A primer on men’s reactions to the gender war.

Larry Kummer of Fabius Maximus has a new post up titled: The Lone Wanderers’ solutions to dating and marriage.  The bulk of the post is a cleaned up version of our discussion of the topic on his previous post.  I don’t think much (if anything) will be new to regular readers of this blog, but I think he has done an excellent job crafting our exchange into an accessible introduction into the issues we discuss in the Men’s Sphere.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Fabius Maximus, Larry Kummer, Linkage. Bookmark the permalink.

87 Responses to A primer on men’s reactions to the gender war.

  1. My thanks to Dalrock for his comments, which are the core of my post. Most of what I added explains things that he mentions (e.g., what is “Eat Pray Love”), and gives links to more info.

    There was so much meat to the discussion that I broke the conversation into two parts, each of which discusses different aspects of the gender wars.

    This series goes beyond the analysis and description that is much of the content in the manosphere. It looks at solutions. The first two examine the limited gains possible for men acting alone.

    The third part goes up next week. It discusses how the big gains can come — and will come — from men standing together. Working together for common goals as groups (packs, tribes, whatever name you prefer). And eventually working to reform America.

    These are, of course, just sketches. Early salvoes in a long debate.

  2. Anonymous Reader says:

    My first reaction: stop using the feminist word “Gender” in place of the word “sex”. Gender is a linguistic term that has been hijacked by radfems for their own purpose, that is to claim “Gender is a social construct”.

    Using feminist words leads to fuzzy, incorrect, inaccurate thinking. Men should refer to themselves as men, not “guys” and they should live in a mental world of two sexes. Not some Disney Princess land of 27 “genders”.

  3. Pingback: A primer on men’s reactions to the gender war. | @the_arv

  4. Anon,

    “My first reaction: stop using the feminist word “Gender””

    My dictionary says that “Gender is the state of being male or female, typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones.”

    I don’t care what feminists say.

  5. Anonymous Reader says:

    My dictionary says that “Gender is the state of being male or female, typically used with reference to social and cultural differences rather than biological ones.”

    That is a feminist definition derived from the blank-slate fallacy that “Gender is a social construct”. Your dictionary supports my point nicely. You are using a feminist definition of a word, therefore you are ceding definitional ground to feminists from the very start. You are even thinking like a 2nd stage 1970’s era feminist!

    I don’t care what feminists say.

    But you are willing to use their definitions? That leads to unclear thinking.

  6. Anonymous Reader says:

    Also stop conflating Game with “Pick up”. Game is a useful tool for any man, most especially married men. Pick Up Artists (PUA’s) are just one group of men who use Game.

    If the term “Game” is offensive then use another one: leadership, Captain, headship, whatever. The specific mindset and techniques that Game involves work whatever they are called.

  7. Lost Patrol says:

    Truly informative and entertaining posts and comments in the series. Looking forward to the rest.

    I have to go with AR on “gender”. Feminists of either sex use the term precisely because by definition it refers to other than biological differences. It’s the biological fact that Homo Sapiens exists as only two distinct, and different sexes that really bothers them. Gender sidesteps the hard science and focuses us on the social and cultural. Hence their preference that we all get on board the gender wagon.

    That alone was enough to convert me. I’m big enough to admit how small I am. If a thing bothers a feminist, I’ll do that thing whenever I can.

  8. John says:

    New data suggests up to 30% of Millennial women will remain unmarried by age 40, double the rate of Generation X. I read this in romper.com.

  9. stickdude90 says:

    Once you separate the word “gender” from the biological underpinning, you end up with things like this –

    List of Facebook Genders

    Agender
    Androgyne
    Androgynous
    Bigender
    Cis
    Cisgender
    Cis Female
    Cis Male
    Cis Man
    Cis Woman
    Cisgender Female
    Cisgender Male
    Cisgender Man
    Cisgender Woman
    Female to Male
    FTM
    Gender Fluid
    Gender Nonconforming
    Gender Questioning
    Gender Variant
    Genderqueer
    Intersex
    Male to Female
    MTF
    Neither
    Neutrois
    Non-binary
    Other
    Pangender
    Trans
    Trans*
    Trans Female
    Trans* Female
    Trans Male
    Trans* Male
    Trans Man
    Trans* Man
    Trans Person
    Trans* Person
    Trans Woman
    Trans* Woman
    Transfeminine
    Transgender
    Transgender Female
    Transgender Male
    Transgender Man
    Transgender Person
    Transgender Woman
    Transmasculine
    Transsexual
    Transsexual Female
    Transsexual Male
    Transsexual Man
    Transsexual Person
    Transsexual Woman
    Two-Spirit

  10. da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo says:

    The genius of da feminsistz movementsz
    is dat it gets menz to expend all their
    energy
    attacking one-another
    but never
    ever
    ever
    mentioning those
    who created
    feminismzimzz.

    zlozozoz

  11. thedeti says:

    he forgot buttsecks.

  12. Opus says:

    Gender relates to language, sex to person. Sex when sexual intercourse is meant is an unhappy use of the term – no one ever says they have just had great gender. There are two sexes male and female and three genders – masculine, feminine and neuter. There are various other words which I much dislike because I do not believe they describe anything real – one of those is Homo-sexual.

