If a woman doesn’t have a hymen, she’s a whore.

You might as well assume she’s had sex with over 1,000 men.

It doesn’t matter if she says “oh, I only had sex with my nerd boyfriend in high school.”

You can’t prove that.

Mary Madigan

God man hymens so you can tell if she’s a whore.

That’s the only reason that piece of skin exists.

It literally proves intelligent design, by a God who has no respect for dirty sluts.

But it doesn’t have a meter on it.

She’s a virgin or she’s a whore. Period.

Mary Madigan, know as “the Beast,” writes for News.com.au:

Women are still being judged based on how many sexual partners they’ve had in 2023.

There’s a TikTok with more than 30,000 likes in which Jake Maddock, a relationship expert, advises an anonymous man to break up with his partner after she revealed how many men she’d slept with.

She was also lying.

No woman ever told the truth about this, ever.

Any man who thinks a woman told the truth about this is mentally ill.

It is essential to point out the video has 30,000 likes — not views, likes.

An anonymous man turned to Maddock for advice and explained that his girlfriend revealed, without him asking, that she’d slept with 62 men and she was only 25.

Jake Maddock

Perhaps this could have been used as a teaching moment, where Maddock could have explained that any issues the man had with his girlfriend’s sexual past was a reflection of his own issues, insecurities and ingrained misogyny.

Hahahahaha.

You let women make decisions.

This is what you get.

He could have calmly outlined that women shouldn’t be defined, judged or seen differently based on their sexual experiences.

That wasn’t what happened.

Maddock made a few of the standard quips about her “body count,” called the man’s girlfriend “busy” and said she’d had a “good time.”

Then he advised the anonymous man to cut ties with his girlfriend.

He could have told him to cut something other than ties.

If we lived in a just country.

Maddock said he would be better off ending the relationship and “starting fresh” with someone else because she’d done “irreparable damage” by revealing how many men she’d previously slept with.

He told the man the information would always “plague” him if he stayed with her and joked that the boyfriend got to be number 63.

The relationship expert did advise that no one should tell anyone how many people they’ve slept with before getting into a relationship.

The comments section, at least, wasn’t just men slamming women for daring to have sex lives before meeting their boyfriends … but there was plenty of it.

“Would it be okay for a man to have a body count of 62?” one woman asked.

Uhhhh.

Men don’t have vaginas.

So the question doesn’t even make sense.

Demographics is destiny

— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 22, 2023

(note to Anglin: source article dated April 26, 2023. Removed 10 paragraphs. If a woman is not having sex because she’s not getting the relationship she wants in return, that sounds pretty much like being an incel in the sense that incels are not having sex because they don’t want to pay for it. But overall, this article touches on some important points about how men and women are not getting what they want.)

Women, apparently, are having less sex.

What the reader would expect for me to do here is say “this sounds good, but actually it’s bad, because….”

I am very aware that at least since the 2020 election hoax, I’ve become “Dr. Poison Fruit.”

In actual fact, “The Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” is a legal metaphor that means that any evidence obtained illegally is tainted and inadmissible. That is to say, if a police officer pulls over a car for speeding and opens the trunk and finds 100 kilos of cocaine, but the lawyer of the criminal is able to prove that he was not actually speeding when he was pulled over, and the original traffic stop was therefore illegal, then the cocaine cannot be used as evidence in court.

However, I have used this metaphor as a reference to another metaphor which I have forgotten the name of, and which may no longer be active in English, wherein every seemingly good phenomenon which happens in the Western world is meaningless because it is tainted by the denial of God. I may also make some reference to C.S. Lewis’ view of pride as the ultimate sin (which I actually find to be an uncharacteristically non-useful Lewisism).

Please see: Victoria’s Secret Embraces Ugliness, Signaling That the Porno Age is Already Totally Over

However, I am only making this assertion in terms of the positive actions of the Beast 666 – not to lack of actions by the Beast, and certainly not to individuals making positive changes for negative reasons.

