4 Ways That Western Women Are Ruining Themselves

Women are the foundation of any successful civilization because culture passes from mother to child. But in the name of “liberation,” Western women have adopted a number of traits that make them utterly unsuitable for handing on Western civilization. Here are four ways they are ruining themselves.

1. Promiscuity

Western women ruin themselves through sleeping with a lot of different men before they get married. This means the average girl that you meet while dating has already had sex with several different men before meeting you, and given the wide availability of porn, you can bet that this sex was not limited to the missionary position. It is also safe to assume that there are compromising photos and videos of her on the phones of various men.

This is a gigantic problem because exclusivity is the foundation of a man’s love for a woman. This is especially true for young men who have not been married before. There has to be an element of, “this girl is mine and no one else’s.” Female promiscuity before marriage robs men of this certainty. This is why one reason so many men are unwilling to get married. Why risk a potentially expensive divorce for a woman who has slept with the entire roster of her college football team?

But even apart from promiscuity’s effect on bonding between a man and a woman, prior sexual partners can wreak havoc on a marriage in very practical ways. Once a woman has been with a particular man, it is very easy for her to fall back into a physical relationship with him. How many marriages have been destroyed by old flames rekindling a physical relationship through social media?

Don’t expect the promiscuity to be reversed any time soon. From an early age, girls are taught that promiscuity is empowering. One glance at the Cosmopolitan website, a magazine read primarily by young, unmarried women, will demonstrate that their articles presuppose that women will slut it up.

2. Tattoos

As a man, one of the most beautiful things in the world is fair, unblemished skin of an attractive woman. There’s a good biological reason for this: Skin color and tone is a good indicator of health. If a person has blotchy skin or lots of blemishes, it is a sign that they are not healthy and therefore not a good person to reproduce with. Tattoos interfere with this natural signaling of reproductive fitness. By putting artificial blemishes on her skin, an otherwise healthy woman is inadvertently telling men that she is not a suitable wife and mother.

Like promiscuity, a man can sometimes look beyond a woman’s tattoos, but it takes some effort.

3. Careerism

A woman’s natural role is to be a wife and a mother. A man’s natural role is to be a husband, father, and provider. This is not some artificial norm foisted upon us by some imaginary patriarchy, this is the natural order of things. In the modern day, men still carry forward the idea of being husbands and fathers, but something terrible has happened to our women. Young women are now subjected to years of indoctrination that teaches them to regard motherhood as something demeaning. Instead, women are led to believe that true fulfillment can only be found through a career.

This has led many modern women to distrust their own desires. They may secretly want a domestic life but feel obliged to get a degree followed by years of slaving away in a corporate cubicle farm. This chews up a woman’s prime childbearing years. By the time women start having children, their hope of having a large family is already over. They’ve already become addicted to their salary so they are never able to break themselves free from their corporate drone status. This means the very best people in our society do not reproduce at replacement rates.

I am happy to report that there is a glimmer of hope that things may change. An editor at Buzzfeed recently noted that “rah-rah lean in corporate feminism” is “garbage.” Is it possible that young women will finally realize that they have been tricked by corporations to exchange the best years of their lives improving the stock values of a handful of wealthy men? If they do, I will feel vindicated.

4. Ghettofication

Ghettofication poster child Iggy Azalea. Her music is rap. She only seems to date black guys. And her butt is strangely enormous on an otherwise normal girl.

There was a time when Americans aspired to high culture. In the early years of the US, even the coarsest Americans tried to engage the best literature. French writer Alexis de Tocqueville remarked on this amazing phenomenon:

There is hardly a pioneer’s hut that does not contain a few odd volumes of Shakespeare. I remember that I read the feudal drama of Henry V for the first time in a log cabin.

During first half of the 20th Century, the thirst that average Americans had to learn about the world around them gave rise to the great general news magazines, such as Time. Walt Disney pumped out cartoons that introduced audiences to classical music and European culture. And early television programming would mix in highbrow theatre along with the more popular fare. Americans wanted to better themselves not just financially, but culturally.

What a change in the last 50 years! Americans have gone from seeking the best to chasing after the most degraded culture. Young women in particular have adopted the worst of black culture. They listen exclusively hip hop music and social media is now filled with pictures of white women with preternaturally large butts. But it is not just whites who are being hurt by ghettofication, blacks too have been pulled down.

The ghettofication of American women is an alarming trend because it promotes promiscuity, having children out of wedlock, and poor life habits. Unfortunately, these ghettofied young women are also reproducing which means they will pass a trash culture to their offspring.


It’s easy to blame women for all of this but it is not that simple. Most people are natural followers. They will obediently follow any dictates that their leaders put forth. This is a good thing because not everyone can be a leader. It would result in chaos. And, in a well-ordered society, it works: Benevolent leaders guide their people with the same care that a father guides his child. The problem is that we do not live in a well-ordered society so both women and men end up following the wrong types of people.

We live in a culture where all the institutions are firmly under the control of progressives who are gradually phasing out every aspect of traditional society and replacing it with degeneracy. Children who are brought up in this environment will adopt the teachings that have been drummed into them by years of school and media indoctrination. Some males, for whatever reason, have the ability to “wake up” from the progressive delusion. This is what the red pill is. Still, the majority of men stay asleep and blindly parrot the teachings that have been instilled in them by their globalist masters. Count yourself lucky if you are in the red pill minority.

Some women also demonstrate the ability to overcome their programming, but it seems like there are a lot fewer of them are awake to what is going on. While everyone is responsible for their own actions, it is not a surprise that many young women follow the advice they’ve received and end up ruining themselves in the process. That doesn’t make it any less devastating to single men who are looking for a suitable wife, but it helps us understand how we got into this mess and how we can stop it from happening in the future.

Read More: How Girl Power Is Ruining Western Culture

784 thoughts on “4 Ways That Western Women Are Ruining Themselves”

  1. “This means the average girl that you meet while dating has already had sex with several different men before meeting you.”
    This means the average girl that you meet while dating has already had sex with several hundred different men before meeting you.
    Fixed it for you ^^

  2. how we can stop it from happening in the future
    There’s only one way to get out of this. Take women’s rights away. Are the beta males going to do that? No way they will. So we’re all being fucked into the collapse. Enjoy!

    1. Good luck with that brother. There’s an army of whiteknight, male feminist, pussy hat wearing, orbiter simps that are going to stand in the way of that. Their manginas will tingle with joy at yet another opportunity to please and pedestalize the whores, who are in “danger” of having their rights taken away. The plugged in betas will also feel threatened because you will be robbing them of the opportunity to prove themselves to these “women”, as well as their privilege of paying for fathering the children they didn’t conceive with the said sluts.
      At this point I know that women are doomed and beyond redemption because men have allowed them to slut up in the past 50 years. Their women’s betrayal PALES IN COMPARISON to how the unplugged men are constantly undermining our efforts, and are stabbing us in the back, by dutifully unleashing female sluttiness, and advocating for reducing ALL MEN to slaves to the female primacy!

      1. So the question to the solution becomes, how to we change the power structure so betas are not in charge of laws anymore? Then we can reverse all this shit.

  3. Nah, they didn’t ruin themselves, the government did it.
    Welfare, divorce rape, retroactive rape, informed consent, alimony, maintenance payments, jobs they don’t deserve, etc.

    1. Why some people thought the experiment of welfare and single parent homes, the drug war, popularizing of rap having a marriage with corporate America, and empowering of women to have it all, would stop once it was successful with non whites both overseas and on American shores is beyond me.

    1. If all you know is macaroni and cheese, you’ll never understand what people find wonderful about a finely prepared filet Mignon.

      1. I would add that if all you know of macaroni and cheese is Kraft Mac and cheese from a box, then you will never appreciate real mac and cheese.

    2. Sluts are awesome. But you lost the rights to creating your own personal slut and have ventured into community pussy territory.

      1. “community pussy territory”
        Another reminder of the specter of creeping collectivism behind all that which is fukked up.

      2. Exactly, women take to fucking like a duck to water. They don’t need much practice to get really good. The biggest fallacy is that women get “better” at sex with more partners, not so. They get worn out and jaded. Men however do.

    3. I disagree, but I still upvoted. I get it. I used to think that way too.
      Just don’t marry one. And be aware that she is aware she is being degraded and will feel compelled to spread her toxins around.
      That is where the new fake morality comes from. Women feeling degraded seeking to transform their vice into virtue with a new ideology.
      Nostradamus said the time would come when that which is evil will be seen as good and that which is good will be seen as evil.
      PC moarality is it.

      1. “That is where the new fake morality comes from. Women feeling degraded seeking to transform their vice into virtue with a new ideology.”
        The new ideology is “if it feels good, it must be right and if it feels bad it must be wrong.” Its the anthem of weak humans the female hamster and will gain traction the more women get in positions of power. Feminism is their religion precisely because it defends the pursuit of good feelings for women, no matter the cost or consequences. Sex feels good so it must be right to have as much sex as possible without restraint. Any limit placed on good feeling is persecution and oppression. Exercise and eating healthy unpleasant so it is fat shaming to expect someone to suffer for 30 minutes out of their day. Everyone must feel good at all times and anyone promoting hard work and sacrifice is an enemy. Pure degeneracy and will be the end of modern civilization if we let them win.
        Masculine men have always known that restraint and sacrifice are necessary to achieve true happiness and success. It becomes more and more evident that character, integrity, morality, ethics, etc. are exclusively male virtues. Deep down inside women know this also, which is why they crave men that punish their bad behavior. Dominance is the number one trait women look for in men because women know they are lost without males enforcing limits and boundaries on her feral behavior. The fact that women have zero respect for men that give them everything they ask for (beta providers) echoes this point. Only in the last 50 years of humanity have women been given the freedom to make their own decisions instead of a man making them for her and we are now dealing with the consequences.

        1. not so sure about that…..the only real difference between then and now is birth control. Getting pregnant out of wedlock is a sure way to ruin your situation. But what about the women who couldn’t get pregnant?

        2. They were usually discarded if they failed to conceive.
          And at least when they did leave, they didn’t leave with your house.
          I’ve never been all that bothered by my wife having a shag on the side (after all, I do). But I wanted the kids to be mine, and I wanted to keep my house.

        3. One of the daughters of Caesar was married to Agrippa, but was well know to have numerous affairs. She had six children, and she was once asked, how is it that they all look like Agrippa? she replied she always made sure she had a full cargo onboard before taking on a new passenger.
          Infidelity is as common as dirt and always has been.