    When I hear American women addressing a group of men or men and and women as ‘guys’ I cringe. I equally dislike the use of the word women to refer to females; girls is much preferable.

    The control of language is the control of the thinkable.

  13. Marquess of Cuttingoutbury says:

    Anonymous Reader is on the money about “gender.” Shape language; shape thought.

    The biggest promoter of “gender” was a psychopath quack who mutilated and sexually abused boys:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

    The concept was promoted for its instrumentatlity, not its– non-existent– merit. Satanic psyop.

  14. Lost Patrol says:

    Elizabeth Holmes.

    It’s proverbial that Elephants never forget.

  15. anonymous_ng says:

    @Lost Patrol nails an in the park home run.

    I’m big enough to admit how small I am. If a thing bothers a feminist, I’ll do that thing whenever I can.

  16. Cane Caldo says:

    I saw that post on Elizabeth Holmes and immediately thought of Anon.

  17. Hugh Mann says:

    There’s a great clip from a German state parliament, where an AfD politician opens a speech by greeting all the 60-odd ‘genders’. Half way through the Speaker interrupts him, “I haven’t finished my opening greeting!”.

  18. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Marquess of Cuttingoutbury

    Remarkable link, this is the first time I have ever heard of John Money. This one man did so much damage at the individual and social level.

    The concept was promoted for its instrumentatlity, not its– non-existent– merit.

    Agreed.

  19. Marquess of Cuttingoutbury says:

    Incredible isn’t it?

    Or perhaps not, really. Evil doesn’t hide. It revels in twilight; you have to open your eyes a little wider to see it dance.

    From the wikipedia (!!! lololol !!!) article on John Money, several pertinent excerpts:

    “In 1966, a botched circumcision left eight-month-old David Reimer without a penis. Money persuaded the baby’s parents that sex reassignment surgery would be in Reimer’s best interest. At the age of 22 months, Bruce underwent an orchidectomy, in which his testicles were surgically removed. He was reassigned to be raised as female and given the name Brenda. Money further recommended hormone treatment to which the parents agreed. Money then recommended a surgical procedure to create an artificial vagina, which the parents refused. Money published a number of papers reporting the reassignment as successful.

    In 2000, David and his twin brother (Brian) alleged that Money forced the twins to rehearse sexual acts involving “thrusting movements”, with David playing the bottom role.[16] He said as a child, Money forced him go “down on all fours” with his brother, Brian Reimer, “up behind his butt” with “his crotch against” his “buttocks”, and that Money forced David to have his “legs spread” with Brian on top. Money also forced the children to take their “clothes off” and engage in “genital inspections”. On at “least one occasion”, Money reportedly took photographs of the two children doing these activities. Money’s rationale for these various treatments was his belief that “childhood ‘sexual rehearsal play'” was important for a “healthy adult gender identity”.[16]

    On July 1, 2002,[18] Brian was found dead from an overdose of antidepressants. On May 4, 2004, after suffering years of severe depression, financial instability, and marital troubles,[19] David committed suicide by shooting himself in the head with a sawed-off shotgun at the age of 38. Reimer’s parents have stated that Money’s methodology was responsible for the deaths of both of their sons.[20]”

    Matthew 18:

    “At the same time came the disciples unto Jesus, saying, Who is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven? And Jesus called a little child unto him, and set him in the midst of them, And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven. Whosoever therefore shall humble himself as this little child, the same is greatest in the kingdom of heaven. And whoso shall receive one such little child in my name receiveth me. But whoso shall offend one of these little ones which believe in me, it were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that he were drowned in the depth of the sea.”

    Wikipedia:

    “Money’s writing has been translated into many languages, and includes around 2,000 articles, books, chapters and reviews. He received around 65 honors, awards, and degrees in his lifetime.[2]”

    Who do you serve? That is the question of the age.

  20. Dark knowledge from Rudyard Kipling

    From a comment at the FM website. Open paragraphs to Kipling’s “The Vampire”.

    The Vampire
    A fool there was and he made his prayer
    (Even as you or I!)
    To a rag and a bone and a hank of hair,
    (We called her the woman who did not care),
    But the fool he called her his lady fair–
    (Even as you or I!)

    Oh, the years we waste and the tears we waste,
    And the work of our head and hand
    Belong to the woman who did not know
    (And now we know that she never could know)
    And did not understand!

    A fool there was and his goods he spent,
    (Even as you or I!)
    Honour and faith and a sure intent
    (And it wasn’t the least what the lady meant),
    But a fool must follow his natural bent
    (Even as you or I!) …

    http://www.online-literature.com/kipling/921/

  21. Bee says:

    Anonymous Reader,

    I have now concluded that Larry Kummer will not listen to, or consider any input except it comes from Dalrock.

  22. Pingback: A primer on men’s reactions to the gender war. | Reaction Times

  23. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dark knowledge from Rudyard Kipling

    Not all that dark. But Kipling was a romantic Victorian, so his image of women was inaccurate.
    Nothing wrong with Kipling, please don’t misunderstand – “The Female of the Species” has some truth.