This, typically, would be the point at which I have found myself buried under something too convoluted to be useful, and would delete all preceding text, given that the level of seriousness of the tone and its implications are lost on me, the writer, and I have therefore lost all control of the communications process. Instead of doing this, however, I will not do this, out a a peculiar spite for the reader, which only made itself manifest mere minutes ago, and will surely pass before I understand where I am going with this.

I will instead make an outrageous claim: a reduction in premarital sex by women is probably good regardless of why, but it is also possible that is not true.

And then, eventually, I’m going to claim that this is a conspiracy designed to explain the birthrate collapse which resulted from the vax.

The Guardian:

Caitlin didn’t set out to become celibate – at least not in the beginning. Three years ago, she was coming out of an abusive relationship and wasn’t ready to meet someone else. Then Covid happened, and the lockdowns made it impossible anyway. “I thought during that time I needed space to heal and reflect on what I’d been through,” she says. Towards the end of 2020, the 23-year-old artist started therapy. “I realised if I was going to be sexually active, I needed someone who would understand my past, and where I was coming from. I don’t want to be with someone unless I know it’s committed, and I’m not in a rush to find that.”

And there it is: the thing.

It is like when the coronavirus masking phenomenon led the Guardian to promote the niqab.

The evil of society has resulted in withdrawing from society in a positive way.

She had been on dating apps, but found it hard to meet men who wanted a relationship, rather than just sex. “I found they would stop talking to me if I made it known I wasn’t going to hook up with them on the first date. I found a lot of men would put on a bit of an act to appear as if they wanted a relationship, then as soon as you took sex off the table while getting to know them, they disappeared. It’s tricky when a lot of dating is around hook-up culture, which I’m not interested in.”

Maybe, however, the woman is simply aging and becoming and and more bitter, as is the case with women.

Caitlin’s celibacy, three years in now, became intentional. She hasn’t missed sex itself, she says, and certainly not casual sex, although sometimes, “seeing people in relationships and having healthy sex lives, can make me go: ‘Why don’t I have that?’” But it has had unintentional benefits. “It’s taught me more about what I enjoy in sex, which I wasn’t expecting. I thought it was going to put me at a disadvantage, but I feel a lot more confident in my own sexuality.” While sex with someone else is out, masturbation is still in, and she says her libido has increased. “I think because exploring different things without dealing with another person has allowed me to find what I enjoy.” It has also made her more relaxed about finding a relationship (or not). “I’ve got other things to focus on. It’s if someone fits into my life rather than me needing to make room for them.”

So it is entirely negative, maladaptive behavior, which lines up with Christian thought only incidentally, in a way that almost makes a mockery of sexual morality.

On TikTok, voluntary or intentional celibacy has become a trend – the #celibacy hashtag has had more than 195m views – with those who practise it claiming it has improved their focus, mental health and energy. In January, it was reported that there was a 90% increase in Google searches for celibacy that month.

We already knew this.

It says it in the Bible.

“This coincides with a long-term trend among people today, in general, having less sex with fewer partners,” says Dr Justin Lehmiller, a Kinsey Institute research fellow and host of the Sex and Psychology podcast. “Humans are increasingly less sexually active, with some forgoing sex altogether.” Study after study of sexual behaviour, in different countries, show this. The last National Survey of Sexual Attitudes and Lifestyles (Natsal) in Britain found that 16% of men and 22% of women aged 16 to 74 were sexually inactive, and for most of them, it wasn’t a problem. While the authors noted the documented wellbeing benefits of a satisfying sex life, of those who had previously had sexual experience, the majority were not dissatisfied with their situation (around a third of men, and a quarter of women reported they were dissatisfied, although age had an effect, with younger people more dissatisfied than older people). The Natsal data is more than 10 years old, though, and its authors noted in a 2019 paper on the sexually inactive how little is known about them.

