How to be a hero.

As feminists have run out of institutions to mark as feminine in their futile effort to abate their driving pangs of envy, they have more and more turned to marking men themselves as feminine.  Part of this no doubt is the recognition that it is far easier to convince men to be like women than it is for a woman to convincingly pretend to be like a man.  This is made simple because so many men are desperately searching for a socially acceptable concept of noble manhood, following feminists’ successful cultural jihad against the notion.

Chase Bank teaches us that heroic fatherhood means dressing in drag:

Dads can be heroes in many ways — and, according to JP Morgan Chase & Co., that could mean putting on makeup and a wig and donning a tutu to play the fairy princess at a birthday party…

 

Real Men Wear Pink*, a campaign from the Australian National Breast Cancer Foundation, teaches a similar message:

Heroes change the world, so we’re daring all real men to wear something so outrageous their friends will sponsor them heaps of cash.

The site is filled with pictures of men in pink tutus, feather boas, and onsies, and suggests that men dress up in “mankinis”.

As long as it’s safe and as embarrassing as possible, anything goes!

There is a common theme to all of these messages, and it is that if you are a real man who cares about women, you will gladly feminize yourself.  The specific cause will vary, as it could be showing your daughter that you love her (the Chase commercial), driving awareness for violence against women (as with the soldiers marching in red high heels), or breast cancer research (in the US this is primarily men’s sporting teams wearing pink). But the solution to all of these is for men to prove their manhood and show they care about women by emasculating themselves.

Individually, as I’ve pointed out before, these are in the big picture petty things.  But pettiness on a grand scale is entirely the point.  If feminists can’t experience manly pride, they don’t want men to experience it either.

*H/T Spike.

This entry was posted in Disrespecting Respectability, Envy, Feminist Territory Marking, Manliness, Turning a blind eye, Ugly Feminists. Bookmark the permalink.

117 Responses to How to be a hero.

  1. Scott says:

    This is going to be a bigger and bigger problem for me as time goes on.

    My daughter recently wanted to tie multi color ribbons/bows on our horses mane. My wife was asleep during the day (she is still a nurse and works about 1 weekend a month, though still a 99% SAHM).

    The ribbon thing fell on me to do. It was stupid and awkward but I helped. (She can’t reach that high, and he won’t stand still for her). I did it “like a guy” would, I’m sure you can imagine.

    That’s about my limit though. There is tremendous pressure from other dads to act silly, dress like s princess etc. I just don’t. I don’t have it in me.

    This will result in “he’s not secure in his masculinity” and other nonsense and it’s getting worse.

  2. Elspeth says:

    Saw that ad last week while watching local news here. 7 in the AM! Husband was left to explain to the kids why it was ridiculous and inappropriate and something he would never even consider doing.

  3. DeNihilist says:

    and yet more men die of prostate cancer then women die of breast cancer……

  4. Novaseeker says:

    This will result in “he’s not secure in his masculinity” and other nonsense and it’s getting worse.

    Yes, exactly.

    I view these things as falling under the rubric of “weak men are screwing up feminism”. Basically weakness is being redefined as “being so insecure that you are unable/unwilling to act feminine, be married to a woman who is much more successful than you and leads you”, etc. It’s about redefining subordination as strength, and resistance to subordination and reprogramming as weakness and insecurity.

    It’s effective because (1) men really *are* confused about what it means to be masculine in this confused era with all of the cultural messaging that is contradictory in the extreme which presents the opportunity for (2) reprogramming of men to consider subordination as strength and resistance as weakness. Very much like something out of 1984. Men will then reinforce this against each other, as men generally enforce masculine norms against each other, but now with the revised, upside-down “content” of these norms being the essence of what gets enforced, with the right-side up content being shamed and dismissed as insecurity and weakness.

    It also ties into the hypergamy/adultery/cuck thing in that it’s a very good bet, in my opinion, that we will see this same approach being applied to married men whose wives have affairs — that is, that it is a strong man who accepts, embraces and encourages this, because he is “secure”, while it is a weak and insecure pseudo-man who objects to this based on his fears and insecurities. Upside-down, for certain, but that’s the whole point.

  5. Boxer says:

    As Jack Donovan said on twitter, about a year ago: “Are you man enough to chop off your penis and name yourself Susan? If not, why are you so insecure in your masculinity?”

  6. Novaseeker says:

    As Jack Donovan said on twitter, about a year ago: “Are you man enough to chop off your penis and name yourself Susan? If not, why are you so insecure in your masculinity?”

    Haha, exactly — it’s redefining what weakness and strength are, in substance.

  7. Looking Glass says:

    @DeNihilist:

    Because it’s easy to raise money when you can show breasts and call it “awareness”.

    On the topic of Breast Cancer “Awareness” in general, I haven’t thought a lot about it, but it strikes me far more as a vanity & corruption vehicle more than anything else. Though it’s possible the staying-power of it might as much be about the instinctual response of modern Women to the fact that they’re not really very Womanly anymore. Because there’s some obsession on the topic in certain circles that don’t just fit into the standard Feminist playbook.

    Or Women just fear anything scary and, since they have breasts, clearly it’s “important”.

  8. Scott says:

    Shared on FB wall with this comment;

    Men-

    There is literally no culturally accepted norm for operationalizing “masculinity” or “manhood.”

    Just do your own thing. Define it for yourselves.

    Good luck.

    DSK

  9. theShield says:

    I have four young daughters, and as the God-ordained custodian of their concept of “normal,” particularly when it comes to men, there is no way I am going to mess it up for their impressionable little minds by putting on women’s clothes and makeup. As we say in my house, “Men don’t wear dresses, sweetheart.”
    Have a tea party with them and their dolls? Absolutely.
    Dress as if I were one of their dolls? Not a chance. I show up to any formal occasion as a churchman and a gentleman, in that order.

    And regarding the “secure in [his] masculinity” thing, I don’t know what definition of “masculine” is beneath the assumptions, but I do not see how it would make me “secure” in the notion that the ground is solid beneath my feet to go find a cliff and jump off of it. Denying something does not make it more real. We don’t live like that when it comes to our personal safety…at least not yet.
    I am more interested in my daughters being secure in my masculinity these days than subscribing to the quickly changing ideals of the people around me. That is, having a stable father and being taught how to be little ladies from convictions of both their mother and their father together should be prioritized if all were consistent with the “for the children” mantra one so often hears.

  10. htris says:

    Whether or not you think pink or ribbons or onesies are ’emasculating’ depends entirely on your personal experience of masculinity. It’s not like things are inherently not-male, we’re just socialised to accept certain arbitrary things as male or not-male. When our grandfathers were growing up, this pink/blue association didn’t even exist. Plenty of our grandfathers probably wore thermal onesies as well.

  11. The Real Peterman says:

    “Individually, as I’ve pointed out before, these are in the big picture petty things”

    I’ve come to believe that there are only small things. Every mountain, every building, every animal is just a vast collection of small things assembled together.

  12. Nathan Bruno says:

    @htris

    I hope you aren’t meaning your remarks to be an argument to be a reason as to why this behavior is OK. If it is, you’ve boiled this down to:

    1. Men are doing things that are female behavior today.
    2. In some other time period, different behaviors signified male or female norms.
    3. Therefore, you’re OK with men doing female behavior today.

    It’s literally a facepalm moment if you think this is a counterargument to anything Dalrock said.