        4. Holy cow, you know, I’ve never really thought about that before. Women domesticated cats, yes, that really makes so much sense that I can’t see how it can be any other way.
          And think about it, women find and adopt one of the most useless (albeit, cute) animals on the planet who displays no loyalty, obeys no commands and comes and goes as it pleases as their own. Men on the other hand domesticate dogs from wolves, as hunting companions who are sharp enough to learn words, obey commands and they work together in a complex hierarchial relationship to achieve common goals (eating, security, etc).

        5. Cats hunt mice and other vermin. They weren’t domesticated for nothing. That is just the soft dying civilization of the west talking. In the village where my wife grew up, everyone had dogs. But those dogs were not family members, they were guard dogs kept to provide security. They ate the scraps from the table, and when they get sick they are killed and a new dog is picked up. My wife is amazed and appalled at the way we treat dogs in the west.

        6. Right, but that’s not a trained behavior, it’s just “what they do”. I know they have a purpose, I own farmland, believe me, I well understand their purpose. I was being a bit flippant with “useless”. But that’s not the same as the dog relationship. With dogs it’s more about what the dog can do to assist you through it’s own will and intelligence and ability to learn, where with a cat it’s more “hey, cats do XYZ without training, that’s useful”.

        7. That is because all domesticated dogs come from wolves. Wolves hunt in packs with verbal/oral commands from the alpha male on the hunt. When domesticated they retained the hierarchal structure that is natural to wolves, only with humans as the alpha males. So we have to train them to respond correctly to our verbal commands just as they had to learn the verbal commands of the pack leaders to hunt. It is just their natural condition. It is not a result of domestication. Cats are individual hunters; that is their nature.

        8. I’d rather see mice. The paranoia about the neighbors knocking out secret portals in my walls would drive me nuts.

        9. It took a while to get that under control, I wont lie.
          And it goes both ways: When I first moved in, my wacky geriatric refugee neighbor would wail (mostly in Ukrainian) that we were pumping gas into her house….one night I was woken up by the police, fire department and gas company apologizing profusely…

        10. Hierarchy is in their nature, which is why they’re useful, but wolves will still bite your face off no matter what you do 90% of the time. The value of dogs was their nature PLUS their ability to be trained to do tasks that *we* want them to do, as opposed to just having XYZ natural qualities that we let them express around the house without training.

        11. Julia. Her mother was a slut as well. Agrippa was a good father though. His daughter, Vipsania, virtuous and loyal, married Tiberius. After she became pregnant, Augustus forced Tiberius to repudiate her and marry his daughter, the recently widowed Julia. Tiberius acquiesced but was after seen following Vipsania through the streets in tears. He hated Julia and had Vipsania’s second husband killed. It can go either way … which way, as far as I can tell, is most often determined by dad.

      1. I have been married four times, twice to frigid bitches (the norm in the west), once to a virgin, and once to a slut. The slut was just fine, as she was happy to be the slut of one man, but demanded a lot of servicing. I was young and happy to provide services. She died young. I am not sure I could have continued to function as we got older at the pace we were running at that time. The virgin is the current wife and I like to say, “When we me she didn’t smoke, curse, drink, go out at night, gamble, or even wear high heels. And she was a virgin. Now she doesn’t smoke.”

        1. Stupid is as stupid does.
          I also have six children spread across 3 different women, one of which I wasn’t married to, ever.

        2. Four? You must be a glutton for punishment. Too much more than that gets you into Johnny Knoxville getting kicked in the nuts for a living masochist.

        3. Two happy satisfying marriages, and two tours of hell. So I am batting 500, which is the national average.
          And yes, I do not recommend this idiocy to my sons.

    4. There’s a time and place for both. Sluts are like fast food and decent women are like a home cooked meal. Sometimes when you wake up, you need that grease. Other times you need something lighter on the stomach that has a bit more substance. One problem I have is I can never decide what I want most: A few sluts or one good girl.

      1. Now see here sir, there has already been one food analogy, and this site has a strict one food analogy per article!
        But yeah, what you said.

        1. food analogies are like wings….one is too many, but there are still never enough

        1. (rare gun analogy from me)
          Unchecked sluttiness is like a 70 pound 12 year old firing a bazooka. But with the right strength, know how and grip sluttiness can be harnessed in very positive ways.

        2. I hear you….that is a a problem with self improvement and such. Now she has expectations and I can’t slip into being the beta.

        3. I guess it condemns me to have to be the man of the house in all situations. Slip into being a beta with a dad-bod and she will go looking elsewhere. Such is life.

        4. I don’t know how far it goes but I would imagine that after some amount of training you eventually create a pattern which they will default to. Like waking up early in the morning. I get up at 4. It was really hard to start. But now on sundays my eyes open at 4 automatically. Far be it from me to give parenting advice, but I do believe that if it is done right the kiddo will eventually default to good behavior.

        5. If I may amend.
          Unchecked sluttiness is like a 70 pound 12 year old firing a bazooka. Sluttiness that is directed and controlled is like a 200 pound well trained sniper and a 338 Lapua Magnum with premium optics.
          Since you did a gun analogy, I felt it necessary to put it into full gunner’s terms, lest the resident firearms experts here swoop in and clunk you on the noggin.

        6. Yeah, in the past couple months, she has really opened up in the bedroom and is exploring new venues. Still, anything that approaches infidelity (looking at porn, exhibitionism, fantasies of threesomes), I will shut down.

        7. Your assumption is correct. Fathers (and to some extent mothers) create and reinforce behavior patterns that, once set, become their default set of responses to life, barring any major tragedy or mental illness. A good 50% of personality is noticeable within months after birth, but the other 50% is what you help create and shape.

        8. nice. I like the editing process. I can come up with random vague gun analogies and you can edit them for terminology. We make a solid team GOJ a solid team.

        9. not to put too fine a point on it man, and def not to come off untoward, but you are a guy with a daughter and I have no doubt from our conversations here and on telegram that she is a good girl. But if you were an unrepentant faggot or cuckolded sissy she would most likely, er, not be such a good girl. That instinct is in all of them.

        10. makes sense to me. Look, there is no reason in the world that in the confines of your marriage and in your bedroom you should enjoy whatever fruits your wife has to offer in whatever way you enjoy so long as you are keeping your end of the bargain with regard to being a husband. I am not a fan of marriage in my own life, but conceptually it makes plenty of sense.

        11. is that why they are in the process of teaching them deviant behavior in the schools?

        12. Its getting really creepy. One school district has kids doing all of their work on ipads, the pads dont go home with the kids (no homework) so how the hell would you know what kind of brainwashing your kid is getting?

        13. That instinct is the 50% that you can train. The set parts are more like things that they find funny, or their initial attractions
          My son got the whole “hot girl” thing by 18 months old, when he’d consistently walk up to the television and point and smile everytime the then young Shanaia Twain appeared on a commercial. His mother and I were quite happy and openly gave a “Well, we know one thing, that boy is straight as an arrow”. My daughter was firmly into quiet domestic play since the time she was old enough to move under her own power. My son got his first toy gun at age 3 and was shaking in nervous happy excitement and he didn’t even know what it was, he just saw me use it once and he was sold. Some things are just hard wired.
          Sluttiness (and bad behavior in general) are the 50% trainable things. There are also good traits you can train positively as well (manners, etc).

        14. I’m still working on that, but it’s a slow process. I just have to get that “what would my friends think if they knew I did x” mentality out of her head.
          Making progress, but it’s not as fast as I would like.

        15. Their mother volunteered at the school a lot, knew all the teachers, the curriculum and the personal views they held. Since she volunteered so much, she was able to shift the kids away from teachers she thought were questionable. (… you get free labor, you try to keep them happy…)

        16. I was a teacher in my daughters high school.
          I never taught her, I only did the naughty kids classes.

        17. They are asking rather personal questions of the kids too(e.g., “Does anyone in your house have a gun?”

        18. Yep. drs and teachers essentially are part-time workers for big brother. gotta flesh out your profile. how fuct is this?

        19. Indeed. There is a strict “No iPhone/electronics” rule for dinners at our house, which are always sit down at the kitchen table. Even now I’ve noticed that my 20 year old son will always put his phone away when eating with myself or others, without even thinking about it.

        20. That’s true, they are. My kids both had “questionaires” about “health” that grilled them about private matters unrelated to medicine. My daughter and son were instructed to not answer that section, nor the “do you smoke dope in your home” questions. When the doctors would get upset, and they always did, I’d say that they are asking questions that are none of their concern and also asking kids to self incriminate in documented filed papers that can be accessed by the police.
          “We’re legally required to ask these!”
          “First, no you’re not, and two, I’m not legally required to answer them regardless of what you’re required to do”
          “Those are questions for her, not you!”
          “She is my daughter and I have full legal responsibility for what she does or doesn’t do”
          One doctor got outright hostile and I ended the appointment informing her that we’d be going to another practice in the future.

        21. Indeed. It most certainly is not, and further, I get very offended that they feel brazen enough to not only hand us this kind of thing, but then get pissy when I throw it back in their face.

        22. another reason to despise doctors- most are just dealers of legal drugs at this point…

        23. Mine did, except I’d explained you don’t discuss whether there are firearms in our house. So he started it with ‘Do you mean weapon?…’

        24. It might actually be more fun to get him to do the whole “Steers and queers” spiel in Gunney’s voice at the doctor’s office. Especially if the doctor’s degree is from a university in Texas.

        25. Yup. My virgin bride was very shy so I insisted that the rule was naked in the bedroom. Years later, she is the one insisting on naked in the bedroom, while I have come to appreciate the comfort of warm and comfy flannel pajamas.

        26. I have raised many children. You have to set standards, enforce them consistently, and love them generously. I have found this is pretty much the same you have to do with wives.

        27. How did you know that my last name is Connor? Have I been doxxed?!?

        28. Hasn’t early computer use been found to be a negative experience? And pads don’t even allow them to learn the most important skill, typing.

        29. Just don’t let em join. Gets noticeably worse every year. Can only imagine what lil bem would be walking into in 20 years.

        30. Take your time, and do the little homework assignments that the book suggests. Getting her to change how she views herself is a slow process.
          Meanwhile, I would suggest reading from this blog, apart from your wife.
          It is red pill wisdom for the married man. Not as entertaining as this site, but very rich in substance.

