Archive for April, 2016

Do Sex Ratios Cause Feminism and the Scarlett O’Hara Effect? Introducing the Cunty Country Ratio

April 23, 2016

*trigger warning: I use the terms sex and gender interchangeably. Because sex and gender are interchangeable terms, bitches.

*The idea from this post—that sex ratios affect how women behave  in a society–has actually been explored in a real sociological theory: The Guttentag- Secord Theory. Hattip: The Tingler in his comments to my comment at Heartiste here. However, from what I’ve read, Guttentag-Secord reaches different conclusions than what I’m positing and seeing in reality (for example, Guttentag-Secord posits that more men than women will increase marriage rates and lower divorce rates, whereas I think it would decrease them, since women will have more options for mate resources from other, more desperate males).

RooshV published an article a few months back about how nightgame was dead. As part of  his argument, he posted several pictures he had taken of night clubs he had visited, and pointed out (via marking folks with blue and pink dots) how men vastly outnumbered  women at the North American nightclubs.

The pictures got me thinking: what if gender imbalance is what causes feminist behavior?

People respond to supply and demand. And a big fish in a small pond feels a lot better, ego-wise, than being just another fish.  Better to reign in Hell than serve in Heaven, and all that.

So why wouldn’t this apply to the sexual market place? Specifically, to female entitlement?

If there are more dudes than chicks at an establishment–such as a night club or bar– you notice how even the Plainest Janes cop a bitch attitude, become attention whores, act like princesses, and otherwise lose their femininity. The location suddenly becomes its own little world, mentally sealing people into it, and can warp  men there into thinking the chick who is a 5 is really a 6 or a 7.This goes double if the men are hard up or extremely horny. Instinct overrides logic.

This can go to extremes. At a comic book  convention, for example, the few women who go are usually plain to ugly, and yet, amongst a sea of desperate dicks, most of whom are socially awkward nerdy types, these women “blossom” into attention-whoring princesses: wearing revealing clothing, bitch flirting with the few top nerds, making beta orbiters do ridiculous things for them, and otherwise start thinking they are 10s. It might take those girls several weeks to come off the delusional high such a convention would cause upon their brains.

I call it the Scarlett O’Hara Effect. Scarlett was the most sought-after sexpot in Atlanta in Gone With the Wind, with dozens of rich, handsome suitors who pursued her for years, and so she was warped into an entitled bitchy cunt. Not even poverty, the destruction of her family, the burning of Atlanta, and Rhett Butler’s badass game could tame her ego after it had been inflated during her sexual awakening period. .

She was spoiled. Oh fiddle-dee-dee!

So if this kind of ego-warping via sex imbalance can occur on a small scale such as at a bar or a convention–and can inflate a woman’s ego to another level lasts for weeks afterwards–could this happen on a societal scale?

The CIA World Factbook lists the gender ratios of nations around the world. Notably, it appears that more males than females are born every year: somewhere between 1.05-1.07 males born to every female. Throughout most of world history, such an imbalance was necessary because of war, hunting, and other dangerous activities men had to do to keep civilization going. Sperm is cheap, eggs are expensive.

But in a society such as in the United States of 2016, dangerous jobs are rare, so much so there is a cottage industry of reality TV shows of “dangerous” jobs for the soft public to gawk at, like customers at a freak show. And the risk of invasion, slaughter, and enslavement are well-nigh laughable to most of the West. And our medical advances are keeping a lot of folks alive that just thirty years ago would have died.

So what is the result? Men in the U.S. are not being killed off at the rate they were in the past.Between the ages of 24-54,  there are 63,838,086 men to 63,947,036 women.   That is 0.998 men for every woman. The sexes are roughly equal in number in the prime dating market.

That  doesn’t seem like it would cause much in the way of problems such as feminism….except when you compare it to nations where, in 2016, we (as Americans) think the women are more feminine and less feminist and less cunty.  Suddenly a 0.998 ratio of males to females seems significant, because even a slight drop in the ratio of males to females correlates with better, sexier, more feminine women.

