, anyway. Or have their kids. Can you blame them?” FUCK YEAH I CAN!
    These beta males aren’t all social retards living in their parents attack. They are well-educated and decent looking men who earn 50 to 100G a year (maybe more). They are only “boring” because they’re not douche-bags who live their lives they’re starring in a reality TV show. And I guarantee most if not all them would become more assertive or manly if they had the trust of a decent woman. Beta Males are the “strong, silent types” of yesterday.

    Should the punishment for not wearing a goofy hat be sexlessness and extinction via sexlessness?

    To all the worthless bitches who judge these men inferior: from hell’s heart I stab at thee. Let it all burn down.

    • Fakeemail has a good point: it’s not just about the most “poster boy” type Betas, the Aspergery tech geeks, but a war against the entire bourgeois ideal and everything that goes with it.

      The inoffensive bourgeois middle class family where kids were safe, mom and dad got along and accepted certain roles in life and perhaps were even faithful to each other, is conflated in the Cultural Marxist imagination with Jeptha sacrificing his daughter to the angry Father God, Agamemnon and Iphigenia– I was about to think of some male counterpart for these sacrificial lambs, but guess what, Orestes and Hamlet weren’t gay, so nobody gives a flip about their problems.

      In terms of alphas, I was mentally comparing John Malkovich and Colin Firth as the infamous Viscomte de Valmont in Dangerous Liaisons (1988) and Valmont (89) and I thought: how would either of these fare in modern America? They’re clever, cocky; Malkovich’s is fantastically manipulative and intellectually brilliant and seething with charismatic arrogance; Firth is full of controlled amusement and unobtrusive but constant reframings. Very different interpretations but both impressive.

      But in light of what he said above about “a goofy hat” and what someone else said about drugs and partying– how many of these bimbos could even follow their gist? I mean I’m sure they wouldn’t go completely dry, but– in a world without reputations or rules, would a Valmont bother? Or would he repent already and retreat to a monastery rather than slug on through the lumpenproletariate waste of a nation of “Julia”s?

    • conchobar14 says:

      its the “View screen”, the TV, “pop” culture, take that shit away just like in that blackout we had years back and you’ll see them look at you. always remember that the “alphas” of today, mainly the PUA-ish posuers and bro douches will not be the alphas in the mad-maxian future.

  12. shiva1008 says:

    This is the most depressing thing I have ever read. lol I’m not sure I see it playing out like this though. So far we have seen the upper classes behaving differently than the lower classes, in regard to marriage. The marriage rate is higher among those with higher levels of education and income. So it’s likely that the patriarchal marriage/family will become a status symbol, much like all the other vestiges of 1950’s patriarchal dominance. (Notice the often-referenced worship of Mad Men).

    From what I have observed, middle class/ upper middle class women are much more faithful in line with the type of behavior that would traditionally be expected of them. So it becomes a situation like in a flood, where the low-lying areas get hit first. In the same way, the middle class white-collar workers will be some of the last to realize the true impact of the situation.

  13. Conquistador says:

    No mention anywhere of John Mcafee and his South American harem. Now he’s on the run and suspected of murder. He’ll be even more popular with women now.

  14. anti-racist says:

    This sounds like absurdist ranting.

    Look, Im a 30 year old virign with no hope of intimate contact. Its my fault. It has nothign to do with wwomen or society. I just failed.

    • Look up ‘The erotic review” online,get an asian hooker,and get busy. Its not too late! ood luck!

    • Wilbur J Huffnagel says:

      The quickest and surest path to failure is to convince yourself that you are a failure. Think differently, my friend and you will get different results. Success goes to the person who refuses to stay knocked down (and quite frankly, I often lack the determination to live up to my own euphemisms…)

    • Zimriel says:

      You can hardly say that you “failed” if you are only 30, male and virgin. You have no STDs, no kids, and no past females that future women will worry they have to compare themselves to (or to show up at your trailer all drunk and starting drama).

      Get off your ass, learn a trade, lose weight and/or buff up and then at least decide if you want to compete.

