u/ppchampagne

You are not owed 'revenge'
▲ 277 r/itsthatbad+1 crossposts

You are not owed 'revenge'

I hate this.

'Be glad women don't want revenge!'

It is surely one of the worst, most low-effort sloganeering forms of activism that exists in this space; not only because it is unproductive and divisive, but it is also objectively stupid.

Assuming this young woman is below the age of 35, and American, she ought to know, she has been advantaged at every stage of education, throughout her entire life.

She'll get better marks, for the same work.
She'll be treated better, for the same behaviour.
She'll have access to ~90% of gendered scholarships.

As a result –
She will be overrepresented in college, across every racial group, every year, and to a greater extent than the 'men' from the 1970s, who she now whines about.

She'll have better health outcomes than men, across all racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups; she will have lower mortality rates at every age; and will enjoy far more funding spent on her health, than what is given to her male peers.

In fact -
Even for suicide research, which is the greatest risk to young men's lives, she will get 33x more (!!) gendered funding spent there too.

There will be ten federal tax-funded offices dedicated to researching her health, with zero for men, and in every country on the planet, she can expect to live longer than men.

She lives during a time where she's paid, on average, more than men of the same age, even at the median.

If she ends up in an abusive relationship, she'll have access to billions of dollars of services, and support, and thousands of shelters; with virtually nothing for men.

If she goes missing, her case will receive three times more media coverage than missing men, and three times more again, if she's white.

If she commits a crime and goes into a criminal court, she'll be treated more leniently, and more likely to avoid a custodial sentence, even when committing the same crime as a man – doubly so for black men.

And that's not even getting to family courts, where the systemic advantages really stack up for her.

She will never be legally required to go to war, to be obliterated as many millions of young men have been before her; and she will not be imprisoned, if she refuses to go.

From the day she's born, her body will rightly be protected from genital cutting by law; while millions of boy babies are strapped down and mutilated, with no consent, no anesthesia, and no medical need.

She'll be –

Less likely to be homeless.
Less likely to die from drug overdose.
Less likely to die by suicide.
Less likely to be killed by police.
Less likely to be murdered.
Less likely to die at work.
Less likely to be criminally exploited.
Less likely to be assaulted on the street.

So... for what is she owed 'revenge' exactly?

And why is it appropriate for a woman like this, who has enjoyed all of the above privileges, and more, to piggyback-on and steal sympathy from women who lived hundreds of years ago, who she never met, and knows nothing about?

I imagine none of this has occurred to her.

I imagine she wouldn't believe it either.

This chronic victimhood complex pulls at the fabric of society in ways we cannot even comprehend, driving a wedge between us, and only serves to keep swinging the pendulum of equality, for eternity.

You are not owed 'revenge'.

You are already the beneficiary of far more than 'equality', in many ways that you don't even know.

u/TheTinMenBlog — 1 day ago

The nightmare life of a perpetually single man

Close your eyes and imagine...

You're a single man.

Let's say you've been essentially single your entire life.

Oh, the horror!

You're in your late 20s or early 30s. You make a decent living. You're free of debts. You have a little bank. You don't have the big bank yet – relax. You have room to grow, but you probably don't need the big bank to live your life. Either way, your assets are solid. You're not worried about personal financial setbacks.

  • Money is the master key.

One day, you decide to hop on a plane and travel to some other city you think you might enjoy –  in another country.

As you all know, this is a sub about dating and it's still passport bro adjacent. Some men here are interested in going abroad to look for wives and girlfriends. Okay. If your ultimate goal is a family and you're serious about that, then in my humble opinion, power to you. There is no society without families.

Other men might prefer to chase random women in the streets. I'll hold my humble opinions about that.

Personally, I only make transactions, exclusively with wide-hipped European women – safely, ethically, legally.

To each his own.

