Friday, 31 December 2010

New Year Game Special I: Alpha Male Impregnates Seven Anglobitches



As most readers will know, I have a deep and abiding interest in Game. Sex is just about the only positive engagement men enjoy with women, so such discussions usually draw a wealth of interest and commentary. Writers like Roissy in DC seem fiercely insistent that women are attracted to 'alpha' virtues such as confidence and high social status. However, it would be interesting to see what they make of the following case - a British 'omega male' who enjoys not only sexual but a great deal of reproductive success:

He has fathered seven children by seven women in just seven years and abandoned each and every one. Dressed in a tracksuit, jobless 24-year-old Keith MacDonald is enough to put women off men for life. Yet, despite his appalling track record, the man dubbed Britain's worst dad is to marry. And, naturally, the happy couple have already started trying for their first baby.

The binman's son, who lives on £44 ($60) a week income support, has never paid a penny towards the upbringing of his children. Nor does he see them. Apparently it is 'too much of a hassle'. But bride-to-be Clare Bryant, 20, is convinced he has changed and says they plan to have two children together.

'Some people say he's a bad dad - and, as he doesn't see his children, for all I know he might be,' she said yesterday. 'But I think he'd be brilliant with our child.'

They first started dating in March when MacDonald bumped into her at Sunderland bus station and asked her out.

'He was drunk, but knew what he was doing, so I said 'yes',' she said.

Three days later the couple boarded a bus and headed to Middlesborough for their first date. He didn't have any money after walking out on his trolley-collecting job in January, so I got us lunch from Greggs (the bakers),' she added. 'He told me he didn't see any of his kids any more, but I wasn't bothered. I was more concerned about the drinking or if he might cheat. Keith said he was a new man though, and I thought he deserved a chance. My mum and stepdad told me I was an idiot. They didn't think he'd change and told me not to let him get me pregnant. After a few months I decided I'd like to have his babies, so there's no point in using condoms now.'



MacDonald proposed in June after buying a £30 ($50) ring she had previously seen in a shop window.

'He said: 'So, do you fancy it? I agreed right away,' added Miss Bryant. 'I want two or three bridesmaids, and I'd love a honeymoon too.'

The couple have since moved in together in a two bedroom council (Housing Project) house in Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, and are applying for joint benefits of around £100 ($150) a week - leaving the taxpayer to pick up the £60,000 ($100,000) bill for his seven children.

'I can keep an eye on him now,' said Miss Bryant, who is also unemployed. 'We only go out to the pub twice a week, and Keith only has one or two pints. Every morning, I watch a few hours of telly, while Keith surfs the web. Then we go around town, and every now and then pop into the JobCentre, but there's never anything going. We'll keep going though, because we want to save for our wedding.'

MacDonald first had sex at the age of 10 and boasts that he has since slept with 40 women - even claiming to be 'a sex god on £40 ($60) a week'. He first became a father at the age of 15 when his then girlfriend, Michelle Purvis, now 31, gave birth to his now nine-year-old daughter, Jamie Leigh. When they split up he met Charlotte Anderson, now 24, who fell pregnant with daughter, Kady, now seven.

MacDonald then met Jordan Banks who was just 15 when he got her pregnant. They had a son together, Angelis, who is now six years old. June Garrick, now 25, gave birth to his fourth child, Brandon, in October 2003 - just a month after Angelis was born. Then, in 2006, he met 17 year old Stephanie Jubb at a bus stop. She gave birth to their son Matt, who is now three.

When their short-lived romance came to an end he started dating Stacey Barker, now 21, who fell pregnant and gave birth to his third daughter, Emily, now two. His seventh child was born after a brief romance with Bec Wright, now 21, who gave birth to Clio, now one. By the time all of the children are 16 the total bill to the taxpayer will be in excess of £1 ($1.5) million.

MacDonald told Closer magazine: 'When I got with Clare I was downing 12 cans of lager a day. Now I've quit booze and I'm looking for a job. I'll never stray again. Clare says if I go out with my mates I'll just get myself into trouble, so I don't mind staying in with her.'




So - what is the secret of MacDonald's romantic success? Is it his good looks and buffed physique that is generating all these conquests? No - unless the camera is a pathological liar, I don't think so. Could he be the master of some field of science, philosophy or the fine arts, whose dazzling repartee is winning all these female hearts? Well, considering he has no qualifications of any kind, that is decidedly unlikely. Is it sheer wealth - the dazzle of his sequinned lifestyle -that is turning their heads? The fact that he lives on the desultory sum of 60 dollars a week tends to refute that interpretation. Is it his animal confidence on the Serengeti of life that wins womanly approval? Aye, even the coldest woman's heart is often won by the sight of raw courage - surely that's the answer? Hmmm, he looks like he has never thrown a punch in anger, so probably not. Is it his steely self-possession that draws admiring eyes? Considering he drinks twelve cans of beer a day and has never held a serious job, that is also most unlikely.