We know a lot about sexually inactive men. I can tell you this. It’s simply that this data is considered unimportant by a feminist society that assumes a man not having sex is dangerous or evil, and apparently it is only now that we are thinking about the existence of women who are “post-slut” sex-free.

And, I can pretty well tell you, it will only be the Guardian discussing this (at least in English).

The National Survey of Sexual Health and Behavior in the US found that between 2009 and 2018 there was a rise in adolescents reporting no sexual activity (partnered and alone), from 28.8% to 44.2% of young men and from 49.5% to 74% of young women. In one interview, the study’s authors raised several possible contributing factors, including gaming and social media taking time and precedence, more awareness of asexuality as an identity, a decline in alcohol use, an increase in “rough sex” practices such as choking that may be frightening or off-putting to many, and lower incomes.

lol @ pornography as instructional material leading to unsatisfied teen whores.

Who could have imagined??

Voluntary celibacy in the US, where Lehmiller is based, seems to have more links to religion than it does in the UK. Furthermore, he says, “in this #MeToo and post-Roe era [with the rollback of reproductive rights] we find ourselves in, the perceived risks associated with sex are higher, particularly for women. And, when you factor in the orgasm gap and the fact that women’s pleasure still isn’t on a par with men’s, some women are asking themselves whether sex is even worth it. If you see it as a high-risk, low-reward kind of thing, you might decide you’re better off without it.”

Haha.

The “ask the kike” section.

It’s still so strange that the Guardian manages to print articles where they give arguments that are not Jewish. If this was in the NYT/WaPo, the entire article would be Roe v. Wade and the “orgasm gap.”

He suggests that celibacy, for some, may be part of “the growing trend towards delayed adulthood. Individuals might see sex and relationships as distractions, or as not having much point until they’ve found stability in other life circumstances.” The pressures of studying, establishing a career or saving for a home may take priority. While voluntary celibacy seems less popular among non-religious heterosexual men, some have talked online about intentional celibacy providing more focus for their careers, with sex being a distraction.

But he will never tell you that video games are more fun than sex.

For those who are dating, apps have changed the way many people find partners, but as Lehmiller points out, online dating is an arena “where there’s a lot of toxic behaviour, brutal rejection and feelings of intense competition for mates. It can make sex and relationships feel like a high-stress, high-stakes thing. Some people may find that taking a pause from that is good for their mental health.”

Online dating is the World Trade Organization for the sexual marketplace.

I should delete everything else I’ve written here and rewrite everything around that sentence.

While celibacy is for many a positive personal choice, it can also be viewed as the result of, or a reaction against, a messed-up sexual culture, just as some of the second wave feminists chose political lesbianism decades ago. Last year, the “femcel”, or “female involuntary celibate”, went mainstream. “They feel the same sense of ‘humiliation and exclusion’ that ‘incels’ do,” as a piece in the Atlantic put it, “but they react to those feelings differently.”

It’s almost like someone lied to them.

Unlike the notorious misogynistic incels who blame women for not wanting to have sex with them, femcels posting in online groups tend to blame their celibacy on the soul-destroying sexual landscape and a society that, for all its hollow talk of “body positivity”, is still obsessed with looks and beauty conventions.

Shut up.

If you’re not explicitly attempting to have children, then you are going to separate sex from physical attractiveness how?

This is like a situation of a person becoming obese by eating ten thousand calories of Romaine Lettuce every day.

(Another notably good sentence.)

Louise Perry, author of The Case Against the Sexual Revolution, says that many young heterosexual women “now feel as if they have to run the gauntlet of hook-up culture if they want to have any kind of sexual relationship. I think a lot of them, quite fairly, would rather not have any sexual relationship at all.” The influence and availability of pornography, she adds, “has had a really destructive effect on sexual culture.” She says surveys show that “most women don’t get that much out of casual sex. The problem is, because our sexual culture is so oriented towards a more masculine style of sexuality, a lot of young women in particular don’t feel as if they are able to demand commitment from their partners. Increasing numbers are opting out of the sexual culture altogether.”