_

From the Champagne Room

Single men, you're gonna be alright

The Art of Transactions, by P.P. Champagne – part I (links to the other parts)

u/ppchampagne — 5 days ago

It wasn’t what she expected

Sips tea

Even if this is staged or fake, I gotta teach some game to you men searching for “good” women. Sighs…

After marriage, but especially after marriage and having kids, the chances of a woman cheating go up – not down.

Some of you will default to “baby black pill” thinking and assume that cheating comes down to physical attraction. That’s not it – or at least not all of it. It’s about how much more forbidden cheating becomes for married (monogamous) women and especially married mothers. That “forbidden fruit” can make it more exciting for them to cheat and can drive their temptation to do so.

This woman (in the video) mentions growing bitter and resentful towards her husband for lack of that good sex. Even if the sex is good, wives can still hold some resentment towards their husbands for being the catalyst in transitioning them from a “fun” stage of their life into a more demanding stage of life, in which they’re basically trapped.

You guys want a low body count woman, so you can “pair-bond,” and she’ll be less likely to cheat, right?

Oh, I feel sorry for you guys.

Those of you who intend to find “good” women, who you don’t believe will cheat on you (and divorce you) – you men have to think.

This woman (speaking in the video) waited until marriage – 30 years for her to have the sex. And the sex is wack. Dude ain’t hittin’ it right. And that’s a problem for her. The probability of her cheating is high. If she makes it until they have a kid, putting up with the bad sex, I’d bet however many thousands of dollars that she will cheat some time after that. You can already hear that in her statements. She wishes she’d had “fun” in her 20s, instead of waiting for him, the man who she now resents.

She’s going to cheat.

This is gonna be controversial to some of you, but I think it’s only natural for her to cheat if the husband cannot smash. She’s a real woman. 

Every man reading this understands that, right? 

My guy is about to learn that, if he doesn’t already know. Of course, married men cheat too. They’ll sneak out to make transactions, for example.

Everyone’s human.

u/ppchampagne — 9 days ago

Is the clown man right about women?

No, not exactly. This is Mr. Clown Man’s creative interpretation of the book, Sex and Culture, by anthropologist J.D. Unwin.

Unwin’s non-religious theory, formed from his study of several civilizations, is that the more a society practices “prenuptial chastity” (no sex before marriage), the more productive they are, the greater the achievements of their civilization.

  • Less fornication = more productive civilization (culture, society)

But Unwin doesn’t argue that restraining sexual opportunities before marriage is a necessary conflict of men against women. According to him, it’s practically the opposite. 

One of Unwin’s observations is that men (in general) imposing rules on women’s sexuality is futile, because women naturally don’t want people telling them however many men they can or can’t bang and when. Since they naturally don’t want to be subjugated in that way, sooner or later, one generation or another, when they have the opportunity, they’ll start going against whatever rules were imposed on them. And the culture is in free-fall after that.

Ultimately, a culture that forces women into restrained sexuality is unsustainable. The same is true of a culture that promotes sexual liberation, according to Unwin. In a way, Unwin doubles down against imposing rules on women by noting that productivity and greater accomplishments go hand in hand with more rights and freedoms for women.

The challenge is, with those rights and freedoms for women, the whole society—enough women and men—must voluntarily practice sexual restraint in order to maintain their culture. Unwin didn’t observe any civilization that was able to do so successfully. He did observe civilizations that imposed virginity at marriage rules on women, but those rules could only be enforced for so long.

The other “Unwinian” condition for a thriving civilization is absolute monogamy, which means that married men and women are expected to be exclusive to each other. If you put all three together – voluntary sexual restraint, prenuptial chastity, and absolute monogamy, then you have an “Unwinian” superpower civilization, which has yet to be seen...

You often come across men on social media, who insist that women should want to pair-bond, which is done most easily with few or no previous sexual partners on their part. But you know what I find funny? It seems if that were something women were naturally inclined to do, then they would voluntarily restrain their sexuality.

I dunno. Women gonna women.

_

From the Champagne Room

Is there a case for enforced monogamy?

