Porn IS better than the average woman

I don't see what is so surprising about this study, let alone shocking. Women, on average, have gotten worse since 1970 in almost every possible way. Porn has gotten considerably better. Throw in the relative costs involved, and frankly, it's pretty damn hard to make any sort of rational secular case for women, let alone marriage, over porn, video games, and sports.

Pornography is replacing the desire among young men for marriage, according to a new study that finds males are chasing “low-cost sexual gratification” on the web over a wife and family. “Traditionally, one of the reasons to enter into a marriage was sexual gratification. But as options for sexual gratification outside of marriage have grown, the need for a marriage to serve this function is diminishing,” said the report....

Researchers analyzed data from 1,512 surveys completed by American men aged 18-35 between 2000-2004. What they found is that porn use makes marriage unappealing. The study is titled: “Are Pornography and Marriage Substitutes for Young Men?”

The researchers were interested in how declining marriage rates impact society and the economy. They said that “stable marriages create substantial welfare improvements for society, especially to the degree that marital stability produces high-quality children.”

Porn use, they said, can be credited with cutting the marriage rate. They cited statistics showing that men 25-34 are six times less likely to be married than the same age group was in 1970. They also found that divorce rates are twice what they were in 1950.

Women still have a tendency to think they're the only game in town and behave accordingly. But they're not. Men have always felt the call of the wild, but the combination of a good woman and societal pressure tended to overwhelm that. But when marriage increasingly looks like not having sex with an obese bitch who can rob you at any time, it's little wonder that more young men are opting for doing whatever they hell they want all the time for the rest of their lives instead.

It's idiotic to claim that porn is the problem. It's not the problem, it is the suboptimal solution to the real problem. The problem is that far too many women have been raised in a manner that renders them unattractive to the opposite sex and essentially unmarriageable. The boys always go where the attractive girls are. If they can't be bothered, that means the girls are insufficiently attractive.

Read More

Go away, you nasty creatures

This was amusing. Just in case it isn't perfectly clear to those who inflict tattoos on themselves that it is still, even today, a class issue:

A tattooed lady and her boyfriend were turned away from a nightclub by bouncers because they had visible body art. Miki Lane, 23, and her partner Jason Barker, 24, were told they could not enter Club Amadeus in Northallerton because they had tattoos on their arms. The pair were told by security staff that it was club policy not to allow people with body art into the premises.

It should be amusing to see the Left trying to turn "tattooism" into a social taboo because feelbad. Of course, if they can turn disdain for self-mutilating head cases into "transgenderism", I suppose anything is possible.

Read More

Dr. Helen, call your office

US marriage rates hit all-time low:

According to the latest available census data, the percentage of U.S. adults who have never been married has hit a new, all-time high.

In 1960, about one in ten adults over the age of 25 fell into that category.

By 2012, the number had jumped to one in five.

Combine disincentives to marry with incentives to not marry, and unsurprisingly, the result is half as much marriage. The solution is simple. End no-fault divorce. End asset-stripping. Ban the pill. Prosecute adultery and punish it with severe fines. Harshly slut-shame non-virginal women.

It will work. We know it works from history. But instead, societal decline, soft totalitarianism and feral children are preferred because women are short-sighted. Imagine what US society will be like when those rates fall to one in two.

Read More

The problem of insufficient vaginas

I've found that one easy way to stop a feminist running the usual "moahr wimmins" line in her tracks is to ask her to explain, specifically, how more vaginas will improve whatever situation she is complaining about.

"So, precisely how will having more vaginas in the immediate vicinity improve our sales?

"Do vaginas make people smarter and more productive by mere physical proximity or is it some sort of aromatherapeutic performance enhancer?"

"Will we generate higher investment returns in proportion to the additional number of vaginas involved?"

It's rather amusing to see how they can't even begin to make a case for it. The exception, of course, being a society with insufficient native vaginas giving birth to children. In that case, it is a real and serious problem to which "moahr wimmins" being encouraged and incentivized to do so is a legitimate solution.

Read More

Why women shouldn't vote: Scottish edition

It was entirely predictable that Scottish women would vote against freedom and independence:

Among women, however, an increasing number are coming down in favour of voting No. The results show that the No campaign now has a 16 point lead among women who have decided which way to vote - up from 14 points on Sunday. Some 58 per cent of women say they will vote No on Thursday, with 42 per cent planning to vote Yes, among those who have reached a decision.

Men are more evenly split but more than half – 53 per cent – now back independence.

