Men acting like chicks: Jesse James “lost himself” in marriage

Oh no!  Jesse James wasn’t haaapy!  Being married caused him to lose his identity!  Jesse James Blames Marriage to Sandra Bullock for Losing Himself

I became a big shot and married some Hollywood actress and didn’t talk to anybody anymore, so I feel bad…I feel obligated to reconnect with all these people and show ’em that I’m still the same fabricator motorcycle guy. I’m not what I became.

The sad thing is I think we can look for much more of this.  The well worn theme of female martyrdom combined with the fantasy that men and women are identical will tempt more and more men to start talking like pathetic helpless women.

Less striking but along the same lines is Newt Gengrich’s more subtle appeal to the “I was focused on everyone but myself;  I gave too much!” excuse for cheating on his second wife as described by USA Today:

In an interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network this year, Gingrich said his marital infidelity was “partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.” He went on to say he “felt compelled to ask God’s forgiveness.”

This entry was posted in Divorce, Manliness. Bookmark the permalink.

181 Responses to Men acting like chicks: Jesse James “lost himself” in marriage

  1. tvmunson says:

    Jesus fucking Christ. First of all I dig Sandy; he fucked that up. After that, not sure what to say. I’m not too familiar with this guy. If he was an actor, I’d say his publicist told him to say this shit so chicks wouldn’t take it out on him at the box office. I can’t divine a reason or purpose for him to need to say this, if he’s that guy on the bike shows(why would they give 2 shits?). If that truly is coming from him, he needs to have a bike gang (no one too high profile like the Angels; maybe the Gypsy Jokers) “jump” him in for allowing that shit to even see the light of day (‘course no colors after it; he don’t deserve ’em).

    Newt: when Bill Clinton tried to create the “blow job” exception to marital infidelity; it was a worthy effort, much appreciated by us married guys (“honey, it was only a blow job”; her:”well, ok”),, even though doomed like the Texans at the Alamo. Bill’s had some plausibility, which was its hallmark. This will never work; “Honey, I felt so passionately about my job, so dedicated to its performance, that it aroused me such that when my 19 year old secretary bent over the file cabinet I got carried away, bent her further, ripped off her panties, and fucker her up the ass ’til her ears bled jackrabbits.”

    Nope Newt, you went to far with this one. Gotta’ dial it back big guy, need a better angle.

  2. Well, pulling the “I’m not haaaapy” excuse for adultery is sort of equal to the “I’m not haaaapy” excuse for divorce.

    I guess it’s a race downward for lame excuses for both sexes to break the marriage vows.

  3. Feminist Hater says:

    I guess it’s a race downward for lame excuses for both sexes to break the marriage vows.

    Yea, pathetic isn’t it? Why do people think marriage is easy? Why do they think it’s always going to be the good times and no bad, even depressingly worrying times? It’s a disconnect from reality. I suppose Hollywood would show that more than your average citizen though. Their lives revolve around creating drama to remain in the public spotlight. I don’t take anything Hollywood stars do or say seriously.

    What’s even more interesting. Go read the comments on that article. Everyone blames him, which they should, he got into the mess in the first place. However, why don’t they EVER use that logic on women? Women get a reprieve from responsibility for their actions and instead get off with sympathy, never their own faults, etc etc. Yet men are expected to take responsibility for their actions, no one bats an eyelid or sheds a tear for them.

    On the “men becoming chicks” meme. What do you expect? For the past 50 to 60 years many, many groups have made their entire living off “victim” status. About time men got on the bandwagon. Anyway, this sick society will crash sooner if men decide to abuse it too. I don’t agree with them, I’m an independent person but, and that’s a big but, I cannot blame them. Society has left them with very little room to move. They have simply taken the path of least resistance!

  4. Suz says:

    “I guess it’s a race downward for lame excuses for both sexes to break the marriage vows.”

    Yep. Hardly a surprise, though. We’ve watched feminism devolve from women demanding the right to live up to their individual potential, to spoiled brats demanding the “right” to “have it all,” regardless of their ability or willingness to pay for “it all.” Sadly I’ve seen a similar development in the Manosphere: “Women can act like jerks, so why can’t we?”

    I will grant, however, that men have been at a disadvantage in recent decades. They’ve been taught that, “Man up and be responsible,” actually means, “Man up and let women be irresponsible.” Coming from such a no-win situation, it shouldn’t be a surprise that many men are going to come up swinging their fists. I personally would like to see more of them spew their vitriol and then get over it, and get on with their lives. I would hope they will learn that the mature response is to shame irresponsible women, not to emulate them.

    I have an ideological stake in this. I have “betrayed my gender” with my utter contempt for the feminine double standards and manipulation that modern society has come to see as normal. I have always respected and championed men who have the internal fortitude to succeed in this environment. I really don’t want the male gender to let me down the way the female gender has.

  5. Feminist Hater says:

    Oh…should add that if this Newt guy becomes the Republican nomination for the 2012 presidential election, I feel really, really sorry for you bunch. A race between him and Barry?? It’s like a coin flip between Hitler and Stalin. Good luck!

    I never held much hope for democracy, always seemed a bit lame to allow every single person to vote for who leads but I never, ever thought it would be so bad!

  6. greyghost says:

    I like it more, men need to see it that way. This is men quitting and why not. as feminist hater said 50 to 60 years of everything male is bad well fuck it. Screw duty and screw honor for those are bad patriac concepts any way. Look at the church they rolled over and want men to man up and pay the bill. Does anybody think any less of Jesse? no Does it make any difference if he was a “good” guy and got dumped in a divorce? nope. He is still male and we all hate men and men are starting to pick up on it. This article from Dalrock is just another variation on the “peter pans”, and the grass eaters of Japan. These are men who subconsciously quit being used as fools. (MGTOW are red pill fully aware) I’m all for it, modern women and western society deserve no men for what it has done and contunues to do. Men are now feminine and say they want happiness like women . So what, go on and get that happiness fellas you own nothing to this society.

  7. zed says:

    On the “men becoming chicks” meme. What do you expect? For the past 50 to 60 years many, many groups have made their entire living off “victim” status. About time men got on the bandwagon. Anyway, this sick society will crash sooner if men decide to abuse it too. I don’t agree with them, I’m an independent person but, and that’s a big but, I cannot blame them. Society has left them with very little room to move. They have simply taken the path of least resistance!

    And, or the past 50 to 60 years, men have been badgered and beaten to become more like women – that “fairer” sex – get in touch with their emotions, cry, be a SNAG, get rid of that “toxic masculinity”, get over their “testosterone poisoning”, get in touch with their “inner child.” And, BTW, if young boys ever showed even the slightest tendency to reject the “gender is just a social construct” dogma and act like boys – they were slam dunked by the therapeutic and legal profession, and medicated into somnambulent compliance.

    Remember that – “if Lehman Brothers had been Lehman Sisters, this whole financial crisis would not have happened.” (<-anyone who is not aware of the source of that quote has no business participating in this conversation.)

    So, from the time that most people younger than those figuring out when to retire so they get the most from their Social Security (superannuation, for those not in the US) boys have been raised to be girls.

    And people are surprised when boys follow their culture's instructions? Isn't that what the socons are prating about?

    Well, as Gomer Pyle would say – "Surprise, surprise, surprise."

    Only a real fool would take on a gang of a couple of dozen bikers singlehandedly. I'm sure that the White Knight brigade would be happy to extract what measly net worth that Jesse has – even thought it is likely to be less than 1% of what Bullock has – to give to the "little lady."

    Given the choice between being stomped by a couple of dozen Gypsy Jokers or a few million White Knights, I would say that Jesse made the smart choice – diving for the glass cellar.

    Funny how Bullock still enjoys the pussy pass. Whod'a thunk that marrying a tatooed biker bad boy would result in being married to a biker bad boy?

    Maybe she made an exceptionally poor choice of husband. But, you know, I'll bet he gave great 'gina tingles – to her, and Susie, and Ann, and Angel, and Desiree, and a whole host of others.😉

  8. Suz says:

    greyghost, that’s an understandable sentiment, but it’s part of the downward spiral. Where does it leave the “real” men, who demand more of themselves regardless of what society demand of them? “Real” men have no use for excuses (and they don’t accept them from women.) And what of the “real” women? When are the responsible men and the responsible women going to stand up together and say, “Grow up already!” to the entitled whiners of both genders? Probably never. We’re too busy trying to be responsible and honorable, and dodging the shit being flung by those who can’t be bothered.

  9. Feminist Hater says:

    Well, as Gomer Pyle would say – “Surprise, surprise, surprise.”

    Indeed, who would have thought?! Cause and effect, lost on the very people who are supposedly the most educated. Can’t let little boys be little boys! Better to put them on Ritalin and other drugs, to make them more suited to a feminist world.

  10. Feminist Hater says:

    Where does it leave the “real” men, who demand more of themselves regardless of what society demand of them?

    Up Shit’s Creek without a paddle?! No seriously!

  11. Mark Slater says:

    “Gingrich said his marital infidelity was ‘partially driven by how passionately I felt about this country, that I worked far too hard and things happened in my life that were not appropriate.’ He went on to say he ‘felt compelled to ask God’s forgiveness.’”

    Sweet Georgia Brown! What sensible person could possibly think Newt Gingrich and say: “My, what a sensible choice for President.”

    Feminist Hater: Where is it again that I’m supposed to bang my head? Thinking of all the Religious Right types who think he’s great gives me that urge. (I am a Christian, by the way)

  12. grerp says:

    How, HOW, did we wind up with Gingrich as the frontrunner? What a tool. And, yeah, I’d vote for him, if I wanted a steaming pile of MORE OF THE SAME.

  13. zed says:
    Where does it leave the “real” men, who demand more of themselves regardless of what society demand of them?

    Up Shit’s Creek without a paddle?! No seriously!

    Nope – Gone Their Own Way.

    The MRM must be coming of age – going by how many people are suddenly waking up and crawling out of the woodwork to attack it.

    The problem here is one of who gets to define “more of what?” The society has thrown away its right to make any demands on anyone. “The society” has thrown away its own credibility and moral authority.

    The men who “demand” not only more of themselves, but more for themselves than “society” will allow them to have, have opted out of the slave’s existence. Brendan put is succinctly in calling the current marriage contract a slave’s agreement which is only binding on the man. (Damn that ungodly “autonomy” and the pig-headed tendency that some men have to reject being forced into that slave contract.)

    So, Atlas is shrugging. I hope that young women are prepared and will enjoy carrying the weight of the world which is the existence that feminists have labored tirelessly for the past 5 decades to bequeath to them – now that the US is “A Woman’s Nation” and we are reaching “The End of Men.”

    Wasn’t there some old story about someone named Pandora and some sort of box that covered all this? 😉

    Simply put – the culture has alienated and marginalized all of its future producers and sustainers. Good luck with how that turns out.

  14. Buck says:

    Zed,
    Thank You…
    “Funny how Bullock still enjoys the pussy pass. Whod’a thunk that marrying a tatooed biker bad boy would result in being married to a biker bad boy? ”

    Sandra married a cad/player and is now SHOCKED that he is a cad player…WTF!

    I have a close relative who married a cum dumpster whore and he too was SHOCKED when she reverted to her nature and cheated on him…MANY times! He still whines about it 10 years after the divorce, is still single ( she was remarried within months to a beta chump and she cheats on him too).
    I’m disgusted with him and his bitchy whining about her. He actually got out of his marriage pretty cheap; his ex found a new chump who had dough, so she was ready for a quick deal). This guy is athletic with lots of poon interest, but he drones on about how his ex screwed him over and chases the new prospects away. After ten years of telling him to get over it, I have given up with him too.

  15. grerp says:

    What Jesse James did to Sandra Bullock was entirely predictable based on his past behavior. Yeah, it was wrong and he’s a jerk, but anyone could have seen it coming. Anyone who wasn’t playing high stakes Tame the Rogue. She rolled the dice and lost.

  16. greyghost says:

    Suz
    zed beat me to the punch but it is to live as MGTOW, or the grass eater/peter pan a real man is big enough to see though the lies and is kind enough not to take up arms and destroy the society that hates them with violence. Suz if it bothers you, feel comfort in knowing there are still enough fools out there for you to fleece and the government as it stands now is more than happy to imprison or kill a man you choose to love and doesn’t go along with his fleecing.

  17. Feminist Hater says:

    Don’t worry Slater, I’m a Christian too. I also terribly dislike these “religious” types who masquerade as moral authority. They lost the right to have anything to do with God and morality in my country, when they betrayed us to Marxist terrorists. However, that’s another debate entirely. Seems they lost that right in America too.

    On the matter of where to bang your head? Well…I think the sweet spot is just a little to the bottom right of the word “Bang”. I would advise all politicians, feminists, religious wannabes and lawmakers to hit that spot with their heads about twice a day, once after waking up and another before bed. It might cure them of their ills. Not promising anything though!

  18. Anonymous Reader says:

    By the way, Gingrich was dating his current wife (Callista) for several years, as in “3 to 5”, while he was still married to his second wife. After he divorced his second wife and married his current wife, both of them were accepted wholeheartedly by the Roman Catholic church. You know, the church that supposedly is opposed to adultery and divorce? Yeah, that one. Something to bear in mind.

    As for Newt’s status in the GOP primaries…I’m thinking that much of the support by Republicans for Gingrich is basically some sort of “Die Hard IV” revenge fantasy as anything else. Not exactly the best motivator in my opinion.

  19. Feminist Hater says:

    Who would you vote for, Obama or Gingrich? I know, rhetorical question! I would vote for my ass too!

  20. Rum says:

    J.J was never smart enough to possess a conscious understanding of WHY Sandra Bullock did the naked cowgirl with him in the first place. He is a Natural alpha and also dumb.
    Rick Perry has the best biography and the best looking wife.

  21. CL says:

    A race between him and Barry?? It’s like a coin flip between Hitler and Stalin. Good luck!

    It’s Kang and Kodos!

  22. jack says:

    Underneath the bulging biceps and gratuitous tattoos beats the heart of a pussy.

  23. zed says:

    Underneath the bulging biceps and gratuitous tattoos beats the heart of a pussy.
    LOL!

    Reminds me of a great many American women! 😉

  24. YBM says:

    Well Dalrock I would say that these guys talking like women is a deliberate attempt to create rapport with their primarily female audience. Especially Newt.

  25. Suz says:

    greyghost, you misunderstand me.
    “a real man is big enough to see though the lies and is kind enough not to take up arms and destroy the society that hates them with violence.”
    This doesn’t bother me in the least, since I’ve been happily (and gratefully, yes I said it) married to a “real man” for a couple of decades. I’ve had the privilege of observing a true alpha up close and personal. This is a man who chose to go his own way long before it was fashionable. He’s honorable and responsible, but he rejects society’s current definition of those traits.
    When I asked, “Where does that leave the real men?” I should have defined “that.” Were does it leave the real men, when it becomes OK for average men to use girly excuses for their own bad behavior? That doesn’t reject the feminization of men, it embraces it.

    “Screw duty and screw honor for those are bad patriac concepts any way.”
    I beg to differ. True duty and honor are deeply personal traits, and a mature, intelligent man understands that society’s definitions of them are frequently arbitrary and just plain WRONG. It takes courage to maintain one’s integrity and reject society’s illegitimate judgments, and courage is an honorable trait.

    Is the MRM going to follow the path of feminism? Are men now fighting for the right to be just as two-faced, irresponsible and underhanded as women? The way to reject what feminism has done to society is to rise above it, turn your back on it, speak against it. Not emulate it. I’m not saying this on behalf of opportunistic women, I’m saying it on behalf of good men like my husband and my son. They have to hold their own against bitchy whiny women, and now those women are being joined by bitchy whiny men?

  26. Anonymous Reader says:

    Re-reading Gingrich’s comment I’m struck by how it looks like a twice divorced woman whining about “caring too much” and “needing more time for myself”. It’s something that a pretty muscular rationalization hamster would put out.

    Did GIngrich actually meet Callista during a trip to Jamaica … or India? Can’t decide if she helped him get his groove back, or something else.

