Women Don't Care About Morality. Female Morality Only Revolves Around Her Good Sexual Strategy

Let me be clear. I’m not arguing that women don’t have moral standards. Of course they do. Even sociopaths have a moral framework, though it is devoid of sympathy and concern for others if it doesn’t also benefit them.

The most basic definition of normative morality is “what a person ought to do.”

The operative word here is “ought.”

For many people, their “ought to do X” revolves around duty. This is called duty ethics, for obvious reasons. “My family, my tribe, or my culture demands that I do X, thus X is my duty.” Of course, at some level they have to accept this duty, but this is meta-ethics, and a digression.

Others argue that we should be utilitarian, that our actions should benefit the greater happiness of society. This might also be classified as a duty ethic.

For some moral frameworks, morality is absolute. In others, it is relative. In some scenarios, you should act according to “good,” in others, you should act for yourself, even if it means doing something “bad.”

The usual response to this is some pseudo-intellectual form of “Well, who can define good and bad, huh? It might be bad to one person but good to another,” and it’s left there without an actual foray into meta-ethics.

This response, if anything, is an implication of normative moral relativism, which states that “Because we can’t come up with a good definition of good and bad, we should tolerate everyone’s definitions.”

How that works out in practice, you can judge for yourself.

Fortunately, this isn’t an article on normative or applied ethics. It’s an article about descriptive ethics.

I am describing the observed amorality of women. Nothing more, nothing less.

What you do with this information is up to you. Any anger or spite you may cultivate as a result of this article is your responsibility alone. If anything, I respect women for their savagery. They may not be as violent as men, but they can sure inspire violence, socially and physically. If you want to truly become a lover of women, you need to understand and accept the amoral nature of women. Any remnant of false idealism, and you are loving a false ideal of women, not women themselves.

Let us begin.

NATURE VS. NURTURE

If a pattern of behavior in a demographic is observable in a large sample set, and you can also free it from the cultural and environmental context you observe the said pattern in, you can reasonably assume it’s a natural law of behavior.

Let us then start with a statement about women that is reasonable and go from there.

“The primary goal of a woman is to be impregnated by a strong man, then find someone to protect her and her offspring.”

My first response to this is to counter the latter statement, as I’ve seen women abandon their children and ex-husbands or boyfriends (the fathers of their children) to pursue careers or to date other men.

But then I look at the context of these behaviors. Usually the woman abandons the children or neglects the children when the biological father is a wimp.

If she leaves the old family for a new man, the motivation still aligns with the aforementioned law. She’s abandoning a bad set of genes for a shot at some better ones.

Okay, the theory remains intact.

But what if a woman neglects her children to focus on her career? Or, in a less extreme case, avoids or delays having a family to pursue her career.

Well, another observation might settle the confusion on this one. Women often pursue the fields they do because of the men in these fields.

·         Women become nurses partly because they have nurturing instincts, but they also do it because they want to bang doctors. They like traditionally-minded men with high IQs.

·         Women become fitness Instagram models because they want to date ripped male models (or really anyone who is massively successful, be they businessmen or famous people). Status is their primary drive.

·         Women enter the business world because they are high-testosterone and ambitious, but also because they want to date a man who is even more ambitious and masculine.

Thus, even if on the surface a woman seems focused on her career, she is really using this career as a means to put herself in proximity with the men she likes. The career may be stimulating on its own, but the primary drive seems to be mating. As a side note to this, professor of psychology and clinical psychologist Jordan Peterson has pointed out that women with super-high IQs – like those who kill it in law or business – tend not to find long-term partners or start families before their biological clocks hit hard because their standards are so high.

It’s clear that women join these fields wanting strong, dominant, intelligent men, but because of the level they are playing at, they are left with fewer options. The 1% of the 1% is a small club.

So far, it seems that the natural law of the entirety of a woman’s life revolves around her sexual mating strategy. Her ethical framework is about the ends and means themselves being mere rafts. Thus, by many moral frameworks, women would be classified as amoral, since the morality of their day-to-day actions are entirely focused on sexual mating strategies (which is primarily self-preservation) and not focused necessarily on “good.”

To be fair, men really aren’t much different. The motivation for most men is sexual. They want to be rich for women. They want to be ripped for women.

But fundamentally, what distinguishes men from women is that men use their capacity to pursue an interest for its own ends and to pursue good for its own sake. They can pursue Plato’s Transcendentals: the Beautiful, the Good, and the True.

Women generally do not possess this innate capacity.

