The countries I’ve visited with the most feminine women have also had the least helpful social welfare programs. If you know how much a country spends on their welfare in relation to GDP, you can come close to predicting how feminine, compliant, and nurturing their women are.
If a woman knows that she can be impulsive, a bitch, a slut, or get knocked up by any man, yet still receive free food, shelter, and a mobile phone from the government, what incentive is there for her to settle with a good man and keep him happy? Why would she pick any man who works in a “boring” job like engineering or computer programming instead of having exciting hookups with the indie guitarist who plays every Tuesday night at the dive bar?
When a girl thinks she can play the game for fifteen years, she simply won’t give a provider a chance until her womb is polluted, until her body is twenty pounds beyond its optimum carriage, and until she’s so entitled that the poor sap who marries her can’t possibly give her satisfaction. His life will turn upside down when she gets bored, divorces him, and takes his money.
In countries where welfare doesn’t exist, picking the guitarist over the engineer will actually decrease a girl’s survival chances. She may end up homeless and have to depend on the church for beetroot soup. She will definitely not have a car, a good home, or an iPhone, not even an older model. She will not have reliable access to health care. Therefore she must be extremely careful about who she sleeps with, and only when she’s still very young can she slip once or twice and fuck the bad boy without a condom. But if she’s still fucking a bohemian who smokes weed every day after she’s 25, her future will be bleak as the odds she enters poverty becomes 100%.
Ukraine doesn’t have welfare for women. Women there must find a husband or else they are in big trouble. While Ukrainian women can be tough, extractive, and transactional, especially for naive men raised in Western suburbia, they ultimately make for excellent partners. I got into a great relationship just one month after I landed in the industrial shithole of Kharkiv, and it ended up being more satisfying than all the relationships I’ve had with American women. The amount of pleasure she gave me based on the little work I had to put in was not surprising considering that she wanted to show her worth so I would deem her a good wife. Even upon marriage, she would not taper her womanly duties because a divorce would put her on the street.
There are three ways a woman can survive in this world:
2. Government (welfare)
If you want an opportunity to meet the best women in the world, simply pick a country with low wages and no welfare. Those women will run, not walk, to the boring provider who has zero game, a 100 pound bench press, and clothing from Old Navy. I’m not saying you’ll bang a lot of hot party girls in those countries, but I am saying that you will find a caring wife one-hundred times easier than in America.
You must go to a country where a man of modest means, who is making GDP level income, is a far better bet for a woman than the government. This is not the case in many Western countries, especially Scandinavia, where the government provides a much better deal than any man. The irony of Scandinavia is that their taxes are so high to provide those gold-plated benefits that it’s almost impossible for a man to compete with the government as a provider. The government cockblocks its own male citizens, who have the indignity of having to pay for the cockblocking. Is it any surprise that the biggest sluts in the world exist in Scandinavia? Why be a good woman when the government will bail your slutty behavior out? Their governments are too beta for sluts to fail.
It’s much easier to choose a bi-annual visit to a welfare office to get monies directly deposited in a bank account while succumbing to whorish tendencies than to serve one man and ensure that his marital investment is paying off. If there is no potential for the woman to endure financial hardship after getting kicked to the curb for being lazy, foul, or unattractive, then the institution of marriage will collapse. There would be no incentive for it.
Government welfare is a woman’s backup plan, letting her know that if she fails with pleasing a man, with internet dating, with a strategy of one-night stand empowerment units, she will not be on the street. In addition to its soft form of government paper-pushing jobs, welfare provides incentive for the worst part of female nature to be released, subsidizing alphas with the right attitude but wrong job while reducing betas—who contribute most to society through their slavish labor—to masturbation and sex dolls. Note that welfare for men, in the form of unemployment benefits, doesn’t have the same perverse effect as welfare for women, because a man does not marry to be provided for. Therefore if you want a society of good wives, and not just good sluts, welfare for all women must be abolished.
Once the abolishment takes place, women who already made bad decisions with men will suffer and wind up on the street, begging private charities for food while turning to prostitution. Their children will be admitted to foster homes to be trained as future criminals of the state. But this suffering will provide a much needed example to young women, still motherless and in the prime of their fertility, of what type of future is in store for them if their slut stage goes beyond one or two bad boy cocks. If anything, school trips in fortified yellow buses can be taken through bad neighborhoods where it’s easy to see how yesterday’s party slut is today’s dazed streetwalker.
