I found this video from the Manosphere commenter “Love, Ashley.”
Ashley’s insightful commentary:
I think men and women could potentially get along so much better if men knew how to communicate their feelings. If they did, I could have avoided so much stress and drama in the relationship and dating scenes. I am a firm believer in the idea of when there is a problem that comes up, communicate it with the person it concerns. Let it out, talk it out, get past it. But since men are taught to “be a man” and not show or express their emotions, there is so much they bottle up in fear of looking weak. When that happens, I sense it and it just pisses me off and makes me all kinds of uncomfortable. Now, there are men I have met who are more open and straightforward and have been able to express their emotions and me and those men get along so much better.
One of the commenters links to Jackson Katz, who claims to be an “anti-violence” expert, and his video called “Tough Guise.”
Further, the first video draws heavily on a book called Guyland, in which Michael Kimmel singles out white, heterosexual men and their degenerate culture for holding men back from gender equality. The problem with these authors and approaches is it does not understand what exactly is going on in society nor does it proscribe any appropriate or justified remedies.
First, people who like and believe these videos can’t conceptualize of people with healthy, solid personal identities. They are playing a frame control game that is aimed at eroding stronger—but still weak—personal identities of others. Kimmel and Katz don’t believe in strength and personal calm. Since they start with themselves, they assume that everybody else must have the same personal deficiencies as them.
The videos observe the wasteland of the modern boy growing into a man. They note explosions of violence, unstable identities, and inability to connect with other men. That sounds like a serious personality disorder manifested at a social level, which is known as social narcissism.
Still, it sounds like these boys subject themselves to recurrent, unhealthy patterns of thoughts. That is the definition of personality disorders. For the boys presented, they never mention anything about personality disorders. Isn’t it funny that people who bloviate so much about “harmful thought patterns” don’t understand that that is the definition of personality disorders. Therefore, there is no racist personality disorder, misogynistic personality disorder, or homophobic personality disorder. Anti-social, passive-aggressive, histrionic are all personality disorders.
It is disgusting that the video talks so much about “hyper-masculinity.” In the modern era with a clutch of boys who talk very nervously about their self-identity. What an example of hyper-masculinity!
d
One problem presented here is that as a society devolves it needs enemies of the thinly-veiled decline. The Duck Dynasty star said something something bad about practicing homosexuals and was skewered immediately because he represented an incredibly easy and threatening target: a family man from tradition with a solid personal identity. All three of those concepts is incredibly threatening to mainstream identities, as independence, fleeing the past and weak personal identities based on social approval are in vogue today.
Note the implicit assumption of female superiority in emotional and relational realms presented. Women start from themselves and part of collective female identity is that they have superior relational skills with friends, family and romantic partners. Society knows this isn’t true because the constellation of reality TV shows, etc. all know that women are worse at relationships than men.
Still, this stubbornly persistent belief bleeds over into discussions of masculinity. Women pretend that men don’t communicate with one another or if they do, it isn’t in an honest or effective way. We see the ridiculous multiplicity of crossed wires on the Left, as they dispute the fact that women speak more than men: it is either equal or men talk more. But, men don’t talk about what they truly want to talk about, just engaging in conversation to prop up their identity or maintain appearances. See the projection here?
This is also a derivation of the concept that “all men are beasts.” This concept exists in most cultures and—apparently—is a psychological construct that helps women explain male behavior they don’t understand, especially violent or abusive behavior males engage in. It shows the biological roots of female rationalization, as women have a incredibly tough time dealing with female homicide, child abuse, or any other behavior that is seen as originating from men. To be fair, men have unfairly categorized women, as a class, as dumber than men. That isn’t true from an IQ standpoint and much more reasonable observation is that women suffer, collectively, from a supreme drought of wisdom.
The other looming issue presented here is what happens when men express themselves. MRA’s have long realized what happens when men talk candidly and frankly about what men are feeling. Take Michael Kimmel. In his book Guyland, he worked intimately with many men, only to treat them—at best—as lab rats of an inferior breed. At his worse, he shows off his true intentions—to paint white men as morally repugnant, psychologically ill, and potentially homicidal and rapey maniacs.
What these sorts of people don’t realize is they are the reason men have so many issues. When feminists and women constantly label men as creepy, rapey, etc. all they do is place a damper on more honest exchanges between the sexes. Sure, the idea of a perfectly honest social dialogue between men and women is absurd on it’s face, but we could be more honest. Feminism has been complicit in so many things, but one striking is sex and relationships with women—with men as the speakers. Men can’t just say that men get fucked in divorce court, but Chris Rock can make jokes about women cleaning men’s financial clock in divorce court.
Personally, I see feminists as latter-day torch bearers of old, puritanical ideas about sex and relationships. They really don’t want sex to be talked about—but most especially by men. It isn’t any surprise that early second-wave feminists thoroughly trashed gay men and treated them like dirt. Of course, they had to educate gay men about misogyny because women are men’s moral superiors while they kick dirt in gay men’s faces and call them worthless faggots. Seriously check out some of Gloria Steinem’s early work in the seventies. That bitch hates gay men. But, now she hearts the gay marriage.
Back on point, these sorts of people who are apparently dying for a conversation about changing masculinity are part and parcel of the problem. First, they don’t realize how much of American masculinity is based on female approval. Second, they don’t understand that replacing the wider family unit with government bureaucrats and media is insanely damaging to the psyche of a child. Teachers, TV and social workers can’t unconditionally love a child.
Further, by the time kids enter the school system, personality disorders are already in force. If we expand the system—like Sweden—and start the governmental intervention as early as we can after the one year of parental leave, those children all present similar problems later on in life: the inability to handle change, a strong need for public approval and a highly deficient emotional life.
I feel they think that if men will just open up and express themselves, that will solve so many problems. Trust me—from first hand experience—revealing what lies beneath is often an incredibly dumb and short-sighted idea. Personality disorders exist to allow a person to live in society as best they can.
Finally, it is a stereotypically naive left-wing idea that if we all embrace all the egalitarian diversity tolerance then all the plus-good stuff happens. It reeks of an extremely naive view of the world that if we are all the same and appreciate each other not for substance by for superficialities, then we can finally rid the world of the wants, needs and frictions that necessarily inhere as existing as a human.
It should not have to be said, but: masculinity has never been a problem, but a solution to the social ills that plague so many societies.
Read More: Men Need A Return Of The Male Only Gentleman’s Club
One more edit before publication. Good article though. I know some people who believe that men need to open up more. It’s about bending men to female power. Twisted thought.
Revealing feelings to a female is a death wish 95% of the time.
especially if she has bpd, she will use it against you in ways you never thought was possible.
I dated a girl with BPD 30 years ago, before we knew what it was. And before she was done with me, she had literally destroyed my life. I lost family, friends and even had to leave my church because of her. When she didn’t get her way I was “all bad”. She accused me of rape, of abuse, and ran me damn incessantly when she didnt get what she wanted. I still have people today that won’t speak to me 30 years later because of her cunning manipulations. It took me years to sort it all out until I read the classic book on the subject, “I Hate You, Don’t Leave Me.” If I knew then what I know now, I’d never let a woman enter my home! You young men be careful, nothing can destroy your life like a woman.
How sad! What a horrible person.
Indeed. Such incidences are why men, including yours truly, are increasingly avoiding marriage, relationships in general (to varying degrees), and children. Women are not only legally allowed to destroy a man via the force of government but the incentives actively encourage such malicious and narcissistic behavior.
I totally empathize with you. After I tossed her ass out, My ex gf who has bpd started a smear campaign that would make even the nazi’s proud.
BPD, that’s more or less an excuse for a females bad behavior. Most women don’t have mental disorders, they’re just children who have never been disciplined.
BPD – Grown women who were emotionally stunted as children. They never grow up. Dating them is an emotional disaster.
Been through it twice. Nothing is more soul-destroying.
Correction, most women have mental disorders, and they act like children who have never been disciplined.
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=zXTfyAkw7DE
Which is why there’s a distinction between a mental illness and a personality disorder. A mental illness is chemicals being out-of-whack in the brain. Personality disorder is simply medicalese for “fucked-up human being”.
That is, saying “BPD” doesn’t excuse the behaviour, doesn’t “oh, that’s ok; she just had a personality disorder is all’. Quite the opposite. It’s a declaration that the *person* who someone *is* is just basically fucked up. It’s as close as science can come to using the word “evil”.
Borderline Personality Disorder is basically a grown-up baby. When things are good, everything is 100% happy and wonderful. When things are bad, everything is 100% dark and scary. And this state is always someone else’s fault.
Adults learn to moderate their passions, to put a little distance between their self and their feels, to view their transient ups and downs with just a tiny pinch of cynicism: I’m having fun, but I am going to have to go to work tomorrow; we are arguing, but underneath it all we do love each other and we will sort this out.
BPD people never learn this. Their feels is all that’s real.
My happiest days are when i spend time with my male buddies. Cool stories,wait till a bitch arrives.
I believe mental illness occurs from stress. Stress is the umbrella for mental health disorders. Stress can happy anywhere in development – neuro-chemically; biologically – alcohol/substance abuse; trauma during being a fetus, traumatic brain injury from an accident; socio-cultural issues stemming from experiencing domestic violence between parents, being a victim of rape and torture (read the book a Child Called It – it is about a boy being raised by a dysfunctional mother, she was an alcoholic and I would assume BPD).
I don’t think there is one gold standard as to how one has a mental illness. But stress can occur in many forms and thus cause poor medical and mental health conditions. Then the movement came and decided to place a label on anyone who manifested deviations of their stress (aka the Diagnostic Statistical Manual for psychiatric disorders).
A person has a mental disorder whenever an “authority” declares they do, rendering them a social nonperson. This may or may not have anything to do with the person’s actual behavior or brain chemistry.
BPD is used by both men and women to explain away bad behaviour. I was diagnosed with BPD and instead of drinking the kool-aid of psychiatric illness, I refused to eagerly grab the crutch. Instead I have been on a personal trip of discovery and bettering myself. Had a friend who was very into her “problems” and I eventually had to dump her because she was just dragging me into her mentally disordered cesspool.
Yeah girls with BPD only feel 3 emotions….anger, pity/self-pity, and admiration. They dont feel anything else, and she thinks youre a weakling if you show joy, happiness, disappointment, jealousy, or any human emotion. Theyre literally emotionally retarded and will waste your time and energy, all while playing the victim the entire time.
Haha good summary… And I totally agree… BPD chicks are not worth the hassle even if they’re a good lay.
They wouldn’t think twice about your life being ruined over some stupid shit… even worse than most girls.
BPD is one of the hardest emotional disorders to treatment. This is because the person is resistive to treatment and will basically not acknowledge there is anything wrong with them.
That’s why its important to leave a paper trail:
Yep, when women say they want men to “communicate” and show their feeling, they are really looking for soft spots to be manipulated.
interesting. Feeling “anger” or whatever, is a form of sovereignty. The real problem is channeling that power into something useful for yourself. It’s a powerful tool to use against an opponent if you do manage to control your reactions. If an opponent loses his cool though you can control him.
Like putting a red flag in front of a bull causing him to charge towards you only to fall into a deep hole filled with spikes.
women saying men need to communicate better is identical to men saying women need to shut the fuck up better
LOL. Not the same thing. One is a form of being manipulative; the other is demanding the former stop or else.
Since physical threats to these harpies are now facing the gun point of a police 9mm/40ca/45 ACP, you can’t properly satisfy her need for drama by slapping her when she aggressively hurts you with weapons or another. Instead, now you just leave, and gift her the cold shoulder.
To us men, in our version of logical thought, a woman wanting to be slapped, whilst saying the opposite makes no sense. When you learn game, and the dualistic purpose of most everything they do, you realize they are simply missing the occasional back hand of the “rock” in their emotional storm.
For it was not cruelty that a man may have lightly slapped his woman. But merely the extension of his masculinity that says “Go no further, or I will leave you alone.”
It is counter-intuitive to us. For a man simply means what he says, and says what he means. Even if you don’t understand it. But a woman pushes a man relentlessly with drama probing for a weakness, lest he leave without her seeing it coming.
A man who slaps her when she brutally hits him, but does not leave, let’s a strange woman like that calm her emotional fear. For she knows that even when her worst comes out, he will deal with it, but not leave her alone to fend for herself.
Nowadays, women are expected to be ms “strong and independent.” They don’t need no man! And since a man cannot reciprocate, she learns far to little, far too late, about what her actual predicament is.
This is why much social science points out that lesbian relationships, statistically, have some of the most egregious domestic violence problems. Women are not the tepid wittle angels they/we have been led to believe.
“Since physical threats to these harpies are now facing the gun point of a police 9mm/40ca/45 ACP…..”
And that’s the problem. There’s probably nothing in this world less relevant or interesting than “what women wants”
Women want what their alpha tell them to want. No more, no less. While men (at least some) exercise their free will by doing something they want to; women exercise theirs by aligning with an alpha, then getting fulfillment by contributing to his project. They never have, nor ever will, just set off on their own.
Changing what “women want” into something healthier, or what women do into something less destructive; will always and everywhere require the same tactic: Changing who society’s alphas are.
As long as tax feeding government apparatchiks and their employers can point more bigger guns to your head than you can at theirs; women will, and rightfully so given their evolutionary heritage, side with the government. And do their best to help that real alpha take as much of the beta chump provider she has some sway over’s wealth and autonomy away as she can. It’s biologically built into women to behave that way.
Corollarily, what men have to do to sort women out, is simply to get rid of anyone who has a priori power over them. Once the buck stops with Hubby, Hubby is alpha and women will once again be the healthy, productive, faithful, useful helpful and beautiful creatures they were supposed to be. Until their so called men let them down, by wilfully letting themselves be suckered into giving up their autonomy to some schmuck who claims to have blue blood, be divinely ordained, or be democratically elected, or whatever the fashionable excuse for bending over for someone happens to be today.
Perhaps. But I sense it is now too late for that. Things seem different, and there is no going back to the way it was. An economy as ours, and the world’s, will never allow it.
Both must work, and if both work, both must have a level of autonomy that their predecessors did not; a semblance of control.
No more can a man flex his muscles or influence, and expect obedience. He must have charm and charisma on top of said physical prowess. Top dog if you will.
But now the top dog must learn how to woo the queen bee. She has manipulation instead of might, and her charm and charisma are different, and can exceed even the top dogs if she can garner enough of a following.
I’m not sure that the echo chamber here has it right on how to move forward. Time will tell if the old masculine ways will have the sort of effect you are claiming?
Personally, I think the whole dynamic is fundamentally different, and even if women tried to use their overriding voting advantage, plus their sexual charms, to lure men back into a 50’s suburbia Renaissance, and leave the work force……many men will not follow.
I think short of another dark age, this is all she wrote. Also, unlike the last dark age, I don’t think we will lose too much information. I think the info will be there in the consequent power vacuum a dark age would create. Women will be taken advantage of, but men will not marry them. They will quite likely be left to defend for themselves.
Short of a post-apocalyptic situation, men and women are now both permanently affixed to the ol’bump and grind of the work force; and it is going to stay that way for a long, long time.
Unless you can MGTOW, and are content with a little nookie on the side from aging grandmothers as you age; this is as Jack’s character would say is “As good as it gets.”
No Dystopia lasts forever. Rome didn’t. Nor will the progressive hellholes of our time. We’re only a few generations away from outright Islamization of Europe.
More and more Americans are figuring out that there is no “We”, and are turning the US of A more and more into Latin America every day.. With nothing left to lose, as everything you’ll ever have has been stolen anyway, why not kidnap and torture the kids of those who stole it all fro fun and possible profit? The thin and wearing thinner veneer that “The Law” is in some way there to “punish wrongdoers”, rather that just an excuse to enrich insiders, wont serve to sucker people forever. There is nothing more legitimate about the Obama administration than about Chavez’, or Pinochet’s. Or Saddam’s. There’s no society, no nation, no nothing worth bothering with. And while those of us realizing that may be a bit ahead of the curve, the abused masses designated as cannon fodder aren’t too far behind.
What the Somali’s did to Barre, and the outcome of that skirmish, was an improvement. The greatest achievement in governance of the past 100 years, in fact. As will be when the equally abused and disenfranchised, indoctrinated American dronelings do the same to their own Barre’s. Or, at a minimum, kick back with a glass of cheap Champagne while enjoying the spectacle of less cowed outsiders doing it for them. Watching trashcans being blown to smithereens is pretty much universally viewed as entertaining, after all.
Ur right. Keep her guessing. Tell her its none of her business which it is not. Everything you tell her can and will be used against you later. Consider yourself under arrest and everything you say goes through a lawyer.
I’m sure a lot of guys would love to be able to actually talk out issues with their girls… but since when did that ever work? Seriously? No really though anyone have any experience with women where simply talking problems out with them in an open-honest-logical manner actually led to a stable solution? Sounds like non-sense to me…
This is the shit that drives modern men insane…
I get more response from my dog when I talk to him than I do with my wife. My dog loves me, my wife doesn’t.
Maybe it is because you equate your wife with a dog.
Man’s best friend.
Yes, yes. Now go back to the sea.
From hell’s heart I stab at thee…
capt ahab quote? very clever.
Do you always insult dogs like that?
Ha ha, an older diesel mechanic I know used to say the exact same thing. He has since divorced his bitch wife and is quite happy living the bachelor life. I’m trying to get him to join me on a trip to Thailand! >:D
I had a dream last night that I fucked a toned and slim little tart. Thailand beckons! >:)
The door ———————->
at least you can be happy that any time anyone posts one of these articles they actually benefit feminism through a display of enraged, impotent ignorance.
The delusion…
I’m sorry, is English not your first language?
He said the dog was better….
Any whore can spread her legs.
Only a dog will love you unconditionally.
Once upon a time – I still had hope for my gender. Maybe. A little bit. After seeing the influx of females that have swarmed to this site the last few days…nope. It is probably, not possible.
I would encourage you as a woman, to speak out. Call your sisters in humanity out on their BS and their games. Do it for yourself, if for no one else. Feminism hurts men badly, but it affects the few good women out there too, and a lot of them sit idly by, doing nothing. We men have little sway over any women, and many men have done left the plantation, never to return. More and more MGTOW every day.
I’m afraid that as a woman, I hold even less sway. Women LOVE to undermine each other, antagonize each other, and for some reason will turn on each other at the drop of a hat. If I make mention of these behaviors, point them out, or don’t support them – I’m the enemy. Yet sadder still, I’ve come across so many women that are /proud/ of those behaviors. I’ve witnessed friends, over the years, practice horrible, abhorrent, gut wrenching behavior, and not give a second thought to it. I’ve seen women get pregnant to trap an ex boyfriend (only to make sure she then leaves him, and holds the kid over his head) I’ve driven a friend to file a rape charge she later admitted to being false (only about an hour after we had left the rape crisis center) I’ve seen friends cheat on their boyfriends or husbands and ask me to lie for them, I’ve chased half naked drunk girls down the street and had to pull them out of strangers homes, women that had 3 children by the age of 21 they could not FEED OR AFFORD BABY WIPES for…but they kept having them. I’ve had to excuse myself from conversations where women proudly recounted cheating on their partners, for fear of being sick to my stomach. The list could go on forever. And no, I absolutely do not associate with any of these people anymore. I am afraid however, there is nothing that I can do about this behavior but refuse to engage in it, or support it.
Humanity is truly a sad lot. Women are cunts, and men are their all-too-willing enablers.
Where is an asteroid when you need one?
Yes, we have all doomed ourselves, I’m afraid. What was the quote from The Road? I believe the old man’s character said something along the lines of “Whoever made humanity will find no humanity here.”
That quote resonates with me, daily.
Well. If a woman is a unicorn. She should find other unicorns to form a sorority that also doubles as a dojo for femininity. Red pill women on reddit is one example:
http://www.reddit.com/r/RedPillWomen/
Avoiding bitter and negative women is a must lest their negativity rub off on them.
This is the problem with feminism and the vast majority of women in western society, in a nutshell. Women are above criticism and questioning their behavior is out of bounds. You should defer to a woman on these subjects, unless the woman is going off script, in such case she has internalized misogyny and can safely be discredited, marginalized and ignored.
Aspects of Feminism are very toxic and simply claiming any criticism leveled at it is simply because the criticizer is a MRA, misogynist or “doesn’t get it” is the best way not to address the problem.
Whatev.
Betas allowed this to happen. I’m getting sick of blaming women, as I now see up close how good father’s raise daughters compared to beta provider daddies.
Fuck beta providers from Gen X and the Baby Boom. They failed miserably due to their own ineptitude, lack of courage, and selfishness.
Any father who loves their daughter keeps a firm hand. You shouldn’t be having children if you let your daughter become a slut. Look at twitter for 16 year old girls. Depressing.
I see it with my cousins … I could have been a better dad to them at 20 than their own 40 or 50 something beta worker drone fatso.
“Aspects of Feminism are very toxic and simply claiming any criticism leveled at it is simply because the criticizer is a MRA, misogynist or “doesn’t get it” is the best way not to address the problem”
YES. Sincerely, thank you for that.
Relax buddy, when i swallowed the Redpill at the beginning of this year i grew in awareness to a new level. I really don’t give a damn about a woman. Her actions do not harm me.I realized as a man i have better things to pursue. Build better male friendships and venture in my own life. I started going to the gym and started reading alot of books. Read principles of manhood pdf. Visit rational male and read about hypergamy. Good luck.
There are other women, good women, speaking out on this issue and so much more. If you really want to see an opinion that may widen the scope some as to what is really at work, while I typically would never recommend this to a woman, research the name Ester Villar. She has a book called The Manipulated Man. She also has another book called the Polygamous Love. Read through both when you can. Also there are a few outspoken women championing the fight for men on youtube and while it is weak in terms of an overall voice, it is a start. Maybe one of them has started a second group linked to speak up against this.
Many women have taken the aspect of empowerment and flipped it into an avenue to take what they choose and ream a man. If you can find some women who also are looking to fight, and they are there, then maybe that is one step closer to changing the rape laws in America. And maybe one step closer to allowing men to become equal citizens again.
Thank you very much, I strongly appreciate it. I’m vaguely familiar with the author and her first book from one of the articles on ROK, but I did not know she had a second book. I’ve been Meaning to read “The Manipulated Man” for awhile, guess it’s a good time to kill two birds with one stone! 🙂
I am giving you that information because something about what you said begged me to take a chance and share. Do not make it so I did it in vain.
I also have a suspicion that there are more women, than I previously thought, who are floating on this site hoping to have this knowledge spread. It is in that spirit and that of the many men who have taught me much here, in one way or another, that I pass that along to you.
While those books will provide major insight into how the sexes relate, it doesn’t resolve the immediacy of this situation any. There is truth in the book. Truth that when read comes at you in such a way, unlike most things, all you will need to do is look at your life to see the effects of it all. Like I said, it isn’t pretty by any means but push on. Share it with your boyfriend. To start having better relationships with each other, honesty needs to come in and tear down the lies and propaganda.
Thank you very much, I know what you mean, and it will not be in vain. I realize this is knowledge that you did not have to share, and I am very grateful that you did. I would not disrespect that in any way or let it go to waste. Truly and sincerely, thank you.
True but it’s almost impossible to blame Betas without blaming women. The crux of the matter is that Betas, who were once rewarded and respected for their role in society, are now treated like Johns.
You’re dead on about the lack of fortitude, which I try not to hold it against them as those are inherently ‘Alpha’ traits. Though, given the silent war against patriarchy and masculinity in general, what I do hold against them and find especially treacherous is the sustained Beta behavior (e.g. shaming, player hating, white knighting, marriage, etc) despite our predicament and the information available.