  27. Feminist Hater says:

    Suz, men on here won’t whine. They will point out obvious truths and then leave it at that, or debate it. However, most people, including men, are not independent thinkers. They will follow the mob. That means taking the path that delivers the least amount of stress in the short-term. That’s what these “men” are doing and will start doing more as time goes by. They see what works for women and minorities and will start to use it too. You can complain about it as much as you want, till your blue in the face in fact but nothing will change. It’s a simple truth. Society’s morality determines the outcome of the youth. If society’s morality is in the toilet, you can guess where the youth will be??!

    That’s why the greatest social experiments are not done on the old or wise but on the young. Notice all the political jargon. “Old people are just bigots, young people are progressives and enlightened” they say. What they mean is that old people have been around the block and witnessed it all before and young people are naive and easy to indoctrinate. How can you expect the average youth, who is worried about pimples, girls and grades to take that all in, to fight it “honorably” and be a good man?

    Furthermore, turning your back on a corrupt system is actually honorable, it’s not “courage” to keep that system afloat. And the current system is hugely corrupted! The “Western Civilisation” of today is not worth the sacrifice of the men it demonises and dishonours . It’s corrupt to the core! The true Western Ideals that gave birth to America are on life support. The only place they truly exist, is in the hearts and minds of individuals who are not tainted by the corruption.

  28. Serpentus18 says:

    I noticed that both of the men in the post were still following one of Roissy’s Commandments: Never directly apologize.

  29. zhai2nan2 says:

    ‘Jesse James wasn’t haaapy! Being married caused him to lose his identity! ‘

    He was married to a Hollywood actress; Hollywood actresses are notorious for promiscuity and infidelity. Quite possibly Bullock had cheated first and he was trying to get tit-for-tat.

    There’s a pun in there somewhere, about breasts and tattoos, but I’ll leave that as an exercise for the reader.

  30. Suz says:

    Feminist Hater,
    Perhaps you are misjudging me as well.

    “Furthermore, turning your back on a corrupt system is actually honorable, it’s not “courage” to keep that system afloat.”

    The courage I’m talking about IS the courage to reject the corruption. “Keeping the system afloat” is utter cowardice.

    Also, I didn’t say that men on this blog are whining. I was supporting Darlock’s premise that Mr. James is a whiner, and I was pointing out what it will lead to. As were you:

    “They see what works for women and minorities and will start to use it too. ”

    And as for immature men not knowing any better, I would point out that immature women don’t know any better either. We’re all supposed to learn from our mistakes, and most of us are capable, even women. I did. Did you?

    You see, you and I are essentially in agreement, and if you had read my comments carefully, you might have noticed that. (Or did you just read my name and assume I’m from the enemy camp?) I’ve been holding whiny disingenuous women’s feet to the fire for decades. (It’s a lonely job. Thank you, Manoshpere for finally stepping up and joining me.) If I didn’t do the same with whiny disingenuous men, I’d be maintaining a double standard, wouldn’t I? To me it was never a matter of gender, it’s a matter of character and personal responsibility. Both genders have the capacity, should the individual decide to use it.

  31. ray says:

    tvmunson: “Jesus fucking Christ. First of all I dig Sandy; he fucked that up”

    here’s your Sweet Sandy, commenting publically on tiger woods being beaten by his wife with a golf club:

    “Yeah, she [Elin] stopped, she was respectable,” Bullock continued. “I’d get the baseball bat, I’d get everything out.”

    so much for There’s No Excuse For Domestic Violence, eh?

    mister I Wanna Be Famous dorkus married yet another empowered hollywood hagette? he gets no sympathy from me, and no cred for his blather

    Suz: “I personally would like to see more of them spew their vitriol and then get over it, and get on with their lives”

    translation: men should stop criticising females and the gynogulag under which we (try to) live, and “grow up” (continue doing what women and their punks command)

    “When are the responsible men and the responsible women going to stand up together and say, “Grow up already!” to the entitled whiners of both genders?”

    what entitlements do men, as a group, have in american/western societies?

    your comments are v typical of modern western females, who are starting to smell that what’s ahead for their gynocracies is big trouble, the kind of trouble that cant be stamped out with more anti-male laws, cops, governmental police/security agencies, and cages (for males, overwhelmingly)

    the kind of trouble that, THIS time, will include FEMALES in the pain and suffering

    you SHOULD be worried, too. . . at least you’re paying attention

    see, Suz, a lot of us have already played your “responsibility” game, played it from Grade One, to the fullness of our abilities, played it in trust of our governments and fellow men and female companions, and we just got stabbed in the back, over and over and over, as your Responsible Culture cheered and poured on the degradation and disenfranchisement (while calling us Oppressors)

    you dont get it, we’re NOT COMING BACK to the plantation, and we’re going to do our best to ensure that western boys dont get led down the path we were

  32. RL says:

    This reminds me of ‘Here is my simple association: Socialist group oriented leanings = beta leanings. Selfish individualistic leanings = alpha leanings.’ http://xsplat.wordpress.com/2011/08/12/spectator-sports-are-beta-to-the-bone/

    Jesse spreads the vibe of like: ‘I feel betanized, less respected and socially approved by my biker peers’. So he wanted to get out.

  33. Feminist Hater says:

    Suz, I think you misunderstand me too. I’m not actually disagreeing with you. Nor am I trying to make you out to be any sort of enemy. I’m stating my point of view. Still allowed last time I checked. People from the same “camp” disagree all the time, it’s called having a discussion, a debate if you will. I have not insinuated anything about you at all.

    Basically, I think you are saying that strong men are needed to be intelligent, courageous, honorable and put a stop to the madness that has taken hold. I have no real problem with that in theory, however, it’s bad in practice. The current social, political and legal system are completely against men speaking out. It’s almost a revolutionary act to come out against feminism. Merely saying things that are not politically correct on a tram can get you sent to prison over Christmas without bail. That’s for a woman, by the way, I wonder how bad the legal and political system will come down on a man was he to do the same?

    Try to understand where men like me are coming from and why we feel the way we do. It’s not because I want to be a male that sleeps around, abuses women and screws over the system. I want to be a good father and husband like my father was to me and my mother. My mother respects him greatly and he loves her fiercely. He was in the army too by the way, the SADF for National Service, so he has a military background too. Their lives were actually rather simple. They are both educated but married young, they both had duties they had to fulfill towards each other. It was expected of them, they were not forced to do them, they just did them.

    That sort of understanding has been lost. It may look like they were just doing the things because society told them too, but that would be overlooking a huge part. In my opinion, they did it because it made sense and it WORKED. They are still married and have stuck together. How many marriages can say that today? Now that’s what I want, but when I look around me, at the girls who were on campus while I was studying or the TV shows I see, or the magazines and papers one reads, it all played to a life spent chasing a false dream. I realise now that society is ill. I’m still looking for my woman, where ever she might be in this world. However, I am not playing by the old rules anymore. I’m going to call out women I speak to on their double standards regarding the gender social dynamic and I will see how they react. Doing this limits the risks that I take on whilst interacting with women. If they are truly objective I stand a far greater chance of finding the right girl for me. It also has the great ability of drawing out the inner feminist from hiding. Feminists cannot control the rage when you ask questions they don’t like, especially when you have preplanned answers for them!

    All one can really do is assess the risk, determine if it stands up to scrutiny and act upon it or look for another option. I have known woman who are worth it, so therefore I am still taking the risk. However, I do that on an individual level. I am no longer interested in protecting other women who walk all over men in a quest to find themselves and sleep around. Just not interested!

  34. Suz says:

    “I am not playing by the old rules anymore. I’m going to call out women I speak to on their double standards regarding the gender social dynamic and I will see how they react.” This is what I want to see more of; this is how I want men to treat their daughters. And I’m glad to see more men who will stand up to the BS, and walk away from the bitches. In my opinion, doing that on an individual level IS putting a stop to the madness. Or at least it’s attempting to, which is about all anyone can safely do.

    I have an inkling of where you’re coming from. I wouldn’t take a million dollars to put up with women’s shenanigans as a man; It’s hard enough as a woman who doesn’t play. And I don’t even want to get into their pants! I’ve been the target of that irrational feminist rage, and I’m supposedly “one of them.” They can’t dismiss me with the “Men are all idiots” line. To them, I’m not merely stupid, I’m evil.

  35. Suz says:

    Ray,
    “translation: men should stop criticising females and the gynogulag under which we (try to) live, and “grow up” (continue doing what women and their punks command)”

    Inaccurate translation. The “get on with their lives,” part did not mean go back into the meat grinder. It meant “grow up, learn from their mistakes, and move forward – in a DIFFERENT direction.” In other words, STOP allowing feminism to victimize them. If that means playing by new rules, bring it on!

    ” what entitlements do men, as a group, have in american/western societies?”

    Apparently, according to this article, some of them are actively trying to get in on the “I’m not Haaaapy” entitlement. Are we going to let them get away with it?

    And Ray, I’ve known for a long time that there is no such thing as a Responsible Culture, but there ARE responsible individuals, and with your hostile attitude, I hope to God your among them. Please don’t read code words where there are none. I’m kind of old school about language; I say what I mean.

  36. tvmunson says:

    Ray
    I said I dig her, not that I endorse everything she says or does. She’s sexy. As for There’s no Excuse for domestic violence-I never said that,did she? I can think of many explanations for it, and some probably would constittute excuses. I don’t follow the rest of your remarks.BTW is tha sign supposed to be a swastika? If so, why not man up and just put one there? If not, what the fuck is it?

  37. Rmaxd says:

    Suz you can cheerlead for us as much as you want, but realise this …

    All women have a blindspot when it comes to feminism … ie grerp thinks divorce makes it easier for women to stay married & porn is a sin …

    Its these blindspots when you read their posts, something seems to be missing in their support for men

    Its these blindspots which prevent women from fully supporting men, not just in the MRA, but also in your own families & your roles as wives

    In your case suz, you make the mistake of equating the motives of men with women, ie yourself

    In jesse’s case, an alpha when he states he’s not happy, its not some hypergamous rational, its because hes an alpha, he’s untamable, hence him not being haaappy …

    A woman unhaapy mistakes him for being beta & her lack of gina tingles, as being out of love … & not haaapy ….

    Same difference …

    Also as i pointed out in an earlier post to grerp … pretty much everything beneficial to man always benefits all of society, as society is designed to function on the needs of man

    ie sex positive feminism – for women, leads to carousel riding & mass promiscuity

    Sex positive masculism – for men, actually saves marriages & relationships & benefits society ultimately with betas turning into alphas

    Also look at the female equivelant, massive social disarray & the disintegration of 1000 year old family traditions

    While sex positive masculism, stable relationships for those able to find a decent woman, & men rewarded with a stable future as they MGTOW or PUA same difference, neither commit to women

    When women interfere with the needs of men, all of society suffers

    Ultimately western women dont hold the needs of man sacred, hell western men dont even hold their own needs as sacred

    Asian women & traditional women hold the needs of men as sacred, they may not know why, but the results are the same, all of society benefits

  38. Rmaxd says:

    @YBM
    “Well Dalrock I would say that these guys talking like women is a deliberate attempt to create rapport with their primarily female audience. Especially Newt.”

    Yep, this is basically a media stunt by jesse, a pr exercise to win over a female audience

    Men, very rarely say they’re unhappy, they just leave

  39. Anacaona says:

    I don’t know who was more stupid Sandra for buying the “I can change him” crap Jesse from using a woman’s excuse (although I think he might want to try is a trick and frankly maybe if enough men were pulling this crap some women’s will get that this is just BS when they do it too, now if that would make them change their behaviour is a yet to see thing) or Kat Von D for dating him still hot from the scandalous divorce. Can I just declare all of them “incapable of adult behaviour” and sent them back to kindergarten?

  40. zed says:

    Apparently, according to this article, some of them are actively trying to get in on the “I’m not Haaaapy” entitlement. Are we going to let them get away with it?

    Define “we”. What responsibility do “we” have in this, particularly if “we” are not amused?

    Bullock is apparently the highest paid actress of all time – over Elizabeth Taylor, Katherine Hepburn, Meryl Streep, over every other actress, obviously. She married a tattooed, twice divorced hustler with 3 children. His second ex-wife is porn star Janine Lindemulder, who also sports extensive tattoos.

    I don’t remember her consulting me about whether she should marry this dud. If he showed up at my front door looking for some yard work, I would not hire him because I would expect him to be casing the joint for a future burglary.

    Bullock may be pretty, and she may be talented, but she sure cannot be considered smart. The “I” part of “we” isn’t invested in this at all. That is one of the fundamental sets of issues here: women choose bad men – so fundamentally bad that most decent guys would give him a wide birth – and then when there are bad consequences then the blame gets passed around to all men taxing them with the responsibility for turning that sows ear into a silk purse for Sandy.

    I will continue to do what I have always done – don’t pay him any attention, don’t buy any of his products, and don’t watch his TV shows.

    But, I will maybe start a betting pool on how long it will take him to get a new wife. I expect that it will take a lot less time and trouble than many far more decent, and authentically “manly” men.

  41. tvmunson says:

    Ok-I guess I should have just said I think Bullock is pretty. I don’t think she’s the Virgin fucking Mary, cured AIDS, smallpox, and molecular disorders.

  42. ray says:

    tvmunson–

    you said you dig Bullock and that her ex-twerp “fucked up” presumably for leaving such a FABULOUS celebrity sexy babe

    i pointed out that the woman in whom you put such stock and high regard publically advocates beating males as recourse for “cheating” (tho i’m willing to bet she advocates injuring males for their larger crime of maleness as well)

    now — rather like a fem, actually — you attempt to deflect responsibility for your comment away from yourself by wondering “what the fuck” my logo is, and why i dont just go Full Nazi etc

    speaking of man-up, you also seem much enamoured of the word “fuck” including “Jesus fucking Christ” to lead off this commentary — not my favorite phrase, admittedly — is this what you imagine Real Men say to emphasize weak points?

    you’d fit right in for a Womans Studies Degree, as youve already got many of the rhetorical tactics down

  43. ray says:

    Suz-

    In other words, STOP allowing feminism to victimize them. If that means playing by new rules, bring it on!

    count on it
    _______
    what entitlements do men, as a group, have in american/western societies?”

    Apparently, according to this article, some of them are actively trying to get in on the “I’m not Haaaapy” entitlement. Are we going to let them get away with it?

    1) that’s an evasion, not an answer

    2) there is no “we”

    3) “Are ‘we’ going to let them (those men you mention) get away with it” sounds exactly like the Let’s You and Him Fight” i’ve heard from females my entire life… how could you let HIM say/do/think that to me? WELL!? arent you going to DO something (to him)

    answer: no, i’m not

    “Is the MRM going to follow the path of feminism? Are men now fighting for the right to be just as two-faced, irresponsible and underhanded as women? The way to reject what feminism has done to society is to rise above it, turn your back on it, speak against it. Not emulate it. I’m not saying this on behalf of opportunistic women, I’m saying it on behalf of good men like my husband and my son.”

    youre saying it on behalf of yourself

    your “good men,” like the “Good Men Project,” are those who will make the MRM, and the nation/planet, whatever you and the grrls decide it should be

    i’m not sure the MRM needs you, Suz, to delineate its “path” nor to decide what the best way to reject feminism is

    thx for showing us The Way, tho! lol

    where would “we” be without YOU, Suz?!

    “And Ray, I’ve known for a long time that there is no such thing as a Responsible Culture, but there ARE responsible individuals, and with your hostile attitude, I hope to God your among them. Please don’t read code words where there are none. I’m kind of old school about language; I say what I mean.”

    so do i, and i say youre a liar and a manipulator

    and those are the good qualities! :O)

    as for my attitude, i’ve had a full lifetime of you and the womenfolk and your enablers telling me what my attitude can be, what it cant be, when it can/cant be, how high i need to jump, how low i need to grovel, and what punishments will be forthcoming swiftly if my attitude isnt what serves your immediate (and ever-changing) monetary, material, power, and social-status interests

    lessee, youve decided, in all your magnanimous glory, what the MRM should be, and what my attitude should be — despite the fact that nobody’s ever heard of you before

    any other orders, your highness?

    as for hostility, so far it’s been mr nice guy, but that probly wont last

  44. Suz says:

    Zed, I figured someone would ask what I meant by “we,” and I almost said “you,” but “we” is more accurate, since I’m on you side. I meant “men and the tiny minority of women who despise ‘males’ (and ‘females’) who perpetuate irrational and irresponsible nonsense.”