As men we have to ask ourselves what type of women we ultimately want. If it’s good sluts, the Western world will more than provide (as long as you can provide tight game). If it’s good women, we must change the state’s policies or—more simply—relocate to countries where the state does not compete with us and encourage women through generous welfare programs to live a life of fucking around instead of maintaining a good family. I hope you choose wisely, because your future as a father and husband will depend on it.Tweet Follow @rooshv
Related Posts You May Like:
Game Tips Newsletter:
Roosh, just saw this and thought I’ve got to put this on, made me think what your alter ego looks like.
[Roosh: Roosh W is blowing up this year. He's pretty good: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyDAHqDhwpQ ]
Ok jokes aside, another great post here Roosh. Without a shadow of a doubt my desire to have a serious LTR here in the UK with the idea of having kids is almost non existent compared to a year or so ago where I had pretty much accepted it as the norm. Thanks for keeping on providing the window of what’s out there on ground level man. I’m glad the hiatus was short lived!
why woman can’t be slut but man can be players?
why do you judge sluts but you yourself is a big player?
why woman need to wish a husband and be faithful, if man don’t want to sttle with a wife?
As a Dane, I agree with you completely. Also about what you have written in the past about Danish girls. I ended up marrying a Danish citizen but with African roots to get the best of both worlds :)
To a person,
A key that opens many locks is valuable. A lock that is opened by many keys is worthless.
Women don’t have to have skills at getting sex and for the most part, their value is in their ability to discern and choose. Bad choices or many partners don’t indicate strength or intelligence. The exact opposite especially if they repeat the same continually and end up in worse shape than before.
This is all good, but once you find the dream wife, do you bring her to the West, where she would quickly be spoiled by her spiteful sisters? This was even observed by Eddie Murphy in the 1980s:
Or do you settle with her in her shithole? If so – how do you maintain your income which is perhaps 90% of the reason she chose you. If you lose that, she’d be gone with a quickness.
Since women have the vote, you can’t have male welfare without female welfare.
However, as technology improves labor itself, especially middle and lower on the bell curve labor, is becomming obsolete.
So the only way to distribute the gains of technology, since lower end labor is no longer competitive, is some kind of redistribution mechanism.
In the absence of such a mechanism men of average or lessor natural ability are still screwed, since their labor is not worth anything.
And yet we can’t seperate this mechanism from female welfare because they vote.
It’s worse than Roosh is portraying it!
It is not a coincidence that in the US and the UK the two parties that are losing support from single women are the Republicans and Conservatives. In other words the parties more committed to reducing public spending.
As the dependency culture expands it will become harder to reverse this tide of voting in favour of those that give you other people’s money of which you can then claim is your ‘entitlement’.
The only good news on this front is that, in the internet age, there are increasing opportunities to work remotely and just walk away from the tax and cultural burden of this culture by just going to live in countries without these problems.
It is small beer but corporations should be encouraged to do more on this front. Where I think the PUA forums and blogs can come in useful is in -somehow- finding a way to coordinate and discuss these activities. If more companies offered the opportunity for young Western men to go and work remotely (or rather in a satellite office) in other parts of the World than they would be astonished by the take-up and reduction in head office costs.
As a 34 year old man that abandoned the idea of having a wife and kids because I failed in finding a woman worthy enough of mothering my children, I like the way things are now. Learning game and applying it ruthlessly has opened up a world of scoring notches week in and week out when and where I want on my terms. Once the woman I enjoy at any given time crosses my silent boundaries, I simply move on to the next. The USA is a players paradise gentlemen.
I don’t think it’s so much countries with welfare vs ones without. I think it is more of a question of wealthy countries, ones with high GDP per Capita versus poor countries. In wealthy countries, many women can fall back on their families even if they don’t take welfare, while in poor countries their families can’t support them past a certain age or the only way to climb the ladder is through marriage.
Is there an example of a wealthy country without welfare and feminine women?
#7 is correct – as technology improves, most of the mid/lower class male jobs will become more and more obsolete. It is simply easier to buy robots and computers to do things for you, and use fuzzy AI to do simple low level executive decisions. All you have to do is feed them power – they won’t go on strikes, ask for raises, threaten to form unions, or steal your employees/customers to form their own companies.
So how do the masses of average/below average male get money? The government would either have to 1) give them welfare or 2) more police/jails.
However, those masses of welfare males can’t really support females, so government must 1) hand out welfare to females or 2) legalize polygamy.