    If you didn’t mean it to be that, it’s like saying – you know the Greeks used to wear togas, and togas are basically dresses? Yes, well, a woman didn’t wear a poodle skirt in 1955 as a sign of masculinity because a Greek scholar in 350 BC or a Roman statesman in 50 AD wore a toga. Although signs and signifiers change, when you overtly adopt the opposite signs in the present age, that’s got a specific meaning – i.e., a father is a hero when he becomes a pretend mother.

  13. RedPillPaul says:

    Modern society defines man as…
    Man=stupid, foolish, dumb

    Therefore “are you man enough” is really “are you “stupid/dumb/foolish” enough to chop your penis off and be called susan”

  14. PokeSalad says:

    @htris:

    That post was so perfectly nonsensical, I suspect it must have come from a Womyn’s Studies “PhD” thesis.

  15. iamadamalan says:

    This will only end when men collectively realize the envy and want of women cannot be satiated. Then it will be back to patriarchy of the strictest sort just as the fisherman’s wife went back to the shanty.

    In the end, the only thing to truly make them content is to be owned by a man strong enough to tell them no. Anything less is trouble for men, families and society.

  16. Boston to Providence says:

    I have to put more emphasis on it and declare it to be more than merely feminizing oneself. In the Australia case, it’s outright sexual humiliation.

    They’re asking men to dress in ways that would be just as embarrassing to a woman dressed in the same way.

    In what ways are women interested in making fools of themselves to support prostate cancer research?

  17. PM says:

    I’d wager that 99% of men wouldn’t dress up like a fairy, daughter’s birthday or not. The commercial is attention grabbing because it is so ridiculous. The point of these kind of things is to shock people with the contrast, not to feminize men. Football players didn’t stop being masculine because they wore pink for a cause and I seriously doubt that the most elite athletes in the world felt humiliated and feminized by pink cleats.

  18. Dalrock says:

    @TheShield

    I have four young daughters, and as the God-ordained custodian of their concept of “normal,” particularly when it comes to men, there is no way I am going to mess it up for their impressionable little minds by putting on women’s clothes and makeup. As we say in my house, “Men don’t wear dresses, sweetheart.”
    Have a tea party with them and their dolls? Absolutely.
    Dress as if I were one of their dolls? Not a chance. I show up to any formal occasion as a churchman and a gentleman, in that order.

    Well put.

    @Scott

    There is tremendous pressure from other dads to act silly, dress like s princess etc. I just don’t. I don’t have it in me.

    This will result in “he’s not secure in his masculinity” and other nonsense and it’s getting worse.

    This should be really easy to handle, and if you do it right pretty fun. The serious answer is explained by TheShield above, and you can cite Deut 22:5 for reference. The huge push to normalize men dressed as women, including the bathroom/locker room issue, should make this a very easy point to make. The world has gone mad, and your kids need dad to model sanity in an insane world.

    The less serious answer is to agree and amplify (with a twinkle in your eye*):

    Yeah, I’m definitely not man enough to wear that dress Bob. But I have to admit I thought you were more manly than that. Frank in accounting is wearing full heels with his dress, and yet here you are only manly enough to wear pumps. You need to up your game!

    *The pure absurdity of this should make this twinkle entirely natural. Deep down they themselves know this, which is what makes it all the more ridiculous.

  19. Avraham rosenblum says:

    It is one of the prohibitions of the Torah for a man to wear a woman’s garment and visa versa

  20. Dalrock says:

    @Scott

    One thing I forgot to mention is that Mychael can help with this too. Imagine what your grandmother would have said if someone had suggested to her that your grandfather to wear a dress, etc. Women used to be quite fierce in guarding the respect and masculinity of their brothers, husbands, and fathers; they understood how petty this kind of envy was. Mychael can teach both your daughter and other wives by example here.

    Edit: I should add that my guess is that Mychael already reacts this way, but it is something to consciously reinforce.

  21. anonymous_ng says:

    IDK, seems to me that step one is to not watch television. Seriously, the only place I see these commercials is here.

    I’m not saying that somehow makes me and my kids immune to the wider societal influence, but there is something to be said for not letting the rot into your head, or that of your kids.

  22. htris says:

    @Nathan Bruno

    I get your point, but when we’re talking about things that wouldn’t have mattered to men I knew, it renders those particular concerns a little less relevant to me personally. As I said, what a person views as emasculating is just a reflection of their own view of masculinity, and it isn’t necessarily immutable.

  23. Boston to Providence says:

    Htris, being pedantic is a way of distracting from the point of the discussion. Here’s my attempt to speak your language: Masculinity is defined within general parameters in any given culture, time, and place, and generally recognizable by said culture-time-place’s inhabitants.

    Must I really add that My grandfather would not have worn a tutu?

  24. Scott says:

    D-

    Great minds, I guess. That is more or less the way I handle stuff like this. Generally, it comes up in contexts (like little girls birthday parties) where the dads are expected to do something “silly” or else risk being ostracized for not participating.

    And yes, Mychael is quite in my corner when I refuse either with humor, or if I just ignore it.

    She has a way of sending the “my husband does what he wants, thank God” message pretty well.

  25. When you watch the Chase commercial it is shot so that the first impression you get from the man applying make up is that he’s transgender. Watch from the start to the :20 mark. His expressions are of sincerity, reservation, hesitancy and shame, but not in the context of he’s doing something “silly” for his daughter. Rather the initial impression is that this guy is doing something “courageous” by coming out as trans.

    The “oh, phew, I thought it was something different” relief comes when you see he cross dresses for his ballerina daughter, that’s when you go “well ok then, I guess it’s all good”.

  26. Scott says:

    Rollo, that is a fantastic observation, man.

    But the ever weirder part is, what are we supposed to be worried about?

    “Phew. He’s not headed into the women’s restroom at Target.”

    ?

  27. htris says:

    Of course not, BtP, I just think it’s useful to keep in mind how quickly some of these things change.I half expect that within a few decades the pink/blue gender differentiation will be consigned to historical trivia. “Did you know that from 1940-2040 people in the West associated pink with girls and blue with boys”.

    I’m not suggesting that there isn’t a general societal shift towards diminishing associating things with particular genders. There certainly is such a movement.

  28. mendo says:

    Dalrock, thanks for putting up that bible verse. I always like to refer to Matthew Henry’s commentary and he elaborates more plainly on this matter:

    “men must not be effeminate, nor do the women’s work in the house, nor must women be viragos, pretend to teach, or usurp authority…[p]robably this confounding of garments had been used to gain opportunity of committing uncleanness, and is therefore forbidden; for those that would be kept from sin must keep themselves from all occasions of it and approaches to it.”

    With the world “unclean” no wonder it’s being pushed so hard.

  29. horatius67 says:

    You called it, Dalrock. All expressions of masculinity, and symbols thereof, are a threat to feminism. Even something as prosaic as clothes. It’s not enough for them to wear pants. We must be shamed into wearing skirts.

  30. Dalrock says:

    @htris

    Of course not, BtP, I just think it’s useful to keep in mind how quickly some of these things change.

    BS. Be a man and have the stones to make your argument outright. You don’t believe in the idea of manly pride. This is what you’ve been edging around about since you first started commenting:

    Why would I want to be proud to be a man? It’s not a trait I worked for. Shouldn’t I be proud of my accomplishments, rather than my circumstances of birth?

  31. lckcychrmsrr says:

    The point isn’t that in the early 1900’s pink was for boys and blue was for girls. It was also historically accepted that all children (male & female) were clothed in dresses until a certain age…it helped with diapering. No rational person disputes that styles and customs change over time. What matters here is the relationship of the custom/dress/habit to the –currently– accepted norms.

