Tag Archives: women

The war of the sexes heats up: society changes as men learn the Dark Triad

Summary: Revolutions begin in the shadows, emerging only when they grow too large for society to ignore. So it is with “game”, the science of seduction. Today let’s look at a revolution in the war between the sexes. It’s one of our weekend posts about American culture, keeping you informed about things not yet in the mainstream news.

During this whole century the progress of artillery has been a duel between the maker of cannons and the maker of armor plates to keep the cannon balls out. You build a ship proof against the best gun known: somebody makes a better gun and sinks your ship. You build a heavier ship, proof against that gun: somebody makes a heavier gun and sinks you again. And so on. Well, the duel of sex is just like that.

— A pick-up artist explaining life to a feminist in George Bernard Shaw’s play “You Never Can Tell” (1895). See the follow-up to this in the comments.

About “Game”

Like the art of war, relations between men and women are a constant remixing of methods. As with war, during the past century science has forced breaks with the past. Nukes made it suicide to wage traditional State-to-State war, driving the shifts described in “Unrestricted Warfare” (e.g., to 4GW, cyberwar, economic war). Similarly, technology brought women to equality in the labor force while allowing them to control their fertility — changes expressed ideologically as feminism. These unleashed trends that we don’t yet understand.

The reaction to feminism has begun, as every force produces an opposite reaction. Like all revolutions and counter-revolutions, it began in the shadows as the ancient methods of pick-up artists became systematized after WWII.

Decades of slow evolution brought “game” to maturity in the mid-1990s. It’s the science of seduction, a crude applied psychology derived by men on the streets. Like alchemy, it’s a mixture of sense and superstition used by people working without theory. It began, like most revolutions, with an insight: men realized that they break the conventions and act as bad boys — against their own natures — and increase their odds of success with women.

Like most innovations in interpersonal relations — new forms of dancing (e.g., the waltz), divorce, abortion, the pill, rock music, postal boxes on the street — moralists have condemned it as a step on the road to iniquity. Feminists have gained the high ground in control of society’s institutions, and watch with outrage as men act in defiance of the new social norms.

As with alchemy, science follows the amateurs in the field.

Continue reading

Rambo & James Bond teach us about Afghanistan’s mujahideen, and the lessons of history.

Summary: Films from 1987-1888 about the Afghanistan mujahideen reveal much about our inability to clearly see the world and learn from it. We can do better.

Accusing eyes of the women in the lands we've liberated.

Accusing eyes of the women in the lands we’ve liberated.

With childlike wonder each day I see with astonishment our willingness to believe what we’re told. We suffer from our lack of curiosity, our minds closed to alternative sources of information. We treat the information highway like a Fisher-Price toy.

A previous post reviewed the many outright lies told us by high government officials about enemies of America — and how we fail to learn, but believe the new lie. Today’s post looks at something more subtle but just as deceitful: the narratives spun in the news by government officials, their associates, their useful idiots, and journalists. There’s a pattern here that we refuse to see, a costly error. As with so many aspects of America, it’s clearly seen on the big screen.

Today we look at three films from 1987-1988, the end of the 1979-1989 Soviet-Afghanistan War — in which we played so large a part, with horrific results for Afghanistan and America. Here we see what we were told about that war, and the mujahideen “freedom fighters”, despite the ample information available showing this to be false.

Mujahadeen riding to the rescue in "The Living Daylights"

Mujahideen riding to the rescue in “The Living Daylights”

Continue reading

Women in combat are the real Revolution in Military Affairs

Summary: Women combatants appear in many of today’s conflicts around the world, a change in warfare with few precedents in history and perhaps the biggest change since the use of nukes. Recent examples include fighters in the Eritrean Wars, Middle East suicide bombers, soldiers in western armies, and in the Kurdish forces. With few historical precedents, except in near-mythological tales, large numbers of women in combat represents a real revolution in military affairs. Here we sort through the news for an introduction to this powerful trend.

Warrior Women

Fact catching up to fantasy.


  1. War by women in the developed nations
  2. The test for women soldiers lies in future wars
  3. War in the less-developed lands
  4. The democratization of warfare
  5. How will this revolution change war?
  6. For More Information


(1)  War by women in the developed nations

First let’s look at women’s increasing role in the military forces of the developed nations.

