By now you've all witnessed the shellacking Susan Patton has taken over her advice to the girls at Princeton. James Taranto comes out swinging in her defense---and napalms an entire village of hamsters, to boot.
I quote him at length:
Read the whole thing.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...%3Darticle
A mainstream news organization is shitting on feminists by name and disseminating hands-on, practical Game advice---with no apology. It's worth considering for a moment how remarkable this is. This could not have happened even two years ago. I don't think it's too much to assert that manosphere ideas and tactics are now firmly a part of this American cultural moment.
And not a moment too soon.
I quote him at length:
Quote:Quote:
Don't be in any hurry to get married. Assuming that you inherited your mother's self-confidence and that you develop a professional career worthy of a Princeton man, your marriageability will only increase for at least the next two decades.
And that's a conservative estimate. Your mother has classmates--men now on the wrong side of Justice Elena Kagan's hypothetical age limit of 55--who are married to their first wives and are the fathers of toddlers. Needless to say, the wives are a lot younger than the chaps. That is the paradox of male aging: The older you get, the younger the pool of available women becomes.
All of which is to say that because of the biological differences between the sexes, the Rosin play-now-marry-later strategy is as perfectly suited for high-status men as it is dysfunctional for women. That's especially true when the Rosin strategy is prevalent among women, for if women followed the Patton strategy instead, high-status men would face greater pressure to commit and a smaller pool of playmates in college and prospective wives later on.
If that is sexist, then Mother Nature is sexist. (Or, if you prefer, God is sexist, or natural selection if you don't go in for anthropomorphism.) If you think it unjust that our social institutions tilt the sexual playing field even further to the advantage of high-status men and the detriment of everyone else, then your quarrel is with those who espouse the ideologies that have produced that result: feminism and sexual liberationism.
One more bit of advice for Susan Patton's son: A lot of your mother's detractors seem gleeful at the thought that her notoriety will rub off on you to your disadvantage--that you'll be embarrassed and women will shun you. As long as you take it all in stride, nothing of the sort will happen. You are now slightly famous. That won't repel women, it will make them curious about you.
But be prepared. Being curious, they will ask questions. You need answers that will heighten their curiosity rather than satisfy it, that will not allow them to pigeonhole you as "too eager to commit" or "just a player," even if you are in fact one or the other. We suggest the following, delivered with a wry half-smile and a slight roll of the eyes: "Oh yeah, Mom really wants grandchildren. I don't know if I'm ready for that kind of commitment."
Read the whole thing.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424...%3Darticle
A mainstream news organization is shitting on feminists by name and disseminating hands-on, practical Game advice---with no apology. It's worth considering for a moment how remarkable this is. This could not have happened even two years ago. I don't think it's too much to assert that manosphere ideas and tactics are now firmly a part of this American cultural moment.
And not a moment too soon.