    Dalrock is correctly pointing out the ridiculous and heavy handed push by the media to pressure men into feminizing themselves. I cannot count how many times I’ve heard the phrase “If you were man enough…” or “Real mean wear…” especially when associated with wearing the color pink. As if somehow the shaming language accurately defines manliness.

  32. Opus says:

    I am sure that I am far too girly and dressed and made up as a girl will merely look like my Mother; certainly my parents like most parents were terrified that their son would grow up to be effeminate. A spell in Stalag Luft 17 would surely sort that out and the best way to get there is via boarding school and the Army. The best laid plans…

    New commentator Trish (I have all the right letters though not necessarily in that order) suggests that the association of blue with boys and pink with girls is a social construct and likely to change. I beg to differ and would refer him to Norwegian Harald Eia’s seven part documentary Brainwash and in particular the episode on sexual equality. It ‘s on YouTube and the relevant part is at about 29’ 30″ where you can see the baby boy crawling towards the mechanical toy and the baby girl towards the soft pink thing.

    I was talking the other day to my girlfriend and telling her that a fifteen year old daughter of a friend of mine is having her bedroom painted and wanted all four wall to be a bright shade of Pink. My girlfriend said she had never worn Pink (and come to think of it I have never seen her in that colour) but was enthusing over the fact that some men are wearing a light pink in their formal shirts. No way am I going Pink if for no other reason than I am embarrassed to admit some of the colours I wore back in the seventies. Shades of purple even Abba would have thought twice before donning.

  33. Pedat Ebediyah says:

    @Dal

    You’re on it. As I was reading his post, it became clear that he wasn’t going to consign, nor give the impression of the static nature of manhood/masculinity.

    Men do men shit. It not even debatable and it’s hardly that fluid.

  34. Jim Christian says:

    Dalrock, You: “BS. Be a man and have the stones to make your argument outright. You don’t believe in the idea of manly pride. This is what you’ve been edging around about since you first started commenting:”.

    Good take, Rock. THAT’s the message. WE, not one of us, ever need fold up and toe the feminist de-nutting. That is something going on outside, but in our circles, in our lives and in our churches we must never tolerate this. The push back from us, at the grass roots, can at least halt the destruction of masculinity, keeping this silliness and the alphabet soup of sexual depravity it out of our lives, our families and the minds of our children. They threw feminism at us, then homosexuality, now transsexuality and then it will be another perversion, another attack on masculine heterosexuals and another. It never ends, but we can and must kick back. In OUR lives, we don’t have to have it because nose-to-nose, these people are weak and will find others to pervert where they find strength in those of us who are fighting back.

  35. Alan K says:

    “men […] prove their manhood and show they care about women by emasculating themselves.”

    This is not a petty observation, at all. Women are once again projecting their destructive feminine behaviors—but, this time at the direct expense of masculinity. After all, if she chops off her hair and butches up, then why can’t men perform similarly self-destructive acts? Worse yet, men are accepting the premise and going along with it.

    Please, just say no to both sides of this ugly coin.

  36. seventiesjason says:

    Watch ESPN. The men now have “soft-metrosexual looks” to garner and appeal to the supposed ‘female demographic’, I mean…..Howard Cosell would have ZERO chance of being hired today. Look at ALL the ‘on field / locker room “sports” reporters now……they are all women. Even on the MLB network there is always at least one female commentator now dressed like she is going to a nightclub with ‘pole-swinger’ shoes on. Look at football, making men wear pink for “breast cancer” awareness……never mind the fact that prostate cancer kills more men today than breast cancer…..and if you DARE question this you have your manhood shamed by men because if you don’t want to protect “boobies” you might as well be wearing a dress. I have said it before….just wait until the pampers commercials and tampax ads appear during the commercial breaks for football, baseball, golf, and basketball

  37. feeriker says:

    BS. Be a man and have the stones to make your argument outright. You don’t believe in the idea of manly pride. This is what you’ve been edging around about since you first started commenting:

    Are you sure htris is a man? I’d don’t get that vibe at all so far.

  38. mike says:

    The Meta Shit Tests have come. Will you transition or not? The ultimate just-get-it tests are upon us and your testicles, literally, are at stake.

    “Wait, you actually believed we thought that was sexy?”, says his best girl friend. Man goes, “Oh my God, what I have I done. They promised they would like me if I went on hormones, but they still like the jerk jocks!”

    Without fatherly figures and rights of passage into manhood, each man must rely on his internal guide to be a man and resist the social lie of entry into manhood through femininity. You think you’re being the real you, but you are just playing really crappy game. Feminine identity game – and it never works. They will cheer you on to your death. Look at MtF suicide rates.

    Hell, Even Jenner said he wanted to keep his D and be a “lesbian” – i.e. maybe Kris just never loved him and grandpa game wasn’t going to work after the divorce.

  39. htris says:

    Dal, I didn’t edge around it. I explicitly said that it’s not for me.

    It’s not that I don’t ‘believe in’ manly pride. Quite clearly lots of people have it! I stated that personally, I don’t attach pride to my gender (or race, or sexuality, or country of origin), but rather my actions.

    I grew up in a mining town and on the land. Dad was a rugby playing park ranger who liked the ladies and never showed much emotion beyond disapproval when I didn’t win. With that background it’s not exactly a surprise that my interests and behavioural traits mark me as pretty unambiguously male. But it’s not a source of pride (or shame) it’s just where I come from. And yeah, I think the idea that pink is somehow ‘feminising’ is ridiculous. Although that doesn’t stop it from being a pretty awful colour to wear.

  40. The Question says:

    All I can say is the androgyny is getting so bad I can’t tell sometimes if a person is a guy or a gal talking to me.

    This nonsense is going to get a pushback sooner or later, and it’s not going to be pretty. At some point all there will be left for men is to act utterly feminine or wholly barbaric.

    When that happens this will be the battle hymn of the barbarians.

  41. BillyS says:

    My wife knows better than to buy me anything pink. Bright orange, sure, but pink would go with the other shirts I never wear.

    I was not completely bothered in the past for guys who wore pink shirts, but I would probably push more against it now because of the message it includes today.

    This is also idiocy, since women are generally attracted to masculine guys. This is a push far from reality.

  42. Emily says:

    That video Rollo linked is just embarrassing to watch as is the commercial that precedes it. Why would anyone want to encourage this kind of behavior is beyond me.

  43. Desiderius says:

    “I don’t attach pride to my gender (or race, or sexuality, or country of origin), but rather my actions.”

    The pride arises from the extent to which those actions fulfill manly purposes.

  44. htris says:

    Mate, the thing hanging between my legs is designed for pissing and fertilising, and I only plan on doing one of those in my life, so my primary manly purpose is already a wash.

  45. Feminist Hater says:

    Then, kindly, piss off!

  46. Pedat Ebediyah says:

    “Mate, the thing hanging between my legs is designed for pissing and fertilising, and I only plan on doing one of those in my life, so my primary manly purpose is already a wash.”

    Huh? Who bitch dis is?

    Your estrogen treatments are kicking in and you need to lay off the W.H. Auden poetry…

    …the stars are not wanted now: put out every one;
    pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
    pour away the ocean and sweep up the wood.
    for nothing now can ever come to any good…

    I guess I’d wax gynocentric too if my nuts were put on time out…

  47. htris says:

    Eh? Do I need to break down contraception for you?