Some have gone all the way: “8 Other Nations That Send Women to Combat“, National Geographic, 25 January 2013 — Australia, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Israel, New Zealand, and Norway. In these nations women serve in roles that include “engaging an enemy on the ground … while being exposed to hostile fire and a high probability of physical contact with the hostile forces personnel” (per a 2010 British Ministry of Defense (MOD) study).

The number of nations doing so is increasing. As in the UK “Women soldiers to serve in front-line combat units” — “Senior Whitehall source says that MoD is ‘leaning towards making the change’ to allow women in front-line combat units after a six-month review” (The Telegraph, 5 December 2014).

But things might not be what they seem, as Martin van Creveld explains in Men, Women & War (2002):

This argues it is all a great illusion: that the influx of women into the military, far from representing a world-historic step in women’s unstoppable march towards liberation, is both a symptom and cause of the decline of the military. The process was triggered by the introduction of nuclear weapons over a half century ago. Since then the armed forces of no developed country have fought a war against a major opponent who was even remotely capable of of putting its own national existence in danger …

The more superfluous they have become — indeed precisely because they have been becoming superfluous — the more society and its leaders feel able to treat them not as fighting machines but as social laboratories …

For more about his theory see his article “The Great Illusion: Women in the Military”, Millennium – Journal of International Studies, 2000.

(2)  The test for women soldiers lies in future wars

The test of van Creveld’s theory and of western nations’ commitment to gender equality in combat, comes when women return in large numbers of body bags. So far none of those nations have had large numbers of women casualties.

Women have died serving America in our post-9/11 wars, but in small numbers (reflecting limitations on their roles) — as shown by this Congressional Research Service report (OIF and OID are Iraq; OEF is Afghanistan): women are 2% of military deaths so far vs roughly 11% of total US troops serving there.

Continue reading

The University of Virginia shows how change comes to America: through agitprop and hysteria

Summary:  Another round of hysteria in America, this time about the “rape culture” causing a “rape epidemic” on campuses. The flagship of this campaign, the lurid gang rape reported in Rolling Stone, has sunk. But the program rolls on, disconnected from the truth of this or any other aspect of the activists’ case. This is how change comes to America, and why meaningful reform remains difficult while our society slowly decays. As any society will when it’s ability to self-repair breaks down. We can do better.

A rape victim speaks

To read the message, click to enlarge


  1. How Did We Get Here?
  2. How Change Comes to America
  3. What About All Those Rapes?
  4. For More Information


(1)  How did we get here?

The story showing the “rape culture” at the University of Virginia continues to unravel, with stories in the media such as “Key Player in UVA Rape Story: Rolling Stone Never Talked to Me“, Hanna Rosin, Slate, 6 December 2014. However we’re dealing with agitprop, not just news. Activists manufacture these stories to justify social and political change. Their underlying truth is irrelevant to these stories ability to motivate Americans. That’s possible because people have found that we don’t object to lies. That’s a discovery of kind that changes the course of nations.

The initial project, pushed for decades by feminists, was re-definition of “rape” from crime by force to the more ambiguous crime due to lack of consent, then to the in the eye of the beholder crime due to lack of “explicit consent”. This greatly increased the numbers so that rape could be declared a major social problem (although a large fraction of sexual assaults or even rapes under the new definitions are not considered rape or assault by the victim — not just at occurrence, but even years later during the survey).

That required blurring the lines between rape by force (assault or battery) — which often leaves behind forensic evidence that provides a strong base for prosecution — to “he said, she said” accounts that would stump Solomon (this also distorts surveys, as they probably have very different rates of under-reporting). For details of the early stages of this project see “A matter of force: The redefinition of rape“, Timothy W Murphy, Air Force Law Review, 1996.  For an example of this advocacy in the press see “The Misguided Definition of Rape as ‘Force’“, Mary Adkins, The Atlantic, 21 May 2014 — “Sometimes, saying no is as brave as a person can be. Isn’t that brave enough?” She conflates woman sleeping with their boyfriends, with sex despite no affirmative consent (but no resistance), with violent stranger rape:

“Another close friend of mine, at age 27, was raped and murdered by an intruder in her sleep. She survived in the hospital for several days before passing away, having been beaten so badly. Her hands were broken from fighting back. Another local woman was also raped by the same intruder, but she didn’t fight back. She lived.”

