Violence Is A Means To An End, Not A Coming Of Age Ritual

Just because you see the sun go across the sky doesn’t mean the sun goes around the earth.  Upon reading 2wycked’s article last Sunday, the take away I got from it was that combat between men was some ritual that made one feel better and more alive. While this is an effect, I am of the belief that violence is a tool to accomplish a goal, not just to feel better about yourself. I also found a few points in the story that I take issue with. In his preface 2wycked states:

“Go see a shrink if you think violence is the answer for you.”

I will actually disagree with that. Powerful people in this world use violence as the answer to many of their problems. Bombs are dropped from 30,000 feet for economic social and political advantage. These powerful people use violence as a tool to great effect. Nuclear weapon States tend not to go to war directly with each other. This is true when scaled down to the community level, equally devastating opponents have less actual direct conflict. Only when there is a real or perceived difference in capability does a person use violence. This is amplified through intoxication.


Many people support the idea that a lot of things are bad except when the state does it, especially violence. How do the people that run the state accomplish this magical circumstance? They discouraged the use of violence by lessors so there will not be any possible competitors. This is referred to as the state’s “monopoly of violence”. Those below them are conditioned through social control by labeling it primitive, non-progressive, or as 2wycked implied: mental illness. This fact is quite a red pill bit of knowledge.  Just because it does work doesn’t mean it can work for you though.



In his article 2wycked tells story of an altercation occurring by his domicile that lead to bodily injury and law enforcement involvement. There are a few highlights I would like to review and comment on.

“They left the apartment and went over to the apartment of a friend directly across from mine. I breathed a sigh of relief, as we were outnumbered 6 to 4 and I was in no mood for a fight.”

Being outnumbered in your own home is amateur hour. But then again not everyone is ready for war at all times.

“I rushed out to try to break it up just as a fist crushed the side of my face.”

Making rushed decisions when death and grievous bodily harm is on the table is not advised. Also, entering into fights with the intention of “breaking it up” is lame.

“Bandages are for women. I have more beer to drink.”

Proclaiming your level of intoxication for law enforcement or other public service is not recommended.

“Then, I went to the police station, where I gave another statement and followed up about the racists.”

If you do tell that story to the police only tell it once and stick to it. Avoid going to the station as well.

“Violence and war are never off the table simply because there exist people who simply won’t do right by the world.”

It’s not the existence of bad people. In this world people in competition with each other and some are unwilling or unable to compromise so things have to be solved through violence.

“The pressures the modern man faces can’t be stomped out by force nor can’t be rectified with the double-barred end of Remington shotgun to a person’s head.”

Actually there are quite a few examples of problems being solved this way. Stop paying your taxes and see what the government does to you.

“once a man fights, he is calm.”

Only when the threat of violence has left does one become calm.

“Fighting represents the culmination of male frustration with themselves, others or society in general.”

It  can be argued that fighting is the escalation of interpersonal conflict but I would not blame it on male frustration. If you use violence as an outlet for frustration, you are irrational and most likely have poor critical thinking skills.


All’s Fair

Because violence is a tool to use to achieve some goal, the fantastical idea of honor in fighting is merely a vain exposition. Three PM fights at the flagpole are blue pill. If you disagree with me I can point you in the direction of some windmills you can charge. Drop kicking some interloper in your realm  into a urinal while he is pissing will update his shit status to “rekt” faster and cleaner than asking him to step outside. You should also remember this in case you are a fan of chivalry because maybe your future opponents won’t be.

Violence is an option to protect family, business and  positions in some social hierarchies. Some drunken dude looking for a rumble in a parking lot is not going to get you anything by engaging him.  If someone is trying to hinder my cash flow or spoil my mood through villainy, stupidity or “AMOG” that’s different though. You better believe that his ass is going to get cracked.


 Actuarial Assessment

As many have said before, doing violence to your fellow man in modern society has legal and civil consequences. Fighting with drunk people in a bar or apartment complex full of witnesses with no actual material or social gain for doing so is a fool’s errand. This would make the case too easy for even the dumbest prosecutor or civil litigator.  This is a nifty little chart from the FBI for those of you want to know what the actual odds are if you do want to play the game.