I have nothing but contempt for today’s Beta male. I fuck their girlfriends behind their backs, poach their women at clubs and bars and cut them off at the knees whenever possible.
You can show some guys better than you can tell them and there will be eternal animosity and hatred between us until a) The patriarchy is restored. b) They join our ranks. No quarter will be given.
The patriarchy doesn’t exist if men don’t choose to respect each other.
If we go around posturing all the time and AMOGing every man that is maintaining a decent relationship, and humiliate him after putting in diligent work… You just can’t expect the patriarchy to magically appear.
What kind of patriarchy are you talking about where men don’t maintain solid relationships?
We’ve already got that.. right now everyone is fucking everyone.. and almost no woman is worth committing to. Whats the patriarchy supposed to be in that context? Men with guns passing women around like whores and raising a collective of bastard children?
Every time you screw over some hard working dude, thats one more hard working dude who is saying fuck it to the system. I’m not talking about white knights or manginas – those guys are either naive or delusional – I’m talking about hard working betas with character… What option are we really presenting to them???
Perhaps I’m misunderstanding you but your post struck a nerve for some reason.
I understand where you’re coming from but you’re advocating a soft and excessively pacifist stance.
What are you suggesting? That we maintain an illusion? That we foster false beliefs in men that women aren’t hypergamous? That they never engage men behind the backs of their SO’s? That upwards of 70% of the divorces in the Western world aren’t filed by women? Which is more cruel? My way or yours?
Further, if a
chump’sstranger’s girl slips me her number and I wasn’t holding a gun to her head, fuck chivalry. The more mainstream men who see this trash culture for what it is and say “fuck the system” the better. Continue propping up this failing paradigm by being a nice guy if you like but there is a war, against men and anything even remotely masculine; Enabled, sustained and supported by men.Any man complicit in the perpetuation and spread of the current model, is an adversary and thus, unworthy of the dignity and respect accorded to comrades. When mainstream men hold women accountable for their actions and we’re able to discuss these topics without pseudonyms is the day the I’ll stop encouraging men to shake men who are still asleep.
Yeah, I have little respect for my gender. But as a woman, my head will be torn off if I say that to other women. They can’t stand criticism from a man, but from a woman?
Oh boy, that traitor b**ch is gonna pay in their eyes.
After a while one just gives up and watches as women silently pick at each other’s carcasses to win the biggest jerk in the room.
Then after they get him, complain about how he doesn’t understand them.
Wrong.
Patriarchy involves only the genetic elite of strong men (not always sexually alpha) who form a state based on honor and strength. Beta providers are not part of the patriarchy, they are subject to its power, like women.
Beta fathers (who refuse to set standards or live for anything other than comfort) create whores and cowards as children … it is only by finding the guidance of other alphas that a young man born to a beta can develop. This hard to come by today.
Life is zero sum … those beta providers, and their lack of self assertion and responsibility, are the reason America and most of the west is collapsing. They hoard resources and produce spawn, all for the sake of maintaining sex with their wife. The beta boomer is the epitome of a classless slob, spoiled brat who enjoys the safety and productivity of a world created by alphas and the genetic elite.
Masters and slaves is the true state of humanity … liberal democracy is a temporary arrangement that masks this.
Betas are the reason the West is collapsing. They were given too much power and resources and were unworthy of it.
Men are not equal. That assumption is the root of decadence.
I am certainly not advocating for the MSM disinformation culture. Hypergamy is a harsh reality and young men are being raised to be completely unprepared for it… and then they’re completely lost at maturity when the women and the few alpha men have all the power and everyone is miserable (except for the few alphas who came out on top)… It is a shit-stain culture we’ve found ourselves in. Marriage breaks down, women turn to shit, it appears that the general economy can’t handle it, breakdown of civility… Seems like a decline from my point of view… A war of all against all.
Manginas and white-knights are the root cause from what I can see so fair enough. I just don’t have contempt for beta males per se.
It’s so nice to hear another girl who sees all the crap that these extreme feminists do to give other women a bad name. It’s because of these manipulative, psychotic sort of women that we are all grouped together with the same labels. What’s worse is because of this whole push for female equality, it gives men unequal benefits. This is why things like only 1 in 6 custodial parents during divorce cases are fathers, (that’s only about 17% in most cases), despite the fact that the mother may be unfit for parenting, and men will almost always be charged with rape should a women press those charges against him, whether or not it’s the truth. Yes, in the past, women were oppressed. But now it’s like these extreme feminists are looking to oppress men, not just gain equality. They fabricate problems that do not exist and play with men. It makes me sick to be immediately associated with such a group just because I was born a girl.
I want to argue with you but its difficult… If you look at history it seems like the bottom line default is that there are always master and slave classes…
I don’t know if it is the alphas that create this world though… I think it is safe to argue that alphas equally ride on the productivity of the beta classes. These master alphas specialize in obtaining and maintaining power… innovation and genius aren’t necessarily their domain…
Also, can there not be different kinds of patriarchal groupings? I don’t know the true history of Sparta but in the movie 300 they made it appear that Xerxes of Persia was ruler of a slave army whereas Leonidas of Sparta was ruler of a brotherhood army. Do you think there can be any truth to that distinction in real life?
This is an interesting discussion… a hard one… but kind of fundamental really… I think we would need clear definitions if we really wanted to pursue such a large scale speculation.
It’s not speculation, it’s genetic and historical reality… only bourgeois conditioning and liberal rhetoric mask this fact. I don’t glorify slavery, but at the same time what happens if you let the slave be king?
Your society collapses, because the slave is a slave for a reason … genetics, personality, physicality, temperament. I think Nietzsche was right, and as a former christian, it was never easy for me to swallow that pill.
… and BTW, the Spartans had slaves and the weak died in child birth, or as infants, or became peasant serfs.
… also the liberal bourgeois depends on slavery of one kind or another, whether he admits this or not.
Slavery is ameliorated solely by advancement is technology, not activism.
That’s certainly your prerogative but in the words the words of Sun Tzu, I would encourage you to “Know thy enemy.”
Manosphere terminology is fairly nebulous to begin with we’re not talking about a few “manginas” and “white knights” here and there. There is an entire political and social system aimed at destroying man’s role in society. You had better believe the majority of Beta men you advocate for would have no qualms about putting a knife in your back for frequenting a “sexist” blog or having “misogynist” views to make himself look good. Be magnanimous with them at your own peril.
Find women like you. I’m sure they are out there. Somewhere. You sound like someone a man or a woman could learn from.
Thank you, very much. Gratitude and appreciation for your kind words 🙂
After reading RoK, I find it difficult to have conversation with women. In particular, despite being a woman, I have been irritated with their conversation, the tone of their voice and the incessant whining. I have started to notice young women and how badly dressed they are: sweat pants, flip flops, pyjama type clothing in public. They are massively large and I worry (as a healthcare professional) what their lives will be like in decades to come. Maybe I will live long enough to see change, but I really don’t know if it will be for the better.
It never ceases to amaze me how young women in particular seem to abuse the hell out of their bodies. Drugs, chain smoking, getting black out drunk and puking on themselves, going on drug or alcohol binges for days or weeks at a time…It’s troubling. I’m more perplexed at how women try to lose/monitor their weight. Binging, purging, taking insanely dangerous supplements (that one gets me the most) smoking to reduce appetite. I once had a girl tell me that going on a 3 or 4 day meth binge was the best way to lose weight. Who thinks like that? Adopt an exercise routine, eat a few more vegetables, juice. It’s not sexy when your teeth fall out of your head from all the tobacco and drug use, your hair turns to straw, and you skin turns into parchment paper from malnutrition. Where is the logic these days?
I have no reason to argue with you at length. Your point of view makes sense to me.
Perhaps I am just an idealist.
I’m not arguing the point that man is not a selfish creature… Trust me, I do get the impression that quite a few men out there are total morons and rationalize all their retarded behaviour or just don’t give it a second thought…
But scratching away frivolously at a time in history where we may have the opportunity to rise above ignorant brutality? Seems like a waste to just go straight back to the dark ages. Basically no better than naked mole rats…
I see nothing wrong with that if you’re aware of it. There’s nothing wrong with taking a firm stand either.
I think that there are different types of “alpha” dominance. The Jews run the world right now and they are certainly not physically dominant. However, they have above average intelligence and have mastered the way to manipulate beta humans for centuries. Xerxes forced his slaves to fight, Leonidas jad brothers, and the Jews trick or bribe people to do their bidding. Its different but its the same hierarchy.
So by their intelligence the Jews are genetically alpha, forcing the betas to do all of the hard work similar to how an architect designs a building, gets $200k and minimum wage “slaves” risk their lives building it.
Definitely. Survival of the fittest right?
Its not about who is the strongest or the best looking… Just who is the “fittest”…
In some sense it doesn’t mean shit if you sleep with the wife of every beta in the world if none of them birth your bastard spawn.
In this sense the left is doing pretty well… at the end of the day their beta bux and government safety nets are paying for plenty of beta children…
The “alphas” are just getting the high of feeling like they’re better than everybody from one-night stands and fun parties… They can laugh all they want but it doesn’t really mean much in the end…
Its all a matter of perspective… everyone has to play their best hand.
Truth is though I haven’t yet settled on any particular philosophy. I’m still taking in information.
If I had an absolute stance with regards to morality I would fight for it. I have my attitudes and opinions but I’m comfortable living my life the way I want to without expecting other people to behave similarly.
I do think that men naturally acknowledge virtue in each other… for example, fortitude, courage, mastery of skills, honour… Even if they don’t like each other they acknowledge these points of character in each other.
But whether or not men can live peacefully amongst each other (or with themselves for that matter) I don’t know.. I just wanna do my own thing and live a good life. I cut people out who are without character from my life and thats that from my point of view.
With regards to the women issue… I date women… I like women… Am I gonna marry one in these fucked up conditions??? Is it even possible to have children who don’t grow up to become betaized by the system? I don’t know….. I gotta figure things out and I’m not there yet.
I think it may be a mistake to think in these ‘fixed’ categories. Just as with income quintiles in macro-economics, there is most likely frequent movement into & out of categories, especially at the extreme ends. Very few retain their status on a permanent basis. “…the race is not to the swift or the battle to the strong, nor does food come to the wise or wealth to the brilliant or favor to the learned; but time and chance happen to them all.” Ecclesiastes 9:11. There is power & peace in moving beyond, which is the meaning of the Greek word ‘apeiron’.
You are definitely not a woman but a man disguised as a woman to troll. Way to try to make it seem like there are women out there that agree with any vomit on ROK. Only idiots fall for that, and there are at least 48 going by your up votes.
How was your childhood? Was your dad alpha? What was his job?
Yeah good point.
I knew a guy who went between alpha and omega all the time… He knew how to put on an act, and he was a total degenerate. Started off as a total loser. His whole sexual strategy was to be-friend guys and sleep with their girlfriends when their relationships hit rocky patches.
Of course the Toronto girls saw nothing wrong with this… and he became popular with the ladies after that… preselection and all…
Now he’s dead. No joke. No exaggeration. One day two guys wearing black masks broke into his house and stabbed him to death in his shower. I can only assume his constant philandering was the reason someone went to such an extreme.
He went from omega, to alpha, to dead.
So yeah… I think what you’re saying makes a lot of sense.
Amen.
Preach!
“It is not the strongest of the species that survives, nor the most intelligent that survives. It is the one that is most adaptable to change.”- Darwin
So what does a normal guy gotta do nowadays?
Become a beta-male-mangina and finance a frivorce for the sake of making a baby? Or become a psychopath and make bastards with the girls on Jerry Springer?
I would say keep doing what you are doing. Develop yourself. Increase your knowledge. Start traveling. Try to find a foreign wife. Invest in asset protection, and something more than a simple prenup. Find out what you are good at. Be the best you can be. Be happy! And watch the world burn, hopefully with binoculars.
Cheers mate, I’m thinking the same thing 🙂
“Fuck beta providers from Gen X and the Baby Boom. They failed miserably due to their own ineptitude, lack of courage, and selfishness.”
I feel the finger pointing directly at me here and that’s OK. We’re in a mess and these things need to be dealt with. I plead guilty to spoiling and enabling my daughters. Up to a point. I came from a highly dysfunctional background and wanted my kids to know that I wasn’t going to abandon them, or in the case of my own father be totally unreliable. So yes I spoiled them a bit, while still doing my best to enforce standards and keep a family unit intact. What I was totally innocent of was how the culture had declared war on me and that after puberty I was no longer my daughters hero but suddenly the evil patriarch. Now one is successful and the other a mess and both to the left of Lenin politically. The culture, the politics of the day won out and I lost. This scenario has repeated itself hundreds of thousands of times all across the nation the last 30-40 years. I lost all while working myself nearly to death trying to do it all. So yeah if you want to vilify me and others go ahead. Like I said things are a mess and for the most part I like reading your take no prisoners efforts on this site. Just never underestimate the tsunami of evil that buried a couple of generations of well meaning parents in the new USSA.
I have no desire to be anybody’s master except my own and if you try to make a slave of me you better kill me, because that ain’t gonna happen. Nitzchean/Hitlerean fake Darwinism survival of the fittest crap can get tiresome. I don’t want to take the New World Order PC crap or yours either. The alpha/beta thing is also way over done. Very few men anywhere are real alphas and some men that look weak can bring you to your knees calling for your mommy. I tried to take the high road in my last reply to you but now you are just getting on my last nerve.
That’s funny. I was sure that I was a woman! Damn.
I’m not going to bother engaging in an argument about my gender, as clearly I know what it is. As does anyone who bothers to look at my avatar. Your words reveal your own ignorance. I’m here for opinions and insight, and have received such. I do not find any of this “vomit” as I find value in knowledge, especially opinions I’m not well acquainted with. More so, I realize that I’m on a masculine website, and that my presence here as a female isn’t necessarily welcomed. The mods could have deleted me at any point, but they haven’t. I have not been on the receiving end of anything unkind. Furthermore, there have been users kind enough to send me in the direction of additional resources and similar content. They have extended to me a curtesy and a kindness, and in no way do I intend to disrespect or spit in the face of that. Nobody has to let me be here, nobody has to even act decently towards me, but they are. I appreciate that. I came here to deepen insight, and widen my scope of knowledge. I come to this website and ask a favor merely because of the nature of my presence. So I’m sorry to burst your bubble, but yes, there are women out there who are interested in this “vomit”
hahahahaha….do you believe in the illuminati too? how about shape shifting lizard people?
Just wanted to say thank you again for the book recommendations, both books have been ordered 🙂
You are very welcome. Once again, it isn’t the kindest of books to read, but the truth when exposed can be quite brutal. So be patient as some parts get rough. All in all I’m happy you are looking to see if something can be done to improve relations between the sexes as well as where the damage may stem from. It isn’t about the source but stopping it from spreading. We can spread respect for people, one person at a time.
Sorry friend, but that just doesn’t happen. Personally, I haven’t had an open and honest discussion about my feelings with my wife in almost ten years, and I can truthfully say things have worked out better this way.
When women say, “Let’s talk about it,” they mean, “Let’s talk about it and talk about it and talk about it until I wear you out and you give in.”
yes
Yep. Because that’s how women fight with each other. They destroy each other emotionally because they can’t do it physically. So why would a man want to give them that opening?
Unfortunately, I have to agree with this.
Even more unfortunately, I have to also disagree. More and more women are creating and accepting, a culture of extreme violence, often being the aggressors. The rising statistics are terrifying.
Yes. You are correct. Women are becoming much more violent than they were in previous eras.
Perhaps it’s just where I live, but I’ve encountered much more…potent violence from women, than men. Not to say it hasn’t been found in the opposite sex as well. Perhaps (I believe) most of the world is still possessive of the mindset that women can’t do any physical harm to somebody – so they get away with it. I mean, my god. For the longest time it was thought women weren’t even capable of violent actions or murder. That’s obviously out the window. I can name plenty of times I’ve seen women slap or attack a man in public. The other night my boyfriend and I walked out of Walgreens only to find a man that had just been pepper sprayed by his girlfriend. When I asked if he needed help, his girlfriend angrily shouldered past me grumbling that she had it under control. Yes – The woman that had just maced her SO, “had it under control”
There is at least one study conducted that suggests in ordinary life that women are more aggressive and controlling than men in their relationships: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/relationships/10927507/Women-are-more-controlling-and-aggressive-than-men-in-relationships.html
Note that the author of the study was female and directly addresses the fact that in the last 10 years at least studies into aggression in relationships were biased by the assumption that “patriarchal values” were the reason men showed up as more aggressive than women.
The reality was that the biased studies tended to be of dysfunctional relationships — i.e. those of men in prison, and those of women in refuges — rather than a plain study of the general population. In the latter case, it’s women who are doing the beating, the controlling, and the use of weapons – moreso than men. I’ve not read the full study, but another newspaper report cited a quotation that said women were “significantly” more violent and controlling. That’s sharp language for science, since a result showing a correlation doesn’t tend to mean much unless it’s a significant correlation.
Admittedly this won’t come as a surprise if you’re familiar with Erin Pizzey’s work (and she *was* working with data from women’s refuges), but it is a recent study confirming those results nonetheless.
Thank you for that link! It was a fascinating read.
Women have always, to one degree or another, been capable of violent. However, in recent times it is essentially written into law that women are simply freely allowed to perpetrate as much violence as they deem fit provided the victim is male. This bigoted attitude is disturbingly similar to how blacks were treated under Jim Crow in the southern states decades ago. And then, like now, most individual have little to no problem with this world view.
Meanwhile, many women are truly baffled as to why an increasing number of men are unwilling to marry and have children with a potential mate. Some, like yours truly, virtually avoid women altogether. Who wants to become a torture slave in prison and have ones life completely destroyed merely on the whim of a woman?
It is positively extraordinary that even many men are willing to mock and shame other men over acknowledging reality. This obviously proves that men do not, unlike women, have own-group preference and thus debunking the mythological construct of the patriarchy that professional feminists have dreamed up in their own perverted imaginations.
If they’re becoming more violent, it’s only because society has made it easy for them to do so. Men aren’t allowed to fucking whack women into their places anymore, so this is what we get for it.
Precisely. Even with my wife, I don’t share most of my feelings. If I did, she would likely lose her respect and attraction to me. Every girl claims otherwise, but just try it with her for a while, and she starts hating you.
So why not lie? Show feelings you don’t actually have.
That’s a dangerous game for those with the dark triad. Not recommended, less is more.
Agreed. Not a good idea. MGTOW brother. MGTOW.
This is so true. I learned the hard way that revealing your feelings to a woman will result in meltdowns and tantrums, being told to shut up, having your concerns being totally written off and laughed at, and your sorry ass being kicked to the curb.
Gospel.Fucking.Truth.
Agreed and well said!
virtus veritas…I’m sure you knew this would make top comment! Men keep this in mind at ALL times with ALL women…very important.
I would include “truth” in this. You don’t ever want to tell a woman the truth and she doesn’t want to hear it, no matter what she says.
A man who won’t lie to a woman has very little regard for her feelings.
Well said.
No matter what women claim it has been my experience that women DON’T want you to “communicate your feelings.” Anything you say can and will be held against you. Not only that but if you really want to hash out a financial, relationship, family, or any other important problem with your woman it will be as painful as pulling an impacted wisdom tooth with a set of pliers. I rarely have had trouble communicating with men, once a protocol has been established. With women, especially those closest, I have found it to be nearly impossible. So cut the crap ladies. You don’t really want or need any substantive communication.
Keep the fucking bitches guessing; say as little as possible. Explode in a fit of vociferous anger when the silly bitches push it.
Here here!
Did the old veterans talk about the war with their wives? No, they got together with other Vets and drank and commiserated.
They immediately lose respect for you, it most definitely is a death wish 95% of the time to reveal your feelings truly.
If your goal was to lock her down, I would say “bullet dodged”. If you can’t fully express yourself to a potential mate, then she isn’t worth anything but a fuck and chuck.
if you have feelings YOU have to find out why you have those feelings, AND find out how to get rid of them…. all emotions are bad, even ones we consider ‘good’ or ‘happy’ emotions need to be removed….. being happy just sets you up to be sad later on…..
women need emotions to communicate with children….. they need to be able to vibrate on that childish emotional level…. it is their way….. but it is not a man’s way.
however a man cannot just put on a fake frame, and there is a fair amount of hard work to do to build a real frame that is emotion proof….
Well, you do have to explore your actual feelings. Otherwise you’ll develop ticks and awkwardness.
There are ways to avoid negative consequences to your emotions.
1 transfer responsibility to a benevolent force (jesus, buddha, cosmos) even if you know it’s a fairy tail.
2 think of adversity as a good. You will surprise yourself.
3 fake it until conditions change.
4 imagine yourself as a speck of dust, among other specks.
5 Think of your pain and pleasure as mere chemical reactions. Coruscating embers.
lots of literature on positive reframing, charisma, positive mind…
But you can’t bury emotions and lie your way out. That’s poison, you’re going to eat yourself up in bile.
I wouldn’t be a good guitar player if I didn’t play from my guts… And some of my best writing has come from times where my guts were twisted in knots.
“It isn’t any surprise that early second-wave feminists thoroughly trashed gay men and treated them like dirt.”
This is interesting. Source on that?
I don’t get the hostility towards the Duck Dynasty guy, even though I don’t share his religious beliefs. I suspect the SJW’s want to discredit him because we can’t have the “wrong” sort of white men come from the gutter and make fortunes in business. Why, that might discredit the Narrative that “You didn’t build that” and that self-made men don’t exist.
He’s a heterosexual white male who does not scrape and bow and mouth the words to Cathedral-approved slogans. Simples.
À bientôt,
Mistral
You forgot to mention that he has money and celebrity as a reality TV star.
I find it interesting that the people who make programming decisions for certain cable networks see fit to show the “wrong” sorts of white people in reality series, like the Robertsons, the religiously obsessed Duggars and Mormon polygamists, but in sympathetic ways.
This article came at the perfect time. Sharing your feelings with a woman often leads to some true backlash. If it isn’t aggression directed at a sports team or lightly used during sex, it scares women. The biggest shame is that by just being a guy, a straight guy, all you ever hear is your not wanted. Your way of existing is offensive. What purpose does it do to share your thoughts with someone who starts you in the negative? At best they “understand” you. It may be better to just stake your right to be by being. If only we didn’t have that loving misogynist label to deal with. So much basic male behavior is not only seen as offensive but punishable by law.
One of the biggest tragedies to occur to today’s man is the punishment we levied on the physically abusive man. In ridding ourselves of that behavior we unknowingly allowed men to be blanketed as violent, destructive souls. This is where we have to step back from. That aggression kept us healthy, strong, quick to react and form solutions.
The human right to contradict yourself and also to leave.
It is sad how many women came here looking to pick a fight and refuse to admit they have fault in this situation.
I’m in my 50s, and I reached the point in my early 40s that I didn’t give a damn what women thought about anything. I realized they are all batshit crazy. The biggest mistake I made in my young years was to derive my self worth and self image from women. It’s a losing game. I realized women don’t give a damn about anybody but themselves. And even then they are so stupid they become their own worst enemy through their self destructive behavior. Knowing what I know now, in my youth I would have derived my self worth and self image through accomplishment, and not what women thought of me. Learn crafts, skills, hobbies, save money and do the things you want to do. And don’t give a damn what a woman thinks. They don’t give a shit about you anyway.