Once people believe we face an emergency, hastily drafted legislation gets passed and the law enforcement system swings into action to force the desired changes in our behavior. The Left believes in social engineering. It’s one of their defining characteristics, despite their repeated failures from busing children to other schools (instead of fixing all schools) to wrecking our inner cities.

Continue reading

It’s time to forcibly re-shape America to fight the campus rape epidemic! Even if it’s fake.

Summary: Let’s look at the U Virginia rape culture. In other words, it’s time for another wave of hysteria followed by social engineering, this time about the epidemic of rape on campuses.

We should mark our seasons by the prevailing hysteria rather than seasons. Much as calendars reflected the reigning monarch, we’d say this was the rape hysteria. Or Ebola, North Korea, melting Antarctica, Alar, overfilled garbage dumps, Saddam, Bin Laden, AIDS, bomber gap, missile gap, Yemen threat, Libyan hit squads, etc.  When we grow up we’ll no longer fall for these info ops, and perhaps then we can retake the reins of America. Perhaps until then we’re not fit to run a nation (good thing we have the 1% to do it for us).

This is the second of 2 posts today. Post your thoughts in the comments.

Ms Magazine: on rape

Most don’t know they’ve been assaulted



  1. The horrific story of gang rape at a prestigious university
  2. Reminders of past false stories
  3. Obvious actions
  4. About the epidemic of rape at colleges
  5. For More Information


(1)  The horrific story of gang rape at a major university

A Rape on Campus: A Brutal Assault and Struggle for Justice at UVA“, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, Rolling Stone, 19 November 2014 — Jackie was just starting her freshman year at the University of Virginia when she was brutally assaulted by seven men at a frat party. When she tried to hold them accountable, a whole new kind of abuse began.”

This describes an old-fashioned gang rape. No alcohol, no fancy date-rape drugs; no he-said-she-said. Lure the girl upstairs, then seven men brutally rape her for three hours. Bleeding she stumbles away. Three friends advise her not to go to the hospital, not to call the police. It would be a DA’s dream case, as so much physical evidence gives an easy convictions (blood and glass on the carpet, her wounds, DNA, etc).

The three friends launched into a heated discussion about the social price of reporting Jackie’s rape, while Jackie stood beside them, mute in her bloody dress, wishing only to go back to her dorm room and fall into a deep, forgetful sleep. Detached, Jackie listened as Cindy prevailed over the group: “She’s gonna be the girl who cried ‘rape,’ and we’ll never be allowed into any frat party again.”

It’s a horrific story. This girl stumbles into a fraternity of psychopaths (why didn’t they expect jail time?), then finds her three best friends are sociopaths. Although the vast majority of the media coverage has expressed uncritical outrage (always believe the victim), there have been some dissenting voices. First, questions about the reporting by Rolling Stone. Such as in “The Missing Men“, Allison Benedikt and Hanna Rosin, Slate, 2 December 2014 — “Why didn’t a Rolling Stone writer talk to the alleged perpetrators of a gang rape at the University of Virginia?”

Last week, we invited Erdely on the DoubleX Gabfest to talk about the story. I asked her in several different ways if she knew anything about the seven men whom Jackie accused of committing this crime, or if she had talked to them. In the story, Jackie’s roommate at the time, Rachel Soltis, tells Erdely, “Me and several other people know exactly who did this to her.” Jackie says she still sees “Drew,” the guy she alleges orchestrated the gang rape, walking around campus sometimes. (Jackie is the alleged victim’s real first name. Drew is Erdely’s pseudonym for the alleged perpetrator.)

Continue reading

“Mockingjay” shows us a Revolution in Gender Roles. What’s the next revolution?