    But Victorian pedestalization of women is part of the problem. It’s part of how we got “here”.

  24. Lovekraft says:

    Certain advancements in the ‘debate’ serve to move us forward and to dispel past misconceptions. The Marriage 2.0 was one such event. For the inquisitive and analytical, it represented a whole new set of tools with which to analyze the current miasma.

    I suspect we are on the cusp of another such advancement. The generation coming up, steeped in internet truths (believe me, these kids have ingested far more in their short lives than of any previous generation) will long for something to help them process it. On the one side will be the authoritarians, the professional lying machine (aka the Media), phony politicians and crude antifa-types degenerates. On the other will be the theorists, who are like surgeons, able to dissect and repackage the data into digestible concepts.

    You know the latter is winning simply by how desperate the left has become (Damore’s manifesto, Ontario’s forced language laws, GloboJihad continuing to be unwilling to concede). Take the Cruz massacre: I’ve pushed for the examination of his family and upbringing as major causes (or at least something to be examined) and have seen this also being pushed in various other venues.

    The Great Meme War of 2016 served to introduce many new concepts into the public realm, exposed the left as vapid sloganeerists, demonstrated how a movement can unite even if they’re among multitudes of differing classes, origins etc.

  25. Anonymous Reader says:

    Lovecraft
    Certain advancements in the ‘debate’ serve to move us forward and to dispel past misconceptions. The Marriage 2.0 was one such event. For the inquisitive and analytical, it represented a whole new set of tools with which to analyze the current miasma.

    Very aptly put.Back in 2010 few people knew what “Marriage 2.0” meant. Then it became a bad, evil concept on a lot of sites: just typing it out could get you banned. It is still not a widespread enough concept but it cannot be bottled up anymore as something only PeterPan manboy porn addicted basement dwelling gamers (with “small hands”) refer to.

    Whenever I am working with college students out here in flyover country, I bear in mind that about 4 out of 10 have seen a frivorce up close and personal. They know far, far more about the evil that women can do than a whole NFL stadium full of aging Boomers who write tendentious tomes about “How To Do Marriage Rite!” ever will.

  26. Burner Prime says:

    @da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo,
    Nice try, but regardless if “da Jooze” created it, the ability to flourish is due to the dynamics and environment created by the excess male/female (reproductive age) population.

  27. Paul says:

    … AfD … 60 gender .. greeting … video …

    You mean

    Fantastic speech to German parliament: “we reject your proposal”

  28. Devon35 says:

    I’ve seen Japan mentioned on here before but this article provides details about how many men in Japan aren’t making enough to be considered “marriage material” and I think it’s a peek into what the US gender relations will look like in the future.
    http://toyokeizai.net/articles/-/118105

  29. Spike says:

    Marquess of Cuttingoutbury says:
    March 14, 2018 at 3:58 pm
    Anonymous Reader is on the money about “gender.” Shape language; shape thought.

    The biggest promoter of “gender” was a psychopath quack who mutilated and sexually abused boys:

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Money

    The concept was promoted for its instrumentatlity, not its– non-existent– merit. Satanic psyop

    Marquess: I read through this and was struck by the similarity it had to Josef Stalin’s favorite scientist, T.D.Lysenko:
    https://www.britannica.com/biography/Trofim-Lysenko
    Lysenko was decorated 16 times by Stalin for what was basically a form of Lamarckian evolution. His profoundly ignorant theories caused widespread famines and deaths, not only due to poor crop growth, but also as a philosophy that worked its’ way into microbial genetics where the treatment of infections and aseptic procedure in surgery was also heavily influenced by him.
    Let that be a note to all Christian men: Whenever atheists arrogantly claim scientific superiority over you, (“Haven’t you heard about science / evolution?”), happily reply that when the atheists were in charge, science and lives were destroyed by ideologues like Lysenko.

  30. American says:

    “SHOCKING! Former Feminists Ticking Biological Clock Causes Major Panic!” by Stefan Molyneux
    : https://youtu.be/s_p0rYaTzJo

    Comments?

  31. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Devon35
    If I remember rightly, Japan has an even higher percentage of women working full time than the US, and AWALT when it comes to the glass floor of hypergamy. Japan’s population began contracting back in 2007; there are fewer Japanese living now than a year ago. They are still well above the carrying capacity of their islands, perhaps when they get down to 100 million or so the population will stabilize.

    I think it’s a peek into what the US gender relations will look like in the future.

    It’s hazardous to generalize much of anything just by looking at Japan because that culture is unique in multiple ways. It is also extremely homogeneous, very different from the US.

    Give serious consideration to dropping the word “gender” from your vocabulary except for linguistic situations. It’s a fuzzy, slippery, feministy word.

  32. American says:

    @Anonymous Reader, the U.S. would have to have to mirror Japan’s strict immigration outcome to realize Japan’s population decline in the context you outlined.

  33. freebird says:

    Ok I’ve read the editor’s posts and I only see one point he is willing to actually express,and that is that men’s disenfranchisement is hurting America economically.
    Perhaps America should abandon the Duluth Model and tame down The Police State that keeps men under the boot heel of women.
    “These boots are made for walking,and that’s just what they’ll,one of these days these boots are gonna walk ALL OVER YOU.