That, or entirely rethink the concept of money. What do you do when human labor/low level management can simply be replaced with machines?
Welfare does not enable sluts. It enables mothers. Who are looking to be only 50% of western women at this point. The desire for motherhood far from universal among women. Until you can wrap your head around that fact you won’t understand the problem civilization now faces or how to fix it.
More than Social Welfare, I guess the most corruptive force is entitlement programs for women. In former Soviet countries Ukraine, Russia, Bielorussia, etc., many communist institutions are alive, that is, public eductaion, public health, public housing, etc. Yet, these public services are not directed to women, but to population in general. Aside from that, women in those countries know that life is not easy and that there is a real shortage of worthy men who have the will and the means to stand up for a family. That’s why they do their best to catch Western men to marry them.
No doubt the worst thing about welfare whether they’re handouts, ridiculous government jobs or cool laws all for women, is dealing with mediocre and below average looking women that act like they are high value.
As a half Dane, thank you for posting what I have felt for decades.
I’ve come to this conclusion myself: There should be an interest among (beta) men to reduce the state
Feminists and women’s interest groups on the other hand will try to make the state larger, increase taxes and expand the welfare programs.
Beta men are essentially tax paying slaves to women and the alpha elite.
They are giving up their own money to make themselves redundant, worthless and unnecessary.
I live in NYC. I knew a graduate school educated asian girl in a long term relationship, who also signed up to be on a waiting list for NYCHA (govt. subsidized low-income housing). Once she was guaranteed housing, she kicked her beta boyfriend (white guy) to the curb so fast, his head never stopped spinning. Now that she could keep her (low wage) nonprofit job and have her rent subsidized, he was no longer needed. Cock Carousel for Life, baby!
spot on post roosh … Applies ten fold to the U.K were these idiot girls are literally cradled by the government after shitting out a child aged 17 because its the ‘ cool thing too do ‘ . having dated a single mum i couldn’t agree more.. im not saying its a easy ride having a kid and being on your own BUT the attitude and self entitlement that comes with knowing you’ll get a free house and money etc. is incredible. further more , it detaches them from reality of normal life.. i work , i own a property i have too pay for all my own shit etc. and i clearly remember having full blown arguments with my ex about mortgages , tax , price of fuel etc.. they just don’t have a fucking clue and as a result cannot relate to the day to day problems than 90% of ( mainly ) men have to go through just to exist nowadays and be independent. fuck them . The only possible bonus is …if you catch a single mum out on a night ‘off’ a chance of a fuck is quite good..but be warned … there will be issues.
12 and 9 have a point. I think you have the causation backwards. Hence, liberated women help create social welfare. Social welfare did not just fall out of the sky.
Yet it’s interesting that communism maintained feminine women better than post-war Western society. You could ascribe this to poverty but then we’re seeing still poor countries in Latin America today become more feminist. I think Uri Katsav is correct that it’s because of the prevalence of specifically women-targeted social welfare programs, equal opportunity gender employment, and so on. And these were the products of Western feminism.
#9,#13 and #15 touch on another aspect of these issues.
The UK and US have a share of wealth and income much more skewed towards the upper quartile than in countries like France, Germany, Sweden or Japan.
This doesn’t affect divorce rates (US & Sweden ‘lead’ the way together there) but I would argue it does affect hypergamy virulence.
Hypergamy does seem to be much more of an issue in the UK and US. And guess where the fatattitude problem is the strongest? Guess whose lower than median income women are becoming obese?
Obesity in Europe here
(see page 2). Yep UK women right at the ‘top’ of the 24-44year old group with 20.7% being obese.
Interestingly here are some of the countries in Europe where the women are less obese (by at least 2% points) than the men (18-25 and 25-44)…
Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Greece, Spain, Italy, Cypus, Latvia, Malta, Rumania, Poland, Slovenia, Slovakia
Countries in Europe where women are 2% points more obese…
UK. France almost makes it in there and the Belgian sub group (18-25) make it in.
Of particular note are England’s (the data is from England only, if Scotland and Wales were included the rates would be even higher) 18-25 year old group. Only 5.6% of men are obese against 16.6% of women. If you strip out Malta the next highest would be Belgium at just 5.4%. And shockingly the English data is for 16-24 year olds. My guess is the rates would be higher if it was from 18-24 years.
You want a whale on welfare? Come to the UK.
Why would you want a future as a husband and father? That’s not a future, it’s a sentence.