Summary: The previous post discussed violent revolution as a possible future for America, of the kind seen in “Mockingjay” (3rd film in The Hunger Games series). Today we we looks at a different aspect of The Hunger Games,  social revolutions of the kind that have repeatedly reshaped America. Women using violence against men (for good or evil), revolutions of the past and present — pointing to the possibility of a radical revolution in the future (with unimaginable effects).

Love revolution


  1. Revolutions of the past
  2. Revolutions in the present
  3. Revolutions of the future
  4. For More Information

(1)  Revolutions of the past (now stereotypes)

“What intrigued me most, however, was the role gender played in the books, and now the movies. With her bow and arrow, inability to talk about or express her feelings, and her lack of respect for the laws and government of Panem, Katniss Everdeen is far from your stereotypical female protagonist. She isn’t weak. She isn’t in distress. And she sure as hell doesn’t need a boy to save her.
— “does ‘The Hunger Games’ really subvert traditional gender roles?“, Kelsey Sejkora, 24 April 2014

Ms Sejkora writes an interesting review (well worth reading), and here states the consensus wisdom of film critics — but she and they are wrong. These features of Katniss are those of today’s stereotypical female protagonist, and have been for a generation. That revolution began in the 1960s.

Diana Riggs as Mrs. Peel

Diana Riggs as Mrs. Peel

Since we spend more time watching TV than films, let’s look at that history for the extreme examples of strong capable women who don’t need saving: action women (i.e., they fight and defeat guys). One of the first on US or UK TV was Dr. Cathy Gale (actress Honor Blackman) in “The Avengers” (1963-1965). She was followed by Emma Peel, and a few imitators, such “Honey West”, and the “Girl from UNCLE”. In the 1970s we watched less-violent action women, such as “The Bionic Woman”, “Wonder Woman”, “ISIS”, and “Charlies’ Angels”. In the 1990s we marveled at “Xena: Warrior Princess” and “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” (“Xena” had Joxer, the first instance of The Chad character: a obsequious male subordinate to the lead woman). And in our century scores of women kick-ass every week on TV, such as  Ziva David  (“NCIS”), Kensi Marie Blye (“NCIS: Los Angeles”), Kate Becket (“Castle”), and the dozens in “Arrow”.

We can see the breadth and depth of the action girl role by consulting the Ur-enclycopedia of American culture: the TV Tropes website. The sub-categories and indexes of “action women” make this section only slightly smaller than the Britannica. And these don’t include the scores of strong women in crime procedurals who don’t kick ass (or do so less frequently), from “Police Woman” and “The X-Files” to the dozens playing today. And the hundreds of strong women professionals in medicine, law, and other fields — commonplace since the Mary Tyler Moore show (1970-77)

Sixty years of the same revolution, endlessly recycled, each time proclaimed new!  In the 1960s independent women, especially as action heroes, violated social norms. They were transgressive, hence shocking. There’s another revolution running today…

Continue reading

The feminist revolutionaries have won. Insurgents have arisen to challenge the new order. As always, they’re outlaws.

Summary:  Yesterday’s post took 2,200 words to explain a simple theory, because I took readers on a journey to “derive” the conclusions. Here’s the spoiler version, in which we “cut to the chase” — showing only the last section.


Feminism is one of the big revolutions of our time, over-turning our concepts of romance and marriage. In response to its success, insurgents have arisen. It’s early days yet, too soon to forecast which side will win. Reviewers consider this one of the more shocking — and darker — posts of the almost 2,900 on the FM website. Post your reactions in the comments (at the original post). It’s the first of two posts today.

Settling for a beta

Feminism is a revolution, one with few or no precedents in history, now in the last stages of consolidating its victory.  We can only guess at the effects.  This post discusses one facet. I expect (guess) that as guys understand the new order, many will refuse to play. They’ll become insurgents — outlaws — from their designated role as beta males — expected to dutifully ask permission at each step of the romantic escalation (see “Feminism for Bros“), marrying a women at the end of her youth after she’s chased alphas (of whom she’ll dream), and dutifully supporting a family until and after your wife divorces you (40-50% of first marriages; higher for subsequent ones; most initiated by the wife).

Once men see the game, why would they play? An insurgency might begin, perhaps leading to a new revolution (or a counter-revolution).

Continue reading