  48. Anon says:

    What really stands out is that women are so desperate for a man who actually gives them gina tingles…. there need for this is equal or greater to a man’s need for the world to have more 9s and 10s..

    Yet…

    Women are utterly incapable of teaching a man how to become more attractive to women. No woman can articulate Game or associated traits to men. Women can only ever mislead men, and any man who does exactly what a woman tells him to do in order to do better with women, will precisely become less attractive to women.

    So, even though women are desperate for more attractive men, they cannot understand female psychology well enough to TEACH men anything…

    Women are stunningly incapable of self-sufficiency. They cannot even teach men to generate more of what they themselves crave most, and in fact actively misguide men away from it…

    No wonder that female unhappiness is a virtual guarantee outside of rare cases of Game and/or strictly patriarchal cultures.

  49. Anon says:

    There is literally no culturally accepted norm for operationalizing “masculinity” or “manhood.”

    Well, there is Islam…

    No wonder female voters vote in more Islam into the West.

  50. Boxer says:

    New commentator Trish

    Good catch home boy.

    A big tip of the hat to the latest trans-man on Dalrock to pull chains and watch the dancing. The fact that you so easily fooled me means that I’m getting old and slow, you’re particularly skilled, and society has degenerated to such an extent that I can’t tell dude from chick any longer.

    More blood in the gutter, and me without my spoon…

    Boxer

  51. greyghost says:

    Mate, the thing hanging between my legs is designed for pissing and fertilising, and I only plan on doing one of those in my life, so my primary manly purpose is already a wash.

    What the hell kind of “tough guy” talk was that. The fella from “40 year old virgin” trying to sound like one of the guys came off harder than that. ha ha ha ha. Go knock up some pussy. Use “jerk boy” game to moisten that hole up. It is the manly thing to do beside pissing sitting down.

  52. greyghost says:

    Looks like some of y’all beat me to it ha ha ha ha!

  53. JDG says:

    Scott – This will result in “he’s not secure in his masculinity” and other nonsense and it’s getting worse.

    Scott I rebuke anyone who tries that with me. When they try the shaming I quote scripture. The best they can do after that is A) a weak attempt at misrepresenting scripture or B) attempt to undermine the authority of scripture. Neither goes well for them. If they try option A I put it right back into context. If they try option B I ask them to explain what they appeal to for ultimate authority and why it should be considered higher than the Bible. I find that most believers don’t know the Bible as well as they thought, and most unbelievers appeal to themselves as the ultimate authority (which begs the question why is their opinion better than anyone else’s?).

  54. htris says:

    Option D) Is paranoia :p Commented here because I don’t like being in echo chambers all day long. Not to troll, but out of curiosity. I’m completely ignorant of this side of the table and wanted to interact some. Glean some sort of insight. Determine whether or not you’re all frothing imbeciles or whatever. You’re not. Well, not all of you at any rate🙂

  55. htris says:

    @greyghost

    You don’t sit down to pee? Are you a barbarian?

  56. greyghost says:

    don’t sit down to pee? Are you a barbarian?

    You’re damn right I am. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha Good to see you acting like an asshole instead of some fairy trolling a men’s blog.

  57. Just frothing. Not an imbecile.

    @Pedat

    …… and sweep up the wood?

    Check….swept it away indeed

  58. Skip says:

    Men – Want to live a simple, successful, carefree life unburdened by women’s and the state’s forced wealth, power and life transfer from men to women? Don’t (1) get married, (2) give women any legal, social, psychological, physical, financial or spiritual power over your life and (3) enlist in war to have your body parts blown across the battlefield for women. Let the little female snowflakes fight off the foreign aggressors themselves. Don’t build anything for them. Don’t sacrifice on their behalf. Women love it when men sacrifice of their life, health and wealth for women. Just stop doing these things and women’s power declines precipitously.

    It’s all so simple. Women use and manipulate men for transfer of power, wealth and control from men to women. All you need do to have a great life is to not participate in their game. All you need do is cut them off from their normal, every day pipelines of wealth and power transfer.

    “A prince proposed to a princess. The princess refused. The prince lived happily ever after.” This is how it really works. Never give a woman any power over your life and you’ve solved 99% of your potential life problems. Be happy. Be free of women’s power and control. For every man that opts out, another man is freed from the slavery of women’s hatred and envy of men.

    Marriage = male disposability and cultural misandry. Do not do it.

  59. Gunner Q says:

    lckcychrmsrr @ 2:23 pm:
    “No rational person disputes that styles and customs change over time. What matters here is the relationship of the custom/dress/habit to the –currently– accepted norms.”

    Exactly. I like to wear kilts. They’re comfy and perfect for hot summer days. It’s masculine because a kilt is not a skirt and I’m a son of Scotland.

    BUT. I live in California, where most people have never seen a kilt in daily life, gender confusion is formal government policy and transsexual freaks are celebrated. Therefore, I rarely wear a kilt in public because I don’t want to encourage cross-dressing.

  60. Vektor says:

    Men are not afraid of their masculinity. Men are afraid of the state..rightly so. The State is the vehicle of their enslavement. Tradcons/cuckservatives are a far greater, far more dangerous enemy than Feminists/progressives. It is the cucks/trads, and their associated white knighterly, that must be utterly destroyed.

    Women are afraid of femininity. They have been told that they are victims (at the same time that they are empowered). They have been told that ANY sign of femininity, is a sign of weakness that will instantly be exploited by the legions of evil men in the world. Rapists everywhere. They have been told that being a man is about freedom and power (except the part about responsibilities)…..so now modern western women want to be men, and they have done so. Modern women live lives of such debauchery that the greatest womanizer of old could only dream of. Modern women have notch counts that would blow almost any man in history out of the water. They have not just become ‘men’, they have surpassed men…..in all the classic negative traits.

    Men dressing as women. This is degeneracy. Degeneracy encouraged by government/media. I have nothing against gays and transsexuals personally. I have worked and been friends with both and it was no big deal. However, their lifestyle is ‘alternative’, and should always be ‘alternative’. That is, not mainstream. Degeneracy, like pollution, can be managed to a point. Beyond a level, you are living in a dying dystopia.

    Regarding the Old Navy shirt. I call it an L.T.B. Lifetime Ban. I will consider them as being LTB. I will never ever, buy anything from them, ever. Another example of a LTB for me is T-Mobile. “Sorry, it’s a boy”. Fuck you T-Mobile..forever. LTB.

  61. SnapperTrx says:

    Ha ha! What did the do, take a page from Despicable Me 2? At least in that situation our reluctant hero Gru dressed up as a fairy to save the day! He had ordered a “fairy” for his daughters birthday who failed to show. This commercial has no such back story and appears to be just a guy who finally gets to try on the man-sized dress and wig he bought a year ago. Sorry, kids, dads a creeper!

  62. Spike says:

    “As feminists have run out of institutions to mark as feminine in their futile effort to abate their driving pangs of envy, they have more and more turned to marking men themselves as feminine…”

    This statement hits the nail on the head, Dalrock. Institutions are no longer men’s spaces: not the services, the Army, sporting teams, martial arts schools – nothing. So feminists have gone after men as individuals. The saddest and most pathetic expression of this is the dressing of young boys in girl’s clothing, painting their nails and giving them bangles (yes – I’ve seen this!) at a time when the child isn’t cognisant enough to resist. it is a form of abuse and it is vile.