She explains how your culture is broken

>Sexual freedom was never a part of modern feminism, never celebrated as such at Feminist Headquarters.
Because so many of us marched in both the Women’s Movement and the Sexual Revolution, and because they happened simultaneously, those events remain in memory as one glorious upheaval. [...]
I automatically assumed that those of us who marched and wrote in the late 1960s and early 1970s knew there would be no joy in the workplace without sexual freedom, by which I don’t mean fucking in the Ladies’ (Oops!, Women’s) Room. Simply put, I knew that we would never be equals staying in the traditional sexual straitjacket.
Nancy Friday, My Secret Garden – Forty Years in the Garden

u/ppchampagne — 11 days ago

What comes after looksmaxxing?

Many men don’t see themselves living a decent life without receiving “genuine” affection, attraction, whatever from women. For those men who’ve never had any women even hint at any interest in them, okay, you guys who experience that (as a problem) have my sympathies. The real problem there is that it has to be so much more difficult for you to realize you’re not missing out on anything special. It’s like, how could you know?

Now, the way things are on social media these days, it’s like every single man in his 20s is instilling into themselves and others the idea that “genuine” affection, attraction, whatever from women is the peak of life for a man. And this is supposed to be achieved through a man’s physical appearance. Y’all trippin', but I’m not even gonna try to reason that out of you (them), because it’s like a religion. Good luck trying to get someone to give up their religion through logical reasoning.

All I can really say is, you (guys in your 20s) are going to age out of that mindset eventually. That mindset is largely a product of our current era – not something that men develop naturally. Hence, why looksmaxxing is probably at least close to being a household idea now vs in previous decades. That emphasis on appearance comes directly from dating apps and social media in a crappy dating market.

To be clear, I have nothing against some degree of looksmaxxing. I definitely looksmaxxed in my early 20s, although we didn’t call it that back in my day. We called it “working out,” for example – what the younger guys today call “gymmaxxing.” And yes, all my “looksmaxxing” paid off.

Then, I grew up and realized that getting women to “like me” enough to open box for me wasn’t something I needed to be a man. That didn’t make me a man. It didn’t make me a “good” man. It didn’t make me special or “validate” me or any of that. Some men never stop to think and realize all that, but I did. Thank, God. Otherwise, I’d still be chasing women and working like a slave to get whatever approval from them.

Now, I’m not gonna lie. At least one of the more invasive lookmaxxes I acquired puts a smile on my face when I look in the mirror. And today, that’s completely independent from any evaluation of how other people might view me. That’s just me looking in the mirror, seeing the reflection of how bad I am. I couldn’t give one single nut about what other people think about my appearance. Do you realize how liberating that is?! The only thing I care about is what I think. And if I like myself, I’m good.

Searching around social media today, I feel bad for the younger men – guys in their 20s. I’m pretty sure the “baby black pill” (as I call it) could have eaten me alive along with them if I were in my early or mid-20s today. It’s that bad. I’ve sampled content from younger guys all over social media on this topic. They think they have it all figured out, down to a science. And they’re using what they believe is that “science” to delay their maturation into men.

Sighs…

My guys, personally, I could not be a man if I cared what women think about me.

_

From the Champagne Room

Your life is greater than whatever women might think about you

The “looksmaxxing” obsession

Do women like you yet? (short video post)

Single men, you're gonna be alright

My brothers, the epiphany is waiting for you

What is it that men truly desire from women and why?

reddit.com
u/ppchampagne — 15 days ago

Ah, yes. The “male loneliness epidemic,” our favorite topic.

Ever since I heard this term, I’ve wondered who coined it, with what evidence, and why? I still haven’t found any solid evidence of a “male loneliness epidemic.” There’s plenty of evidence for a “male singleness epidemic,” if people insist on using that language. I collect as much of that evidence as I can find. There’s even evidence of a general “loneliness epidemic.” But I can’t find any stats or data on a distinct “male loneliness epidemic” – all three words.

