Young and attractive female bloggers gain a lot of attention. They can post a photo and receive 1,000 likes, 500 comments, etc. And yet, all this popularity is suspect. Realize that America is infested with beta-male orbiters. These are men whose desperation is painful and palpable. These men are Incels (involuntary celibates) that are trying to gain the attention of attractive women in the digital landscape. Maybe…just maybe, she will bang him.
To all the young and attractive female bloggers: Do not conflate this online attention with genuine fandom.
You want to see how talented you are? Change your photo to that of a middle-aged woman. And then wait…just wait (can you hear the crickets?). Nobody will be liking or commenting on your daily thoughts. That’s the harsh reality.
The beta male giveth and he taketh away. His adoration of you is a false display of affection. Once you hit 40, he’ll no longer care if you’re alive or dead.
Only an older female blogger can truly assess her talents. Because the men that comment on her work will be basing their assessment on the value of her thoughts (as opposed to her youthful appearance).
See Related Article: Photo of Dallas: Then and Now
Major Styles 
Another classic piece of insight from The Major! Can we expect a thesis on all these postulations or a published collection to sit alongside Cicero, Marcus Aurelius……?
Lol. Just making a passing observation. Perhaps common knowledge to some…and an “ugly truth” to others that is known but rarely said.
It is interesting how the women blogging or the “THOTS” Roosh has pointed out, were actually writing for women, and not men at all. So hopefully, this wouldn’t even be an issue if a female blogger was writing for single or married women.
I’ve asked Stingray about this topic though – about why the men who are supposed to be on our side, are calling fellow antifeminist women, “whores,” and claiming they write for men when in reality, 99% of what I’ve seen from the female side of the red pill is directed toward waking up other women?
This quote: “Only an older female blogger can truly assess her talents. Because the men that comment on her work will be basing their assessment on the value of her thoughts (as opposed to her youthful appearance).”
Is it really true? Can only an older woman like Elspeth or Stingray assess their “talent” at writing because their beauty has faded and their entering their grandma years? I think it’s a lot deeper than that, and hopefully younger women can provide substance, regardless of what they look like.
*they’re (typos!)
It happens. 🙂
Thanks for the reply, Stephanie,
I was generalizing, of course. There are some talented young female bloggers, no doubt. That being said, I’ve noticed some female bloggers who receive hundreds of likes merely from posting a photo. I think you would agree with me that a photo is hardly offering anything of value in the intellectual sense.
Forgot to add… what Stingray thought about this “THOT” wave – calling traditional housewives who some actually managed to marry as virgins, “whores,” was just about control. She thought it was none of their business if women were writing for other women, and that these men just wanted to exert control over other husband’s wives.
Hmmm….I don’t know this Stingray fellow. Personally, I think that any woman that espouses traditional values online is to be applauded. Everybody can have a “red-pill revelation” so to speak, male or female.
My analysis was also directed at beta-male thirst, which is a very real problem is American culture.
Fyi…I have a young daughter. Hopefully, I can direct her into the arms of a strong man that will genuinely love her (as opposed to a weak man that’s merely lying to her in order to get the bang).
Stingray was a fairly popular (and really wise, in my opinion) female blogger who was older – I believe she started blogging in her early 40’s and is closer to 50’s now. She decided to mostly stop blogging due to the demands of raising children and keeping a household, but I still email with her quite a bit asking her questions about life, child-raising, and the red pill world. Her dormant blog can be found here: https://verusconditio.wordpress.com/
You’re right about the beta male thirst and how this problem of female bloggers does exacerbate that. Stingray actually called it “gross” to see men who cling to the female bloggers on a daily basis – and thought the men’s motivation to call these women “THOTS” (whores) was probably in part to just get those beta men to stay away. But she also could see how that reaction harms the overall affect of anti-feminist female bloggers since in the real world, we’re going to need more women who are red-pilled or have values that can recreate a failing society at some point.
She was adamant I keep blogging if I’m able and allowed to, and encouraged me to keep reaching out to women in that way because it can help or make small changes in other people’s lives. So my take away was: yes, there’s a male beta thirst problem… No, that’s not really something I should worry about since my target is other women who actually need this stuff. I’ve seen at least one younger blogger (who I guess had no one to ask about this issue) quit blogging completely, who cited the reason why as her not wanting to be seen as an “attention whore.” This was someone who never even posted pictures! But we lost a pretty good voice just because she felt like she was harming the men more than helping the women. Stingray was glad I didn’t do that.