True. Expressing your emotions will get you pegged as “weak”. Still, sometimes I hate this and i just want to vent. Then i go online and do that on strangers. I guess I’m not the only one doing it.
Women believe lies and doubt the truth.
Women don’t have a monopoly on feelings and morals. If you look at it from another point of view, you could say that women are the ones who don’t know how to handle emotions. How is being overly sensitive and lacking self-control a positive thing?
Men don’t need fixing, they don’t need to be more feminine, their emotions are fine. No one except the manosphere is trying to understand masculinity. These so-called experts have no idea. The feminine way of thinking is the ideal state to them, so of course anything different is bad.
exactly…. if you go to a strict military school, you will find the weaker kids complain that the teachers are too harsh or too demanding, or unapproachable…. but they are not, they are simply setting a different (higher) standard.
how many husbands have been driven up the wall, because she has to have a ….- insert color here – …. car…… only that color… a perfectly decent model, a complete bargain – no that won’t possibly do. It must be metallic lime green. i know mothers with 2-3 kids that refuse to drive a sensible car, and force the husband to commute to work in a huge family car, because the wife’s ego is too threatened driving a mommy wagon….
men can make a small mistake not to address their inner fears, they can bottle up emotions, sure…. but talking to a woman about it is always a bad move….. a man can be seen to be hiding behind a wall – but he can deal with that in much better ways, than prattling like a chicks coffee morning….
i don’t really see it helping women either…. sure they are all chummy and open and intimate with each other, but it’s superficial as hell…..for example…. you can go to the USA and strike a conversation with complete strangers much more easily than you can in many other countries because the US has that immigrant culture and even today people switch cities alot….. that makes them more talkative….. easier to get to know…. but it also makes them more superficial…… and poor, less reliable friends….
women are the same, they are all open and reliant on each other, and intimate secrets of period pains and sex lives are shared with some new BFF practically the day they meet…. but six weeks later they hate each other…. being open and superficially chatty, doesn’t make you superior.
Your point about girls switching BFFs like toilet paper deserves a whole RoK article IMO.
Not only that, that women will talk to each other and share details then bury EACH OTHER with them, at least psychologically, so in their minds they can tell themselves how much better they are than their ‘friends’. When you open yourself up to a woman, that instinct is still there, then they see you as weak. They know your weak spots. They’ll bring them out in any conflict (to start fights also). Narcissistic supply.
The notable thing being that this sort of behaviour only otherwise commonly happens as an expected, granted part of life in one place: the primary school playground. Kids switch BFFs around like shuffling cards below the age of 10. The only difference being that boys stop doing it at puberty, and women keep on doing it for their entire lives.
Girls are messed period.
Tonight at work (nightclub) I was chatting with the girl who takes care of the VIP section. Short, sexy, blonde chick, bubbly and fun..
She said some interesting details… like about how practically every attractive girl she knows is on some kind of anti-anxiety drug. That so many chicks she knows go through unwanted bouts of depression. And all this other stuff about how girls are competing with each other and being shallow and narcissistic. I thought it was neat to hear about being a girl from a girl’s perspective.
I know a lot of dudes can be assholes… but chicks seem utterly messed up… they’re at war with each other over who is the prettiest… what a pointless fucking existence that must be…
Perpetual childhood theory. I like it.
My girlfriend takes pills … it’s across the board. Facebook is a big reason why.
And the over eating/food porn is all the rave. Followed by three hour gym sessions. Vicious cycle.
No attention span, just feelings and one line aphorisms that make them feel philosophical.
Anti-depressants are bad. Try coming off them and getting your life really together is almost impossible. Being dependent on a false sense of happiness from elevated seratonin levels allows you to ignore what is really going on. The real crash is trying to get off this crap. No wonder people commit suicide. I spent a month of hell withdrawing from a SSRI and was able to walk out of the pharmaceutical induced insanity and regain my life.
Good for you man… it doesn’t sound easy to just get off it. Specially when your doctor, a “health professional”, is telling you you need it.
Fact is, our modern way of can be depressing… for some more than others… and even for the others… shit happens…
There are other ways to manage those feelings. For everyone its probably different. But lots of people have them… even the best of us.
I play a lot of golf, and since moving to a new city two years ago I often head to the course by myself. I always get along great with whoever I’m paired up with–and I think this is common among most men. Pickup basketball comes to mind too, even if egos can flare up on the court.
We don’t have that urge to undermine and mentally smash each other the way women do. It’s not even on our radar of things to do!
Expressing anger to a woman is a way to get rid of her. Anger is a feeling.
Nah, women are turned on by anger. Get mad at a woman, put her in her place, and watch her panties get wet. Get into a fight with another male, same result.
How about just walking out and never coming back.
Yes, a fight or breaking up a fight between others with force (as a bouncer would) is a sure fire panty wetter. Assuming you prevail. If you’re a pulp on the floor you get friend zoned and find out two weeks later she fucked the guy who kicked your arse.
This.
women are also increasingly (and sometimes strategically) autistic in relation to ‘mind-reading’ men. Being unable to read emotion in men – for the most part – seems to lead them to blindly assume their own moral superiority based on their own tendency to wear their own emotions on their sleeves
Right, “masculinity studies” taught in colleges are all fronts for equalist propaganda.
Having “feelings” is your first mistake. Real men don’t have those. Show no weakness, because you have no emotional weakness. Stoicism is our way!
“Feelings” are the result of emotion mixed with subjectivity. Become objective with your emotions and keep them at a distance and no woman can control you. Women should not be able to emotionally hurt you, if you keep the equilibrium of feeling on her side completely.
Men will always win, if they defeat their “feelings” and inner vacuity.
Stoicism is the perfect frame to have when dealing with women
there is a big difference though, between actually having that John Wayne / Clint Eastwood style masculine frame, and putting it on while still pissing your pants on the inside….
the complaint women make can be valid because men can bottle up their emotions and hide behind a false frame…. real natural, couldn’t give a fuck, attitude is not easy to master…
activities like contact sports, firearms, boxing, martial arts, hunting, taking financial risks, taking life threatening risks….. these calm down the inner chatter and put a man slap bang in the present moment… where there is no place for emotion, conversation about the past or future…. it’s all about the moment and the goal….
the stress is then released with sex, recreation, eating, drinking, fun, relaxation etc…. and the creative reward of having obtained the goal….
if the stress is not unwound and or the man is some iron pumping gym faggot that is scared to cross the road….. well then women are right….
see Harry Flashman, He’s shitting bricks 24/7 but overcomes the terror. George MacDonald Frasier was brilliant author vis a vis male identity.
Here’s the thing: women will judge totally on face value! Even if inside, a guy is a simpering mess, outside he has the tattoos, swaggers, swears and smokes even, she’s got the tingles. They’re all about status and visible resources.
Emotions are not a man’s friend. We do not need them. We have rational brains that override our useless emotions. Learn to master your emotions as much as possible. Few things will serve you better in life as a man.
the problem is NOT masculinity but how males are treated. they receive less love, are more often left alone and are judged by their behaviour (instead of judging the behaviour they receive). feminism tries to create the impression that they care about men but in reality try to bash masculinity yet again instead of fighting discrimination against boys and men.
The single biggest problem we have as a nation is fatherlessness. The Cathedral wants, as the Soviet state did, to replace the father as head of the family. No fault divorce to enable the destruction of the family, and the awarding of cash and prizes to women who abandon their families. They also want to get a hold on children earlier and earlier so they can fill their little brains with poison, so now we see attempts at universal pre-K for 4 year olds. The sooner children are taken from their parents, the sooner the Cathedral will control them, and the better for the the Cathedral’s programming to take.
Remove a father from his family, and his children will not be taught to test their limits, his sons will not learn how to properly control their emotions, nor how to behave as responsible men. The problem is not boys. The problem is that boys should not be taught to be men, it’s that they’re being taught to be men by women, or by the hollow masculinity of “street culture”.
What Daniel Patrick Moynihan wrote nearly 50 years ago remains true today:
“From the wild Irish slums of the 19th century Eastern seaboard, to the riot-torn suburbs of Los Angeles, there is one unmistakable lesson in American history; a community that allows a large number of men to grow up in broken families, dominated by women, never acquiring any stable relationship to male authority, never acquiring any set of rational expectations about the future — that community asks for and gets chaos. Crime, violence, unrest, disorder — most particularly the furious, unrestrained lashing out at the whole social structure — that is not only to be expected; it is very near to inevitable. And it is richly deserved.”
À bientôt,
Mistral
The thing is that we are so far down the line that we cannot reverse the trend and as far as the whole unrestrained lashing out at the whole social structure is concerned …Well we have pharmaceutical drugs now to keep your evil male brain from developing and functioning properly don’t believe me just look at the male children they have on drugs from an early age notice its always the ones that show potential for leadership that they get on the drugs first
that’s hilarious. When I was a kid, they had me on Paxil. I completely believe this.
Nobody compelled my son to take any meds in school. He is a leader of men (within his social circles), doesn’t take shit, has fist fought with at least two other young men that I know of, and he was a range master on the rifle line at scout camp which featured actual real semi-automatic and full auto weapons (a scout master there had the tax stamps). He has a girlfriend who is shy and submissive and extremely feminine that he treats the same way I recall my grandfather treating my grandmother e.g. – with the idea that he is the head of the relationship. Nobody, not once, suggested to me or the wife he should be on any drugs, nor did they make him take any.
Forced pills must be a blue state thing, such a thing would be unthinkable and likely to spark a hell of a lot of protest out here in flyover country.
Fuck the social structure. It gives me a deep sense of satisfaction to watch this misandrist, socialist, PC “paradise” wither and crumble to dust. I only hope I live long enough to see the Anglo princess get what’s coming to her when, through her own solipsism, selfishness, and ridiculousness, her and her people are outnumbered in their own lands, whether it be by Muslim or Mestizo conquerers, or both. It will give me a great sense of justice to see this branch of humanity on its way to extinction. I may look like these people on the outside, but my heart and mind are no longer of this “culture.”
I agree. I think if you survive next 20 years, you’ll be here to see it. Make sure you got your popcorn. MGTOW. Is there really any other way??
You will not see that. There is no justice in this world. This shit show will go on and on, and many good people will be destroyed by it.
I agree the shit show will go on, but the future belongs to those who will be in it. Check out some statistics on which kinds of people are fading away demographically. One group has gone from over 90% in 1960 to barely over 60% today to around 33% of the United States by 2050. This isn’t an invented number. Its based on people who are already born and the Boomers dying off. Among children under 5, that group is already a minority and has been since 2012. And it’s just so deeply satisfying to watch the very things men like me have been ostracized for noticing and saying coming to pass. That’s just in the US. Check out a similar situation in Europe.
When it comes to white folks, the emphasis should be quality over quantity. It works for the Jews.
While I understand the sentiment, there are too many white men with guns to prevent the Muzzies from doing much beyond what they are already doing: blowing themselves up over retarded shit like cartoons, and whether on not they can see the hair of a married woman, etc. They are the real dead-enders.
Little white entitled princesses already get a Lesson when they hit the Wall at 30 or 35 and figure out that they can be no-man-having corporate career trolls with 37 cats, or they can learn to suck dick and start giving up the ass, and hope they find a beta-provider who will buy in.
Right now, there’s a big chunk of white America on the coasts and in the northeast that lives under a “Bubble”. That’s not going to last much longer, but I also think there’s a bit of a “Double Discourse” that goes on. For example, when I visit the Home Office (which is cyclical for about a week at at time), there’s a woman there who is generally regarded as a PITA (she’s feminist, but sex-positive). She cooks dinner for me at least once when I’m there. Nobody (other than me) understands why she’s such a kitten for me. The bottom line is, there’s the “everyday” attitude, and then there’s the attitude when the Wolf is At The Door (by way of example, another company in that building had a ‘disgruntled ex-b/f’ incident, and she told me that, ‘If that happened here, I would be right behind you or [name of guy who played DT for FSU) b/c that would be the safest place in the building.”
So there’s how they pose, and then there’s REALITY.
Bottom Line: when the going gets tough, Anglo princesses learn how to suck cock.
À bientôt,
Mistral
I hope you are right. But the Cathedral propaganda is strong where I’m at now. And its disciples are becoming more ruthless in enforcing its dictates. Not to mention a lot of the worst damage has been done already.
Shit hasn’t hit critical mass, yet, and won’t for some time. Just be ready for when it does.
À bientôt,
Mistral
You can never have enough white men with guns. That’s a fact.
I see it from a different angle … I think shit has hit the fan. The idea of a singular collapse is popular … but that’s not how Rome went down. Yes, there may be a symbolic “fall”, but I suspect the collapse will effect community by community or demographic by demographic silently. First college students, then the retired.
We will wake up one day and 75 percent of the country try will be dirt poor, with a small upper middle class. Panic, anger and violence will incubate.
The problem for those of us making money is that we are going to be taxed probably beyond 50 percent (which won’t disincentivice work bcase of desperation). Taxes will be ransom, if nothing else to pay grave diggers and security guards. We will be prisoner so our own home.
Right on point. American blacks are the perfect example for every feminist society. Black men act like childish women. No work ethic, emotional strength, or character. Step on their shoes and watch them lose complete control of their faculties.
Saying, ‘I’d rather LOSE and look good than win and look bad’, or something like that. Me, I’d rather win and look bad than lose and look good.
This is 100% dead on balls correct. The black community is the canary in the American coal mine, and what happens to them will eventually happen to everyone else. We see their families destroyed, men sent to prison, leaving such a gender imbalance that the remaining men impregnate women at will and then split. Why? Because they can.
À bientôt,
Mistral
The global elite are trying to reprogram the genders. They want men to become women and women to become men. This is why the big push now is acceptance of transexuality by the media. And the first thing they do to break down men and feminize them is to get them “in touch” with their feelings. This starts the feminization process. Young boys are taught in school to be weak, emotional and cry like girls and that being masculine, strong and in contol of your emotions is wrong, if not criminal. Traditional masculinity is quickly being criminalize. Down south I grew up with men like Phil Roberston. We had real men here in the 60s and 70s, who’d punched the hell out of you if you told them to wear pink or behave like women. Now I see young men behaving like feminine, attention whoring, narcissistic school girls. More concerned with social media than hunting and fishing. If this trend is not arrested, we will see the destruction of our civilization in our lifetime. As Aaron Clarey says, enjoy the decline.
true.
It cannot be reversed at this point. The dysfunction is thoroughly institutionalized. This misguided social experiment is going to end very, very badly.
Furthermore, millions of years of human evolution cannot be changed in 2 short generations via silly media campaigns and oppressive laws. War is coming. The weak will be wiped off the face of the earth. This includes low level leftists, weak males, the entire freakshow that is the left wing, and sadly many good people will perish too.
Nature abhors a vacuum. Things will correct themselves over time, through the natural channels of death and destruction. At least that what history has consistently demonstrated up to this point.
It is completely unbelievable to modern Social Justice Warriors and Gender crazies, that our biological default state is highly masculine and feminine behavior in both sexes. The more we express those natural behavioral patterns, the more attractive we find each other in relationships and the more happy we are in our lives. And the female porn writings like “50 Shades of Grey” clearly support that innate desire of a woman to be submissive to a man – she does not desire a man she “can communicate with” in the same fashion as with her girlfriends.
I am a Southern Baptist in the Deep South, and I am amazed at how many so called “good Christian women” in my church are obsessed with that book, including my wife and daughter. These church women read romance novels and throw sex toy parties, yet constantly castigate men as being perverts. Women say they want wusses in touch with their feelings, yet what they really want is a dominant man that puts them in their place. I call these women out for their hypocrisy, but their little hamster just rationalizes it away. It’s ok if they read porn or play with sex toys, but if men do it they are low life pervert scum! Southern church going women are some of the craziest, most psychotic women I’ve ever dealt with. They’re psychos with personality disorders, but they get away with it because their insanity is covered over by a veneer of religiosity. I wish ROK writers would do an in depth essay on southern women. They are the most dangerous cause men assume they are religious, yet not knowing that while these women are praising Jesus, they are stabbing you in the back with the knife and beating you over the head with the Bible! Just be careful if y’all come down south. Women here are not always as they seem.
I think bloggers Dalrock and even Rollo Tomassi (Rational Male blog) are doing a good job covering the hypocrisy and current feminist infiltration in the US churches. Personally I would let them have their “50 Shades” if they would not belittle and shame male sexuality at the same time. The plutocracy financed council of churches did a good job steering the whole Christian doctrine ever more into almost pure Marxism until “relationship advice” nowadays consists of “Man Up” (serve the feminine imperative blindly) and “Communicate More” (be more like a woman thus become less attractive to your wife).
Good point. I love Dalrock. So true, feminism has completely infiltrated the church. On Mothers Day we get a sermon on how wonderful women are and the great sacrifices they make for their families. On Fathers Day we get a sermon on domestic violence or porn addiction!
Any society or institution that openly shits on it’s producers and protectors, while still expecting them to comply, is destined for the dustbin of history.
The next several decades in the Western civilization are bound to be interesting, and by interesting I mean violent and chaotic.
The official message from the top is grossly at odds with common sense and real life. The smelly, unwashed masses are beginning to figure out that things are not right.
There will be blood. I for one am NOT looking forward to it. I can’t say that for many of the dudes here.
If you’re looking for salvation by the Hipsters, I’m afraid you’re going to come up wanting.
“They’re psychos with personality disorders, but they get away with it
because their insanity is covered over by a veneer of religiosity.”
The majority of them, deep within themselves they are looking for authority, for limitations but are simply unable to acquire it within this politically-correct, faux-equality atmosphere of today. This is the reason some of these women of which you describe go to such extremes. The tension build up is so great that it just tends to explode via extremes.
Even equality does not square with reality as nature is inherently hierarchical.
There’s that Jesus on a cross sunday and Pilates on Saturday.
you get no points for consistency.
The fact that women support Christianity shows their need for dominance. They want rules, to be told what they can and cannot do by a male force. If god was a woman I wonder how many woman would be Christians.
Plus, the bible is a pretty awful book for women. They are treated like cattle throughout the book and theyre not allowed to be priests in most churches.
Women’s actions tell us everything we need to know about them. They dont care much about being respected or loved; they want to be dominated and treated like she is a piece of property. Its just in her nature.
Ever see High Plains Drifter?? Ol’ Clint knew she’d love it in the barn.
Southern Baptists infected:
http://societyofphineas.wordpress.com/2014/04/17/the-malaise-of-churchianity/
This is the best comment on the site.
I lived through this exactly, except it was with lower class Pentecostal women- who are even crazier.
I am going to write something up. It may be good enough for others to read even.
Christianity is favored by crazy women because it provides them with narcissistic supply. God the father is the ultimate alpha and modernized prosperity gospel Christ the ultimate beta provided. Hell, throw in the Holy Ghost and you have the ultimate white knight.
I got out of that system by becoming a traditional Catholic. Looking at this current Holy Father has me wondering if I’m going to stay in it. I don’t want my kids internalizing the SJW garbage that is big in the church.
Francis is a huge disappointment. I was actually heartened when the last Pope tried to restore some dignity and tradition to the Church, but it appears that the cushy Vatican II group will have none of that. Meh.
Sunday Christians…that’s what we call them. They sin all week and rationalize everything away with one trip (Sunday) to church.
You can’t win an argument with them (logically) because these women don’t live in the realm of logic (only beliefs). They believe that they (women) can do no wrong (or harm) and come Sunday all is forgiven.
Religion truly is a salvation for women because it plays on the feelings of belief.
In other words, with the exception of Sunday…these bitches run wild.
That’s what church going women and tatted bitches have in common, hunger for alpha cock.
Yep. That alpha douche with the sleeve tattoos gives snowflake the Gina tingles.
There is no alpha cock to be found anywhere near a Christian church, aside from the con-artist pastor perhaps.
Ever been to a modern church? I’ve never seen so many doormats in my life. Any “man” who is willing to spend every Sunday listening to a sex-fiend conman recite ancient fairy tales deserves what the church is offering him.
Unfortunately, the church has become so vaginized that it has become bastardized beyond recognition.
Beta traning. That’s what church is.
Warriors have always been the envy of priests. The priest can’t Sodomize the warriors, so they psychologically castrate them.
So true, ‘they’ broke me only to find out later they made a Warrior they cannot control or keep…BUMP!
Men and women should have a balance of masculine and feminine energy. When they are not balanced, there are problems. Men should be about 80/20 MF and the opposite for women.
I kinda think I’m in the high-90s, myself.
À bientôt,
Mistral
Its that yin/yang kinda thing. You need both, especially if you plan on having children. They need a certain amount of emotional comfort from their father. There are alot of fucked up women in this world as a result of a cold, emotionally distant father.
You can be emotionally distant and still present.
I have a hard time showing emotion, but I don’t believe that women want that any way …. they can get that from their friends and sisters.
The aloof attitude doesn’t assume neglect … Women just want the continual show of strength. Not emotion.
True but children, especily daughters, need some emotional input from their father to feel completely secure. If not, they will spend their entire lives looking for it from other men.
I disagree. Some of the biggest whores I know had sensitive father’s who loved their kids to death.
If a daughter is properly disciplined by her father, she will look for an equivalent mate and expect to be subordinated.
No, BrockSamson is right. Daughters especially, but even sons, need that little bit of emotional connection. To feel loved. To feel secure. These are a basic human needs. But they also need discipline. That is why BrockSamson said 80/20. There needs to be both strength and warmth, for the child to be mentally healthy.
80 is too low, that’s family man stuff. 65 is grandpa.
I don’t want a woman with 10 percent plus masculinity … eastern European girls are like 5 percent masculine (but they are hyper maniac).
Its not about what you want, its about what is necessary to be mentally healthy. I will find and post the article that talks about the dangers of having too much/little of either energy. It can affect your physical and mental well-being.
It depends we weren’t all born 80 percent masculine.
This. Feminism is a misguided slave rebellion. If it wasn’t, women would give the pussy up for every sensitive little-Timmy-half-a-fag who asked for it nicely and promised to respect their “person-hood”.
But they don’t. They give it up to men they perceived as dangerous and who are most likely to put them on their backs and pound them like they were a hole in the mattress, dump their loads, get up, walk out and never call them again.
This is The Knowledge, dear friends. Study it, learn it, practice it, become one with it.
À bientôt,
Mistral
You are such a douche bag!!! You “Men” who are on this moronic, cave-manish, woman hating, bitch-fit throwing site, have absolutely no idea how a woman feels or even thinks. I have never seen so many males come together and sound just like the bitches they are complaining about and hating on. Fuck all you baby whiner Douche Bags.
Shush. The grown-ups are talking.
À bientôt,
Mistral
So no criticism of the actual ideas- just hatred for aware men.
Cat’s out of the bag on this one. I have benefitted too much from being a jerk to women to ever go back to being a supplicating simp.
I actually agree with some of you on some things.I think feminists are destructive to society, I also believe in The Natural Order. What I don’t agree with nor abide is the degradation and hatred for females that I have seen here. I was completely wrong in the words I chose for my former comment…well, the Douche Bags part….wait no, I kinda meant that. Actually, maybe it was the fuck you part…Yeah, let’s say that is what I was wrong in saying. Oh! I also am completely against circumcision. I am a circ regret mom (1992) and that would never have happened had a MALE Army Ob Gyn not told me that it was best for cleanliness and so that he won’t be picked on by other boys because he won’t look like the other boys. WTF?????????? Well, anyway, that is just a few things we might agree on.
The door is that way bitch —————————————>
No one here gives a shit about what you think, attention whore.