        31. Kids WILL develop habits — it’s the parents’ job to make sure those habits are GOOD habits.

        32. Of course its detrimental to kids’ development- these Silicon Valley types dont let their little kids use the tech they hawk to the masses, but this will be a huge sales boon to Microsoft, Apple, and so on if and when it rolls out nationally.

        33. Ahoy there mate!
          I was thinking about precisely this today, how I should probably lower my standards, because just restricting myself to women who behave with what I consider basic human decency, like smiling, not burying her face in her phone, not dressing like a slut, not using profanity in public, etc. really reduces my options to traveling out of state to meet Amish chicks.
          I used to immediately “next” a girl who would distract herself with a smartphone during an encounter, and often wouldn’t even approach those who walk like zombies, eyes fixed on screen. But those are 90% of the girls I see.
          We should have standards, and there are definite no-goes, but expecting a young woman today to know that she should not be making telephone calls while she is eating, or in conversation with a real, live person is, sadly, unreasonable.
          My current theory is that you should still attempt to approach those that are merely going along with *herd mentality*, ie if most chicks have a nose ring and so does she, approach her and eventually get her to remove it. If she constantly uses her phone, tell her not to, remove attention if she does, and drop her if she continues.
          Not because she should get a pass on herd mentality stuff, and I still don’t approve of most of it, but merely from a practical standpoint that you’re greatly narrowing your female options right off the bat.
          I still don’t think I’d go for visible tattoos and I wouldn’t wife up ANY of the above, but if you’re just looking for a mini-relationship, give them a pass on being stupid peer pressure zombies.
          Of course if you just want the bang, the more of these signs she has, the better.

        34. yeah.. conspiracy theories.. the silicon valley guys build everything to controll other people…
          guys, just because it sounds legit, this does not mean it is.
          People are building conspiracy theories all the time. Just ask why some americans made Trump a president..
          Or what people think why the Ukrainian Maidan happended.. (jeah, the CIA did it… without proiding socks to the soldiers..) Stupid theories based on some assumptions and no knowledge..

        1. why
          Women are sluts. Your ex, you wife, your sister, grandmother, mother Theresa…all dirty filthy whores. Some just happen to be controlled by well meaning and strong men.
          I think marriage is useless for what its worth as is family. It is just good fun and fulfilling to some people. That said, for those men who find it rewarding it is a wonderful thing. Their wives and daughters, however, are fucking sluts. It is up to them to keep that under control which many men are able to do very handily.

        2. Right, so guys who are trying to raise their daughters with values are wasting their time amirite?

        3. not at all. you aren’t hearing me. THeir daughters are whores and if left unchecked will act as such. However, strong men can control their women…daughters included. It is up to a father to steer his daughter from her natural tendency to be a cum guzzling whore and many men do so with aplomb. Weak men fail. Then their daughters come to me.

        4. OK, so let’s run through this –
          1. Father controls daughter, and by doing so, she is not a slut despite her natural tendency
          2. She is a slut anyway because AWALT, thus canceling out point 1

        5. No, I get what he’s saying. Instead of using “slut” use “their nature is known and constant”. Part of that nature is hypergamy, part of that nature is deception for self benefit, part of that nature is nurturing and caring for children, part of that nature is joyful, part of that nature is seeking the best conditions and circumstances to bring a child into the world. If a father (and husband) controls the bad part of that nature through active alpha, that lets the good part of that nature grow and strengthen. She’ll always have the bad parts there, in the back of her mind, but her willingness to indulge them will be blunted greatly by the strong men in her life.

        6. exactly. Fathers need to control the children.
          Is the very reason the schools try to take that control.
          and decades of indoctrination takes its toll on most of them. as we see clearly in western society.
          I see it every time I engage with teachers — the propaganda is immense.
          Luckily her mum is a trump voter — southerner…

        7. Not just fathers, but husbands as well. At no point can you let her natural impulses roam free and unchecked. We have a disintegrating culture and society now because so many do.

        8. I don’t know dude. I have no idea how to be a parent. But I do know that young children are susceptible to impression and if you get them off to a good start and train them how to behave early on there is a good chance they will grow into good adults. Human beings are animals. WE have to learn a lot of habits like letting people off the elevator before trying to get on or not masturbating in the park but eventually we learn if we are taught right. There are loads of fathers here that can speak to this subject which I am fairly ignorant on. One thing I do know, however, is AWALT. Talk to the fellas here about whether it can be subdued in wives and children.

        9. but, not a crazy feminist. Like all teachers, and most parents around here…
          so we have accord with raising the kid

        10. sure is — and will get worse while women vote.
          The Facebook comments about London are just impossible for me to grasp…
          Anyone speaking out is a racist Nazi.
          “we didn’t ban Catholics when IRA bombed London”

        11. “Nature is known and constant”
          Ok, so let’s suppose I am a guy who has control over a chick. I turn my head for two seconds and she’s off sucking dick?
          What’s the point of training then if their sluttiness is constant?

        12. It’s not a question of parenting. It’s a question of logic. Women aren’t quantum particles that can hold multiple states at once. It’s either or. She either is a slut or isn’t. This is why AWALT doesn’t work.
          AWALT is nothing more than a description of women that were raised solely by their mothers.

        13. It’s random, some daughters run off to be sluts, others don’t.
          My English daughter appeared to have no boyfriends before 21, my Thai step-daughter appears to have none and she’s 18 now. My English son had gfs sleeping over when he was 16.
          I thinking it may be the same as grown women, they move on when they find someone prepared to pay more. I’ve always been perfectly clear, I don’t support a woman another guy is fucking …… other fathers may not be so outspoken (or even care).

        14. You’re thinking in terms of physical control. Psychological control and training is what keeps them from running to Chad Thundercock when you head off to work in the morning.

        15. I was talking about psychological control. If her slut state is constant, control is not possible.

        16. or not masturbating in the park

          Wait…you mean I’m not supposed to do that?
          Dang. No wonder that old lady on the park bench was scowling at me. I just thought she had gas or something. Huh.

        17. I have no kids so I won’t push the point. You have first hand experience here and I don’t. My instinct is that you are wrong, but I don’t have the authority to argue it. That said, I will be interested to see what some of the fellas who are in a better position to discuss this here think about this comment.

        18. I think that you’re just being pedantic at this point (no offense).
          The nature is a constant, how she’s trained to deal with that nature is the variable. A variable can modify a constant without the constant itself changing. Thus (sperg geek out alert)
          int Girl = 1;
          int Training = 2;
          int Freedom = -1;
          Girl + Training = 3; //(condition, good)
          Girl + Freedom = 0; //(condition, feral)
          Girls natural state of 1 remains the same in both cases, but the end result of the equation is what has changed due to the variable.

        19. sorry buddy boy….but I believe we are at an impasse. You see, you are wrong and I am right so we will find it impossible to come to a consensus I am an easy going chap though, so let’s agree to disagree and move on.

        20. Yes, every since Senator Spankum Munkey championed the Beaten Bishiop bill of 1969 all public masturbation has been forbidden

        21. He’s wrong. Given his own state of mind as expressed throughout this site, he clearly lacks a lot of alpha qualities. A girl raised by a weak beta will naturally run off to be sluts. The ones that don’t have influence from a positive male role model somewhere in their life, even if it’s not the father himself.
          What he expressed about his daughter is good, that’s actually an alpha move. But I don’t think he’s cognizant enough to understand why she obeyed him.
          I’m saying this to you and not him because I’m fairly convinced that he has me blocked or is ignoring me.

        22. Explain the traditional Catholic French girls raised by strong patriarchal fathers, who, after hubby went off to war and daddy was killed, rushed to fuck Klaus and Hans in Paris.

        23. This is what I assumed. However, I figured I would back down on this one and let others say it.

        24. No offense taken. But there still is a problem of logic here. If a woman’s slut state is constant (as you stated and according to AWALT) ideas like alpha, beta, dominant and submissive become irrelevant. What’s it matter if you are swole or fat, confident or neurotic if none of these have any effect on the constant state of slut for a woman?
          And what about the impact of genetics?

        25. Apparently not as strong as we thought it was.
          By the way, when did ROK turn into MGTOW?

        26. You’re confusing constant with “unalterable permanence of end result”. My equation is perfectly sound and applies to women fully. The nature is constant and doesn’t change qua her nature, but the end result of her behavior is guided by the variables of freedom or training. She won’t act like a slut if she’s totally smitten with you and thinks that you’re a walking god on earth and craves only you, it literally doesn’t cross her mind and it’s not “who she is” yet that one little sliver deep in her psyche will fire up immediately the moment you put on a pastel sweater and offer to carry her purse in the mall, and at that point “she’s never liked you, god, what is wrong with him…hey, Chad is hot!” That little sliver is what causes things like shit tests actually, it’s always trying to get out and assert its feral nature even when she’s properly trained.

        27. Who is speaking about MGTOW? I’m married.
          My point was that without the guidance and constant behavior reinforcement, her hypergamy takes over and throws everything to the curb and badda bing, she’s having a threesome with Dieter and Heinrich without batting an eye.

        28. It’s about them learning self-discipline; understanding consequences of uncontrolled behavior.
          Every kid is curious, every kid sees fascinating things and wants to explore them. Things like stoves- but if they touch a hot stove, they’ll get burned. You teach your kid to control their curiosity- don’t touch the stove, and from that concept- don’t fuck with shit they don’t understand .
          It’s teaching your daughters the downsides of uncontrolled ‘sluttiness’, or hypergamy. How it will in fact result in their lives being worse, not better. How it will in fact prevent being able to form a meaningful pair-bond with a good man. How it will in fact interfere with being able to form and maintain a family and long term relationship– if that’s she wants.
          Women, like men, have some natural tendencies and it’s getting daughters to understand the downsides of lack of control.
          ETA: A big problem for young women is when they develop physically– all of a sudden they’re getting attention from men. If they’re pretty and fit, a lot of attention. And they start to realize it also gives them power– they can manipulate men, men who want to please them. Power is intoxicating, young immature folks don’t deal with being given power very well. It’s why you keep rules and boundaries in place for your kids- bright lines they can’t cross, and firmly communicate you are in control. My daughters understood if they decided to go down the path of screwing around, they wouldn’t be living with me. You think you’re adult enough to do that, you’re adult enough to pay your own bills, live in your own place.

        29. OK, that makes more sense. This “constant” you refer to is a function of evolution, no? So we can say the evolutionary psychology of natural selection that is built in, right?