  63. Dave II says:

    Not to play devil’s advocate, but I do think we are being a bit harsh on the uninitiated (as Bane would call them). Htris sounds like I would 10 years ago and thanks to blogs like this one I have managed to avoid the kinds of traps that would fill me with anger, so I have the ability to be a bit understanding and patient with such commenters.

    That said, @htris, you have a lot to learn. Let me address your “social construct” argument.

    There are two things at play here: principle and presentation. In other words, substance and form. Generally form/presentation follows function/substance/principles but other times form is also used as an indicator of said function (such as a brand is used to indicate the services you can expect from a company even when it is not necessary to the direct operation of providing the service).

    The function, or substance, of man and masculinity is encapsulated in the following principles:
    1. Superior strength, encompassing
    1.1. Superior ability to provide
    1.2 Superior ability to propect
    2. Leadership
    3. Lover

    By “superior” in point 1 I mean superior first to the wife and kids as a starting point, and then to other members of society, and as that superiority increases within a community so does that man’s status in that community.

    These represent masculinity in principle. It does not change, regardless of culture, time, geography, fact or fiction, etc. It is so pervasive that cultures that never knew of each other’s existence came to the same conclusion to expect these from their men, and shame those who failed to provide them. This masculinity is not a social construct. Therefore I submit that it is biological.

    Then there is presentation. The form. This is to an extent also not a social construct (e.g. a manly man is generally more muscular than an unmanly one), that is, to the extent that the form aids in the fulfillment of the masculine principles (big muscles contribute to superior strength). However you also get an area of form that simply brands a person so that society knows what it can expect of them. This is where masculine attire comes in, colours included. In our modern western culture blue brands boys and pink brands girls. This may be a social construct, but that is irrelevant. In any community you go to you will be looked at funny if you dress in their version of feminine attire when you are a man, and vice versa. There is a reason why when a tranny man “feels” like a woman he puts on lipstick and a dress. He is trying to tell the world he is a woman. That is the message that the colour pink, and especially female dress, sends in our modern western culture. And that is why it is unmanly.

    For those who do not respect the Bible it may seem a harmless thing to do for a day, but for those who do, we consider Deuteronomy 22:5 (that was going to be the entirety of my initial post, but Dalrock beat me to it). If it is so harmless, why does God despise it? The KJV puts it more harshly:

    “…for all that do so are abomination unto the LORD thy God.”

    From https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/abomination :

    “The word abomination comes from the Old French word abominacion meaning “horror, repugnance, disgust.” The word abomination can also be used to refer to a person or object you find utterly loathsome and repellent. If you look at someone else as an abomination, that means you are horrified by them, and barely even think they’re human.”

    And our society thinks it’s just a harmless joke…

  64. Dave II says:

    @htris, by the way, I also responded to your question of why we need manly pride in the last post: https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2016/06/08/unquenchable/#comment-211699

    Welcome. Take some time to see how deep the rabbit hole goes.

  65. kaminsky says:

    @Spike,

    I have seen the painting nails thing personally with the sister of my friend. She is a single mom (sperm bank) and had twin boys. She is doing EVERYTHING she can to push this crap on them, including taking them for manicures and pedicures (at age 6-10 or so), doing the nail-painting, dressing them up as princesses etc. One boy seems to be a real boy somehow but the other is succumbing and starting to seem very girlish. It’s is truly ‘abuse’ as you say and I can’t imagine the rage they might have later in life when they realize their childhood was used as fodder for their mother’s phony cultural war.

    The left is simply throwing out a gauntlet daily, if not hourly, and the mechanism of the internet allows this. The culture can transition at ten times its normal speed. Basically, with the internet, it seems that the ‘movements’ (and all associated emotional payoffs) can spring up and flourish without the actual results having to cycle through.

    Hippies in the sixties started their movement and had to actually live the life: deal with all the b.o. in the communes, maybe feel hungry, miss running water, suffer headaches from drugs etc. The movement had to run an actual, full cycle. The life had to be lived. Now the cyber movements don’t require actual life results. Only the statement and the emotional payoffs are required.

  66. seventiesjason says:

    one of the final…and last “everyday” male spaces is the “traditional barber shop”. Not the “super cuts” in the strip-mall. He has a pool table, polished concrete floors in the place. Straight razor shaves, and always a straight razor shave on your neck with every haircut.

    My barber, a younger guy gets it. In fact, he has a list of a few rules about his shop on the wall:

    *Talk to me. Tell me “what” you want. Once I barber your hair a few times, I won’t need to ask.
    *I don’t give credit. Don’t ask.
    *When there are little boys with a parent or a younger teenager getting a haircut…..men…..watch your language.
    *This is barber shop. I don’t cut women’s hair. I don’t “cut” “trim” or “take just a little off the ends” there are three salons on this block you can go to.

    and lastly……

    *Men. Don’t bring your girl / wife or FB here while you get a haircut because you think you look “cool” while getting one. You look retarded is what you look like. I don’t care if your girl / wife or FB is “one of the guys” because she isn’t. I don’t interfere with my wife’s salon, and she doesn’t interfere with my barber shop. Keep your girl / wife or FB at home, or have her drop you off and pick you up. This is a barber shop. A place for men.

  67. Anon says:

    Bill Burr is awesome :

  68. htris says:

    Dave

    This masculinity is not a social construct. Therefore I submit that it is biological.

    I would suggest it is a social construct based on biological factors. Some social constructs will almost certainly occur within our species, during the developments of our societies – eg as the exchange of goods becomes more complex, you require a system of record and end up with writing. As populations become larger you need increasingly sophisticated hierarchical structures. Similarly, the various strands of mythological storytelling tend to coalesce into a system of religion. The thing is, these social constructs do change. our attitudes towards lending, bonded servitude, voting franchise, employee rights etc etc. So while masculinity is a product of biological differences, what it represents has changed over time, and will continue to change. And whenever the changes occur, there is pushback. Aren’t you guys the pushback for this latest example of changing norms towards masculinity?

  69. Spike says:

    kaminsky June 10, 2016 at 10:55 pm
    Thanks for your reply. I moonlight as a martial arts instructor in two studios. One is in a conservative area, one liberal. The liberal one is where I encountered a boy of about 10-11 with female-styled hair, bangles, painted finger and toenails. I train boys his age hard, and he worked out with me really intensely. I told him to punch hard and kick hard and he responded as if that was what he wanted. The parents met me. It was truly a case of the woman being in charge, with the dad – if he was indeed the dad and not the beta schlub cuck – was disinterested, tattooed and dressed in rags.
    It seems to me to confirm what you say: these kids are the pawns of women’s twisted ideological war.

  70. Hells Hound says:

    There is literally no culturally accepted norm for operationalizing “masculinity” or “manhood.”

    Just do your own thing. Define it for yourselves.

    The common social consensus anywhere in the world is, of course, that this shouldn’t be permitted, beceause, you know, men cannot be trusted with that sort of autonomy. This highlights how gynocentric all societies are. After all, what would happen if men started doing their own thing? The horror!

    Some man might decide that a real man doesn’t sign up for the farce that is marriage 2.0. Another man might decide that a real man doesn’t pay child support for a child that probably isn’t his. Yet another man might decide that a real man doesn’t listen to feminist/tradcon BS. Another man might decide that a real man is aware of his own sexual value and explores his options accordingly. Another man might decide that a real man doesn’t just accept rape accusations without physical evidence. We can’t have any of that, can we?!