I don’t even know what you’re supposed to say to that.

Whose idea was it that women would get something out of casual sex? What could they get, other than their power trip? What value does the power trip have the next day? And what have they paid for it, emotionally, psychologically, and spiritually?

Who spread this idea into society in the first place?

Was it the Jews again?

It’s naive, she says, to think you can simply choose to avoid pornography and casual sex if you’re sexually active, “because the nature of sex in general, and social relationships, is that they’re networked – you have sex with people who have sex with other people, who watch porn. Even if you choose not to do that, other people do it, and it changes the culture. I think that, particularly in young people, who are super-sensitive to what other people think about them, the default setting now is to have pornified, casual sex.” For some people, opting out might feel like their only option.

You cannot have non pornified sex, no. That is a good point, if obvious.

The same people will tell you to do “foreplay” and then have sex for thirteen (13) minutes in order to cause a “female orgasm”(???)

We should maybe remember we are animals, physically, and just start showing kids the Discovery Channel.

This “sex as nearly hour-long dramatic performance involving multiple ideological disciplines” is pathological behavior which is only possible now.

That’s what the article should have been about, frankly. Pornography oriented performative sex, even if it doesn’t include BDSM materials, is like if Mary Poppins was your real nanny.

Seriously, watch the video:

Then think about all the different implications of the sentence “Pornography oriented performative sex … is like if Mary Poppins was your real nanny.” They all apply.

Also: I’m going Napcel.

It’s up.

It is up.

Reuters:

Indonesia’s parliament is expected to pass a new criminal code this month that will penalise sex outside marriage with a punishment of up to one year in jail, officials have confirmed.

The legislative overhaul will also ban insulting the president or state institutions and expressing any views counter to Indonesia’s state ideology. Cohabitation before marriage is also banned.

Decades in the making, the new criminal code is expected to be passed on Dec. 15, Indonesia’s deputy justice minister, Edward Omar Sharif Hiariej, told Reuters.

“We’re proud to have a criminal code that’s in line with Indonesian values,” he told Reuters in an interview.

Bambang Wuryanto, a lawmaker involved in the draft, said the new code could be passed by as early as next week.

The code, if passed, would apply to Indonesian citizens and foreigners alike, with business groups expressing concern about what damage the rules might have on Indonesia’s image as a holiday and investment destination.

Indonesia is an extremely technological society.

This disproves the basic claim of modernity, which is the claim that underwrites everything that happens in Western society: that technological progress is linked to so-called “social progress.”

The two are not linked. There is no reason you can’t have a technological society that enforces traditional values. It’s just totally made up. People connect these two forms of “progress” in their minds. It’s like how people think they will get fat if they eat fat.

Jenee Pedesclaux, 31

This is America.

Don’t catch you slipping, ha?

New York Post:

A disturbed Louisiana mom repeatedly video called her ex after slitting their two young kids’ throats — showing him his daughter “gasping for air” before she died, according to harrowing court documents of the “unspeakable” crime.

Jenee Pedesclaux, 31, first called her ex, Jermaine Roberts, to tell him she’d damaged his vehicle amid their bitter child-custody battle — and that she planned to kill herself and their kids rather than go to jail, according to court documents obtained by NOLA.com.

She then FaceTimed him three times to show how she’d stabbed their 2-year-old son, Jay’Ceon, and daughter, Paris, 4, the report said.

In the last video call, she showed him how she had slit both kids’ throats — with their daughter “gasping for air” on the bed before later being pronounced dead in a local New Orleans hospital, the outlet said.

Covered in blood, Pedesclaux at some point went on Facebook Live to blame her ex for the bloodbath.

“My children is dead! I’m done!” she howled in the distressing live video, although her young son survived.