        30. Young women have a power through their sexuality. Like anyone having power- it can be misused. For those French girls, their sexual power was an avenue to improve their material status. Given hypergamy, a natural tendency for women to use their sex to get the best man available to assure their security, them hooking up with a german who could provide resources and security was almost inevitable– without some moral foundation providing a reason/rationale to rein it in.

        31. I’m partially on board with evo-psyche, if that’s what you’re asking. I’m also of the mind that free will can override our more feral evolutionary traits to a certain degree. Those traits however, never really go away, they’re just managed.

        32. I agree with GoJ, genetics impacts personality- all kids are different, you need to figure out what works with each kid. My oldest loves confrontation and was defiant from birth. She practically lives to argue, and will do so for hours. She tends to have to learn things the hard way through personal experience. Difficulty was keeping her from having disastrous personal experiences. Younger one is every bit as smart, but non-confrontational, very observant and learns from others mistakes.
          However, I was able to get them to think long term interests vice short term.
          I disagree with GoJ on one thing, kids are individuals and have free will. You can certainly control them in the short term– but no matter what you do, ultimately they can make bad decisions and bad choices. The valedictorian in my high school was from a deeply religious family with an alpha father that did everything ‘right’. She went to college and became the duty slut– she did everybody.
          Robert Asprin had it right in ‘Little Myth Marker’ parenting to a large extent is taking the credit or the blame for things you may have had nothing to do with and have no control over. Other things in their lives may have been the key influence, you try and eliminate the bad influences by home schooling if you can, eliminating the ‘Disney’ channel/cable…

        33. I am married (multiple times) but I preach MGTOW to my sons. I am concerned for their well being and I see the huge risk that is marriage for young men. I was strip mined early and often so by the time I reached later life a new bride couldn’t get much of the cash and prizes on divorce.

        34. I have raised many children; 6 of my own, foster children, and step children. at one time I had nine in the house (not counting the most responsible teenager in the home, you know, the mom). What I tell new parents that ask me how they can avoid screwing up as parents is that they can’t avoid it. Abandon hope all ye that enter here. You will screw up, and the kids will survive. The second thing I do is repeat the advice my father (raised 7 children) gave me, they are going to do whatever they are going to do, and you, and they, will be happier when you accept that. Give up the illusion that you have control as a parent. The best you can hope for is a bit of influence; which will decrease as the child grows. But then, when they are grown and have children of their own, you get the pleasure of I told you so.

        35. Your control isn’t overt. It’s guidance through their formative years, such that when they reach those “they’re going to do what they do” years, they make good choices more often than not without you having to be there. You’re already “there” in their head, via the mental framework that they’ve constructed around your lessons, guidance and examples provided how you live your life.

        36. … and the pleasure of teaching a 4 yr old grandkid to state ‘On advice of counsel, I plead the fifth’;
          And sending them home just after giving them some chocolate covered espresso beans…

        37. Interesting thing for me to ponder- have they made the good choices due to my guidance and good example? Or, have they made those choices in reaction to their mother’s poor example?

        38. I didn’t know that about you. I thought I was unusual with six.
          Agreed, you will screw up, mostly with the oldest. Poor kid is the guinea pig for all types of parenting experiments. Still, he is a good kid and wants to make something of himself.

        39. Most important thing with kids is them knowing you’re making the effort. Kids will always test you, they know you making an effort is indicative of their worth.
          Heard one kid say how their biological mom didn’t love him since she let him do whatever he wanted, but at least his step-mom did, she wouldn’t let him get away with crap, she cared.

        40. It could be both. We all know the person who says “I am the way I am because I didn’t want to turn out like my parents”, where the parents are both fuckups. That too is a form of guidance.

        41. It is kind of fun though. If I want to tease them and wind them up, I just say something they did reminds me of their mom….

        42. That is the problem with today’s parents; they only have one kid, or two close together. You have to have gone through the entire process with number one to figure out not to sweat the small stuff, and that most everything is small stuff. Toilet training my last one consisted of when he pulled on my pants leg and said he didn’t want to wear diapers any more I looked down and said OK.

        43. “don’t sweat the small stuff”, ain’t that the truth. Stressing about something usually compounds the issue. Now, instead of just dealing with the issue, you have to deal with the issue and deal with the blowup.

        44. Yeah, my daughter complained about I’d only provided her a 10′ by 10′ box to live in. Kid had her own room in a 4 bedroom house, in an association that had 4 swimming pool complexes. A lot different than my childhood, but she had no other frame of reference.
          We sat down and I went through the budget it took to provide her the ‘box’, cars, phones, computers, healthcare etc. I also had her go through job listings to figure out how many paid enough to support it. Then apartment listings, and told her she was free to do better if she could.
          Also useful taking kids through the budget for supporting a child, and explaining I wasn’t going to be the one footing that bill, should they make bad decisions and have a child while young…
          Now that she’s older and living on her own, she’s apologized several times for how unappreciative she was as a kid. Most teens are, we don’t have much understanding at that age.

        45. well that is good. I have been trying my best, but there simply are too many pouring in

        46. I first realized this when my younger cousin, who was a freshman in college, told me a story about her grandmother, who was my great aunt, probably in her late 60s at the time. The girl lived with her when she was growing up because her mother was a deadbeat who I’ve never met, and well, she found out that grandma was blowing dudes for coke and money.
          This was a kind, typical grandmother type, spoke polite and proper English, and I would have felt uncomfortable saying a dirty joke in front of her. She spoke and dressed well, and acted a bit upper class and indeed lived in a wealthy region of California.
          That’s when I started to look at all women differently.
          The only thing stopping them from their true nature, is patriarchy, whether that is the strong will of a man in her life, or a patriarchal society like the west used to have, and the Mooslims have today.

        47. Not wasting time but I will say that a society and culture that is not in line with the views of the moral father makes it an uphill battle.
          There are still good girls in America today, but that is despite of our culture, not because of it.

        48. Yep- my mom’s aunts/great aunts would blurt out anachronisms all the time while being fussy about tea and…whatever they served- biscuits?

        49. FWIW, The bit from ‘Little Myth Marker’ re parenting in a talk between two characters-
          “it’s been a long time since I was a parent. I’ve been sitting here, trying to remember what it was like. What’s so surprising to me is the realization that I’ve never really stopped. Nobody does.”
          I started to shift uncomfortably.
          “Hear me out. For once I’m trying to share some of my hard-won lessons with you without shouting. Forget the theories of parenthood! What it’s really all about is taking pride in things you can never be sure you had a hand in, and accepting the responsibility and guilt for things you either didn’t know or had no control over. Actually, it’s a lot more complicated than that, but that’s the bare bones of the matter.”
          “You don’t make it sound particularly attractive,” I observed.
          “In a lot of ways, it isn’t. Your kid expects you to know everything … to be able to answer any question he asks and, more important, to provide a logical explanation of what is essentially an illogical world. Society, on the other hand, expects you to train your kid in everything necessary for them to become a successful, responsible member of the community… even if you aren’t yourself. The problem is that you aren’t the only source of input for the kid. Friends, schools, and other adults are all supplying other opinions, many of which you don’t agree with. That means that if your kid succeeds, you don’t really know if it was because of or in spite of your influence. On the other hand, if the kid goes bad, you always wonder if there was something else you could have said or done or done differently that could have salvaged things before they hit the wall.”

        50. You know, the first few years here they learn integrity and morality is by far the most important. Later on, when the factual information comes in, they can explore the world.

        51. Bro, how do you not get this… it’s nature vs nurture. Yes all women are sluts when left to do their own decision making. What GOJ is saying is that good behavior can be instilled and “help” to deactivate that impulse to ride the cock carousal. If boundaries have been enforced by a strong father figure from an early age, the likeliness of that happening has dropped significantly

        52. In fact, I know tens of women that are not like that. Maybe more. In fact, most every woman I know is not like that. But I have known the other kind. You just need to know where to look.

        53. It means all women are like that
          Some women will behave differently from others but the instsncts at their core are the same—AWALT

        54. I am truly sorry you think so poorly of all women. I cannot judge you because I presume your experience and encounters are why you feel this way. I just felt sad reading your comments because behind the bravado of your words and jokes aside, I detect genuine disappointment. I sincerely hope that your point of view will change and that someone amazing comes into your life, a good slut 🙂 who has your back in the good times and bad.
          Personally I been married 15 years to a medical doctor who is a great provider but his hardly home because his working so hard and I appreciate him and love him but I am always so ALONE. I had plenty of opportunity to be unfaithful and yes even been tempted by some fools but still I have resisted and never been unfaithful. A woman who respects herself does not need to be controlled she has value for her own body.
          As I see it a woman who does not love, value, and respect herself first is not capable of loving, respecting or seeing the value in anyone else.
          I bet there are many women out there that truly view and believe that every man is just a violent, sex crazed beast in disguise who takes pleasure in violence against women and this thinking I think you would agree ? Is irrational and ridiculous but is all due to bad personal experiences.
          The reality is every person is a unique soul but the problem now is that so many people in this day and age both men and women alike are lost souls who view themselves and everyone around them as a cheap consumable that is to be used and discarded.

        1. Why would you want a slut for anything other than building up for that trophy non-slut?
          Don’t you know how this works? An inexperienced woman will submit to an experienced man.
          Otherwise it’s just equality bullshit

        2. My car’s a manual. But sometimes when I rent a car I enjoy the automatic. That’s the best I can explain it.

        3. No it isn’t. The analogy speaks to voluntarily relinquishing control for ease of operation. Same reason sometimes a hooker is more relaxing than plugging a squirmy teenager.

      1. You are missing out. Their unbroken pussies are a whole different ball games. It is very primal when you break a woman in. In no uncertain terms, depending on the age of the woman, and temperament, you have rights to that pussy for life. I got at least 2 married women I have rights to tap barring a good 20-40 minute conversation.

        1. I may have to add, that you need to be very deliberate when breaking a woman in. My wife was a virgin on wedding night, still having beta tendencies, I didn’t demand her to give me head right off. So, she developed expectations of what sex should be (missionary) and it took some time to get her past that.

    5. Sure, some people like to eat McDonald all day. Even after they have diabetes and they lose a leg. A salad might not get you fired up at first but over time you will see the health benefits.

    6. There are 2 kinds of sluts.
      The good sluts are sluts because they actually like men, they like being around us on our terms, and they dig us for our desires. They are fun, and laugh easy, are skilled at making a guy feel like a real person, and leave you smiling when they slink away. Those sluts are increasingly rare.
      Then there is the mass-mediated, academically sanctioned, you-go-girl, socially engineered slut (the majority). These girls are tools of cultural Marxism that have had their innate hypergamy weaponized by consumerism to punish masculinity via the destruction of femininity. They hate men and view us with contempt, and they clumsily slut it up as an act of vandalism.