To put this another way, women need men, but men want women. This is practically demonstrated even in Girls Chase sexual strategy by our recommendation that you find a goal or passion that goes beyond women, not only because doing so is attractive to women, but because a man needs something higher than women, else he will lose himself. Pure, unadulterated sexual strategy is the realm of women.

Ponder on this.

Why have there been far more male monks and lone artists in history than female ones?

Women who pursue pursuits because of those pursuits are very rare, and it’s usually because they have a very masculine spirit, either from birth or by circumstance.

Nietzsche puts it quite savagely in Beyond Good and Evil: “When a woman has scholarly inclinations there is usually something wrong with her sexuality.”

Look at everything a woman does.

·         Social media. What do women primarily use it for? To gossip (i.e., gain information on the sexual marketplace) and to pump up their value to convince men to message them or approach them in real life. I need no other example than the popularity of Instagram models who literally do nothing but show off their asses (and I’m not complaining).

·         Television. What do women usually watch? Soap operas, reality TV shows, dramas, and the news. Why? Because they want to stay informed on the sexual marketplace. They’re training themselves by watching the relationships of others.

·         Career. As I’ve already asserted, women tend to enter careers because of the men they’re interested in.

·         Social life. If any woman has ever told you she went out “for fun,” you need a reality check. Bars, clubs, and parties are meat markets and nothing more. She’s pumping up her value to her social circle by showing how much attention she gets, and she’s looking for cock.

This isn’t a bad thing. It’s the way it is.

And you can’t blame women for this behavior; it’s in their nature. Plus, we reinforce the behavior.

The morality of women is determined by what men will and will not let women get away with. It’s been this way for the entirety of civilization. This is the real patriarchy, and it is glorious.

Men lead, women follow.

However, this responsibility and leadership also reveals a dark truth.

Women do not care about morality beyond its ability to further their sexual agenda.

Why? Because that’s how society was formed. As I pointed out in my series soon to be released article, women are form and we created society for them. Every aspect of civilization can be seen as helpful to women, in both theory and practice. Without the motivation created by women, men would be content crawling around in the jungles of our ancestral homes.

Form. Society. It was built by the hands of men for women.

And the pinnacle of society are the Transcendentals. The Good. The Beautiful. The True.

These are our ultimate gifts of logic and intuition, but women do not care for them in and of themselves, they only care for what these Transcendentals have created, which is everything – all technology, all culture, all everything that gives women the amazing societies we have built for them.

However, this playground is, for women, still only a means to sex.

To illustrate my point, let’s go through a few cases involving women amorally using moral frameworks.

THE RELIGIOUS GIRL

If you’ve ever met a girl who was raised in a conservative Christian household, you might have gotten the line: “I don’t want to have sex before marriage.”

Now, most of these girls eventually succumb to environmental pressure, especially in college, and renounce their celibacy. I would argue that this is because men have also become lazy about the moral frameworks and religious frameworks handed to them (since women follow the lead of men), but this is a discussion for another time.

However, even the women who stay true to their moral, religion-derived framework are only using it as a sexual strategy.

This is evidenced by the high incidence of these women engaging in oral and anal sex. I’ve had girls tell me they’re waiting until marriage for sex, but then be perfectly happy to suck my cock dry and let me cum all over their tits. It’s really hard to take a girl’s religious morality seriously when you can pound her bumhole any time she’s with you. Seems like a pretty big violation of the spirit of the law, but remember, we’re dealing with women. If there’s a loophole in even one ambiguous word or tenet, be sure they will break it (plus, if you’ve ever taken the time to read scripture, you will know that while her hypocrisy is funny, the scriptural basis for her “celibacy until marriage” is thin at best).

Keep in mind, this is not a criticism of religion itself, it’s an analysis of female adherence to moral systems.

Why do women follow religiously moral frameworks at all? Three reasons.

1.    To follow the code of her social circle and remain an “in-group” member

2.    To use it as a screening tool to identify men in the social circle she values or to screen in men who can overcome and replace her moral framework with a new one

3.    To preserve her value. The more inexperienced the woman, the higher value she is. This is an amoral value judgment. A girl who’s been with 2 guys is far more valuable than a girl who’s been with 10 (if attractiveness is equal), because she’s harder to get.

If you want to see this through the lens of a different culture, check out this field report from a soldier who toured Iraq in 2004. The American army rolls in and cucks a bunch of locals on their patrols to find Al Qaeda members, and the women go crazy for them.

Why?

These new men have dominated all these girls’ patriarchs – their brothers, husbands, and fathers.