Because danish women are so ugly and MASCULINE, a larger procent of danish men and women are paying to have sex with dogs, and other animals.
True and serious, the government welcomes sex between danish and animals:
There is no reversing a decline. Future elections will focus on which candidate is offering the most handouts to women. Men can only try to slow these new entitlements before their standard of living is completely gutted.
This is gold: “If you want an opportunity to meet the best women in the world, simply pick a country with low wages and no welfare.” However, there is the corruption factor, as comment #16 indicates. It seems that tight Game is essential regardless if I want any success with women.
I’m one of those disconnected-from-the-economy types. So I don’t think I can be tight enough. Men are expendable: it’s evolutions way. Women are expendable only in civilization. Pruning (correctly) removes poverty of character and ability. Men are logical because the pruning was harsh. Women will change only after harsh pruning over 100,000 years of civilization.
#3 is not a person but a woman in love with her feeeelings.
From other comments, if a rich nation without welfare exists (#9), which came first between feminism and welfare (#18). We are the duck that makes foie gras, force feed. The calories are wealth and the gavage is fiat money. The new money from nothing, and its credit more removed forms, force economic activity that kills for a quick harvest with heavy collateral damage. We are NOT being conserved by conservatism, nor are we ever on offense with conservatism.
Which came first? Fiat money.
If women don’t marry a man, they’ll marry the government.
Your post could easily have been titled, “Social Welfare Creates a Society of Fatties” for many of the same reasons.
Look at how the government messes with the male/female dynamic by getting involved in divorce.
Roosh, I’ve heard your previously say the government should provide health care for its citizens. I’m wondering if you’re rethinking that belief.
Once you start down this rabbit hole, you see how far it all goes.
Excellent post Roosh. Respect.
“Mothers” is your attempt to imbue motherly virtue when in fact you despise and denigrate it, put plainly its newspeak.
Firstly being a mother doesn’t preclude a woman from being a slut.
So uncompromising are these “mothers” that the greatest handout in history (Obamacare)almost failed on the single issue of subsidized abortions and contraception.
What is worth is how you are exporting these “issues” onto 3rd world countries under the guise of “non violence against women” etc
Social welfare creates a society of sluts, for sure. But also, governments inevitably create social welfare, as that is the only means they have available to buy votes. Expanding the share of the population that are dependent on you, is how you solidify your grip on power. Allowing you to expand more and more.
The only way out, is if those you plunder to pay for your “largesse”, fully recognize the absolute incontrovertible inevitability of this dynamic; and quit naively believing that there is some mythical “we” that include both them and those plundering them. Then they will start making efforts to withhold resources; as well as possibly actively diverting resources to directly fight the plunderers.
Eastern Europe may be better than America as of now, but as there exist some mechanism by which government there can make more people dependent on handouts fro them, they will do it. It’s only a matter of time. It has happened in every historical society, from Rome and onwards (and even prior, for sure.)
The only place I’m aware of that never succumbed, is tribal Central Asia, like Afghanistan. Where the default action to take when encountering someone unknown, is to shot him, unless he specifically and individually indicates he is bringing more benefit to you, than the risk he poses. Not a fertile place for tax collectors, that’s for sure.
And yet Scandinavia has extremely low rates of teen pregnancy and teen birth, compared to the UK and certainly compared to the US (despite the US’ stingier welfare system). Women are not making their sexual calculus based on recent legislation that has been proposed by the Prime Minister. They’re making it based on the same old stuff: primal instincts, desire, emotional stimulation.
In any case, I don’t consider an uneducated woman with no skills to be a “high quality woman” but that’s just me. If I wanted an LTR, she would surely have to be my intellectual equal, or close to it, otherwise I would be bored to tears and pull my hair out. But for a casual fuck, sure, bring on the bimbos.
“The government cockblocks its own male citizens, who have the indignity of having to pay for the cockblocking.”
You misunderstand me. My point is childless female sluts get no more advantage from welfare than males. Were it not for welfare our birth rate would be like Japan’s.
“The government cockblocks its own male citizens”
Ain’t that the truth?!
Quote of the month!
Whereever the majority rules(Majority being the betas and omegas) eventually you get this type of society. The majority has to socially engineer the women of society to go for those things that they can provide (beta males strategies).
You won’t be able to rack up the same amount of notches in a state with less welfare, provided this idea is realised. Would someone in the game community be happy with girls stopping after 2 one night stands? Sounds like sex would come at long intervals.