      1. the second type you mentioned are the toxic ones. They are the ones that will shut off them moment she eats wedding cake.

      2. “…They hate men and view us with contempt, and they clumsily slut it up as an act of vandalism.”
        Yeah — then they reach their thirties: the time when they smack into The Wall, get tossed off The Carousel, and then start crying and whining about the “lack of Good Men”.
        Hilarious, isn’t it?

      3. very good point bro, they slut up as an act of vandalism. Dang that hits the nail right on the head!

      4. Never heard sluttery described as vandalism but its spot on. Tattoos and piercings are along the same line. Vandalizing themselves, femininity, masculinity and society as a whole. Bravo.

      1. It’s the difference between MickeyD’s and a delicious home cooked meal. Too much McDonald’s will start making you feel sick.

  4. I like to tell my liberal English major nephew who lives in Berkley that he will be the last generation to read Shakespeare. Or value the best of the classics.
    The barbarians have overrun modern academia. Especially the humanities. Fields like gender studies are replacing rigorous philosophy like Hegel, Plato, Aristotle which are too “white”. Multicultural and global studies where students learn no skills such as foreign language are replacing majors such as area studies which require often lots of language classes.
    But learning a new language skill is now called cultural appropriation by the self-righteous PC crowd.
    Our culture is totally degraded. I can’t help but think a renaissance man might still be valued if he continues to work on himself and his skill set. As even those with no class or culture do know how to burn with envy when they see someone who has it.
    And women do value the alpha.

    1. I was in college in the mid 90s, and while it was possible to get a classical education you had to make it happen. Every elective I took was in greek and roman history, literature and culture. They had done away with the Classics major in 93, otherwise I could have graduated with a triple major instead of a double. Of course that was when they started adding the gender and racial studies majors. I think that now they are hard pressed to even offer a course in Latin. It truly angers me how cheated these last few generations have been when it comes to education.

      1. “They had done away with the Classics major in 93”
        Now at UCLA it is possible to major in English without reading one word of Shakespeare. If things do not change, it won’t be long until colleges and universities outright ban all the classics across the board.

        1. While I want always a fan of Shakespeare, I did however appreciate his writings. Seeing this makes me weep for the future.

    2. Well said.
      Women attending Womens Studies, Blacks attending Black Study.
      I call it “self study”
      The right wing speaker – Ben Shapiro – said he attended Jewish Studies for two reasons: Meet Girls, and get an easy A.

      1. I remember when I was in college. I was always a bit of a ladies man and never had a steady girlfriend, but always a never ending conga line of fuckbuddies. I used to joke that I was a “Women’s Studies Major”
        Probably would get expelled for that now

        1. love that one. I remember clearly having this reputation as a ladies man. I was sitting on the lawn in the quad with some guys and some girls normal college bs’ing and this new girl who I was told had a crush on me sat down (this is taking me back over 20 years my lord) and she is talking to me and is skittish and nervous. It is really cute. And she asked what my major was and I put my hand around her waist and said women’s studies. My buddies girlfriend lets out this moan of derision and I looked at him and said “hey….stick something in her mouth so I don’t have to hear her jealous moans any more”
          I spent the better part of that semester fucking that little freshman girl.

        2. I think that this is probably true right now….in a world where if I want to learn more about Durer’s Meloncholia I, I can just google it on the buss on my way to another class. However, there was a time when it wasn’t that easy and I, for one, believe that understanding art and the history of art, at least a little bit, is something every man should do.

      2. Ben Shaprio’s “white knighting” for Michelle Fields, the “Megan Fox” of reporters, was hilariously pathetic.
        Having seen that, I doubt his first reason for going into Jewish Studies.
        …Why is it that native speakers can’t take college language classes but Jews can take Jewish Studies and blacks can take AA classes?

    3. I cannot remember the movie but it was about the elite creating their own world above earth. In the future I believe the 1 percent will escape and have no qualms leaving the rest of humanity to burn itself out.

      1. The movie itself, I forget the name too, but it wasn’t so much about the elite as in “them” escaping, it was meant as an analogy to shame white people for not wanting to be vibrantly diverse. Matt Damon was in it I think?

        1. There we go, that’s it.
          How dare all of those uppity white people not want to live on a planet with trashy, nasty poor brutes! That’s the message I took from it.

        1. Thing is, by the time humans are capable of creating what amounts to a Skyhook, they won’t need human slave labor, it’ll be robotic.

        2. But without making all the brown people slaves, how can one effectively cast shame and guilt on white people? Dude, think this through…

        3. Sure, I was just noting that the movie was just another White Guilt movie more or less. Kind of like Avatar was.

        1. Hardened Vietnam vet crying to his substitute army daddy scene spoiled it for me.
          Oiled up muscly topless men are a big turn off, I just don’t wanna see it.

    4. While Shakespeare isn’t bad, what is funny is that he was pretty much the Michael Bay of his day. Pure entertainment. Folks from then would be amazed to see how much he has been elevated.

      1. THANK YOU!
        I feel pretty isolated when I critique Shakespeare most of the time. He’s not the most awful writer in the English catalogue of literature, but the way he’s been elevated really does amaze me. I won’t go over what I’ve said about him twice, I did it above in the thread.

        1. That’s how I approach Macbeth and Hamlet. I genuinely like them. But I really don’t see anything particularly profound in either one that I can’t find anywhere else, and end of the day, they are little more than soap operas.

        2. But that was the medium- plays. I think soap operas of the day is a good analogy. Shakespeare was working within the limitation of a play which has the visual element as well as just the script. And, given the performances were going to be viewed across class lines- relatable to the audience members. Write plays that were too esoteric, and they wouldn’t have been produced. Had to find things that could be understood by most- revenge, love, family rivalries etc.

        3. Precisely correct. Your average 1600’s serf was not going to sit and be preached to about profound truths of nature for very long, rather, he was going to sit and be entertained. Shakespeare threw in a few good insights on human nature, but nothing that the serf wouldn’t grasp as common knowledge to begin with.

        4. I think art, to a great extent, is dependent on the audience as well as the art’s creator.
          I read all the Russian works in high school, and frankly, didn’t find them interesting. Which probably says more about me than the works themselves. I’ve also never been motivated to go back and re-read them, although I do enjoy reading.
          So, a writer/painter/sculptor does have to create with the audience in mind and how he’s going to communicate his concepts. And the audience inserts a lot of themselves into it- Bay was mentioned above, I found the Smithsonian scene in TF2 a pretty good visual commentary on the consequences of delaying opposition to evil within a summer pop-corn movie.
          I don’t know what makes art/literature great- is it that it can reach a lot of people in communicating something about the human condition? Than Shakespeare probably qualifies.
          Is it still great if the audience is perceiving a message the creator didn’t intend- is there such a thing as accidentally great? Does art/literature fail if it doesn’t communicate what the creator intended, even if it is well received? Or, if it is profound but only reaches a small number of people who can understand and appreciate it?

        5. I enjoy his so-called “problem plays”, the seven or eight that aren’t classics. Coriolanus, for example, which virtually nobody performs anymore. Or, even better, A Winter’s Tale, with the most famous stage direction of all time: “Exit, pursued by bear”.
          Yes, Shakespeare actually put an effin’ bear in one of his stories.

        6. Shakespeare’s star has fallen, particularly in America, for one simple reason — our language has changed. It’s harder and harder for us to see his genius when his syntax, diction, and idioms become stranger with every passing year.
          Soon we’ll be translating his plays into our own idiom. Kinda like the same way that we read a translation of Chaucer, even though Chaucer’s Middle English is still intelligible.

        7. Well, it already has been ‘translated’ in a way. Romeo and Juliet was redone as ‘West Side Story’, I think there are a couple of other ways it’s been ‘updated’.

        8. Quite so. In some ways out of necessity (technology comes to mind here), some ways because of other cultural influences meshing with ours (immigrants) and in some ways through a democratization process. Of the three, the first two are legit but the democratization process really leaves a bad taste in my mouth. We’re using less words, synonyms are falling out of use (why use two words for the same thing? derp), and the word lengths are shortening, either through just using the “easiest” word or through intentional shortening “No prob, man!”.
          In theory, as I understand it, the entire notion of a democracy set up by the Founders was put into motion with the declared understanding that it was to uplift the common man and give him not only a voice, but a sound mind with which to process the world and make critical decisions. I don’t think anybody anticipated this going in the opposite direction, and in fact it didn’t for the longest time, but since around the late 1960’s we seem to be on this path of reducing language, and intellectual discourse, to bumper sticker length “easy” words (and no, I’m not talking politics, I mean in general).

        9. And it has also occurred in art in general. Calling talentless displays of random things ‘art’, or what would have been dismissed in the past as just crude pictures ‘art’.

        10. I think the word you are looking for is not democratization but degeneration. I guess it’s true what I heard a long time ago: Whenever the intelligence/knowledge/customs of a population sink, so does their ability to use the language of their forebears, hence the need to create new and simpler tools to communicate with each other, since the old forms are just too complex for them…

        11. I guess I’ll have to dust off my English then. I could only spot one. But you are right. Just a few days ago, I was reading an old book (>100 years old), more than a decade before WWI and It was, at the beginning, somewhat cumbersome, until I got used to the terms and synthaxis….I guess that is to be expected from a non native speaker like me but I understand what you said about works from 500 years ago…

        12. I’m partial to the theory that we haven’t understood Shakespeare properly for hundreds of years, by unintentionally misinterpreting (and mispronouncing) his plays.
          There’s a video that went up here a while back on the subject where some Shakespearian gents theorize that proper pronunciation turns Shakespeare from pretentious/profound to prurient.

        13. Well, I simply mean that what brings people together is an external threat or challenge. Hi and are made to do two things, solve problems and create problems. Once the “problems” are solved, new ones are created. There is no neutral gear in us, we either create or destroy but we do it together. We aren’t equipped to coast on any level as a species. The closest thing that we have to a sustainable culture that we have produced so far is natives.

        14. Shakespeare and the King James Bible (to which Shakespeare may have contributed translations) marked the origin of our modern English. Try reading anything written prior to these, such as Canterbury Tales or Beowolf. Indecipherable.