  34. Anonymous Reader says:

    Ok I’ve read the editor’s posts and I only see one point he is willing to actually express,and that is that men’s disenfranchisement is hurting America economically.

    He has a background in finance, so no surprise. It will be interesting to see what he suggests as an action plan.

  35. Cane Caldo says:

    @Bee

    I have now concluded that Larry Kummer will not listen to, or consider any input except it comes from Dalrock.

    Haha! Three times on his site I agreed with him, and he took them as arguments. I assumed he was just my style (I’m younger, blue collar, and Texan. He’s older, white collar, and Californian). We’ll see.

  36. Cane Caldo says:

    Whoops! Should read “I assumed IT was just my style”. Editing error. Hilarity ensues.

  37. Anon says:

    Cane Caldo,

    I saw that post on Elizabeth Holmes and immediately thought of Anon.

    Indeed. Before she was outed as a fraud, I actually wanted her to succeed, since she didn’t verbalize any outright misandry the way Sheryl Sandberg (who has never been a Founder or CEO) did.

    Alas…

    If we were to list all the points against the preposterous ‘women in tech’ narrative, Elizabeth Holmes ranks near the very top of the long list.

    At the same time, anything that parts manginas from their money should be applauded. That includes fraud by women against manginas.

  38. Here is the second of three posts about Dalrock’s comments.

    “Women reply to men’s counter-strike in the gender wars”
    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/03/15/dalrock-women-gender-wars-the-future/

    Dalrock discusses women’s responses to men’s counter-strike to feminism (Game and MGTOW). It is the next round in the gender wars, with no end in sight. He speaks about the experience of young men and women individually trying to cope with the gender revolution.

    The last of the three posts discusses what comes next, visions of the future!

  39. infowarrior1 says:

    One of the comments talked about marrying foreign women on the FM website. But forget that when brought back to the west end up becoming like other American women. The cultural toxin affects all. A detoxification is required.

  40. infowarrior1 says:

    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/03/15/dalrock-women-gender-wars-the-future/
    ”When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. ”

    The fundamental problem with feminism especially at its best. The fallacy of egalitarianism and of course utterly opposed to Christian Patriarchal marriage.

    This demand for the equal partner may betray their urge to dominate the menfolk in the marriage setting.

    Feminist activists have high digit-masculinity:
    https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01011/full

    Which explain biologically their contentious and headstrong nature. And makes many of them insufferable human beings.

  41. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Santa Monica’s new police chief is a woman: http://smdp.com/santa-monica-names-new-police-chief/164888

    She succeeds Santa Monica’s previous police chief, also a woman: http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/04/santa-monica-names-first-female-police-chief.html

    The new woman police chief hopes to “tackle rising crime rate” (left by the previous woman police chief): http://backissues.smdp.com/031418.pdf

  42. Paul says:

    Just recently overheard that our company has introduced a policy a couple of years ago to introduce more women, because there were too few of them (we’re doing hardcore engineering and production). Apparently this have been a bonus target for all managers, and – hey presto! – suddenly a lot more women were walking around. The scary thing is that they were not hired based on proper qualifications criteria only. I even overheard a long-time female co-worker complain about this; she does NOT want to work under a female boss (‘they are horrible’), and PREFERS a male dominated workplace (‘to get things done’). We were happy when women were only dominating HR, Marketing, and supportive roles.

  43. https://ifstudies.org/blog/the-state-of-our-unions-marriage-up-among-older-americans-down-among-the-younger

    A few factors help to explain the different marriage trends experienced by younger and older adults. Americans are marrying later than ever, and more are living with a partner rather than getting married. And the share of never-married adults under age 65 has risen dramatically—from 26% in 1990 to 36% in 2016—which has directly contributed to the declining share of currently married among younger adults.

  44. Opus says:

    @American

    It has been a little while since I last listened to Stefan. I listened and carefully to the linked conversation between him and the 32 year old female Swedish PhD who spent the last two years dating (clearly, just shagging) an itinerant peaceful hawt-guy from the middle-east and who claims to have been strip-mining for men before that and from the age of twenty-four. Had I been Stefan I would have probed as to her sexual history before the age of twenty-four.

    By the end I was telling myself that I begin to understand why men might prefer to marry each other – the check-out girls in my local Tesco [Walmart] strike me as smarter, more coherent, and more focused.

  45. BillyS says:

    The argument about gender vs. sex seems a bit stupid. Language use changes over time. Try reading things in the original KJV if you doubt that.

    The changes may or may not be good, but they happen. I would focus on many other things, even though much discussion/arguments today are a complete waste since so few participating really want to learn, whatever point they are harping on.

  46. Oscar says:

    @ American & Opus

    That Stefan Molyneux call with the 32-year-old Swedish doctor was HILARIOUS! It’s difficult to nail down one favorite part, but one that stands out was when Stefan asked her to describe what the kind of man she wants looks for in a woman, and her answer was “I assume he would want pretty much what I want”.