    Instead we have various interest groups claiming the moral authority to lecture men about “true”, “real”, “acceptable” etc. masculinity: feminists, tradcons, PUAs, MRAs etc. Why do they believe they have the authority to do so? They just see it as self-evident. How absurd is that? Literally every shitbag journalist, blogger, TV show host, anchor, pastor, celebrity and pundit sees it as self-evident that he/she should have the moral authority to lecture men.

    If you want to get an idea of the the true extent of this absurdity, compare the concepts of masculinity and femininity. Can you picture any pastor or media figure saying “a woman isn’t confident in her femininity if she doesn’t do X” or “real women don’t do Y” or “real women support Z”? Can you picture any mainstream journalist arguing that “there is a femininity crisis in America”?

  71. BLAK says:

    Why him, and not his wife put on the costume? Was it above her?

  72. infowarrior1 says:

    Men instinctively recoil from effeminacy because long enough exposure would result in the adoption of such behaviors unconsciously.

    Hence undermining masculinity.

  73. infowarrior1 says:

    Cross-dressing behaviorally eventually leads to cross-dressing physically.

  74. Linx says:

    @htris
    “I would suggest it is a social construct based on biological factors. Some social constructs will almost certainly occur within our species, during the developments of our societies – eg as the exchange of goods becomes more complex, you require a system of record and end up with writing.”

    You are presupposing that the current society is more developed than previous ones.

    “As populations become larger you need increasingly sophisticated hierarchical structures.”

    No it doesn’t. If it did then your claim would mean that communist China is the standard that others should aim for.

    “Similarly, the various strands of mythological storytelling tend to coalesce into a system of religion.”

    Then the goddess worship during ancient Greece would have all men doing needle work and not develop masculine qualities.

    “The thing is, these social constructs do change. our attitudes towards lending, bonded servitude, voting franchise, employee rights etc etc.”

    You are equating the change that does occur as being functional in nature. Has it ever occurred to you that the society has become more dysfunctional due to change for the sake of change?

    “So while masculinity is a product of biological differences, what it represents has changed over time, and will continue to change. And whenever the changes occur, there is pushback. Aren’t you guys the pushback for this latest example of changing norms towards masculinity?”

    Again you are equating change by default as being something being positive and functional. So your claim of “push back” is nothing more than poisoning the well. The men you are referring to are a bulwark that your social construct can’t get rid of. No matter how hard you push.

  75. Dave II says:

    @htris,

    Social attitudes to masculinity can and lately have changed. Masculinity (the principles) has not. You are seeing change on the surface and confusing it for change in the underlying nature/reality. For example, men these days are ancouraged to embrace their feminine sides and help support women to be strong and independent. Hence they become more submissive to women, believing each other equal in function. That is the attitude change. Then what happens? Women romantically recoil from such men, findinding themselves “inexplicably, irresistibly drawn” to “bad boys” and other forms of powerful men who have not forsaken their masculine principles of superior strength, leadership, etc. There we see that the underlying reality has not changed. The masculine principles remain, and those men who forsook them are rejected romantically for it, even though this was on the instruction of the very women who told them to do so. Those who do marry them (often for financial stability) often report feeling bored, unhappy, unfulfilled. Even feminists reject romantic liaisons with beta men. Spend some time here and this will become ridiculously common.

    Another example: men have been the protectors of society since forever ago. Feminism fights for female inclusion in the military. That is the surface (that women can also fight in war “just as good as men”). When this is granted, and talk starts about includkng them in the draft just like men, an outcry ensues that men should not allow women to go to combat in their stead. It is “unmanly” and cowardly. And there that pesky mole reality pops up its head again. The masculine virtue of superior protector did not change. Society just, for a moment, flirted with the idea that it was not a real thing. Society was wrong.

    And another example. Women fought for the right to go to work because they can do it “just as good as men”. They got it. There is the attitude change. The result? Prioritising career over marriage and motherhood has left a swarm of single aging mothers or non-mothers who are dissatisfied with their lives. Turns out they would have preferred the whole stay-at-home-and-take-care-of-the-kids thing after all. Even the feminists. They want the men to be the primary breadwinner. Superior provider. The masculine virtue, unchanged.

    You see the thing about truth is it is immutable. Really clever people who are good at arguing can make people believe for a moment that it’s actually flexible or relative, but it’s not. Feninism is the current iteration of that clever movement that can make people doubt the solidness of gender and gender roles. But much like a kid trying to fly by jumping off a roof, eventually reality brings you back down to earth. It is inescapable. Feminists are just incredibly persistent in their war against reality.

  76. feeriker says:

    *When there are little boys with a parent or a younger teenager getting a haircut…..men…..watch your language.

    I’ll admit that I’m of two minds on this. On the one hand, I certainly don’t approve of or encourage gratuitous use of profanity. On the other hand, to attempt to shield little boys from any instance of its use strikes me as the ultimate in feminist-inspired helicopter parenting, the sort of thing that is responsible for the hyper-sensitive and weak man-boys we see being created in ever-increasing numbers today, usually the product of single-mother parenting.

    So, yes, your barber friend should encourage the use of civil conversation in his shop at all times, if for no other reason than to encourage the preservation of what little remains of civilized America. But I hope he doesn’t go all “female” on any man who does use profanity by overreacting in hysterics. That, sez me, is ultimately more destructive than the profanity itself.

  77. feeriker says:

    and lastly……

    …*Men. Don’t bring your girl / wife or FB here while you get a haircut…

    Recommended addendum:

    “Mothers bringing your sons in for a haircut be advised: this is a barbershop, a MEN’S space. Be prepared for your son to be talked to as if he were a young man, with men’s interests and men’s needs. If that offends you, TAKE YOUR SON ELSEWHERE FOR A HAIRCUT – OR BETTER YET, LEAVE HIM HERE TO BE RAISED AND MENTORED BY A MAN IN ORDER TO PREPARE HIM FOR LIFE AS A MAN IN THE REAL WORLD.”

    Consider also asking: why are you, and not his father, bringing him in for a haircut?

  78. Novaseeker says:

    Why him, and not his wife put on the costume? Was it above her?

    That would have missed the whole point — the whole point is to say this: “real men are secure enough in their masculinity to dress and act like women do”. Thereby redefining what a real man is. That’s the point. Redefining masculinity in ways that the FI wants for the typical beta male (they do not want this for the alpha male, of course).

  79. Jack Russell Terrorist says:

    seventiesjason says:
    June 10, 2016 at 2:39 pm

    Watch ESPN. The men now have “soft-metrosexual looks” to garner and appeal to the supposed ‘female demographic’, I mean…..Howard Cosell would have ZERO chance of being hired today.

    Exactly. Look what happened to Curt Schilling when he spoke non-pc. He got axed, yet some blonde bimbo ESPN host was suspended when she got outed.

  80. Laguna Beach Fogey says:

    Eventually, we will be compelled to commit acts of violence against the creatures that are pushing this agenda. They have no idea how good they have it at the moment. Never forget.

  81. feeriker says:

    Exactly. Look what happened to Curt Schilling when he spoke non-pc. He got axed, yet some blonde bimbo ESPN host was suspended when she got outed.

    One of the many blessings of being unplugged from the “boob tube” for going on a year now is not having to watch castrated, dumbed-down, feminism-infected, PC sports broadcasting (to say nothing of the increasingly piss-poor and clownishly amateurish performance of nearly every professional team in every sport). Also gratifying is knowing that by not paying DirecTV or a cable company, I’m no longer subsidizing that sickening shite.

  82. htris says:
    June 10, 2016 at 4:50 pm
    @greyghost

    “You don’t sit down to pee? Are you a barbarian?”