Despite these men keeping their women in line with a strong patriarchy via the frame of Islam, their dominance was immediately subverted in one patrol by a bunch of big, strong soldiers. The women instantly dropped their moral codes, if given a moment of freedom, to get cock from the new dominant force.

The nuances, histories, and traditions of these hyper-complex moral frameworks derived from mystical men who have communed with higher forces... are just boring to women. Let this anger you all you want, it is the truth.

What is important to them is: “How does this affect my sexual strategy?”

“X DATES BEFORE SEX” GIRLS

If you’ve ever had a girl tell you “I don’t have sex on the first night” or some other version of “no sex until X,” you were being constricted by female morality.

However, if you’ve ever had a girl tell you this, then ended up shagging her anyway, you’ve likely realized this is not a strict moral code, it’s a screening tool.

What she’s really saying is “YOU have to wait this long... unless you’re a stud and can convince me otherwise.” If some mega-pimp or celebrity met your super-conservative girl, you could bet the farm that she’ll suddenly “have a really strong connection with this guy” and drop her rule.

Her backward rationalizations are true in that this or that guy was different and thus exempt from her moral code. But the moral code itself, well, it was as true as the girl who told you she was “going to the bathroom” but never came back.

It’s sexual strategy. Her moral framework was a means to an end. It never had any transcendental value to begin with.

OFFENSIVE MORAL FRAMEWORKS

So far, we’ve covered how a woman can use moral frameworks defensively, as in keeping losers out of her pussy, but now let’s go over how women use moral frameworks offensively.

That’s easy.

Slut-shaming and player shaming.

They are one in the same, really. One is built for female competition, and the other is built to ward off losers and to garner support in a bad breakup.

Whether her framework comes from religion or bare sexual strategy, she will call other women sluts in order to eliminate women from social circles or knock down their value. If her friend tells her she got double-teamed by the hot twins on the basketball team, she will leak the information to others, either secretly or openly, and then this girl will get labeled a slut. Every other girl will jump on it, too. Women only care if they are called sluts. If another girl, especially one who is strong competition for her, is vulnerable to slut-shaming – watch out.

Even if it’s not true or the rumor exaggerates reality, it will cast doubt in the minds of men. Men will still want to have sex with the alleged slut (depending on the culture, sure), but if they ever cuff the “slut” or wife her up, his value will be diminished, since her value as a mate and a partner has been diminished via the accusation.

She’s easy, so getting her doesn’t make you as cool as it would if you got a girl just as hot but more inexperienced.

Depending on the society, this woman might even get killed for being accused of sluttery, whether it’s true or not. Yes, this still happens to this day. Do not for a second question the savagery of people. If some people can get you killed without too much blowback simply to eliminate you from the competition or because you romantically spited them, they will.

Player-shaming is the same tactic, but it has a paradoxical effect. It makes other women more attracted to the player and garners him respect from men. But at the same time, women will be wary of someone finding out about their amplified attraction for his high status, and other men will attack him, socially or physically, to demonstrate their solidarity with the accuser.

Men aren’t labeled less valuable for being sluts; they’re glorified for it. It takes practice and skill to be a manwhore, but there are four cases in which shaming a man for his sexual prowess can work:

1.    Calling you a player and insinuating that you use or manipulate women will label you as “bad.” This makes men gang up on you to preserve their status with these women, either socially or physically.

2.    It makes any woman who has sex with you a slut (“Only a slut would sleep with that player!”), even if, ironically, the woman who is doing the shaming has also slept with you.

3.    Women can tinge the accusation with a “loser” connotation, like with the use of “fuckboy.” Women will insult men for only wanting sex, calling them fuckboys. There are scores of articles, Tinder profiles, and social media conversations about the “loser” nature of fuckboys despite it quite literally being slut-shaming. That they will then turn around and defend the sexual freedom of women is a very obvious example of the inconsistent, and thus amoral, nature of female morality. And yet, most men fall for the screening tactic and will avoid being labeled a player if they think it hurts their chances with the girl who is shaming fuckboys. Some men eventually recognize that the girl might say she hates fuckboys, but then, if the guy is studly enough, she will go to bed with him on the first date even if he’s a total prick. When a girl says “death to fuckboys,” what she really means is “I’m learning the strategies of men wanting to impregnate me; if you want to fuck me, you need to level up... oh, and to all the men who have fucked me and chucked me, I’m still horny for you.”