    Rmaxd, You’re dead on; everything you said is true. I’ve been chipping away at my blind spot for 30 years. Just please, don’t call me a cheerleader. Anything but that!

    Ray, I’d have to guess you’ve never met an honest woman in your life, so you probably wouldn’t recognize one if she were standing in front of you. Everything you said is based on this assumption: “so do i, and i say youre a liar and a manipulator. and those are the good qualities! :O)” That says far more about you than it says about me.

    You are mistaken, sir, and that is unfortunate.

  45. Suz says:

    …and for the sake of rational thought…
    “1) that’s an evasion, not an answer”

    It IS an evasion, and women have been using it for decades. This is not a good thing. Does men doing it give it validity?

    “2) there is no “we””

    Yes there is, as we are inherently social beings. I recommend (with your permission of course) that you know who your “we” is.

    “sounds exactly like the Let’s You and Him Fight” ”

    -doesn’t apply when the real sentiment is “let’s you and me fight HIM because he threatens US. There’s that “we” thing again.

    “youre saying it on behalf of yourself”

    In a roundabout way, you sorta nailed it. I know that what’s good for real men is exactly what’s good for me. If I didn’t understand that concept, I’d be a feminist.

    “i’m not sure the MRM needs you, Suz, to delineate its “path” nor to decide what the best way to reject feminism is”

    Thanks for attributing these insights to me, but I’ve read them (usually written by men) elsewhere in the Mmanosphere. I wrote them because I agree with them.

    “and what my attitude should be — despite the fact that nobody’s ever heard of you before”

    a) I described your attitude as hostile, in my opinion. I did not tell you what it should be; you’re a grownup and that’s up to you. Fortunately for me, I don’t have to live with your attitude. All that anger must be exhausting.

    b) Does it matter who’s heard of me? Is this a private club? Isn’t the point of the Manosphere to reach out to others, to express one’s views and share knowledge gained from experience? Anyone who gives a damn who I am, can click on my name and read my blog. You don’t even have to register and sign in.

  46. Elspeth says:

    I saw that episode of American Chopper when Jesse James said that (husband likes the show), and I thought that was the strangest thing to come from a man who looked so masculine outwardly. I thought it sounded just like something a woman would say when she ditches her marriage for frivolous reasons.

  47. Opus says:

    So, I had to look this up, because I didn’t think that Ms Bullock (who I have heard of) was marrying a 19th century gangster – and what a fine figure of a man he is too – but, as no one else has mentioned it – he is a youthful 42 and she a menopausal 47. What do you expect – I rather admire the way Mr James has used the usual female rhetoric for his own purposes – but we know the real reason why he ditched her. This is the fate that awaits cougars.

  48. tvmunson says:

    Ray
    1) I was curious about your logo. I was not trying to deflect anything. I was saying I should have left it that she’s sexy; I did not say I have high regard for her, nor do I see how anything I did say could be interpreted as having a “high regard” for her.She’s a movie actress, one whose work I like, and she’s attractive.I know little else about her,and that was my point.You’ve alleged she’s made some remarks which if true I agree cast her in a negative light. I’ve never read or heard them before.

    2) I said I didnt’ follow the rest of you earlier remarks.

    3) You jump right in with gratuitous aspersions on my masculinity. I’d say you’re the one with those issues dude.

    4) Your logo is the same colors and design of the National Socialist one. The little interior slashes don’t change that. YOU’RE THE ONE WHO DEFLECTED MY QUESTION-IS IT NATIONAL SOCIALIST, OR NOT? You still haven’t answered; go ahead and mock my masculinity as opposed to answering the question like you did before.

    5) Enamored? No, I wouldn’t say that i’m enamored of it. I’m sorry if you didn’t like the phrase “Jesus fucking Christ” although you quoted it, twice. I note you didn’t mention “Virgin fucking Mary” so you must not be Catholic.

  49. Feminist Hater says:

    tvmunson, his logo is a bunch of F’s placed in the fashion of a Swastika. WOW! Amazing! It’s putting the nazi back in feminazi, what’s not to get? I really don’t think he wants to kill 6 million Jews.

  50. tvmunson says:

    FH-I’m new here, and I’m old. Didn’t get it-my bad. That’s why I asked him; Blue Oyster Cult decades ago had a weird logo that suggested the same thing, but ti wasn’t. I wasn’t sure what it meant-so I asked; Thanks for providing the answer and apologies Ray.

  51. Feminist Hater says:

    No worries tvmunson. We all have our moments. Hopefully Ray can forgive me for letting the cat out the bag and taking all his fun away. Anyway, I thought it best to put you out of your misery so we can actually focus on the topic at hand, rather than a logo.

  52. zed says:

    Zed, I figured someone would ask what I meant by “we,” and I almost said “you,” but “we” is more accurate, since I’m on you side. I meant “men and the tiny minority of women who despise ‘males’ (and ‘females’) who perpetuate irrational and irresponsible nonsense.”

    Good response, Suz. As I just pointed out in the last thread to some conservative guy, the conversation will go much smoother if you bear in mind that you are stepping into a conversation which has been ongoing for the past 5 decades – wearing the colors of the enemy. If you have the qualifications to back up your claims, you cannot possibly believe that you are the first woman in the history of the world to show up and claim “I am different. NAWALT.”

    Guys like Ray who have been in the war zone for a long time – many their entire lives – are suspicious of you. You have no street cred here. You will have to build it. Responding like a typical woman – as you do in many of your posts when you feel attacked – isn’t the way to go about that.

    There is no way to accurately determine who is on whose side any more. When I look at the Bullock/James situation, I see an aging actress – a bit like Demi Moore – whose career so far has been based more on her being pretty than being an actress of the caliber of Katherine Hepburn. Even in her twilight years, Hepburn was still turning in powerful performances in films like “Lion in Winter” and “On Golden Pond” For some reason, Spencer Tracy and Jesse James just do not seem to play in the same league to me.

    People who work with alcoholics have the saying that it isn’t the last drink that gets a drunk drunk, it is the first. The first drink starts the chain of behavior that always results in getting really drunk on the last drink. If someone doesn’t have the first, then they don’t have the last.

    So, the “first drink” in this social bender was when Bullock “slutwalked” into being married to a twice-divorced hustler. Everything after that was simply waiting for the ambulance to show up.

    Apparently, according to Anacaona , some minor celebrity named Kat Von D is already lined up to get some of Jesse’s tingles.

    That would be the place I would suggest intervening to cut off the irrational and irresponsible nonsense.

  53. Rmaxd says:

    Yea Rays logo’s been explained before … swastikas have nothing todo with nazi ideology, except for them adopting it as a flag, its a hindu or buddhist symbol …

    Rays logo is pretty clever …

    @suz its great you see things as they are, most women get pissed off when you point out their drama, or point out theyre irrationality, they actually feel entitled at being irrational, obviously its all a shit test … & easily taken care of

    The problem comes with hypergamy, telling a woman she’s irrational or call her out on her drama, & she makes a six figure salary, unless you give off a stereotypical alpha response, ie emotionally manipulative asshole, she actually becomes even more irrational, as women filter logic according to social status ….

    Over here in the manosphere, we get hypergamous women going insane in the comments section, precisely due to their graduate degree’s & 5 figure wage slave salary, their social status reinforces their entitlement to their irrational

    Women use social status to filter the logic they should respond to, men directly respond to logic, a womans higher status requires large amounts of negs, & cockiness just to get them to respond logically

    Unfortunately there are women, who dont even respond to game, they’re literally begging to be put down as viciously as possible … i’ve tried responding by putting down women like Lara, & almost got banned from several blogs, including this one … lol

    As I predicted, even though i brushed a ban, they actually stopped being irrational & started spouting some sense for a few weeks, but women like that need constant reinforcement …

    Women use shaming language on blogs, precisely because they view the men as being lower status, until they get slammed correctly which doesnt happen often enough …

    Anyway I didnt realise Jesse married a cougar … hence countdown to dumping for a younger chick …

    What i’d like for Dalrock & the manosphere is to examine why women are hypergamous & promiscous, it cant be feminism, as women are equally hypergamous & promiscous in none-feminist secular societies like Eastern europe

  54. tvmunson says:

    FH-POINT!
    Plus I was really more responding to Newt’s-the JFC was directed at taht. Didn’t check but Christian Science Monitor is gold standard. I’m surprised this hasn’t been blasted all over. I guess I’ll have to see how old it is.

  55. Suz says:

    Good point, Rmaxd, and thank you. Having come to the Manosphere from relative isolation, I was only vaguely aware of that status issue. (I make $10/hr and I didn’t finish college.) I’ve always related better to men than to women, so I don’t hear a steady stream of female rationalization. Mostly I just see what it does to men, who are left scratching their heads in bewilderment and frustration. I still have a lot to learn.

    While I don’t expect instant cred here, I’m hoping that in a male-dominated venue I ‘ll be allowed to join in rational, relatively civil discussion and debate. For the most part, that’s happening.

    I have no excuse for my defensive responses, except to suggest that they stem from a general insecurity not an entirely gender-based one, and I’ve seen my share of irrational ranting from people with penises. God knows men need a safe place to cut loose, but I tend to call logical fallacies when I see them. Men usually don’t mind. Please feel free to call mine, by the way. I don’t particularly like it, but I learn from it, but I’d rather be publicly corrected than ignorant.

  56. Suz says:

    *epiphany*
    ” a womans higher status requires large amounts of negs, & cockiness just to get them to respond logically”

    Wow. Does this actually work? Should I try this, because you’re right, they DON’T respond to calm logic, and my brand of sarcasm goes right over their heads.

  57. Feminist Hater says:

    Please feel free to call mine, by the way. I don’t particularly like it, but I learn from it, but I’d rather be publicly corrected than ignorant.

    Going to take you up on that offer. I might hate feminists but I don’t hate women. That certainly doesn’t mean I think women are perfect either, far from it. I believe they are human like the rest of us men.

    I hope you find Dalrock’s blog interesting, I sure have!

  58. greyghost says:

    “What i’d like for Dalrock & the manosphere is to examine why women are hypergamous & promiscous, it cant be feminism, as women are equally hypergamous & promiscous in none-feminist secular societies like Eastern europe”
    Rmaxed
    That is normal female behavior. There is no cause. It is normal. That is why the behavior is at times discribed as feral and women that behave like that as feral women. The irrational behavior discribed is how a woman allows her nateral desires to be expressed in a civilized society while maintaining a false pretense of not being feral(slut). One of the things women will do is call themselves christian. They also have serial monogamy. (i had 20 boyfriends this year and never cheated on any of them) Any check on this feral desire is called oppression. That is where the being true to yourself bullshit comes from. It never goes away and women that have it in check are called ladies. Even those women will still direct their energy towards to a sitiation that advantages them. Asian women that have a tendency to take care of their man have a cultural understanding and point of view that is good for them and coincidently good for the family but overall can be still seen as a productive self interest.
    Another thing that goes with hypergamy is competition among women. This is the status game women play. It is one of the primal motivations for the herd mentality. The fashion industry is a ready mix way of seeing it played out. A style is popular and unpopular in a race for status and then popular again.
    Once you undrrstand and fully appreciate hypergamy and status competition you will understand what on the surface may seem sexist and wrong as told by feminist. Women not voting,arranged marriage, slut shaming, girls schools, the tradition of the symbol of the white wedding gown, biblical submission to male leadership in marriage,even the old wedding vows to honor and obey their groom. All of these things were in place to keep hypergamy in check and the minimise the damage unchecked hypergamy had on civilization.

  59. zed says:

    “sounds exactly like the Let’s You and Him Fight” ”

    -doesn’t apply when the real sentiment is “let’s you and me fight HIM because he threatens US. There’s that “we” thing again.

    Having come to the Manosphere from relative isolation, I was only vaguely aware of that status issue.

    I would say that you are only vaguely aware of many issues, and need to spend some time coming up to speed before you jump into well worn ground that has been covered 10s of thousands of times and will inevitably get an “Oh no! Not this tripe again” reaction.

    And, on the “we” thing. This is the most significant issue on which you need to get up to speed. You are trodding a worn out path where the rut is worn so deeply that is deeper than you are tall.

    Allow me to throw you a footstool to get your head up above ground so you can take a look around.

    You are starting from a mistaken assumption. If I point out the manosphere faux pas (false step), and you are the real deal, you will think about what I say and try to apply it to your conversation here. If, however, you are one more in a long gray line of women poseurs – 10s of thousands long – you will argue with me, correct me, and tell me what I need to think instead of what I am telling you that I do think.

    This is a test.

    YOU are threatened by HIM, I am not. I need to expend absolutely no effort to deal with him, I –
    1) ignore his spiel,
    2) keep on walking.

    You are following the time-worn female path followed by just about every woman show shows up in the manosphere, which I abbreviate as “invade and usurp.” It generally takes the form of “let me tell you the battle that ‘we’ should be fighting, and how YOU should fight it.” Of course, “we” fighting this battle turns out to be exactly like “we” moving furniture – the woman stands on the sidelines pointing fingers and issuing instructions on repositioning the couch 0.5 inches this way and that until we get it in exactly the right place.

    I have no time to waste dealing with a twice-divorced hustler who might as well have LOSER tattooed in capital letters on his forehead. Your recruitment spiel attempting to get me to join your fight is, shall we say, uninspiring. I’m not threatened by him, I just avoid people like him.

    Now, to the crux of the biscuit, as Frank Zappa would say.

    The other actor in this melodrama (actress, actually) is Bullock. She married a bad man.

    Now, the two primary methods of preventing women from marrying bad men are:
    1) “empower” women to make better choices regarding husbands, or
    2) rid the world of bad men.

    Let’s just say that #2 is a “work in progress.” It has been an ongoing project since it was written down in the Code of Hammurabi and the 10 commandments. Progress has been uneven.

    Now, the fundamental issue which has so many people at each other’s throats is that #2 seems to be the preferred female strategy – because #1 is “blaming the victim.” And, a subpart of #2 – let’s call it #2a – is that even if good men miss even just one bad man, that some women like Bullock will seek them out, but somehow that isn’t her fault – because that would be “blaming the victim”, so the fault would like with other men – the good ones – who failed in ridding the world of bad boys on the way to be bad men.

    So, the male strategy is #1. No matter how many “bad men” are out there, a woman empowered to make better choices of a husband will never end up with one. It seems a very simple and elegant solution. Oh sure, we take on bad men as the need arises, but whining generally does not rise to that level.

    James seems to be a pioneer of sorts – he is out-victiming the victim. And, as we all know, we can’t “blame the victim.” A poor schlub of a motorcycle mechanic married to the highest paid actress of all time – as his 3rd wife – dives for the shelter of the “glass cellar”. Smooth move, Jesse!

    I can see no way to keep women from lining up to be his 4th ex-wife, but I think that is where I think the solution lies.

    So, what are “we” going to do about this?

  60. Just1X says:

    “Wow. Does this actually work? Should I try this, because you’re right, they DON’T respond to calm logic, and my brand of sarcasm goes right over their heads.”

    It’s probably worth a go, but don’t bet your balls on it…

    Welcome to the manosphere, might I recommend ‘AVoiceForMen’ as another top place to visit?

    As you said that you were new to the neighbourhood, can I sugest that you are careful when going anywhere near recommending what men should do?

    There are hair-triggers around that issue (you have probably noticed).

    When I read your earlier comments, I thought that you got unintentionally close to saying ‘man-up’ (what men should do). Any mention of men ‘doing the right thing’ is explosive – it requires men to sacrifice their immediate interests for the good of society, when society will fuck them over for it.