I recall an interesting discussion on Scarecrow's blog, wherein a Roissy-inspired American PUA took him to task for questioning whether Charles Manson was an alpha in any shape, sense or form. The Gamester's general argument seemed to be that, because Manson somehow garnered a harem of adoring females who were prepared to kill for him, he must automatically be an alpha. I suspect that many PUA's parrot this line without really thinking about it too deeply. By their reckoning, MacDonald - a jobless, ugly, ignorant, inbred bum - is also an alpha.

Let's start thinking outside the box for a moment. The 'alpha' theory of Game takes its cue from the quasi-science of evolutionary psychology. Nothing wrong in that - the Darwinian paradigm is supported by a good deal of tangential evidence. However, it assumes (without warrant) that female preference had a large part to play in shaping male behaviours during human biological history, and that female preference has been shaped by evolutionary necessity. In this view, all men have to do is mimic the 'alpha' archetype embedded in female preference and they will get sex. However, it is quite possible that the well-attested evidence for unequal male reproductive success in pre-civilized eras might derive from intra-male competition and subsequent sexual coercion of unwilling females rather than females selecting males as reproductive partners, as such. If this coercive theory were true, there would be little reason for women to 'evolve' any such 'alpha' archetype, since their views would have counted for little in intra-male struggles for sex. Further, we might expect women to have rather limited sexual drives and interests, since their evolution would be pointless - their preferences would be entirely obviated by the fact of post-conquest sexual coercion.

And frankly, this is what we tend to find (or rather, what serious researchers tend to find). Professor Glenn Wilson of the University of London opines in The Great Sex Divide that female sexual drives are, at their strongest, merely equivalent to those of males in a non-aroused state. That is, 'sexy' women just feel what men feel on a near continual basis. American sexual research indicates that only a quarter of women enjoy sex, and that three quarters have no sexual feelings. Professor Wilson alludes to research indicating that rural women in Ireland (notably ignorant of Cosmo, Sex and the City and other feminist media) have no concept of sexual pleasure whatsoever. So, far from the 'Gina Tingles' beloved of American PUAs, a reasonably strong case can be made out for women never having 'evolved' a sexual preference, never having had to. And if women never evolved a sexual preference for an ideal male sexual archetype, post-Darwinian 'alpha' Game techniques are probably ineffectual, too.

In short, women don't know what they want. Sex is largely meaningless to them at any deep level, and their aversion/attraction to it the product of rational (i.e. material/cultural) considerations. This would explain the well-worn dictum that sex is the only thing men are completely irrational about, and the only thing women are completely rational about. It also explains why so many women fall prey to gamma/omega males such as Manson or MacDonald. In short, they are not unsung, socially dominant 'alphas' at all, merely 'chancers' with little to lose in today's 'post-marriage' moral climate.

Finally, this 'sexless female' interpretation of gender-relations lends much strength to the Anglobitch Thesis and other 'cultural' interpretations of gender relations. If women in general harbour no deep sexual instincts, how they relate to men becomes crucially determined by the cultural values around them. In the case of Anglo-American women, the repressive, puritanical nature of Anglo-Saxon culture explains far more about their casual misandry than any biologically-ingrained psycho-sexual preference - since the latter does not exist, as such.

18 comments:

  1. BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN
    Why American men should boycott American women

    http://boycottamericanwomen.blogspot.com/

    I am an American man, and I have decided to boycott American women. In a nutshell, American women are the most likely to cheat on you, to divorce you, to get fat, to steal half of your money in the divorce courts, don't know how to cook or clean, don't want to have children, etc. Therefore, what intelligent man would want to get involved with American women?

    American women are generally immature, selfish, extremely arrogant and self-centered, mentally unstable, irresponsible, and highly unchaste. The behavior of most American women is utterly disgusting, to say the least.

    This blog is my attempt to explain why I feel American women are inferior to foreign women (non-American women), and why American men should boycott American women, and date/marry only foreign (non-American) women.

    BOYCOTT AMERICAN WOMEN!

    ReplyDelete
  2. You said it, friend!

    A great New Year thought for all of us!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Avoiding American women like the plague is a good idea! My friends say, "why don't you settle down with a nice (American) girl."

    When I think about settling down with an American woman, I don't know whether or not I should laugh........or vomit!