    The other one was when Stefan pointed out that the man she wants is 1/1,000, which means he can have pretty much any woman he wants, and he probably doesn’t want a 32-year-old career woman who’s hit the wall. She accepted the facts, which is commendable these days, but her response was that her only option, then, was to be a single mom.

    Stefan’s response: “No! Lower your standards! That didn’t even occur to you, did it?”

    She’s like a script written by some denizen of the androsphere!

  47. Anonymous Reader says:

    Here is the second of three posts about Dalrock’s comments.

    The word “Hypergamy” is conspicuously missing. You can’t even understand what Sheryl Sandberg’s motivations are in her “Alpha /Beta” mating strategy without understanding female hypergamy.

  48. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    That shows how illogical most women are.

  49. Oscar says:

    @ Billy

    And she’s a medical doctor, for frack’s sake! How can she be intelligent (and logical) enough to earn an MD, and simultaneously so stupid?!

  50. BillyS says:

    Oscar,

    I suspect you may have answered your own question. “She” is a doctor. Affirmative action efforts tell us the sex/gender of the individual is more important than their skill today.

    Though this also demonstrates the difference between knowledge and wisdom.

  51. Anonymous Reader says:

    That shows how illogical most women are.

    It shows how hypergamous women are. All women are like that to some degree.

  52. earl says:

    ‘but never
    ever
    ever
    mentioning those
    who created
    feminismzimzz.’

    Rockefellers and bankrolled through Bernakification.

    But wimminz keep eating that butthexed apple too thinking this time will be different.

  53. earl says:

    Comments?

    The biggest thing I got out of the video is a lot of women have impossible standards for the man they want to marry but will often take the dicks of the lowest standard men. (Let’s face it, tingle inducing men are often not success stories…there’s a price to be paid living as a cad) There’s a big cognative dissonance in your modern woman.

    If I spelled it out brass tacks…the dicks you take in honey, are the men you are choosing. You take in low standard men, you are choosing low standard men. And low standard men often won’t commit or will treat them low standard. That’s the price to be paid for tingles and promiscuity.

    Hence why true virgins are prefered for marriage. At the very least she has some proof she doesn’t take in low standard men. Her discernment might actually be a bit higher than the rickety door that lets anyone in.

  54. earl says:

    Stefan’s response: “No! Lower your standards! That didn’t even occur to you, did it?”

    She already did by wasting her time with a Muslim pretty boy who bolted. Her standards for her vagina were probably low…but she still has the high one for marriage. Life doesn’t work that way.

  55. Anonymous Reader says:

    Earl
    But wimminz keep eating that butthexed apple too thinking this time will be different.

    Thread winnerzzzz

  56. Wraithburn says:

    @Marquess of Cuttingoutbury

    That article about Money reminds me of Moira Greyland’s father, which she wrote about in The Last Closet.

  57. Paul says:

    Stefan Molyneux: so society has already paid millions of dollars for you to become a doctor, and then will be paying you for NOT being doctor [while you’re on maternity leave at 80% income].

    Wow. Sucks to be a taxpayer.

  58. Opus says:

    @Oscar

    She is no different from the heroines of so many pieces of romantic fiction, heroines to whom in never seems to occur that marrying (I am thinking here of Jane Austen and her Persuasion) the lowly Curate or Lawyer’s Clerk – who may of course one day be the Rector or Lawyer never mind considering the stable boy or servant or gardener – might resolve their unhappy and lengthening singledom. It is only when we get to Lawrence (D.H.) that we learn that what they have been doing all along is shagging the gardener.

    I say therefore that: she is of average looks and a massive slut. The tells are there to see: her erasing of her sexual life before the age of twenty-four – it must have been bad – her prissiness as to the hundred guys she claims to have dated since then (I think we can double that number and assume sexual behaviour) and her succumbing to the mystery-meat Muslim time and time again and at an age when she can see she is past her peak SMV and MMV – or perhaps that was why she did it. She said she told him no and more than once – he obviously sailed through her fitness tests.

    Stefan is just too kind to his guests.

  59. BillyS says:

    AR,

    It shows how hypergamous women are. All women are like that to some degree.

    Her desire for “the best” shows that, but failing to consider the likelihood of getting it is where her logic fails. Thus this is a case of logic failure. Hypergamy doesn’t guarantee a given woman gets what she wants, just that she will keep seeking better in most cases.

    Opus,

    My ex claimed she married me “for my potential,” implying she left because I hadn’t lived up to that. Having a lake house might have saved my marriage! Though she probably would have just sought it in the divorce settlement instead.

  60. Oscar says:

    @ Opus

    “I say therefore that: she is of average looks and a massive slut.”

    That was my impression as well. You couldn’t fit so many androsphere stereotypes into one person on purpose if you tried. I need to make my daughters listen to that interview. “Don’t be this chick!”

  61. Anonymous Reader says:

    BillyS
    Her desire for “the best” shows that, but failing to consider the likelihood of getting it is where her logic fails.

    Hypergamy doesn’t care about logic. Thus there is no logic to fail.

  62. Jason says:

    Was at a small Bible study last night…….and the man leading it said on an off tangent “well, if you are a single man, the problem is your expectations………you already have a set image and look of what your future wife must be…..and that isn’t Christlike. All the Bible says is that finding a wife is a ‘good thing’ and nothing about appearance.”