I think the issue of beauty IS problematic here though, because by it’s definitive nature, it is **meant** to attract attention. Everything in nature that could be categorized as having anything of beauty, it attracts the eye more than it’s diminished counterparts. The moth does not stand out like the butterflies do, it’s just how it is. They are noticed more or wondered at more – just because of the way they look. It isn’t “bad” it’s just the way it is.
Stingray told me something kind of profound about this Thot argument… she said the men would not care if these young bloggers *weren’t* attractive, because the harsh and ugly truth of the matter is that if they weren’t attractive, they would not even be on the men’s radar, nevertheless be as popular as they are. So… even if a young but plain female blogger was writing really great articles, she still would more than likely not be as popular as the more attractive bloggers writing the same or lesser valued content, all other things being equal (like publicity, connections, and so on) – and she certainly would not be called a “Thot,” even if she was “craving” attention. Looks can be deceiving, in other words.
I don’t know… people – men and women both really are more drawn to look at people who look “pretty.” Even babies have a preference to look at a pretty female’s face rather than a plainer one – so it starts from infancy, this wanting to give more attention to women with beauty – it’s not a “bad” thing necessarily that by definition it gets more attention. It’s why we have models for advertisements and actors and actresses who look certain ways on the screen – because it sells or is more “popular,” than the alternative. I think we see this natural preference play out in the same with social media (and blogging).
Sorry this was so long! Just thought her thoughts on this were too interesting not to put out there. I thought about putting them into a post months ago, but wasn’t sure how it would come across.
Sounds like she was pretty wise. I will have to check out here archived material. Good point about the nature of beauty as well. And you;re right, it is what it is. The Greeks and Romans put virtue in the value of the human form (as witnessed by the sculptures and writings). So it’s only via the relativistic push that something like human beauty becomes downplayed (leading ironically to a Harrison Bergeron type of reality world.)
Right, it is very much a Harrison Bergeron type of thing.
Something else that makes me think it’s more a Harrison Bergeron kind of mentality is that as Stingray pointed out, it really only applies to the attractive ones – wanting them to hide being attractive.
A few years ago, a young female blogger that had been around the red pill world for years, decided to suddenly start uploading homemade porn videos for free viewing on her blog!!!! I had conversed with her back and forth for a couple years at that point, and she was very intellectual (albeit obviously not a Christian or having Christian values), this decision seemed to come out of nowhere. I had really liked talking to her.
But…. no one, absolutely no one said anything bad about her uploading porn videos of herself on her blog – which kind of shocked me. No backlash posts, no calling her a Thot. The red pill world largely ignoring what she did, in my opinion, was because she wasn’t really on a lot of people’s radar, being not conventionally attractive and a little overweight. She did have some beta males, who even commented on the porn uploads, but she was never said to be one of the Thots, even though that kind of obviously sexual attention getting behavior was much more “whore-like” than Lauren Southern just posting a pretty picture or somewhat. I mean… can you imagine the outrage if one of the attractive ones actually started uploading free porn of themselves? The backlash posts would be everywhere. This girl though, no one said anything to or about it. If they did notice it at all…?
“I mean… can you imagine the outrage if one of the attractive ones actually started uploading free porn of themselves?”
These are the SMV realities that have been discussed in the Manosphere. But more importantly, these conceptions of beauty have been common knowledge throughout most societies. So perhaps the only thing new here is the current societies push for equalism.
Stephanie, I would add that the sexual marketplace is very real. Also, we stand to be greatly damaged by our refusal to admit to this fact. This is often called the “wisdom of grandmothers” who, because of their mistakes, advise their granddaughters to behave in politically incorrect ways (i.e. chaste, husband-searching, etc.).
I think it was Roissy, a long time ago, who pointed out that lower SMV women tended to be more slutty, crave more attention, and be more promiscuous than women higher up the SMV scale. Probably because to some degree, no one cares about unattractive women.
“Probably because to some degree, no one cares about unattractive women.”
Even HL Mencken pointed to this around 100 years ago.
*It’s noteworthy that men in the Manosphere (i.e. Roissy, Roosh, etc.) have such large followings. These followings have been collected without the help of NY publishing firms, references in college textbooks, etc. I