The problem with the term is, it’s consistently used to tell men that if they’re “lonely,” then they have a problem and need to change (as you can see here). The women are perfect, delightful, thriving (even when they’re single). There must be something wrong with those “lonely” men and only those men. Everyone else is meeting some standard of being a good person that they’re failing to attain.

A self-inflicted epidemic.

It’s absolutely amazing, isn’t it?

Here’s a strange idea. Maybe, after so many interactions in the dating market, some men in general have decided there’s not much in relationships for them. They haven’t been impressed by all the wonderful women they’ve met.

Here’s an even stranger idea. The women are marvelous, of course, but maybe—for no fault of those “lonely” men themselves—the women simply aren’t interested in them?

One more thought. Since so many men now believe they need to looksmaxx to meet women, maybe those “lonely” men are unattractive – in which case, maybe that can’t be helped.

I don’t think this is so complicated. I think this woman (in the video) spelled it out clearly.

>“Ultimately, women are realizing we no longer need partnership to survive.”

Women have enough money to have fun. They’re all set. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with any man for being single.

_

From the Champagne Room

“We no longer depend on men financially. They need to not depend on us emotionally.” (video post)

The evidence does not show a “male” loneliness “epidemic”

The “male loneliness epidemic” explained (video post – more links there)

The “male loneliness epidemic” is only a social media trend

Guys, the idea of a “male loneliness epidemic” is designed to work against you (video post)

“The global dating crisis” (video post)

Men at the bottom get nothing. Absolutely nothing.

The “looksmaxxing” obsession

Do women like you yet? (short video post)

u/ppchampagne — 18 days ago

The easiest way to misinterpret this man's statements is to think he’s claiming that all men are ideal “romantics” and that women are bad. No. He’s expressing how deeply “romantic” men can be, to the point that they idealize their female counterparts to some degree. They believe their own love for a woman is the mirror reflection of that woman’s love for them, which gives them a sense of emotional security.

When a man experiences just how different a real woman is, compared to his romantic expectation, that can devastate a man. You could make the same statement with the genders reversed. Most of the differences are difficult (maybe impossible) to understand.

For one, in my opinion, a man’s love for a woman is more emotional than a woman’s love for a man. Men’s love for women is often irrational. It doesn’t need to serve any practical purpose, and oftentimes serves no practical purpose at all. I would say that a woman’s love for man typically serves much more practical and rational purposes. There’s nothing wrong with that, but there’s a difference. Experiencing and coming to terms with that difference has a more profound effect on men’s psychology when they’re inclined towards this “romantic” love.

This man speaks to the heart of that issue, but he underestimates just how much men can truly desire to love women. Learning about “red pill” on the internet isn’t even remotely enough to change a man’s desire to love a woman. Manosphere or not, men can pursue that desire to love. It’s only a man’s experiences with real women that may either teach him to love differently or even eliminate his ability to love real women in the deeply emotional way that he might have desired.

_

From the Champagne Room

I was once like you.

u/ppchampagne — 19 days ago
▲ 70 r/itsthatbad+1 crossposts

People often label all the men who get nothing as "angry," for example. No, having paid attention to a wide range of their social media posts, I can tell you they're more depressed than anything. Personally, I seriously don't care for men who are legitimately angry or frustrated about getting nothing, but I can definitely sympathize with the ones who are depressed about that.

I really don't know what to say about this. I'm stumped. I would try to write a post to encourage guys going through the experience described, but based on my previous attempts, that probably wouldn't go over well. I won't even link those posts below. They'll most likely miss, because I can't truly relate. I don't think I have any good words for men who are struggling with absolutely nothing – possibly for their entire adulthood. I can't teach or explain or reason them through to feeling better about their lives.

And realistically, as far as I can tell from searching through all kinds of research about the dating market, I can't even find solid evidence of anything getting better in the dating market, to give guys any positive outlook for their future.

Keep on truckin.