    I chimed in politely but firmly “So you had zero attrection to your wife when you met her. Her looks and appearance played zero part in you deciding to pursue her, dating her and marrying her.”

    He refused to answer that question but instead said “Oh…..you used the word dating. There is no word “dating” in the Bible. Looks like you gotta get deeper into the Word my friend.”

    Just rolled my eyes.

    It’s pointless to try and discuss this with a church setting / small group setting. Don’t pursue, and just wait on God….but men “evolved” to be predators and its our natural instinct to hunt……….don’t pursue, but sit in a church service a few times a year to hear the usual “you men are not pursing all these amazing, holy, beautiful, good women of God in this church because you all are addicted to porn and video games….”

    Pursue, try, attempt………well, now you are not waiting on God, or His house is a House of worship and shame on you to try to chat a woman after church. Real men don’t txt, but don’t call, don’t ask about her….just sit and wait on God……….

    Unless.

    She sends you a direct signal that it is okey to pursue her….and then its soley on you…make sure you can read minds, know the complex aspects of female sexual psychology as well.

  63. da GBFM zlzoolzlzzlzozlzloozozo says:

    The GENIUS
    of da fmeinist movementz
    is that it causes men to battle amongst themselvesz
    to become
    the ONLY man in THE ROOM
    as society and culture decline all around
    as the titanic sinks
    the men rearrange the deck chairs
    proclaiming themselves the
    ONLY MAN
    on deck
    while
    completely
    ignoring
    and banning those
    who mention
    icebergs

    lzozozozozozozozzo

    GENIUS!

  64. Jim says:

    Was at a small Bible study last night…….and the man leading it said on an off tangent “well, if you are a single man, the problem is your expectations………you already have a set image and look of what your future wife must be…..and that isn’t Christlike. All the Bible says is that finding a wife is a ‘good thing’ and nothing about appearance.”

    Was that a bible study or a women’s study course?
    What a pathetic simp. Don’t bother with these pussy worshipers. I was done with those idiots long ago.

    He refused to answer that question but instead said “Oh…..you used the word dating. There is no word “dating” in the Bible. Looks like you gotta get deeper into the Word my friend.”

    IOW he knows he’s a lying piece of shit but is too much of a pussy to admit it. Damn dude stop going near these Churchians. They’re worse than a pagan.

  65. feministhater says:

    It’s pointless to try and discuss this with a church setting / small group setting. Don’t pursue, and just wait on God….but men “evolved” to be predators and its our natural instinct to hunt……….don’t pursue, but sit in a church service a few times a year to hear the usual “you men are not pursing all these amazing, holy, beautiful, good women of God in this church because you all are addicted to porn and video games….”

    Pursue, try, attempt………well, now you are not waiting on God, or His house is a House of worship and shame on you to try to chat a woman after church. Real men don’t txt, but don’t call, don’t ask about her….just sit and wait on God……….

    Unless.

    She sends you a direct signal that it is okey to pursue her….and then its soley on you…make sure you can read minds, know the complex aspects of female sexual psychology as well.

    Welcome to the world of Christian dating. It’s wondrous to be over that. I can laugh at the futility of it all now. Those women in church are mainly born again virgins anyway. It’s their ticket to find Mr Beta Rightnow and burp out a few kids before accusing him of all sorts of abusive acts of depravity.

    In the end we have the ‘man up’ tradcons on the one side and the feminist churchian women on the other, all looking over you as a fresh morsel of delicious meat. It’s beyond the point where you can find sanity, let alone a spouse. Accept what you can change, yourself, and leave the stuff you can’t to the experts, alphas and uber pastors. They got it all sorted out. No problem.

  66. Dalrock,

    I would like to see your book recommendations!

    You have mentioned many books, but your posts I’ve seen about them are mostly critical.

  67. Vektor says:

    “But I strongly believe (guessing) that neither Game nor MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way) will work over the long-term for most men.”

    It’s amazing what you can accomplish when you have no choice.

    The greatest population of MGTOW men are/will be men that have never heard of the term. They are de facto MGTOW by virtue of simply not going to college, not becoming high earners, and thus not being marriage worthy for the entitled modern western female. Or they are men who are divorced and child support enslaved, and thus not marriage material for any female.

  68. Bee says:

    Cane Caldo,

    ” Editing error. Hilarity ensues.”

    A good laugh for all of us.

    BTW; thanks for summarizing points regarding Wilson and posting them here and at his blog. You distilled everything down into concise, clear, actionable points.

  69. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    Was at a small Bible study last night…….and the man leading it said on an off tangent “well, if you are a single man, the problem is your expectations………you already have a set image and look of what your future wife must be…..and that isn’t Christlike. All the Bible says is that finding a wife is a ‘good thing’ and nothing about appearance.”

    It likely wouldn’t have helped, but I would have laid into that idiot and I expect I could hold my own when it came to the Scriptures.

    Too many utter fools are claiming to teach Biblical truth, especially in this area. They will ultimately be held accountable for the damage to lives they cost, including to the children of the homes they help break up.

    It really riles me up.