Countries Where Americans View the Women as More Feminine And Attractive Than American Women

Russia: between the ages of 24-54: 31,779,688 men to 33,086,346 women. That’s 0.961 men for every woman.

Brazil: between the ages of 24-54: 44,358,524 men to 45,111,178 women. That’s 0.983 men for every woman..

Japan: between the ages of 24-54: 23,764,421 men to 24,297,773 women. That’s 0.978 men for every woman.

Thailand: between the ages of 24-54: 15,675,425 men to 16,061,864 women. That’s 0.976 men for every woman.

Now, let’s look at countries where, from an American point of view, feminism is strong and/or the women stereotyped as bitchy and cunty (please get offended):

Countries Where Americans View the Women as Feminist and/or Cunty

Canada: between the ages of 24-54.  7,239,027 men to 7,041,886 women. That’s 1.03 men for every woman.

United Kingdom: between the ages of 24-54: 13,344,087 men to 12,873,234 women. That’s 1.04 men for every woman.

Argentina: between the ages of 24-54:  8,452,645 men to 8,489,476 women. That’s 0.995 men for every woman, nearly one man for every woman, nearly statistically identical (0.998 to 0.995) to the U.S. (And let’s not forget that, even though Argentinian women are viewed as being just as bitchy as U.S. women, they are viewed as being more attractive and fit and feminine in looks–which I  almost want to attribute to that .003 difference).

Such numbers, of course, don’t take local factors into consideration. For example, there might be a surplus of women between 24-54 in a specific city or town that would make them more feminine.

But overall they seem to support a hypothesis: bitchiness/feminism in women is correlated to if they have to compete for a man/ risk not having one. That is, if there is real risk that women in a nation will end up old maids because there aren’t enough men to go around—that no man might put up with their behavior–women will instinctively rush to curb their behavior and make it more pleasing to men.

In other words: the more options a woman has, the less willing she is to behave. Or: Thirsty Dudes Create Fat Princesses.

Ironically, this would mean that if feminists/lesbians truly want feminism to survive and thrive and rule the world…they need to start aborting females and select for a lot more men. Another way to say this: Queen Bees Need A Lot of Drones.

It would seem to be that there might be a Cunty Country Ratio/Rule: if there are equal or more men than woman in a nation, the women will be entitled bitches. If there are more women than men, women will behave and be feminine and pleasing. The more men than women, the cuntier the behavior. The more women than men, the more sweet and pleasing.

This also suggests that feminism is nothing more than a rationalization for cunty female behavior. Women get entitled because the number of males is equal to or greater than females, and then try to intellectually justify their bad behavior.

The Cunty Country Ratio/Rule  has an application to getting laid. If you’re thinking about traveling  to meet women, you should check to see what the ratio of males to females are between 24-54, just as you check a club or bar to see if it’s a sausage fest. The lower the over all Cunty Country Ratio–as with Russia–the easier it should be for you to meet an attractive woman who acts pleasant and feminine. Avoid, however, countries with high ratios—which I would say is a 1 to 1 ratio, or beyond. For example, I might avoid Saudi Arabia (1.15!) and China (1.04) like the plague, unless you think (1) your ethnicity would do very well there and appeal to the exotic; and (2) you would avoid getting tortured by the local governments.

A good rule of thumb for American guys seems to be finding a travel location with a Cunty Country Ratio of, at most, 0.98 males to females between the ages of 24-54. Overall for men from any nation, if you travel for coozy, look for a nation where the Cunty Country Ratio is at least .02  less that your home country.

Any higher and it gets too cunty to be pleasurable, because you’re either equaling or exceeding your own nation’s percentage of Cunty Cunts. Again, this doesn’t factor in local demographics, your status as exotic foreigner, your wealth versus the locals, your game, and your ability to speak the language. But it seems like a good rule of thumb.