    Check out this great discussion forum about American women, foreign women and moving to more "man friendly" countries:

    http://www.happierabroad.com/forum/index.php

    ReplyDelete
  4. The best way for a man to earn a woman's respect is to become a fearless warrior, valuing death as a far worthier enterprise than life itself. Then, women will be forced to respect you (albeit grudgingly), even when they publicly revile you with the bitterest curses and insults.

    A woman admires a dead lion more than a dog who has managed to survive by means of cowardice, regardless of what she says.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Rookh

    I totally agree that the reasons for women's choices is mostly determined by the cultural milieu; and to a lesser extent by corresponding psychosocial factors.

    When I was dating Anglobitches (before I woke up and started dating foreign ones); I NEVER saw a phenomenon referred to often by the 'game' theorists: that Anglo women were on the make for the 'bigger, better deal'. I've never ONCE been dumped by Anglobitch because her new 'love interest' was an improvement. Most of these males were in MacDonald's category, at best. Most of them were worse.

    Anglo culture teaches women that they are superior to men, so it logically follows that the women will choose men who they perceive as inferior to themselves. Anglo women will go for the living dog (how many times have we heard that all men are dogs?) over the lion, dead or alive, every time. Contrary to what Anon1306 writes, Anglo women do not respect men and there is no way a man can earn her respect. They despise us because we are male; and whether you are Clint Eastwood or PeeWee Herman makes no difference to them. In fact, most would choose the latter, since the Peewees of the world are easier to despise.

    ReplyDelete
  6. *When I was dating Anglobitches (before I woke up and started dating foreign ones); I NEVER saw a phenomenon referred to often by the 'game' theorists: that Anglo women were on the make for the 'bigger, better deal'. I've never ONCE been dumped by Anglobitch because her new 'love interest' was an improvement. Most of these males were in MacDonald's category, at best. Most of them were worse.*

    If one studies Roissy's blog carefully, one is struck by the number of posts by socially and economically successful males for whom Game has been no help at all... Guys making six figures and functioning members of the upper-middle class. Compared to Manson or MacDonald, George Sodini was an uber-alpha with bells on, but he did not have sex in 20 years. Time should be called on these 'alpha' theories of Game since all they do is waste men's lives. Any decent Anglo-American male is wasting his time pursuing the Anglobitch. Indeed, a case can be made out that 'Gamma' Game strategies have decidedly more impact across the anglosphere - the bigger the bum, the greater his reproductive success, or so it seems.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Anon 2032:

    I sort of agree with you, but they will seek the super-duper-mega Alpha types first, like Brad Pitt and Tom Cruise (high-status males with untold amounts of wealth) before seeking out people who make us look like the kings of a small empire. They literally go from one extreme to the other when seeking mates.

    Why? Well, Anglo women are notoriously materialistic, so men with lots and lots of money (relative to other guys, of course) are attractive to them. However, they also seek out degenerate bums because they share a similar mindset to those guys, no matter how pretty they look on the outside. In other words, they seek out those sorts of 'bad boys' because they are 'bad girls' at heart, not because they are 'good girls' somehow attracted to opposites (those kinds of relationships don't last for more than 5 minutes, whilst these Anglo girls tend to be loyal to their bad boys).

    For what it is worth, I don't like using the terms Alpha, Beta, etc. In the Anglosphere, the term Beta has a sort of stigma to it, for one, whilst the terms tend to be rather subjective. Roissy, in his myopia, views Alpha's exclusively in terms of sex, for instance. Rookh views them differently again. Also, in truth, people aren't so easily classified, which is the same reason why the Myers-Briggs Test, although interesting, remains nothing more than a very vague psychological evaluation.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Rick

    There is truth in your assertions. However, the Anglobitch preference for plutocrats and deadbeats (while eschewing the 'middle class' male) is not determined by biological factors, as the PUAs aver. Rather, it is the product of socio-cultural factors inhering to Anglo civilization. In the Anglosphere, the prevailing memes are inherently misandrist, which feeds the negative situations that Anglo-American males of all classes continually experience. Male status is not consistently defined in the female psyche since females have not evolved a rational mating strategy (that was all taken care of by prehistoric intra-male competition). This goes some way to explain the failings of Game plus the widespread misandry of Anglo-Saxon women. Applying male logic to female mate-choice is like applying a bridle to the wind: the two don't fit.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Rookh,

    I agree wholeheartedly - Anglo females are the way they are for cultural reasons, not for biological reasons. If I did somehow imply that they were, then I apologise.

    Roissy and the like do not see that, because they are focusing on one area of the world where females behave a certain way. I assume that they don't travel much; if they did, they'd realise that females everywhere are not the same (people who assert that they are usually don't travel).

