Of course, this is all merely speculation, but still my belief nonetheless. It all started with this old thread at Heartiste:
The post calls to attention a forum where women have poured out their hearts for death row inmates. Honest to God love for murders. For example, one women thinks she get cheated on when a guy on death row, her pen-pal, makes an online dating profile. She says how confused and panicked she is that he is looking for other women. She never even met the guy outside of a letter, and she has already emotionally attached herself to him. Pardon my french, that’s fifty shades of fucked up.
The comments oh Heartiste’s blog rolled on like a runaway train, and one particularly jumped out: (editor is Heartiste)
[editor: if women were so aware of their basest desires, then why are women the first to express incredulity when i present their natures on a platter, garnished with wit, as i did in this post? do you really think women are as forthright with what really turns them on as men are about their masculine desires?]
A user named “Poetry of Flesh” responded thus:
This returns to my previous comment, that women are not aware of their basest desires because they are taught not to be. How can one be aware of sex, of their own desires, if they are taught not to engage in sex, not to explore those desires. When you made this post, I agreed with you entirely, as you should see by my first comment. I find the majority women completely unaware of their own sexuality, their own desires, their own needs, and completely unable to acknowledge that, wrapping sexuality in drama and miscommunication that results in significant asshattery and tragically bad TV sitcoms.
If you follow the other comments from this chick, most likely a SWPL-type (since she’s on Heartiste’s blog on a computer in an office somewhere), she clearly acknowledges that women crave death row inmates and the violence. But then, in the above comment, she blasts us with this: “Women are taught not to be aware of their basest desires.” I wonder if she would have society encourage women to pursue their feelings that lead them into the love and pants of, like we have seen here, violent murders, sociopaths, and dark triad egos?
She clearly doesn’t realize that the old society, Marriage 1.0, worked precisely because women were ideally married off to the first and only guy she would have sex with. In other words, NOT encouraged to sleep around and get a feel that she loves the violence and unpredictability of criminals. She goes on with this juicy nugget:
I appreciate violent men. I appreciate being dominated. I appreciate knowing that my partner has the ability to kill for me. I revel in male strength and I adore submitting to it. But this self-knowledge and acceptance came through experience, came through sexual experience.
I can only imagine the number of men it took for her to sleep with before she could so clearly articulate her desire.
Step back and absorb what we have here. We have low class women who directly pump out criminal spawn. We have internet savvy middle class women who profess love for killers. We have SWPL chicks profess that with sexual experience, they too love violent men and domination. We also have tacit connection between feminists and love for violent men (because if society could teach women to explore their sexuality, like a feminist would want, the violent love would eventually be aired out). If you still think NAWALT, you are absolutely true, to a degree. Not all women have experienced increasingly violent and degrading encounters with men. When they do, their eyes and souls light up in a bright sparkle of desire. The blindfold gets pulled back ever so slightly with each pump and dump.
Next time you tease a girl, make it count. “Haha. Blah Blah Blah. I like flirting with you.” She looks at her phone. “If you fucking do that again, I’m going to smash it.” There’s some alpha cred. Kudos if you lie making it look like she broke it by being a klutz. Woohoo.
Seems like every feminist blog post I write makes me chuckle now, since ‘apocalypse’ inevitably ends up a tag.
EDIT TO ADD: So I found this article from Heartiste. Heres a fucking fantastic selection:
In the 1970s, a woman working for a drug treatment center in San Rafael visited San Quentin and was mesmerized by a convicted murderer speaking about a prison program that tries to keep youngsters from getting into trouble.
“You just don’t know how things will work out until you live with them,” she said. “It just didn’t work out.”
She still considers him to be “an unusual, interesting man who is charismatic. I wasn’t desperate by any means. I just really liked him and became attracted to him and wanted to be with him any way I could.
Get ready: here comes the greatest quote ever uttered.
“It’s too hard for me to try to figure out why other women would do this, ” she said. But she added that she had met several other wives of condemned inmates, and that some had clearly “lost their marbles.”
“They were attracted to men who did serious, ugly types of crimes, child molesting and such,” she said.
HAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHA. Apparently violent first degree murder is not a serious ugly type of crime. More fodder to launch over the beta walls of denial. Desperate betas are the true ugly serious criminals.