  70. Vyasa says:

    Hey infowarrior1,

    saw your comment here about my comment about foreign women. I replied to it on FM’s website, but here’s my response:

    “Hey ChristianCool, appreciate the response. Also not sure if it was you (infowarrior1) who referred to my comment on Dalrock’s website (I actually found Fabius Maximus through Dalrock).

    Thank you for your insights in Latin women. I had no idea.

    I agree that for most men, leaving the US isn’t an option. I will also be honest here and admit that I plan to do so this summer. It wasn’t an easy decision – in fact I was mighty depressed this winter, thinking about where my dating life had brought (28 and alone). Dalrock’s website brought me some sanity, his explanation of how women have pushed the marriage age back put so many things in context (including why all my engineering professors were already married before grad school, but I was spending an inordinate amount of time trying to learn game and date in grad school).

    I quite possibly may end up as a MGTOW. My cousin moved to Russia for work many years ago, and ended up staying there, marrying a local woman and having kids. I have a certain affinity for Putin, as on International Women’s Day, he thanked Russian women for taking care of homes and kids.

    I’m a bit nervous – travelling around, trying to find a more sane place outside the US – it all may end up as a failed effort. But at this point, I’m at the end of my rope. I don’t plan on coming back to the US, unless things change dramatically – which I don’t expect. Or if they do change, I wonder if it’ll be some weird repeat of Weimer Republic and Hitler coming to power.”

  71. ManlyMan says:

    I still don’ know why you support this guy. He’s a condesending equalist tradcon cuck that censors anyone who disagrees with him.

  72. American says:

    @all who replied: Exactly, I had the same thoughts processing in my head as I listened to Stephen and the uber-hypergamist. It would be hilarious if it weren’t par for the course across our civilization.

  73. JDG says:

    BillyS says:
    March 15, 2018 at 8:19 am
    The argument about gender vs. sex seems a bit stupid. Language use changes over time. Try reading things in the original KJV if you doubt that.

    Sorry this is a day late.

    I disagree because using “gender” instead of “sex” is what gave and still gives feminists subterfuge for their arguments that social constructs via the evil Patriarchy is responsible for the differences between men and women rather than biology or, more importantly, than God’s design.

    Anonymous Reader is correct in that we should not concede linguistic territory to the enemy, even at this late date.

  74. Luke says:

    Jim says:
    March 15, 2018 at 4:27 pm
    “Was at a small Bible study last night…….and the man leading it said on an off tangent “well, if you are a single man, the problem is your expectations………you already have a set image and look of what your future wife must be…..and that isn’t Christlike. All the Bible says is that finding a wife is a ‘good thing’ and nothing about appearance.”

    One possible comeback would have been to point out that not being selective for apparent fertility in prospective wives would have put you in violation of the verse in Genesis commanding us to be fruitful and multiply. To further twist the knife, you could ask him if the Ten Commandments also are null and void in his “church”. (We already know that Corinthians, Ephesians, Proverbs, and Titus are right out in Churchianity social clubs.)

  75. The third post about Dalrock’s comments discussing men’s solutions to the gender wars.

    An expert looks at the gender wars & sees wonders ahead!
    https://fabiusmaximus.com/2018/03/16/dalrock-solutions-to-the-gender-wars/

    I agree with his vision about the present, but we have different visions beyond that. His last comment perfectly tees up my next post about what comes next — solutions from men forming groups. The big version of both Game and MGTOW.

  76. JDG says:

    There are no wars between the masculine and the feminine (gender), but rather an attempt to remove any distinctions between the two when and where it suits the SJW narrative. You may as well go ahead and concede that biological differences are really due to social constructs.

    There is an attempt to maintain an illusion of a war between the sexes, but even that is a leftist (farcical) narrative (“the war against women” or rather adults of the female sex), which is used to render the patriarchal family model illegitimate and remove authority from fathers especially and men in general.

  77. Lovekraft says:

    Was watching two movies recently (Oliver Stone’s ‘JFK’ and ‘The Insider’ with Russel Crowe) and noticed a common occurrence which may have flown past my radar had I not been tuned in:

    Both of the wives of the men going through absolute hell pursuing a noble cause (exposing corruption or worse) had their ‘what about me!’ moment, threatening to divorce/nuke the family. The husband had to meekly explain to each that the wives are still in their hearts, but have a higher calling. In ‘Insider’, the wife divorces. In ‘JFK’, the wife sticks it out (but these were actors of the Southern U.S., not to mention being produced a decade earlier).

    It would be interesting to see a full analysis of the progression/interjection of the ‘what about the family/me!’ theme where men are taking on challenges.

  78. BillyS says:

    JDG,

    Anonymous Reader is correct in that we should not concede linguistic territory to the enemy, even at this late date.

    So what successes have you seen due to faithfulness to the technical differences in this area?

    I just can’t get into arguments like that because they end up seeming more like arguing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin than something that will really connect with people. Do common people really consider the difference? Are feminists really driven by using proper English and dialectic arguments?

    It is rhetoric that will take the day today. Though that is probably the reason Dalrock’s somewhat recent post took me to task for something. I can’t even remember the issue, but I was not swayed.