This is one of your best posts Roosh. Great analysis.
You have a point. Whenever the liberal media says a politician doesn’t connect with women its a euphemism for him not bowing to women who want the state to pay for kindergarten and extend after school bullshit so they can make more money whilst neglecting their kids.
But to say childless sluts don’t get subsidised is misleading. You missed my point abound state subsidised Obamacare now forcing us to subsidize contraceptives and abortions.
You miss the fact state supported Planned parenthood rarely attends to mothers but rather helps women avoid motherhood.
The needless expansion of Big government is in part aimed at creating needless Federal jobs for sluts who vote for Obama when in actual fact the social fabric of society would be better preserved if we used that money to pay men to dig a big pointless hole in the ground.
Any ex-porn star can get a job teaching our kids despite the absence of male teachers being to the clear detriment of our kids.
However would it be a bad thing if our birth rate were more like Japan’s ? For a start we’d have less bastards to enable our militarist leaders to start wars of aggression. Hopefully it would put an end to the spreading of slut empowering liberal democracy we seek to spread through the barrel of a gun.
No man is a bigger pimp than the U.S. Government.
It also stands to reason that if the end destination for sluts is state funded motherhood then the entire journey in getting there has also been subsidized since the state was always a safety net / guarantor regardless of what bad decisions she took in reaching her destination.
This is very true in the case of finding a good girlfriend and potentially a wife. In countries where women are competing for the best possible mate, it will be detrimental to be even 15 pounds over weight. In the Dominican Republic the most beautiful women most of the times are accompanied by a successful man. In these types of countries, there is a different type of game needed to be run. You must run “Value Game”. I am not saying you have to actually have value, but come across like you do.
I never thought of it that way but Roosh is absolutely correct. This is the number-one reason for the fuglys(fat ugly girls) running around acting like they are a 10. It amazes me also that most of these girls are actually able to find someone to fuck them on the regular. They demand a whole list of qualities that they are looking for in a man. These ridiculous qualities that the only reason they demand such a thing is because in their minds, they think that they can actually have it all.
After living in New York for two years, I have noticed that America is not the place for me. When I was in my country, even though my level of game was “chubby chaser” I was able to keep myself satisfied not just sexually but emotionally. I didn’t have to put a lot of effort into getting laid. After I discovered this site and pick up valuable techniques, I could plow through pussy, but the amount of work I am putting in is just unbearable compared to the potential quality my hard work can generate. I haven’t game in another country, but I am excited to go back to my motherland and see what my skills will bring me. I can just imaging that if I could get laid here bi-weekly, then in a place where women have to compete for “MY” attention, I will catch AIDS.
What fascinates me about these posts in the game/HBD blogosphere is that sentiment like these are pretty much American Applachian/Deep Southern thinking (or in some cases Irish, Eastern European, or someone outside Germanic Europe). The Western World and the American North/West Coast is an egalitarian, “commonweal”-centric society. The welfare of all its citizens is of prime concern and always will be. “Gender equality” will be the norm, as seen in the extremes on Sweden. You will NEVER get these ideas across in this society. It is not in their nature.
This is in contrast from the American South, which descends from the Celtic fringes of Britain. There, tradionational gender roles are embraced, people are not viewed as equals, and notions of commonweal are weaker or nonexistent. The sentiments you express here are a combination of the Scotch-Irish and Deep Southern view: the natural wickedness/flawed nature of man and the need for a strict social hierarchy to keep things in order. As HBD Chick would tell you, the difference is outbreeding vs inbreeding. The liberal elements are more outbred and commonweal centric. The conservative elements are more inbred and more individual/kin centric. You guys exercise these views without knowing it’s as reflexive for you than it is for women to be women.
Keep in mind “gender equality” is in itself a sort of welfare, as is Title IX and the like. These concepts and programs remove qualified men from the workforce or colleges, and replace them with unqualified or underqualified women.
In doing this, the state is making Betas as obsolete as if it were handing out welfare. Things that would have worked for men in the 1950s, like job security, are now not even there and if they are, women can often best them. Hence men becoming obsolete as fathers and husbands.
Beyond that, this is an insightful write-up — and exactly what I bet the mainstream press knows but won’t print.
“The welfare of all its citizens is of prime concern and always will be.”
