Ladies! Maintain your youthful glow by limiting your penis intake
… at least if she comes into contact with multiple penises! (Pic from The Kitten Covers; click on the pic to see the original post there.)
Ladies! Do you want to look younger? Forget green tea moisturizers and cucumber face masks and exfoliating gloves! Don’t waste your hard-earned stolen-from-men money on $200 Clarisonic Skincare Brushes or Botox or Shiseido Benefiance Pure Retinol Instant Treatment Eye Masks, whatever those are. Pickup guru Krauser, of Krauser’s PUA Adventures, offers four simple rules to help you look your best!
1) Don’t live past the age of 30!
Women possess a short fragile bloom of youth. From about age fifteen their body begins to take on a woman’s shape but it takes time for her to grow into it – to lose the puppy fat, have her hips widen, and develop the poise of a real woman – so she is kinda cute but not really able to inspire lust. Depending on the girl she’ll hit her true bloom somewhere near nineteen years old and hold it for a maximum of five years. She can continue to be sexy into her late twenties but the unmistakeable radiance diminishes.
2) Avoid “excessive careerism,” or, really, any job with any responsibilities at all:
Women are not designed to carry the weight of the world on their shoulders. Look at photos of Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson. When a man carries responsibility he takes on a weathered look that adds value. A weathered woman looks horrible.
3) Don’t drink (at least more than is necessary to convince yourself to have sex with Krauser):
Men are constituionally far more capable of holding their beer over time than women. It’s not merely because a man’s physique is less important in determining his overall value. Women who drink even 10 units a week are seriously messing up their hormones, their shape, and their skin.
4) Don’t have sex with more than one penis!
“[G]ood girls” who follow a healthy lifestyle and identify with the feminine last longer than “bad girls” who chart a path through hedonistic waters. …
Sex in itself adds to a woman’s glow but sex with different men detracts from it. A woman who gets herself fucked 500 times by one guy she loves will look good. If the same woman spreads those fucks across 30 guys she will look like shit.
Let’s do the math here:
One penis x 500 fuckings per penis =Youthful bloom!
30 penises x 16.67 fuckings per penis = Weathered crone look!
And remember, gals, once you’ve “squandered” your “bloom,” that’s it: “Once it’s gone, it’s gone forever.”
Happily, at least for Krauser’s readers, there is no similar aging effect from contact with multiple vaginas. Evidently, the more vaginas your penis touches, the better! At least I assume that’s the case. Why else would Krauser devote his entire life to teaching those with penises how to get these penises into as many vaginas as possible?
Like this:
Posted on August 4, 2012, in misogyny, crackpottery, sex, men who should not ever be with women ever, PUA, creepy, I'm totally being sarcastic, disgusting women, I am making a joke, penises. Bookmark the permalink. 165 Comments.
@Snowy- I’m only mentioning the female- specific situation because there was a recent article about a woman who escaped a kidnapper/rapist/torturer after being stuck with him for a couple weeks, and people were saying that she wasn’t actually in danger because she “could have escaped at any time” since he wasn’t using a weapon on her or something. I’m not 100% clear on the details, but as far as I’m concerned, that’s fucking bullshit to treat a victim of an overtly obvious crime as though she was somehow willingly participating in it.
It bothers me to have to explain this here, but I guess it’s not as obvious as I thought it was:
If you are getting/encouraging/facilitating a situation wherein you are taking advantage of a person’s chemically lowered inhibitions to get them to do something they wouldn’t when they are sober you are being creepy.
Whether that something is sex, or conversation or “the truth”, you’re still being creepy and it’s wrong.
If you don’t think someone isn’t revealing the “real” them when they’re sober don’t be intimate with them. Don’t “get them drunk” to take advantage of them and then excuse your behaviour by claiming you’re only doing it for a “good” reason.
That’s what rapists do.
So stop that crap, okay?
Blargh! That should read:
“If you don’t think someone *is* revealing the…”
“Look at photos of Clint Eastwood or Charles Bronson. When a man carries responsibility he takes on a weathered look that adds value. A weathered woman looks horrible.”
What responsibility? Eastwood is at least a former mayor and acclaimed director, but neither man exactly has the weight of the world on their shoulders.
@ Plex Flexico
Honestly? Bite me. I’m not going to be responsible for your willful misreading of my comment. Nobody here is advocating taking advantage of anyone.
Not that I don’t think that the idea of getting people drunk in an attempt to get them into bed is creepy and wrong, mind you. I just think that to get from what I said, in the conversation in which it was said, to “OMG she’s advocating rapey behavior!” takes some deliberate misinterpretation.
For one thing, 15 year old girls inspire lust all the time. How else do they get knocked up? Also, Demi Moore, Halle Berry, Jennifer Aniston, just to name a few, all sexy women over 40.
re Roosh and Iceland: He got raked over the coals when Iceland found out he was coming. He says it didn’t matter, but I think it bothered him a lot.
He also complained that game there doesn’t work, because the women who want to fuck, fuck whom they want to fuck, when they want to fuck them. Game, he said is counterproductive.