        15. It wasn’t until the twentieth century that things got much more subversive in popular entertainment. Sure, artists always had ways to subtly suggest iconoclastic messages and critiques, but I’d be surprised if, for example, Shakespeare, Chaucer, Dante, Marlowe, etc. made it their personal mission to undermine the foundations of society, generally. I don’t think their writings ever suggested or slanted towards tranny rights or homosexual agendas, for example.

      2. Hes very entertaining, but I’d liken him more to writing sitcoms and dramadies. But hes certainly no Dante or Chaucer.

      3. There are two sex jokes on the very first page of Romeo and Juliet. You have to “speak Shakespeare” today to spot them.
        He knew how to get an audience’s attention.

      4. True but Shakespeare was a master of dilemma and tragedy based plays like Othello and King Lear. He painted scenes quite well.

        1. It’s just garish fashion now – but if you are older, tattoos once had a meaning that is basically gone now. They generally used to mean either the outsiders – sort of a signal to stay away – or conversely, the insiders – a proud sign of shared military or other masculine service experience. Now it’s just kids who assume that laser technology will be cheap in few years to take their fashion accessory off – as UV light exposure fades it into blue green blur.

        2. I had a moment of clarity on this topic at a family reunion a few years ago.
          I witnessed my Great Uncle, a WWII
          Marine, notice a discreet tattoo linked to Seal Team 2 on my buddy’s
          shoulder. My friend acknowledged what it was, and my Uncle, an Iwo Jima
          veteran, rolled up his sleeve to reveal a bold, crude USMC. A young
          ‘man’ with a wierd hole in the side of his nose and two nasty rubber
          band looking thingies where his earlobes should have been, just couldn’t
          resist inserting himself into this solemn conversation.
          He pulled up his pant leg to reveal a Pac Man and some first person
          shooter game character. Next he dropped his shirt off of his shoulder (in a
          strangely effeminate manner) to reveal a dopey Japanese cartoon face.
          It was very important to this young ‘man’ that he get to share his individuality and sense of
          community with these two veterans.
          ********** https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/5f70c910450a20fa4c2546f845ac9b2a439ec5baef4d34dec0b380ed4290e595.jpg

      5. Well, Titus Andronicus, yes, that was to split the ears of the groundlings. But not everything else was. It takes time to sift the rubies out of the mud. Try this though experiment. Go to the New York Times of December 1944, and look at all the movies listed there – you will probably not recognize a one. (I did this once as part of personal study of home front during the Ardennes Offensive.) Yet a few years earlier Hollywood gave us “Casablanca”.
        In editing his version of Shakespeare, Alexander Pope read hundreds of plays from the Elizabethan Age – many of which are not now even saved in manuscript due to fire, and neglect. I believe this article correctly identifies the loss of standards, which create cultural continuity across times and peoples. With the Web, it has never been easier to become knowledgeable about our patrimony – and at the same time, increasingly less common.
        This is beginning to create obstacles in understanding US history. The participants in the American Civil War continually made allusions to ideas in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin civilizations that are increasingly foreign to most Americans. It isn’t necessary to put the past down a memory hole in order to destroy it – just eliminate the connection between their culture and ours, and time will increasingly do the rest.

    5. I can assure you, your nephew at UC Berkeley is not reading Shakespeare. Instead, he is participating in vandalism while blasting East Oakland rap music.

    6. They’ll keep reading Shakespeare, but they’ll have to include trigger warnings beforehand.

    7. I studied undergrad humanities beginning in 1990 – politics and history – it was a radically different time. Campus was ruled by scholarly white men in offices with walls of classics, and they set serious reading lists, texts written in 18th century English language and painful translations of French/ Latin.
      Friends took the piss even back then for not doing engineering etc – but it was an actual classical education, that left a graduate versed in the basics of western classical culture.
      You had all encompassing, chronological, first year foundation units, that covered the essential western arc of political and historical culture. Later on, you really had to trawl through choices of basic classics – politics: Hume, Locke, Smith, Rousseau and the icons of historiography: Eric Hobsbawn, Isaac Deustcher, E. H. Carr – without that material under your belt you would simply fail and be kicked out.
      Ahh, but that was all so last century now…

      1. 1990 was so long ago. I started college in 1981. Majored in French and European studies. I saw the beginning of the BS crap in 1993, I believe, when I took a gender studies linguistics class for my MA in teaching English as a foreign language. I did not even know what gender studies was before I took that class. Had never heard of it. But the prof was an evil bitch who hated men, and, I was surprised how quickly all the dudes in the class followed her line and swallowed it all.
        I considered myself a feminists and diehard liberal at the time, but even then, I was not having any of it. I challenged her beliefs as unconstitutional and treating people by their groups or genders and not as individuals. (Word identity politics did not yet exist to my knowledge.)
        I got a B- on the paper and for the class. ThAT Was all I needed. It was a one credit hour class that simply required sitting through a week-end of 2 eight hour sessions on Saturday and Sunday. Most of the class consisted of creating what I would call NEWSPEAK. That is, looking for “non-discriminatory” was to change words.
        Like calling a “manhole” an “access panel”.
        I did not really see where they were going with it all at the time. Feminism in the early 90’s still seemed rather reasonable to me.

        1. I hear you. It really was a very long time ago. Agree, even in very early 90’s there was some push for inclusion of gender and oral based history in humanities, from the advocates of 1980’s postmodernism and cultural relativism. I went to the most conservative and high status college in my town, and the college’s humanities departments, at that time, were very skeptical of the value of these studies, and paid them purely token attention. The idea of university politics and history education back then, was to prepare you for law, academia, gov, politics, journalism etc and was assumed you would need good general knowledge on hand. But those scholarly old white guys eventually retired, and in came the new crop, with a notable influx of women pushing for ‘critical studies’ agenda.
          ‘Manhole’ to ‘Access Panel’ – you nailed it – that was the new direction.

        2. My French professors were sooooo into the the classics of French literature. I loved every class I took in the French department. Grammar rigorous, literature classes great, contemporary French culture, business French………………
          Really enjoyed my education, and I was prepared to study in a French university when I went over there for graduate studies in European political history.
          I really do miss my college days. But I do not miss the stress of taking tests.

      2. thanks learned something. Will ruminate on it while gardening today. Nice sunny day, starting a 3 week vacation !

      1. yea, makes it even more delusional…
        Saw a chubby women at gym yesterday with trainer– made to push the weighted Sleigh(I think its called)
        I’m no expert on fitness, but seems not good for weight loss for a woman – but to maximize but size…

        1. wow.
          This is officially the single worst comment I have seen on this site by anyone, ever, at any time, Even famed idiot Father of Three was never so bad…not by half. THis is just fucking disgusting. I have to congratulate you. Not a lot of people say something that makes the kneeman think they are a disgusting deviant who should be shot….but winner winner pedo dinner

        2. Yup, blew my “two year old contacts” comment yesterday out of the water. (I was speaking of the time since I last contacted, not the age of the women)

        3. Yes. I gave you the appropriate amount of shit for that one, but you recovered most elegantly. All about frame, dood.

        4. good times……I can’t get over how many out there that gets in a huff because of someone messing with you.

        5. Father of three was an odd egg , to say the least. I kind of miss his antics though. Every now and then, he would come up with some useful comment.

        6. he wasn’t dumb, just strange. ALso, he never suggested that women look better with the bodies of 12 year old boys. I would gladly make this trade.

        7. If you like vaginas that are shaped like a dick, that doesn’t mean that you’re straight.

    1. I can’t stand their terminology. I finally figured out a trans man is really a woman and a trans woman is really a man. So technically that’s a trans woman. Which is why it’s allowed to compete with women, see it’s all in the name. If you called it a man that wouldn’t make any sense.

        1. 3 points of positive here
          1) She is a celebrity and I am a total star fucker. Guilty.
          2) Those lips scream put cock in me
          3) There is no way that she won’t fuck and suck you until your balls are drained good. This dirty little whore knows what she is doing.

        1. that is very much my type too. However, I long for distractions and “famous wigger singer” is a little nice. Not sure if the bikini girl here is famous or not but she rates a 9 in my book.

        2. One thing Curwen, I have a very well defined type. I like dark thick hair, eyes so dark they are almost black, on pale skin with very much the body of this girl, pouty lips and a look of real cuntishness so that you feel that every thrust into her womb is punishment for some crime or another….but I am a sport fucker. Novelty matters.

        3. Not sure if the bikini girl here is famous or not but she rates a 9 in my book.
          There’s enough here that made me curious to check. (Not the least of which she isn’t quite a 9 for me.. More like 7.5ish, at least in this photo.)
          This 43 (!) year old chick is apparently Kate Beckinsale. Other photos of her push up up to an 8 for me.

        4. wow, give that she is 43 in this pic that is fairly impressive generics and/or surgery I ment the general slip look with light skin, dark features, big hips and tits not particularly big enough to stick out.

        5. You can see her completely naked at age 20 in the movie “Haunted”. Well before the vampires and werewolfs had her.
          Too old for me now, looks like she’s had a Cesarean from the bikini shot.

        6. The first photo is almost a dead ringer for my daughter. How odd.

        7. Hathaway in her prime is the N° 1 in my B list (B for Brunettes), sharing the position with Monica Bellucci in her prime. However, I do prefer Hathaway in The Devil Wears Prada, I watched that fucking movie only to see her.

        8. You just admitted to watching The Devil Wears Prada, dude.
          I…wow. Just wow.

        9. When I first saw it I actually had to do a double take.
          I’ll look up this actress. Maybe it’s just the lighting or whatever.

        10. Devil Wears Prada Hathoway also amazing. My B list is my A list as brunettes are my thing so prime time hathoway is about as close to the top as it gets for me. I mention Love and Other drugs for this wonderful images
          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/71c3ab18755bcd448af7f53ffa4977594ef80309bd45e02209633ea3339bf8e1.png https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/66df885b1df5e4ccbeccb19cd2e63e1e238b87efd0a58d33bcfe35a965958aee.png

        11. young anne hathoway being topless and slutty? yeah, i’d suggest its worth a watch

        12. Looked at the link and at pics. Some pictures she looks distinct, but in most of them she bears a very striking resemblance to my daughter. And they’re not far apart in age either. Grace is just tiny bit older than my son.

        13. It was on tv a lot a few years ago. I have seen the whole things in bits and pieces, but never sat thru the whole thing

        14. We’ve taken great pains to ensure that both of our children are light years away from Hollywood. I’m not going to ruin all of that work now.

