In a recent Open Thread we discussed whether women are really attracted to their husbands. I stated that most women are not, and based this on the observation that women flock towards a small fraction of men in online and real-life dating. Those men get all the action. It’s just another example of the Pareto principle in action: 20% of X get 80% of Y. One of my readers sent me an interesting comment via email, which I wanted to post here as it leads to a much bigger issue:

I enjoyed your recent comments. I think one you touched on one of the most important truths to be revealed in the internet era — that most women find most men to be sexually unappealing. And that a shockingly high percentage of married men have wives who were NEVER sexually attracted to them. In hindsight, this should have been obvious, but having been around before the internet was a thing, this truth was more or less obscured and hidden from the general public. The high rate of female-initiated divorce was assumed to be the result of male infidelity; spousal abuse; and other misbehavior. When in reality the key factor is female sexual attraction.

I think this comment stands for itself. A key observation made is that before the Internet, and before we could easily communicate with people who did not live in our geographic vicinity, anybody who suffered in life could easily have thought that he is to blame for his problems. In terms of marital discontent, given how rarely men are willing to admit shortcomings in their life, it is easy to see how Jim Cuck could have thought that only his wife detests him because all the other guys, even though they may look equally miserable as him, tell him how great everything at home is.

This post is not about women who think they deserve an Ultra Chad as a husband and who get more and more hostile as they realize that the man they married is not going to transform into a buff billionaire. Instead, it is about the dramatic change in perspective due to technology. Running a country, or the entire world, used to be so easy. You had state-controlled media and journalists who wrote what they were told. There was a very clear demarcation of what kind of topics and which opinions could be publicly voiced and what was off-limits and whatever was off-limits you could not easily get access to. You probably didn’t know any alternative to the mainstream opinion even existed.

You used to hear that your country was the best in the world and never did wrong, and all the wars it fought in the past were just. Then you got some propaganda that told you how bad and dangerous any other country was so that you would be content with your position in life. I am not exaggerating. German state TV, which I haven’t watched for decades, has a news show (“Tagesschau” on ARD) that was based on this very format, or at least did so in the 1990s. They’d often have some reports about how great Germany was, and there was aways time for a few minutes on some calamity that happened in some third-world country. When I then travelled abroad to a clearly wealthier country for the first time — I think I went to Copenhagen, Denmark — I was quite baffled. As I grew a bit older and saw a bit more of the world, it inevitably dawned upon me that, no, Germany really isn’t as great as state TV tried telling you and not the best country in the world to live in. Note that ever since the Marxist-Communist takeover of the West by the German Democratic Republic, state TV has been singing a different tune. They are all about “oppression” and all its shades now.

When I was a kid, I had access to a few books at home, a mainstream newspaper, and government TV. That was it. There was no Internet, and getting out of this bubble of disinformation was very difficult. Technology made this accessible to all of us. In contrast, today’s 13 year-olds have an ocean of information available at their fingertips. They can learn Calculus online if they want to, get news from other countries that may paint a much different picture than their local media (you can think of Russia, Saudi Arabia, or China what you want, but you have to admit that their take on Western issues is refreshing and often illuminating), and access more or less any book they might want to read. Today, it is much harder to suppress truth, but, of course, the mainstream still tries to. In a few years, you will probably have to go on the “darknet” though as censorship of the Internet is getting worse and worse.

Once the cat is out of the bag, it won’t go back in. Normies could easily learn that their government’s official version of history is ludicrously biased, if they wanted to. They could also learn not just about female behavior but human behavior as well as human psychology. There is no end to the number of available harsh truths. It is just a matter of whether you are strong enough to accept them. The normie version of basically everything is wrong. However, any black or red pill you swallow is only the beginning as there is a lot more to life than sex. Chances are that there are some of you who have grave misconceptions about more or less everything: history, women, economics, nutrition, exercise, and so on and so forth. Of course, you can lash out to anybody who questions any facet of your world view, but by doing so you will only ensure that you will stunt your personal development.

The comfort you may get from accepting normie beliefs is deceptive. Eventually, your misconceptions will crush you. Let me give you a simple example: Who is more likely to commit suicide — a normie who got divorced by his sweetheart who never loved him, a man who is aware of female nature and took precautions against divorce, or a man going his own way who is living life the way he wants it, given societal constraints? My money is not on the normie, that’s for sure. Similarly, there are people who commit suicide or fall into depression because they got laid off at work. They assumed their devotion amounted to something and that their manager would look out for them. Guess what: they don’t. You’re a “cost factor” to them. By the way, HR and business types don’t even know enough basic math to realize that the sum total of what you cost the organization is not a factor. HR types also use terms like “fully loaded cost” or “loading rate”, which all mean the same thing (again, ‘rate’ is misapplied). BigCorp does not care about you.

Get up and question your beliefs! It would seemingly make sense to say that the younger you are, the more likely it is that you hold some completely wrong beliefs. However, this is only partly true. We now have red-pilled teenagers, thanks to the Internet. In contrast, a lot of the older generation who did not grow up with the Internet and instead believed what they heard in their state-controlled media are often the most naive people you can find. I think if you are reading my blog, you are already in a pretty good position compared to the average guy. You are at least partly awake already.

Did you enjoy this article? Great! Here are further steps to take:

(1) Leave a comment and tell us what you think about this article. If your comment is not related to this article, then post in the most recent Open Thread. Keep the comment policy in mind!

(2) Check out Aaron’s excellent books, the latest of which are Sleazy Stories II, Sleazy Stories III, and Meditation Without Bullshit.

(3) Book Aaron for one-on-one consultation sessions if you want brutally honest advice.

(4) Donate to the upkeep of this site. This blog is free of advertising. This is great for your user experience, but the site costs money regardless. Please contribute!

Share this: Reddit

Facebook

Twitter

WhatsApp

Pocket

LinkedIn

Email