      The only thing I can see that’s stopping you is if you have a load of debt and/or are looking after a sick family member. But that’s what lying to dumb chicks is for! :^)

      Anyway don’t give us this blather about “I just failed”.

    • Conquistador says:

      Anti-racist is a parody/satire user and one of the best. Keep it up dude. You’re fucking hilarious.

  15. boo says:

    Great article, Whiskey.

    The only problem is that there is really no solution short of a collapse of our current system, which could be a long time from now. The guys who think that our current system will collapse any day now are being a bit to optimistic. The current situation can continue for quite some time before it finally becomes untenable.

    • Wilbur J Huffnagel says:

      If there is a reason that the system won’t collapse is because the Treasury Department has the ability to create currency out of thin air – it’s called Federal Spending- Social Security checks, Medicare / Medicaid payments, Treasury bond interest and principal and EBT cards will NEVER miss a schedule due to a lack of tax revenues – the Treasury possesses a legal monopoly on the creation of valid, legal tender currency and the ability to enforce that currency’s usage in the economic system….but creating currency can cause it to lose value – that is what pundits claim is very possible. Look @ the price of oil.

  16. Dan says:

    This post kind of has it backward in my opinion.

    I should preface this by saying my conservative reference point is that we should never have overthrown the monarchies.

    The key fact to realize is that ***92% births to women who have graduated from college*** are within wedlock.

    http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2012/09/marriage-americas-greatest-weapon-against-child-poverty

    Marriage and the nuclear family are not dead, they have just become elite. Marriage is worth more than ever. Divorce rates are down and everyone knows that non-married relationships are basically invisible.

    Consider the how Kate Middleton occupies the highest echelon of status in the world while the skanks that Prince Harry cavorts with register less than zero on the status Richter scale. Should Harry take one of those whores out of the skeezy depths by putting a ring on her finger, she too would rise to lofty heights of status. Doesn’t seem like marriage is a dead institution to me.

    The closest reference point I can think of to today in terms of marriage would probably be England of hundreds of years ago, where proper marriage was the central thing on the mind of everyone with status while the dirty masses lived in a cesspool of poverty and common law relationships.

    We have more in common with the old feudal world than is commonly realized.

    • kgaard says:

      Yes, this is a good point. Charles Murray has put out some great charts on the matter in Coming Apart — the State of White America. I love Whiskey’s article and agree with virtually all of it, though you are correct about marriage becoming a status symbol. Question is: Will high-status MEN want to keep getting married when the risks are so high?

      One other weakness with the article: I don’t anticipate a fiscal collapse in the U.S. Our 10-year treasury bonds are at record lows. There is NO PROBLEM refinancing the debt and thus NO PROBLEM spending more money. The fem-state will be with us indefinitely.

      • blert says:

        The powers that be NEVER see it coming, but it is ALWAYS the case that the economic value of a fiat currency — the whole world’s printing them now — goes lower as the printer kicks into high gear.

        This drop in the currency operates as a Wealth Tax — and is the reason that Europeans have so many Swiss Francs in bank boxes in Switzerland.

        In ALL fiat money systems, central government spending = taxation.

        Either the taxes are collected straight up the traditional way — or the tax is collected by bebasing the currency.

        The Confederate States of America never really had a tax base. They merely printed like 0bomba. By the end, Confederate currency was a national joke. What started out as parity to the US Dollar ended up utterly worthless.

        This effect had a drastic impact on the South. Even families that did not lose blood in the war — lost all of their financial well being.

        Please review the bitter plight of Scarlet O’Hara in Gone With the Wind. Even with a massive estate, she couldn’t raise pittifully low real estate taxes.

  17. IA says:

    If Harry is smart he’ll marry the same as ‘ol Keefer.