    We are losing a huge battle and worrying about the difference between “gender” and “sex” is largely a waste of time from all I can see.

  79. Cane Caldo says:

    @Bee

    My pleasure!

  80. feeriker says:

    “Don’t be this chick!”

    ▪ Scandinavian
    ▪ Feminist
    ▪ Career woman
    ▪ Mudshark/slut

    Pretty much the epitome of quality man repellant.

  81. JDG says:

    Are feminists really driven by using proper English and dialectic arguments?

    Feminist used “gender” instead of “sex” to support their entire social construct theory, so yeah their driven, only not for proper English. They’re driven to twist words all the long to obtain their goals. Words like abuse, rape, racist, bigot, hate, love, and on it goes.

    We are losing a huge battle and worrying about the difference between “gender” and “sex” is largely a waste of time from all I can see.

    Not worrying about the true meanings of words is one of the reason’s the battle was lost in the first place.

  82. BillyS says:

    Not worrying about the true meanings of words is one of the reason’s the battle was lost in the first place.

    Such is the claim, though I don’t see that in practice. I have yet to hear someone say “my eyes were opened when I thought about gender” or something anywhere close to that. I am talking normal people, not MSM and other progressives that further their causes by such revelations.

    Most people don’t think about things at all past the rhetoric, which is why “pushing grandma off the cliff” was such an effective add even though the ones pushing it were far more likely to do that. The words used were irrelevant. The picture left in the mind was.

  83. Marquess of Cuckbury says:

    “Feminist used “gender” instead of “sex” to support their entire social construct theory, so yeah their driven, only not for proper English. They’re driven to twist words all the long to obtain their goals. Words like abuse, rape, racist, bigot, hate, love, and on it goes. Not worrying about the true meanings of words is one of the reason’s the battle was lost in the first place.”

    Right. Furthermore, they were able to use Middle American Cuckian Squeamishness Syndrome (formerly GRPDS, Gay-Related Probity Deficiency Syndrome) to drive home the substitution.

    Cuck: “Says right here in my Bible, one of the first things God said to man was: go make me happy, go fuck your wife. But… we’re Christians. We can’t say that! We’ve been told good people don’t want to say bad words like S – E – X. (Eww!)”
    Enemy Agent: “I understand, fellow good-person. Well, here then, how about saying H – A – I – L S – A – T… er… ‘gender.’ See? Sex. Gender. Sex – Gender. Gender. Exactly the same. It’s even better.”
    Cuck: “Oh. I like that. Yes, much better now. That was close, I was about to get the vapors. You’re a good guy. I like you.”
    Enemy Agent: “No problem. I heard on the radio today…”
    [Decades of full-spectrum subversion.]
    Cuck: “Fellow good person?”
    Enemy Agent: “Yes, brother?”
    Cuck: “I’m confused, what’s this ‘gender studies’ and ‘gender fluidity’ stuff? I’ve never heard about that before. This doesn’t make sense to me. Can you show me where it says…”
    Enemy Agent: “Look over there.”
    Cuck: “Ooh the game’s on! Glad I signed up for that new cable package. Wait, what were we talking about? My friend, you know just what to say to me, and just how to say it. God bless you.”
    Enemy Agent: “Any time.”

    What a coup. What a great joke! Joke’s on you (and I), Billy.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity

    (The concept is the weapon, it requires a champion: an agent blinded by hubris and gifted with charisma or authoritativeness. Sophistry, rhetoric, PR, persuasion are his form. He strikes, dazing you, and the others close in for the kill.

    You don’t recognize what has happened. Until, one day, you have to choose between right and wrong: “Huh. This was so easy, before. … … … What the hell happened to me?”)

  84. JDG says:

    Academia gave weight to their fallacies by twisting the meanings of words and lying about history. For their theories to hold water they first had to to circumvent facts and logic. This ended up being quite easy because most folks can’t be bothered to confront error when they see it, if they see it.

    The meaning of words mattered a great deal to the legislators, media talking heads, and academia professors who forced feminist policies into the everyday life of the average person. Turns out it ended up mattering a great deal to the rest of us too.

    Most folks may not know how their society came to be falling apart around them, but that doesn’t change why it happened. How does the saying go? “Those who do not learn from history…”

  85. JDG says:

    Just ran across this remark on a Youtube comment:


    I think we should stop using the left’s language. It’s not “gender”, it’s “sex”. Gender does not reflect reality– it presupposes that this is a performance rather than a biological reality. “Gender” has opened the door to 51 genders.

    Sums it up nicely.

  86. Here is the series Dalrock mentions in this post. “Enough analysis! What are possible solutions to the gender wars?”

    A return to traditional values.
    Men finding individual solutions.
    Coming next week, my answer: A counter-revolution in society.

    Dalrock posted some powerful comments to my first two posts.  I posted our dialog as a series of posts. This was a useful pause before writing my concluding post, as I learned much from his comments.

    An expert discusses individual solutions.
    Discussing women’s responses to men’s solutions.
    An expert sees wonders ahead!
    An expert: respect is a key battleground in the gender wars.
    An expert’s insight: Game is toxic to feminism.
    An expert describes the road to respect for men.

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )

w

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.