NAWALT and Other Scams

droogies

Someone calling himself Jeff Strand has recently been trolling Dalrock’s comment section. His schtick is old, though he is a bit better at it than most of those who have come before. The argument goes something like:

  1. There are divorced men on Dalrock.
  2. I married well, and I am not divorced.
  3. Therefore, the divorced men on Dalrock did not marry well.

Strand continues by insisting that had these idiot men merely done what he had done, they would be having no problems. When asked pointed questions, however, his testimony collapses. At one point, Strand breaks down and admits:

[My slut wife] was not a virgin [when I met her]. However, she was pretty sexually inexperienced. I met her right as she was turning 25, and I believe she lost her V card at around age 21…which is pretty darn good for today (or even 20 years ago) when most girls lose it in high school. It’s tough to make it to 25 still a virgin. Also, she never had a serious, long-term boyfriend before me…so it was nice for me not having to deal within the shadow of an ex-bf.

(source)

Point no. 1: Any man using the feminist term “V-card” is confirmed as a faggot.

Point no. 2: It doesn’t matter whether I’m right, in assuming that Mrs. Strand was turned out as a teenager, and had spent a full decade worshipping cock of many colors, before finally settling on this chump. It may be that I’m wrong, and that Strand is right in assuming that his whore only serviced a few dicks in adulthood, belonging to steady eddies and a couple of hookups when she was drunk and drugged. If you’re into fetishizing virginity, then who cares? The only salient point is that she failed this weird test.

In any case, Strand doesn’t deviate from his basic point. Wimminz choosing to betray their families is always the fault of the men involved. If the losers on Dalrock were as manly as Strand, then their wimminz would be nice and obedient, like the reformed slut Mrs. Strand supposedly is.

It is hardly surprising that one of the people Strand hates most is Scott, a qualified psychoanalyst, who did marry a single mom, and was quite open about raising her son. He has done a good job by anyone’s standards. Scott writes, about meeting his wife Mychael:

Still basically like that when I met Mychael, I have, through much trial and error reverted back to much of my former high school jock behaviors within the context of marriage as well as simply reading around here. And I am on much more stable ground in my marriage. I don’t pretend she is NAWALT. Or that either one of us are made up of some material that rest of you losers are. I move forward with knowledge I did not have before and I am basically happy with married life.

(source)

It is as though we must approach wimminz as we approach the Dao: He who claims to understand NAWALT does not understand NAWALT, but he who claims he can not understand NAWALT is approaching an understanding.

Scott claims his wife is not NAWALT because she is, in fact, NAWALT. Anyone who has read their posts, seen their photos, and interacted with them honestly will attest to this. Unlike Strand, Scott has given mountains of good advice to all the other men who took the “man up and marry a slut” advice to heart. It is possible to reform a ho’, because he has done it. Now, I don’t think it’s worth the time, effort and headache to do this; but, if you’re already deep in that hole, you might find it easier to follow Scott’s advice than to divorce your bitch wife, pay through the nose, and start all over in my lifestyle. Strand’s wife is not NAWALT because, in the first place, he has admitted that she was a skank-ho slut when he met her. In the second, and most importantly, she is not NAWALT because he claims she is NAWALT.

Ask yourself if an honest-to-god NAWALT would settle for being with a dope who spends all his life trolling internet comment sections that almost nobody reads.

Now ask yourself why Strand has so much traction, while Scott has next to none…

NAWALT is a ready-made scam, because so many men want it to be true. In that regard, it falls neatly into a wider set of scams, that start out with “nine out of ten doctors recommend…” rhetoric.

Men will believe the NAWALT scam for precisely similar reasons they will believe that buying a certain brand of toothpaste will cure their dental problems, and that buying a new sports car will cure their wimminz problems, and that fat girls make better wives, and that single moms make better lovers. Specifically, they believe these scams because they want to believe them. These scams contain artifacts that appeal to certain inborn, abstract, moods in the male primate: justice, fairness, right. Feminists like Strand peddle them to men on Dalrock, and the men on Dalrock lap them up, because it’s easier to believe that there are easy answers to their problems than to take advice from men like Scott, who will tell them the truth: namely, that you have to work hard and exercise discipline if you want a functional relationship.

 

Author: Boxer

Secret King of all Gamma Males, Member of Frankfurt School, Your Fave Contrarian!

7 thoughts on “NAWALT and Other Scams”

  1. I must have missed the fact his wife wasn’t a virgin. Well that basically shoots his little fantasy down in flames.

    ‘[My slut wife] was not a virgin [when I met her]. However, she was pretty sexually inexperienced. ‘

    Sexually inexperienced means she didn’t have sex…she had experience. Not a NAWALT. Also how the heck does he know…is she really going to tell him the real number?

    ‘ I met her right as she was turning 25, and I believe she lost her V card at around age 21…which is pretty darn good for today (or even 20 years ago) when most girls lose it in high school.’

    So she held out 3-7 years longer than most girls…she still did what most girls did. Not a NAWALT.

    ‘It’s tough to make it to 25 still a virgin. ‘

    But if she was a NAWALT she would have.

    ‘ Also, she never had a serious, long-term boyfriend before me…so it was nice for me not having to deal within the shadow of an ex-bf.’

    So she hooked up with men instead of going the serial monogamy route. That’s even worse. Not a NAWALT.

    If he wants to prop up his snare and chains and make her look good…more power to him. That doesn’t mean we have to believe it.

  2. I’ve been skipping over Jeff’s posts at Dalrock’s (borrrrrrring! And pointless), so I didn’t see his posts about his “NAWALT” not being a virgin (and this rendering his claims pure BS).

    Reading this admission, I’m now convinced that he’s had a red pill suppository jammed where the sun doesn’t shine and that the realization that he’s been cucked has led him into delusional denial.

  3. Some mild arguing coming: One of my first girlfriends was pretty sweet, and the guy she got next, she married, probably around 25 and her count would’ve been 3 at most by then.
    For the bravado of Jeff’s tone, his advice constituted a mild and solid reasonable first cut of which women to reject ( no fems, no nuts, and I think a 3rd and 4th category). I wish my church had been doling out those basics, but they didn’t even get that right because they are so enamored of education, they would never tell a man to say no to a women’s studies prof or student. That would be obscene to them.
    But yea, Jeff clogged the board with 10 posts that drove the quality downward for every one post that was reasonable and contributed to growth for other readers.

    1. 3 is still 3 too many. Even if they appear to have a heart of gold the emotional rammifications of what happens are often not talked about when the couple splits.

      Divorce risk stats don’t lie…even 1 pretty much makes the risk 50/50. For some reason 2 is even worse…after that it’s pretty much a coin flip.

      I don’t have a virginity fetish…I have what reality shows. Premarital sex for women is an instant larger divorce risk.

  4. A quibble:

    1.There are divorced men on Dalrock.
    2.I married well, and I am not divorced.
    3.Therefore, the divorced men on Dalrock did not marry well.

    That’s not the argument I read. The argument I read is

    You are divorced men/in bad marriages. I am in a good marriage because I am an attractive high status man. Therefore, you divorced men and men in bad marriages are unattractive low status low value men. Or you’re middling value men who screwed up and didn’t vet properly and chose poorly.

    But, maybe that’s just me.

Shout!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.