    IMHO men should just go their own way ‘MGTOW’, society will have to learn its own lessons.

    As I said, I didn’t read you as saying man-up, but what you said could be read that way by some. I hope I’m saving you future grief that is un-deserved (by my reading).

    I hope that you find the manosphere as interesting as I do. It took me a year to get to (my new favourite) Dalrock, you got lucky!

  61. grerp says:

    Progress has been uneven.

    LOL.

  62. Suz says:

    Thanks for the advice, Just1X. I intentionally didn’t say “man up,” because it usually means, “Man up and do what’s right for society.” The phrase itself, baggage not included, IS a pretty apt description of what I see happening in the Manosphere. I see decent, moral men gathering the courage to do what’s right for themselves and their tribes, while being shamed by a larger society that wants them to believe they’re just selfish. Doing what’s “right” for a big, corrupted society is the real mistake. If a man with a conscience does what’s right for himself, he won’t be doing wrong, even if it’s against society’s rules. (And society will benefit from it, crucifying him anyway.) That takes guts. I applaud and I encourage but I don’t want to sound like a condescending spinster-aunt, praising her dear nephew for not missing the potty.

    Zed, I appreciate you frankness and what you said makes sense. I did not mean to come off sounding like a recruiter/zealot. I’ve been reading Manosphere posts occasionally for over a year now, so I’m not a complete neophyte, just a very new commenter. I think I’ll be studying the jargon more carefully, to avoid saying things I don’t mean. In that respect I’m certainly naive, and there’s no point in rehashing old debates, especially if we are actually in agreement. Thank you

  63. Anonymous says:

    In a word… ghey or omega, your choice.

  64. zed says:

    @grerp – glad you caught the joke. 😉

  65. Brendan says:

    What i’d like for Dalrock & the manosphere is to examine why women are hypergamous & promiscous, it cant be feminism, as women are equally hypergamous & promiscous in none-feminist secular societies like Eastern europe

    It has to do with (1) lifting socially enforced long-term monogamy expectations, (2) cheap, reliable, readily available contraception and abortion. Feminism succeeded in this environment, because it is an ideological wrapping paper around it, and gives a social/life philosophy that justifies living in accordance with a looser, more “freedom” oriented sexual/relational life For women, this generally doesn’t result in wild promiscuity (it does in a fairly small number of women), but serial monogamy coupled with select ONSs and “it just happened” ONS/flings with alpha males who are not suitable/willing for commitment to serial monogamy.

    Eastern Europe certainly had a form of feminism in the communist era, and has largely inherited Western feminism, to different degrees, in the ~20 years since then. But it also always had contraception and abortion from the same time period, and lower expectations of long-term monogamy. When these screws are loosened, many people will simply go as close to feral as possible, and for women that typically means serial monogamy coupled with a handful, perhaps, of selective “it just happened” ONSs/flings with higher SMV men.

  66. Suz says:

    TFH, It is a clever move, intentional or not, and you make a good point. Principle v. Principle. Because of people with no principles. Either don’t do the girly thing, or do the girly thing and show the hypocrisy in girliness. The contrast between his alpha image and his feminine language sure is startling enough.

    Thanks for the article.

  67. Rmaxd says:

    TFH – I’m not really bothered if men use the same tactics, we just have to realise the context men exist in is completely different from women, the same tactics never implies the same motives

    Which is what dalrocks article should have made the distinction, Jesse isnt acting like a woman, as his motives & context will always be a mans

    @greyghost the problem with Dalrock & the manosphere, is that they still think Hypergamy & promiscuity is a biological & normal for women

    I’ve been around alot of women, & I know for a fact Hypergamy & promiscuity only occur under very strict conditions

    I’ve known women across a vast strata of the globe, & i’ve found women are only hypergamus & promiscous in communities with low rates of nuclear relatives & low rates of children to nurse & mother, ie 1 to 2 child families

    I’ve witnessed communities with high rates of nuclear uncles, aunties etc., have virtually zero single mothers, low rates of serial promiscuity & low rates of divorce, well below the national average

    It’s only when they come out of those communities & discontinue the practise of a large family, by giving birth to 2 children

    When women dont have enough children to nurse & no large nuclear family to gain the emotional feedback they crave, do they become highly dysfunctional, leading to hypergamous & promiscous behaviour

    The same thing applies to a womans daughters, if they dont have a large nuclear family to gain emotional feedback from, they become highly promiscous & ride the carousel like crazy

    Also women need a stable social network to be able to think logically, as they use social feedback to stabilise their emotions

    A prime example is India, where women from large traditional families, goto the city, marry some chump, have only 2 kids, & divorce the guy

    While the women with larger families & stay in touch with their nuclear family, have zero promiscuity & zero divorce rates

    Hypergamy & promiscuity from my own research, a social form of dysfunction

    @Suz If you read Justix’s comments, you’ve just come across an anti-gamer MRA, which is why he suggests Avoiceformen, effectively a home for anti-game MRA’s, they basically think concepts such as MGTOW & being aware of a mans legal rights is far more effective, then learning game, or PUA, basically how a womans psychology & biology works

    I’m a huge fan of game, one of the best sites for negs etc., is Roissys Chateu Heartiste

    “a womans higher status requires large amounts of negs, & cockiness just to get them to respond logically”

    I also add in alot of objectification & sexism, lots of women are bad driver jokes & small arm punches, teases etc., hilarious seeing their hamsters spin furiously, when you tell them men dont need women, all the above turns most women on, nothing like a bad boy dismissing their feminist identity skillfully … lol

    But if you’re a woman negs & cockiness need alot of aloofness & emotional distance, ie ignore everything they say, control the conversation & shut them down completely, by never agreeing with anything they say, basically turn them into an emotional wreck everytime they try & talk to you

    Also everytime they act or say something irrationally always disagree with them, they soon stop acting irrational

    Also if they start acting bitchy, aloofly dismiss their comment or behaviour, ie your above that sort of behaviour, I normally noneverbally ignore what they say the same way an aloof asshole would, as if theyre presence is below me

  68. Suz says:

    “Also everytime they act or say something irrationally always disagree with them, they soon stop acting irrational”

    Hehe. Got that one down pat. Works like a charm. Thank you for alerting me to the difference between those two sites. I’ll probably find myself leaning toward anti-game, after so many years chiding manipulative women, but I’m intrigued by the mechanics of game. I can’t help being tickled that so many men are realizing women are just as easily manipulated as they are, possibly more so since women believe themselves invulnerable.

  69. greyghost says:

    Rmaxed
    what you discribed as normal is actually a societal check on hypergamy. They go to that when the family breaks down. That behavior is a normal behavior without duty and responsibility to family. Since it is “normal” in the society you have experienced for female herd to be a part of a family you were imersed in a society that had a normal check on hypergamy. Feminism was not an over night thing years of lies about DV rape and the demonization of men. Also the same family that you discribed is considered patriarchy oppression of women in our society. With the psychological removal of the oppression of family women have no check and go feral. Even christianity is no longer a check with FOTF praising single moms as heros.
    what you discibed was a normal society not normal women. Those women you discribed were civilized women that chose to belong to a normal community.

  70. ray says:

    Hopefully Ray can forgive me for letting the cat out the bag and taking all his fun away.

    no entertainment left now but neutering the gerbils w/my moustache scissors; hey thx a LOT for snatching my blankee away FH

    tv munson – Thanks for providing the answer and apologies Ray.

    oh not at all, i’ve been in a scrap once or tooz

    the first 10 words did it tv — JFC followed by digging sandy who, along with pussycat woods, has been on my shitlist awhile

    you just happened to hit sore spots, pls excuse my zeal, but not my intent

    ps Virgin Fucking Mary is ok by me…. she’s only God to the catholics, after all

    the other guy…deserves respect

    i see zed has answered Suz far better than i could, guess that’s why he got his own movie (zardoz) and i got the popcorn

    cheers

  71. Just1X says:

    @Rmaxd
    “@Suz If you read Justix’s comments, you’ve just come across an anti-gamer MRA”

    Nope. Please don’t make such assumptions. I can’t see anywhere that I gave you grounds to leap to that fucked-up conclusion.

    In fact, the reason I ended up on Dalrock was that the Chateau BS / avfm vs game shitefest was not interesting to me. I didn’t see the point of the argument then, and I still don’t. I made a few comments to that effect in the various threads (feel free to check, or not)

    I see game as a central part of my going my own way. I’m not interested in being a PUA, but I’m as interested as all hell in trying to understand wimminz and how their hamsters work. I still see Chateau as a central resource in the hunt for the terrible truth at the heart of wimminz (not all women are wimminz, I use the term to differentiate).

    In fact, my manosphere journey started at the chateau, and I still point people there frequently. I don’t find the majority of the comments very interesting any more (too many, too lame for the most part. I see gbfm as a gigantic shit-test on anyone who reads his comments lozloozzll). But the archives are packed with manosphere goodness (commandments of poon, for a start). I think that the Chateau has become a bit of a victim of its own success, and so has attracted too many witless wonders like Lara. It’s not the only blog I’ve seen suffer from this.

    So, Suz, I too would recommend Chateau Roissy / Heartiste. And I think that many readers of AVFM would agree. Just because a couple of the main-men at avfm hate (so it appears) game, doesn’t mean that they persuaded many people of that point of view. The whole shouting match was a big waste of time IMHO. Register-Her was a master-stroke, however, and just underlines how important avfm is becoming.

    MGTOW means you get to take what you want, from where you want; love avfm, hate the game-hate

  72. tvmunson says:

    We’ll have to agree to disagree on the JFC. I may use it again, if I feel like it.

  73. Just1X says:

    Go ahead punk, make my day…

  74. Legion says:

    tvmunson says:
    December 12, 2011 at 8:56 am

    Don’t apologize. Ray had a clock up his ass and didn’t give a simple explaination.

  75. zed says:

    So, Suz, I too would recommend Chateau Roissy / Heartiste. And I think that many readers of AVFM would agree. Just because a couple of the main-men at avfm hate (so it appears) game, doesn’t mean that they persuaded many people of that point of view. The whole shouting match was a big waste of time IMHO. Register-Her was a master-stroke, however, and just underlines how important avfm is becoming.

    I’ve mostly stayed out of the great Game/anti-game argument, because it strikes me as just another episode of the circular firing squad that the MRM has mostly been, MRAs have spend far more time arguing over which of the 10,000 ways to split a hair is absolutely the best than they spend doing anything else. The perfect has always been the mortal enemy of the good. I’ve often joked that it is pretty easy to get any 3 MRAs to agree on most anything – all you have to do is shoot two of them.

    However, I don’t think that the debate was a waste of time because it took some of those “things we cannot talk about” – and talked about them. Both sides of the debate made some valid points. It isn’t an either/or situation – people will fall into one or the other camp based on their political philosophy.

    Speaking as a guy who Paul Elam told 15+ years ago that he had “slipped off the dock”, I can tell you that you have to take Paul’s abrasiveness for what it is – an incredible strength which he uses to cut through bullshit and keep the conversation moving along. It is what allows him to pursue his FTSU campaign, along with Register-Her. I agree with TFH that Paul and his crew are the only group out there who really deserve to be called “Men’s Rights Activists.” Most fall into the category of “MRBs” – “Men’s Rights Bloviators” – and measure their success by how much they can contribute to global warming with the amount of hot air that they spout.

    And, typically of the MRM, the minute some dude sticks his head up and tries to do something, MRAs gather from far and wide to attack him for it. If one of us gets out of the circle of friendly fire, he has really accomplished something.

    So, I don’t see any point in attacking Paul, and and I don’t see any point in letting his abrasiveness ruffle my feathers. I have been known to be a bit abrasive, myself, on a few occasions. Nowhere close to Paul’s league, but he did learn a few tricks from me back in the bad old days of the 1990s. On one of our first encounters with each other, I told him to “Go piss up a rope, jerkoff.”

    Now, having said that, being of close to same age and coming from the value system of the US in the 1950s, I share some of his objections to Game. Guys who were born 20-30 years later grew up and live in a different world than we have.

    I think it is possible to talk about those objections, and state our position, without coming across as saying “and you are stupid for using it.”

    The first and foremost issue for older men when it comes to Game is that it seems sleazy. I quipped in another thread that when the first PUAs appeared on the scene that they came across as a cross between Leisure Suit Larry and Bernie Maddoff – shallow hustlers. In fact, a lot like the subject of this post – Jesse James.

    There was a guy who went by the alias Ace Poindexter who came across like a guy who cleans septic tanks by day, and goes to the club and hustles your daughters into bed by night.

    Aside from the topic of “Marred Game” (a whole different set of issues) all younger guys have to say is “Well, it’s a sleazy world you left us” and us older guys have no real comeback to that.

    And, the fact that women of all ages seem to like Roissy a whole lot better than men my age like him, is all the evidence that anyone needs to prove that game works. He offends our ethics, and the whole reason this debate is happening is because women don’t share those ethics.

    Which leads me to my second big concern about Game – I am not at all convinced that it is not pretty destructive to those guys who use it (except the married ones who use on their wives).

    Speaking as a man with a partner count most people would consider extremely high, there isn’t much good I can say about it. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt, don’t want to go back, can’t recommend it.

    My personal experience is that a high partner count affects a man’s ability to sexually bond with a partner in the same way it does women’s – perhaps to a lesser degree, but it is still there. I’m fairly sure that I have lost the ability to fall in love, and I would bet that Roissy has as well.

    Chasing poon has a tendency to turn women from 3-dimensional human beings with their own sets of needs, wants, and desires, into an object. They become the wrapper and transport vehicle for poon. Each wrapper turns out to be a remarkably similar package of neuroses, and the more packages of poon you open, even the wrappers begin to lose their distinctiveness. Sometimes it gets difficult to remember which poon package was which.

    Now, one of the fundamental tenets of no-married Game is that losing the ability to fall in love is a feature not a bug. Falling in love is now called “one-itis” and is a dreaded disease to get. It is even a libido killer in marriages and LTRs. But, on the list of terrible diseases to get, it is the one that feels best.

    The quest for poon has a lot in common with using crack cocaine. (pun intended) It becomes about the getting, not the having. Once you open a poon package, it becomes old hat and you become fixated on your next fix. I would bet that Roissy or Roosh could bed a sweet solid HB 9.5, and would not want to wife her, but keep his eye out for that 9.7 he expects to come walking down the street any moment now.

    If I could go back and do something different with my life, I would likely turn down about 90% of the poon I got offered. I saw the effects of the sexual revolution on my generation, and I think a lot of us did serious damage to ourselves and our culture.

    Now, lest this come off like I’m bragging, I know guys with partner counts far higher than mine. We simply came of an age when the barn doors repressing female sexuality got thrown open and decades of pent-up female libido got unleashed, and we were in its path. And, they weren’t all 7s and above (but, this was before the rating system got established) – however, an average 23 y/o woman who is halfway decent shape has to work really hard to make herself unattractive.

    Many men my age felt terribly guilty about turning women down, so when poon was offered, we took it. Some of us learned, however, after suffering some really horrible poon-hangovers, that it really worked out best for us to say “no thanks” to a lot of offers.

    Fortysomething, fat, married poon was everywhere, and easily available. It was fairly easy to turn down by saying something like “no, you have a husband or boyfriend.” That worked part of the time, until they came back with “well, what if I didn’t?” That one was much harder to get out of.

    Chase crack all you want, but the male counterpart to the cat lady spinster is a guy who looks at a woman, and the first thought to enter his mind is not whether she is a 6 or 7 or 8 or above, but “Which of the 10,000 ways of making a man’s life miserable will turn out to be your favorite?”

    Don’t believe the travel brochures – the accommodations stink, the service is terrible, there are an unbelievable number of hidden charges, and the taste of the food is abysmal. Send me an email and I will send you one of my large collection of T-shirts. 😉

  76. Legion says:

    Just1X says:
    December 13, 2011 at 8:07 am
    “MGTOW means you get to take what you want, from where you want; love avfm, hate the game-hate”

    100% agree.