Remember the wise man Maynard James Keenan said “it’s only wrong if you get caught”.  Allow me inform you that I’m not an attorney and I’m not advocating for you to do anything.

Read Next:The Chinese Are Coming

66 thoughts on “Violence Is A Means To An End, Not A Coming Of Age Ritual”

  1. Men thrive off of competition. Fighting is an expression of that. Combat has been, and always will be, the ultimate articulation of masculinity.

    1. Except that fighting is very different from combat. As for combat being the ultimate articulation of masculinity, no. The “ultimate articulation of masculinity” is doing whatever needs to be done. Sometimes it’s combat, most of the time it’s not.
      And contrary to popular romantic notions, someone could be brave and resourceful in combat, and the complete opposite of that outside of it.
      Just ask Navy SEAL posterboy Marcus Luttrell.

      1. I’m sorry I don’t quite understand you’re point about Marcus Luttrell could you elaborate further for me?

        1. My point is that, while Marcus was probably resourceful and brave in battle(since he’s the only one who survived), his behaviour since leaving the service has been… unbecoming for someone who thinks himself a warrior. Writing a book full of inaccuracies and outright bad enough. But he seems intent on blaming everyone and their mothers for the failed operation, when the truth is that the SEAL themselves fucked it up. The simple fact is that they were outmaneuvered and defeated. It happens. Defeat and death are a part of war. He should accept it like the warrior he claims to be. Not throwing the around like a child and anybody and everybody.
          Read his book and you’ll see what I mean. It doesn’t matter how “elite” the SEALs are or how hard their selection is, Marcus is lacking in intelligence and integrity and emotional courage.

        2. I was an 18C from 2007-2013. SEALs have been notoriously bad at attention-seeking behavior ever since Admirals began comprising the flag officer ranks of SOF. I think that mentality has trickled down into the operators since they don’t seem to be able to do a mission without making a publicity stunt shortly thereafter. Though most the guys I worked with were consummate “quiet professionals.”

        3. It’s more than attention seeking though. It seems that the bullshit PC mentality has infiltrated even the elite ‘warrior caste’ of America. I have nothing against the man, and may he rest in peace, but giving Jack Murphy the MOH for essentially getting himself and 17 other US military personnel killed(and failing his mission to boot) is, in a tragic way, the same as giving every kid a participation trophy even though he loses the game. Instead of having the courage to take a good hard look at what happened and learn whatever needs to be learned, to powers-that-be would rather throw medals and propaganda books/movies at the situation.
          To their credit, it looks like your former outfit, the original “quiet professionals”, is so far immune to this.

    2. The ultimate articulation of masculinity is replicating your DNA.
      So called “men” who do not have kids are evolutionary failures and men in name only.

        1. The they can volunteer at Big Brothers/Big Sisters or help take care of their nephews and nieces.
          The fatherhood imperative drives masculine men to fulfill their evolutionary purpose.

  2. I like (and by like i mean hate) how this articles repudiation of the other one makes no attempt whatsoever to challenge the pure left-tard faggotry in the first. Go read the ridiculous article this one is ‘challenging’ it’s the most hilarious lie about some disney movie confrontation with the ‘i dun lake nyuggers boi’ crew at a beer pong game.
    It even goes out of its way to make fun of Tebow like some militant elitist rag that doesn’t take too kindly to the notion of football getting a dose of religiousity and offsetting its piggish purpose as bread and circuses for a consumer society of effete weirdos.
    The fact that this article is the best counter point that could be drummed up against the first is a good reason to bypass ROK for where one does not have to be moralized by black assholes and liberal dick sniffers, or conversely let down by posters who should know better but unfortunately have no spine.
    Goodbye ROK!

      1. I like some of the articles here, but in my opinion narratives about fighting “racism” and so forth are aspects of political correctness, an inherently feminine ideology that has no place in what is termed the “manosphere”. So I call it out when I see it.

        1. lol, I get your point I didn’t care much for that article either. I could see the situation happen but reeks of a fish story. I disdain victim status in any fashion.