“I’m done with life, and it’s all Jermaine’s fault! … I’m killing myself, I’m done!” she sobbed.

The kids’ dad — who called cops after the first threatening call — raced over to the house, but his ex had locked him out, Nola.com reported.

“We gone. It’s over with,” Pedesclaux allegedly told him.

The dad eventually managed to force his way in after smashing a window, finding his kids on a blood-soaked bed, the girl foaming at the mouth and her younger brother face down in blood, court documents said.

One kid died, the other is alive, and the mother only like, scraped her neck.

Is the dad white? Is that what’s going on here?

There is only that one picture of the dad available online that I’ve found.

He’s definitely not black, though “Jermaine Roberts” sounds pretty blackish.

The kids are clearly not pure negro, but the mom isn’t either, so I guess both parents might be some shade of brown.

Whatever.

Who cares?

I don’t care.

Everyone of every race has gone totally off the goop, and it just is what it is. This country is so doomed and it’s so not even funny that it’s hilarious.

donated a kidney to her boyfriend – then he dumped her. pic.twitter.com/gfc20OaFo5

— World Latin Honey (@WorldLatinHoney) January 23, 2022

This goes along with the old rap adage “fuck bitches, get kidneys.”

New York Post:

Donating your kidney to a person in need is not something anyone goes into lightly.

But when Colleen had the chance to change her boyfriend’s life six years ago, she didn’t think twice about going under the knife for him.

In a series of viral videos, the TikTok star explained how she made the decision to have the procedure to save his life.

…

But while you’d naturally assume the man would be eternally grateful to his girlfriend for what she did for him, he then had the cheek to cheat on her seven months later.

In a follow-up video, Colleen explained how her ex told her he was going to Las Vegas for a bachelor party with some guys in his church.

At the time, the TikToker was in the thick of her final exams and trusted her boyfriend completely so didn’t think any more of it.

That is, until he turned up on her doorstep and confessed to cheating.

“A lot of arguments later, I eventually forgave him and gave him a second chance,” she said.

But three months later, the guy brutally dumped Colleen over the phone.

Chances are she made the whole story up.

Women are known to just make stuff up every single day to mess with people’s lives.

I don’t agree with it.

But I understand.

Daily Mail:

A jealous boyfriend who killed his pregnant partner’s unborn baby because he resented it being fathered by another man was today jailed for life.

Asa Davison, from Gillingham, Dorset, attacked victim Isabelle Irish while she was 29 weeks pregnant in order to destroy the child.

The 35-year-old, who has a history for domestic violence, deliberately kicked and punched Miss Irish in the stomach and dragged her along the road.

She was found cowering in a back garden of a house by the homeowner who called the police.

Miss Irish was taken to hospital and a scan detected no fetal heartbeat. She had to give birth to her dead baby, who had been perfectly healthy at its 20 week scan.

Davison was found guilty of the lesser-known offence of child destruction under the Infant Life Preservation Act (1929) following a trial at Bournemouth Crown Court.

Oh, so wait.

Hold up.

Abortion is still illegal in the UK?

Interesting little factoid in paragraph 7 of a feminist outrage news article.

I have a hard time feeling bad for the guy, however.

The court had heard that Miss Irish was already pregnant when she entered a relationship with Davison in early 2020.

Although he told her they could carry on being a couple after her baby had been born, resentment inside him simmered away.

Police later recovered recordings on his phone to Miss Irish. In one he said that it ‘broke (his) heart’ that the baby was not his.

He also said: ‘I don’t give a s**t about your baby.’

There is no lower scum on earth than a man who enters a relationship with a single mother. He is in fact much worse than the single mother herself, who is just a retard like all women.

If you’re that thirsty, go live in the woods alone and chop logs and forage for mushrooms and herbs. Don’t submit to raising another man’s child. There is nothing more degrading on this earth.

Killing the baby was just the natural outcome of a completely unnatural situation – which the man voluntarily put himself in.