        15. I know, my comment was a joke. Movies today are mental poison, especially to young people. For me is almost unbelievable the level of corruption, decadence, and plain evilness the movies spread today.

        16. I don’t know who she is actually, and I’ve not seen the series, as I don’t watch television.

        17. That is impressive. A normal man married to a 43 year old woman wakes up to a woman every morning who looks nowhere near 10% that good.

        18. Go Asian. I am married to an Asian and almost all her friends are Asian. As a result I know a ton of women in their forties and older who look better than that 43 year old in a bikini.

        19. I went full bore German…BUT…not before getting a good looksee at her female relatives first. It’s all in the genetics. Her aunts aged well, and her female cousins are so freaking hot that it defies imagination, so I figured “Eh, this check box is ticked”

        20. The critical relative is her mother. I met my wife’s mother just after she turned 50. She had hair down past her but and was still slim. The face was a bit wrinkled, but the body was still solid. This was very early in our courtship.

        1. was originally going to go with “oh, it is true” “baby, that’s my arm” but instead I am going to go with
          15 is my limit on schnitzengruben

        2. One of my favorite exchanges in all of movie history is in that movie
          Sheriff: A man who drink like that and don’t eat is sure to die
          Wako Kid: When?
          Funny story, when Obama was inaugurated the first time I was with a buddy in some irish bar in midtown getting day drunk..,..I don’t think either of us had any idea the inauguration was going on. The bartender put it on the TV and all these people are watching. I jumped up on a bar stool as Obama was walking towards the chief justice SCREAMING

  5. The above Feminist Virus is spreading everywhere. In the USA I believe it has reached it’s peak because marriage rates, birth rates and sex rates are starting to slow down. It just shows that enough is enough and men are waking up. If there ever is a turn around it will sadly be Muslim men who will do it.

  6. Ghettoification and tattoos are the biggest turn offs for me, they simply scream trash taste in everything. I can deal with the other two with no problem most of the time, however.

    1. Effective propaganda requires repeating the key ideas you want to get across in different ways.

    2. I’m pretty sure this wasn’t a collaborative effort by the membership.
      You’re free to write and submit something new, fresh and shiny, btw.

        1. The submission process leaves a lot to be desired. It’s hard to tell sometimes if they even received the manuscript.

        2. Could be, my first one was about shutting off the TV, second was about applying red pill knowledge into marriage.

        1. That’s fine, but then I don’t see where you get the notion that you should guide what is published here if you don’t wish to contribute a solution to your perceived problem.
          Bitching about something is fine, but bitching without offering or searching for a solution is pointless.

        2. Ah, you’re not into accepting criticism. Ok then. Later.

  7. Today’s college students rebel against reading Shakespeare and other great English writers because that would require their coarse and animalistic minds to try to understand unfamiliar words and difficult syntax.

    1. All students have always rebelled against reading Shakespeare at first. They need to get it kicked into them before they realize how great it is. The problem isn’t the students, and while sometimes it is the teachers it isn’t always the teachers…it is the fact that everyone needs to succeed, by law, so everything needs to be spoon fed. Shakespeare is one of those very rare writers who deserves his place in the pantheon. He simply can’t be over estimated. But breaking in to understanding it takes work and effort and those two things are anathema to children who aren’t given any structure and since the schools now pander to students rather than challenge them ole billy shakes is on the back shelf..

      1. In a way we waste the classics by teaching them to the young. You need a certain amount of life experience to appreciate them, as you’ll discover when you go back to these works later in life.

        1. I have always felt this to be right. I had a professor I liked who told me that every 10 years since he was 20 he read the brothers karamozov and don Quixote. He was nearly 70 when he told me this and was preparing for his re read. He said he never got the same thing from them twice.
          The problem with waiting until you have the emotional maturity to understand the great works is that reading Hamlet, or Karamozov, or The Enneads is not like reading the newspaper. You need to train the skill to read.
          I am not a computer guy, but the IT person at my office was telling me how literally nothing he learned in college in the 80’s is in any way relevant to modern technology. However, what was relevant was the logical way they taught him to think that he can equally apply to computer stuff in the 80’s as he can in to 2010’s as he wil in 50 years from now. I don’t think we need to teach 15 year olds to read hamlet because reading hamlet is important for 15 year olds, but rather starting the process whereby there is a particular way to read and access the meat in literature is a skill learned over decades and needs to start early.
          If you pick up hamlet today and get the same thing out of it as you did when you were in high school then in many ways you have failed at life.

        2. “However, what was relevant was the logical way they taught him to think
          that he can equally apply to computer stuff in the 80’s as he can in to
          2010’s as he wil in 50 years from now. I don’t think we need to teach 15
          year olds to read hamlet because reading hamlet is important for 15
          year olds, but rather starting the process whereby there is a particular
          way to read and access the meat in literature is a skill learned over
          decades and needs to start early.”
          Perfect. Couldn’t agree more. Education is not so much about retaining stuff as it is about learning how to learn in the first place.

        3. I was just thinking about this recently regarding the “agile craze” to transform IT workplaces into sweatshops where coding is broken down into 5 lines of code each lest they become a “waterfall”.
          Coding as taught in the old days in the 80’s, back when you had about 5 lines each, required thinking in larger terms to hold it all together. With limited memory and resources, you wanted to be efficient and this showed up in the final work where the code was written so well, that it was a problem getting it to work beyond the year 2000 when nobody thought the code would still be needed. Today, some code is so awful that it barely lasts a year before being replaced and instead of a single programmer writing amazing code, it’s 20 of them hacking away like monkeys on a typewriter to correct the errors of other monkeys.

        4. I was chuckling about this since I’m in a book reading club and enjoying these classics from a new perspective because I now have the maturity and depth to enjoy them.
          I’m reminded of when I first read The Hobbit and loved the whole story but whenever the elf rhymes came about, I’d flip through them without reading because I couldn’t care less about elf poetry and wanted to find out if the goblins would eat the dwarves. I think this is similar to many young people reading the classics who only digest the basics missing all the other crafts spread around the pages that are viewed as filler by the young reader.
          That being said, I still don’t want to read the elf poetry. Man, Tolkien could have edited that out and maybe won the Nobel prize…

        5. His use of that poetic form was reminiscent of how the anglo-saxons preserved stories, mytholgies and histories prior to becoming literate. Everything he did, had a reason and a history to it. That’s what makes him so interesting to me, since I’m into that whole deep honkey history thing.

        6. Best thing about reading the Hobbit and LoTRs was then reading National Lampoon’s ‘Bored of the Rings’

        7. The first time? Hell no. As an adult, especially after studying Wessex Saxon and reading various texts in that tongue, yes. They became very meaningful to me after that, not so much the “he did this and went here” but the meter and form and the method in which the story was told.

        8. “Today, some code is so awful that it barely lasts a year before being replaced and instead of a single programmer writing amazing code, it’s 20 of them hacking away like monkeys on a typewriter to correct the errors of other monkeys.”
          Excellent, and I don’t think I could have said it as eloquently. 😀

      2. Dude, I so cannot disagree with your assessment more.
        I do think that yes, they must be lead to come to understand the Bard, clearly. He’s cannon and many of our common sayings originated in his works. That’s cool. But as a writer he was little more than a soap opera hack. I’ve read every freaking word he’s ever written and come away, after analysis and pondering, liking very little of it outside of maybe MacBeth and Hamlet. You know that despite my hillbilly idiom, I’m actually an educated man with a vast amount of reading and thinking under my ball cap. He just didn’t make my socks roll up and down, and if I accidentally watch ten minutes of The Young and the Restless I come away feeling the same as if I read A Midsummer Night’s Dream.
        But students must study him, and all of the cannon of literature in my opinion, in order to have a good understanding of the culture that they are inheriting.

        1. It is funny how we have some odd ball disagreements. I would suggest that Shakespeare is like the far side. If you didn’t enjoy it it meant you didn’t get it, not that it was in any way lacking. I’d never object to you being an educated hillbilly (for sake of argument we will call this Hill William from now on) but I would heartily disagree with your assessment of the bard and suggest that there is a treasure within that you simply missed.

        2. Gonna have to say that I believe that you’re wrong in this instance. Chief, I made my way through the jungles of James Joyce and came out the other end unscathed and more of a man (who left alive can even make that claim any longer?). I digested Dostoevsky and Chekhov and grew in depth and scope intellectually and emotionally from it. I made Victor Hugo my bitch. But Shakespeare? I’ve read and re-read and come away feeling like I’m reading some guy who did a side hobby and who had a fair knack for capturing the more aburd elements of human nature, in a Young and Restless format, nothing more. When I found out that his main line of wealth came from real estate dealings, I nodded my head and thought “Well, now it all makes sense”.
          Maybe what he offers are things that I simply take for granted so that for me they are no great insight, whereas when you read him perhaps those things were new to you? That might explain what’s going on here.

        3. see I think joyce is an over rated hack. To each their own I suppose. I think Shakespeare has access to a depth of humanity that few others do and is able to be fun while doing it.

        4. Now see, here I’m going to pull a lolknee on you and say that his genius was in his madness and that if you really, really, really get down to the stream of consciousness he was delivering, that he delivered some really interesting messages.

        5. Joyce isn’t my top pick for writer of the Millennium. I’m just noting that if a guy can get through Joyce and make *any* sense out of it, that his critical reading skills might be a scooch higher than your average bear, with or without pic-a-nic baskets.

        6. I liked his earlier, sane work. But Ulyses just felt like I was being intellectually molested, like cubism and most ‘modern art’ that needs a goddamn essay to explain it.

        7. Top pick here with be muh man fydor…..followed in a close second by Thomas Mann

        8. You know how some people read Also Sprach Zarathustra and come out saying “Well, that was stupid and nearly unintelligible” and then you tell them “It was mostly a collection of inside jokes for the high placed intellectuals at the time” you can hear them say “Oh….that changes everything”?

        9. For me, Dostoevsky has the corner on the market regarding insights into the soul of man, as far as literary writers are concerned anyway. He excavates the soul and extracts the absolute evil and good that men have in them and puts it on bare display in a way that leaves you breathless. If ever a man wants to see the depth of depravity and evil that human kind has hiding under the veneer of civilization, he need look no further than Crime and Punishment. IMO

        10. Gotta do The Brothers Karamazov, man, gotta do The Brothers.

        11. fair enough…only I get the Joyce. I just think it is shallow and pretentious whereas Zarathustra, I believe, if it were to be properly understood by at even 10% of the people who quote it would be a very powerful book

        12. Hell yes. The city of Dublin does James Joyce tours around the town. You would occassionally see a Group of tourists clutching “The Dubliner” while the guides explaing what ever blather out the book. Make you think “where’s a car bomb when you need one.