  18. Will Powers says:

    Just coming back with the pop-culture perspective Whiskey…just went to a concert last night…3 acts, 8 total musicians, all white males. The crowd of 2,000 was 90% white, 75% female, average age about 24..median probably closer to 21. White males still represent a huge portion of pop-culture, and probably even a greater one than 15 years ago. Just looking at the videos for the Billboard top 50 videos, which are driven by the music consumption primarily of young white females…in the top 25 videos a plurality of 10 were white male musicians, then it was 7 black males, 4 white females, 3 black females and 1 Asian male. Of the featured lead roles in their music videos, as in who figured most prominently, in the 25 videos there where 12 white males, 8 white females, 7 black females, 6 black males, 1 asian male and 1 asian female. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDHUAuceGFs&feature=share&list=UUFB1w45uBp2c-gDkOjWvRuQ

    Speaking about the voting gaps…you have to break the numbers down more. You can’t just look at single women, which is disproportionately composed of minorities than married women, you have to look at regions, etc. Romney still won a majority of white voters age 18-30, I don’t know how that broke down though along sex/marriage status lines. While there are no numbers that I’m aware of, single white women in the Deep South as well as Arkansas, Missouri, West Virginia, etc. probably voted at a higher rate for Romney then did married white men in Vermont. I’m sure that married white union trash men in Minnesota voted more for Obama than did single but in a steady relationship white women who graduated from Ole Miss or University of Georgia in the past 4 years.

    Also, I think the other commentors are right when you break down education status and willingness to marry. Yes, the young white woman working at the strip club will probably shun the good in all other respects beta male, but not so much the white woman who graduated from college and sang in the choir at the Catholic Student Center.

    When you blur all these lines together, the end product indeed becomes distorted.

  19. The award for delusion goes to:

    The crowd of 2,000 was 90% white, 75% female, average age about 24..median probably closer to 21. White males still represent a huge portion of pop-culture, and probably even a greater one than 15 years ago. Just looking at the videos for the Billboard top 50 videos, which are driven by the music consumption primarily of young white females…in the top 25 videos a plurality of 10 were white male musicians, then it was 7 black males, 4 white females, 3 black females and 1 Asian male. Of the featured lead roles in their music videos, as in who figured most prominently, in the 25 videos there where 12 white males, 8 white females, 7 black females, 6 black males, 1 asian male and 1 asian female.

    If pop culture spells American success, we are in a world of hurt.

    Even the FYF fest in LA a few months ago (a hipster salute to anti-pop) was decidedly more colorful than that. Though not much more so, to be honest.

    • Will Powers says:

      How is that delusion? It’s just an observation of what is making it as pop culture, not saying that pop culture success is a perfect reflection of cultural success altogether…but it does give some helpful clues. Some people are delusionally fatalistic, and think that young white chicks nearly unanimously listen to rap and only date and have sex with black men even to the point where they will date a Steve Urckel black guy over a Channing Tatum white guy. The only reason I even point out pop culture is to cast some rational doubt on those ideas.

  20. dioflora says:

    Will, was it this concert?

    • Will Powers says:

      I have seen pictures like that posted before and used as evidence of black men being more popular than white men among white women who are in the younger age bracket. When I post the charts I am just showing the counterpoint and my theory that white men are still more popular. Whiskey believes that all other things being equal, more women will take a black or immigrant guy over a white guy. I disagree, and believe that white women still on average like white guys better, and would bet that concert attendance for white artists blows away attendance for black male artists even more so than it does on tv, radio, online and in sales where white men still lead, even over white women artists.

  21. Anonymous says:

    “Last tries to argue that somehow, Republicans can urge White women to “eat their vegetables” and get married to boring, Beta Male Kitchen Bitches. That’s like marketing Brussells Sprouts Ice Cream — in the US (Japan is another matter).”

    Yes, unfortunately conservatives don’t fully understand the dynamics of the sexual marketplace. I really think the Chateau Heartiste (aka Roissy) worldview needs to become more prevalent in conservative circles before there is any real solutions (if there even are any) can be talked about.

    Great post, Whiskey.

  22. Spengler says:

    Fuck this bankrupt society. Let it all burn to the ground.

Comments are closed.