If she’d gotten pregnant by another man while they were together, I could sympathize.

Here’s an interesting factoid for all you “boyfriends” and husbands out there – women regularly do get pregnant with other men’s babies, and just don’t tell you.

A recent poll showed that 8% of these whores are willing to admit to a polling company that they don’t know where their kid came from.

I guarantee, the number is a lot higher than that.

You should always demand a DNA test after the child is born, no matter how sweet you believe your little angel is.

There are several things that you’re really just not allowed to talk about under any circumstances.

The most obvious historically has been the historicity of homicidal gas chambers in Nazi prison camps. The newest off-limits topics are the obvious fraud which took place in the 2020 election and the clear health danger of the coronavirus vaccine.

Another one of those topics is the health danger of birth control pills. Another is the health danger of so-called “anal sex.”

You cannot do studies on any of these things, and you cannot even collect information on them informally.

Fake shower room gas chambers, the 2020 election, the corona vaxx, the pill and anal are all black boxes.

The health dangers of cellphones – the worst of which are psychological – are not quite as off-limits as the pill or anal-ramming, but they’re close.

Occasionally, a study gets through.

It never looks good.

The Guardian:

Smartphone users have become “human snails carrying our homes in our pockets”, with a tendency to ignore friends and family in favour of their device, according to a landmark study.

A team of anthropologists from UCL spent more than a year documenting smartphone use in nine countries around the world, from Ireland to Cameroon, and found that far from being trivial toys, people felt the same way about their devices as they did about their homes.

“The smartphone is no longer just a device that we use, it’s become the place where we live,” said Prof Daniel Miller, who led the study. “The flip side of that for human relationships is that at any point, whether over a meal, a meeting or other shared activity, a person we’re with can just disappear, having ‘gone home’ to their smartphone.”

This phenomenon was leading to the “death of proximity” when it comes to face-to-face interaction, he said.

“This behaviour, and the frustration, disappointment or even offence it can cause, is what we’re calling the ‘death of proximity’. We are learning to live with the jeopardy that even when we are physically together, we can be socially, emotionally or professionally alone.”

This site was launched just right about the time that this phone phenomenon began in earnest, and Andrew Anglin has continually pressed the issue, and told people: you don’t have to participate.

Yes, you probably have to have a cellphone. And yes, it probably has to be a smartphone. That is, for most people, not avoidable.

However, you can and should establish clear boundaries with this device.

For example: when you meet with a friend or family member, you can simply turn it off. Sometimes, you may be able to just not bring it to a meeting.

It is a good idea to own a computer. You can make the computer your primary device for reading and electronic communication. Most of the major messaging apps have desktop versions that you can install. This will cause you to associate your electronic behaviors with a device that is not always in your pocket.

Something that we have yet to see a study on, but which is anecdotally true, is that if you do not bring out your phone while meeting with someone, that other person is much less likely to bring out their phone. If they do bring out their phone, and you do not immediately respond by also bringing out your phone, the person will likely say “I’m sorry, I just have to do something really quick” and then put the phone down.

What has been observed is that people expect that if they pull out their phone, whoever they are with will do the same, and people seem to be aware when they pull out the phone and the people their are with do not do the same. If you simply sit there, the other person will recognize what is happening.

It might not seem like it matters at this point, but limiting cellphone involvement is good for everyone’s mental health. The likelihood is that you are personally addicted to the device yourself, and you will have some trouble getting off of it. But like with alcohol, drugs, or sugar, the less you use it, the less it calls to you.

People will say that women got prostitution banned because they were jealous of the women their men were visiting. This is in fact totally untrue.

Women don’t typically think it is a big deal if a man has sex with some stranger simply for the purpose of sex. They’re worried about the man developing an emotional connection to a woman that will lead to him expending more resources and time on her than ten dollars for ten minutes.