Which would be disappointing to him, if (as I suspect) he’s not in it for the sex, so much as the sense of power/dominance.
lowquacks: Meller cropped up in the “Educated ladies are destined for spinsterhood post”. Not a surprise, it pushes his buttons. He’s been trying, I think, to fly below the radar by cruising posts after they more than a week old; or perhaps deep in the “recent posts” list.
Cassandra: Cynical me says he took the unkempt hair as you heading home from seeing a lover, ergo more likely to be “up for some fun”.
The salsa lessons were to make it clear he was good in bed.
Eastwood got himself elected mayor to win a zoning fight about his restaurant. He did a decent job, but being mayor of Carmel isn’t the toughest of civic offices. He did one, and out, because he wasn’t in it for the job.
@ pecunium
Yeah, you’re probably right. It was just so odd and random, especially when sleep deprived. Like, isn’t it a bit early in the morning for sleazy pick-up lines and wink-wink jokes about dancing?
Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson have the same job as Brad Pitt and George Clooney. I don’t understand how acting made two of them grizzled and the other two HAWT.
@Missy
Magic, I assume.
Hey, Cassandra:
You can bite me right back. Twice. Rape-y behaviour doesn’t have to result in rape. Taking advantage of a situation where someone is under the influence of any mood-altering substance when not been clear about your intent is creepy and wrong.
If you think it’s fine, then bully for you.
If you don’t give a crap about people giving informed consent to intimacy (and remember intimacy does not always mean sex) then you go right on being that way. I’ll keep doing the right thing and *not* doing that to anyone in any situation.
For me the question is the verb phrase, “get someone drunk”. It does imply active effort.
I know that I’m not going to be happy if someone works to make me drunk, I’ve got no problem with observing how some handles drink. I don’t mind the thought of taking them someplace where alcohol is served. I’ll even buy a round.
But the intent of making them drunk, so I can suss them out… that’s the line I think Plex is drawing, and I’m not comfortable with that idea. Good intentions, or not. Because intent is problematic.
Calling something that is not actually rape or rape-y by those words is problematic. Doing something without someone’s consent or using some kind of influence to get them to do something they wouldn’t have otherwise consented to is only rape or rape-y if the thing they aren’t consenting to is sex. Stealing someone’s wallet is not rape. Getting someone drunk and convincing them to buy you a bunch of stuff is not rape-y. And I think it’s the same with getting information out of a person. If a person is encouraged to get drunk and talkative they have not been raped. If you think it’s creepy and wrong that’s fine, but don’t dismiss the pain of actual victims of rape by calling it that.
Hey, Snowy:
Thanks for the lesson in my own life experience. I really appreciate being told how my own words affect me.
Also: If you think I’m dismissing their pain, you’re dead wrong. I’m saying that getting someone drunk and pumping them for info without telling them in advance that that’s what you intend to do is JUST AS WRONG. Consent isn’t just about sex. It’s a really, really big part of intimacy. If you’re trying to be intimate with someone under false pretenses that’s really, really wrong.
That you don’t see it that way tells me much about your views on consent.
yeah dude lots of things involve consent. it doesnt mean all of those things are the same as rape. what are you talking about?
Making someone drunk so they tell you info is wrong, but its not as bad as someone violating you body. They are not comparable.
He never said that ignoring consent in social situations was okay, he was annoyed you called it something its not (rape). Calling everything that breaks consent rape minimizes the experience of people who you know are actually raped.
Eh, it wasn’t meant to imply active intent so much as “going out drinking with a person in a social way and observing their behavior when they’re drunk, then noting signs of misogyny if they appear - in vino veritas, etc”. Poor phrasing on my part, to be sure, since I wasn’t expressing what I meant very well and expecting it to make sense based on context. Where the troll took it, though? Looks like I was right that zie is a troll. I figured, based on the whole “show up, make a couple of sort of reasonable comments, then try to pick a fight” thing.
BTW, things that are like rape? Other forms of sexual assault that for whatever reason aren’t recognized by the law as rape in a certain jurisdiction. Things that are not like rape? Everything else that has nothing to do with sexual assault.
Hey Cassandra:
I know it’s nice to just label people who disagree with you as trolls, but you might want to consider that as someone who has been assaulted I *do* know what I’m talking about. Working with street outreach in “low-track” areas, I also have more than just my own experience to draw on when it comes to the multifaceted ways in which consent is eroded in our society and how many perfectly reasonable people exhibit behaviours which are common to rapists.
Want to know what other thing those perfectly reasonable folks have in common with people who rape? They never think they’re doing anything particularly wrong, because they’re “not as bad as the other guy”.
Perhaps you might want to step back on calling everyone who disagrees with you a “troll”. Sometimes, you might be in the wrong, and when that’s pointed out you ought to take a second and really look hard at your own behaviour.
Finally, that you expected that your intent would magically make your words clear, as you have stated was your expectation, is not my problem. Intent is not magical and no one can read your mind.
i’m sure you mean well dude, but this shit is not helping. none of what you said changes the fact that your argument doesnt make any sense. just because something has consent as an element, doesnt mean it’s rape. you’re stretching the word beyond all meaning and diminishing the experiences of actual rape victims.
Like Sharculese said, dude, you’re not helping your argument here at all. You are not going to find a receptive audience to the idea that things that are not rape are just as bad as rape here.