        13. He was vain and pretentious yes. So was Oscar Wilde. It seemed to be a thing of that age in WASP society (yes, I know he was Irish, work with me here), or at least, for a certain segment of it. But if I had to choose a novel from the time to read, and I had only Virginia Woolf or Joyce to read, I’d take Joyce any day of the week over that insipid, highly overrated old modernist hag.

        14. an interesting thing about Dostoyevsky is that a lot of people credit the change in his writing from mediocre writer to the full understanding of the human soul to his mock execution. I guess putting someone in jail for a bit, putting them against a wall and shooting some blanks at them and then sending them home to write novels is a good strategy

        15. I have found that it is best to ignore female authors. There are a handful of exceptions which only serve to prove the rule.

        16. how much of a “revolutionary” he was I am not sure. The boys at fontanka 16 sure thought so, but they were a little trigger happy

        17. You know, now that you mention that, I wonder something. This is not something I’ve seen asked before, but maybe it has been. I wonder if Chekhov’s Ward Number 6 was based on or alludes to Dostoevsky’s experience in some manner? Strange now that I think about it. Probably didn’t, but it does seem like Chekhov would be influenced by Dostoevsky to some degree simply due to some level of intellectual association, nationality and the times.

        18. In truth though there was nothing really depraved and evil in the calculations he made – he weighed up the value of someone he considered anti-social against his own life which in terms of pro-social potential he considered of greater value, and decided that the murder he was planning was a utilitarian good. The interesting thing is whether he would have had his fevered conscience induced breakdown had lizaveta the innocent not entered the room and got herself horribly killed.

        19. Sometimes you don’t get a chance to dodge that bullet in a university lit class. But yes, I totally agree with you. And how anybody can read Mary Shelly and not come away thinking that she was the most over-rated author in human history, is a mystery. Plodding through Frankenstein was like pulling teeth trying to get through her absolutely unnecessary and pretentious attempt to make English turn into the French language.

        20. dostoyevsky was a dreamer, and as such he even described himself (his younger self?) as ‘the incarnation of sin’ as I remember in one of his feuilletona, perhaps because he thought, imagined and wrote, instead of acting in the world as a praxis oriented revolutionary would, so yes, one might wonder how much of a revolutionary he really was. To be honest I’m not that clear on his early biography.

        21. prince mishkin and alyosha hadn’t quite found find the red about women.
          Ivan was red pill. How about the grand inquisitor?

        22. Ah but sir, there is a segment of humanity that considers taking human life’s value as a matter of utilitarian calculations to be pretty close to one of the ultimate evils.

        23. He was guilty of “situational ethics”, a self-centered hubris that places his own (perceived) needs above the rules of society.
          Classic SJW….

        24. raskolnikov seems to me to represent the idea that ‘without god, everything is permitted’ i.e. that a godless society will make precisely those kinds of calculations to evaluate who does and who does not have social utility, and therefore the right to draw breath etc. Most atheists, agnostics aren’t inclined to murder or crime and have their own moral codes, whether derived socially or through conscience, but the Dostyovesky’s interest does seem to relate to the issue of whether ultimately there is really anything stopping us, if we should choose to make the kinds of calculations that Raskolnikov makes, and his answer in a sense is a terrifying ‘no’. His response is a religious one, but leaves open the possibility that should you ultimately reject God then there is no such necessary restraint. I’m not saying that’s correct, but that is how I read Dostoyevsky in C&P. If you consider the atheist revolution that followed Raskolnikov’s atheistic, rationalistic and nihilistic reasoning is in a sense worked out practically, for life is assigned value within the scheme of things precisely on account of it’s utility to the dictatorship of the proletariat

        25. Mitya was the real red pill. Ivan was all bluster. As for Father Zossima….he was the real deal despite his smell of corruption

        26. yes he was, but I would say that D. would have emphasised the moral / religious law, above any obligation to abide by the rules of society

        27. Yes, but he (at least Raskolnikov) believe that was a malleable thing, subject to personal interpretation.

        28. Mitya / Dmitri was the most human and down to earth and clearly had solid ‘game’, but he lacked self control and the ability to control his passions, so I’m not so sure. Father Zossima always bored me a little, despite Alyosha’s devotion. Ivan & the Grand Inquisitor is the heart of the drama though

        29. I think mitya’s lack of self control was indicative of the world around him which he was (rightfully rebelling against). I am a big Dmitri fan. As for the inquisitor, I like him. I loved Zossima but it has been a while since I read it so I can’t say why. You might get a kick out of this but some years ago I threw a party with a bunch of other lit nerds and we went to a Russian store in Queens here and bought all the provisions that Dmitri took to Mokroe for the party he threw. I have to re-read. it has been a while.

        30. dostoyevky’s more interesting when he’s dramatising debates like this, rather than necessarily providing the solutions at the end. It’s an ongoing issue I guess

        31. Good literature’s like that though – illustrates the debate and then says “find you’re own damn conclusion!”

        32. I liked Dmitri too, not sure about the Inquisitor, although he makes some interesting points.
          That party…..as literary fandom goes I guess it’s a tad better than re-creating a Quidditch match or something

        33. yeah, both dostevsky & tolstoy offer their own though, but you can take or leave them as you wish

        34. Took me a second to grok that. And now I return the obligatory:

      3. IMO, plays were meant to be watched, not read. I just don’t have the patience to read words set in that format. But I do find Aristophanes and The Taming of the Shrew amusing.

      4. People rebel against Shakespeare because they can’t understand the perceived fruity language. If you get beyond that, it’s fun.

    2. I prefer Mark Twain. He had some scathing criticisms for the pomposity of his day and some pretty keen insights, like in “The Tragedy of Puddinhead Wilson”

      1. Best line in all of American literature in his ‘The Recent Great French Duel’:
        I walked the floor turning the thing over in my mind, and finally it occurred to me that Gatling guns at fifteen paces would be a likely way to get a verdict on the field of honour. So I framed this idea into a proposition.

  8. Speaking of literature, Americans a few generations back also had exposure to the language of the King James Bible. Even if they didn’t read it themselves, they heard its words spoken from the pulpit, and they understood allusions to the various stories and precepts in it phrased in early 17th Century English.
    Back in the 1970’s I noticed the trend towards increasingly dumbed-down Bible translations, starting with the immensely popular paraphrased Living Bible. Apparently Christian publishers had to publish these Idiocracy versions to try to keep the Bible relevant in American culture because of a decline in general standards of literacy.

    1. I agree with your sentiment here, so this isn’t a criticism so much as noting that the language used in the King James Bible was considered archaic at the time it was translated and written. Not “1000 years ago” archaic, but rather like the kind of language you’d hear grandma and grandpa speaking when you went to visit. Your overall point stands however, they’ve so modernized the language in modern Bibles that if you sit down and compare both translations, you’ll many times come away with entirely different meanings out of the same passages. I believe this is by design.

      1. New translations are watering down the message. Got to make everyone feel comfortable. Can’t have anyone feeling bad about how bad they are screwing their life up, can we?

        1. Yes, and this is anti-ethical to the entire point of religion and morality. You MUST feel something is compellingly good or compellingly evil in order to accept the wider moral code being instilled. If the Book becomes a watered down tail of Rainbow Brite and the Unicorn Gang, it loses all of its value.

  9. Article nailed it, trash moms raise future hood rats. I see it daily in a rental next door. The quality women I went to school with, from elementary to college, that are still solid-all came from good families. If I were dating again, I could weed out the field so easily. Tats- NO, Came from single mom- PASS, Over 130 lbs or leg hail damage- NEXT, Has kid(s)- HELL NO, Tight with sleaze gfs- PISS OFF

  10. “Ghettofication poster child Iggy Azalea. Her music is rap. She only seems to date black guys. And her butt is strangely enormous on an otherwise normal girl”
    I noticed this too; a lot of jelly in that skanks ass.

  11. Todays woman: slut around till about 30, then get pregnant by a random dude and pop out an autistic kid. Top that off with “I can raise my kid by myself” mentality and you’ve got yourself a winner.

      1. When I came of age during the early 80’s, the stereotypical hero single mother was a woman who married young and helped her husband become successful and he dumps her for a younger woman sticking her with the kid and she’s struggling while he parties it up. This is represented by the character played by Bette Midler in “The first wives club” with a plot that kicked off when a woman committed suicide because her husband left her for a younger woman and wraps up on that theme as well.
        Laughable because this rarely rarely happened. It’s amusing that the left which claims that we can’t judge, say, Islam based upon the actions of a few radicals turns around and generalizes about men as rapists and CEO child abandoners when only a fraction live that lifestyle.
        This propaganda was meant to justify the anti-male divorce courts by treating a working class shmoe as if he was a rich CEO and could afford to buy his ex wife a new mansion lest “the children suffer”. Many women were dumb enough to buy into it and think that NOT getting married was a good idea. And those are the loser single mothers.
        The system soon adapted to raise “child support” liens to make it more lucrative but men, to our credit, have wised up. It took a good two generations or so but most men now know that if you bang some chick you just met without a condom and give her your name, you are facing 18 years of involuntary servitude. It’s hard to even feel sorry for them since it’s now such a socially acknowledged fact.
        But even that route is drying up since as the smart men take themselves out of that gene pool, it leaves these women with losers who wind up not bothering to work 80 hours a week to try to live a semi-middle class life so they just drop out.

      1. It’s one of the worst kinds of abuse. The child has no say in being deprived of a father, or only getting their dad part-time, and having to grow up in the single mommy household with all her dysfunction. Then later on they get saddled with a stepdad who isn’t gonna give a crap about them and possibly abuse them. Even if the stepdad isn’t abusive or uncaring, it’s still an unnatural living situation and is not even close to a replacement for a good biological father.
        A prime mental/emotional disorder-breeding environment.

        1. It’s even worse when little Billy or little Ashley has two “mommies” or two “daddies”. The kids that come out of that kind of “family” unmolested are still going to be major league screwed up in the head.

        2. Wait, on TV every set of gay parents has all-encompassing wisdom, sage-like maturity, and infinite love and understanding towards the children. Model parents, just perfect in every way. You mean this isn’t true??

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *