On gun control and wimpy betas.

The topic of wimpy betas is a common one in the manosphere.  While being wimpy is not part of the definition of being beta, in practice it often seems that way.  Why is this?  Part of the reason would seem to be that the non wimpy betas get snapped up pretty quickly, leaving mostly just the wimpy ones behind.  So while there is a shortage of manly betas, there probably isn’t as big a shortage as would seem.  But if you are a woman looking for a manly beta, or a wimpy beta yourself the fact that the manly betas are likely already married isn’t especially helpful.  So this brings us back to the question of why.  Deansdal offers this insight in his post Now really, WTF is game?

The feminist zeitgeist indoctrinates all kids with the notion that men should be submissive to women under all circumstances, in addition to being nice, peaceful and “romantic” – which is also redefined basically into catering to every whim of your goddess girlfriend. Many are so thoroughly indoctrinated that they will defend these ideas as long as they live.

This pretty neatly sums up the kind of indoctrination which game will help a man overcome.  But there is another related but slightly different aspect to the issue.  Verie44 wrote about her challenge finding a worthy man in church on Hooking Up Smart:

Much like most of American society, [the church] doesn’t teach men to be men. I mean, sometimes you have to go Old Testament on someone’s ass. I guess I don’t feel like I could trust a lot of these guys to take care of business in the way that I know my dad would. If we were poor, he would break his back digging ditches to keep us fed and scheme until he figured out a way to build his own business rather than throwing up his hands and relying on government assistance to eke out a miserable living. If someone hurt me or my mom, he would kill them (not joking in any way — he honestly would find them and remove them from the planet).

Without advocating vigilante justice, I found something very poetic in her description of her father.  What struck me was how un PC this was.  She described her father as a potentially dangerous man.  But our society has a hysterical fear of male power.  Men must be made to be entirely non threatening.  This is enforced by law, culture, you name it.  In short, we are over civilizing men.

How feminists see men.

What feminists turn men into

Please understand that this is a matter of degree.  To be a complete man, one must have the ability to be threatening. But this must not be something which rules him.  He must rule his own emotions and his own power, so that it is only expressed at appropriate times.  But the feminists and the PC left are oblivious to any potential benefit from allowing men to remain men.  They want to stamp out every last bit of potential for threat.  So they indoctrinate him into fearing that part of himself instead of teaching him how to harness it.  At the same time, they do everything they can to literally disarm him.  These two go hand in hand so closely that we have all met men who were elated that their government had disarmed them.  They are actually proud to wear a muzzle, and they put it on willingly.  Then they start suggesting I put one on as well.

If you are a woman unable to find a manly white collar man, my bet would be that you live in an area with strict gun control.  I’d even bet that where you live there are strict restrictions on carrying a pocket knife.  This is both a symptom and a cause of the problem.  It is a symptom in that it reflects the local attitudes on men and male power.  An area with strict weapons restrictions fears men and is looking for a way to make them as harmless as possible.  Men who are less concerned with society are less susceptible to this kind of indoctrination.  But a beta is all about following the rules and being part of the team (even when they are the leader), so they are most swayed by this kind of message.  Because of this a beta in that area is likely to have adopted a fear of his own power as a man.  You might want him to turn this part of him back on, but the brainwashing is often too much to overcome.  Men who live in areas like this are repeatedly told that if someone breaks into their house and threatens their family, they should cower in fear and call another man to solve the problemThis is not how a healthy well adjusted man thinks.

The good news is there are still many men out there who are very manly, even in areas with strict gun laws.  Blue collar men or those with a blue collar background are more likely to have a dose of male power properly mixed into their personality. After all, a man doesn’t need a gun to be dangerous.  There are also pockets of white collar men who embrace this part of themselves, but you will have to search to find them.  If you have no luck in your local area, look for a place which still believes in the right of self defense.

If you are a man who suffers from fearing your own power, the first step is to acknowledge it.  If your first instinct is to tell me that the real solution is for all men to be powerless, examine that part of yourself.  From there, look for ways to express this part of yourself and make it a slightly larger part of your overall mix.  I’m not saying to become violent or nuts, but to become a man with a healthy sense of his own capacity to be dangerous.  Part of being a man also means controlling that capacity, so don’t overlook that part either.

Wolf photo created by the US Government (see also here).  Maltese photo from Arvin5200.

This entry was posted in Feminists, Finding a Spouse, Guns, Manliness. Bookmark the permalink.

79 Responses to On gun control and wimpy betas.

  1. Gorbachev says:

    One thing that gets a woman wetter than the Amazon:


    Take a liberal girl hunting. Show her how to use a rifle, or better, a bow. Then illustrate how dangerous you are by skewering a small animal (say, a rabbit); and if it suffers, put it out of its suffering in a confident manner, as a kind of gentility.

    Wet like the amazon in rainy season. They love it.

  2. white and nerdy says:

    This is case where I have trouble believing game exists.

    I more or less agree with what you say men should be doing in this post. However I don’t see how women are attracted to that. It’s clear that most men are wimpy compared to me for whatever reason. Women do find me threatening and more so than most men but this has not led to them wanting to get fucked by me. No they want to take away my job, throw me in prison and/or have me killed. They actively do things like throw sexual harassment charge after sexual harassment charge at me to accomplish their goals.

    I don’t fear my own power. I am using it to make real changes in my life. However women are afraid of my power and seek to destroy me because of it.

  3. Susan Walsh says:

    First, those photos cracked me up, well done. Second, I believe you said at some point that you are from TX. I have seen many recommendations online that women who are seeking a lifetime partner would do well to move to areas of the country where there are a large number of unapologetically masculine men. I don’t have any stats to refute or cosign this, but it strikes me as quite a sensible notion. If you live in DC or NYC and you’re having no luck, try Wyoming. Or Colorado. Or Texas. I’d do that in a heartbeat if I felt like a lonely loser in a big metropolitan area.

  4. Women in general don’t want men being violent in general, but they absolutely want their man to be able to be violent to protect them should the need arise.

  5. dana says:

    I once saw my husband, then bf, get in a fistfight with his brother in our living room. at one point he lifted up a 10 lb dumbbell and almost bashed his brother with it. when i saw him do this his shoulders looked extra broad and there was an aura around him and cartoon glings were coming off of him–i was screaming at him to stop, but in all honesty i have never been more attracted to him than i was at that moment.

  6. Lily says:

    Guys being a a black belt in something like karate is a big plus. i.e. he’s not a crass streetfighter but if anything happened, you know he’d be able to protect himself and you.

    On the other side, years ago, I was walking down the street with an ex (whom the PUAs would describe as an alpha, he was a former player who had decided to go serious with me – no nothing special about me, I’m pretty sure it was a timing thing and he projected a load of stuff onto me about what I was like). There was a homeless man in a doorway, minding his own business, just sleeping I think. A couple of ‘lads’ (not particularly big ones) were a bit drunk and were bullying him. I wanted to say something, but he stopped me as he didn’t want to risk getting beaten up/stabbed. I felt my feelings about him change immediately, any alpha stock immediately plummeted. I also still feel really guilty for carrying on walking, I should have at least called the police a couple of minutes down the road 😦

  7. dalrock says:

    Hi Susan,

    Glad you liked it! I’m enjoying the photo aspect of blogging. I wish I had figured that out earlier.

    I grew up in S. California (San Fernando Valley), but as you might guess I didn’t exactly fit in there. I went to school in Colorado and my wife and I lived there for some time after we met/married. It is funny you mention those three states (CO, WY, TX), because I’ve house hunted in all three and can confirm that gun safes are extremely common in all three. TX probably has the most, then WY, then CO. I wouldn’t mind living in WY but I think it might be a very difficult move for someone used to a big metro area. It is just radically different. Colorado is a bit better that way but it is very isolated. Basically the whole state feels like an extension of Denver. If one likes Denver though, it would be a good choice. TX is a great choice if you don’t mind the heat. There are lots of big cities here, each with their own flavor. Even the DFW area has plenty of variety. Dallas is more white collar, and Fort Worth more blue collar. And the satellite cities each tend to have their own feel too.

    BTW, did you click on the link about a man not needing a gun to be dangerous? I love that story! If I wasn’t already running out of room I would have included it more prominently.

  8. dalrock says:

    I’ve only shot one rabbit, and it tasted like pine needles (probably shouldn’t shoot them at 10,000 ft in the Rockies in December…). But I used to go rabbit hunting with a buddy of mine just to get out. One time we tracked a rabbit to its hole and my friend was kneeling down to see in. Just then the rabbit bolted out and my friend punched it out of sheer reflex, killing it with a single punch. It was very cave man. I’m sure his wife would have loved to have seen that!

  9. dalrock says:

    Guys being a a black belt in something like karate is a big plus. i.e. he’s not a crass streetfighter but if anything happened, you know he’d be able to protect himself and you.

    Good point. This is actually one of the reasons why gun control hits ordinary betas so hard. Only a very small percentage will ever be at that skill level. Most white collar guys lack either the skill, time, or desire to get to the kind of level you are talking about. But here in Texas a law abiding white collar guy is not only allowed to own a gun, but they can keep it in their car concealed without a license. I do this when I have to take my family downtown or on a long road-trip. I’ve never needed it but just like a fire extinguisher or spare tire it is nice to have and not need. Guys who want to carry concealed have to pay a few hundred bucks, take a couple day course and pass a test and a background check and they can get a concealed carry license. Your average street thug sees a white collar guy in a very different way here in Texas. And home invasions are a very risky business.

    I’ve read that in the UK thieves prefer to break in while the owners are home because it is easier to get past the alarm, etc and they know they have little to fear from the occupants. I also recall a story a while back where a woman was chastised by the police after she had the poor taste to grab a large knife from her kitchen to visually warn some thugs in her back yard (garden) that she wouldn’t be easy prey if they broke in.

  10. Gorbachev says:

    That … that is fucking Alpha.

  11. Lily says:

    Yes, we don’t have guns much here, even in the countryside it’s a small percentage of people who have their own guns and more my father’s generation (more people will have access to them at for example a shoot). Though I’m from the deepest darkest countryside, I live in a major city now. Even taking into account everyone I know from both social circles, I probably know 5 times as many guys with a black belt in a martial art than a gun (and know some who are quite good but haven’t made it that far), obviously not way enough for my liking though 😉

    I don’t know if thieves here prefer breaking in when people are in or not. I would guess not actually, a lot of thievery is opportunistic when they see open windows or doors and think nobody’s in (houses with automated lights when you’re away have less burglaries than those not). You’re right that if someone breaks in and you show force to them then you could be in trouble with the law. Although this has been exaggerated by the press. There was one big case where a chap was charged with excessive force, a group of young ‘pikies’ (that’s an offensive word hence the apostrophes, it sort of means part proper gypsy mixed up with ‘chavs’) broke into his house and he shot one and he died, but even in that extreme case, the houseowner was not found guilty.

    Any people in the country have big dogs which tends to deter burglars and where I live, the police would be round in less than 5 minutes.

    That said, if I ever moved to the States, I’d most likely live on a farm so I’d be tempted to have a gun. I don’t see the problem with training and getting a license though.

  12. Lily says:

    Actually, that’s an exaggeration of police response time, it would more likely be more like 2 minutes, it’s a dense area not like the countryside where they would have to drive miles. As well as statistics, I have witnessed three street robberies and the police were there (called by people in the vicinity) within that.

    I do think English policemen are very good. There is an old saying which goes something like
    heaven is where the cooks are french, the lovers italian, the mechanics german, the policemen are english and the whole thing’s run by the swiss
    hell is where the cooks are english, the lovers swiss, the mechanics french, the policemen are german and the whole thing’s run by the italians.

  13. Lily says:

    aww, poor little bunny 😉

    the boy would do that. but he’s from the country. don’t all country boys do that?

  14. Lily says:

    I meant to say many people (not any) people in the country, not everyone has a big dog/s. I certainly would.

  15. tspoon says:

    Strict weapon controls have a strong feminist / matriachal component, working as they do to remove the equalising effect amongst males which their invention bought about. In such an environment, often the only remaining ‘dominant male’ behaviour on display is the somewhat contemptible behaviour of thugs and gangsters, as often lamented by ‘average’ males and the occasional enlightened female.
    Removing from the male (of average stature and physical ability) the ability to effectively protect his family unit, has the effect of removing from him one of his primary functions, and this is not unnoticed by anyone in that family unit. So if you are one of those males (of average stature and physical ability) you can thank this modern trend for the further removal of your ability to attract a mate and start a family.
    In a larger way, strict gun laws contribute also to the altering of the makeup of the next generation, with the offspring of thugs and reprobates becoming far more numerous than those of the more law abiding. Of course, gun laws are not responsible for this on their own, but as part of a cocktail of idiotic government policies.

    Also on another point, that of the expected underwriting of female safety, with that of the males own safety a la :
    “If someone hurt me or my mom, he would kill them (not joking in any way — he honestly would find them and remove them from the planet)”

    This is a subject that can be approached from more than one angle. Violence gets women wet. Let’s not beat around the bush on that. I’ve been in the company of females who enjoy provoking confrontation in public places, but who then expected that I should bear the fruits of their completely unwarranted aggression toward others. For her entertainment.
    Let’s be clear, likely that is not what the writer was referring to. And as a father I know all too well how it is to be protective of daughters.
    So yes I’m prepared to underwrite their safety with mine, but like any entity which undertakes to underwrite the risks of another, I have expectations for the behaviour of those I must protect.
    Which is where it breaks down somewhat. Outside of my two daughters, it’s been over 20 years since I met or knew a female of whom I knew, without reservation – That I would in fact guarantee her safety as far as I could. Outside of a minor miracle, I have no anticipation of meeting another…

  16. Meh says:

    For what it’s worth, the most beta guy I know has three black belts and a concealed carry permit. For a long time I thought he was an omega but recently a desperate cougar attached herself to him (no doubt after riding the cock carousel to exhaustion).

    Is he dangerous? Not at all, though certainly he could defend himself if attacked. But the amount of alpha vibe coming off the guy is essentially zero. He’s got needy and clingy written all over him.

  17. Doug1 says:


    There was one big case where a chap was charged with excessive force, a group of young ‘pikies’ (that’s an offensive word hence the apostrophes, it sort of means part proper gypsy mixed up with ‘chavs’) broke into his house and he shot one and he died, but even in that extreme case, the houseowner was not found guilty.

    I think he should absolutely have the right to do that, and laws that countermand the long English common law tradition that he should in home invasion cases infuriate me. It varies with the states here.

  18. grerp says:

    Here’s one thing that I’ve found confusing: back when I was commenting on Alex Knepper’s article highlighting why frat parties can be dangerous, I was told that I must hate men because I said that girls who dress provocatively, get really drunk, and wander off alone are putting themselves in some danger. Which some people took to mean that I thought that any man was a potential rapist – therefore, I hate men and think they are all ravening wolves only waiting to be loosed.

    But isn’t this the position of feminism? When I posted a very, very similar opinion at In Mala Fide just weeks before the Knepper thing went down, I heard no cry from the men there that I was misandrist. So I was genuinely perplexed. Is it wrong to say that men can be dangerous in the right setting or under certain circumstances or if they are, in fact, trained to be dangerous (military, martial arts, etc.)? Women can be dangerous too, in a different way. I suppose I can’t say that either because it’s anti-woman.

    Oh, and guns make me nervous.

  19. dalrock says:

    This guy had a double major and was working as a chemist at the time. His other degree was Environmental Health I think. He also was an accomplished wrestler in High School.

  20. Tarl says:

    I thought the position of feminism was that women had the “right” to pass out drunk at a frat party – or walk down a dark alley – or pretty much behave however they liked – and not get raped. In the feminist worldview, the woman has no responsibility whatever to reduce the likelihood of attack, since the man is 100% to blame when such attacks occur.

    As for guns making you nervous, you ought to familiarize yourself with them until the nervous feeling goes away. They are only a tool. And they are a tool that can negate the tremendous disparity in physical strength between you and the average male.

  21. Gorbachev says:


    If guns make you nervous, you should try hunting. Better yet, ditch guns, and get yourself a crossbow. You’ll realize: Guns are bad when they’re used to shoot people.

    But it means when you’re cornered and some dangerous guy threatens you, you can totally reverse the stakes.

    Not that I’d say shoot anyone. But it does tend to equalize things for you given that you’re going to have 1/4 the strength of the average man.

  22. Lily says:

    What are your thoughts on women who’d skin and make a stew out of that rabbit? I feel I have to hide those sorts of my skills (plucking pheasants etc) along with other kitchen ones as urbane metrosexual men would find it unfeminine. and the blood on your hands aspect.

    (and i suppose in this instance, it could be considered scary? bunny boiling heh)

  23. Lily says:


    Do you have much experience with crossbows? (I’ve never actually seen one outside vampire films….)
    Are they fairly easy to learn to use? I’d be a bit nervous about using one in a self defence way in case I missed or hit poorly and the person kept coming towards me. I’m fairly confident that if I took lessons I’d be pretty good with a gun and would able to aim for a leg or whatever and I’ have more bullets. Or do crossbows also reload without needing to put in a new arrow?

  24. dalrock says:

    I’m fairly confident that if I took lessons I’d be pretty good with a gun and would able to aim for a leg or whatever and I’ have more bullets.

    INAL but as I understand it deliberately shooting for a leg, or even firing a warning shot could put you in legal jeopardy at least in the US. Using a gun (or crossbow) is lethal force. It is justified if you feel your life is being threatened. But once you start doing things like aiming for a leg or firing a warning shot you tend to ruin your own case that you were in immediate and grave danger. From a practical point of view, if someone keeps coming at you once you have drawn a weapon you really don’t want to be fooling around anyway. You are much better off aiming for center mass (torso), which also gives you the best chance of hitting the target. Oh, and from what I have read you keep firing until the threat stops (they turn to run away or they go down and stop advancing).

  25. Pol Mordreth says:

    @lily: never ever ever ‘aim for the leg’, ‘shoot to wound’, or any of that other nonsense. You will become a statistic. If a goblin is within 21 feet of you you will only have time for 1 or 2 shots before he is on top of you. Shoot for center mass until the threat is stopped, then call the local police for the cleanup. It is hard to hit a moving target at all, especially a limb that is relatively small and moving rapidly. (leg, arm, etc.) On top of that a wounding shot will not stop the goblin from killing you.

    The only time you are justified to produce a weapon is if you feel in danger of death or serious bodily harm, and you are only allowed to shoot to stop the threat.

    I live in Nashvlle, TN. I have a carry permit, and carry my handgun openly on a belt holster. It’s amazing the reactions I get – convenience store clerks and bank tellers thank me for being armed. All across the south and mountain west carriage of handguns are looked at as a good thing generally.


  26. dalrock says:

    I found the story on the woman cautioned by police for showing a knife to guys trying to break in to her home.

    Klass was in the kitchen with her daughter upstairs when she spotted the youths in her garden just after midnight on Friday. She grabbed a knife and banged the windows before they ran away.

    Hertfordshire police warned her she should not have used a knife to scare off the youths because carrying an “offensive weapon”, even in her own home, was illegal.

  27. Lily says:

    I’m not very comfortable with aiming for centre mass. And I’d definitely get into a lot of trouble with the law. Definitely if I shot them in the back if they were running away.

    By the way, my family house had intruders a few years ago and my father shot one in the leg (he was in the army for a while and also has been shooting since he was a young boy), but it didn’t even come up that there could be a chance of him being prosecuted.

  28. Lily says:

    “Strict weapon controls have a strong feminist / matriachal component”
    Gun control in the UK has been around long before anyone thought of feminism.

  29. Lily says:

    Mylene Klass! The thought of her waving a knife is quite amusing. But seems the police denied they said that

  30. dalrock says:

    I wasn’t aware that you were still allowed to keep a gun in the home in the UK. Good to know.

  31. dalrock says:

    Good link. And good to know she wasn’t actually in the wrong. But I don’t believe the cops claiming they never said such a thing to her. It sounds to me that a cop found out he didn’t know the law as well as he thought he did and chose to cover his rear.

  32. Lily says:

    Shotguns etc, sort you use for shoots. I’d also imagine most farmers have them. You just have to have a licence for them, I don’t think it’s hard to one, the licensing is more to keep track of guns.
    I think you have to keep them in a locked cabinet and store your ammunition separately.

  33. Lily says:

    I think you’re most likely right, the police on the whole tell people not to take matters into their own hands so it was probably an individual copper and then got told off later for being misleading on the actual law.

  34. Gorbachev says:

    Well, guns are obviously more useful. But if someone breaks into your house, a loaded crossbow will scare the shit out of an intruder. I don’t know why, but a crossbow bolt or arrow lodged in the chest tends to make people much more terrified than a bullet – which makes no sense. But it’s true.

    I own two; a large hunting version and a smaller practice crossbow, meant for easy portability. The larger one has a double firing action, and is compound; it can put an arrow through a moose. It’s devastating.

    Show up, point a crossbow at a dude breaking into your house, and he’ll back down. But you need to look the part.

    Also, … the odds of killing him (instantly) are lower. And if he does die, it’ll be much more painful.

    A woman leveling a crossbow and looking mean will scare the shit out of a guy. Trust me.

  35. dalrock says:

    Hard to argue with. It would be even more effective though if they could make a crossbow that made the sound of a shotgun being pumped. That has to be the most frightening sound in the world to an intruder in a dark room!

    Also, key to looking the part is mental preparedness to pull the trigger if he doesn’t change course immediately. That, and not aiming for the leg. 😉

  36. Reinholt says:

    A couple of points:


    Be willing and prepared to use deadly force, else don’t own a gun and just run away. If you pull a weapon and you don’t intend to kill with it, you will often have it turned against you or your opponent will have brought a deadly weapon with them and will use it on you. You absolutely cannot screw around here. Shoot to kill, or don’t pull a gun.

    As to the legal side, check your local laws and know them well. The key phrase in the US is usually that you thought you were in mortal danger (as in you believed your foe had the intent and ability to kill you) and you did not believe you could escape. The UK will have its own nuances. Know them.


    The crossbow ideas is humorous, but I would not suggest actually using it. For one, crossbows are big and bulky, and if I want to use something that requires a bit of room, I’d prefer a shotgun for home defense (less likely to penetrate walls and inflict unintentional damage, more likely to cause massive carnage in an enclosed space). Racking a shotgun often terrifies people as well. The problem is the bulk; the shotgun is a big weapon compared to a knife or a pistol. With the crossbow, if you miss, you have a problem. If the other guy has a gun, you have a problem. If someone gets in close on you, you have a problem. There is too much room for error compared to modern weaponry, and also, they take longer to die. It’s quite possible you shoot them and they return fire and kill you anyways, and you both end up dead. I consider this a sub-par outcome.

    From my personal perspective, I prefer a good knife (in case things get up close and personal) and a solid revolver (because I don’t want a weapon jamming on me in a one on one situation – it’s one thing to clear a jam when you have four other guys laying down suppressive fire, and quite another to have to do it solo).

  37. dalrock says:

    Agreed. The crossbow was Gorbachev’s idea. I was agreeing with him that it would be less practical but very frightening. And I agree on the sound of a shotgun racking. My 12 gauge 870 used to be the weapon of choice in the Dalrock household for just such an emergency. But with little kids I now have one of those touch operated safes with his and hers autoloaders. A Para 1911 .45 for me, and for Mrs Dalrock a Ruger high capacity 9mm. Plus a rear button flashlight and spare mags. Once Mrs Dalrock finds a revolver she likes that will take the place of the Ruger in the touch operated safe.

    I also keep a fire extinguisher in the kitchen and a full toolbox, recovery strap, come along, and floor jack in my truck. I hope to never need any of these.

    Edit: But if it comes down to needing a knife, something in my plan has gone terribly wrong.

  38. dalrock says:

    What are your thoughts on women who’d skin and make a stew out of that rabbit? I feel I have to hide those sorts of my skills (plucking pheasants etc) along with other kitchen ones as urbane metrosexual men would find it unfeminine.

    If you like the kind of guy who would be freaked out by this, then yeah I’d probably not share it. Especially if he is a fatal attraction fan.

  39. Rum says:

    In Texas, Law Enforcement has become very supportive of the concealed carry law. The background check is uber-strict and so it is a great way for them to know by computer who is a certified good guy. It is linked to your drivers license and everything else. They have absorbed the notion that strict gun laws do not deter the type of criminal who might commit a gun crime and decent citizens who are carrying give off vibes that make bad guys leave them alone. So, why not let the good guys stand their ground? Besides, huge areas of this state are scarily empty. When seconds count the cops are just days away.
    When it comes to guns and crime, character is everything.

  40. Reinholt says:

    Agreed that the times when you need the knife is when something has gone very wrong. However, if and when that time comes, I’d rather have stacked the odds in my favor, so I’m with you on that.

    The only other use for the knife is if you know that you have more than one intruder in the area, and can sneak up on one. I wouldn’t advise attempting that without proper training, however.

  41. grerp says:

    I take your point, Tarl. It’s an emotional reaction I have. I feel that way about some knives too. Not cooking knives, though. Except for cleavers or really big knives. Those remind me of The Shining.

  42. grerp says:

    My grandfather taught me to shoot both a rifle and a bow, so I know how. I just don’t really like weapons, although I do see your point and think learning to be adept with them would be a good skill to learn. I’m not sure I could actually hunt, though. I’m one of those animal lover types – although not vegetarian, so hypocritical, I suppose. I could shoot at a target.

  43. Gorbachev says:

    Yeah, I don’t think a crossbow is practical, … but it seems less threatening than a gun when it’s just in the house, for some reason. But load the thing and point it at someone and they wet their pants. A gun should scare them more, but a loaded double-action compound crossbow will make people soil themselves – especially when it’s a little women holding it up to a home invader. They laugh for a minute and then the thought of a massive crossbow bolt in them, moving at the speed of a bullet but weighing 50x more and getting stuck in there – somehow it really plays with their brains.


    Shooting at animals is a good thing to be wary of. I only do it when hunting. And I eat the animal, too.


    I once fired both bolts into a moose at a good distance; the first skewered it, and the bolt came out the other side and destroyed itself against a tree (it literally exploded); the other bolt hit a bone and bounced around inside the moose. It was dead instantly.

    Had that been a person, even at that distance, the person would have gone down like a stone.

    At close range, the hydrostatic shock from a crossbow bolt when pulled to maximum resistance at, say, 5-10 feet is the equivalent of a shotgun blast. It can liquefy tissues, break bones.

    Not that it’s particularly practical, just that I know from experience that a woman who is good with a crossbow (I know a number of them) is a sight to behold; a woman who can successfully bring down a large animal with a compound bow is a woman few men will mess with.

    My brother’s wife can bring down ducks. She hunts illegally all the time. I believe she broke several laws and an international treaty last year by tagging a Canada Goose. They ate it.

  44. Rum says:

    There are a lot of horrible jokes going around about accidently (or otherwise) hunting spotted owl and/or California Condor. I will not tell them here because I am afraid of the cyber police.
    I am getting the impression that the handguns getting the most real-life carry time these days are the Keltec .32 and the soon to be Ruger LCR..Because they so much a habdsize. They are the ones that work best ergonomically, that is, you actually will have onegun or type of gun in your sweatban your jacket when the final ballon goes up or,eg, —the customer ahead of you in the line at a convenience store line starts shooting the check out girls and every possible witness, on her way to a major drug score of cashed stash. But you still standing. She has many rounds left. But so do you.

  45. Gorbachev says:


    A woman who would take that rabbit and skin and clean it and cook it would get +1 on the points scale just for being awesome.

    If I wasn’t sleeping with her already, she’d be on my radar, let me tell you. Prime genes, there.

  46. Gorbachev says:

    You’d be good to be afraid of the cyber police for this sort of thing. The fact that we’re talking about guns puts us on someone’s radar – for sure.

    The Keltec .32 is a popular one in Texas, for sure; my cousin has one. Of course, he also has a collection of old rifles, one of them Confederate, which hangs in his living room (and, um, fully functional, too; probably not a safe place to put it, but it’s utterly beautiful. I’ve never been allowed to thoroughly examine it. Look with your eyes, not with your fingers).

    I don’t have a handgun. I pretty much just hunt. Handguns aren’t much use in the woods.

    But, … I do know if I walk around with a bow in town I get a lot of very, … interested glances. People pay attention. especially if it’s drawn.

    But trust me on this one: If you’re notched, cops will absolutely take you down. It’s like brandishing a handgun.

    A friend of mine is a cop (small town, New England). He used to hunt with us. He was once carrying his crossbow, not in uniform, and was tackled by three squad cars – he’d been seen by a few people walking through town, the crossbow in his car. They thought he was a psycho wandering the streets with a loaded crossbow. He pulled out his badge, and a very spirited conversation ensued. Including a departmental investigation. Was he going postal? WTF was he doing wandering around town with a crossbow?

    This, for carrying his unloaded crossbow in town.

  47. Pol Mordreth says:

    @ Reinholt:
    A shotgun load that will not penetrate drywall walls will also not penetrate a human. If there is enough charge and sufficiently sized shot to stop an attacher, than anything on the other side of a wall will be similarly impacted. Head on over to http://www.theboxoftruth.com for testing videos.

    Otherwise, all valid points.



  48. Pol Mordreth says:

    Handguns are no use in the woods? I carry my sidearm when I hunt. My deer rifle and ammunition is great for bambi and company, but if I happen to be in the wrong place at the wrong time and mama black bear thinks I’m a threat to her cubs the handgun will stop her long before the rifle will.

    Of course, I hunt for maybe 20 days a year. I carry 365 days a year, because the bloody 2 legged predators cant be picked out of a crowd at a distance and allow me to go a different direction.


  49. Reinholt says:

    I am not saying shotguns do not penetrate things like drywall with shot, but rather that it does not have the penetrating power of many other weapons.

    I’m far more likely to have loose rounds go unexpected places with my .45 than my shotgun, in short.

  50. Lily says:

    Thanks dalrock and Gorby. I’ll have to mull it over a bit. Unfortunately, I’d say 90% of guys I know in my big city would be freaked out by it 😦 Guys in the country probably less so but then I’m not very compatible with them in other ways. It is tricky being single again!

    The boy’s from the country but even he was really freaked out when he saw me demolishing some chickens with my cleaver (already dead ones lol). He likes watching me cook but seems to appreciate things like patisserie more than the bloody stuff..he just looked at me horrified and said that’s so bloody looking and won’t it spoil your manicure. Maybe he associates it with something older women in the country do.

  51. Lily says:

    Wow, you all know a lot about guns. Quite scary.

    I think I’d be nervous about using a crossbow for self defence, too worried about missing and/or going wrong. But I’m not thinking of going on an archery or crossbow course (thanks Gorby!). I think it would be a good skill from a hand/eye coordination perspective even if I don’t take it further.

    I have a tough dog in the house at the moment, though he’s still a pup and I do have a good alarm system, it makes me feel a lot safer when I’m on my own. Hopefully the barking would deter as I think the only harm he’d actually do is lick someone to death 🙂

  52. Gorbachev says:

    Yeah, Lily, if you miss with a crossbow, you’re fucked. If you hit, chances are, the guy is deader than a bag of rocks; but there’s that if.

    Learning archery is a great way to improve lots of skills. Most clubs here (US) are female-dominated, for some reason; but hunters are pretty damned serious types. I’m a big city boy, myself, but I grew up in rural New England, and there were, shall we say, lots of animals here and about. We regularly went hunting with my father. I had a slingshot when I was 12, and I could hit targets at crazy distances (not so good now).

    You’ll meet some interesting characters, though, and the skills you develop are very impressive when you illustrate them to non-archers.

  53. Doug1 says:

    I’m not very comfortable with aiming for centre mass.

    That’s one of the reasons you need a man, a real man, sweet thing.

  54. AUM says:

    Generally speaking there’s no reason to have guns in your home if you live in a middle class suburb. Nobody’s going to bother you.

    If you really wanna test your alpha metal – move to the ghetto.

  55. Gorbachev says:


    Maybe. I have a better suggestion. Do what my brother did.

    He fought in both Iraq wars, and is worried about being rotated back in. He’s career military. His wife is a tough lady; he’s a born killer. Not huge success with the ladies, but he didn’t mess around and his wife is reasonably hot.

    You want to test your alpha credibility? Do what he did.

    Go to Iraq and blow things up. He drives an armored unit and got to do that. His wife is pretty impressed. Making things go boom.

  56. Lily says:


    I’m booked into an crossbow intro course!
    (my post should have said ‘I’m now thinking’ not ‘Im not thinking’!)

    Really looking forward to it.

  57. Gorbachev says:

    Lily ,that’s awesome.

    You’ll enjoy it. Imagine you’re a 21st century version of Joan of Arc.

  58. Lily says:

    Or…a vampire slayer! I’m more likely to slay one than kiss one (still haven’t got round to finding out about this twilight nonsense).

    Thanks again for the inspiration.

    Lily x

  59. J says:

    Please understand that this is a matter of degree. To be a complete man, one must have the ability to be threatening. But this must not be something which rules him. He must rule his own emotions and his own power, so that it is only expressed at appropriate times.

    Yep, that’s the appropriate balance. It’s not having hand or being abusive. It’s the ability, like the mottos of half of the police forces in the country say, to “protect and serve.” It’s male competence, not male rage, that’s attractive to healthy women.

    But the feminists and the PC left are oblivious to any potential benefit from allowing men to remain men. They want to stamp out every last bit of potential for threat.

    It’s over-reaction to male loose cannons spoiling things for everyone. In some respects, the social engineering behind the “feminization” of American culture is a backlash against men who tried to rule others before learning to rule themselves. If men want to be patriarchal then they have to live out patriarhical virtues. Otherwise, you’re asking women to turn over control of their lives to overgrown babies or pimps. (I just saw the last half of Baby Boy, which provides a pretty good picture of what happens when machismo and lack of responsibility coincide.)

  60. J says:

    Wow! Unless there was a very good reason for that fight, I’d have ran in the other direction if I were you.

    OTOH, I probably wouldn’t be here if not for the fact that my dear old alpha thug daddy give my mom the ‘gina tingles. However, his propensity toward unwarranted displays of temper made him someone who needed more to be protected from reality by me than a wise, helpful or protective parent. I’m sure your mileage varies.

  61. J says:


  62. J says:

    I thought the position of feminism was that women had the “right” to pass out drunk at a frat party – or walk down a dark alley – or pretty much behave however they liked – and not get raped. In the feminist worldview, the woman has no responsibility whatever to reduce the likelihood of attack, since the man is 100% to blame when such attacks occur.

    I have a year old post at Jezebel on this subject that is still in moderation. In the best of all possible worlds, a woman could pass out drunk at a frat party or walk down a dark alley without getting raped. A man could walk down a dark alley without getting robbed or knifed. I truly believe that. I also believe that we do not live in best of all possible worlds. I therefore tell my sons to stay the hell out of dark alleys. If I had a daughter, I’d advise her to stay sober at parties. None of that though excuses the perpetrators.

    As for guns making you nervous, you ought to familiarize yourself with them until the nervous feeling goes away. They are only a tool.

    Unlike grerp, I am not made nervous by guns used as tools. It’s tools using guns that scares me.

  63. J says:

    Wow! Enjoy your course! I’ve done archery with my boys’ scout troop. It was fun.

  64. Sox says:

    I found Knepper’s article really interesting, having gone to school at AmericanU. Pretty much describes the culture I noticed while I was there. One of the most militantly liberal schools on the east coast.

    He was obviously going for effect, but I was amazed at how so many people dogpiled on him in the comments and totally ignored the content of what he wrote.

    Anyway, DC is a great example of a city that could benefit from looser gun control laws. Formerly the second highest murder rate in the country, here. The areas right near the capitol are some of the worst. It makes me appreciate VA, a much gun-friendlier state.

  65. Pingback: Word Around the Campfire – the Moveable Feast edition « Hidden Leaves

  66. Pingback: Linkage is Good for You: Absentee Edition (NSFW)

  67. Pingback: NFL goes pink. | Dalrock

  68. Pingback: Overcivilized men, uncivilized women. | Dalrock

  69. Pingback: The value of men as protectors. | Dalrock

  70. Pingback: Chivalry and protecting the weak. | Dalrock

  71. Ok, after reading this I DEFINITELY recommend you read “Wild at Heart” sometime.

    It’s almost this post, expanded to book length with extra Christianity added.

    (well there’s more, but why bother spoiling it for you)

  72. Pingback: Violence is for the Left

  73. Pingback: Thank goodness daddy can’t really protect her from bad guys! | Dalrock

  74. van Rooinek says:

    Late to the thread…. but Gorbachev’s comment —

    One thing that gets a woman wetter than the Amazon:
    Take a liberal girl hunting….

    — reminded me of a true story I posted at Roissy’s a while ago, in a thread about dating vegetarian girls. For your convenience, I repost the text here:

    Once in college (80′s), a vegetarian girl approached me at a party and asked me, rather sniffly, if I was a hunter. I don’t know how she knew, as I was not wearing hunting related garb nor was I talking about the subject. I guess she discerned it from my body language or the way I walked. Of course, I answered, Yes, and the debate was on. Naturally, like all such debates, it eventually moved away from surface issues to core philosophy. Ultimately, it became a religious debate — JudeoChristian versus Newage world views — which went nowhere.

    However…. the WEIRDEST THING… Somewhere during the conversation it became apparent to me that this girl was strongly attracted to me! Which was rare for a nerdy technical type, even a tall and decent looking one such as myself , as (unfortunately) a niceguy/beta persona normally cancels the advantage of an alpha physique. It boggled my mind until, long afterwards, when I realized:

    (a) Women prefer badboys, and from the perspective of a liberal vegetarian, a conservative hunter was the ultimate badboy! and,
    (b) A hunter triggers (no pun intended) a deep ancestral longing in a woman for… well, a hunter, a man who can provide in the most primitive, rawest terms. Being a “beta” almost doesn’t matter at that point — after all, in the stone age most hunters were betas because most men in general are betas.

    What a shame that her liberal/feminist/urbanist/vegetarian programming, caused her to resist on ideological grounds, the very sort of man her most ancient instincts craved AND UNERRINGLY PICKED OUT OF THE CROWD…. Poor thing. I’m sure she hasn’t had a happy life. I certaintly wanted nothing to do with her; “Do not be unequally yoked”, either in faith or at the dinner table, and besides she had narrow boyish hips… yuck. (I eventually married and had a family with a beef eating, breeder hipped, Bible thumper…. and couldn’t be happier.)

  75. S. Chan says:

    The following is from The Wall Street Journal, September 22, 2012. It is extracted from a review of the new TV series The Mindy Project, which is about a girl (Mindy) seeking a husband.

    Danny … serves as Mindy’s often-disapproving sparring partner. Mindy may not realize it yet, but we see right away: Danny knows what women want. “Was he a man?” Danny asks after Mindy comes back from a first date. “Was this the kind of guy who, if you heard glass breaking in the middle of the night, is he gonna jump out of bed and say ‘Stay here,’ and look through the house naked with a baseball bat?” Yes, Danny gets it. If enough men watch this funny and clever show, they may finally get it too.

  76. Anonymous Reader says:

    Some feminist at the WSJ wrote:
    Yes, Danny gets it. If enough men watch this funny and clever show, they may finally get it too.

    The problem is, Mindy doesn’t “get it”. Neither does Karen, the WSJ writer. Nor will the millions of women approaching the Wall, or past it, who are clearly the target market for this show. Nor do the script writers likely “get it”.

    If the scriptwriters did get it, then Danny would not talk about a man investigating breaking glass at night, armed only with a wooden club. They’d show a sticker on Danny’s wall, briefcase, desk, etc. reading:

    In Case Of Emergency, Dial 1911.

  77. Pingback: What we need is more chivalry! | Dalrock

Comments are closed.