    1. First off, this article is a “response” not a “repudiation” you dirty revisionist.
      Second, I responded to the main thesis of the other article, not the setting.
      You should look up the term “suspension of disbelief”, because what you just did is the equivalent of refuting someone’s thesis that “captain picard was a good leader” by saying faster than light travel is impossible.

      1. That’s fair, but to ignore the heavy PC element in the first article is to my way of thinking a soft endorsement of it. I am of the opinion that you can either have a site for men, or you can have a site for the product of the grade school gynocracy. Parroting the garbage of harridans who had their way the minds of young men during their formative years, but you cannot have both.

        1. ” but to ignore the heavy PC element in the first article is to my way of thinking a soft endorsement of it.” are you sure its not you who is the leftist?

        2. It has been said that extremes of the right and left eventually meet to some degree, so there may in fact be some truth to what you are saying. But allowing such ridiculous talk of fighting klan members at a beer pong game and constructing “heroic” encounters in the fight against “racism” is pure unadulterated faggotry I don’t care what end of the political spectrum you are on.
          An interesting side note, much of the liberal consensus that makes up the thinking of Americas ruling class was heavily funded over the years by hideously wealthy plutocrats. So in a strange way, opposing such talk is a fight for the people against rootless cosmopolitans.
          The modern West is a very strange place and if you’d like to read more I would suggest this incredible book for starters.

  3. I kicked ass last weekend after reading the original post! You see these great looking jew bitches were at my house and these Nazi germans showed up and started talking shit to my JAPS. Took them krauts outside and unleashed a suplex followed by that twist and flip move steven seagal used on dudes in Above the Law. jew bitches was all over me after that as the nazis made a beeline for the border in their jettas. Now i can be a real ass kicker alpha like my klan beatin hero 2wycked!!!!

      1. so does jean claude van damm, michael dudikoff, and Chong Lee,that crazy korean [email protected] from Blood Sport, . But none of us are in 2wycked’s league!!! The only guy that can beat the klan killer is the other author on ROK who bores us to death with those stupid triathlon articles. He’s in such a peak condition from all that swimming, biking, running, and talking about swimming, biking, and running that no one’s match for him. Now go home and choke masturbate yourself with that YMCA martial arts black belt they gave you for breaking a board faggot.

        1. something tells me the tone you read my comment in and the tone I wrote it in were different. Ah, the downside of internet communication. PS, there aren’t ‘belts’ and board breaking in muay thai.

        2. Yes, I know about the moo thai belts. If only someone would have warned dennis alexio in Kickboxer he’s still be walking today. and yes again, getting context right on the internet is tough, so I erred on the side of being a smartass.

  4. Odds aren’t too bad… Assault you have a witness. Murder you leave a body. I’m sure missing persons aren’t factored in murder. Gotta love stats.

    1. I was thinking something similar.
      You have to figure the percent of murders that eventually get solved are much higher, since it’s a high priority with no statute of limitations on being charged.*
      But agg assaults most likely get solved very quickly or not at all. So your odds are slightly less than 50/50.*
      *This is assuming that chart reflects crimes that occurred and where cleared that same year.

    2. I’d say about 99.9 percent of murders get reported too, while maybe 10% or less of fights get reported to the cops. So even if 56% of reported “aggravated assaults” result in arrest thats still low relative to the high number of total fights.

  5. Fantastic Article. As a person who’s been training in the martial arts for years, I’m definitely less confrontational than before. You’re more aware of the potential for dangers than other people. I’ll give you an example. When people start sparring, they’re almost exclusively worried about their face getting hit, completely unaware of how easy it is to be dropped from a simple liver shot. People get injured falling on mats, nevermind the concrete outside. Just because you win a punch-up (numbed by alcohol mind you) doesn’t mean it’s something to glorify. You were better than the guy as much as you were lucky. You roll the dice enough you’re luck’s gonna run out.
    It only feels like a ‘rite of passage’ to people with minimal exposure to violence. It really is just a means to an end. A tool in the toolbox needed to navigate through life. Doesn’t mean I won’t stand up for myself, but I’m not gonna escalate a situation b/c some guy stepped on my Puma in the crowded subway.
    But I will say one thing though. I do think there is some pressure this day in age to take a fight when someone starts it due to women. I saw at a baseball game once this guy talking shit to this guy and his girl. The guy (smartly) walks away with his woman only to have her call him a pussy for not hitting the guy. There was literally zero to be gained from the confrontation but more than a few women today want a man who’s an almost cartoonish caricature of masculinity to the point of the man’s own detriment. But this can be remedied by the four letters “NEXT”.