    Paul Elam even got into a fight at the Spearhead because everyone piled onto his protegee Izzey. He seem’s to be a his way or the highway guy and that’s just a waste of time fighting that way. Yet Paul still does excellant works.

  77. Firepower says:

    Just1X says:

    In fact, the reason I ended up on Dalrock was that the Chateau BS / avfm vs game shitefest was not interesting to me.

    lmao – just bc there, you can’t get away posting “fuck shit up yours moron” as credible statements is no reason to retreat
    from the limelight

  78. zed says:

    “Marred Game” is “Married Game” (I proof read that dommed thing 5 times!)😡

  79. greyghost says:

    No way zed you did that on purpose

  80. greyghost says:

    On a more series note you are right about the effects a good PUA will have on himself. But then again is it any more damaging that what happened to Thamos Ball or welmer Price or even the men that live in misery in sexless marriages knowing they are in hell and knowing that they have no legal recourse and the fact that at every level in society that no one gives a damn. The misery of men is a joke for fun and laughs just ask sharon Osborn.

  81. zed says:

    No, it isn’t, gg. Pick your poison. Just keep in mind that no matter which one you pick, you will pay a price for it. Maybe poon give the best rush for the least long-term cost – I don’t know.

    All I’m saying is that personally I am so sick of it that I could scream.

  82. greyghost says:

    I see what you mean I’m married now due to wanting to be a father. I look at my son and worry for him but if i had to choose I would have him be a player that graduated to man gone his own way.
    It looks like we may be able to beat the hell out of this monster. We are getting closer to a male pill and Dalrock here has blown the cover off the charade of churchianity. With the articles about how miserable women are It looks like they are telegraphing what will kick their ass.
    don’t die too soon you will miss out on the turning point. Thanks for being a voice for us beta guys lost in hell.

  83. Buck says:

    Zed,
    Was musing the other day about tang I took a pass on…I can honestly say, I’ve never regretted a “no thanks” vote.

  84. Just1X says:

    Re Game.

    I think if you want in depth (oops) research done on how women work, you get an army of horny guys to look into it (oops again). They’ll bat ideas around, find out what works and…voila. Having been married I was interested in the subject, so looked into game. I have enough t-shirts to not really be worried about the PUA side of it, but the psychology is both depressing and interesting.

    Clearly I like avfm, I just recommended it (and in fact have the patch to prove it) and have no issues with Paul, Alek etc. They have a depth of feeling over game (I _think_ about people making a religion / profit out of it), that I don’t share. I have reservations over PUA morality as well, so I don’t do it, but it’s not my place to put another brother down for going their own way. In the same way that I don’t fight people who believe that chocolate ice-cream is better than vanilla, it’s not an issue that I want to fight.

    It was my lack of interest in that issue (and the related threads) that meant that I looked around for other blogs of interest while they were playing out (I still regard AVFM as central to my list of places to visit). As an atheist I was a bit surprised to find Dalrock’s blog to be so interesting, with interesting commentors too…so now I see avfm and Dalrock as my most interesting places. tpm, pmaft, cappy cap, spearhead are others. I’ll be checking out Zed’s blog too (I skimmed it ages ago and thought it was more religious / spiritual in nature) judging by comments I’ve read by Zed since, I believe I may have been too hasty!

  85. Keoni Galt says:

    Just1x – go to the Spearhead and download The Book of Zed.

    Now shovel the fuckin’ gravel.

  86. Just1X says:

    Okay Keoni, that could be a good idea.

    I don’t know why it took so long to cross paths with him, but glad I did

  87. Keoni Galt says:

    Once you read it, you’ll get my reference: “Now shovel the fuckin’ gravel.”

    Zed is the man.

  88. Just1X says:

    I’ve seen references before, but not ‘the source’ (bows head in reverence).

    I’m looking at it now, and the tone feels different to the commenting Zed (I know there might be a reason for that), I’ve got to say that I ‘click’ more with the commentor, but I’ll stick the book on my holy kindle and take it for a spin.

    Zed, thanks for putting in the gravel shovelling to write a 721 page book (on A4)

  89. zed says:

    Re Game.

    I think if you want in depth (oops) research done on how women work, you get an army of horny guys to look into it (oops again).

    …but the psychology is both depressing and interesting.

    My comments were not addressed directly to what you said, but used it as a springboard to launch into one of my favorite diatribes.

    That first sentence there is all the reason it takes to justify Game completely. From the perspective of Game, looking back, a lot of my experiences make sense now when they made absolutely no sense as I was living through them. Game is nothing but a framework which makes observed experiences make sense. I am guessing that Roissy developed most of what he knows by watching older men flounder around clueless about what was happening to them.

    I think the biggest issue that guys like me have with the whole picture is not the Game part, but the PUA part. I will probably go to my grave believing that tricking women into bed is unethical. “Carving notches on the bedpost” was a way to slam shallow cads when I grew up. I always knew that you could get most any woman into bed if you lied to her and told her what she wanted to hear, but even during my horniest days my integrity meant more to me than poon. “Where pretty lies perish” – pure poetry.

    I was a bit surprised about the reception that Solomon II got to his story about seducing the deacon’s daughter, among this relatively conservative and religious audience. I would certainly tell any young woman I cared about to stay away from guys like him.

    I think where a lot of guys get hung up is at the depressing stage and never advance to the interesting stage. Younger guys have an irrefutable point when they say – “We aren’t dealing with the same women you dealt with, and besides, look how badly you guys screwed things up.”

    I jumped in when I did, and said what I said, in order to knock off the launch pad what looked like an impending launch of the great “Game/anti-game” war.

    And, yeah, I forgot about Alek. He really is one-note little twit, isn’t he?

  90. Just1X says:

    I just don’t understand the depth of feeling that he has for game…I left him to it, but hey I ended up here. He got a LOT of stuff off his chest, and I found other interesting sites; win-win.

    Solomon II wrote some good stuff too. Steak vs hamburger was him, I believe. Didn’t read the deacon stuff.

    “pretty lies”, yeah poetry indeed. And pure truth as well.

    Understanding that I wasn’t mad, it was I’d been lied to about how things are, was a great Aha moment. Thanks to Roissy (initially) and the manosphere in general latterly.

    Argue over Game? not me, ‘you’ can take it, or leave it. I think that it’s useful, but there are too many stupid people in the world for me to worry about converting a few. Many people aren’t grateful for being given the red-pill (but, I suspect that you know that)

  91. Keoni Galt says:

    From the perspective of Game, looking back, a lot of my experiences make sense now when they made absolutely no sense as I was living through them. Game is nothing but a framework which makes observed experiences make sense.

    As usual, you hit the nail on the head.

    When I first read about Game on teh interwebz, I had that ‘AHA’ moment of clarity on so many different things.

    My relationships with girlfriends and my wife.
    My father’s relationship with my mother.
    My father-in-laws realtionship with my mother-in-law.
    Why my friend’s relationships failed. Why my Aunty left my Uncle and their kids for a bad boy motorcycle thug. Why some girls LJBF me in high school (the ones I pedestalized because of beauty) and why some girls nearly stalked me (because I was aloof and did not care for their attention because I did not find them attractive).

    After reading about “game” I literally had a thousand memories for which I had no intrinsic understanding of, clarified almost perfectly. It was the code cracker. No longer did events regarding women and relationships seem like events that “just happened.”

    Game.

    You either get it, or you don’t.

  92. zed says:

    the tone feels different to the commenting Zed

    The source material for that “book” was written over about 12 year period beginning in the early to mid 90s and lasted through about 2006. (During the time when I first met Paul Elam) Changes in tone are due likely to both deepening understanding of the issues involved, and a cooling of the stridency I felt about them.

    The real credit for the “book” goes to a guy who goes by Rogue Wolf. All the organization is his. He took my old geocities site (which I let fall into the bit bucket when Yahoo discontinued geocities) and combined the articles with about 3 years of conversations at the niceguy forum. I write best to a focus – an idea on the table. Writing in a general sense always read very unfocused to me – blah, blah, blah, blah-blah. And, I can’t organize for shit.

    So, we really ought to call it “The book of zed’s thoughts, edited by Rogue Wolf.”

    I believe that the answer to all this – for the individual – lies in spirituality. However, out of respect for our authentically Christian host, I don’t think this is the proper venue to get into discussions about Christianity versus zen. Christianity has all the tools anyone needs, if they would just be willing to do the work to apply them.

  93. zed says:

    After reading about “game” I literally had a thousand memories for which I had no intrinsic understanding of, clarified almost perfectly. It was the code cracker.

    And, you took a nail set and set the nail, flush.

    If you know Game, there is no feminine mystique.

    Game is the code cracker.

    I recently made a reference to “dropping the big one.” Game is “the big one.” Male birth control is a significant issue, but the handbook for reversing all female tricks at manipulation is like giving every man out there detailed instructions on building his own sexual-atomic-bomb.

    That is why the gyno-centrists hate it so much – Game is the game changer.

  94. ray says:

    tvmunson– We’ll have to agree to disagree on the JFC. I may use it again, if I feel like it.

    it’s your eternity, baby

  95. Rmaxd says:

    @Greyghost

    From what I’ve observed & participated, there was alot more then simply hypergamy in check on display

    A nuclear family & a large family provides the social feedback a woman needs to function logically & rationally

    It is the absence of a social feedback system, which forces a woman to be promiscous & hypergamous, in order to try & recreate a large nuclear family to provide a social network for her to function in

    Basically women need a social network to function, becoming highly dysfunctional & irrational

    Women need massive social feedback to think rationally & logically

    Without massive social feedback, they default to hypergamous & promiscuity to try & recreate a network necessary to create the large amounts of social feedback theyre biologically designed to function

    ie. Women spend massive amounts of time, literally hours daily on the phone, internet, facebook & other social networks & social media

    In the same way men need a competitive network to function, otherwise they become highly ruthless, building gangs & military in an attempt to recreate a competitive environment

    Which is why we have corporations & male orientated families, they provide competitive networks for men to function correctly in

    Without massive competitive feedback men simply cannot function

    Without massive social feedback women become dysfunctional & irrational, women need constant reinforcement & contact from male driven nuclear communities, in order to create the social feedback their biology needs to stabilise & think rationally

    While men are the complete opposite of women, men thrive in the absence of families & social networks which regulate a womans biology

    It is their need for the absence of society which allows men, to build societies which exist to serve the needs of the whole, by serving the needs of man

    Men dont need societies & families to regulate their biology, so men avoid building the necessary inequality & injustice men would need if we needed society to cater to their biology

    Women are dependant biologically on society & family to function correctly, it is this need which creates an unequal & injustice welfare, women dont need safety, they need the safety of a family, women dont need protection, their biology needs the appearance of protection from a society

  96. tvmunson says:

    Eternity in hell-for that? Really? I would think that the forgiving, loving Jesus, the one I hear most commonly espoused and described, would be more inclined to have me write 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 times ” I WILL NOT TAKE THE LORD’S NAME IN VAIN.” then condemn me to Hell For All Eternity for dissin’ Him on Dalrock.

    Eternity in hell. Wow. Ok Ray well that changes it allright. Jeez (oops-is that His too?), I didn’t know. Do you think I can straighten things out if I never never use it again, or am I already fucked? I mean if I am,I might as well go ahead and use it ‘cuz it’ll make no diff. Hey it’s unfair to put you on the spot, you’ve already done enough pointing this out. Thanks.

    But what about the Virgin Mary? I mean, if the Catholics are right, I square it with Jesus only to find out His Mom is still pissed-I’m still screwed, right? I know you’re not Catholic (practically no one I know is) but do you think I should cover all bases, or can I go with a “Jesus Only” play?

    Man, I’m glad I didn’t say the Holy fucking Ghost-then I’d have the Holy fucking Trinity ready to jump my ass when I die.

  97. YaBoymatt says:

    Yea dude, religion is dum. *bong rip*

  98. tvmunson says:

    Ray, baby, do you think I can cop a break from Jesus ‘cuz His Birthday is coming up? Doubt it’ll matter much to His Mom- She probably doesn’t have many good memories from that night in that smelly manger what with all that straw up Her ass while She’s giving birth to Him, probably a lot of animal shit mixed in too. I’ll have to wait for the Assumption celebration to try and appease Her.

  99. Rmaxd says:

    @Justix

    I presumed you were anti-gamer from your milage may vary type response & link to paul elams avfm, in reply to my advice about using negs & cockiness on high status chicks …

    I’m a huge fan of Paul Elams work & site & I couldnt agree more Paul Elam & his side of MRA are the true MRA’s, ie mens right activists

    PUA & game are self help, albeit highly advanced & highly practical, & while its great for empowering men everywhere, society & social networks which serve women, will never be able to understand the concepts of game, as game creates a competitive sexual environment for men to exist in

    Also PUA & game turn a feminine concept of love & sex, into a competitive construct men can apply as ruthlessly as science & technology, & as usual because men created society, all of society benefits

  100. Rmaxd says:

    @Zed

    “I will probably go to my grave believing that tricking women into bed is unethical.”

    The whole point of PUA is women want to be tricked into bed, the ultimate form of tricking women into bed is obviously rape, which just happens to be most womens fantasy

    Women want to ride the carousel, women want to be used & abused, nothing immoral with giving stupid ppl what they want

    I think Paul Elam made a massive mistake by not liking pua or game, as pua & gamers make the MRA movement alot more accessible to normal guys, pua & game is also a much bigger entry point for men to mra, then the mra movement alone

    but I do understand his view, as MRA is activism, not picking up chicks … a subtle difference …

    & yes Alek Novy is an annoying twit, like most anti-gamers weird & clueless … pussy begging & outwitting chicks into bed as giving into chicks, ridiculously surreal & moronic …

  101. zed says:

    @Zed

    “I will probably go to my grave believing that tricking women into bed is unethical.”

    The whole point of PUA is women want to be tricked into bed, the ultimate form of tricking women into bed is obviously rape, which just happens to be most womens fantasy

    Women want to ride the carousel, women want to be used & abused, nothing immoral with giving stupid ppl what they want

    I said unethical, not immoral. There is a significant difference.

    Other people can choose to do it, and I will not give them a hard time about it. I can choose not to do it, and expect the same.

  102. greyghost says:

    Rmaxed
    The example you gave is female social stautus /hypergamy in action in a healthy society. The women behave the way they do because it gives them the most. If the culture was you don’t need him, food stamps ,housing vouture, you should be happy, why should you be stuck taking care of the kids and you will see what appears to be dysfunctional and irational is the normal state of women with out the society. If men don’t have that they will just make it.

  103. Feminist Hater says:

    The whole point of PUA is women want to be tricked into bed, the ultimate form of tricking women into bed is obviously rape, which just happens to be most womens fantasy.

    Please explain that to me. I have never, ever heard that before and I have a very, very hard time believing a woman actually wants to be forcibly raped? That seems very wrong to me. Are you talking about a woman who might like rough sex or a woman who had consensual sex and then cried false rape because she regretted it; or are you seriously talking about a woman being raped forcibly by some random stranger?

  104. tvmunson says:

    @YaBoy

    Some are; some people’s approach to them is, too; that is, dumb (I assume the misspelling was intended to be sarcastic). (declines bong; takes discreet sip of VO rocks with a twist)

  105. Anon says:

    Yep, men acting like women.. with zero accountability. These guys are losers, and their words confirm that.

  106. zed says:

    Skip it, TFH. Paul’s shtick, carefully honed over many years, is to FTSU. He’s volunteered for the time being to be the MRM’s junkyard dog. Its a mode that he can’t switch on and off at a moment’s notice. If he disagrees with you, he will FYourSU.

    He’s busy doing our work for us – FTSU. Leave him alone and don’t make him waste his venom on an ally.

    When all the issues we agree upon get settled, then we can get down to those many things we don’t agree upon – in the next life or two. 😉

  107. YBM says:

    I’ve read the Misandry Bubble but I don’t recall exactly where it outlines what a violent unwinding scenario would look like. Care to direct me?