Women voting. A free and independent society. Choose one. The choice between the two is rarely so obvious as this, though.

Read More

There is no rape epidemic

Not in the USA, anyhow. Although I'm sure the importation of more Pakistani Muslims can correct that in a hurry.

Prof. Mark Perry comments: "FBI crime statistics reveal that far from an “epidemic” of an increasing frequency in rape in America, we’ve fortunately experienced exactly the opposite – the frequency of rape has been declining for more than two decades, and fell to a 41-year low in 2013."

What happened around 1990 that changed things so dramatically? My guess is that the rapid expansion of concealed carry laws has had a significant effect in reducing the frequency of actual rape as opposed to date rape, near rape, regret rape, and other forms of rape that take place only in the female imagination.

Read More

A collapsing civilization

Sarah Hoyt laments the decline of civilization in her old Portuguese village:

It just seems that every woman my age has been divorced three times, or is shacked up with some guy half her age who is eating out her savings. Every younger woman is having kids out of wedlock starting well before seventeen. And I keep thinking: Oh, h*ll. When did everyone who grew up with me become… low class?”

Look, the village was poor as Job, and financially we were probably the wretched of the Earth. Things I remember from my childhood could fit in a documentary on “growing up in the third world.” Stuff like getting clothes stolen from the line, because there were people who genuinely couldn’t afford clothes for their kids; stuff like eating day old peasant bed fried in lard for a meal, to stretch out the grocery money of the household; things like getting the toes of my shoes cut off when I outgrew them, so I had ersatz sandals for spring. Other things, like playing with empty containers, or thinking the days the crops were irrigated (not with water!) ideal for cork boat races (disposable, thank heavens, but…)

We weren’t rich, and my family was relatively well off.

But dear Lord, we were middle class, no matter what our actually available money was....

Again, I ask you – can the roof stay up when the walls fall? Will we turn in the “middle class” standards so many found so oppressive for medieval standards that bring poverty and misery? For places where women and children are only safe while a man is willing to defend them; where the bad men aren’t looked down on by other men?

Is this what we want?

And how is it possible we came so far so fast? How did we tumble to this?

Her answer, I suggest, can be found here: "And I’m not going to lie and say that all things that went on and the established mode was the best one. It very well wasn’t. For one, it was a genuinely patriarchal society in the sense that women had almost no power."

There is her answer right there. Civilization depends entirely upon the restriction of female sexuality and the limitation of female power. It’s not the only factor, but it is a necessary one. The restrictions can be cruel and enforced primarily by men, as in the case of Islamic semi-civilization, or they can be soft and enforced primarily by women, as in the case of traditional Western civilization. Or something in between, such as she describes. But the restrictions must exist, be they self-imposed or externally imposed.

There is no equality. There never will be as long as young men are willing to build, steal, or kill for sex. Unless sex is primarily made available to young men by forcing them to jump through various hoops that help build and maintain civilization, it’s back to barbarism and grass huts for everyone. And that decivilizing process is exactly what she is describing.

The decline of civilization is the logical result of the Sexual Revolution combined with the Divorce Revolution. There were no winners and civilization lost.

Read More

Unrestricted female sexuality

Modern women absolutely hate the fact that the restriction of female sexuality is a core foundational element of civilization. But the fact is that if their sexuality is not restricted by fathers and husbands, by men who love them, then it will be repeatedly abused by men who don't and there is absolutely nothing they can do about it. Nor will the State upon which they are relying in lieu of their families. As the young women of Rotherham will bear witness:

Vicky, now 27 and training to be a paramedic, is one of the countless youngsters groomed by the predatory gangs of Pakistani men allowed to roam the South Yorkshire town with near impunity for so long.  She recalls being picked up at night in taxis in the town centre at the bottom of Ship Hill, where drunken crowds gather around takeaways and under-age white girls are seen as easy pickings.

“We would come for a night out and they would be sat around waiting in their cars,” says Vicky. “My friends had met them before me and said they had got beer and stuff like that. We would be taken to these big houses in Rotherham and Sheffield and they were always trying to give us drink and drugs. I was spiked a few times, they gave me ecstasy and cocaine. I knew what they wanted from me. I still remember being called a dirty gori [Pakistani slang for a white woman] which is what they always used to say to us.

“Once I was spiked with something and ended up in a right state. I was 15 and had tried to walk home but couldn’t get in the door. My dad threw cold coffee over me to try and wake me up.

“After that I ran away for two weeks. One of my friends went with a man to the pub and ended up being taken away for a few days and raped. She reported it to the police but nothing ever got done about it.” 

Notice that she ran away from the protection of the only man who didn't want anything from her. As civilization and Western culture wanes, all the protections that the modern woman relies upon in her unrestricted sexual freedom vanish.

If women genuinely prefer to be dirty goris rather than restricted wives, daughters and mothers, there are millions of waiting barbarians who are more than eager to drug and rape them. Of course, the fact that they have to be drugged and raped tends to indicate that it's not a choice they would knowingly make if they truly understood the consequences of choosing the protection of the indifferent state in preference to the protection of a man who loves them.

The State will not protect you. That is the message that has to be driven home to young women. The State does not care and it will not protect you.

Read More

He said, she didn't say

It's always fascinating to see how feminists oppose the entire structure of the Western legal system, namely, evidence and eyewitnesses:

Rape conviction statistics will not improve “until women stop getting drunk”, a retiring judge has said, as she is criticised by women's rights campaigners for her "potentially very harmful" remarks.

Judge Mary Jane Mowat, 66, who worked at Oxford Crown Court until earlier this month, said it was difficult to secure convictions when women could not be sure what had happened because they had drunk too much.

She said juries were faced with an impossible task when a case came down to one person's word against another.

The retired judge told an Oxford newspaper: "I will be pilloried for saying so, but the rape conviction statistics will not improve until women stop getting so drunk. It is inevitable that it is one person's word against another, and the burden of proof is that you have to be sure before you convict."

Perhaps women would be slower to put themselves in positions where they can be raped with impunity if they understood that they will not be taken at their word simply because they cry rape. It's ridiculous. Can you imagine any other purported crime being investigated, much less prosecuted, on similarly vague grounds?

"Hello, police? I'd like to report my car stolen."

"All right, when was it stolen?"

"Um, I don't actually know."

"You don't know when?"

"No, I mean, I don't actually know it was stolen."

 "Oh. All right. Where did you last see it."

"At the mall. In the parking lot."

"I see. And where are you now, Miss?"

"I'm still at the mall. But I can't find it, so I thought maybe it was stolen and I called you."

"Yes, that is possible. Is it also possible you simply forgot where you parked?"

"Um, yeah, maybe. I'll keep looking for it then."

"Yes, that might be a good idea, Miss."

Read More

A tale of a white knight

It's always mildly amusing to observe brave white-knighting going south, especially when it's over something as harmless as young men exercising their right to free speech in public:

A Texas man who attempted to intervene in some routine street harassment landed in the hospital over the weekend, after a group of catcallers knocked him unconscious while he was visiting Philadelphia’s Rittenhouse Square.

Police report that around 2:45 a.m. on Saturday, the 39-year-old man (whose name has not been released) saw a vehicle full of men pull up next to a group of women. The men began taunting the women and making suggestive comments, at which point the victim decided to intervene, according to NBC Philadelphia:

“The male victim took offense to something that the guys were saying to the girls and said ‘hey, watch what you’re saying,’” said Philadelphia Police Captain George Fuchs. Police say one of the men inside the Nissan then got out of the car and punched the victim once in the head. The man was knocked unconscious after he fell and struck his head on the concrete.

First, it's not your business. Second, a group of women can take care of themselves better than a single middle-aged man because Equality. Third,  you have neither the responsibility nor the ability to patrol the streets ensuring that no one makes a woman feel bad. Fourth, don't threaten violence unless you actually intend to follow through on the threat. Fifth, what are you doing in a place where people behave this way? Sixth, don't take offense on behalf of someone else. And seventh, it's not your business.

Violence is serious affair not to be taken lightly. I have weapons. I know how to use them. But since I'm not willing to gut a teenager like a fish or blow his head off simply because he's inclined to say stupid things while trying to sufficiently impress a girl so that she'll open her legs to him, I'm not going to intervene unless the girl is family and I have a responsibility for her. After all, the reason most young men will promptly back down to fathers who tell them to shut their mouths is that they suspect, quite rightly, that the father is just looking for an excuse to unleash Hell on them.

But if you're not willing to kill a man over his actions, then don't confront him. It's ironic, but it seems it is often the men who are least prepared for violence who are most eager to threaten it and leap into situations where it is a distinct possibility. It is vital to understand that we no longer live in a society where either basic civility or sweet reason are paramount.

Read More

Defending the West

Heartiste brought this important video to our attention. It shows why MGTOW is not an option. This is why it is necessary for men to learn Game, to reproduce, and to build strong families. Civilization literally depends upon it. If you want to live a hedonist's irrelevant life for fear of a woman claiming cash and prizes, no one is going to stop you. But Man is made for more than momentary pleasure. If all you seek is pleasure, then smoke crack and crystal meth until you die. If you seek more than that, if you seek to help shore up and sustain civilization, then you have to take the risks that are inherent in doing anything worthwhile.

Marriage 2.0 is part of the plan to destroy Western civilization; it is part and parcel of the program that includes multiculturalism and mass immigration intended to do to the Native Europeans in Europe and America what was done to the Native Americans three centuries ago.

As it happens, I am both Native American and Native European. And I certainly don't wish to see the latter suffer the fate of the former, particularly since the well-being of the entire world depends upon the survival and well-being of the Native Europeans. Never forget that the future belongs to those who show up for it.

Read More

Nothing angers a slave-owner more

Than the sight of an escaped slave become a free and independent man:

Besides the warm, pumpkin-candle scented aisles of the Hobby Lobby, there’s another new club for self-effacing female enablers of angry white men. Women Against Feminism had, last time I checked, 16,013 followers on Facebook. Its tumblr is constructed of selfies of young women, dressed and posed like ads for DIY escort services, holding up bits of notebook paper on which they’ve scrawled screeds against feminism.

Here are just a few quotes from a compendium of such blinding idiocy and prejudice that it defies description.

Black nail-polished hands hold a notebook over a half-shirt exposing a bellybutton: “I don’t need feminism because I don’t think it’s necessary to belittle and dispose of an entire gender in the name of equality.”

A note is propped against the protuberant cleavage enhanced by a pushup bra under a tank top. “If I’m wearing a top like this I want you to look.”

A woman with two or three lip piercings: “I don’t need feminism because blaming men for your OWN insecurities and mistakes is WRONG & ABSURD.”

These women are slandering the movement that enabled their freedom. They live in a world in which they and their mothers can vote, decide whether or not to work, who and when to marry, and whether and when to have children. That was not the case for women within living memory. They have feminists to thank for that, not Rush Limbaugh’s ideological forebears.

And yet, when male critics point out that feminists are to blame for all the negative fruits of women voting, working, and failing to produce the next generation, we're told that it is the fault of the men who gave in to the dictatorship of the petticoat.

Aging feminists are angry that women are wisely beginning to turn away from an insane and incoherent ideology that is societal and civilizational suicide. And that anger is a positive sign that the equalitarian wave is finally beginning to recede.

Read More

Equality in action

As I have repeatedly pointed out, equality is a myth. It is no more real than a unicorn. Those who appeal to it are simply engaging in meaningless rhetoric. And we have absolute proof that the feminist appeal to equality was never anything more than a means of guilt-tripping men into giving them power that they would promptly use to establish pro-female inequality.

The latest trend in dining all over the world including Dubai, Las Vegas, London and Zhengzhou, China is women-only restaurants, where men are not allowed. What may seem like an unfairly exclusive establishment (especially if it was the other way around) has become the norm in various cities around the world, as steakhouses and beer-tasting clubs in London are mainly female-oriented.

The latest eatery to cater to the fair sex is set to open next month in London’s Soho area, as The London Evening Standard reports that Sofakingcool on Frith Street will reopen as KC’z Bar on February 1st as a women’s-only restaurant.

It sounds like a joke, doesn't it, in light of the way women have methodically gone about destroying men's clubs. But it isn't:

‘Many women want to be around other women they can socialise and network with while having fun,’ explains Gates. ‘A lot of them will be lesbians, if you want to focus on that, but certainly not all of them. I envisage all different types of women coming in, from athletes to creative individuals.’ Gates also emphasises that, although men will be allowed in on designated nights, she wants to create a ‘safe zone’ for women to go where they won’t be seen by or bothered by men.

There is the "equality" for which feminists have been fighting: the chance for lesbians to get the straight girls to themselves.

Read More

Magical thinking

I always find great amusement in magical thinkers, those who genuinely appear to believe that reality is defined by their description of it. This artist has taken the concept to verbose new heights:

I started the series because the world’s attempt to control women’s bodies, behavior and identity really bothered me. This kind of oppression seems so entangled in our culture that most people don’t even realize it’s there. My goal with these illustrations is to show this oppression in all its shapes, and make people question themselves about it. The project has grown, and I like to talk about other themes as well, such as racism, ableism and LGBT issues.

But "the world" isn't attempting to control women's bodies, behavior, and identity. Not the Western world, anyhow. Most of the problems the Western world presently faces, and the root cause of its future challenges, stem from the fact that historical restrictions on female behavior have been considerably loosened. In fact, the only people even attempting to restrict anyone's behavior tend to be women.

Since women are authoritarian barbarians by instinct, once freed from their civilized restraints they promptly began beavering away at destroying the foundations of civil society and civilization that were so painfully constructed over the centuries. In less than 40 years, they have destroyed their society's ability to sustain itself, in another 40, their societies will no longer exist in anything remotely identifiable with the civilization of the 1980s and before. 

But at least the grunting, tattooed, illiterate 80-IQ female denizens of the dysgenic barbarian future will be assured that they are entitled to self-respect as they are gang-raped by roving bands of grunting, tattooed, illiterate 80-IQ male denizens of the broken shards of Western civilization. And that's really the important thing.

Read More

A society of cellos

This ad should suffice to illustrate why educational equality at the university level combined with career-prioritization is an unmitigated and dysgenic disaster for Western civilization. The cello may be her baby right now, the problem is that 20 years from now, her hair will be graying, the cello will be sitting in a storage closet, out of tune and unplayed, and in its place on the slide will be the woman's four cats that she "regards as her children".

And she won't thank those who encouraged her to "pursue her dreams" rather than telling her to get married and have children.

Read More

Female education is dysgenic

I've commented in the past about the insanity of any society that prioritizes the education of its women over preparing them to be wives and mothers. After all, the one and only thing any society actually NEEDS from its women, the one and only thing humanity actually needs from its female members, is for them to propagate the citizenry and the species. Powerpoint presentations and prospective cancer cures are all very nice, but they are, strictly speaking, unnecessary luxuries without which the species has survived since before the dawn of recorded human history.

Societies without children, on the other hand, tend to terminate within a single generation.

Since we know intelligence is heritable, it has long been obvious that educating women to the point that they decline to breed was bound to have long-term implications, especially if the women least likely to have children tended to be the most intelligent women. The hypergamous nature of women being what it is, it logically follows that unless the most intelligent women can be supplied with a selection of prospective mates who are more intelligent and more educated than they are, they will increasingly refuse to breed. This has observably been the case, and now the negative effect of encouraging equality in education has been quantified:

This study estimates the effect of dysgenic trends in Taiwan by exploring the relationships among intelligence, education and fertility. Based on a representative adult sample, education and intelligence were negatively correlated with the number of children born. These correlations were stronger for females. The decline of genotypic intelligence was estimated as 0.82 to 1.33 IQ points per generation for the Taiwanese population.

What feminists consider progress is literal intellectual regression. Feminism is not only the most evil and incoherent ideology in human history, its natural consequence is the literal enstupidification of any society that permits it to take root.

The connection between the theory of Game and the continuation of civilization should now be readily apparent to even the most dubious skeptic. There is no conceptual model that better describes and predicts what has been observed taking place over the last fifty years in the West.

Read More

Progress

LL commented at VP concerning how men's behavior has changed with immigration and women's sexual liberation:

My mother who was young in the 70's told me once that one time when she was out with her friends, some guy blatantly suggested her an one night stand. Not even harassment, just a 70's free-love-pick up line. She told this to me like it was something shocking.

Well, every time I go out here in 21st century London, I get harassed, grabbed and often groped. And I always go out with my husband, these things happen when he has to go to restroom and is gone for five minutes. And it's always Arab guys who do the harassment. Nothing works for those guys. When you say you are married, they answer "All white women cheat their husbands" or something like that.

If this is progress, I hate it.

If feminists think Western civilization is "Rape Culture", just wait until they discover what post-Christian culture is like. Outside of Western civilization, the a woman's right to choose will be reduced to the brothel or the burqah.

Read More

The decline of marriage

A few years ago, I pointed out that the combination of female hypergamy and the increasing F/M sex ratio at university would inevitably lead to at least one-third of female college graduates never marrying. It's not the only reason, of course, but professional statistical analysts in the UK indicate that this is now happening.

Half of today’s 20-year-olds will never marry, striking research reveals. Instead, couples are increasingly choosing to cohabit without ever deciding to commit. A report published today using the latest data from the Office for National Statistics reveals a generational shift away from the institution of marriage, with youngsters far less likely ever to wed than their parents and grandparents.