    Barbarians will inherit the earth. The bloodthirsty, the violently intelligent, those who practice both the desire and the methodology for hunting the most dangerous game. We look forward to meeting your sophisticated urination during the hobbesian war of all against all.

    With foes like these the future is going to be sweet, sweet, sweet.

  83. Rose says:

    Dalrock,

    I headed over here to see if you had any commentary on the Brock Turner situation because I am sitting in my home pulling my hair out over the outrage. After reading a few articles from mainstream news sources, and that ridiculous letter from the young woman (on buzzfeed), I feel bad for the guy. More than the girl. And I was born a member of team girl. Clearly, he shouldn’t be climbing on top of women behind dumpsters. As a star athlete, there is no doubt he could have set his sights higher and treated himself with more respect. His error started long before the rape, It is not for princes or kings to drink strong drink for the reason of Proverbs 31:5-6. this whole situation is a case study on the book of Proverbs. But I digress. The letter from the young woman was ABSURD. If her girly bits being violated causes her such life-altering difficulty, why in the world did she not guard said bits with a little more diligence? It’s seems like she (and apparently the majority of womenkind for that matter) can’t face reality, can’t face that men and women are wired differently, and can’t face that you cannot force a man into operating like a woman. It’s ludicrous to think that a woman can drink until she surrenders inhibition, dance in mixed company, and expect that that is not a giant signal to men that one is open for sex. Trip all a guys wires and expect him not to explode. This world has gone crazy. That young man’s life is destroyed. She will be fine as long as everyone feels sorry for her. Can’t handle it.

    I read this article and had to comment on a few of the comments.

    @kaminsky and @ spike. I have a SIL who allows her boys to paint their toenails. Because “it’s not fair that boys don’t have something fun to do like girls.” (slingshots, frogs, BB gun, Lego????).She thinks she is being nice, and that they would be emotionally hurt if she told them no. For real. She frivorced her first husband (who granted, was not my favorite from the time they dated. And my husband warned her about him. Not a divorce- able offense though. Just lousy character) and while she was on FB waxing emotional, her older boy molested her younger boy. Repeatedly. And then she married a beta-orbiter whom she runs. As crude as the term is, mangina suits him. How either boy stands a chance at manhood is beyond me. And we are “self-righteous”, “mean”, and “judgmental” because we do not allow her unspupervised time with our children, and our boys aren’t permitted to play with her boys alone. The Lord judge between me and thee, that’s my only response.

    @feeriker one of the greatest take-aways I got from my husband attending Bible school was this understanding, that manhood is rough and harsh to women. Having someone draw my attention to the Savior and the disciples roughness was a huge help to me. The founder of the school was in his 80’s when we attended and he often used to say that becoming a Christian didn’t mean that he gave up his manhood. I fully enjoy that aspect of my husband now, whereas before we went to school, there was this niggling guilt that he wasn’t being “Christ-like”. A guilt I attribute to the pastor-worshipping, man AND woman hating, fundie church I was raised in. My Pastor was one who taught that a Pastor’s authority superseded even the authority of a husband in the home. Women, his wife included, were openly mocked from the pulpit. It was an odd place. The result was the same as the less-conservative evangelical sorts…a feminist spirit in the church. Thank-goodness my husband spotted me and whisked me out of there.

    Anyhow, I read occasionally and have only commented once before. There is usually a well-rounded bit of thought by the commenters and it’s always a pleasure to read.🙂

  84. stevo says:

    A bit off topic but if you can, see the Angry Birds movie. It is full of non PC symbolism and is immensely satisfying

  85. feeriker says:

    My Pastor was one who taught that a Pastor’s authority superseded even the authority of a husband in the home.

    Pastors get away with this heretical nonsense because their congregations generally consist of lazy biblical ignoramuses who want someone else to do all the heavy lifting for them (and pastors, many of them being megalomaniac egotists, are only too happy to foster this state of affairs). Thus they are fine with sacrificing both their dignity and their souls for the sake of continued, comfortable spiritual sloth and darkness.

    Glad to hear that you and your husband “escaped” such a church. The challenge is finding one that is Scripture-centered to replace it. Such churches are exceedingly and vanishingly rare.

  86. justdoit says:

    Speaking of heroes, does anyone know a name for the new fad “sport” consisting of men lying on the ground and balancing women on their feet while said women strike poses and show themselves off? It is just another new way for men to be subservient to women, as if we did not have enough of that already. And just another way to have fake intimacy and no sex. What’s not to like?

    Be a hero, balance a fat chick high above you and hope you will not get squashed when the avalanche of fat strikes you.

  87. PokeSalad says:

    @Boxer

    kudos on the Pepe…… *thumbsup*

  88. BillyS says:

    Sounds stupid justdoit. How many of the women in such pictures are attractive?

  89. justdoit says:

    @BillyS: Most of them are semi-attractive and semi-desperate.

  90. MrMasculine says:

    Men are supposed to understand women’s issue while women could not give a damn about what men go through. Bill Burr is the only guy on TV who even brings up real men’s issues. Men need to say “no thanks” to folks who want us to be more girlish. When I saw Tatum Channing do that lip sync Beyoncé crap I wanted to puke. Hell, I won’t even wear pink shirts.

  91. Seriously, I thank God that I only had boys. Strong Boys.

  92. Jim says:

    Men are supposed to understand women’s issue while women could not give a damn about what men go through.

    ikr? So why should I give a shit about their so-called issues?

  93. Tim J Penner says:

    @Rollo
    HEY OLD NAVY
    STOP YOUR
    FATher SHAMING
    really.

  94. theasdgamer says:

    Why would I want to be proud to be a man? It’s not a trait I worked for. Shouldn’t I be proud of my accomplishments, rather than my circumstances of birth?

    The first step of the Red Pill is owning your identity as a man and being pleased with it. The FI attempts to shame masculinity and it’s important for us as men to reject that shaming and own our masculinity. You apparently are still ashamed of your masculinity.

  95. theasdgamer says:

    Similarly, the various strands of mythological storytelling tend to coalesce into a system of religion.

    More like the various strands of attacking religion coalesce into myths about how religion came to be.

  96. theasdgamer says:

    htris is an obvious troll and pretty good at it. Use his trolling to help us express the Red Pill.

  97. theasdgamer says:


    You don’t sit down to pee? Are you a barbarian?

    I don’t speak Greek, so I am a barbarian, of course. I own it happily.

  98. PM says:

    Rose – I have no sympathy for Brock Turner. There were a lot of drunk men and women at that party. No one else decided to rape someone. When the men passing by saw Turner behind the dumpster they didn’t join in, they were rightly disgusted by his actions and took him to the police. If they’d put him in prison for decades I still wouldn’t feel badly for him. The woman is foolish, yes. Most of the time, getting drunk doesn’t end with rape because most men aren’t rapists. She played the odds and lost. I don’t feel particularly sorry for her either. Sometimes high risk behavior has consequences.

  99. qwck10th says:

    First thing I thought of was, real men wear black. I immediately thought of Johnny Cash, and later thought of Ray Liotta in the 1800 Tequila commercials.
    … Enough said…
    Qwck

  100. seven dials says:

    For a long time, a lot of official / high culture was normative, it was even in some 20-th century totalitarian states and the BBC until the 1980’s, and still is in middle-Eastern cultures. But at no time or place has Pop-Culture ever been normative. It’s there to make money from various target segments by trying to giving them what they want to eat, smell, feel, hear and see. Telling people to do something in an advertisement is as normative as a sideshow barker’s plea. Advertisements have one and only one intention and test: increased sales. An advertisement for a campaign directed at men that insults us, is a really bad advertisement because we won’t respond the way the advertisers want us to. Don’t believe them when they say it was a “success” either, because “success” means “we kept the account”, not “we got a great response”.