You’ve been drinking the liberal cool-aid Sir. Try selling that to the Occupy Movement. Besides if we are all citizens of the same country (regardless if we are North / West Coast or Appalachian why do we feel our welfare is not of their concern ?
Truth is government works for the privileged and powerful. “Liberals” , even those who spout egalitarian ideals are simply those who have been accommodated / absorbed into the existing power structure, either through plum jobs or welfare handouts.
Note they don’t tolerate anyone with opinions outside a certain tolerance (when did you last see or hear an honest leftwing firebrand in the US who was given the time of day by our liberal media?).
I think you need more depth to your theory.
Sounds like you’ve gone full Roissy. You never go full Roissy.
Because danish women are so ugly and MASCULINE, a larger procent of danish men and women are paying to have sex with dogs, and other animals.
True and serious, the government welcomes sex between danish and animals:
According to the Danish newspaper 24timer, this interesting gap in the law has led to a flourishing business in which people pay in order to have sex with animals.
On the internet, several Danish animal owners openly advertise their services. The newspaper contacted several such individuals and was told that many of the animals have been engaged in this kind of activity for several years and that the animals crave the sexual stimulation. The newspaper found that the cost charged by the animal owners varied from DKK 500 to 1,000 (USD$85 to $170).
Best country to live in: Denmark. Women behave like men, and the majority of SEX happens between people and ANIMALS:
More of THIS.
I’ve been wondering about something. In a society without welfare, almost all women would get married. In 1940, ninety per cent of all American women were married. Beta females were married to beta males and alpha females were married to alpha males. In a welfare state, the beta females don’t need the economic resources of the beta males and can offer alpha males the tantalizing prospect of having large harems of beta females. I don’t see how the alpha females benefit from this potential competition. Is it really the case that all women are natural supporters of the welfare state? Is there any possibility of a beta male-alpha female political coalition to shrink it?
“‘The welfare of all its citizens is of prime concern and always will be.’
You’ve been drinking the liberal cool-aid Sir. Try selling that to the Occupy Movement. Besides if we are all citizens of the same country (regardless if we are North / West Coast or Appalachian why do we feel our welfare is not of their concern ?”
Because you’re not their follow citizens – or at least less so. In many ways Northern American Whites, particularly the Puritan-derived ones, see the Dixie Whites as The Enemy – a group that needs to be guided, controlled, or when need be, suppressed. Especially since it would be so easy to for you to regress back to your Jim Crow past.
That, and you’re deemed in need of a little altruistic punishment.
“Truth is government works for the privileged and powerful. ‘Liberals’ , even those who spout egalitarian ideals are simply those who have been accommodated / absorbed into the existing power structure, either through plum jobs or welfare handouts.”
While there’s truth in the elite domination of government, don’t think for a second that all liberals are somehow part of the conspiracy. It’s just that the elites of co-opted the egalitarian tendencies of liberals to promulgate PC nonsense about how “we’re all the same.”
“Note they don’t tolerate anyone with opinions outside a certain tolerance (when did you last see or hear an honest leftwing firebrand in the US who was given the time of day by our liberal media?).”
Puritan-derived liberals are tolerant of others in the abstract (and they were very slow to embrace this point), but not in practice. They prefer to be only around people like themselves, and always have. The view much of the rest of the world as uneducated, unenlightened buffoons/savages.
Similar views pervade Northwestern (i.e., Germanic) Europe. Anyone not for the welfare of all people, equal rights for women, religious tolerance (today, irreligiousity) is a backwards savage that needs to be educated to join the enlightened modern world. You will never get these ideas to gain traction there. The differences between Germanics and Celtic/Slavic Europeans are as intractable as the differences between Europeans and Africans.
I must admit that this is pretty solid theory. It makes completely sense. Impressive post Roosh.
So Scandinavia is good if you want to get laid a lot, and fuck around with a lot of hot sluts.
Eastern europe and other low-welfare countries are good when you want to settle down and get a wife.
Makes perfect sense. Thats why I find it so frickin easy to get laid in Denmark :D
Btw… I’ve never heard of that animal sex thing.. idk why people keep talking about that…
“I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I traveled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer.”
On the Price of Corn and Management of the Poor, November 1766
“Repeal that [welfare] law, and you will soon see a change in their manners. St. Monday and St. Tuesday, will soon cease to be holidays. Six days shalt thou labor, though one of the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase, and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing all your estates among them.”
letter to Collinson, May 9, 1753
The right way to express it is find a former communist country with low wages which is not Muslim.American women are as bad as western European women although no social safety net exists in America.It is just the job opportunities they have.