The research by the Marriage Foundation shows that, for a variety of reasons, 47 per cent of women and 48 per cent of men aged 20 will never marry. The baby boomer generation – born between the end of the Second World War and the early 1960s – has maintained a healthy level of marriage, with 87 per cent of men and 92 per cent of women having married at some stage.

But subsequent generations are facing a sharp decline in marriage rates. Half of 40-year-olds today are already married, but they are not expected to reach the levels set by their parents.

This is a dire warning for Western civilization. There are increasing indications that the West cannot survive without Christianity, and there is almost no chance it can survive without either Christianity or marriage.

No-fault divorce has to be eliminated now. Adultery should be criminalized, alimony should be eliminated, and child support payments set to a minimal standard. People worry far too much about the potential costs to divorcees and the children of divorce, but divorce is a female industry and the costs to the never-married and the illegitimate children are considerably higher.

Read More

A world of white knights

An experiment shows that strangers are ready to rush in to defend women, but laugh at men being attacked:

A hard-hitting experiment has revealed how strangers react differently when seeing domestic abuse depending on the gender of the aggressor. A video filmed with hidden cameras at a London park shows a male actor attacking his ‘girlfriend’ in front of onlookers who immediately rush to help, with one shouting: ‘Oi mate, what's wrong with you?’ The man is told ‘someone will call the police if you carry on doing that to someone’, before a passer-by says to the woman: ‘You don't have to put up with that honey, he's not worth it’.

The experiment is then conducted with the same actors - but this time, the woman is the aggressor, attacking him and saying: ‘Don't try to walk away - listen to me when I'm talking to you.’

However, instead of reacting with shock, nobody watching even attempts to help the man. They actually seem rather entertained by the incident, stopping to stare and laughing about it.

No wonder Ray Rice is still being publicly pilloried for knocking out his fiance, despite the fact that the woman went on to marry him, the prosecutors struck a deal involving no jail time, and his lawyer has strongly implied that Rice was defending himself against a physical attack by his now-wife.

One might wonder at the man's willingness to marry a woman who attacked him, but then, one tends to doubt he'll have any future trouble of that sort with her.

Read More

The slut sell

Steve Sailer asks the purpose of female tattoos, given that male tattoos are meant to make permanent life statements:

What's the purpose of tattoos for women who wouldn't wear the same shoes for six months? Is it too signal to the kind of guys she likes (e.g., drummers) that you are the type of guy I like? But what if after another year here she decides that while she liked drummers back in South Dakota, now she likes producers and agents? Tattoos are class markers, and might work against attractive young women rising in class by marrying well.

Is getting tattoos something guys suggest to discourage hypergamy? Or is it something that other women suggest out of the usual feminine malice?

The answer is pretty obvious to anyone who has paid attention over the last two decades. Tattoos signify the degree of a woman's publicly advertised promiscuity. This is not necessarily a reliable advertisement, but it is a sexual advertisement nevetheless. The advertisement is that the more ink she has, the easier the sexual access to her will be. (It pains me that at this point, I should probably remind some readers that not all advertising is true. Some women are more interested in being perceived as sexy than actually following through on the message being broadcast.)

This is why tattoos are considered "sexy" by men. The tattoos don't make the woman any more attractive, they simply provide an easy method of quickly identifying that she is more readily accessible than the average. So, tattoos are one way for less attractive women to better compete with more attractive women, in much the same way as wearing shorter skirts or unbuttoning an additional blouse button.

A discreet tattoo or three in easily hidden locations are a nice girl's way of showing a few men of her choice that she isn't always a good girl and thereby giving her a leg up in comparison with other nice girls. Extravagant tattoos that can't be hidden tend to be the sign of a woman who is either desperate for attention or sexually incontinent. Although there aren't many studies on it yet, there are indications that "tattoos may be possible markers for lethality". For example, one study found that 57% percent of young white suicides were tattooed compared to 29% of matched accidental deaths.

If you're set up on a blind date with a girl and you're told that she has a tattoo of an dove on her wrist, aren't you going to have different expectations of what the evening holds in store than if you're told she has a giant tattoo of a werewolf sodomizing a vampire on her back as well as a bloody dagger between her breasts and the twelve signs of the zodiac in various places around her body? QED.

Nota Bene: please don't even think about starting in with the blather about why the little butterfly on your ankle is deeply meaningful to you because it signifies your best friend who died in a car crash on prom night. Nobody has ever bought that transparent nonsense. You got a tattoo because you wanted to be seen as stylish and sexy, but not trashy. That's fine, so stop pretending it's some sort of massively encrypted code that no man could possibly crack.

Read More