    There’s a tipping point of female participation in a previously male occupation or interest, and once that point is reached, the men start leaving and stop joining. Call it “man flight” – though interestingly, nobody does. (I checked on Google – there’s no such thing.) Don’t like pink ribbons on football players? Stop watching football. Cancel the subscription. Don’t like a dumb-father comedy? Don’t watch it and tell the kids to do their homework when it’s on. Don’t like an ad? Don’t buy the product. Want to express your opinion? Join You Gov, fill in their surveys and go on to the rest of the site where you can slag off what you don’t like and get discussions going. That stuff gets fed back to the companies and advertising agencies. Don’t like the way one of your favourite haunts has been feminised? Stop going, drop in two months later and casually tell the owner why you haven’t been by recently. Don’t like the feminised HR policies? Take the time to find somewhere else, and when you leave, praise everything you think is wrong about the place. Tell them to do more to advance women in it. The exit interview is your last chance at sabotage. And get off all social media, unless you’re using it professionally. Sure you are going to miss some stuff, but you’re missing a memory of what it used to be, not the reality of what it is now.

    We don’t get pride from what they do, but the way we do it. When something is done our way it becomes more valuable, and when it’s done any other way, it’s less valuable. Women have been complaining about that since the 1950’s and they still don’t get it. Excellence needs testosterone. (Just ask Florence Griffith Joyner.)

  101. Boston to Providence says:

    Rose, PM:

    I’m not sure how this could be measured and proven, but I believe strongly that a large proportion of rape (especially in its modern, watered-down definition) could be prevented by women taking reasonable precautions. Naturally, this would entail limiting women’s behavior in meaningful but simple ways. The reflexive and strident backlash by women against any suggestion that their momentary behavior (or worse still, overall lifestyle) be modified speaks very clearly of the true agenda. One sex will be liberated, the other shackled.

  102. @Rose: I have some sympathy for the young man. Six months in jail! That is no small thing. The brutal truth is if the White Knights had not “rescued her” she would probably have never known what had happened. It probably has happened to the little slut multiple times. I would just bet this girl is the type to party down and get busy, and then laugh it off with her BFF’s. Except now she has the excuse to increase the histrionics to levels not seen before.

    I agree with you her letter was RIDICULOUS! She went on and on and on how “You have been inside me” and “I am scared to go to sleep now because I might be sexually assaulted.” I felt no sympathy for the girl and her “agony.” People have children die and they don’t engage in this obscene attention seeking behavior. Oh, somebody that I was making out with touched me! Now I can never sleep again or I might be raped in my sleep!

    No sweety. Instead of “not sleeping” how about you try not to get stumbling, fall down drunk at a party and then go off alone behind a dumpster to make out with a guy you don’t even know. Want to bet the little trollop grabbed the guys junk. Want to bet she was kissing him back before those last 3 shots she took (right before leaving with the guy) hit her like a ton of bricks. Want to bet the drunk guy was barely more coherent than the girl? Want to bet the drunk girl wanted it just as much as the drunk guy?

    Oh I am sorry? You say girls should be able to do whatever want, lead on whoever they choose, toy with whoever they desire, play games however, and have absolutely no responsibility, no consequences, nothing except: Oh, Whoa is me? How about: Fuck Off!

    I mean seriously? The guy screwed around with a girl. The guy was stumbling, fall down drunk. The girl was stumbling fall down drunk. The girl went with the guy voluntarily and was making out with the guy behind a dumpster. At some point she passed out and the guy didn’t stop. Apparently he only fingered her and never even had sex with her!

    So…OFF WITH HIS HEAD! He touched a special snowflake! The precious, almighty vagina has had a finger or two inserted into it without affirmative consent! Give me a break.

    I remember my college days. Once this sloppy drunk girl was crawling all over a buddy. She followed him upstairs and she kept grabbing his cock. He was the host and was turned off by the girl so he grabbed her head, kissed her, and then….handed her to another guy in the room. They immediately started making out and dropped right to the floor and started fucking.

    At the time this was not considered “rape.” Today, they would be calling for a 5 year prison sentence for both my buddy and his friend. At some point, this has to stop but I don’t think women will EVER stop until men are literally in chains and behaving in any way except totally subservient and submissive (for the man) is a 10 year felony.

  103. Anon says:

    It begins :

    ISIS terrorist targets gay bar in Orlando, killing 50.

    It is sad that innocent people died, but the left’s various client groups cannot be kept apart forever (despite the hard work of cuckservatives to draw the fire of all those groups so as to delay their natural conflicts with each other)…

  104. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    MrMasculine: Bill Burr is the only guy on TV who even brings up real men’s issues.

    The shows that do bring up “men’s issues” are often dreadful. Spike TV used to market itself as targeting male viewers. I’m not sure if they still do.

    I’ve not seen Spike TV, but from the promos, it seems they had shows in which men enjoyed and expressed their masculinity by getting drunk, breaking things, getting hurt in crazy stunts, oogling women’s breasts, and overall behaving like stereotypical fratboys. They did nothing noble or respectable, just Beavis and Butthead type stuff, reinforcing the FI stereotype of men as beer-drinking, sports-addled, sex-crazed doofuses.

    TV defines “men’s issues” are beer, boobs, and NASCAR.

  105. Scott says:

    Rose, BiP, BPP-

    I attempted to open this very discussion at my place a few days ago:

    https://morallycontextualizedromanceblog.wordpress.com/2016/06/09/a-dads-open-letter-to-society/

    Your presence and comments are welcome.

  106. MarcusD says:

    The job that makes us happiest? Housewife! Survey finds stay-at-home mothers are more satisfied than any other profession
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3634473/The-job-makes-happiest-Housewife-Survey-finds-stay-home-mothers-satisfied-profession.html

  107. Scott says:

    No where else really to put this for now…

    http://www.sheknows.com/parenting/articles/1123363/

  108. Scott says:

    Gentlemen, it’s Thursday 16JUN (three days before Fathers Day)

    Here is the Matt Chandler video making the Facebook rounds (already) in advance of it.

    Have fun in church Sunday.

  109. Looking Glass says:

    To be honest, Chandler would be on the receiving end of a flying Bible if I was in the crowd.

  110. Pingback: Dalrock How to be a hero Dress like… | Honor Dads

  111. Pingback: Are you man enough to wear a Hillary pantsuit? | Dalrock

  112. Daily Llama says:

    “For a long time, a lot of official / high culture was normative, it was even in some 20-th century totalitarian states and the BBC until the 1980’s, and still is in middle-Eastern cultures. But at no time or place has Pop-Culture ever been normative.”

    Pop culture has been normative in the US for many decades now. American “culture” (if you can call it that) was created on Madison Avenue.

  113. Daily Llama says:

    *When there are little boys with a parent or a younger teenager getting a haircut…..men…..watch your language.”

    How quaint. Here in ‘Murica boys are watching hardcore porn on the internet by 6 so I’m sure your F bombs don’t phase them the slightest.

  114. Pingback: What causes all of the consternation about housework? | Dalrock

  115. Pingback: Weekly Roundup #17 - Charles Sledge

Please see the comment policy linked from the top menu.

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