    Your comment about logic and females rings true, of course; if females dealt in logic, they would avoid bums and thugs for obvious reasons (unless they had some masochistic tendencies, as some might).

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thank you for this article Dr. Kshatriya.

    I met many women - looking at the men they bred with - all I saw were total losers - not even thugs entirely. A few were thugs - but for the most part-

    "I thought I could fix him".

    This describes a man who is DEFECTIVE and not ALPHA.

    I suspect that women are seeking "OMEGAS" in order to compete with them successfully for the "head of household" title.

    That is, they want men that they can measure up to.

    Male authority is detested by western women. Male talent, male drive, male success and male achievement are all frowned on and hated.

    It is called an inferiority complex.

    Pity too.

    Women are better at being the complimentary sex - instead of the opposite sex.

    feminism did all of this.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It was not good for man to be alone. God created us to be man's helper, to meet his every need, body mind and soul, that we might grow together in spirit and in truth, that we might encourage one another and spur one another on in all things. And that we might more fully in our finite minds understand the inner workings of God and His role in our lives. In women, we see humanity in its weak form, easily misled and beguiled, in man; we see God's strength and unswerving authority. We need man's headship and guidance to keep ourselves from falling away, and man needs God's headship and guidance to show them how to lead us in all truth and righteousness. A good king needs compassion, understanding, respect, wisdom and authority and a servants heart. In the union of man and woman we see all these components brought together and knit in harmony for the happiness of the kingdom: their home. If a woman does her part to meet the needs of her husband, thereby freeing him to do the Lord's work, she is being used of God to love and serve him physically the way God loves and serves him spiritually. Our husbands, free to hear the Lord speaking to them, are able to instruct us in the ways of the Lord. They are able to provide for us physically and love us not just from the heart but in all they do for us. They are being used of the Lord to love and serve us physically on His behalf. Perfect harmony and unity in home only comes from the authority structure given of God and from having Christ as the center of your home.

      Delete
    2. Anonymous8 October 2012 15:31

      Go fuck yourself, you wretched cunt.

      You sound a woman i would love to beat to death.

      Kill yourself, whore.

      Delete
  11. Rookh:

    I don't know about Kev lacking self-possession. I mean, he supports Newcastle for god's sake! :D

    ...and, and, he said that he was going to TRY and stop drinking. Next, he'll be in a monastery!

    ;)

    ReplyDelete
  12. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,857838,00.html

    Are you really citing the opinions of only 2 doctors from *1950*?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The author cites Wilson's 'The Great Sex Divide' I think, which was first published 23 years ago.

      Glenn Wilson's that unattractive, fat, priggish, conceited man who has appeared numerous daytime tv talk/ magazine shows. He provides simple answers for stupid people - that's what makes him popular and oft-quoted.

      Wilson's neat little pseudo-evolutionary theories seem to be based on interpretations of anecdotal research carried out largely in the early to late 70s! Wilson claims that women endure sex in order to maintain relationships and - ultimately - to achieve pregnancy. He fails to understand how, to the contrary, the fear of committment and pregnancy can extinguish sexual appetite!

      Wilson has also carried out research whose dubious methodology involves measuring various female body parts and ascribing those measurements to levels of oestrogen and to sex drive. Perve or quasi-Nazi? The jury's still out. Furthermore, the old fool has concluded that only men harbour sexual fetishes!

      My guess - looking at him - is that Wilson has spent much of his adult life trying explain women's lack of sexual interest in him.

      Delete
  13. *Are you really citing the opinions of only 2 doctors from *1950*?*

    No - did you read what I wrote? Professor Glenn Wilson's evidence is ongoing and contemporary. The point is, the evidence I cite eludes the tired feminist claim that women are as ludic as men, a perspective imposed with fanatic zeal across the post-feminist Anglo-American world. How interesting that - when this meme is removed by time or culture - research into female sexuality (as such) tends to produce VERY different results.

    P.S. Are you citing the latest Cosmo report on female sexuality - you know, the one involving three upper-middle class women paddling across the Red Sea on a raft made of eggshells - and proclaiming such idiomatic opinions as faultlessly immutable?

    ReplyDelete
  14. there is nothing to analyze here
    manson or macdonald could fuck those trashy women because those women are retards ie low class-moronic women
    if you insert manson or mc donalds in middle of some high quality hotties 8+ ..both of them could not have any chance...in fact could not have any chance with normal average women in any city

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't make me laugh. All Anglo and scandinavian women are attracted to low class thugs and losers as shown in the article.

      The middle and high class women are even worse, and go after thugs and psychos just as much as all other anglowomen.

      Delete