  108. ray says:

    But he often chooses to waste his own time on tangents, like his ‘Chateau Bullshit’ episode. Agree with him or not, he chose to consume a week of his own time on something that was perhaps the most ‘circular firing squad’ we have seen in a while. No one made him do it.

    probly a kind of ‘down-time’ for him — the daily material is so awful and stressful, and the series was done partly in-cheek

  109. ray says:

    ok tv, bit hysteric tho babe

    to be fair, i am an Extremist (by current standards) about some issues, men and jesus being chief examples

  110. zed says:

    But he often chooses to waste his own time on tangents, like his ‘Chateau Bullshit’ episode.

    I agree with you completely, but that is not going to get me out of my mode of cooling the CFS I see forming around this issue. The perfect is alway, always, ALWAYS, the mortal enemy of the good. It isn’t a waste of time when he is FTSU of someone we disagree with and so does he, but it is a waste of time if he does it to someone who we do agree with, but he doesn’t.

    C’mon, dude, you’ve been around this whole gig long enough to know that we have to keep out of the quicksand. Some of us spent more than 30 years trying to get a fire started in a pile of wet newspapers with a book of paper matches. Finally, FINALLY, something has started. Let’s not throw a bunch of wet newspapers of our own on the little fire, and if someone else heads toward the fire with a wad of wet newspapers, let’s take him out before he gets there – not help him,

    People did the same thing to Marc Rudov. MRAs wore him out by attacking and critiquing his every move. You have been around long enough to have hear Anonymous Age 69 (is he 70, yet?) talk about all those guys who just showed up and contributed nothing but “You’re doing it all wrong” – completely feminized men who never shoveled one shovel of gravel of their own in their entire lives, just tried the feminist way of telling other men how to shovel it.

    You know how the spearhead is – it is the biker bar of the MRM. It is the last stop before going George Soldini for some guys. There are guys over there who will attack anyone who shows up without balls, no matter what they say. Globalman constantly went after crella, who I have known since the early days of niceguy’s. She gets it. She doesn’t express things like a man does, but for god’s sake she isn’t a man, she is a woman.

    Paul, like any decent man, protects his own. Izzy is one of his own, and there is nothing wrong with her. Some hot headed fool went after her simply because she is a woman, not because of anything she said, and Paul ate his face off. I’ve fired on oddsock and AfOR, despite some pretty good commentary from both of them over time, over AfOR’s bitching about the fact that after Paul put together the radio show, raised the money, set it up, coordinated everything, and got it on the air, all that a-hole had to say was bitch about the fact that the downloadable audio was 32 bit, not 64.

    Awwwww, the free beer isn’t cold enough for you. (puke)

    Forget it. Don’t engage in gossip, don’t spread it, and stomp on it whenever you see it. Paul and his crew have accomplished more in the last year that all other MRAs combined (with the possible exception of Angry Harry) in the past 15 years combined.

    Criticism of what he has done by people who ain’t done shit about shit, because he didn’t do it
    exactly the way they “would” have done it – if they had done anything, which they didn’t – has made me quit this movement of idiots a dozen times over the past 15 years, and one of these days it is likely to make me quit it for good. I can’t keep any motivation going for working for the interests of people who are consistently such dedicated idiotic assholes.

    Let it go. Let him shovel his gravel, and you keep shoveling yours.

  111. by_the_sword says:

    “Anon says:
    December 13, 2011 at 8:15 pm
    Yep, men acting like women.. with zero accountability. These guys are losers, and their words confirm that.”

    Yup, Jesse James is a Loser….

    Of course he’s all over the T.V. and has women lining up to be receptacles for his spooge and we’re here dicking around on the internet, reading hundreds of comments about it.

  112. zed says:

    the series was done partly in-cheek

    COMPLETELY in-cheek. You are exactly right, ray. Twelve months, in the ring, without a break, makes any guy lose focus once in a while. Paul slipped out intense target focus for a while and generated his obligatory blog content writing from something he felt deeply inside.

    I went into above the reasons why I don’t have any problems with Game, but I do often have problems with some gamers.

    Roissy is brilliant. Roissy embeds MRA themes and ideas in a vehicle that makes young men lap it up, When the history of the MRM gets written, Roissy’s name will be in the top 5 of men who had the most influence.

    But, Roissy is a sleaze. If a young woman I cared about was talking about hooking up with him, I would advise her not to. I will bet you that he can’t remember the hair color, eye color, and name of every woman he has slept with. Hell, I’ll bet he can’t remember half of them, I can’t, and I am sure my partner count is smaller than his.

    Paul and I are both in this because of our values. We do not cheer for Team Man whenever any man does anything – no matter how sleazy – or does anything which hurts Team Woman.

    He and I both agree that if we can’t stay in this movement and remain true to our values, then the movement can go to hell.

  113. zed says:

    Yup, Jesse James is a Loser….

    Of course he’s all over the T.V. and has women lining up to be receptacles for his spooge and we’re here dicking around on the internet, reading hundreds of comments about it.

    But, what does it profit a man if he gains all the poon in the world, but forfeits his own soul in the process?

  114. Brendan says:

    He and I both agree that if we can’t stay in this movement and remain true to our values, then the movement can go to hell.

    I agree, Zed. But this is the beauty of the MGTOW philosophy. Each can remain true to his values, but support the greater whole in whatever way makes sense (which, in some cases, may very well be just supporting one’s own values). The key problem is whether this tent can be built in a way that encompasses men ranging from MGTOWs to PUAs to Marrieds to YoungBucks/Unecideds. That is the challenge of the moment, it seems to me.

  115. zed says:

    That’s why we built MGTOW, Brendan – those of us who had survived the years of circular firing squads. TFH is right – if we can just hold on a few more years, the house of cards built against us will collapse of its own dead weight.

    But,for God’s sakes, we HAVE TO stop downing our own Pat Tillmans with fire from our own ranks.

  116. Brendan says:

    I agree, Zed, but I also think that this kind of thing is intrinsic to male status mongering. It is almost impossible to avoid in any context, and it also rears its head here. I don’t think there is a reasoned argument that would defeat it, even in the face of the reasoned agreement of the people who are perpetrating this. It’s visceral, and deep, and takes some visceral and deep counter-force to counteract. Glum, yes, but also reality, unfortunately.

  117. zed says:

    So, all this chest thumping and boasting by men about how only men cooperate to build civilization is just BS then, Brendan?

    I’m sort of being facetious, but sort of not, unlike the socon thread where I was intentionally yanking the new guys chain over the NASCALT hijack.

    I get sick of the post after post claiming that men “can” do what we aren’t doing here. So, which sex operates mostly from emotion?

    If I didn’t remember a lot of really decent men from the 50s and 60s, who feminism then attacked, I would not be here. The current crop of “men” have turned out to be a sorely disappointing bunch to try to deal with.

  118. Höllenhund says:

    „That said, the MRM’s only purpose is to make sure the Misandry Bubble unwinds in an orderly way, rather than a turbulent, violent one.”

    I have to say I find it somewhat strange that such a statement’d ever come from you, TFH. It seems to be based on the gynocentric assumption, which generally goes unquestioned in society, that men – or more precisely, young, white ’manly’ men – are somehow morally obligated to make sacrifices for the ’common good’, to save women from any potential harm, even if that harm results from her own idiocy. Tell me, why do you think it’s MRAs – a minuscule number of people who have zero responsibility for the abysmal gender relations of today and zero political power – who should ’make sure’ that there’s some sort of ’soft landing’ after the current gigantic mess? Why is it that, yet again, it should be blameless, ordinary men who sacrifice blood and toil to clean up the huge mess other people created? Yeah, God forbid anyone should get hurt in a turbulent period of violence when decades of enormous clusterfuck finally come to an end! I mean, it’s not like a huge number of people – feminists, their allies and useful idiots (both male and female), white-knighting socons etc. – are personally responsible for untold amounts of misery and dysfunction, and should suffer accordingly!

    Was there a soft, orderly unwinding after the huge clusterfuck that was Soviet communism? No. Is Western feminism a smaller clusterfuck? No. Do the math.

  119. Höllenhund says:

    “For us to live any other way was nuts. Uh, to us, those goody-good people who worked shitty jobs for bum paychecks and took the subway to work every day, and worried about their bills, were dead. I mean they were suckers. They had no balls.”

    I think these lines from the movie “Goodfellas” perfectly describe hardcore PUAs and Roissyites. They have nothing but deep contempt for any man who does not live exactly like them.

  120. Höllenhund says:

    With respect to the Spearhead and some of its supposedly loony commenters, I think it’s important that we see the wider context. Misogyny is probably the most overhyped and overestimated social phenomenon in written history. (I’m sure every man here is familiar with the evo psych reasons for that – competition for pussy, women’s reproductive value etc.) If we assume it’s a problem, we’re already on the wrong path. It’s as serious an issue in the West as, say, anti-semitism in Burkina Faso. Misandry is an immeasurably bigger problem because it has hindbrain force behind it.

    George Sodini? That guy was a joke. How many women did he kill, three? I’m sure the public has already forgotten about him. If you want to complain to me about the grave problem of misogyny, call me when false rape accusers, divorce court ass-rapists and other similar women are hunted down everywhere by death squads of angry men. Then I’ll listen. Until then, take your BS elsewhere, please.

  121. Kathy says:

    Rmaxd: “The whole point of PUA is women want to be tricked into bed, the ultimate form of tricking women into bed is obviously rape, which just happens to be most womens fantasy.”

    Feminist Hater: “Please explain that to me. I have never, ever heard that before and I have a very, very hard time believing a woman actually wants to be forcibly raped? That seems very wrong to me. Are you talking about a woman who might like rough sex or a woman who had consensual sex and then cried false rape because she regretted it; or are you seriously talking about a woman being raped forcibly by some random stranger?”

    Yes indeed, FH I too would like for Rmaxd to clarify his position here.. In any event rape IS most definitely NOT most women’s fantasy… Rough consensual sex is not rape!

    Kudos to you for having the courage to call him out, here.

  122. PT Barnum says:

    Yes indeed, FH I too would like for Rmaxd to clarify his position here.. In any event rape IS most definitely NOT most women’s fantasy… Rough consensual sex is not rape!

    Kudos to you for having the courage to call him out, here.

    You need to consult your female porn collection on that one Kathy.

    Many women want to be raped BY SOMEONE THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH ANYWAY.

    If Kathy chooses to view a man, that she wants to have sex with, forcing a woman to have sex despite definite “Nos” “not rape”, then go ahead.

    This is like all over the place, and female porn writers are the ones that produce it. Go blame your own romance novels.

  123. Brendan says:

    So, all this chest thumping and boasting by men about how only men cooperate to build civilization is just BS then, Brendan?

    I’m sort of being facetious, but sort of not, unlike the socon thread where I was intentionally yanking the new guys chain over the NASCALT hijack.

    I get sick of the post after post claiming that men “can” do what we aren’t doing here. So, which sex operates mostly from emotion?

    Indeed. It isn’t pure BS, of course, but cooperation among men on that kind of scale requires a certain “glue”, if you will. Some kind of togetherness-group-identification based on blood, culture, religion and so on. Not based on sex. While it’s true that men cooperated in cultural/religious/blood-based groups, this cooperation happened in direct competition with other groups of men who were group-identified themselves. What has happened “here” is that the group identifier has been basically destroyed in the interest of creating more personal, individual freedom. A side effect of this is much less cohesion among men, much less cooperation among men, and much less of an ability to do the kind of civilization-sustaining cooperation, simply because the shared basis (which was never sharing the same sex, really) is missing. Without a shared basis in common, men separate into warring groups to achieve dominance — and this is what we see in spades not only in the MRM, but in the West in general.

    If I didn’t remember a lot of really decent men from the 50s and 60s, who feminism then attacked, I would not be here. The current crop of “men” have turned out to be a sorely disappointing bunch to try to deal with.

    I’ve often had the same thought myself. Men are very much not worth it, really, because at every turn they will undermine, backstab, and try to impose dominance over *other* men. The claptrap between Frost and Paul was a shining example of that, really, as were most of the comments on both sides — men stalking each other, staking out positions of dominance, lowering the value/denigrating the value of other men, and so on, all in an effort to prove superiority, dominance and status. Of course, intra-male competition will always take place, even in the context of a shared identification group, but there is a big difference between a generally benign competition for leadership within a shared identity group, on the one hand, and an all out Hobbesian war for dominance in a vacuum of any shared identity – the latter is what we have now, throughout the culture, both inside and outside the MRM.

    It’s important to note that women, who are seen as inherently cooperating better with each other, are only doing so in relative comparison to what is happening among men today. That is, in closely group identified cultures, men cooperate often quite well while having intra-group leadership competition. It’s only when that level of male coooperativeness breaks down due to the breakdown of shared group identity cohesion that women appear to cooperate more effectively together than men do, because in that context men are really not cooperating much at all.

  124. Feminist Hater says:

    You need to consult your female porn collection on that one Kathy.

    Many women want to be raped BY SOMEONE THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH ANYWAY.

    If Kathy chooses to view a man, that she wants to have sex with, forcing a woman to have sex despite definite “Nos” “not rape”, then go ahead.

    This is like all over the place, and female porn writers are the ones that produce it. Go blame your own romance novels.

    Fizzle, fizzle pop, my mind just exploded with the above reasoning. I seriously, seriously hate feminists and I will not join team women ever, no matter how many kudos Kathy gives me, but come on…Seriously!? Ok so…Let me get this straight, there’s “rape” in female porn, whatever that is, and therefore most women must secretly want to get raped. I’m having a “male logic” moment here so please bear with me but I cannot get my mind around that.

  125. Kathy says:

    “Many women want to be raped BY SOMEONE THEY WANT TO HAVE SEX WITH ANYWAY.”

    Then it is not called rape , you clown.

    It’s called consensual sex.. rolls eyes..

    And , as I have said on numerous occasions on various blogs, I have never read romance novels. They hold no interest for me..I’ll stick to the sci fi , thanks all the same. 😉

  126. Anonymous Reader says:

    Kathy, Feminist Hater, others: Google “female rape fantasy” and see what you get back. .Or just look at the covers of many romance novel / emotional porn – the muscular, bare-chested man with the woman in his grasp, etc. The key word is fantasy and the key concept is women are not just men who can have babies.
    Here is an article to start on the topic.
    .
    http://www.slate.com/blogs/humannature/2009/01/26/rape_fantasies_and_female_arousal.html

  127. Legion says:

    TFH says:
    December 13, 2011 at 10:03 pm

    Here is the article by Izzey and comment section. Paul’s egotistical comment comes in at May 20 2011 at 10:53.

    He wants to attack men in the MRA for not following his rules, that’s his busines. But that is the day I kicked his site off my favorites.

    http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/05/19/the-spatula/

  128. Feminist Hater says:

    My problem with Rmaxd’s comment was his going from a fantasy of women, of being raped and turning that into a PUA strategy. Here’s the part of his comment I have an issue with.

    The whole point of PUA is women want to be tricked into bed, the ultimate form of tricking women into bed is obviously rape, which just happens to be most womens fantasy.

    According to that, most women fantasise about being raped, which could be true for all I know. However, if you read the first part of his comment, he states that the ultimate goal of PUA’s is to trick women into bed and the best way to do that is obviously rape. That’s what he said. There’s my disconnect from his reasoning. Even if most women DO fantasise about being raped because they get an emotional thrill due to having the man want them so much that he cannot control himself and just has to have her. That’s a fantasy and making that a “tool” of PUA’s doesn’t sit well with me.

    Come live in South Africa, see the rapes that go on here, then come back and tell me that has much merit at all. I cannot hate women enough that I would want to “trick” them by raping them. How do you even “trick” a woman by raping her? Rape is taking sex by force, there is no tricking involved.