This site is for men…it’s the only place where men can actually have a discussion without being judged or prosecuted.
Beat it.
Prosecuted???? I kinda think you meant persecuted, you dumb, ignorant, inept, fucking waste of space. Unless you really meant prosecuted…wait I’ll bet that is what you meant because you probably have been prosecuted before…probably for a crime against a woman…would not surprise me in the least. Go fuck yourself, Douche Bag.
No I meant prosecuted:
to bring legal action against for redress or punishment of a crime or violation of law.
I don’t see you women marching on the courts to change laws that very much favor women, today (i.e. divorce, alimony, child care and support, etc…). No feminist marches going on, right?
Now, get the fuck out…door ————————->
Ignore it… It feeds off of your attention
Still here…Sorry…can’t seem to stay away. You have me truly fascinated…
Preach! When you decide to open up The Church of Knowledge, I’ll come down and be your assistant pastor!
“Now, there are men I have met who are more open and straightforward and have been able to express their emotions and me and those men get along so much better.” aka men that aren’t getting laid
So true!
RE: Women ‘pretend’ that men don’t communicate with one another?:
Here’s the thing, the domesticated woman, or more accurately ‘resident’ woman in a relationship who has domestic expectations of her and who henpecks, will also henpeck the man’s associations. I’ve known men who barely say hello and nod to their own nextdoor neighbor man and barely get to know him after 10 years as a neighbor outside of the fill in info and gossip the woman feeds. If the woman feels there is male patriarchal collaboration in the slightest, she will drive a wedge between the neighbor seemingly on a whim. So the woman stays cozy and insecure in their blanket with ‘yes honey’ compliance and the village men remain incohesive and unprepared for the future as a community of men.
To shit test a woman on her ‘neighborly’ divisive bent, one often finds she has the intent to start a war if necessary. Many men then simply abide by her whim to keep the peace and keep focused on the rudiments of basic maintenance.
Many communities become then PTA cackling assemblies looking up to a nanny state. If a calamity or crisis rolls around, the female comforts remain maintained, but the community is largely UNPREPARED for anything outside of what the ATM can deliver at the moment.
The patriarchal Afghans are an example of how a local standing army of men who, unimpeded by their women, defeated a world superpower THE SOVIET UNION. I hearken to a famous picture of a 12 yo Afghan boy smiling and holding a rocket launcher next to the wreckage of a Russian MIG that HE HAD JUST TAKEN DOWN.
Now ask yourself, could your local boy scouts led by the local PTA approved, neighborhood association friendly beaks have done that?
I find that I have no interest in talking with my neighbors. I need nothing from them but for them to have a clean and respectable front yard and we’ll maintained house.
Did you take out the trash? And I think I heard a noise, a squeak or a drip drip when you go into the basement when the heat pump is full blast. Would you look into it please. And I stepped on something that felt sharp in the carpet. I’ve called for an estimator to come over from the carpet warehouse. I want lavender this time.
So true, it never stops! Once you get married your life is over. Like hunting or fishing? Well forget it because you’re gonna be so damn busy taking care of her wants and needs that you’ll never again find the time to pursue your own hobbies and interests. Why do men die before women? Because they want too!
That’s a shame. My neighbors are decent people, and my next door neighbor is a good, traditional old school man (he’s a pilot) with a multitude of firearms, a stay at home wife and four children that he’s bringing up like a good father. Very positive, masculine role model, we go out shooting from time to time together, and some summer evenings our families build a fire in one of our yards and drink until nearly midnight while the kids run around in the dark hunting fireflies.
There’s nothing wrong with getting to know your neighbor, if he seems worthy of being known at first glance (you can usually tell immediately if he’s interesting, of course).
The feminists, as shown in the video, believe that their values (weakness, over-sensitivity) are the values that all people should have, and as such conclude that issues in the male community must be result of men being told to toughen up and not be weak. In reality, the feminist encouragement of weakness and over-sensitivity among men is what caused the problems to begin with.
The feminists laments that men are encouraged not to be silent about their problems, when in reality they are the ones who have ended the discussion about male problems in the first place, as well as encouraging institutionalized bias against men in the media, government, and society.
Even as feminists destroy healthy masculinity, they purport to be the saviors of it. If feminism is the savior of healthy masculinity, then why have all these issues arisen concurrent with the ascendance of feminism? One hundred years ago, when gender lines were strongly enforced and each gender new their role, we did not have these problems.
Exactly. I’m always thinking, how would my great grandfather handle this or that. Men a hundred years ago wouldn’t have tolerated any of this nonsense. Imagine asking a man in 1880 to wear pink to show solidarity with women, or purple to show support for the homosexual community. He probably would take his shotgun and blow your head off for being so vile and offensive and stupid. As a reader of history, I’m appalled at how far down we’ve declined in such a short time. I remember back in the 60s my grandmother mouthed off at my grandpa in front of company. He told her to shut her damn mouth and get in that kitchen and fix him something to eat. She immediately shut her mouth, went in the kitchen and fixed him something to eat. Love it! Those were the days when men were men and didn’t take shit off anybody. Now they won’t wusses in touch with their feelings. Makes me vomit.
100 years ago the world had much bigger problems than gender relations. We should consider ourselves lucky, to a degree.
Learned this the hard way myself back in 2008, to the point I stopped caring when the very same girls that wronged me years before are now chasing me.
Today’s Anglo Western WFs and their non-Anglo counterparts that indulge in this mess FAILED the biggest test of society: earning the trust of the very entity they demonize: we men.
As for me, I’ll take Aaron Clarey’s advice to “enjoy the decline”.
Never let a woman under your skin. Ever.
what if she is your own mother?
That’s a tough one.
ESPECIALLY if she is your own mother. That’s an easy one.
Some mothers can’t let go of their adult sons. They cannot accept that they are adults with lives of their own. If you let them, they’ll second-guess every decision you make, from your choice of house, to your job, to your spouse/gf, to having kids of your own, to your parenting choices, etc.
Sometimes you have to expel such negativity out of your life. it sucks, but your own self-worth depends on it.
Interesting, the intellectuals in this documentary tend to come from the fields of psychology, sociology and education. 3 fields which are dominated by women and feminist criticism. The desire to control society, whether it’s through the manipulation of minds, the control of a nation’s institutions and culture, or the brainwashing of children seems to be the driving force of all SJWs. No wonder they are all pulled to the utopian appeals of socialism.
Here Jane Austen is quite useful. D’arcy is emotionally constipated, measured and rational. The main female character cannot get enough of him.
Teh cute ingenue (sp) does not want to know that your emotions are a liquid and volatile as a volcano.
“But, men don’t talk about what they truly want to talk about, just
engaging in conversation to prop up their identity or maintain
appearances. See the projection here”
The above displays the serious lack of understanding women appear to have regarding male thinking. Their projection is quite frequent and is perhaps best illustrated via an example:
A group of men almost never bad mouth their wives or girlfriends or other men’s wives and girlfriends within the gathering. In fact, were a man to actually commit this act it often results in a strong rebuke from other men. In fact, it might even result in physical violence. However, this does not appear to be true regarding a group of women. They tend to incessantly ridicule and insult their own husbands or boyfriends among a group of other women.
The above is such an example of the projection women appear to typically engage in. They merely assume men do and think as they do. Not only is biology an impediment to men thinking like women but current Western culture only reinforces this type of thinking.
Every woman I know, particularly down south, constantly ridicules their husbands to anyone that will listen, especially other women. That is the source of their power in the relationship. Women like to undermine their husbands power in the home, and by constant ridicule increase their own power. That way they can rationalize their behavior, by saying I did so and so, because my husband is an idiot and since he’s stupid and I’m smarter, I’m going to do things my way. Ridicule is a way women forge consensus amongst themselves that allows them to disobey their husbands and excuse their bad behavior. It’s an evil and insidious thing women do, and for that along, I would never marry again. Once you’ve had a woman run you down for 30 plus years, no one in the community no longer respects you. And that’s the way the women want it.
Im 27, if I ever did get married, itd be to a poor siberian or colombian girl.
Ive observed so many stories like yours, even in catholic communities. The scary thing is, I think baby boomer women who pulled this shit are nonetheless more conservative than the modern crop of millennial girls. God knows what kind of shit these girls will pull, but I can guarantee I wont marry one to find out.
Great article…one of the best I have seen here on ROK
“Finally, it is a stereotypically naive left-wing idea that if we all
embrace all the egalitarian diversity tolerance then all the plus-good
stuff happens. It reeks of an extremely naive view of the world that if
we are all the same and appreciate each other not for substance by for
superficialities, then we can finally rid the world of the wants, needs
and frictions that necessarily inhere as existing as a human.”
Perhaps the most malicious aspect of the left-socialist attempt at creating such a world is that it is typically enforced at gunpoint via the legal system and an enforcement arm that has become increasingly and dangerously militarized. Ironically, the left-socialist also decries acts against minorities and women when said militarized force unjustly acquires victims from their ranks. If one actively attempts to bring about big government be prepared to get it and all of the deleterious repercussions that come with it. One cannot have it both ways, it is a package deal.
Government is slowing replacing the man in the home. It will soon be illegal to be a man. I had a cop tell me that men are no longer considered the head of household by the govt, and when a man uses that terminology the cops are taught to assume he’s abusive! And that was 10 years ago. Basically if you don’t bow down and kiss your woman and kids asses, they can dial 911 and have a govt thug in uniform put a boot on your throat and straighten you out. This country is done, put a fork in it.
Indeed. I have pointed this out to women as one of many examples of why men are increasingly avoiding marriage, family, and children. Instead, they prefer to believe that men are simply unwilling to take on adult responsibilities. While that is a normal biological reaction within a female to draw such a conclusion, said women conveniently ignore the actual reasons why men are taking such actions. Therein lies the problem and it is a tragically serious one.
The economy is also usually dragged out as a strawman for this argument, usually by the media.
For me personally talking about how I “feel” all day isn’t productive, I also feel sick to an extent. Keep your feelings to yourself. One of the biggest faults in women is that they run their mouth just to talk.
i’d add a caveat to this:
Don’t talk about your emotions/feelings to anyone who could potentially blackmail you.
Comparing notes with a set of your friends far away from the women is quite productive.
And remember all women are your enemies. My wife brings up things I said or done 30 years ago to use against me. Women are like elephants, they remember everything, especially if it’s something they can use against you. And like elephants, once unchaged or set free, they tend to attack their caretakers.
I’d caution against the notion that femninsts don’t understand masculinity, and that if they did things would be different somehow.
The Marxist/feminist agenda involves an attack on masculinity, in the same way it has attacked religion, the nuclear family, and national identity. This is entirely hegemonic and political, and has nothing whatever to do with a lack of understanding. Marxists/feminists aim to crush all forms of opposition to their collective.
correct, and feminist advice to men about sex and relationships is therefore not naive, but designed to make men less attractive to women, just as feminist advice to women is designed to make women less attractive men. Feminism equates male heterosexuality, and therefore heterosexuality, with patriarchy, and therefore wants to at the very least contain, limit and control that thing. That mighty phallic thing
This is correct. Decades ago the USA and USSR set out to undermine each other’s governments in a non-violent way. (After all, in warfare the greatest kind of victory is one where none of your men die.) So the USA took an economic strategy while the USSR focused on creating internal strife within the American population in order to create instability and eventually a crisis. After all, the USA is an open society. The USSR deliberately filtered all info from outside in order to prevent subversion from the American gov.
The Soviet idea was to teach Americans that up is down and down is up. Turn the population against each other so no one knows what to believe. Women should act like men, men should act like women, the men who built the modern world are your enslavers, etc. Feminism is a thinly veiled version of Marxism where the genders are substituted for the two warring social classes. ROK had an article on this not that long ago. It’s no surprise that the Russians never widely adopted feminism, they know it’s bullshit.
Once the Soviet economy crumbled Americans cheered, “Communism is defeated!” Not even close. All the Marxists didn’t just disappear overnight, and the wheels they set to undermine American culture decades ago are still in place and turning. Many on the Left are, in fact, Marxists. They will deny it, but their words and “ideas” are verbatim Marx.
It’s important for men to resist this pussification bullshit as pushed by the Left. Our national security depends on it. Fems say we need to get rid of our guns and get in touch with our feelings. Yeah, right. Effeminate, pacifist men are easy to conquer. Our foreign enemies are neither effeminate nor pacifist.
Very good analysis. It’s clear that our culture has been infiltrated by Marxist theory.
Wrong. Trad-Con and libertarian bullshit is just as poisonous. As a MGTOW, I resist these attempted takeovers. If not Marxism, women (via feminism) will use traditionalism to get what they want. Think about it. Political stances can bury you. Avoid Ism Schisms. If you’ve read Marx, he was more anti-Capitalist that he was socialist. Not that it matters. Ayn Rand collected Social Security. Look it up.
I strongly disagree. Just as men evolved to provide for women, women evolved to extract resources from men. That’s why they’re more attractive than men, and more manipulative. That is, their nature as honed by millions of years of evolution. See parental investment theory.
Traditionally, in order to extract resources from a man, a women had to provide some sort of value. However, in a welfare state a woman does not need to worry about keeping a man around. She can stay single, and get knocked up by whomever she wants. If the baby daddy runs, the government takes over for providing for her children, thus fulfilling the traditional role of the male provider. We can see the societal move towards this as the mainstream tries to normalize single motherhood and fat, sloppy women.
In the USA, men pay the majority of the taxes, so it’s still largely men who are effectively providing for her children via taxation. So, in a roundabout way, men are being forced to provide for other men’s children against their will. Under a welfare state women no longer have to try to maintain individual men as providers. Marriage will cease to have any real purpose, and men, as a whole, are effectively enslaved as providers to the state.
This is not far-fetched. It’s happening as we speak. One only needs to look at what government did to the black community to see how a welfare state destroys families. Around 75% of black children live in single parent homes. If men don’t need to stick around to raise their children because someone else will do it, then why stick around? The only thing sustaining the black community is the tax money from the white population, which stats show is moving down the same road as the black community.
A society where most men simply function as serfs is not sustainable, because there’s little to no incentive for men to work. What’s in it for men who work but cannot find a woman to have his children? He has no function in society but slave labor. Stats show that young men are starting to opt out of society. The female narrative is that men are “falling behind” and need to “man up,” but what exactly is in it for them?
Under a libertarian government, where individuals are responsible for themselves, women simply can not rely on the government as providers. The woman can try to provide for her children by herself, but obviously it would be more effective with a man assisting her in parental duties and income.
That’s called Argumentum Tu Quoque. Loosely translated, you’re claiming that person X’s idea is wrong, because person X was a hypocrite to the idea he espoused. This is a logical fallacy. Look it up.
And I find out they have stress cards in Army basic trianing.
More -Ism Schism. We didn’t need an outside government to get feminists what they wanted. Women will use whatever they can to get ahead. path of least resistance. Why is it Trad-Con women exist? That puts men back on the plantation too. They stay home ‘Living the dream’ (Bill Burr). They’re just another form of feminist, a subversive one.
Feminism started rather benignly. In the 1980s a woman named Gerda Lerner wrote a “history” book called The Creation of Patriarchy, which introduced Patriarchy Theory. She was (surprise, surprise) a proud Communist! Look it up. (Again, Patriarchy Theory is nothing more than Marxist Theory with men substituting for the bourgeoisie, and women substituting as the proletariat.)
Here’s my understanding of why Feminism began:
1) There were major concerns in the 50s and 60s about overpopulation. Feminism pushes back reproduction in favor of education.
2) The birth control pill gave women control over their reproduction, so they could have children on their own time.
3) Industrial developments in the home had greatly reduced the traditional workload of “keeping house.” (Washer/Dryer, Dishwasher, frozen dinners, vacuum cleaner, etc.)
4) A working women simply meant higher household income for the family.
5) Greater tax revenue for the US government.
6) Some women feared they couldn’t land a decent man (ugly) or didn’t want a man (lesbians), so they wanted the ability to be able to provide for themselves, which is understandable. That meant convincing other women to join them in their cause.
As said, modern feminism is a monstrosity which was hijacked by Marxists and continues to be hijacked to this day.
Your theories are fascinating, and similar to my own.
My Grandfather always used to say, “If two people come to the same conclusion independently, then it must be true.”
It’s older than the 80s. Feminism claims the suffragette movement, as part of a 1st or pre-1st wave feminism. The 80s brought us No Fault Divorce. Without Marxism, women would embrace traditionalism, as the next best thing. Count on it. Whatever would benefit women at the cost of men, that’s what women are for.
I believe you nailed it. Well done.
here’s a great book:
http://www.amazon.com/The-Mask-Command-Wellington-Leadership/dp/0140114068
He wore a mask and his face grew to fit it…Orwell.
Michael Kimmel, the good men project, should head any list of traitors to the male gender.
mens studies should have a yellow hazard warning on it saying this product contains 90% feminism, and is highly corrosive to everything to do with men and masculinity
Hey 2Wycked, I usually really like your articles but I found this one difficult to read.
You might want to consider getting a RedPill editor as I found the lay-out of this article kinda unclear. Also grammar, spelling, and other mistakes made it seem less professional than it could have been. But I’ve never seen the word bloviate before… thanks for that one.
Feminist hate masculinity. That is until they are in a car wreck or in a burning house and their ungrateful asses need saving. Or just when they are wet and they just need a good gina pounding.
Bill Burr has a funny skit about that. Patrice O’Neal used to say the same thing. Miss him, the guy knew women.
That’s why you don’t save them
“Never pity a leftist”
Good one. Strong and independent woman don’t need a man…until they can’t lift or fix something.
I see this happen at work all of the time. Two over educated cunts (and I do mean cunts) look down on everyone until they can’t lift something or fix something. Then, I’ll watch their attitude change because they are stuck.
I’m usually too busy (or I find something to do versus helping their sorry asses). Strong and independent, what bullshit.
This is a feminist lie. When men talk about their feelings women respond with a sigh and an eye roll and a condescending “let it all out”. When men respond that way to women, then men re attacked for invalidating the woman’s feelings.
It’s almost as if women want society to be 100% female. “Males are more prone to violence, and acting out” Are you kidding me? Men need to fight, men need to argue, and to stand up for what they believe in, thats the definition of masculinity. Too bad 99% of society is now too pussified to stand up for what’s right.
I’m sick and tired of the political correctedness of society, great nations were built on the backs of men, and now people want to forget the past and make men feminized and politically sound? Fuck that.
What they want is to not feel threatened or uncomfortable, not knowing or refusing to acknowledge that “nice” men has always translated into weak, stagnant societies.
And yet, it was not a man who beat my face to a pulp. It was not a man that, the next day, beat a sleeping, homeless man into a coma, with a lead pipe.
It was a 15 year old female, on a meth high.
And yet, it was not a man who beat my face to a pulp. It was not a man that, the next day, beat a sleeping, homeless man into a coma, with a lead pipe.
It was a 15 year old female, on a meth high.
Michael Kimmel is an academic leftist who believes in equality, so why take his book seriously?
Because it’s so not-nice to mock soft-headed menginae.
feminists need some cock-discipline. really they should be fixed by being passed around as a fuck-toy by a biker gang. they would be so much happier.
You’d be surprised how often that actually happens. Look up any (attention whoring) autobiography by a bikie girl (i.e. one who wound by married to those guys) and I guarantee you there will be at least a few stories she tells of girls hanging around biker gangs for the sole thrill of being fucked by several guys in a row.
They probably would be, if they actually liked sex. When will people understand, with all its ‘choices’, ’empowerment’, etc., feminationalsocialism is eugenics and strife, not sex, love or freedom.
Now why would they use a black boy? It’s not hard to see that the biggest reason for ghetto lifestyle is the breakdown of the black family and promotion of single motherhood.
”I don’t need no man for NOTHIN’! I’m fine without no man. I can get my public assistance!” . . . I once heard a large pregnant negress ‘amazon queen’ shout those words in a heated debate, I believe it was on the Jerry Springer show.
I don’t even need a tv for that, it’s seems to be the anthem of every single woman in my state. I just have to walk out the front door.
Ironically, said public assistance is at least partially taken from a man’s taxes. Therefore, they still require a man in order to survive. Perhaps even more so given there complete dependence upon forcibly confiscated income (i.e., taxpayer dollars)
And why SHOULDN’T an individual be fine without a romantic partner, why SHOULDN’T they be supported by the state if they are bringing up a child? Personally, I think welfare is vital in a democracy that respects and loves all.
Also, the majority of welfare goes to white women, not black, just saying.
“And why SHOULDN’T an individual be fine without a romantic partner, why SHOULDN’T they be supported by the state if they are bringing up a child?”
Because what you tolerate, you encourage.
For every partner who leaves solely because they must, there is a partner who leaves solely because they can — without any regard for what it’s going to do to their children, their own security, or their own and their partner’s mental health. These are the real parasites on society — not the tiny minority of genuine domestic violence cases which are one-sided (in particular note Erin Pizzey’s work ever since the beginning of women’s refuges that violence in dysfunctional relationships tends to be mutual.)
And if people want to leave, because they can, why should we make that option impossible? Why shouldn’t we make that option safer…encourage the tools to look after one’s own security, one’s mental health, the ability to cope with rejection, to limit the impact on children.
Is a member of society really capable of being a parasite on it?
look up the connection between eugenics, planned parenthood and negricide, then you’ll know.
Certainly, happens every day, look at ‘feminists’, banksters, politicians and other such weasels.
Or if there was an actual connection, you could have given me the link, because I might not want to go diving for something you appear to know about already.
Jobs are not parasites on society, they are part of it. They might parasite individuals, but no society as a whole. This is my point.
Fair enough, brace yourself for truth:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/may/5/grossu-margaret-sanger-eugenicist/
Thank you for the smear piece.
Having done more research on Margaret Sanger, it appears you are right about her links to eugenics, though I feel you’ve performed a texas-sharpshooter error in claiming negricide.
At the time, given the state of the medical community, I can understand her motivations for wishing there to be less children born with “defects”.
There are many many reasons why there were more black women needing contraception/abortions, you cannot say it was simply because of this woman and her casual racism.
Overall, this doesn’t present a solid argument as to why people shouldn’t be in control of their own family arrangements.
it’s a valid intersectional point you bring up here, but I imagine the video was too short for it. The pressures of masculinity are far far stronger and stricter, in poverty, and in blackness.
The current climate in the US must’ve been what it felt like to be one of the last German soldiers defending the Reichstag, Berlin, 1945 during a brutal Soviet/Allied onslaught. At this point there seems no use in trying to achieve in a victory with our cause, but to only go down fighting with the justness, courage and masculinity of the patriarchy. Read any employment handbook in the US and reads almost like a manual of Cultural Marxism, you cannot discriminate on basis of gender, sex or race. You must cannot make disparaging comments about degenerates, you must not offend the goddesses of the work-place by making them feel uncomfortable. No matter how much a woman may be unsuited for a man’s job, the nation will push forward at all costs with ‘equality’.
I read today in the FT that Silicon Valley is pushing forward with egg-freezing benefits for the female employees so that they may delay childbirth. This came at the behest of women in the Valley who feel that the tech world and workplace is too masculine. The last industry that makes the US a somewhat decent country economically will eventually implode under political correctness. If you’re looking for a country to defend young men, you won’t find one if you hold an American passport. Our sons will be absconded, circumcised and transformed into something that may resemble men, but not men. Whoredom, ignorance and emasculation have been enthroned. However, there must be something said for the men who keeps up the fight in the midst of overwhelming odds, his courage will be remembered by posterity, his masculinity preserved and a special place amongst the gods in Elysium.
Circumcision is a good thing.
Huh? If you took a chainsaw and cut just the tops off all the trees in Yellowstone Forest, about a third of the way down, why then it wouldn’t be Yellowstone Forest anymore would it? To add insult to injury of the trees, you could then make the evergreens look completely gay by hanging colorful christmas bulbs on them.
OR . .
If you whacked the capstone off the top of the Washington monument, then it just wouldn’t be Washington monument anymore. WHAT YOU’VE DONE is you took away all of its POWER! The capstone is the focus of the obelisk. The shaft acts as an antenna so it is not necessary to build a massive Cheops pyramid. An obelisk saves space.
THE PENIS
The largest concentration of nerve endings are cauterized during circumcision. If you were whacked at birth, don’t worry. You will never know what you missed. But it is insidious nonetheless. You can try and learn to be sharper in other ways and compensate for the mental martial arts bitch moves the females will spring on you. Chopped down at birth, the whacked man grows up to become A WHIPPED MAN. Never the master of his own house – but rather THE OTHER WAY AROUND!
Male circumcision is and has always been the cornerstone of BITCH RULE. The covenant of circumcision will end when MAN RETURNS TO THE THRONE!
I am circumcised and I love it – wouldn’t have it any other way.
Hmm . . I guess if I had no choice in it, then I would at best have to be positive, like if I were born deaf or blinded shortly after birth. It is tragic that the ‘pussy blind’ dick doesn’t know it is such. Show me an islamic chick then who has had either a partial or full cliterectomy and who goes around saying ”I love it. It couldn’t be better. My hole really ‘ROCKS THE CASBAAH’. . .
What these sorts of people don’t realize is they are the reason men have so many issues. When feminists and women constantly label men as creepy, rapey, etc. all they do is place a damper on more honest exchanges between the sexes.
Could not have said it better myself.
Frankly, it just demonstrates incredibly poor people skills on their part. Basically, they’re telling men (mostly white men) that they’re a bunch of privileged sexists who are deformed and defective, and that their only role in feminism/social justice is to sit down, shut up, and display obsequious behavior in the presence of women.
Then they act amazed that most men aren’t eagerly lining up to join the ranks of feminists. Because clearly, most men with a shred of self-respect will gladly embrace an ideology that harangues and demonizes them at every turn, and only allows them to “listen” (ie. shut up and agree with everything that non-privileged groups say).
The left has a real problem with human nature as applied to men.
That’s actually not what this video is about.
Also, you wouldn’t want a woman to call herself an MRA and start running it, would you? You’d want her to listen to men’s problems, accept them, and help solve them by following the people who it affects advice and plans.
Maybe she ought to stay home with the kids while her man goes out and gets the job done.
The feminists / matriarchs are the ultimate victors in genocidal war. If only to fill the vacuum, they then get queened on the board and move up after a fratricidal bloodbath. ‘Get their way or it’s WW III’ plays out. Keep the fraternity, keep the brotherhood, resurrect the patriarchy. Feet binding, chastity belts, and burqas become old school. In the new age GAME wisdom must be handed down from father to son. All the specifics for keeping the females under control and civil will probably not be learned until after a GREAT CLASH between the sexes. So far the world is ablaze with indirect proxy wars, debauchery, and puppet cinema.
…I’m scared…you’re a very good dramatic writer, but I suggest you broaden your mind and read material from other sources a bit if you genuinely believe this.
Men tend to feel this way when women spit instead of swallowing. That tends to cut them to the quick. Perhaps equally or even more demeaning and hurtful than the infamous “facial” a woman might receive in some restroom at a bar.
This is…nothing to do with the comment above?
Sure it does, let me spell it out, sister.
kramw basically says “You bitches are gonna pay for this. ‘Feet binding, chastity belts, and burqas become old school’, ‘All the specifics for keeping the females under control’, etc.”
I merely observed that kramw is expressing the type of butthurt that a guy might feel if some floozy spit instead of swallowed and got it all over his new, blue suede shoes, to boot, which feeling a female might be able to understand if she ever got a facial in some restroom at a bar from the janitor, and it soiled her Gucci top.
If someone is giving me oral, and then isn’t pleased with the taste, I’m not going suggest the political and social castration of their entire gender, no matter how offended I am.
If someone was giving someone else a facial, I’d think they’d already be offended, frankly, what the fuck is in that for the reciever? Let alone then getting it on their clothing…if you’re into jizz on your face, I doubt you’re going to be extra upset about some on your clothes. It’s not a great analogy here.
Just like 90% of men have no idea what women really want, women, and surprisingly some men, misunderstand men. The myth that women are the emotional, kind sex and men are the cold, unfeeling gender is destroying everything. Too many women think that men are sociopaths and women call men pussies amd bitches way more than men anyway.
Men exhibit every single emotion throughout the day, we just deal with them and hide them to not appear vulnerable. Men have to protect ourselves from other men, and women will never understand this. Its the same reason people dont walk around with hundreds of dollars in their hands. From what I’ve seen, women only feel a few emotions and cant even handle those. Void of virtue and personal responsibility, they only feel emotions that directly pertain to their lives at the present moment.
That’s the whole point of the video though, that you shouldn’t have to be so scared of looking vulnerable, that’s what causes problems like the male suicide rate. And that men shouldn’t shame other men for being “vulnerable”, same way women shouldn’t shame other women for having sex, for example.
Ah, yes, the old boogeyman that “Men kill themselves because they can’t express their feeeeeeelings!”
If so, why do women, supposedly competent at expressing their feelings and with such a lovely support base of friends all around them, attempt suicide at four times the rate of men? Indeed in China — the only country on earth where it happens, but also the most populous — women actually kill themselves more than men do.
Perhaps it’s just that men are a bit more efficient at topping themselves. Either way suicide is a much more nuanced question than “He has a penis and was taught to grit his teeth when the pain comes, therefore he’s more likely to kill himself.” Suicide has any number of factors influencing it—among which may well be a genetic predisposition if you look at families like Ernest Hemingway’s where five members of the family (men and women) killed themselves in three generations. (And one might note Ernest himself was a child victim of a proto-feminist: his mother was a tomboy who ran roughshod over his passive father horribly, for which he hated her so intensely he refused to attend her funeral.)
However, if we’re going to engage in this rather hamfisted analysis connecting suicide to men’s inability to express their feelings, let us indulge another: the fact that according to the WHO itself, suicide has increased by 60% since 1960. Is it coincidental that feminism, divorce, and the destruction of the traditional family began to build in a serious way around that same time, that as feminism has continued, that the suicide rate continues also to rise?
Women get support groups.
Men get responsibility.
A failed suicide attempt is very different from a sucessful attempt…often it can be a call for help, perhaps you don’t actually intend to suceed. This would explain the high female rate, they know that under sexism, they will get support for having got that low, whereas under sexism, a man risks being shamed for even having considered it.
Or maybe men are just better at suicide, that’s a possibility too.
You could argue it’s because of the rise of feminism and female power (being seen as a slight on male power). There’s lots of other potential causes, like america’s drug problem, economic worries, and individual crisises….political differences and turbulence could be one cause amongst these.
“This would explain the high female rate, they know that under sexism, they will get support for having got that low, whereas under sexism, a man risks being shamed for even having considered it.”
You are dodging the proposition.
You characterised suicide as “inability to deal with vulnerability”, being an inability to deal with emotions. An attempt at suicide, whether it succeeds or not, therefore, is evidence of an inability to deal with emotions.
By your own analysis, if women were more competent than men at expressing or dealing with their emotions, they would not be attempting suicide or succeeding at suicide more than men. That being so, women are four times less able to deal with their emotions than men, as evidenced by the fact they try to kill themselves four times more than men do. If anyone is dealing with their emotions better, it’s men.
The rationalisation that female suicide is a “cry for help” is a common one, but it’s inconsistent with framing their actions as attempted suicide. An attempt at suicide is by definition a willed attempt to end one’s life, not a willed attempt at trying to get help.
I suppose you could characterise attempted suicide as deliberate self-harm instead, but that doesn’t help you either, since again women far outstrip men in mutilating themselves. Self-mutilation, too, is an inability to deal with emotions. As compared with men’s approaches to dealing with their emotions, women’s suck given these statistics.
Are we playing word games now? What a shame, I thought we were getting somewhere.
I never characterised suicide as that, I suggested that it might be a potential cause.
An attempt at suicide is a serious attempt to end your life, because it’s unbearable. However, the severity of the attempt and type of attempt vary; some methods are more effective or quick than others. Women taking pills to die slowly, are, on some levels, crying for help, there’s a chance they will be found and survive. Men hanging themselves will die instantly, and not face the “shame” of having failed and survived. It’s possible to have more than one motive in an action at once.
Self harm, since you bring it up, only supports my argument further…it’s not something that will necessarily end a life, and can be found, after which the individual may get help and support. For a boy, who risks being shamed for needing emotional/mental support, the risk will be too great to be worth doing, and so they will take it out in ways less likely to be picked up on as “self harm”, for example, punching walls. Serves a purpose “harm”, but doesn’t serve the purpose “cry for help”.
Exactly! Which is why we need less name calling (“pussy”)and rules about acceptable ways for men to cope, and more actual support.
Most of the ”Men” in that video were pussies. Why would I listen to a pussy telling me it’s ok to be a pussy.
Because you are a pussy looking for validation, rather than looking to improve yourself. That shit’s hard.
How and why is he a pussy?
Based only on the evidence available to me, specifically his entire Disqus posting history, he is not.
Try reading through his question and my answer again. It may parse differently the second time through.
Got it, thanks. You meant, hypothetically, that is why someone would listen to the Kimmel/Katz nonsense.
Because…it’s okay to be a “pussy”…human, failable, emotional, complex. It’s unnatural and unhealthy to be anything else. That’s why there’s such a massive depth of unhappiness in the male world, cos you won’t talk about it openly for fear of people calling you weak.
And who will defend men who are labeled “weak” when those men in question do speak openly?
And who will chastise women who lose interest in men who show that they are in fact vulnerable and human when times get hard? (In extreme cases women have been known to lose sexual attraction to a man & leave a relationship with a man who did exactly what you’ve said…she/they wanted the man to be “open with his feelings.”)
Answer: No one.
It sounds very negative, but after being shit on my numerous women, I’ve learned my lesson. I won’t show weakness anymore. I’m not alone.
Hi. I will defend anyone called weak for having feelings, would you?
I can’t really chastise people for losing interest in people, but I can point out the double standard, and how unhealthy it is to hold in emotions.
However, if someone loses all attraction for me because I act like a human being, then I’m not sure how much that attraction is worth…it’s certainly not worth more than my sanity and self respect.
Yes, it isn’t healthy to hold in emotions. No, I wouldn’t chastise anyone for having feelings, within reason. I do see moments when men (and women, especially) don’t use a sufficient amount of self-control and that I’ll gladly criticize. Generally speaking, a man who’s anger, jealousy, or etc overrides his behavior is weak.
When it comes to someone losing attraction somewhat frivolously, that’s what men have to deal with sometimes.
Some men, myself included, just finally accept that’s the nature of women, no matter the things they say. The parable of the scorpion & the toad comes to mind.
This is where we differ, I find a lack of self control is really a lack of coping, because feelings are not controllable and trying to control them instead of dealing with them is what’s unhealthy and in some senses criticisable.
It’s a universal human experience, yeah.
In the scorpion and the toad, they both drown, because the scorpian’s nature is vicious. If someone’s affections are frivilous, only the person who’s no longer desired suffers, and the nature is not mean, just fickle. I think there are people of all genders who are fickle in their affections, it could be just human nature.
It is not easy, but feelings are controllable. I’ve done it, after much effort. I don’t mean prevent feelings from coming into existence, however yes keeping them in check is certainly doable.
As has been pointed out in the “red pill” way of thinking, such lack of control (along with the wrong mentality) lets men’s emotions control them. They are weak. Hence the typical “white knight” behavior examples we see.
We live in a society where women are frivolous in their lack of empathy for the opposite sex (with exceptions). I do find that a lack of character and selfishness is a major contributor to one’s lack of concern for other’s feelings or lack of attraction.
It’s unfortunate but until things change one day, the best rule of thumb is never show weakness to a woman, but don’t hesitate to (on occasion, within reason) show displeasure with her (get a little angry, etc).
Hmm. Different definitions of controlling vs dealing with (expressing and talking them through).
I don’t think it’s weak to express emotions, I think it’s human, and everyone should do it.
Again, I think this is a universal human experience, we’re trained to be self-centered through capitalism…in a way, should we not be our own allies, and not expect people to empathise with us?
Expressing only anger, through fear of rejection, is only going to lead to even less empathy, it’s a vicious circle. I choose to stop it by not buying into the whole “man up”/ “boys don’t cry” mentality, it only encourages this harsh view of masculinity that doesn’t work out in reality for many men.
Agree. It’s another reason why you never take dating advice from a woman, either. She’ll tell you what sounds good (as what she thinks is acceptable in society).
But does this advice actually work? No.
Women are the worst at giving advice to men. They are pretty much giving advice to men like they would a woman…and then we see the cycle.
Oh and men don’t lose attraction frivolously? What a crock. That is so not an exclusively female trait. Next….
No it’s not. Life is hard. Being a “pussy” is not a quality for a man. Hence the “pussy”.
“pussy” has meant, “cat” or “woman/vagina” equally since the 17th century. It has, in recent terms, come to mean “weak person”, apparently as seperate from the “woman” meaning. This third meaning was the one I was addressing. No one is seriously saying that being weak gives you a vagina or changes your gender identity.
Pussy.
LOL.
Raw, natural and perfectly balanced masculinity and femininity.
If, Mr. Kimmel, you believe they are doing it wrong, I would be glad to learn by watching you ‘splain it to them:
http://img.thesun.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00666/SNA0123AA-682_666564a.jpg
The Manosphere IS men talking about their feelings. It’s the first time we’ve had a privileged space, guarded by anonymity, to actually realize we’ve all been feeling many of the same things. We feel anger, stress, regret, hopelessness, and pain, but until the Manosphere happened, we were too afraid to speak up in our culture lest we be punished more for revealing a weakness. Now we know the game. Too many notes have been compared. Too much data has been accumulated. The femimatrix was a prison camp, and men were serving hard labor for crimes we did not commit. Let women feel our feelings gents. Let them feel what torturous psychic pain is like, what having your legs blown off in war feels like, what black lung slowly suffocating you to death feels like, what corporate wage slavery or daily physical labor is like, what having your children ripped from you feels like, what being falsely accused of a crime feels like….. what it feels like to be disposable to a society that doesn’t even pretend to respect us anymore. Let them feel it until they come here begging us for forgiveness, not chastising us like a mommy would her child. We have begun to speak with one voice, and that voice is angry, and it is angry for logical, thought out, analyzed, reasoned and debated, rational reasons.
Can’t agree more with your analysis. I use to think there was something wrong with the way I felt. I kept my opinions to myself and was worried something was wrong with me.
Love this comment. No one said that men don’t feel emotions, and I agree there should be safe places to talk about them. We’ve all come together to discuss how feminism is harming us, making us feel like second-class citizens.
Whilst I don’t think it’s exactly feminism that’s harming you, I’m glad you feel like talking has helped you, cos that is the point of the video, that men should talk, not just “cope”.
Oh, we will talk. But not with women like you. Nor with any woman. You have proved yourselves untrustworthy en masse of holding the privilege of being privy to our feelings.
…Very dramatic. You don’t know me, or anything about me, but hey, at least you’re dramatically consistent with your stance on people with vagina’s.
I don’t personally care about being privy to your feelings…but you should. You should care about your right to express yourself, all of yourself and your emotions. I wouldn’t shame anyone, male or not, for having feelings. Would you?
The door ———————>
This is not a fight we will win though. Masculinity is not needed as much as it was in the past. That is a fact we all must deal with.
The economy is vastly different than it was even 50 years ago. Masculine men are not needed like they used to be, for war, economic/industrial productivity, etc. This is a fact that we all must deal with.
Now for your own personal fulfilment in this short life, you have everything to gain by embracing and refining your masculinity. Being masculine will only make you more rare and desirable to women in the modern era where the standard issue young male is basically a eunuch. Also, masculine pursuits tend to be much more fulfilling than say, i dunno, walking around like a nanny pushing a stroller with a crying baby strapped to your chest. I absolutely hate when I see men behaving like teenage nanny girls. You see it a lot actually.
@disqus_1cClQAhxfr:disqus
Nations come in cycles. An age of chaos is soon coming and masculinity will either come forcefully or the people of that nation gets destroyed.
History is not a straight line, it is cyclical. What was needed in the past will be needed again in the future.
With China and Russia licking their lips in the not so hazy background fog of international intrigue, I wouldn’t schluff off masculinity with such aplomb.
Exactly…Wait until China realizes that we’re never going to pay them back all the borrowed money. This world hasn’t seen a shitstorm of those proportions yet!
Great comment. I was having trouble articulating what I really felt about this idea that men shouldn’t express feelings… Or that their feelings don’t matter or should be completely repressed…
There is a huge difference between feminizing and emasculating men, and men having feelings. Stoicism is an absolute necessity in this world for a man, so he should learn how to solve problems by dealing with them in a proper way.
But men most certainly have a depth of feeling. Some more than others. Ever see that part in the movie 300 where the high rank father soldier watches his son die, leading him into a murderous rage of blood drunkenness?? Thats a man’s feelings coming out… Ever see a man grieve the death of his dog??? Ever see a man shed tears at the realization that he has persevered in the face of impossible odds? Ever see a man cry at the sight of honourable sacrifice or courage??? Man’s depth of feeling now that I’m thinking about it, can be utterly profound.
I’ve thought the men not expressing feelings wasn’t true between men. What existed was to be in control of your emotions. There was a past article on ROK that talked about it, but when things aren’t going right or falling apart, a man would readily express his feelings about. He just knew that he couldn’t waist time talking too much about it. Yeah, we know how you feel, we feel the same way, it’s screwed up. Now we have to do something about it.
Men feeling that they couldn’t express feelings came about as a tool to control dialogue and actions. At least it seems to me. Was or is a useful tool in an Oprah-ized world to get men to comply. Complain they don’t express feelings, and if feeling aren’t what they want to hear, shame them for feeling that way. And a natural reaction to that would be to say forget it, I won’t say anything. So they attempt again, just tell me how you feel. So they keep vilifying that don’t express your feelings, and vilify if your feeling that are expressed aren’t to their satisfaction.
Your example of a man grieving for his dog makes me think of the death of a child in a family. A man isn’t allowed to fully grieve. He has to be there for the mother, or else he’s not being fully supportive, Plus he has to continue doing the basic necessities so the bases of livelihood don’t fall apart. Can you imagine a father not going back to work while the mother does following the death of a child?
Stoicism is absolutely necessary in this world. It is a necessary life skill to be able to carry on course despite unbearable grief and strife.
I’m just saying, I don’t think it is healthy for men to be ashamed of their feelings. If men aren’t allowed to have any feelings at all, we might as well be ants.
The father character you describe who breaks down after the death of his child is tragic. It is rediculous to expect him to go to work the very next day. If an employer expects him to just be a good little worker and continue with max productivity then we might as well be China. I don’t see the benefit to anyone of bringing about such a world.
I actually agree with you. My point is the thing that inherently men don’t like expressing feelings has never been true. What they don[‘t like is the typical ask for information, they give it to you, now you got a problem with the answer. Then don’t ask the question.
Any male who is hesitant at expressing how he feels about something, it’s not because guys don’t like that, it’s due to several sources, mainly the FI type, complaining that how he feels doesn’t jive with what somebody else wants. So he decides or learns not to express it.
The grieving parent, I didn’t mean going back to work the next day. I meant the difference in perception, in support, and expectations to dealing with grief and horrific situations would be greatly different for a man than for a woman.
Often times the death of a child is followed by a divorce. I think it’s a big part of why.
I think I misunderstood you initially.
I totally agree that men are expected to just “deal”. Some veterans are torn to shreds psychologically and their grief is just considered a pointless burden.
Its an interesting point… that having to bottle up feelings is ultimately to the service of women rather than men. Sure men enforce it amongst each other, but only because the men know the girls will not be interested in a group of emotional and pensive men. They have to put on the “clown alpha” front, so men beat that shit out of each other.
Your logic, syntax, and expository argument are all over the map here, bro. Tighten it up.
Yikes, I couldn’t make it through this one – all over the place with no solid theme. An article was buried in there somewhere but that read like a 1st rough draft at best. Make it more concise brother.
…Katz, Kimmel…the agenda is pretty much spelled out right there.
I’m glad you brought up that disaster of a book, “Guyland”. I read that book and it was one of the most virulently disgusting and openly misandric books I’ve ever read. The failures I see in the book are so numerous and there are so many false dichotomies, hypocrisies, and other blatant lies that it will make your head spin. Let’s talk about some of them.
1) The false dichotomy that men are either married, stable, with a job, children, wife, and house or that they’re an evil sexual predator, on the prowl. All while at the same time criticizing those very men who do actually settle and do find a family as “racist, misogynist, homophobic, etc”. Some sort of negative bullshit term that’s so overused it means nothing anymore. So all while he’s claiming that evil patriarchal society is bad and wrong, if you don’t simply turn around and become a provider male(an essential part of any high-functioning patriarchy might I add), then you’re evil. Right.
2) Hook-up culture was created by men. BLATANT LIE. Hook-up culture was invented by women who wanted to “express their sexuality” back in the 1960’s and not be tied down to those evil gender norms. The reality of the matter is that hook-up culture is mainly propagated by women. Shocking as it may same. Think about it this way, men want sex, men realize they don’t need to get into long-term relationships to get it and eventually realize that women don’t want these long-term relationships either, they turn and participate in hooking up. The idea that men created it is so absolutely absurd and false it can be defeated easily. He even mentions some women who do like to hook up as it means of getting sex with their busy lives. He brushes this off as “internal misogyny” and what have you. With enough misandric stupidity and lacking of common sense to make you go….HUH?!?!?!
3) Let’s see, oh yea women watching male sports and doing male activities is the fault of men. Basically women are freer than ever and like to do male things and that’s men’s fault. Right. First it implies male activities are generally wrong and that female activities, whatever the fuck that is, are somehow superior. Remember, if there’s something happening in society, it’s men’s fault. Like fatherlessness, it’s not the legal, social, and economic system that fucks fathers over, it’s deadbeat dads that are the problem! This book is littered with examples of this. With enough bullshit to make your head spin.
4) And finally, the idea that white men suffer from these problems far more than any other race. It is simply child’s play to show how other men of other races participate in the hook-up culture, sports, academia and other supposed “white male” activities by their own choice. He tries to paint a caricature of all men(but white men in particular) is not one that is reacting to decades of feminism and social engineering, but rather is an irrational, violent, and misogynistic for no reason.
One thing that really got me about the book was a couple of other things:
a) Anecdotal evidence of talking to “lots of men” and the use of many questionable and unverified statistics
b) His smug, over-confident, preachy, condescending, “I’m on the moral high ground”, approach he takes in the whole book. He offers no solutions either, typical leftist bullshit, Remember, complaining without a solution, is whining.
c) (as one mentioned in the article) His complete disregard for the true nature of female sexuality(hypergamy, shit tests, feminism, birth control, and a million other things that redpill members know). His complete denial that women’s choice of men would affect the culture at large.(i.e. if women only go for certain types of men, how men will be much more likely to conform to those standards to getting pussy). And while preaching about the need to destroy masculinity and patriarchy, offers about 0 viable solutions for an alternative. You can’t make up bullshit of this magnitude.
Good points. We all know that women are allowed to criticize men in anyway (even in commercials today showing the male as a bumbling idiot). But, show females in the negative light and an army of women will show up bitching and complaining.
This….is all that women have in their arsenal (and it’s complete bullshit). There is no logic to it (because women don’t use logic)..it’s all how they feel. They “feel” threatened so I guess they were threatened.
It’s bullshit and men need to call women out on it every time.
Live your life. I realized that we cannot change people at all. Change emerges from within.You are not Jesus Christ. You are not here to change the world. Humans are generally selfish. Only men of honor recognize acts of honor. I am content living alone, less bullshit, time to relax and focus on my plans.I realized all women are a liability. Fuck getting kids. Rearing a human in this economy is tying yourself to slavery.
“Fuck getting kids. Rearing a human in this economy is tying yourself to slavery.”
Says you. It’s difficult, requires knowledge, skill and of course luck. Every kid one has (and raises well) kicks the groin of the eugenist feminationalsocialist agenda.
Oh, and your handle is “red” capsule, not “cyanide” capsule, remember that.
If anything is ever going to change, men and women both absolutely have to stop being so hostile with one another. I’ve been skimming through this website over the past few days, and the vast majority of what I’ve read, both in some articles and in many, many comments, has been nothing short of hate-speech. I’ve seen plenty of this on the other side of the fence as well from radical “feminists.” Hate-speech, the blame-game, and over-generalizing will get you nowhere. It will only cause social cliques to form, so to speak, so that typically the only people ever listening to what you have to say are people who already share your views; you end up preaching to the choir, and nothing changes. Being a man can be a bag of dirt. Being a woman can be a bag of dirt. There is SO much wrong with the way society views BOTH genders, and we’re going to have to stop pretending that isn’t true and start acknowledging the issues if that is ever going to end. We have to stop discrediting everything the opposite gender says about gender issues based on our own personal experience, because there are billions of people in the world, and everyone’s experience is different. We have to stop immediately jumping to the defense when our views are questioned or attacked and start actually explaining the reasoning behind the conclusions we’ve drawn in a thought-out, civilized manner that isn’t peppered with insults. By that same token, we need to start letting the opposing arguments be heard. Stop arguing over which gender has it worse and pay attention to the bigger picture.
Back to the Frankfurt School, you misbegotten Trotskyite.
Take your “hate speech” words to someone who cares.
-_-‘
Freedom of speech, love. I’ll take my opinions wherever I so choose, including here. If you want to perpetuate the problem, then be my guest. You have every right to do so, and I have every right to disagree.
Your way of thinking has never been known to get anything done or bring about any change. And yes, this way has.
So we simply call each other names like children until something changes?
No, we communicate with our opposition less.
Run away from the problem, that’ll solve it. I hate to say it, but the small amount of hope I had left for this cause is quickly dissipating.
Nope, that’s not running away.
Well, it seems that way, and perception is everything in matters such as this. This method of dealing with the problem runs the risk of being “weighed, measured, and found unwanting” once it is finally loud and hostile enough to be heard, which will ultimately set the cause back even further.
I myself never argue with them. I just discuss the topic with other men in here.
Fair enough, nothing wrong with that. The topic is getting attention, though. This time could be used wisely. That’s all I’m saying.
I have to “hamsterize” this for males because our hostile voice has been reactionary to decades of feminist bullshit.
It’s akin to any sort of revolution. All of them have come with strong voices and most have come with violence. The mens movement is relatively new, and as you can see with the tattoo article, we need to be loud and hostile in order to be heard. We’re up against a huge enemy: the government combined with the media combined with modern education conditioning women to act without consequence.
Men will let the world know that the way we’ve been treated is not OK, and if that means writing controversial articles, so be it.
Also, for newcomers, they just discovered a place where they can blow off steam without being treated like they are psychopaths.
Of course. There is no other way to spread our message. Our environment is too politically correct to Facebook share, tweet about this stuff. I admire our success in trolling the masses and converting a percentage of those into realizing our beliefs.
This is understandable, and even expected. These are, after all, the first steps in conquering a huge problem, but can we not learn from all of the social revolutions of the past and expedite the process? Maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but it seems to me that in this day and age with as many resources as we have available to us, we could approach this in a more effective way.
YES! We have HUGE advantages, the ability to influence, change minds/alter consciousness and, ultimately, exact change has never been easier. We can, and we will, obtain the same breadth as feminism, but via the internet it should occur quicker and cheaper…by wide margins. Plus, disruptions in academia and the media complex will be ripe for us to exploit.
ReturnOfKings is entering mainstream. We are being watched by Big Brother.
On fa(r)cebook, many people who never were exposed to the cold truths of modern society, specifically in regards to male-female relations, had a little glimpse into the manosphere courtesy of the astronomical exposition of the post about how men view women with tattoos.
Even on tv there was mention of internet sites where “abuse and misogyny from trolls” are rampant. Prosecution may be a possibility. Clearly people with extra sensitive skin bellowed cries all around, and the PC bandwagon is on the move.
It is not too far-fetched to sense this had to happen someday – did Roosh envisage this, and allow it? I gather as much. What happens from here? Talk peace, but prepare for any eventuality I say.
Mainstream, of course, namely because conditions for men continue to suck more and more. People, men in this case, tend to take notice when others start fucking with them.
We’ll know progress is being made when “hypergamy” is a household word.
Some call it “the decline”. I think it’s a transformation. Better get with the new rules. Bang everything you can. If you can’t don’t play their game. Invest into electric cars and sex bots R&D. Remember the future is always bright.
” . . . we need to start letting the opposing arguments be heard.”
I have read Anthony and Nation. I read Friedan and MS Magazine from first publication. I attended private, liberal colleges at the forefront of progressivism.
If there is a way to keep women from presenting their arguments, I have yet to run across it.
So, I’m sure you can’t deny that women’s issues exist as well, only they are usually more talked about. You’ve educated yourself on both sides and are therefore probably more capable of making a valid argument for men’s issues, but you are one man. Not all men do this. Many men shut their ears completely when a woman presents her argument, which is by effect crippling for any man trying to present his.
“Many men shut their ears completely when a woman presents her argument . . . ”
Speaking in generalities, men war, women cat fight.
Rules 5 and 11.
Oh really, well I’m another man that has also seen both sides. As far as denying that just women’s or just men’s issues exists…how about human issues exist? If men and women were once again allowed to be in harmony we’d speak like that. For now, this hideous thing call identity politics has us turned against each other. And where are the “equal” number of men’s studies departments festering throughout academia? Exactly. Moreover, what is “women’s studies” but an institutionalized female-only political lobby. Again, no such advocacy exists for men, so, we’ve heard enough from women.
“If anything is ever going to change, men and women both absolutely have to stop being so hostile with one another.”
Ladies first.
Apologists for feminism and calling for “dialogue” seem to be forgetting women have had the floor for decades. It’s only now, roughly thirty years into blanket misandrist policies that any serious opposition has sprung up against it.
It is not arguable that feminism has solely existed at men’s sufferance: it could not have attained the controlling influence it has without sufficient men who turned their backs on the masculine role models of their fathers and grandfathers. It could never have pushed men down without sufficient men who thought they were doing the right thing by letting the woman get to the CEO’s position without demonstrating sufficient qualifications to perform the role, by letting the woman serve in frontline combat units without requiring that they attain the same standard required of *any* human being faced with direct combat experience.
What you are seeing with the manosphere is the reaction of masculine men who have been treated much like the fictional John Rambo of the film “First Blood”: outcasts in their own societies despite their wounds suffered in defence of or in support of that society — and even on the fringes of those societies they are still being pushed by women who think they can decide what’s in a man’s best interests or even what’s in a man’s mind. Thirty fucking years of skyrocketing divorce rates, broken families, characterisation as rapists, inequitable treatment of male versus female offenders, pedestalling of female illnesses and cancers in preference to those of men, on top of women riding on the sweat of men’s backs, has done this. We have been patient. We have bitten our tongues. We have said we will not rape. We have said we will listen to women’s concerns. And we have listened, and done everything that women asked.
And, for women, it is still not enough. It has therefore come to the point where men are starting to conclude that, for the feminist movement at large, it will *never* be enough. Radical feminism holds the reins of childrearing and most of men’s place in society now, and “moderate” feminism — if there is such a thing — says nothing about what radical feminism is doing. Men, therefore, having concluded that women are interested only in taking men’s roles and giving nothing back, have decided upon the only rational course: conscious self-interest.
Feminists calling for “dialogue” right now are like burglars who have entered our homes, smashed the framed pictures of our fathers on the walls, taken the pocketwatches our grandfathers left us, bundled our teenage daughters out the door to a waiting van, and have returned to find us, previously thought bound and gagged, loose and holding a big chunk of wood … and then having the gumption to say “Can’t we talk about this?”
No thanks. Feminism has taken enough. We men can’t change the system now: it is too far gone. But each of us here has the right and will say: “This far and no further. Give me back the things that are rightfully mine, get out of my house, and pray I don’t blow your fucking head off as you leave.”
Again, is the OP saying that you should get your revenge, or focus on moving on?
It is not revenge to take back that which was yours and that which is being squandered by the person who stole it.
Where did he say he was out for revenge?
He said enough is enough. If that’s “getting revenge” then I’m not sure your side has moved on yet. What else do you want?
It’s very easy when I’m holding a gun to you and I say, “everyone take it easy….we’re all friends here”, but…do you feel like we’re friends?
(Being honest here, please talk to me like I’m a human being please.)
I’d just … you know how you feel when feminists “blame men for everything”? And you’re like, damn, I almost wish it was my fault, cos I’m not actually doing what they say I am, I don’t have this power and yet I’m getting the blame and hate for it?
I feel like that. I can’t see the gun. TBH I’m not even sure if it is a gun, but just smoke and mirrors designed to make us scared of eachother and bitter. Honestly. I’m not your enemy, I’m not holding any gun, are you holding a gun?
What exactly has been taken from you? And by who/what, specifically? Bearing in mind that pride cannot be taken, and purpose cannot be taken. People can try, but it’s yours if you want it, it’s your life.
My personal circumstances are no more relevant than your own to this discussion.
Indeed your asking about them is a rather more subtle but no less intellectually dishonest debating tactic: ad hominem – the suggestion that the speaker’s personal characteristics have anything to do with the point being raised.
It is a more eloquent but just as irrelevant query as the standard screech of ‘WHO HURT YOU?’
You, I meant in the general case, as you, MA, meant with your post, talking about taking back that which was “yours”. Please, don’t apply one standard to yourself and another to me.
So your actual answer is … you don’t have the time to tell me. Fine, that’s okay, I understand, I don’t have the time to tell you what the patriarchy has “taken from” me either…but that’s generally why I don’t mention it as a whole, because if I do, it’s therefore a conversation ender.
Amen, brother.
Great post Marcus. Per your last paragraph…just know this, more and more men are seeing what we’re seeing. This is really just the start, and at that, the start of the start. There are more coming.
The World needs more women willing to keep their legs closed until marriage, but it also needs more men willing to keep their sausages to themselves until marriage too.
Considering marriage is the biggest trap/scheme by women ever devised, I think I’ll pass on this notion.
No fault divorce -> Court ordered alimony -> slave for life.
Actually, God Himself created marriage, not any woman. He also put forth certain rules that, if obeyed, would have prevented the horrible mess that is marriage these days.
.
Rule 1.)
Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.
.
For the husband is the head of the wife, even as Christ is the head of the church: and he is the saviour of the body.
.
Therefore as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be to their own husbands in every thing.
.
Rule 2.)
Husbands, love your wives, even as Christ also loved the church, and gave himself for it;
.
So ought men to love their wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife loveth himself.
.
For no man ever yet hated his own flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, even as the Lord the church.
.
.
P.S. Rule 2 clearly destroys the stereotypical “barefoot-and-pregnant” scenario that the Feminists love throwing at Christianity.
.
P.P.S. Rule 2 doesn’t exist in Islam. Instead they say, “Beat your wife everyday, if you don’t know why, she will.”
I know for a fact that that’s a misquote about Islam, and in defending your own religion, you shouldn’t need to take a hit at someone else’s, because that’s a low blow.
Nope it’s in the gospels we go over it every year at mass. It’s my favorite. I just can’t quote the exact book. If you know for a fact it’s out of the Koran you should site the line and verse.
Hi, this is the “original” quote I think:
“And as for those women whose ill-will you have reason to fear, admonish them [first]; then leave them alone in bed’ then beat them’ and if thereupon they pay you heed, do not seek to harm them. Behold, God is indeed most high, great!” [4:34] Muhammad Asad
So firstly, it doesn’t say anything about beating people for no reason. Secondly, it doesn’t suggest beating them first, but as a last resort, and lastly, it has a lot of context beyond just those words…”ill-will” can translate as treason and treachery, and in dangerous political times, no one can have an enemy within their own household.
I was referring to the first rule, which is found in Ephesians5:22.
Read the bible instead it’s our book. The Koran is for the crazies in the middle east. If you want to defend that lunatic Muhammad you can marry a Muslim, then you’ll know what an oppressed female feels like.
If the bible is your book, good for you. I’m not religious, I’m open to any religions, and it’s interesting to compare them.
Thanks for the reference, and I’m not into marriage thank you.
So what are you into, then?
Why? Why can’t we all just have sex like adults?
Sex out-of-wedlock is the main source of unwanted children, as well as the large number of STD’s that are plaguing Mankind. Disobedience to God’s standards of morality clearly cause problems.
.
P.S. What was it that used to make the honeymoon night so special?
Fine, so we could choose to not have sex, or we could decide to solve that problem more directly, by providing more contraception, education, and sexual health testing. Most STD’s are easily treatable with anti-biotics, and there’s a massive variety of easy to use contracepives.
Given the choice, I’d choose sex with the tools available to make it safer, rather than waiting arbitarily to risk a terrible sex life with one person for the rest of my life.
(Yes, sex made the honeymoon night “special”. But actually, that doesn’t always work: http://www.relevantmagazine.com/life/relationships/4-lies-church-taught-me-about-sex )
P.S Why was it marriage was invented?
And frankly, women in the modern era don’t, in fact, have sex like adults. They have sex like the irresponsible perennial teenagers feminism has taught them to be.
Just like in “Brave New World”. This book is like a prophecy…
So how exactly do you have sex like “teenagers”?
And does the prevalence of this immaturity prove anything about our lack of capability to be mature?
I loved that book! It’s amazing that it was written in the 1930’s!
He was talking about having sex like adults, fmf, that is, responsibly and with a sense of self worth as an individual. You are NOT empowered by being a mindless copulating animal, no matter what your feminist masters tell you. Any pig can fuck all day in the mud hole, it doesn’t make him special or empowered.
Why do I have to be legally bound to someone for life to be “responsible” and have a sense of self worth? What part of fucking all day would inherently mean that I wasn’t being responsible, or being empowered to do what I want?
Marriage will not be considered by the majority of western men – at the very least, not before laws and society change radically, and respect the masculine sex.
The rewards / incentives are due a reversal – if females keep prioritizing sex over commitment, males won’t bother for anything other than getting their physical needs met. Adjusting to the current environment is why we have taken our stance. It’s their move.
Similarly, men will “keep their sausages to themselves” as soon as women stop being… you know, stop giving it sweet to bad boys, and protect their femininity.
Enough idealism. Back to reality, shall we?
With the equality movement many men in lesser educated positions lost work opportunities, salaries got lower, competition stiffer and women were accepted in superior positions, from HR femnazis enforcing political correctness and diversity discrimination to alpha female managers tearing down guys egos to the point where they either become obedient beta providers or secret women haters.
How can you expect a guy to be normal when he’s around women bossing him around all his life from his mother that’s selling him hollywood beta love romance (The Secret Life of Walter Mitty anyone?) as the way to get laid to female managers busting his balls while he’s barely able to afford to rent his own apartment? (common in Europe and I’m not talking about completely unskilled positions)
It took me quite a few years and extended living in developing countries (where male female relations are more normal) to get the brainwashing out of my system.
Where were all these caring women and “experts” when a generation of boys were being shamed on “Take Your Daughters to Work Day?”
Probably somewhere, how were boys being shamed through take your daughter to work day?
By not being singled out as important enough to go to work with the father/mother, specifically in a socially endorsed way. It took a lot of fathers and mothers saying “Now hold on one hot minute” about this to schools before it morphed into “Take you kid to work day”.
This all occurring of course during the time when men and boys were being openly and shamelessly mocked by the MSM and feminists in their blood dances across universities and schools around the land.
You have any idea of the origins of TYDTWD? It originated because adolescent girls recieved less attention than boys. Had it been the other way around, would it have been seen as singling boys out as more important, or merely correcting the fact that one gender was already seen as less important?
Thank you for sharing this video. Whilst it is very short, and your article is not about the video, I’m glad it’s out there. I’m surprised you’re not more supportive of men vocalising their pain, seeing as that seems to be the empowering message of this site.
It shouldn’t be about coping through the pain, it should be about eradicating the cause. For example, people shaming men for expressing pain.
You can no more eradicate the cause of pain in men’s or women’s lives than you can stop the earth from turning. This is the face of feminism that would be chuckleworthy if it weren’t wasting millions of dollars every day: that you can eradicate unhappiness from your life or anybody else’s.
Well no, but trying to is the struggle of being human, as opposed to the stuggle of being human suppressing it and coping. But that’s a radical difference in opinion, so I’m not surprised if I can’t convince you of this.
You are having some difficulty differentiating suppression from control. They are very different concepts.
I don’t think so. Explain.
Explain how, please.
Upon viewing the comment record I note that fmf:
A) Is ignorant of the lived experience of men.
B) Writes entirely in the formal language of progressive feminism.
Behave appropriately, gentlemen.
And do not allow yourself to be shamed into expressing pain, or any other emotion, that you do not, if fact, feel.
My best guess is she is a LCSW or clinical psychologist or therapist. Probably has a yellow page add somewhere. Slight chance a Christian based family/youth counselor. My first take was she was a booksy hippy chick maybe or perhaps both. The ‘can’t we all fuck like adults’ says it’s hippy. These types will never abrogate power to their man over the nanny state. In relationships, they only process sexually weak betas like their book says to. Her persistence suggests almost a religious like zeal to seek out and convert (or shame) the ‘heathen’ alphas over to betadom. So contemporary feminist clique or academian brat adult child VERY LIKELY. She’s been rag dolled by a few alphas after a few bong hits in her lifetime AND SHE KNOWS IT.
Her type is still high risk for pig squealing to the state, especially if cornered in a losing face-to-face debate to acquiesce to ‘the patriarchy’. I’ve tossed risky girls like her. They didn’t even have to ask to leave. Minimum 30 years behind a burqa might render them risk-free in that regard, but they would be way post wall by then. They really need to stop feeding our young girls all of that hormone pumped milk in the school lunch programs. Geeez.
Hi. Wow, you give me so much credit! It’s truly amazing how much you can “get” from a few comments!
So…can you criticise anything I actually said or…? Just my “character”?
He was lauding your goddessness, and suggesting ways you might look into in preserving your sacred chi whilst clearing all the chakras of the refuse clogging them.
And with this response, we see the first cracks in an otherwise superbly maintained passive-aggressive approach to the debate.
Note in particular fmf’s tone and how in virtually every post s/he assumes the people s/he is speaking to are in some way damaged individuals for holding the views they do. This results in a condescending manner in his/her responses, and is itself a subtle form of ad hominem: the attempt to link the argument with a personal characteristic of the speaker.
It’s a somewhat more subtle intellectually dishonest debating tactic, and one I’ll have to remember.
Wow thnx ^_^
Note how Marcus sees that there is no valid answer to why someone might address personality instead of argument that doesn’t sound pathetic, so they proceed to accuse the asker of intellectual dishonesty instead.
Sorry mate, but if the answers to your actions make you look bad, you only have yourself to blame. You clearly couldn’t find a good answer to my question, or else you wouldn’t have given this pathetic ad hominem comment in response.
Well obviously you shouldn’t express emotions you don’t have, I’m not trying to make anyone do that!
Singling out “white heterosexual men” is racist and sexist, isn’t it?
positive discrimination is not discrimination.
didn’t you learn anything important at the university? people tend to pursuit their degrees and care about the core subjects. but nobody really listens t the mandatory indoctrination classes any more.
I went to college 40+ years ago. Few people noticed the indoctrination and those who did were free to ask questions.
It’s upsetting how little empathy women seem to have for men, even young boys. I didn’t realize any of this before hearing about the tattoo articles and coming to this website. Now looking over some articles and comments by women on here, I gotta say that this site makes more sense than women realize.
This sort of response gives me a thousand times more satisfaction than posting forms to half a hundred entitled, egotistical tattooed freaks.
The funny thing is, the angry, hateful response you’ve seen here in retaliation to articles similar to the tattoos/piercing article does nothing to dissuade the points made at RoK.
In fact, the behavior & insults seen posted by women (and the mighty white knights) provide excellent examples of the points made here.
Where emotion reigns supreme, no logic will ever prevail.
Yep, indeed. I’ve told many that I thought it was great to have this in house “lab” for many younger guys to use and see (a model if you will).
A few of us have spent the last couple of days defending the fort, fighting off these selfish bitches to make a stand (and a point).
I hope the younger guys will read and learn from it. It’s great data to have on hand.
I can’t speak for all other women, but I have great empathy for men, especially since I have a younger brother who my sister and I have always been very protective of. As I said on a different comment section, it is no surprise to me that sites like this now exist; radical fem-nazi types have pissed off a lot of people (myself included) with their ridiculous judgements and delusions of superiority (besides their obvious tendency to degrade men, they also insult members of their own gender for being too feminine and shame us for liking things like dressing up, cooking, baking, homemaking and being nurturers. They only care about female desires if they’re identical to theirs). I figured it was only a matter of time before men got sick of being shamed for their natural desires/ways as well.That particular tattoo article was just very poorly written, which was my problem with it; I don’t care whether or not someone likes tattoos, everyone has their preferences, but to site an ex over and over and act like one’s particular bad relationship experience is science is just dumb (and, frankly, should be an embarrassment to your cause; aren’t women the ones who are said to ‘talk about the exes too much’?) If it was just in jest, of course, that’s one thing.
Good feedback vis a vi the tattoos etc, but more importantly, I agree with your other statements. Things have just gone too far. I’m all for things like equality under law and for people to be safe, but, today’s feminism openly declares shit like “men are inferior” or “obsolete” etc. That makes them a verifiable supremacist movement and, to boot, if they put their own ideology up to their own progressive “standards” they easily qualify not only as supremacist by as a hate group. With that said, you’re right, men are getting sick of this, as are women, for many reasons such as the ideological contradictions I listed above. This site is the leading edge of what I truly think will be a rather acute revulsion and eventual rejection of the current progressive religion.
Yes society can always revert or reset back to patriarchy once the gov has to cut half its budget, the ones most hurt by the ‘reset’ will be the women who believed in the shit when they were younger. They can’t ‘reset’ their beauty, but a new crop of 18 yr old girls pops up every year like clockwork 🙂
It’s always been there, though. That little voice in the back of your mind that tells you when something is wrong. That’s why many here have found the truth and it correlates with what you already knew.
Everything about women (but you didn’t want to admit or believe) is actually true. They are very selfish, self centered creatures who only care about their well being. They only care about a man’s well being if it’s connected directly (money) with their lifestyle.
You always knew this in your mind…this site is just a confirmation.
There has been an increase of feminist trolls and their panty-sniffers in the passed few days.
We must be doing something right.
The RoK attack on tattoos and piercings really got the riffraff screaming out of cyberspace by the truckload.
It hit them at a visceral level that tore away at their ego and left them standing naked despite all of the ink they hide behind. It was either jump in en masse or, well, silence implies consent. Their souls were laid bare as the shameless narcissist that they are, it was attack or raise the white flag.
On this topic it’s worth looking up Matt Forney’s old postings around the subject of amdygala hijacking.
RoK has stopped banning them.
Why is that ?
How do you guys deal with dinner and party discussions? How do you hold you “power level” as they say on 4chan.
I’m asking because I understand that my opinions can get me completely ostracized by society (I never EVER thought I would say this, it’s insane). I know that people will call me sexists, machos etc. I try not to talk too much when I don’t know the people very well, but I’m wondering if you guys have techniques to stay “zen” and keep your calm. It’s extremely difficult, and I’m preparing for a life of perpetual difficulty, but I don’t care and I accept it. I just don’t want to burn too quickly, so to say.
This a party that you really wanted to go to? Well, if you fear your opinion may offend somebody, consider if your opinion is based on facts. And I don’t just mean statistics. Because a lot of facts that can be brought up based on statistics, discussion on race is a hot topic for example,(some guy named McGrath may find the scent of this) the arguments usually pick and choose statistics that may be true but don’t look at all the factors, the histories, and the causes to how the stats come about.
So if your opinions can stand up to that, then you may have to learn to stand your ground. Or only go to parties where you’ll actually have fun and want to be there.
I’ve bitchslapped a few women into conservative good sense. Women actually dig the arguments. Try it here and there.
I’ve had women emerge from the shadows at parties saying that it’s a relief to hear what they were thinking articulated by me. Women expect men to be bigoted and aggressive anyways.
Hmm, only 2 hours behind me. Sooner than expected.
Call it Identity game.
well, simply don’t talk about it.
in my immediate surroundings most ppl don’t know my political opinions. i just love to sit back and listen to the biased discussions, sometimes i heat it up by throwing in buzzwords.
i am surrounded by scientists at work and it is always astonishing how little reason and logical argumentation is found. the STEM people are a little more redpilled, but the lib arts re tards we have employed usually dont think, but reproduce opinions from anything they read. and because it is written somewhere it has to be true, otherwise it sould not be written somewhere. and reviewed by someone with the same opinion (which is the most crazy shill).
sometimes i believe the flollowing chart to be true…
Choose like-minded friends.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/13/sexism-feminism-comic-rasenth_n_5976660.html?ncid=edlinkushpmg00000042
Ordinarily I’d not respond to a single weblink, but this proved an interesting exercise. Warning, this response is twice the length of the average ROK article, but it deserves the analysis. And if we’re going to pull the West out of the shit, the phrase “tl;dr” has to die a horrible death.
Two preliminary points about the comic in that link:
(1) Robert McKee, a gifted screenwriting teacher, reports Plato as advocating to the city fathers of Athens that all artists, playwrights, and storytellers be banned from the city. The rationale he had for such an odd request was incisive: unlike philosophers, who were said to argue an idea based on its objective merits, artists tended to wrap up ideas in an emotional charge. The containment of an idea inside visual, auditory or aesthetic cues designed to appeal to people’s emotions gives it more seeming weight than it actually has. That was why Plato regarded artists as dangerous: because they had the perfect capability to warp public discourse. The same goes for any cartoon that “sets out perfectly” why feminism is important: it can only amount to an attempt to wrap up an idea in an emotional charge, not debate the propositions on their merits. In short, it’s intellectually dishonest.
(2) It’s funny that HuffPo chose a 25 year old Japanese artist to advocate for feminism. Japan is presently in the grip of a major gender and fertility crisis due to the rise of the soshokukei danshi – herbivorous boy – or as you may have heard the expression, the “grass eater”. These are men who are not interested in dating, sex, or marriage, and (per this article which also comes from HuffPo: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/yumikosato/who-are-japans-grass-eaters_b_4961817.html ) 60% of Japanese men between 20 and 34 display some tendencies of this. And, per the same article, Japanese women find dealing with them “a pain – they don’t ask me out, so I have to ask them out.”
Based on the percentage involved, there’s literally a better than fifty/fifty chance that Rasenth, the author of this cartoon, is a grass eater himself – a guy who finds it safer both emotionally and financially to stay single and celibate. This is an even more warped position than the supposedly damaged place most ROK men are coming from, and it seems to come direct from feminism. And if “Rasenth” is a woman, that makes the comments questionable and no better than your average lightweight feminist.
That aside, let’s put the propositions of the cartoon’s panels against the proposal that they are justifications for why feminism helps “everyone”:
“Date Me! – No!” Because we think she’s shallow: Feminism isn’t helping anyone here. The woman is behaving exactly as feminism has wanted her to behave: with her own sexual agency and saving herself for a partner she wants — typically the hot, bad boy who will mistreat her. In the Bad Old Patriarchal Days, men like the nerd pictured could indeed have secured a decent wife on the basis that they were providers, i.e. beta game. That time, thanks to feminism, has passed. The wreckage of this scene has nothing to do with patriarchal, masculine standards.
“Date Me! – No!” But we think she’s desperate: again, feminism has helped no one here. Feminism gave women complete sexual agency and the social freedom to screw anyone they wanted to without a sliver of societal judgement or consequence, men responded rationally by having sex with anyone they wanted to in far greater numbers and without feeling any need at all to commit to anyone. Consequently they have no incentive to select anything other than the best-looking woman they can find, because the odds are on she will be sexually open to him. It might also be noted we don’t think the woman is desperate: rather, deluded. She is not looking after her appearance or doing anything to compensate for it, so she is simply not competing in the sexual jungle that feminism has left upon us. Again, this has nothing to do with masculine, patriarchal standards.
“When we think this is happening … when it’s usually like this.”: Again, an idea is more potent when it’s wrapped up in an emotional charge. Thus with this stereotypical image presented as fact – note the word “usually”. Exactly where is the basis to say approaches to women are “usually” by borderline sexual harassment? If anything this is an *inept* approach to a woman at patriarchal standards. Were Roosh or any other competent player watching this approach, they’d be facepalming, because he’s not going to get laid this way. Masculine men know there’s a plethora of available pussy for them. Escalation is handled in a different way; the whole point of the seduction game, as old as Ars Amarotica, is to make women feel sufficiently comfortable to give up their pussies — not overbear them. It’s only men who’ve had their heads twisted by contrary feminist messages about what women want that buy into this picture’s nonsense: so again, feminism hasn’t helped anybody here.
“Because we think they’re decoration for the guy in the middle”: Feminism doesn’t help anyone here, because feminism shames these women no less for supposedly not having their own agency – thus, it comes to exactly the same contemptuous view as people who supposedly see these two as decoration, just for different reasons. Thus, again, no help for anyone from feminism here.
This sort of image is emblematic of male virility, potency, and attractiveness. It says to women that this is the sort of man who is desirable to a majority of women, and it says to women that this is the sort of guy who is likely to be able to provide for you, have good children with you, and basically make your life exciting. In evolutionary and social terms, those are entirely acceptable propositions for the most part. Feminism has only proved this proposition correct, because having been given full sexual agency women pick, in overwhelming numbers, this sort of man.
“Because we blame women for sexual harassment … but this doesn’t happen”. Leaving aside the eye-rolling appeal to stereotypes in the case of “victim blaming” – feminism has not helped anyone over the past forty years with a male problem of this kind. Domestic violence against males, in public, is ignored by women. Groping men in public is ignored by women. More specifically, the situation in the second picture *has* happened – repeatedly. Unlike women, men generally don’t bullshit each other when they’ve been colossally stupid. “He kicked me in the groin!” the kid weeps on a sports field. “Well, why weren’t you wearing a cup, you idiot? It’s part of the basic safety equipment for playing this sport! That’s why they invented it!” And guaranteed the kid will next week be wearing the frigging cup.
“Because we think girls problems are solved with makeovers to passively get male attention”: See the above how feminism basically deregulated the sexual marketplace, meaning women in this feminist world now *have* to compete for sex. Feminism didn’t help here; it created the problem to begin with. Moreover: I have lost count of how many women report feeling their self-esteem, mental well-being, and confidence rise, however temporarily, from feeling they are looking better for themselves. Note the thousands of testimonials from women in weight loss groups about their appearance’s effect on their well-being. The argument in this picture is contradicted anytime a woman goes out on the town with her tits hanging out and proclaims her slutty appearance is “for herself”. I have yet to meet the woman who said her life was saved by a reading of “Meditations”, though I’ve seen plenty who turned into maniacs (and later, regretful spinsters) after reading “The Female Eunuch”.
“But boys’ problems are solved when they accept themselves and get laid”: feminism doesn’t help anybody here, because this rule is actually true. Feminism again created the problem because it encouraged men to think of themselves as creeps and rapists and gave men dozens of contradictory messages about what women supposedly want versus what they want from their actions. ROK advocates three habits to save men’s mental health: physical fitness, reading, and approaching women. For men, these are lifesaving habits. Exercise kicks endorphins in; it’s a potent weapon against depression and it’s an essential tool because the pain of lifting weights teaches you as much about yourself as a good book does. And approaching women is the only way you’ll ever build up enough confidence to wind up eventually sleeping with one, which, like it or not, men want to do in overwhelming numbers.
“When females are taught to control their sexual urges until marriage but males are taught their sexual urges are manly.”: This isn’t a double standard, though I’m sure the grass-eating author thought it was. Females being taught to control their sexual urges until marriage was solid advice before feminism, and it’s pretty much the only female Game that has much chance of securing a half-decent partner in a marriageable relationship now, because again feminism deregulated the sexual marketplace to men’s advantage. And men’s sexual urges are manly – there is no arguing that proposition. They are part of a male’s identity, no matter how deep he pushes them down, and indeed their suppression and denial is what breeds people like Eliot Rodgers. It’s cute the author couldn’t bring himself to step over the line and just screech that “men are taught to fuck anything that moves!” because it’s blatantly not true. If anything, men are harangued to control their sexual urges both before marriage and after, given the state of divorce laws in the West.
“Because this is too revealing – because this is too prude.” Again, see feminism’s deregulation of sexual marketplaces. Feminism didn’t help anyone here. Only feminism makes it possible to be “too prude”, and simultaneously destroy the idea of “too revealing”. That aside, it ignores context in favour of a stereotype. For an Islamic country, the picture on the left is, indeed, too revealing and will get you thrown in jail if you wander the streets wearing it. For the same Islamic country, the picture on the right is commendably modest. For American modern culture, the picture on the left is what women put themselves in when they want to go out and “be themselves”. For American modern culture, the picture on the right is what any modern woman would not be caught dead wearing unless she licks carpet or already has locked down a boyfriend with AAA-class head. And for winter, the picture on the left is idiocy while the picture on the right is common sense.
“Because she’s too butch … because she’s too girly.” Feminism created this problem, and it isn’t helping anyone solve it. No man would say the girl on the right is too girly – quite the contrary, he’d say she’s feminine and attractive. Only women do that to each other, and they do it be destroying norms of gender behaviour. As for Too Butch? That’s mostly applied by women against fellow women – not men against women, because men looking for sex just aren’t going to hit up someone who looks like another man unless they prefer cock to pussy. Regardless of what you’re told about the mind being the best aphrodisiac, if the guy is heterosexual he isn’t going to get hard on a woman who looks like another guy.
“Because she doesn’t care enough … because she cares too much.” Who is feminism helping here? The girl on the left is *obese*. If she doesn’t believe her doctor, then eventually her overworked heart, liver, or joints are going to tell her that. It is a matter of fact, not opinion, that at least up until the point where the picture was taken, she has not cared sufficiently about her own health and appearance to get her body down to a safe BMI. It matters not whether *she* thinks she cares enough – as I said, biology is not arguable. And the girl on the right is presumably suffering from anorexia. If so, she has a mental disorder. She objectively, and clinically, cares too much about her own appearance, and it is killing her. Any doctor will tell you health is about balance: these are overbalanced equations, not demonstrations of feminism helping anybody.
“Because even women perpetuate systemic sexism”: Women always have gossiped and backstabbed more than men. It’s their prime coping strategy in a world where they can’t physically compete. But they do so more now under feminism than they ever have before, simply because they are in a deregulated sexual market by their own – or feminism’s – own hands.
“Because men, women and all people should be treated with respect!”: So every religion in the world tells us at its core. Feminism is not anything original here, and if the verbal tirades of second wave feminism are to be believed, it doesn’t observe this principle.
“Because we think showing weakness is girly.” Women often use being weaker than men to their advantage: look up Rescuer Syndrome in particular. Women are physically and emotionally weaker than men – something feminism has not and cannot change no matter how many papers it publishes, because it is written into our DNA. A man who takes responsibility for himself and wants to achieve anything of substance in the world eventually has to learn to master his emotions and only use them when safe: both women and men take advantage of those who do not. Feminism has never been concerned about men showing weakness: quite the contrary, they prefer it because it makes men easier to dominate.
“Because we think a guy who is a virgin is sad.” If he’s a virgin because of an addiction to misogynist, soul-destroying pornography, as this picture shows, then it’s not just sad, it’s tragic. ROK advocates getting men away from their porn addictions. And the only people who consider a virgin to be sad are those who have actually had sex and understand what a fun and awesome experience it is. If it’s a matter of religious commitment, on the other hand, that’s a different story, and rightly so because you can respect the commitment made. Most male virginity in the modern day is imposed by circumstances or by apathy, not by commitment to a higher goal.
“Because we think a man who has a negative body image is unmanly”. The words don’t match the picture: if the two guys, anorexic and obese in each case, desire a better body, then there is nothing wrong with that at all. If an obviously well-built man thinks he is too skinny or too fat, then he has a mental problem. The question of manliness does not come into it at all.
“Because we think boys with girly interests are shameful”: if it’s other than because the kid is explicitly homosexual or genuinely transgender, then yes, it is shameful. “Girly interests” as portrayed by the picture itself are the immature interests of children. The problem, and dishonest part, being that the author does not identify boys up to the age of 18 and beyond. It’s one thing if you play with dolls as a 6 year old boy. It’s another thing if you’re still playing with them as an 18 year old on the cusp of maturity. And the author ignores that “girly interests” tend to be focused on consumption of consumer goods, focused on buying more useless shit to fill up your house. Girly interests, for the most part, tend to be immature, superficial interests as compared with masculine interests that tend towards the stuff of life and death – and surely need to be mastered.
“Because we think men who dress like women are jokes.” Feminism certainly seems to think so. Feminists actually can’t agree over whether transgender men should be “allowed” to be present at women-only, feminist conferences or part of the movement, since they apparently can’t know what it’s like to be a woman unless born with a vagina. The self-contradictions here are like watching an ouroborous eat itself. And let’s not forget the fact that, to a very large extent, men who dress like women often do so for the express purpose of generating laughter in their observers, or indeed as a profession – go to any gay pride parade and see what happens. Me, I think the biggest joke is how this inclusivity allows a transgender male to enter women’s-only MMA tournaments and knock the living shit out of any of his “sisters” he comes across.
“Because we think men hurt by women are pathetic.” Feminism, again, generated this attitude. By generating the belief that hurting a woman was never excusable or justifiable, feminism basically gave women a full incentive to engage in beatings of men without any fear of consequences. Prior to this, men hit by women were not thought pathetic because it did not happen without the woman getting all the response she provoked if not more. Feminism also actively tries to suppress and offer death threats against anyone who points out the statistical truth that men are actually less aggressive and violent than women in relationships. Feminism’s not helping anyone here. Men – derided and accused of being wife beaters and rapists – did this.
“Because even girls insult guys for being ‘sissy’.” See above about feminism’s generation of a “never hit a woman” attitude. Intriguingly, as the tattooing article demonstrates, women resort very easily and quite freely to resorts they think will attack a man’s masculinity: demeaning the size of his penis, accusing him of being gay, accusing him of not being strong. These attitudes come from militant feminists, who do not have any regard for the men they hurt. No feminist helping hand here.
“Because it’s shameful for men to be weak/like women.” Again, see above about the general tone of responses from women to the tattooing thread. Again, feminists promulgate these insults, not men. Feminists, by their actions, wish to be entirely like men – i.e. they don’t want to be like women, either. No help by feminism for everyone here.
“Because the same sexism that hurts women also hurts men.” Finally a correct statement: the problem is that it’s sexism in favour of women and against men, i.e. misandry, i.e.e. the premier product of feminism at large.
“Because talking about one group’s issues doesn’t mean we’re belittling others.” Show me a Men’s Issues counsellor on a university, in a family court, in a refuge, and I might believe you. As it is, actions speak much, much louder than words.
“Sexism isn’t us vs. them…” This is advancing false equivalence as a defence to one gender – men – having its vitality and purpose ripped from it by misandrist policies.
“Because if we work together…” We did work together. Back before feminism. Back when men and women recognised themselves as complements rather than competitors. Back when a beta provider male, the head of his household, was not only looked up to by society, but honoured as its foundation. Feminism has split the sexes apart – nobody else. Back when an alpha approach to women and life was rare and inherent rather than the only possible course for men now left given the inequity women have introduced into gender relations in the West.
Thank you for your response I do value your opinion more than most on this site. It was interesting read.
Socrates lived in a profoundly patriarchal society, not the schizoid storm of chaos that is gender relations in the West. Indeed the attraction of his society was the fact beta male models of family were respected by society as one of its foundations.
In fairness I should clarify my response: this site and my response has nothing to do with dialogue between the sexes.
As I said further down, feminism created this mess, and given its current lock on public discourse and public policy in the West, it will have to be feminism that fixes it — or feminism that collapses in on itself as unworkable, as most oppressive ideologies do eventually.
I went through that webpage not to provide a male perspective, but rather to provide a set of tools to men who’re going to have to deal with these sorts of erroneous, farcical sacred cows in gender relations on a daily basis. That, indeed, is the purpose of this site. ROK is not a MRA site seeking to shut the gate after the horse has disappeared over the horizon with a screaming feminist on its back. It is a shed for men in which are stored basic survival tools for modern gender relations.
As I said further down the page, the point at which the situation in the West could be salvaged has passed. The point at which discussion would make a difference has long passed. Since women are determined en masse to embrace in sexual socialism, the men on this site or using its tools both mental and physical will simply respond in the time-honoured way oppressed people have successfully resisted their oppressors: withdrawal of their presence as a foundation for the oppression to go on, and passive resistance to that oppression where they chance to meet it.
Women will probably not like this. Indeed they already don’t, though many can’t put their finger on what’s happened to all the good men. At the end of the day, most women still want children, or feel the itch of an empty womb around 40 or so — and many past 40 bitterly regret feminism when they’ve nothing to show for it but a dry, shrivelled uterus. In Japan women have said they don’t like men who won’t play the standard sexual chump game. Japanese culture tends to distill and concentrate elements of Western culture, and the “grass eater” may well be seen as a concentrated, distilled (and passive, and unmanly) version of this passive resistance. But women cannot expect to control the rules of the sexual dance in a one-sided manner and expect men to turn up and play.
There’s a ROK article about how the US black community is a preview of what wider Western community is going to look like fifty years down the line, and one might note the hysterical doublethink of women in that community as they screech on one hand that they don’t need no man but on the other wail about where the good men are/were/went. Men in that community as a large group have fallen into caricatures of masculinity, again largely due to feminism’s influence and men’s rational responses to it. That fate, at large, awaits the West. ROK’ers as a group are not minded to do anything about it. We will simply use the tools that still work and enjoy the decline, waiting for women to come to their senses. There’s no dialogue between the sexes to be had or wanted here, and it’s a reason women are not welcome or wanted on this site.
Who know some day we might find egalitarianism hahah : )
Socrates attacked poetry in General.
It was a thought experiment. Much like the Republic.
He was using Art in general to compare and contrast with Logic.
Aristotle took the task on and suggested that art provides catharsis and that Socrates suggestion should not be acted on. Contemplated but not enacted.
Just don’t confuse knowledge and appearances.
NIAWYC – also a minor footnote that Socrates’ notion of poetry was not poetry as we deem it, i.e. verse that may rhyme or not rhyme depending how post-modernist the author is. 😉 Poetics covered basically most forms of drama – plays, that is, along with epic narratives which were expressed in verse.
Thanks for spending the time to break it down so lucidly.
1. Yes, cartoons are not a substitute for argument, though they might summarise them.
2. Having a vagina doesn’t automatically make everything you say questionable, no more than having a penis does. Or anything in between.
3. I actually don’t think MGTOW’s are that damaged. I think they are almost sensible.
4. Behaving as feminism wanted her to, yes, but having a sexist response from people who wish she wouldn’t anyway. “We” here is the majority of casual sexists. This is very important to understand.
-She’s desperate..there’s nothing wrong with thinking that, but it’s part of a couplet, a double standard.
-“Usually” = In hundreds and hundreds of women who say that’s their experience and therefore relate to this comic. Don’t get me started on “giving up their pussies”…seriously, don’t.
-Decoration..we’re not shaming them, but the people/”we” who see them as decoration. And attractiveness measured through women is only as valuable as much as you think women are/sex is are vital to a man’s life.
-Violence/Blame: Just because something hasn’t been solved yet, doesn’t mean it can’t be. It’s a worthy goal.
-Sexual marketplace existed before feminism, it’s not been introduced by people saying women should be economic agents.
-Again, it’s talking double standard, don’t ignore.
-Sexual urges, is a double standard, and it just reduces sex for everyone, cos we’re all playing “games”. Elliot Rodger’s LIFE was about sex, or lack of it, don’t lie.
– Yes, cultural/seasonal standards are different. Prude came about from people disrespecting liberation meaning the right to say “no” as much as the right to say “yes”.
-Again, “we” is the sexist majority, which includes women.
– BMI is not a be-all, end-all, chill. And I don’t really like this part of the comic.
-Systematic sexism..I think the 3rd wave might have something to say against that.
-Weakness shouldn’t be seen as “girly”, because men are not more emotionally strong than women, it’s a lie.
-Virgin–You’re part of the problem, well done.
-Body Image..you’re just wrong, people do think that it’s girly.
-There’s a lot of disagreement in a lot of political movements, either way, transwomen/dresses shouldn’t be “jokes”.
-But we shouldn’t think that it’s pathetic to be hurt by someone because of their sex.
-Not all tattooed women are feminists.
-Correlation =/=causation.
-us. vs. them: You’re wrong, for a lot of people.
-Back in the good ol’ days when I could beat and rape mah wife, there was none of these loud-mouthed brazen hussies trying to complicate things by being people too! Am I right?
“Back in the good ol’ days when I could beat and rape mah wife, there was
none of these loud-mouthed brazen hussies trying to complicate things
by being people too! Am I right?”
And that demonstrates you as just another raiser of caricatures when you can’t argue substantively. Fuck off.
So, the new agenda is to extend the victimhood self-centered attitude to the male sex. Mix it up with the queer theory, and you have good Brave New World castrated zombies workers, weak happy brainwashed slaves, instead of thinking and acting strong men.
They’ve been moving faster lately because they see that we’re resisting to their social engineering.
Some years ago (before I pulled the plug on the thing) I watched the Peter Gallagher version on TV.
It was sponsored by Zoloft.
You can’t make this shit up.