  6. It can be both a rite of passage and a means to an end. I read the statement “Go see a shrink if you think violence is the answer for you.” as just a polite, meaningless disclaimer.
    This article comes off as a weird right wing survivalist rant. Men who are 25 years of age or under use fist fights to establish alpha dominance over other men. Above 25, everyone thinks you are a low class fool if you still brawl.
    Mixed Martial Arts (MMA) training is great idea for men of all ages.

  7. Good article. The fact is that you should be violent only to protect yourself, your family, or (in very extreme cases) your property. Getting in fights to “prove your manliness” is one of the most beta things you can do.

  8. Any man who treats violence like a responsibility rather then a necessity isn’t capable of being a successful man to begin with.

    1. Isn’t that the problem in the 1st place? If you are going to use violence, you better be prepared to bear the responsibility of it. Even in a self defense situation. Too many people are intoxicated with the thrill of violence but no one wants to learn or understand the moral responsibility of using violence.

      1. “Too many people are intoxicated with the thrill of violence but no one
        wants to learn or understand the moral responsibility of using violence.”
        Like George?

      2. Good question.
        A Responsibility is something that you “choose to uphold” to, while a necessity is something that you “must” do.
        But some people treat violence as an objective good, meaning they want to do it, and as such it becomes more then an obligation into their eyes, and thus it is a “Responsibility.”

        Responsibility and “Being Responsible” is something that can be confused. A responsibility is a chosen obligation, while “being responsible” is someone who upholds his chosen obligations.
        To be honest, this comment could be killed with “semantics.”
        But I hope I am clear.

  9. A tip for effectively dealing with a lot of street violence/confrontations: learn a grappling art, preferable something that works standing. Think old school jujitsu. Joint locks, throws look better in defending yourself than duking it out, it also more reactionary, but putting a guy into an arm lock, or throwing him does have the advantage of asserting dominance.
    And grapppling in being about control, allows you to exercise restraint. An example: you are confronted and have to sock a guy, bing bang boom, you crack him with a right cross to the jaw, turns out its made of glass. Mama’s baby goes out cold, falls, and cracks his head on the sidewalk. Whereas if you have good grappling under your belt you maybe could have ended the confrontation in a more controlled manner.
    The thing to remember about grappling, it takes dedicated time to learn and become competent, longer than say boxing.

    1. I have over 15 years experience in Japanese grappling arts, primarily Yoshinkan Aikido, as well as judo, jiujutsu and aikijiujutsu, and I’ve got to say that I would not really use many of my arts throws in a real situation. Simple and direct is much more effective, like the straight arm palm strike under the chin (irimi tsuki). Take two techniques that you are comfortable with and drill them repeatedly, from different angles and positions, against different attacks your opponent will use. Train them until they are reflexive actions. If one technique is countered, use the other one.

      1. Minor scuffles are usually in your face escalation, elbow strikes. Maximum damage inflicted, minimum damage taken. An aggressor worthy of survival effort would meet a hallow point or on a light day a properly handled blade.

        1. I have a distaste for pistols, and they are highly regulated in my country of residence. Knife is better for such occasions when a pistol would be needed by a civillian anyway, but that’s just my opinion and circumstances.
          I agree that an understanding of distance is extremely important. One of the fundamentals of any combat art. To move in, to enter as my teacher would say, is generally superior to moving back.

        2. Agreed, I would prefer a knife for close quarters. Thumb on the butt with the blade along the forearm.
          Pistols exist, so I use it to equalize possible power differentials. I believe in education over prohibition.

  10. The first half of this article would have had a better home in the comment section of 2Wycked’s post that you are referencing rather than blasting it on your own column. Your review and commentary on another ROK article just looks like a troll, especially considering half the comments are just direct criticisms to the protagonist’s actions in the story that are irrelevant to your point of violence being a tool rather than mental and physical catharsis.

  11. Remember Sun Tzu’s most important lesson: to win without fighting is best.
    The most effective weapons in my arsenal? Body language, confidence and situational awareness. Almost all of the time, these weapons are enough. I’ve stood down punk kids, meth heads, and crack heads with nothing but these three things (and the fist load they didn’t see that I had palmed).
    I don’t fight frivolously, I avoid it unless I have no other choice, but if I have to, I am going with everything I have with the intention of crippling or killing my opponent. You must finish your opponent right then and there, no second chances.

    1. Obtain the most with the least resource. Stupid kids and tweakers have no bounty. Engaging with them will only result in loss. Youth are easily influenced, you may gain a malleable ally. You just can’t be square when dealing with them. Above all create a dark mystery behind your personality and rarely will you have to even engage, but when you do utterly crush. Game skill goes beyond just bitches.

      1. Precisely why there was no violence in those encounters , I have nothing to prove and nothing to gain. But shit happens whether we want it to or not. Be ready when it happens.

  12. The Asian traditions utilized meditation and self awareness with their use of force. That is what martial arts is – meditation. Westerners have no tradition of this. We are only now just beginning to learn from the Asian traditions.

    1. Actually we do. A knight had to spend a night before the altar on his knees before his initiation. The Catholic tradition has a history of contemplation and meditation.

      1. Interesting. Tell me more. Why hasn’t it been mainstreamed in the US in particular until now that Buddhism and Hinduism are becoming popular?

        1. The difference is between Eastern thought and Western thought.
          Eastern thought places tradition ahead of innovation. It is believed that wisdom that comes with age is the true value, and of course by the time people reach a certain age, they are accustomed to the old ways and less inclined to adopt change they may have preferred while differing to their elders. This has kept Asian homeopathic medicine and old techniques alive long after their similar traditions either were discarded or changed in the west. Why did Asian monks adopt kung fu and other martial forms with a healthy dose of self-discipline? For the same problems facing European monks at about the same time actually.
          European thought places value on innovation ahead of tradition. If somebody has an idea in the west, he is not committing an affront to his elders if he pursues his own idea. If it works, he will be rewarded, if it doesn’t then he will have to try again. Failure is not shamed, it is expected. About the same time as Asian monks started their athletic and calisthenics programs, both they and European monks were growing fat and unhealthy in their monasteries. In Europe they began to play a game in their courtyard involving a ball that they hit across a low fence using bowed tree branches woven with horse hair nets. They yelled “Tenisz!” (Warning) before they hit the ball to the other player.

        2. PJ, it has nothing to do with religious identity.
          It’s due to guns. The Western martial traditions were lost with the advent of guns. The same did not happen in Asia due to the low availability of guns there.

        3. You’re off topic. Draugr wrote, “Actually we do. A knight had to spend a night before the altar on his knees before his initiation. The Catholic tradition has a history of contemplation and meditation.”
          My question is if that is the case then why hasn’t it been mainstreamed into the wider culture? Meaning, just like Buddhist meditation is used by psychologists on their patients (stripped of its religious iconography), and yoga and meditation (again stripped of spirituality) is taught in schools here in the West, then why hasn’t the Catholic tradition of meditation been stripped of its spiritualism and gone mainstream?
          “This has kept Asian homeopathic medicine”
          Homeopathy is German, in fact.

        4. The use of plant and animal parts to help with physical ailments was “rediscovered” after it had been largely abandoned by modern western medicine. It never went out of use in large parts of Asia.
          It is somewhat more difficult to seperate Catholic meditation from the religion. It involves directly the lighting candles and prayer rosaries.

        5. They are philosophies geared more toward the above IQ than mythologies geared toward the low IQ.

  13. only fighting for material and social gain? explain please. like someone cusses at u for whatever reason(being a dumbass lets say) and you punch him cause he hurt your feelings as legit or apologize and walk away.