  129. gdgm+ says:

    Meanwhile in the US, another wave of articles about “Marriage Couples At A Record Low” is starting, based on a Pew Research Center study earlier in the year:

    http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/12/14/1709354/married-couples-at-a-record-low.html

    The full article is at the Washington _Post_, but sometimes that site asks for registration, and sometimes it lets one read it.

    gdgm+

  130. tvmunson says:

    Re: MARRIAGE
    If you do not want kids, I ahve 2 pieces of advice:
    1) get vascectomy
    2) do not get married

  131. Brendan says:

    OT for the thread but not for the blog theme — interesting story in today’s WaPo about marriage trends (i.e., downward): http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/married-couples-at-a-record-low/2011/12/13/gIQAnJyYsO_story.html

  132. zed says:

    @Legion –

    Couldn’t you have let that scab go unpicked?

    Don’t drag Dalrock’s fine blog into an inter-blog flame war. Nothing good will come from it, and everyone would be dimished.

  133. zed says:

    @Brendan,

    Will the last married couple in America please turn out the light before they retire? 😉

  134. Lavazza says:

    Kathy: “Then it is not called rape , you clown.

    It’s called consensual sex.. rolls eyes..”

    If the other party does not ask for consent and does not care about it, I don’t think it qualifies as consent.

    “Securing a consent after the fact does not validate what was done before.”

    http://www.criminaldefenseattorneynj.com/results/suppression-brief/

  135. ray says:

    brendan sums it up cogently, yeah zed i dig re circular firing squads, over the years i’ve gotten far more grief from “men’s movement” people than feminists

    guys were a lot more interested in putting me in my place than in fighting the matriarchy, or rasslin’ with my observations… i finally learned why it was taking so long for the plane to taxi, much less fly

    i stopped commenting on pages and blogs for many years, sick of the microscopic critiquing and backstabbing, and concentrated on research/blogging instead

    for above reasons, men have never produced an effective front against collective female power, aside from religion, precisely b/c religion requires the suppression (or, at minimum, sublimation) of the male competitive/jealousy urge to a higher power — then, men are able to cooperate w/o feeling that theyre jeapordizing their egos and status

    even w religion, as we’ve seen in the west, its inceptive power is eventually co-opted by women and men serving women, and becomes antithetic to its origins

    in addition, the backbiting effect is greatly intensified in a culture, like ours, thats so hysterically anti-male — the small percentage of guys who make it to the m.r.m. are already beaten-down and betrayed, so are in no mood to compromise or listen, even to other men

  136. zed says:
    It seems to be based on the gynocentric assumption, which generally goes unquestioned in society, that men – or more precisely, young, white ’manly’ men – are somehow morally obligated to make sacrifices for the ’common good’,

    A turbulent unwinding harms everyone, most especially children.

    Also, activism is not necessarily a sacrifice. Some could equally classify it as vindictive fun.

    Someone is dumping raw sewage into the lake where I get my drinking water. There is no “sacrifice” at all in trying to stop them. I am part of “the common”, and the common good is also my good. I like drinking fresh, pure, water. Doesn’t everyone?

  137. Legion says:

    zed says:
    December 14, 2011 at 1:52 pm

    I’m not picking a scab. Someone (TFH) requested information and I responded. People were already talking about Elam and I added my two cents. Which included agreeing that Elam does good works. You don’t like it, don’t read it.

  138. zed says:

    I won’t, Legion.

    Paul has been shoveling the gravel to build that site for 13-14 years, now. I registered the domain for him back in about 1997-98. He’s like the Wright Brothers – the first iteration or two did not stay airborne very long.

    TFH considers him the only activist site out there. And, TFH is the foremost critic in the manosphere regarding how little activism has been accomplished. I’ve seen hundreds of activists taken down by other so-called “MRA’s” – many times more than taken down by our enemies.

    Since TFH is not funding the site, nor to my knowledge has shoveled any of the gravel which went into it, I don’t think he is in position to determine what Paul spends his time writing about is a waste of time or not.

    There can’t be any sort of conflict between “Game” and anything else, because it is just a name of a natural phenomenon – like “fire.” As people say, it’s a tool and the value lies in how it is used.

    Someone being against arson does not say anything about fire. Pump and dump is social, cultural, arson. Some of us – and count both Paul and I among them, as well as most ethical men of all political stripes – are deathly opposed to it.

    Paul has already peaked. JTO just recently posted “Magic Paul has left the building.”

    The problem with the small-tenters is that they never build their own tents to keep small – they look around for some tent built by some guy who shoveled his own gravel and built it, invade it, then try to order the builder around like their personal bitch.

    Paul won’t allow that. He keeps control of his own frame. He has Game.

    He’s a guy I once told to “go piss up a rope, jerkoff”, and he told me that I had slipped off the dock. We have put that behind us. RealMen™ do that – and keep their eyes on the prize.

    Getting people pissed off at him, and fanning a flame war, will simply hasten the day when there is one less MRA out there. 1-1=0

    We are our own worst enemies.

  139. Anonymous Reader says:

    Regarding the unwind of misandry TFH prefers one form of unwind to another.

    Zed
    Someone is dumping raw sewage into the lake where I get my drinking water. There is no “sacrifice” at all in trying to stop them. I am part of “the common”, and the common good is also my good. I like drinking fresh, pure, water. Doesn’t everyone?

    Sure. Consider three options:

    Door # 1. You take the offender to court, a jury finds the other party is guilty of a tort, orders them to stop doing that bad thing and to pay damages to you, with the threat of imprisonment for repeat offenses or failure to pay.

    Door #2. You get some friends together, go find the offender, take him out and beat the snot out of him, then throw him in the effluent runoff with a warning to “stop this, now, or you’ll get more of the same”.

    Door #3. You get a lot of friends together, with weapons and torches. You find the offender, beat him as badly as you want to, then hang him by the neck from the nearest tree until he is dead, and leave his body hanging as a warning to others. You burn his house to the ground. You hunt down all his relatives and kill them as well; men, women, children, babies, old grannies, all of them. You burn all their houses, barns, cars, everything to ashes. If anyone gets in the way, you kill them, too. If anyone tries to defend any of the offenders relations, you kill them and burn their house as well.

    Three solutions. Each one will end the problem of raw sewage in your drinking water. However, not all of them are going to lead to the same sort of society, right? I think that this is more or less what TFH is trying to suggest – orderly unwind, vs. disorderly unwind, vs. catastrophic unwind, there is a difference.

    Historically, humans have employed all three of the methods above. The more desperate and frustrated and angry that people become about a problem, the more the solution tends away from Door #1, and towards Door #3. I am pretty sure that none of us want to live in the world that Door #3 leads to.

  140. MaMu1977 says:

    @Kathy, rmaxd

    A “rape fantasy” (as written/communicated by romance writers and documented by actual researchers) usually if not always involves a woman who’s been confronted by the “perfect man” (from a physical/biochemical standpoint). The “rape” component (in and of itself) invariably involves the man being so passionate and insistent on “taking” the woman that her cries of “Stop!” “Don’t!” “No!”, are changed to “No, don’t stop!!” as his ardor triggers and enforces *her own* desires.
    Are there some woman who have forced sex fantasies about sub-optimal men (physically unfit/ugly, mentally/socially inept, the “faceless man”, etc.)? Yes, of course. *But*, the vast majority of the fantasies involve the pirate, the woodsman, the cruel noble, the jerk jock, the famous actor, the corrupt businessman, etc. IOW, the type of man with the perfect body, the calculating mind and the *social status/proof* to arouse her and make her feel “helpless”. If you’ve ever read a non-Harlequin romance novel (read as: the type of novel that goes farther in detail than quasi-chaste hugs and/or kisses), you soon notice that the heroine is always described as being drawn to the soon-to-be despoiler (or car, or charmer or rogue, etc.), in question, even/despite all of the warnings (verbal, physical and otherwise) about his lack of character. He always manipulates her into his sphere of influence, he holds back until he “knows” that she’s ready to be taken, then he takes her without accepting her resistance (because he “knows” that she can’t help herself.)

    And therein lies the problem. Very few men have the wherewithal to *be* the “perfect man”. Most of us aren’t handsome enough, fit enough, knowledgeable enough or “dominant” enough to *be* the type of man who lights those fires, yet there are way too many women who believe that any man who’s unable to hit all of those markers is “unfit”. That’s where Game comes into play. Game teaches men how to trigger the mental/emotional spikes that women currently need to find men attractive. That’s it. A proficient Gamesman knows to keep in shape, knows to keep the woman in his frame of mind, knows to either contain her in his world or to keep her outside of her own (preferably both, which is why Game works best in cities. A smart man can maneuver his lady away from her comfort zone and into his zone without triggering her fear mechanisms. For example: by cultivating a small clique of restaurants and bars, an average Gamesman can introduce his “target” to new places while using his own prior experiences at those places to earn preferential treatment. When you take a woman to a new restaurant, get a good seat without trying and get the attention of a waiter in less than 5 minutes, she gets a demonstration of social proof:”He’s popular here, they didn’t make us wait for a table or service!” When he corrects her mistakes, such as warding her away from bad dishes or showing her how a finger bowl is used, he’s ‘negging’ her ignorance in fine dining and demonstrating his aptitude. His knowledge about current/major events is also a type of neg.

  141. Legion says:

    zed says:
    December 14, 2011 at 6:20 pm

    And you, going thru my comments and not seeing my praise of Elam is helping keep tents big? I can’t say that there was once a day when the emperor didn’t wear his shirt?

    “He keeps control of his own frame.” That’s fine with me. I keep control of mine by not bothering to read him anymore. Or is only Elam allowed to keep frame?

    I’m not fanning a flame war against anyone.

  142. Rmaxd says:

    @ Kathy et al …

    It’s called a rape fantasy, not rape reality … lol

    Women want to be dominated, to the point of fantasizing the ultimate form of domination

    Yes the concept of rape turns women on biologically

    & yes there are plenty of women who want to be used & reduced to sexual objects by complete strangers, & do

    Hence plenty of women turning to drink & alchoholism, using their drunken states to sate their needs for dominance in a submissive state, ie drunk

    & no the reason you dont get turned on, isnt because you’re a special snowflake, you do … its called biology …

    The reason you get turned on by hunks with muscles … dominance

    Nothing like the wreckage of a thousand hamsters exploding at a basic truth … sorry to pop your puritan bubbles but yes alll women are like that …

    & yes game is primarily manipulating a womans need for dominance … its what women want …

    Hence women ride the carousel, they want to be gamed ie. dominated by as many guys as possible

    The carousel & dominance is a womans default position in the absence of a nuclear family

    If Christians & traditionalists want to save women, they need to address the prime root of a womens need for dominance & hypergamy, a lack of children

    Any church or religion with too low a population of children always looses its traditional values & social structure

    & it’s women will destroy themselves

    All churches & religions, like all communities are designed to function to protect the children in their communities

    Reduce the children & all churches disintegrate, there is nothing to protect

    Without large numbers of children & large families, there is no need for large communities to maintain traditional cultures or the social structures necessary for religion & an ethical & moral society to survive

    Marriage is pointless & completely futile, to society, if that family doesnt contain the necessary amount of children to create a large nuclear family, necessary to create & maintain a stable community

    When we err from our prime directive to reproduce, traditionalism, religion, morals ethics no longer exist & our society disintegrates violently

    Sociology & sociobiology 101 … well it used to be …

  143. Höllenhund says:

    The type of sex women normally fantasize about would be judged as rape by any Western court if the woman decided to press charges. So legally speaking, yes, it isn’t a stretch to say that women fantasize about rape.

  144. Höllenhund says:

    @TFH

    Yes, I know social turbulence harms innocents and the common good is our good as well. But it seems to me the kind of approach you’re advocating is based on the same mentality that got society in this mess in the first place, namely that men have some sort of moral obligation to serve the common good, to practice self-sacrifice to benefit others. Isn’t this exactly the type of mentality feminists, socons and average manipulative women have traditionally exploited to their own ends, a mentality that leads men to misery and death? Because we should make no mistake about it: activism IS sacrifice, especially if it’s done for men’s rights. I’m pretty sure you expose yourself to all sorts of attacks, largely legal ones, from the feminist system, not to mention the likelihood that you become a social pariah.

  145. Suz says:

    Yes women want dominance, benevolent dominance. We want to be “possessed” and prized by the “perfect man,” the one who is strong enough to protect us or to destroy us, but chooses to protect us because he can’t resist our beauty/charm/intelligence. We don’t want malicious dominance, since it’s purpose is annihilation or dehumanization. Destroying each other is what enemies do.

    Since our legal and cultural definitions of rape have been twisted beyond comprehension, it’s not at all dishonest to say “women want to be raped.” In the broadest sense, we do, just not by the enemy, and feminism allows us to redefine “enemy,” individually, minute by minute, according to our whims.

  146. Feminist Hater says:

    Well Suz, I had an issue with Rmaxd’s original comment, where he said that tricking a woman into bed was ultimate PUA strategy and that rape was the best way to trick a woman into bed. When I see the word “rape” I still think of its original meaning, that of forcing someone against their will into performing sexual acts. He didn’t mention any of the above in his original comment, which to be honest, sounded like he condoned rape. Therefore I asked him to explain what he meant.

    Still, even after his explanation, I have an issue with the idea that a woman wants to be tricked by being raped. And please remember, when I say rape, that’s what I mean, not the trivial definition most countries have now. His reasoning doesn’t strike me as a positive. Rape by action is the use of force to obtain sex, I still cannot see where the a man who rapes a woman “tricked” her into bed. I can see that the woman might herself want to be dominated by a guy she likes and that by the modern definition that might be considered rape. However, that is NOT what he said in his original comment.

    What you describe doesn’t sound like being “tricked”, does it? It sounds like you want to be desired and wanted by your man to such an extent that he cannot think of much else. You want to be ravaged, not raped.

  147. Suz says:

    “You want to be ravaged, not raped.”

    Yes, I agree. That why I said “in the broadest sense,” because there are plenty of people of both genders who don’t or can’t differentiate, who lump coy resistance together with non-consent. The same tactics are used for both. “Tricking” a woman into bed is deceitful seduction and could certainly bring up questions about consent, but I don’t really see it as rape. Men who trick women into bed probably don’t respect them, but I don’t think the trickery is based in predatory destructiveness, as rape generally is. The motives are very different. I think trickery is a rather sleazy way to get around women’s sleazy walls of false protest. We women won’t allow ourselves to respect a man whose message is simply, “I want sex,” so we lie to ourselves and each other. When a man acts to deceive us, we choose to believe him, lying to ourselves, then we get all bent out of shape over HIS lies. Essentially we blame men for our own dishonesty. Trickery may be unethical, but it’s not criminal.

  148. PT Barnum says:

    The women are prettying it up a little.

    The Romance Novels aren’t quite so discrete. “Ravaged” yes, but the fact that the man, who the woman is strongly attracted to, ignores the woman’s clear protests/physical resistance is also an important part of it. She wants to have her choice removed for all variety of female reasons. She wants to be “led”. She wants to avoid having to make choices(choice addiction). She wants to avoid guilt/responsibility. Ect.

  149. Feminist Hater says:

    Thank you Suz, I think that was a most honest assessment.

  150. Feminist Hater says:

    The women are prettying it up a little.

    The Romance Novels aren’t quite so discrete. “Ravaged” yes, but the fact that the man, who the woman is strongly attracted to, ignores the woman’s clear protests/physical resistance is also an important part of it. She wants to have her choice removed for all variety of female reasons. She wants to be “led”. She wants to avoid having to make choices(choice addiction). She wants to avoid guilt/responsibility. Ect.

    I can see how it comes into play within “game”. I just had a problem with the choice of words. I couldn’t in my right mind tell men the best way to trick a woman into bed is “Rape”. For a number of reasons, obviously. Being a lawyer myself, the legal disasters that could befall the man who would take that advice at face value would be utterly catastrophic. I don’t really need to tell you guys why that is, do I? Also, there’s rape and then there’s RAPE, the real deal. I have seen the victims after such incidents and I cannot agree that these women would have wanted it. The scenarios that I am talking about don’t involve getting drunk or going to bad places but entail the girl walking outside her place of work or in the case of a hijacking where they will rape the girl in front of the boyfriend/husband and then shoot them both. If that’s part of a woman’s fantasy she seriously needs help. If I’m stupid for thinking that then so be it.