They first emasculated men and now blame men for not being men. So sick of these twisted pieces of shit. The battle against straight white men continues. I suppose the just want us to shut up and obey. Not gonna happen. . If your pursuit of gender equality or whatever liberal feminist ideal requires me or other straight white men to bow down and obey. You can go straight to hell. I refuse to be a willing participant in my destruction.
was in sweden a while ago. motherland and vatican of its-never-good-enough-feminism.
talked to girls. they think that men in sweden are not men anymore, they go to finland to find real men.
definition of real men: well, at least no swedes.
somehow i am proud not to understand this hamsterisation process….
You got that right!
*************
I saw this working as a fisherman in AK in the 90s. A sailing yacht with Swedish registration came into the harbor. As it approached the float it was clear that the men on board knew more about buying boats than operating them.
*************
I did the courteous thing and took their lines. The wind was blowing hard enough that even with bow thrusters the crew was having a hard time snugging the boat up to the float. The thing any beach-seining crewman knew to do was to sit on the float and push against the cleat with one’s feet while holding the line. It puffed me up when the ladies loudly commented in accented English, “That one is STRONG”. They smiled broadly as I made eye contact. The pulling worked, the boat was secured. Two beautiful women accepted my hand and stepped off the boat. I asked them if they would like a real shower at the cannery, and they were ready with their gear in about 90 seconds.
*************
As we walked them the cannery they asked about the local night life. I did my best to discourage them from going to the bar. There were normally only two eligible women in this town with around 800 single crewmen anchored in the harbor. It would have been strongly preferable to keep at least one of these girls for myself, but they had already spent 5 weeks cooped up on a yacht, and the idea of spending an evening with me on a seiner just could not be made palatable.
*************
During our walk I asked if the girls had relationships with the men on the boat. This unleashed a tidal wave of complaints about Swedish men. Too feminine, too passive, not aggressive, too theoretical, too structured, too weak. They even made fun of the way their own countrymen talked. Both made it clear that they had been to AK before, and they wanted to meet more fishermen on this trip.
*************
This is ROK, so I’ll answer the ultimate question. By the time I made it off the float every boat in the harbor would have been notified via VHF17. There would have probably been 300 men in each of the two bars in town that night looking for an opportunity to impress these girls. On a calm night there is about a fight an hour in an Alaska corporation bar. That night there would be almost non-stop fighting. As nice as these girls were, if I couldn’t carve one out for myself before she made it to the bar, they had to be let go. I was one out-of-towner deckhand. I did not have what it would take to fight every crabber at the bar for the pleasure of the lady’s next dance. I left the girls at the cannery, went back to the boat alone, drank some of my salmonberry wine stash, baked cookies for the crew, and made meatballs ahead of the next opener.
Actually, they are blaming men for being “men”: stoic, aggressive, terrified of being vulnerable. They say we should encourage boys and men to express their emotions and look after them. You should watch the video so you know what you’re fighting.
Not “terrified of being vulnerable”. There simply is absolutely no benefit “from” being vulnerable for a man. On the other hand men are attracted to “vulnerable” girls.
No benefit perhaps for dating as you know it, but the emotional and mental health benefits surely count for something?
Absolutely, there is a double standard, that is the problem… We need to stop encouraging babying of women and desensitising of men, by reducing the stigma of feelings, either positive or negative (idolising them in women, despising them in men).
If you want to get laid consistently better get with the program. I absolutely HATE that i have to be a “hard ass” but being a fit 6’3” male, that comes with the territory.
Again, is it worth it? Is female attention worth more than your mental and emotional health?
Wouldn’t it be better to risk less sex, but be more you? Also, the best relationships, of all types, happen when you’re yourself, if they happen. And that sex is regular, and amazing.
A certain type of man is attracted to ‘vulnerable’ men…
I tried to read this.. but then I thought… I really don’t care..
Not about anything of this shit… who cares?
And yet you decided.. after saying you don’t care… you really don’t care..
You came and commented here… for no reason.
Eh, some practitioners of bad memes need to know that real men hold them in disdain. Her comment is useful in that the replies are an example for others.
************
Besides, have you ever tried to get a lady like Sara to keep her non-germaine thoughts to herself? That never ends well.
Great. Welcome to manhood. That’s the spirit. Keep it up soldier.
What I’m hearing is don’t ‘Man up!’ but instead, “Behave like a woman.”
**************
Men and women are not the same. It is time for the misandryst feminist to admit this.
The suicide rate and explicit teaching of men and women to be different would disagree… If it’s so natural, why do we have to teach it, and shame those who break the mold?
Lessee….
************
We’ve got about 40,000 years of modern humans with men and women playing different roles.
************
We’ve got about 6,0000 years of civilization with men and women playing different roles.
************
We’ve got about 50 years of brainwashing/teaching/programming that men and women are exactly the same mentally, physically, and attitudinally.
************
You are making the case that we have to teach that men and women are different…
************
Hmmm.
Way to show your maturity with the cartman image there…
1. No, we haven’t, we’ve got someone on the internet posting about evolutionary psychology with clearly no knowlege of our prehistoric past from an archeological perspective, and repeating themself to make it sound like he’s got more than 2 things to say.
2. We’ve then got same person claiming that all politics that is different from his view is brainwashing, showing a clear lack of understand of subjectivity, i.e that other people are seperate and different from themself.
3. We’ve got this person then saying that there is no social conditioning involved in creating a society that runs smoothly, thereby completely ignoring the social abilities/adaptabilities of humans that allowed us to thrive, in order to claiming that our basic biology runs our lives and we have no influence in gender socialising.
Wow. Extrapolate much?
************
Here is the pic again. It hurts your feelings because you know you’re being laughed at.
*************
Show me where my facts are wrong.
*************
Show me where I said there is no social conditioning.
*************
Is your point so important that you have to lie about what i said to make it?
Hey, it’s up to you, I’m just wondering why you’d want to make that impression.
No, I’m not going to educate you, because you clearly don’t have enough basic respect for me or my ideas enough for me to waste my time on you expecting you to take it seriously.
You implied heavily that you did not believe my case that “we have to teach that men and women are different”, what am I meant to infer except that you believe the opposite, that we do not have a role in teaching gender?
“We’ve got about 50 years of brainwashing…that men and women are exactly the same mentally, physically, and attitudinally.” Tell me honestly that the fact these are different views from your own hasn’t biased how you think these ideas are spread.
We would all have more respect for your opinions if you had a basic understanding of human history beginning with the stone age.
************
We would all have more respect for your opinions if you had writing skills rudimentary to a freshman at a state university.
************
Seriously, pick up a copy of The Lively Art of Writing here.
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/…
************
Let me guess. Howard Zinn figured prominently among the authors of your history readings. Did I get that much right?
************
You need to worry more about your education and less about mine.
1. So because my interpretation of archeology is different from yours, I’m uneducated?
2. Fine. You only respect those with the same opinion as yours(“educated “), and those who write in a style you approve of. That’s very narrow minded, and means we can’t have any interesting discussion. Shame.
3. You’re still rude, still immature, and it’s still your choice. And I still can’t see why you’d chose that.
You’re right. I like people who write in a style that is easy to read. I also like people who understand logic, and who can express ideas through easy to read prose.
************
You have been shortchanged in your education, but it is not too late.
Seriously, pick up a copy of The Lively Art of Writing here.
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/…
************
We were not discussing archaeology, and you’ve never stated your ‘interpretation’ of archaeology. A logician would call that a non-sequitur. I hope I helped you learn something today!
************
Given that you don’t understand the difference between archaeology and history, I would also like to recommend Vocabulary for the College Bound Student. You can pick up a copy here:
http://www.amscopub.com/vocabulary-for-the-college-bound-student
************
I’m always eager to help a young mind with writing, vocabulary, and logic. Please let me know if I can do more for you.
The video takes advantage of the doubts every human being feels at that age. This is exactly what I would do if I wanted to brainwash an entire population.
The shaming we’re seeing now is directed at boys who act like men, who take risks, who engage in rough horseplay, who establish social order among their peers. In short you seek shame boys who will grow up to be strong men.
A society of betas has never survived for very long. It is also not a society in which I want to live. Those who are bold and successful should be rewarded.
I’d say you are experiencing shaming from both ends, for acting “like men”—engaging in physical play, dominance, risk taking (not entirely valuable skills for the modern, meritocratic, world). And at the same time for acting “like women/beta’s”, for displaying emotions, and not acting like men. A rock and a hard place as it were. Personally, I think the “like men” is outdated, especially as women don’t have to or want act “like women” anymore, because these social constructs belong to an outdated time.
Citation needed: “a society of beta’s has never survived for very long”. Boldness comes in many forms, surely being “sucessful” is it’s own reward?
Anyone who thinks a feminist workplace or a feminist society is a meritocracy clearly needs their head read.
Anyone who reads my post about wanting to live in a meritocracy and assumes that I must mean feminist (and that must be mutually exclusive with meaning meritocracy) is making so many leaps of logic it’s astounding. I mean what I say, I understand what I say, just because you don’t doesn’t make me wrong, it makes you confused.
I don’t need a citation. You need to name for me the society of betas that persisted.
It is not a matter of women wanting to act like women, it is compulsory.
Women, as a whole, will always have better verbal skills than men. They will always have inferior spacial and mathematical skills to men.
Women will always be more reluctant to put an end to conflict than men, even if allowing the conflict to continue is actually allowing evil to exist.
“”When I use a word,” Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
–Lewis Carroll.
I understand that saying meritocracy means meritocracy, is that really such a ludicrous “choice” of meaning?
No, it’s not compulsory. Nothing in life is compulsory.
No, not true, a lot of these differences are due to socialisation and not hormones. Also, these generalisations and averages have so much overlap they are practically useless even when these “differences” do apply.
This society of “betas” are still around…
And the burden of truth is on the person who makes the claim, generally.
So, is homosexuality compulsory? Is it a choice?
Good question. I guess by “things” I meant principles and actions…not identities like sexuality, gender, race, etc.
I mean, you could argue that homosexual ACTIONS are a choice…a lack of them should not be compulsory.
OK.
**********
So you expect us to believe that there is a non-environmental difference between “identities” of ‘genders’ of heterosexual male and homosexual male.
***********
You also expect us to believe that the differences between masculine men and feminine women are “learned” and not tied to “identitities”.
***********
Can you not see your belief system contradicting itself? It is falling apart right before our eyes.
***********
You need to reconcile this contradiction. Only a fool would go through life holding these two obviously contradicting beliefs.
***********
Start by questioning the other premises taught to you by the people who programmed your mind with this contradiction.
Do you not see the screaming contradiction here?
So which one is it?
Either straight male and female identiities are in born, or homosexuality is not. Make up your damned mind.
Consistency is a lot to expect from a leftie, aint it?
Sexual identities are in-born, but how we act on them is a choice. Consistant enough?
(Leftie note: Yes I am left handed, how did you guess? :O )
(And I believe that people have the right to have free choice of how they act on their sexual identities, within reaon ie. without harming anyone.)
Yes.
Yes.
No, no I cannot. The gender/sex binary is a social construct whereas SEXual preferences are somewhat innate, and to do with sex, not gender (gender being learned, not innate, sex being innate, mostly.)
You are out of your freaking mind.
***********
To summarize your points:
***********
Heterosexual behaviours = learned behaviours = unnatural/unhealthy/abnormal
***********
Homosexual behaviours = innate behaviors = natural/heatlhy/normal
If that gave you a headache, it’s because you’re doing it wrong.
OHhhhh that’s what you mean.
No, not at all what I meant. Sorry for any confusion. What I mean is:
Sexuality (homosexual or heterosexual or any other) = Innate preferences = natural/healthy/normal.
Gender (as in the concepts of “feminine” and “masculine”, NOT sexual characteristics) = learned concept/construct/behaviour = unnatural/unhealthy/limiting [but also the societal norm, I’m writing an essay on why.]
Well no it didn’t give me a headache, it is pretty hard to explain to people who refuse to recognise how I see gender, sex and sexuality as all separate things though.
Your observation is so far from the norm that it could not possibly have been learned in the real world. Stuff that crazy can only be taught using highly manipulated examples in unnaturally controlled circumstances.
Suit yourself.
1. I wasn’t aware of visiting any “fake” worlds, sorry, what do you mean? You mean a part of the world that doesn’t fit with what you think? That’s VERY self centered.
2. Just because something is the “norm” doesn’t mean that is right, that’s a logical fallacy. Yeah, you can see sex/gender as joint, or you can see gender as a seperate construct. My interpretation is simply far less limiting.
(If you really think that capitalist society creates norms that focus on fact and not on simply limiting you in order to profit, then you’re dumber than you sound, tbh.)
It is not just Capitalist societies that realize men and women are different.
**********
It seems to be exclusively Communist philosophers who do not understand this difference.
***********
Constructs tied to the real world are by their very nature limiting. I have a feeling that you would describe LSD as ‘liberating’.
I didn’t say capitalist societies where the only ones that created limiting norms, but the “in order to profit” part is more capitalist.
And I don’t see how communists would need a massively gendered view of different sexes, as long as the work was done and the rota is filled, so to speak.
Let me guess, you’re pretty far into the Communist end of the spectrum.
Let me guess, you don’t have anything to actually refute my reasoning, so you’re going to resort to ad-hominems. Thank you. ^_^
The suicide rate, as I’ve pointed out to you down the page and which you are still dodging, does not support your insinuation that men are damaged in some way for not emoting all over the place like Gwyneth Paltrow on Oscar night.
Women, ostensibly more comfortable with showing and talking about their feelings, attempt suicide at four times the rate of men. In China, they actually succeed at suicide more than men do – the only nation where this happens, but also the most populous on the planet.
If you want to characterise attempted suicide as a “cry for help” rather than an attempt to end one’s own life (which is, y’know, kind of the definition of attempted suicide), by all means term it self-harm rather than attempted suicide. Unfortunately for your argument, though, women also self-harm much more than men do. Per your own characterisation of suicides as an inability to cope, women are less capable of coping than men notwithstanding – or perhaps because of – their emotional “openness”. Again, women are crappy at handling their emotions as demonstrated by the rates at which they cut themselves and kill themselves as opposed to men.
That would suggest women’s approaches to dealing with their emotions are less effective than men’s.
Pearls to swine, but I give you a lot of credit for trying.
**********
At least you took the opportunity to demonstrate the superiority of a natural, masculine mind to his tormented, unnatural, gender-neutral skull-o-mush.
I am replying to you in the other thread about that. I am not going to duplicate this discussion.
You already did when you repeated the point about male suicide further up. Not sure why you did that when the point is contested. Clearly you’re not actually interested in debating the point and would rather blame masculinity for suicide.
Firstly, I’ve just noticed, I wasn’t talking to you at the start of this thread. Secondly, I also mentioned the socialisation efforts that go into gender roles (pussy, dyke, faggot, mangina, etc.).
Thirdly, you are being incredibly smug for someone who hasn’t answered my last comment in our discussion of suicide rates.
Your last comment merely demonstrates your intellectual dishonesty. Further down the thread you moved from masculinity “causing” male suicide to saying it was a “potential” cause. Either you lied on first attributing it to masculinity, you don’t know whether it’s a cause, or you would just rather obfuscate the truth.
I intend to challenge your false assertions where I find them. Get used to it.
It’s not a lie, it’s a change of opinion based on your argument, you should be proud of your discussion skills, not insult me for adapting to them. You still aren’t replying to my updated opinion.
This movie actually had relatively little to do with women. It was more about how how always acting like a hyper-macho bad-ass is just just totally dysfunctional in society. And it is. Try working in a public school some time. You’ll see young men refuse to do well in school because they think it is unmanly to be smart. You’ll see young men fighting, sometimes even killing, over the most stupid crap. Try taking that hard ass attitude to work and see how long it takes you to get fired. Sorry, but there IS such a thing as taking masculinity too far.
It would be interesting to take a test of how many of those hypermasculine boys are the children of single mothers, a.k.a. children whose mothers decided they don’t need no man to teach their boys how to be men.
It would be interesting to see how much of this problem we can blame on women, instead of ever looking at our own role in stigmatising all that isn’t hyper-masculine.
Given women are content to blame everything that’s wrong either in their lives or society at large on men rather than on themselves, there is every justification in looking to see where they have done men wrong. Glad to see you’ve abandoned pseudo-science and are now falling back on the snark of an intellectual lightweight; given your adherence to the ludicrous ideas about gender being a social construct, it’s actually a step up in your debating technique.
So we ARE trying to blame everything on women, but that’s totally okay, because they started it, amirite? This is a way better system than accepting that we all have roles to play too, totally.
I said there is justification in looking to see where they have done men wrong, because women refuse to believe they are doing men as a gender any damage whatsoever. I don’t know why you’re fixated on blaming women for everything; perhaps you have some unsorted issues in that department?
So we ARE trying to blame everything on women because they started it.
Right, and this approach is definitely going to show them the light, and not just inflame relations further. Sure.
First off, you are not a guy. I can sense the toxic levels of estrogen through the computer screen. *amirite?*
Second, your reductive binary of men and women batting for either team is false. Nobody is trying to blame women for everything (have you heard about the different legal regimes of contributory negligence and comparative negligence) but hold women accountable *for what they do.*
Third, as far as your assumptions and unspoken commentary on single motherhood is concerned, stop assuming women are victims of male sexual predation. Maybe many women don’t care if their male sexual partner wants to be a father. Just because a male has sex with a female and wants to be a part of a putative child’s life, doesn’t mean said female will allow it or cares to allow it.
I abhor your ignorance and disdain around female agency, but what else to be expected from a feminist troll?
Let me remind you of what MA said “It would be interesting to take a test of how many of those hypermasculine boys are … children whose mothers decided they don’t need no man to teach their boys how to be men”. Followed by “there is every justification in looking to see where (women) have done men wrong”. Marcus Aurelius definitely seems to be batting for the men’s team here, do you want to deny that?
.Er, no. Don’t assume my views, and definitely don’t do that in order to try and bait my into a conversation about something entirely different than the article/comment in hand.
I abhor people who make ethical and logical debates into ad-hominems, it makes their viewpoint look incredibly sketchy.
To me feminist documentaries on “toxic masculinity” only seeks to further shit on the set of personality traits and attitudes that have built civilization, and to some men and to this culture masculinity is set upon the approval of a woman, but women do not define for me what it means to be a man, and they never will.
When women claim that they want honest communication from men what they are really asking is that men only express things that women like. In effect they are lying.
If you doubt this try the following with any woman who begs for honest communication from men. “You want my honest opinion about men and women. OK here it is. I believe women have no business being outside the kitchen. They should be submitting to their husband and not their boss.”
After you put something like this out on them sit back and watch the fur fly. They will show you without a doubt the kinds of liars that they are.
The problem I saw in the video was frustrated young men who are not being led by older men, especially their dad, into their own manhood; they are not being allowed to take their position as men which is required of them because all males are born to fill their position of male authority, power, and responsibility. They all know something is wrong, but they are being told that what is wrong is in them.
The wrong in society is not in them, it is not feminism, though feminism is horrific in itself. What is wrong in society is that men are not standing up in the position that they were created for and train the next generation of young men into taking their own position as a man that our society needs. But in this video, foolish older men were actually submitting to the feminist fantasies of the women and flatly refusing to train the next generation of men. Feminist women are not the cause of our society’s ills. Weak men who refuse to rule women and the children they conceived.
If men take ahold of their own kingdoms as the king, refusing to share the throne, knowing that a man’s authority is too heavy for women, and rule with the authority, power, and responsibility as ‘king’ of their own territory, then feminism would disintegrate in a heartbeat. Happiness and contentment will return to women and there will no longer be ridiculous videos made documenting the frustrations of young men.
I can’t help every man in this country to take up his position as a man. But, I can rule and I do rule as the man for my family and work. And I train my six sons to do the same.
I can’t tell you how good it is to see a man stand up for himself in his God-given role… rather than make excuses for weakness. A godly man who knows how to show honor to others, especially to those in his family, is worth 10x his weight in gold.
Your problem lies in the fact that there is no such thing as a king in his own home anymore. At best a man sits on a throne with the Damoclean sword of the court system hanging above his head. Roughly 50% if not higher of all marriages fail; of those, 70-80% of divorces are initiated by women. And the award of assets and income to women is disproportionately large, despite the fact women have been out of the kitchen for decades.
Men refusing to buy into this horseshit are rational actors and are objective men in control of their own destiny.
“Men refusing to buy into this horseshit are rational actors and are objective men in control of their own destiny.”
**********
Sounds like Ayn Rand when she writes that victims should never give consent.
**********
Things are working quite well in my home, even with two teenage children. I talk to my daughter constantly about the importance of marrying a real man. I do all I can to teach my son to be a real man, to solve his own problems, and to see the vast intrinsic value in feminine women.
No such thing as a king? bs! My man tells me all the time that I treat him like a king! 8 years and counting…..hmmm, I guess that’s why I’m treated like a queen….
When it’s been most problematic in relationships is when men expect some behavior out of me without asking for it. Your feelings are your feelings, you don’t have to reveal them and it may or may not benefit the relationship, but if you want me to behave a certain way and you will be emotionally harmed if I don’t behave that way, it’s completely irrational to not share the reasons. But even very rational men do this, because the reasons are emotional and make them feel vulnerable.
Here’s what is really sexy, at least to me, but I’m not a normal female so I’m not sure how much this will extrapolate. A strong man, who knows who is is, what he wants, goes after it, lives his life for a higher purpose (not god, but not narcissism/hedonism/me me me-ism), but also isn’t afraid to be vulnerable BECAUSE he is secure enough in his person to show vulnerability. That is sexy. Mark Manson does an amazing job writing about this. Check it out. I have a huge crush on him for a good reason.
God forbid you get off your fucking pedestal for a moment and *ask* a man about a certain behaviour. But then women don’t even know what you want done to you sexually when *men* ask you, so why should we expect you to step out of your shell of solipsism to ask men what they want?
Your wagging the finger that men should share the “reasons” they feel a certain way is highly hypocritical. Most of us have have the common experience of a woman completely losing her shit over some perceived slight without for one second deigning to share the reasons why they behave that way. That is the “glory” of femininity in the feminist age: never having to apologise, and always making the man say he’s sorry.
I do ask, as soon as I figure out he is upset, but I can’t change my behavior before I even know my behavior will be upsetting. I don’t read minds. I’m sure many women are like you describe, but I try my best not to be. I’m sorry you’ve had such terrible experiences with women who are poor communicators and maybe generally bad people all around, but you don’t know me. Communication is key to healthy relationships and, having grown up watching my parents fight all the time, I find it even more important for me, so I can avoid that fate. The key is finding someone you can communicate well with, where you both respect and love each other. Sounds like you’re still looking. I’m lucky I just found someone very recently and we both want to grow old together. I wish you the best in your search. There were times I felt hopeless to find a man that I could really connect with, but I’m glad I maintained hope, somehow, through that dark time.
Protip, dear: if you think you’re going to be any different to your parents in your communication with your partner, I have a bridge I’d like to sell you.
I’m working very hard to not be. I can’t make any predictions of the future and all I can do is my best. Life is never easy, but if it were we’d get bored. I’m quite a fan of stoicism BTW, and Marcus Aurelius is a favorite of mine. I’m lucky that my grandma was a natural stoic and I believe I inherited some of my natural inclinations from her, so I have an advantage that way in my dealings with reality compared to those who want blame the world for all their unhappiness. Life is a gift, do with it what you will.
Dear Marcus Aurelius. I’m a big fan, actually. I have a natural talent for stoicism from my grandma. Yes, I do hope to be better than my parents. Or at least do my best. I wish you the best in your future. Hopefully the man you’re named after enlightens your mind to the power we can have over ourselves, when we chose to take it.