Study Finds:

Infidelity. It’s one of the top reasons couples end up in divorce court. According to researchers from the Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU), about the same amount of men and women forgive these indiscretions. How the genders view different types of infidelity however, is very different.

The study finds men are most upset when their partner is physically intimate with another person. Women on the other hand feel most threatened by a deep emotional connection between their partner and another person. This is true even if the relationship does not involve sex.

While both sexes go through similar thought processes to arrive at a conclusion about their cheating partner, the degree of forgiveness (or lack thereof) is about equal whether the injured party is the man or the woman.

…

Although researchers expected to see a greater contrast in how men and women respond, they believe some of the clues reside in cultural gender roles and evolutionary psychology passed down from generation to generation.

They point out that until recent times, men had to manage their “paternity insecurity” inside their own heads. Women in traditional gender roles did not have the question of paternity hanging over their heads. They instead had to establish that the father of their child(ren) would stay and continue to provide for them. So these women were always on the lookout for any rival who might beguile their mates and threaten their survival.

For the current study on infidelity, the NTNU team recruited 92 couples to answer a questionnaire about hypothetical scenarios involving unfaithfulness. In one scenario, the partner sleeps with someone else but never falls in love. In the other scenario, the partner develops an emotional attachment to someone else but abstains from having sex.

The results reveal that participants of either gender thought it was improbable that they would forgive a partner’s cheating. Researchers add the thought processes involving cheating and possible forgiveness are almost identical for both men and women. What makes the difference is the perceived threat to the relationship.

“Whether or not the couple breaks up depends primarily on how threatening to the relationship they perceive the infidelity to be,” according to first study author Trond Viggo Grøntvedt.

The reason women banned prostitution was not because of normal jealousy that you would have if a woman cheated on you.

You have that jealousy because the woman could get pregnant. All emotions are psychological mechanisms that reflect biological realities. So it is a very big deal if a woman cheats on you, as she could get pregnant and you could end up raising someone else’s kid, which is an absolute waste of your personal resources, as it doesn’t carry on your genetics. It doesn’t matter if she only spends ten minutes with the man and has no emotional connection to him, he can drop the seed and you can be left with someone else’s son.

Women tried to argue that their reason for banning prostitution (or severely socially and culturally demonizing it) was related to a similar type of jealousy, and they played on men’s understanding of their own emotions in this. However, just as men have a biological reason to be jealous to the point of murder at a woman having sex with another man, women have no such trigger. There is no logical reason that a woman would be concerned about her man visiting a prostitute, especially if it is kept private.

(Notice that women are also jealous when you spend time with your male friends, and they will try to isolate you from them through punishment mechanisms, including denial of sex. You don’t care if she hangs out with her female friends, and in fact, you’re trying to get her to do so as much as possible so she doesn’t have time to create problems for you.)

The reason women outlawed prostitution was so that they could gain a total monopoly on sex, and so that the only way you could access sex was through their approval. Prostitution gives men control over when they are able to do the sexual release process, which is biologically necessary.

Women understand that as long as a man can go see a prostitute, he is not fully under her control. So the banning of prostitution by women was an absolutely cynical power grab.

Your woman can do whatever she wants, whenever she wants. If she wants to divorce you and destroy your career, finances, and social life, she’s in her right to do so.

There should be nothing you can do to stop her.

Daily Mail:

Threatening to publish ‘revenge porn’ is to be made a specific criminal offence for the first time.

Anyone threatening to leak sex tapes or other explicit images of someone without their consent will face up to two years in jail.

Publication of lurid and pornographic images of an unwitting victim, such as a former partner, has been a crime since 2015.

The proposals will now make it illegal to threaten to carry out such acts.

Keeping women in a constant state of pregnancy is, to date, what provides the best chance at preventing them from destroying everything.

If you’re going to blackmail them… well, we can’t instruct you on that.

But, in a completely unrelated event, a court would probably look down pretty harshly on a video of her beating up the kids. Especially if you’ve got a good lawyer.