  14. those irrational men u are talking about that fight for no reason. those guys were the alphas over 1000yrs ago since they killed anyone and mated with everyone. will probably explain why women love bad boys and some have rape fantasys. it was only until those abramic religions come in and say these are mentally sick people. before they were revered such as the berserker in viking society.
    we have their dna to this day,its instinct but social conditionibg from those religions curb that aggression and stigmatized it to when to fight.

  15. I thank Douglas for writing this post. I grew up having to defend myself. For a long time I was the smaller, physically weaker kid. I had more fights than I care to recall.
    I joined the Army and circumstances led to a few (higher stakes) fights as I did my duty for my country. If 2 wycked could see what I have seen I don’t think he would think highly of fighting. Those last few left some pretty bad wounds of the type that you can’t see.

    1. Keep telling yourself “I did my duty for my country” if you want but I think you are severely mistaken on who benefits from the outcomes of OIF and OEF. WWII was the last time anyone was actually fighting for Americans. Also, PTSD is a such an over-exposed victimhood by veterans it is disgusting. At least half the claimants are POGs that never had any real combat exposure.

      1. Good thing I saw action in other places then, eh? Do you think we were just sitting around on our thumbs in the ’90s? Nobody in my job field was left sitting unless they just couldn’t do the work. Name the operation type and location. Nobody goes in without us somewhere around.
        “Humanitarian” missions? Yep, even when the main problem is they wouldn’t stop shooting at each other long enough to tend crops. That one was really a full on fight from day one.
        “Disaster relief” Yep, I went through three pairs of boots and four uniforms on one, because when we weren’t manning our post we helped the locals rebuild. That has always been a highlight of my career to me. That village certainly remembers the American soldiers that helped them. I’d say that was a service to my country.
        “Other” Yep, try supporting a SOG and see how far behind the lines you are, except there are no lines, and you better be ready if somebody accidentally finds you. It turned out that we were interdicting illegal drug operations. Keeping that stuff off the street because it was never created at the source is probably a service.
        Just because nobody is stupid enough to try us in a stand up fight like Hitler, Tojo, or Hussein doesn’t mean that the troops don’t do a service. It is demeaning to say that just because the danger wasn’t lethal and immediate.

  16. In the wild, an animal will avoid a confrontation with another animal as much as possible. Fighting is for life or death situations, or as Douglas said, if someone is inflicting harm to you in anyone way, whether financially or socially.

    1. Mayne I’m mistaken, but doesn’t your statement hold true when referring only to predators. Predators avoid other predators as much as possible. But they are not nearly so nice with animals of the “not a predator” variety.
      Regardless, that’s neither here nor there. Humans are animals I suppose, but we’re orders of magnitude more complex than any other animal. One has to be careful when drawing parallels between human behaviour to animal behaviour. To do otherwise is to invite misconceptions. That’s why all the bullshit surrounding the alpha/beta paradigm.

      1. I think the only differences we have compared to animalistic behaviour result in cultural norms and “moral standards.” We’re still animals at heart, with too much free time to relate properly. Also, yes mostly predators but large wildebeast, mountain goats, and gorillas which I don’t think are considered predators (I may be wrong) are all examples of this as well. If the other animal is harming your chance of mating, you’re gonna fight it out for sure.

  17. The first article was probably the worst that ROK has ever run, and that’s not an easy competition to win! It was so obviously fiction written by a wannabe tough guy who wants to suck up to the ghetto trash by displaying knowledge of the KKK that is obviously based on a decade’s worth of Hollywood liberal propaganda.

  18. One should be careful fighting. A lot of passive/aggressive beta males taking MMA classes or what have you just waiting to unleash that on you. Imagine they release all that hate and frustration on you..this is their chance to get you.
    You might end up in a wheelchair

  19. If “politics” is the decision of who gets what, how much, and when, the violence is “politics” in its purest form. The more popular and generally approved methods of “backstabbing”, “networking”, and “rice-bowling” may not involve smashing someone’s head, but its political just the same.
    Between men though, a little fist-and-cuff or even a little chest beating s good to determine the pecking order. Otherwise we’re no better than a bunch of cunts just bitching about each other between cosmos.

  20. The photo of german killing Russian women is a fake and war propaganda. (Off the point but could not resist).

Comments are closed.