4.    In the most extreme case, a woman can claim that a man took his sexual aggression too far and raped her. In many cases, she does this to a player or a man she perceives as a player, because he played her, i.e., he disappointed her. If you have any doubts about this working in reality, you don’t pay enough attention to the world around you. Read this story for a wake up call. A girlfriend cheated on her beau by getting spitroasted, but when one of the guys started filming it, she freaked out and called her boyfriend to say she got gang raped. The boyfriend grabbed 2 of his friends, found one of the guys who dicked up his girlfriend, and proceeded to beat him to death. Then, in jail, when the other narratives started coming his way, he realized she had lied and set him up. Despite all of this, he claims to “still love her.” I can guarantee you right now she will face no prison time, but this stupid guy ruined his life over a lie she concocted to preserve her social status.

ADAPTIVE FRAMEWORKS

These two modes of the feminine ethical framework could be classified as psychological egoism, since ethical egoism is the moral theory that people should act in their self-interest. That would be armchair philosophy, because women do not care what you think their morality should be unless you are a dominant figure in their lives, or unless the vast majority of men in her society have made X behavior the new standard, and she either adapts or gets slut-shamed into the cesspool of the sexual marketplace.

Feminine moral frameworks (what they will say or think is virtuous or good behavior) will adapt to the culture around them, but the essence will always remain the same. A woman’s moral framework will always serve as a means to impress and showcase her value to potential mates.

You can see this with girls you are dating or will soon date. If you tell her, for instance, that you don’t like girls who drink, but she goes out every weekend, she might suddenly start sending you messages about how she’s going to stay in on Friday night and read a book. Her sexual strategy used to be “club hard until I find a strong, consistent cock,” but now that she’s found one in you, her new sexual strategy is “I gotta grow up and be mature for him!”

In a more Machiavellian move, she won’t even change her behavior, but rather hide it or revise her past behavior to a potential boyfriend by omitting her history of drug use and hardcore partying. She doesn’t think partying is good or bad, virtuous or not virtuous; all she thinks is “What do I need to do to appease the men in my life?” Everything was and always will be a sexual strategy.

THEY WOULD HAVE YOU BELIEVE OTHERWISE

Very few women would admit any of this to you unless you are known to be truly non-judgmental about the nature of women. It would be stupid and counterproductive for her to reveal this to you. There’s no upside other than Truth for the sake of Truth, and as discussed in the article “Are Women Chronic Liars?” almost every woman you will ever meet does not care about Truth for its own sake. It’s a means to an end, just like morality.

And you probably won’t believe any of this until you’ve seen it for yourself or have studied the relevant philosophy and psychology, so get to work on that. If you aren’t a believer yet, you’re probably quite behind in the game, as women have, by nature, been practicing their entire lives to master the sexual marketplace.

A good start is to consider how successful the average woman is at outclassing the average man in the dating game.

 

SEXUAL STRATEGY MAKES QUEENS

Hate on the amorality of women all you want, it gets results.

Do you know what happened when Donald Trump first asked Melania out on a date?

She refused. She knew he was a player and refused to be yet another conquest.

Her moral framework was “I’m not going to be a slut.” Now, it’s not that being a “slut” is going to get you struck down in the middle of the street because of some transcendental moral law; it’s that Melania can’t afford to risk being labeled such, because a man like Trump probably wouldn’t wife up a woman known for her promiscuity (though in some countries, you could get struck down in the middle of street with stones for indiscreet behavior).

This initiated the courtship. And it worked.

Trump saw her again at a different social event, and this time he offered all his business cards and contact information to her and put the ball in her court. He made an unprecedented move, since most women he sleeps with probably jump at the first opportunity to do so.

Now she’s First Lady of the United States of America.

All because she played the game well and with the right man.

And her frame is still tight. She’s classy, refined, and doesn’t take shit even from Trump himself. Remember when he tried to grab her hand in Isreal but she slapped it away?

That was her asserting her moral framework on a global scale. Whether it was environmental (i.e., she didn’t want to publicly display affection in a highly religious country) or personal (i.e., she wants to be respected and not led around like a submissive wife), it doesn’t matter. She’s expertly using her feminine sexual strategy, probably more successfully than most women on this earth.

WHAT NOW?

Let’s play a fun little game. Think about a woman in the following scenarios:

• Supporting a political agenda
• Shaming someone’s moral character
• Glorifying someone’s moral character
• Defending or shaming a religion
• Criticizing a moral ideal

And then ask yourself: “How does this benefit her sexual strategy?”

The magnitude of some answers could shake your entire worldview to its core.

I wish you luck.