The website name girlschase will cost you because it implies women are not the best

[Jackson_StClair]

The name Girlschase will eventually lead to you being punitively targeted by feminist extremists on websites like reddit or within the media, because of a radical feminist viewpoint where their own sexual marketplace value will be decreased, by an insinuation that they may theoretically be in a position of chasing a man. This will interact with their mental vision of men not being the best, so they will then aggress against anything you have ever said or done, or has ever been on the site. You will be on the back foot from then on, they will insinuate you are a predator, from that initial insinuation of them not being the best in a scenario. The concept of seduction itself is mocked and harassed by feminist extremists because the concept itself lowers their sexual market position, by insinuating that they could theoretically be seduced, and are therefore not absolutely powerful. They will be very upset that men may have anything whatsoever within themselves that can lead to a scenario where she is not all powerful.

You should change the name to menarenotthebest.net or something similar. Not Venusian Arts or something poo-ey, or bizarre, or Zen Perrier pretentiousness about her mother eternal frequency or something, say she is the best with the website name and you will insinuate that she is strong straight away, their initial interaction with the website title will be interpreted differently, they will receive the subsequent information in a different manner. You can go viral in a heartbeat, some hatred fuelled sket in the media who is pissed off about the name or seduction in general, in the here and now for the reason I suggested, can write a gruesome expose and take out of context posts to insinuate you are "sexual assault adjacent" or whatever sophistic venal scheme they will use to make you out to be a predator, they can not stop. The name of your site can disinsinuate whatever they are trying to insinuate straight away, were they to report on you, you will frame yourself differently.

The extremely online radfem psychopaths who made Torero kill himself, because they were pissed off that he was attracted to fertility (a bizarre occurrence to not exist, would be deselected for if it did) will hate you just for suggesting they could theoretically chase a man. They will slander you without fear, they hardly ever face consequences for their venal schemes, their claims of "adjacency" to insinuate something about you as an immediate slur will take you some effort to reply. They know this, by then they have already slandered you, knowing that not everybody reads a full article or a reply, knowing also that a letterhead and the stamp of officialdom makes their reports have gravitas whereas you are obscure.

 

[Bismarck]

Tom Torero was a grown man, so he should be held responsible for taking his own life, not a purported conspiracy of man-hating radfems. (Thoughts of that stripe belong in other corners of the internet, such as RP sites).

I believe he had some unresolved mental issues, at least this is what his family admitted.

It would explain why he published audios of girls screaming as he fucked them, which is going too far. There was also the issue of his not giving credit where it was due, and recording an approach video, early in his career, with a paid actress.

Personally I have no qualms with the other materials he made available, even the video product, as access was restricted, names were always blurred out and you could barely see the girls. The idea was simply to show that it was possible for an ugly dude without muscles to insta day game smash top-shelf snatch, looks-wise, with the use of some verbal crack.

 

[Jackson_StClair]

You are afraid to see the radfem subtext as hostile, perhaps the mainstream feminist subtext as hostile, because of the way that good "game" involved just being pleasant and moving on and not challenging her views, and not being bitter, so you're disincentivized from taking a view that she might be bitter and ungenerous, because you can just move on and you're focused on being strong. Perhaps this is for the best for keeping the good vibes going, but in the truth her views still exist and she is possibly not the best when you are the best, when she has not been told to not be bitter, or doesn't know what generosity is, she will feel entitled to an aggressive and fearful take on what you see. She will be enabled by the progressive left into feeling like she can get away with insinuating you are a sexual predator.

This is the feminist response to seduction itself. Talking becomes "harassing" straight away because they haven't really been questioned in the way you were, they feel like they won't be challenged in falsely accusing you, they get away with false accusations all the time, not of sexual assault to the state where there will be consequences for provably lying, but of impropriety. I have not seen a single generous take anywhere on any of their sites, I didn't see one of them say something to the effect of they see why men might go on a website to learn what to do when society became a bit more open-warfare sexual marketplace and they weren't taught anything about what to see to start seeing her clearly and what to do next. You should see the bigger picture of how last generation they are. They're pre-game level. This isn't a good thing to say on a night out, not a good thing to rage against the feminists on a night out I do get that, but in the truth they actually are pissed off about a basic insinuation of a theoretical scenario where they are not the best. You should try not being shook by their subtext, and possibly mock their frame of reference. You will say she's bitter, I will say she's not. Radfems mmhmm

 

[ulrich]

Dude, seriously chill out.