In many slavic countries the only opportunities women have is to find a man with means or become a prostitute.
I will add that all those Eastern European countries you praise have miserable fertility rates, and accordingly miserable people.
Meanwhile, those Northwestern European countries you decry have fairly good fertility, and despite the problems you claim they face, the people seem to be quite happy.
For all the game talk most men (myself included) would be deliriously happy with one woman who is ours completely. No fuck phantoms, no string of ex’s, no long list of others who got the cream for free while we pay full price for the sour leftover milk, all capped with a divorce disaster all but certainly in the cards later. That gets most betas to work – hard – and do things like keep civilization from falling apart. Kind of important if you like electricity and clean water.
On the path we are on female chastity will re-assert its importance the old fashioned way – social shame, whippings, being stripped naked and run through the streets upon discovery by her enraged husband, and other examples of outright violence after the collapse of society is rightly blamed on the sluts. Women *will* lead the charge for this and will enthusiastically participate.
After Rome fell the dark ages were not exactly kind to single mothers and relegated non-virgins to a life in the whore pits where they belonged.
The problem will solve itself. We can’t afford welfare, we can’t afford social security, we can’t afford medicare, giveaways, WIC, AFDIC, and all the other handouts we’ve been programmed to believe are necessary. When something cannot continue it won’t. Sure they’ll be a big hue and cry from slutty, fat, obnoxious, porcine pieces of human trash blaring 24×7 on the Oprah like shows and radio demanding this and that from the government. The government will make proud pronouncements about the need to fund these programs while using whatever emergency funds that can still be stolen to feather their own off-shore nests and beef up their own personal security forces. Women on welfare will be s**king dick on the corner in exchange for food.
That is nature – if you do not work you do not eat. American style is this: if the government cannot muster enough slave labor to pay for your bad lifestyle choices oh well – time to learn to s**k dick. The U.S. is broke. Rest assured the politicos will pay for their wants before they suffer a dime for your needs ladies. Enjoy the decline! (HT: Captain Capitalism)
” Thats why I find it so frickin easy to get laid in Denmark :D”
In DK, every woman is surrounded by at least drooling males of all kind, beta and alpha it doesnt matter to them, you’re just thrash in their eyes because hey, no one is standing in line for you right ? Even the ugly ones act like rude princesses if you dare approach them. Plus they are always in huge groups..I know tons of Danes who never get laid, young and old, doesnt matter.
The women here sees mean as inferior and not worth your attention.
So its not easy here, you’re the first who ever said that.
Just curious, what made you want to explore other countries? Are Greek women that bad?
Correlation not causality here…
Rich societies that have been well-educated for generations tend to have less conservative attitudes toward women and better social safety nets. Japan/Korea ranks pretty well in terms of little inequality and a decent safety net, and has extremely demure women — Japan much more-so.
And I don’t know that the raw correlation is that great either. Canada has a much better safety net than the US, but I would rate women from Quebec as being more feminine than American women…
I replied to this thread.
A Tale of Three Maps | JayMan’s Blog
Your data is sloppy. Your throwing in immigrant births to juice it. And even when you subtract those out (just using native birth numbers isn’t necessarily enough) you aren’t applying your usual division by IQ. So you don’t know if it’s low or high IQ Brittians experiencing that TFR. I haven’t been able to get the raw data, but summaries indicate that the TFR for educated Brittish women is a lot lower then the overall average.
I’m not surprised that people in western europe are happier. Eastern Europe went through this really shitty leftist thing called communism for a long time. It was a real bummer.
I’m surprised you get any! Atleast with anyone one above 5 and not seriously intoxicated.
You look like a monkey with a hairy helmet. No offence. In Finland we would call you karvakäsi, quite fitting.
A 9 who is indeed a 4. Here in Finland we call you a feminist who re slut:-)
Support to the women can come from plenty of sources:
1.State(case in western Europe)
2.Enterprise(case in the US by the rampant feminism)
3.Family(case in southern Europe where the absence of any protection of women by state or enterprise does not have any influence on princesses since they are largely supported by family and taught to behave like princesses.
The masturbators in this order:
1.Southern Europeans (they have to promise to marry to get some)
2.Americans(land of fatties,only if you have game you get laid)
3.Western Europeans(better than Americans since at least state protection creates trust while enterprise involvement crates bitchiness and entitlement).