_

From the Champagne Room

“The global dating crisis” (video post)

No, the dating culture is completely busted. It's not coming back. This is not a “recession.” (video post)

He explains all the problems of the modern dating market (video post)

"Our black pilled future" (subtitle video post)

u/_Go_AheadMakeMyDay_ — 19 days ago

This is useful, even though it's partly (if not entirely) an act to entertain people.

I've come across a few opinions on Mike's situation here. Some of those opinions were from men in their 20s, who profess looksmaxxing. They believe the problem in this situation is Mike's appearance. He's seemingly unknowingly attempting to compensate for his appearance using his money – as an American dating and financially supporting someone in a less wealthy country. And the problem is that money doesn't lead to any "genuine" desire, which is apparently what Mike wants.

Here's my take.

Mike's appearance isn't the problem. His problem is that he doesn't realize, doesn't accept, and doesn't know how to handle the transactional relationship Ximena is offering him. Granted, it's a bad deal. He could probably find a childless woman if he wanted a transactional relationship. But he doesn't want a transactional relationship. He's a hopeless romantic, who wants "genuine" desire or whatever. And he's not alone in that quest.

The looksmaxxing guys criticize Mike for his appearance. But what they don't realize is, they're just like him – immature, inexperienced, chasing a kind of fairy tale "genuine" whatever from women.

_

From the Champagne Room

Do women like you yet?

The “looksmaxxing” obsession

u/ppchampagne — 23 days ago
▲ 89 r/itsthatbad+1 crossposts

Women are figuring it out

>For there is nothing original in her – neither inside nor out – which could not be replaced.
Why are men so afraid to face the truth?”
– Esther Vilar, The Manipulated Man (1971)

These days, when I tune-in to conversations about dating culture, I'm almost exclusively paying attention to what women are communicating to other women – the "femosphere." Most of their thoughts and opinions are straight-up garbage, but there's one conversation taking place among some that's gold. It's what they often refer to as "de-centering men." A while back, those conversations didn't make much sense to me, but they do now. Those conversations show that women are miles ahead of men, as it relates to dating and relationships – realizing they don't need them.

Aside from some junk "news" articles and a few more solid ones from the mainstream, most of those conversations take place on social media. It's worth noting that mainstream sources almost exclusively focus on women's criticisms about dating and relationships – reflecting and reinforcing their social media conversations. In contrast, the mainstream rarely touches men's criticisms, mostly doing so to criticize men and to promote the myth of the "male loneliness epidemic," for example. So the mainstream promotes single women as empowered and in control, while mostly casting single men as a problem. For examples, see the posts linked below.

Men are “struggling,” and this writer doesn’t have any clue why

Iliza, there’s “an anger toward” men in this country (video)

America does not have a crisis of bitter, single young men

So-called "researchers" and "journalists" attempting to reclassify more single men as incels

Single women are enjoying freedom, funds, and flings!

I'm not trying to convince you. They are. (and links on that post)

I could link more, but you get the idea. "all woman good. woman not never do no wrong. man bad have problem! man need change!"

Men need to change. That much is correct in my opinion, but not in the ways they insist.

"man bad have problem!" is the narrative this sub was started to counter. "Men are disappointing" (already linked). Women are essentially flawless, according to the mainstream. That's also why so much manosphere content is highly critical of women, because men rarely perceive criticisms of women from the mainstream. And we know better. So single men have a sense that their society is bullshitting them in a way. The manosphere is correcting (maybe over-correcting) that to relieve a kind of indignation over how women are rarely sufficiently criticized. But that's where these conversations begin and end. Overall, they don't make any progress beyond that point.

What much of the femosphere does correctly to advance is promote the reality that relationships are completely superfluous, optional, unnecessary. That's where men's conversations are horrendously backwards. If anything, men are becoming more and more focused on, attached to the idea of, and desirous of relationships with women (as they become relatively scarcer).

Of course, there are single men, who (from experience) know better. In general, however, single men express what they believe is a need for "genuine" relationships and affection from women. They often want one special woman to be their Angel Mommy Goddess for life.