You’ve drank too much of that Koolaid.

Whatever the fuck you’re reading, take a time off, turn off the screens and get out and live life for a couple of weeks.

The world is not nearly as scary nor the radfeminists are as numerous or as powerful as you’ve been led to believe.

 

[Warped Mindless]

Trying to please feminists and not piss off the crazies on the left is for cucks. Don’t play that game.

 

[Jackson_StClair]

@ ulrich

Not yet, we're post loss of the Trump sim in their thoughts, we're in a lull. You don't get how dark the city was to somebody when cities weren't safe for skets when we were on the prowl, a possibility to me as well.

 

[Chase]

We're too tame for the "that's sexist!" outrage factory these days. The red pill stuff gets all the oxygen for that now.

I started prepping years ago for a targeting of this site by the outrage machine. So far I haven't had to dip into any of those preparations yet. Though it's reassuring to know we have them in place.

The challenge for actually doing take-downs is if you lack a Censor's Office / Ministry of Truth, which the US currently lacks, then you need... well, I'm not even going to spell all that out. Anyone who's really interested in the subject can read Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals.

At this point, we probably don't have overmuch to worry about, at least over the next few years, unless one of two things suddenly happens:

1. The red pill gets so thoroughly demolished that the only guys left in that space look boring compared to us, OR
   
   
2. Seduction switches from being blacked out in the media to becoming a "love to hate" media darling again, and we end up as a figurehead for that.

I don't think either of these is particularly likely.

I think the powers that be want the red pill where it is as a tent-pole of the ongoing culture wars. You'll see guys knocked off now and then when they get too big, too controversial, and threaten to attract too large and devoted a following, like a bunch of guys I could name but it's probably better not to even say their names (odds are you may know some of them). But they leave all the littler guys because they're not a threat and are actually useful.

Likewise, the media maintains blackouts on topics they're not supposed to cover. It's weird that seduction, which is superficially a highly controversial topic, gets pretty much zero media coverage, pretty much ever, and it is very, very hard to get any coverage at all in this space. It's either not at all interesting to the media anymore (e.g., perhaps airtime that would've went to seduction in the past now gets devoted to red pill, which has more controversial positions to mine, instead), or there's a blackout on it. Either way, without tons of media coverage, it's difficult to build campaigns against an entity in the absence of institutionalized censorship (which, for all its recent ideological purity drives, the West fortunately for now does not have).

Also, and I hate to say it, but the last time PUA was in the limelight we were simply too boring back then compared to the guys who were grabbing girls' pussies in YouTube videos or writing supposedly-satirical articles about legalizing rape or wearing big fuzzy hats and black nail polish. I suspect if it got big again we'd see another mad rush of guys desperate for the spotlight willing to do whatever it takes to get into it who inadvertently turn themselves into the prime media targets just like last time. And boring old moderately-controversial-but-probably-overly-intellectual Girls Chase would continue to be where it is.

No guarantees, of course. They could come for us tomorrow.

I've got various preparations for that if they do.

One thing we definitely aren't doing though is changing the name of the site.

If some weirdo chick is trapped in a hierarchical mentality and thinks "girls chasing you" means you're better than those girls... well I'll tell you what... we get those types too, and they always come to the same conclusion:

"I doubt ANY girl would ever date you, not even the most desperate woman in the world! You sound like an incel! You don't look like any guy any girl would ever blah blah blah."

These chicks don't hate us because they worry we're better than them.

They just assuage their cognitive dissonance by throwing some petty insults at us, then go grumbling on their grouchy ways.

You know what they need, of course, is a charming rogue in their lives (and very likely a good stiff schtoinking ).

Chase

 

[Police dog]

Take two of these please:

 

[Skills]

Autism