Situation in slavic countries:
1.No functional state
2.No successful enterprise
That is why women do not have any protection at all no matter how attractive they might be and their only way to avoid poverty is to marry a man with means.
It boils down to this: in the past women needed men to provide resources for them. They had to “trade” sex, femininity and reproductive access for resource provision.
That system has broken down in today’s liberal democracies.
The state now extracts resources from men forcibly through taxation and insane no-fault divorce laws that create financial
Incentives (or at the very least remove financial penalies) for women to divorce their beta husbands to pursue an eat/pray/love lifestyle on her ex’s dime. There is no incentive for women to give men what men want because women aregetting the resources no-strings-attached.
This has not happened yet outside the liberal democracies. Women there have a powerful incentive to please men in order to access men’s productive capacity.
It’s that simple.
Women,, white knights and manginas will always out-vote regular men. Circumstances will get worse before they get better.
Roosh, in low welfare countries women often run to got married and have child to divorce you strait afterwards and get their welfare from you trough the court. child maintanience in
Poland for instance is nearly have of mans wages.
The harsh truth:
This site is so funny because you guys are all SO right. I am an European women and live in a country that is similar in wealth to the US. I am 38 yrs old and have two kids from different men. They both pay child support for the kids which of course I spend on myself as well. I also get money from the state which pays for my nice apartment. I haven’t worked in 10 yrs and have a fun life. I enjoy online dating and I would never date a boring, ugly guy. I am still pretty hot so I get loads of messages even from much younger men. Of course they are not looking for anything serious but what do I care? As long as they make me feel hot and pay for dinner I’m in :)! (I don’t let them meet my kids though.)
Life is GREAT as a woman. There are still many desperate guys out there who would do anything to get some from ANYONE. I don’t have to be 25 for this lol. Many want to get serious too. These guys are usually pretty plan but if they have a good job I might pick one of them for marriage when my kids get older and child support runs out. I have tons of options and love how the entire world seems to be so supportive to me. At the same time my ex bf, father to one of my kids, works two jobs to pay for our child and the other one he has with a different woman. I am so glad I don’t have to do this. Men are stupid to put up with all this but so much fun. Just love it :). Sorry this is the harsh truth. Don’t attack me now please.
THANK YOU LOKY, you are so brave for telling the truth here. Thank you !
[...] Gameblog Du Jour. [...]
I am an indian man, hindu, roosh is completely wrong about everything.
We hindus have devised best means how to serve women to get some smile from them
If you want dating advice follow hinduism and dont have sex until your 30′s, especially both men and women must abstain from sex until late 20′s and early 30′s
Sex must occur only 3 times in month and during that you need chant some Hindu verses and sprinkle cow urine on each other for purification
Hinduism is only cure for all diseases in west
indian men and hindu women are best of all races,our brown skin and huge noses with hair will make any one horny
Follow hinduism, lets make world an ugly place to life
@loki I cant figure if you’re joking or not, but regardless, you’re speaking the truth. And thats why The West is a terrible terrible place for men, and why we want to get out at almost any price.
Ukraine has welfare for women.
You getaround 1k euros for every child born,you get unemployment benefits (€150/month) and you get alimony).
The ex prime minister of Ukraine and main candidate to the presidency was A WOMAN.
Most radical fenist group “Femen” is FROM UKRAINE.
Get your facts straight and stop telling crap to naive readers of your.
Besides you did not get laid in Ukraine much,tell the truth.
not alimony-child support,sorry
“If you know how much a country spends on their welfare in relation to GDP, you can come close to predicting how feminine, compliant, and nurturing their women are.”
Here’s the chart:
Welfare spending, US states: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/compare_state_spending_2013p40c
I guess I should’ve moved to Texas a few years ago…and California is doomed.
One of the best articles I have ever read. Period.
@8 cad and bounder
i don’t know where you’re from, but in the u.s., you pay taxes on foreign income. so you do not get to simply ‘walk away from’ taxes.
Ukraine has one of the highest divorce rates in the world. How does that mesh with how you see them as a viable long term relationship?
[...] what they’re talking about when they say a career will make them happy? Absent propaganda and welfare to prop up feminism, women would drift back to a more traditional, feminine [...]
Wow, just wow! There is so much truth in this article I almost shed a tear. I will save this entry to break down to any male I see that hasn’t taken the red pill yet. Keep it up roosh.
Brilliant. I like this stuff. Perfect topic for a book.