  • Why should they ever expect any of that from any woman? Really, what’s the basis of that expectation?

It's easier for women to detach, disconnect, and discard the idea that they need relationships and families, because the mainstream regularly encourages women choosing to remain single. In contrast, the mainstream almost always suggests or outright claims that there's something wrong with single men. There must be something wrong with them if they’re single, because we know they want sex, and they’ve been trained to pursue relationships with women and measure their value according to those. So they must be undesirable failures. And if you're smart, you'll realize that those two narratives about single men and single women – they don't add up. Encourage perpetually single women, but there must be something wrong with perpetually single men…

Men also propagate that idea among themselves. The core of that idea is the belief that somehow a man's value in life is determined by his relationships with women. Without one or more women to bless or save him, a man is a problem. That's the Religion of Woman we are taught.

Far too many men believe that dating and mating opportunities are directly tied to the value of their lives. They believe that casual sex opportunities, in particular, must be earned – not by "leading with one's wallet," but through who they are as a person, their value as a man. The same doesn't apply to women. Women need not do anything or be anyone to "earn sex." In general, they simply receive offers because men (as a whole) are always indiscriminately willing, as a function of their physiology. So women correctly don't perceive the value of their lives as tied to sex. And it seems that growing numbers of single women are realizing that their value isn't tied to relationships, marriages, or families.

They're free to determine their own lives.

Men, too, are also free.

But men are desperately lagging behind in that realization because of their social conditioning – part of which comes across in that contrast in how the mainstream covers single men, compared to single women. So many single men feel that they have to prove something to themselves, their peer groups, families, society, etc. They focus on doing so ultimately through women's vaginas. Their mission is flawed from the start. And they will fail.

Some men desire families without even having a clear reason as to why. They have more maternal instinct than many single, childless women. Again, I'd argue that's the result of social conditioning. These men want to achieve the status of father, without putting any thought into the reality of the process of raising children with a woman. They want to signal to society that a woman deemed them "worthy," they're safe, and that they're contributing to the next generation of society.

For American Millennials and Zoomers who take it for granted that they'll get married and have a family someday

Some men desire all kinds of casual sex – not only because of their physiological motivations, but even more-so to "prove" to themselves that they have "value." And these same men will recognize just how superficial is the pursuit of casual sex. They'll acknowledge that appearance plays a significant role in that chase. Still, somehow the lack of casual sex they want means their life has no value to them.

They refuse to "lead with their wallets," which clearly do have the value they spend their time and energy acquiring. No, they must transform themselves and learn how to manipulate women psychologically with "game," so that women "choose me for me...," they say. They'll learn the “game” and claim it's a skill, but the only way they can profit from that "skill" is to teach others. Wouldn't it make more sense to acquire skills that make money and simply pay for it? To each their own – safely, ethically, legally, logically, intelligently.

But that doesn’t work, because they don't believe their own lives have value until a sanctimonious, dignified woman tells them so – supposedly unprompted by their wallet. Again, it's the Religion of Woman. They believe they have to prove their life is "worthy" of women and sex. They never stop to think and reason – to realize they have nothing to prove to anyone. They remain faithful to their religion, to Woman.

By and large, men's conversations about dating and relationships are mostly pathetic. They're stuck, still based on a set of ideas and beliefs they've never stopped to question and think and reason through. Some will go as far as to say those beliefs are "natural," even though they're very clearly cultural, as much as they may be based on what is natural – sex. 

From what I gather, single women have much greater interest in abandoning the idea of relationships. It's hard to tell just how many, really. There's clearly bias in mainstream reporting on the topic, and social media doesn't always reflect reality well.

Either way, single men need to move on from their social conditioning around women and relationships, just as it appears that so many single women are electing to do. In my opinion, single men more than women, have far more to gain in stripping out their social conditioning and moving on from the idea of relationships.

reddit.com
u/ppchampagne — 5 days ago