  151. RL says:

    @Hoellenhund: A related comment from his own blow “I might make the argument that goverment fiscal management is the cause of the change. What is a recession anyway? It is a loss of confidence in the markets, and a necessary correction when financials have run ahead of fundimentals. But today we try as hard as we can to fiscally manage our way out of these problems, to reduce the pain (and blame) for everyone. But are we also sowing the seeds of future failure? Fiscal corrections never get fully made, valuations never get fully adjusted? Minor problems in 1991 become serious problems in 2001, become economic mass destruction in 2011?” http://www.singularity2050.com/2011/12/recessions-vs-depressions.html?cid=6a00d83452455969e20162fd664a53970d#comment-6a00d83452455969e20162fd664a53970d

  152. Rmaxd says:

    Jesus the feminists, still typically whining about the hamster wreckage, at a basic truth about women

    What part of biologically women enjoy the concept of rape, dont you understand?

    No it isnt a modern definition of dominance, i’m talking about rape, ravaged by invading hordes of tribes, as they greedily slaughter the womens children in front of the women & then violently rape the women

    All women are biologically wired to want this …

    I’m talking about the anthropological definition of rape … seriousy go get a freaking clue, feminist fembot ….

  153. Rmaxd says:

    @Suz
    Excellent definition of dominance suz, its amazing how a womans biology plays outside the normal confines of her natural state …

    A family …

    Feminism & need for dominance are closely tied, women use the victim to raise their status in society, as the victim is the most dramatic & immediate response in a society

    It’s also why women always opt for submissive dominance, as nothing is more dramatic & emotive, as the helpless & weak, to the sense of urgency of a super hot rippling alpha as he destroys or dominates a helpless foe … or woman

  154. Feminist Hater says:

    Wow Rmaxd, you feeling a bit better now? I’m a clueless, freaking, feminist fembot. Oh dear, whatever am I going to do? I can just hear the men now, “Hang your head in shame young man! Why aren’t you raping those women? They want it, they need it, go forth and multiply you Alpha Cad you!” Nope, I can just tell the difference between a fantasy and reality. However, you condone rape, that’s cool my man. All entitled to our opinions after all.

  155. Feminist Hater says:

    You know Rmaxd, yesterday was a special day for us Boers. Look it up. A day marking a period in time when all the chips were stacked against us. A paltry 400 of us, including women and children, against an army of 12000 Zulus. But fear not, my man! Those women wanted to be raped and killed by those Zulu Alpha Cads! They must have been having orgasms just thinking about it! Watching their husbands and children being slaughtered before hand. Oh my! The absolute thrill that must have been going on in their heads! But, once again, those damn pesky husbands, the patriarchal types, got in the way and killed over 3000 Zulus before driving them off the battlefield. GRRRR! Why oh why!?

    Yea Rmaxd, I’ll be a freaking, clueless, feminist fembot any day of the week instead of raping a women. I would rather use her need to be dominated via trying to game her, I guess if that doesn’t work I can just rape her into submission. Guess I’ll just stick to disagreeing with you on that one.

  156. A number of commentators have suggested that it makes evolutionary sense for a woman to give it up for a conqueror. I remember Female Misogynist saying that female teachers can’t handle aggressive boys at school because they get turned on.

    There is genetic evidence that women in prehistory moved further to mate. This may have meant basically being taken away by a marauding band in some cases. And marrying their rapists ( cf. the Sabine Women). Some ideas are currently unthinkable only because they are too uncomfortable.

    A lot of traditional female fantasy and even cultural memes centre around the “conquest” by the male. There are still traces of it in customs like the husband carrying his bride across the threshold.

  157. Feminist Hater says:

    David, that’s all well and good. We can discuss the base instincts of men and women and apply them to better allow us as men to circumnavigate the current crisis. There is just one problem. We have evolved a certain amount of civilisation by restricting some of those instincts, those fantasies. If you retreat far enough, civilisation will crumble; and perhaps that’s what many men want. I too don’t like the current situation, with laws against being a man and divorce happy courts but that certainly doesn’t mean I want to go back to where our base instincts served us the best. I can understand women might be fantasising about being dominated and raped but I don’t see how that is turned into, “all women want to be raped, it’s their nature”. I suppose all men want to be in danger constantly because it allows us to relive the days of glory where every moment could be our last. Most boys dream about big things like that but are you honestly telling me that most men would now actively go seek it out?

    Fantasy versus reality. That’s all I’m saying.

  158. I quite agree. The sensible thing to do is to deal in a healthy way with our baser instincts. Work it out in play. It seems to me that a lot of men’s pent-up fury these days is due to having no healthy outlet for naturally dominating instincts. A little bit of male dominance is probably part of normal human mating. Not rape itself though.

    I agree about the rule of law. I don’t want to be in a feud, or live like the Border Reivers of Scotland, always fearing a raid. At the same time, I don’t think we should call the cops every time a man has a scuffle with another man or a husband offends his wife. It is a question of balance.

  159. Feminist Hater says:

    Yep, quite agree.

  160. Höllenhund says:

    “A number of commentators have suggested that it makes evolutionary sense for a woman to give it up for a conqueror.”

    Well, what else are they supposed to do? They lack the physical ability to resist a group of armed men. If they refuse to have sex with them, they get killed.

  161. Not just to accept the rape, but to lubricate. To get turned on.

  162. Rmaxd says:

    “Not just to accept the rape, but to lubricate. To get turned on.”

    Yep, women accept the rape, they also orgasm

    Feminist hater obviously cant handle the finer points of a womans need to get raped … in all its myriad shapes … oblivious fembot …

  163. I meant that women are capable of handling rape in some circumstances. Not that they want it. It would be an extreme response to an extreme situation.

  164. Feminist Hater says:

    Nah Rmaxd, I just disagree with you. Anyone who disagrees with you is obviously a fembot. Oh, good Lord, you’re a fun one!

  165. Feminist Hater says:

    You see, here’s the thing with the “rape is the best PUA strategy” thinking. If that were true, why do you guys even bother with blogs? Just tell men to rape women, all women want and need it. Such a simple solution to such a large problem. They will even orgasm, win-win if you ask me. By the way, that’s going according to Rmaxd’s thinking, which I disagree with, but it is the logical outcome.

  166. Suz says:

    “Yep, women accept the rape, they also orgasm”

    So do children.

    You were saying…?

  167. RL says:

    DC says “I meant that women are capable of handling rape in some circumstances. Not that they want it. It would be an extreme response to an extreme situation.”

    Well, it makes sense that women lubricate to avoid severe damage to their vaginal tissue.

  168. RL says:

    @Hoellenhund: Did you see why I posted the comment from TFH’s blog? A commenter stated that a FULL market correction may be necessary to avoid seeding the next recession.

    I do not know whether the cultural revolution in China is a good comparison. But a full correction may involve significant danger for wealthy individuals like TFH. Check, for example, also South Africa or recent Argentina (also check an article on Alte’s TC) on how wealthy individuals protect themselves via private security guards. So, TFH may want to end misandry but he knows it will end anyway due to male incentive issues and economic issues. However, MRA’s may make it softer fall with less violent implications. I mean why may he motivated that much to support MRA issues. He knows a reasonable level of game and apparently has got enough money too. Moreover, it is not male typical to support common male interests unless you seem some benefit to yourself.

  169. Rmaxd says:

    @suz
    “Yep, women accept the rape, they also orgasm”

    So do children.

    You were saying…?”

    Sorry but we dont speak hamster … care to elaborate … ?

    Typical Fembot ..

  170. Suz says:

    “Women want to be raped.”
    “They accept the rape, they also orgasm.”
    Is the second statement intended as proof of the first, or merely a non-sequitor? Does the fact that the female body lubricates and achieves orgasm, somehow prove that “women want to be raped” (perhaps since they obviously enjoy the experience?)

    Children (of both genders) also sometimes reach orgasm during rape. Do they want it too? Would you advise men to rape children because they “enjoy” it and therefore want it? Or is it wrong because being incapable of consent, children don’t give consent?

    Consent is the issue you seem to be missing. Many women, maybe most, consent to varying degrees of abuse by accepting it instead of running away from it. We do so because we think we have something to gain from it, that it’s somehow worth the pain, not because we “want” it. Victim status is currency, but with rape the price is simply too high. It’s off the table.

    Do you know why I initially supported your statement? I did it because there is a tiny bit of logical merit to the broader concept, but only if you reduce it to the ridiculous. “Women want to be raped” was at the end of a short list of abuses that women routinely invite into their lives. Even though it’s an extreme, utterly dehumanizing abuse, it’s not entirely out of place on that list. It is, after all, a form of abuse. However, do you honestly believe there’s no difference between “women accept abuse” and “women want to be raped?” Is your world so starkly black-and-white that you don’t even recognize varying degrees of severity, or of damage? To assume that a woman wants rape because she accepts lesser abuses, shows a complete lack of judgement and discretion. Or possibly a sociopolitic capacity for rationalization.

    On the other hand, if you were referring to the tiny minority of deeply disturbed women who actually do want to be raped, then I concede the point. But please don’t kid yourself, and please don’t encourage rational men to seduce them. Those women aren’t merely illogical, irresponsible and emotional like most women. They are very, very sick.

    And incidentally,
    “..as he destroys or dominates a helpless foe … or woman.”
    You’re not differentiating between domination and destruction. Domination is a necessary part of destruction, but destruction is not always a part of domination. An alpha must dominate what he wants to destroy AND what he wants to preserve. If a Venn diagram would help you, feel free to draw one. Domination is a big circle. Destruction would be a smaller circle entirely within the big one. There’s plenty of room for things that are dominated but not destroyed. Destroying childbearers is not conducive to species survival, even when those childbearers are the spoils of war. Destroying foes is, because it protects the childbearers (and brings in more of them.) Dominating childbearers is also conducive to species survival, as it keeps them bearing and raising children, whether they feel like it or not.
    That we now see the opposite gender of our own species as a foe, is a result of social engineering, specifically feminism, not of biology.

  171. Rmaxd says:

    Suz has problems with anthropologists proving women have evolved to wanting to be raped

    & obviously has problems with reading & basic comprehension of my comments …

    Wanting to be raped is anthropologically correct, its just a number of things messed up about women, why dont you go & whine at evolution … you’re inability to admit a provable fact about women, proves how misandrist & typical of a woman you really are … & again proving us right about women …

    Thanks for the confession enjoy riding the carousel suz, you’ve earned it …

  172. Suz says:

    Let’s see here…
    You don’t answer any of my reasonable questions about the basis of your statement that “women want to be raped.”
    You don’t address my hardly incomprehensible points about the difference between domination and destruction, or the concept of consent (both of which have quite a bit to do with the dynamics of rape.)
    You don’t show any inclination to back up your statement; you insist that there is proof, but you don’t cite any of it. (And yes, I would like to read about it, if my pathetic female mind could comprehend it.)
    You claim that I don’t understand what you meant, yet you refuse to actually clarify what you meant after I asked you to.
    You use the well worn deflection tactic of countering my reasonable questions with irrelevant, generalized, and completely unsubstantiated judgments and insults.
    What’s next? You *tsk* *(stamps foot)* *Ugh!* don’t know WHY you even BOTHER talking to me?

    RMAXD, are you a girl?

  173. Suz says:

    Here’s a simple anthro lesson. You might note that is is utterly devoid of “theories” that are based on the irrational feminist agenda.

    Men can reproduce at a greater rate than women, literally hundreds of pregnancies at a time vs. one pregnancy at a time. Women have evolved to be highly selective in choosing few mates, in order to ensure their offsprings’ survival. Men have evolved to seek out many mates, with little regard to the status of those mates; if men’s offspring die, they are easier to replace. Women invest much more in each child, and can’t afford to lose as many, so women are biologically programmed to seek out high status males who have the resources to increase reproductive success rates. Women want alphas.

    Rapists are not alphas and alphas are not rapists (unless they’re also sociopaths.) Rapists are low-status men who use force in an attempt to increase their status. (Would-be alphas do this too, but they have what it takes to SUCCEED in increasing their status. Mature alphas rarely need to use force because their status is rarely challenged.) In pre-industrial societies, low-status men had very little access to consenting women. I believe Dalrock has mentioned this. Omegas and low ranking betas could reproduce only by rape or trickery. In other words they could increase their status only marginally, by “stealing” from the weak – in this case women. Rapists are men who don’t have the wherewithal to become alphas, so women do not want to mate with them. Rapists, as low ranking betas with little or no alpha potential, do not challenge “worthy” or strong opponents. Alphas have little use for rape since using brute force to vanquish the weak does not increase their status. *

    Being possessed by an alpha increases a woman’s status, whereas being possessed by a beta/rapist decreases it. Women don’t want to be raped.

    *War rape is more complex. Among other factors, it is aggravated by mob mentality and the fear of losing what has been recently won. Women from the losing community are co-opted into the winning community (if they’re lucky) beginning with rape. However, even even those who willingly accept their new male dominators (which is preferable to being killed) will instinctively seek out the highest-status “rapists” they can get. Captive women who are to be given to warriors as rewards, still compete to be given to the best warriors. In a situation where all of the men become rapists, women want to reject the low-status rapists in favor of the high-status rapists.

    Furthermore:
    While “rape fantasies” may be common, most of them don’t prove a desire for real rape committed by real rapists. These fantasies minimize the real-life dangers of rape by “pretending” that there is no difference between alphas whose “forced possession” of a woman increases her status, and betas whose “forced possession” decreases her status. This same disconnect occurs among video gamers, as video games are (interactive) fantasies. Video gamer players suppress the realities of the roles they are playing. If women who have rape fantasies actually want to be raped, then it would follow that people who play “Grand Theft Auto” want to steal cars while murdering cops and rivals, and that people who play “Halo” want to fight real military battles. Any low-risk pleasures (high-skill driving, marksmanship) that are derived from these games, can also be found in low-risk games, but where’s the fun in that? “Fake” risk is an integral part of the fantasy experience. Fantasizing about violent acts simply does not indicate a real desire to engage in them.

    A quick Google search produced an interesting piece that substantiates my claim, based on well established data.
    http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/thouh/thornhill-preface.pdf
    (Most scientific writings on the subject must be sought out in academic libraries and databases, to which I don’t have ready access. Perhaps you have better access.) Since I favor rational debate over emotional mudslinging, I will gladly read any studies you can cite, which may contradict my conclusions.

    I’ll stop beating this horse now, presuming that it is dead.

  174. Rmaxd says:

    Choke on this suz … lol

    “When a mother’s baby is killed and her suckling stops, however, the whole game changes. Her biochemistry shifts, resurrecting her sexual interest. She becomes an empty womb waiting to have another child. And this time, the child will not belong to the deposed monarch–it will carry the legacy of one of the invaders.

    But surely humans don’t indulge in such barbarities. Or do they? In the rain forests near the Amazon live a people called the Yanomamo. Their ethnographer, Napoleon Chagnon, calls them “the fierce people.” They pride themselves on their cruelty, glorying in it so enthusiastically that they make a great show of beating their wives. And the wives are as much a part of this viciousness as the husbands. A spouse who does not carry enough scars from her husband’s blows feels rejected and complains miserably about her unbruised condition. It is a sign, she is certain, that her husband does not love her. “

  175. Darlene says:

    Jesse is the cause of his own misery. He could have done something about his “identity” but for whatever reason, chose not to. As for, “losing my identity”, this isn’t a female thing. Being male, experiencing his own “crisis”, Jesse demonstrates that.

  176. me says:

    @zed December 11, 2011 at 2:50 pm
    Actually, there are experienced killers and martial artists out there who could beat the shit out of dozen(s) of pathetic bikers and look good doing it.

    You need to remember that despite all their “tough guy” look, bikers are mommas boys who haven’t grown up. Only a fool fears these cocksuckers.

  177. Pingback: The Three Ways Misandry Could Unwind In The Future » Pro-Male/Anti-Feminist Technology

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s