Chivalry just got even gayer.

Presidential candidate Pete Buttigieg cleverly co-opted chivalry in the service of gay marriage (emphasis mine):

Buttigieg, in a speech at LGBTQ Victory Fund National Champagne Brunch in Washington, D.C., referenced the vice president’s less-than-welcoming attitude toward members of the LGBTQ community when discussing his marriage to his husband Chasten. He called marriage equality a moral issue, saying his marriage of two years has made him a “better human being.”

My marriage to Chasten has made me a better man and yes, Mr. Vice President, it has moved me closer to God,” said Buttigieg, a devout Episcopalian.

This is brilliant because he is using an argument that conservatives will love without even understanding why they love it.  This is something married men say about their wives, it isn’t something married women say about their husbands, and it goes back to courtly love (what we call chivalry).  As Roger Boase explained, summarizing Gaston Paris (the man who coined the term courtly love):

…the lover continually fears lest he should, by some misfortune, displease his mistress or cease to be worthy of her; the lover’s position is one of inferiority; even the hardened warrior trembles in his lady’s presence; she, on her part, makes her suitor acutely aware of his insecurity by deliberately acting in a capricious and haughty manner; love is a source of courage and refinement; the lady’s apparent cruelty serves to test her lover’s valour

Likewise C.S. Lewis explains in  The Allegory of Love that courtly love teaches that men must look to women for moral guidance (emphasis mine):

The love which is to be the source of all that is beautiful in life and manners must be the reward freely given by the lady, and only our superiors can reward. But a wife is not a superior.81 As the wife of another, above all as the wife of a great lord, she may be queen of beauty and of love, the distributor of favours, the inspiration of all knightly virtues, and the bridle of ‘villany’;82 but as your own wife, for whom you have bargained with her father, she sinks at once from lady into mere woman. How can a woman, whose duty is to obey you, be the midons whose grace is the goal of all striving and whose displeasure is the restraining influence upon all uncourtly vices?

Puritans tried to tame courtly love (a parody of Christian sexual morality) by bringing it inside Christian marriage.  For gay men to bring the idea into their marriages is a fully logical next step.

Update:  Buttigieg even notes that he is co-opting a conservative sensibility in his CNN interview with Father Edward Beck (H/T JRob):

Beck: What’s your take on why religion finds same-sex marriage so divisive?

Buttigieg: I saddens me because when I think about the blessings of marriage. First of all, it’s one of the most conservative things about my life, very conventional. It is morally one of the best things in my life. Being married to Chasten makes me a better person. I would even say it moves me closer to God. And so the idea that this of all things is what people are attacking each other over and excluding each other over, when God is love, we are taught. Of all the things to beat people up over on theological grounds, it just seems to me that loving shouldn’t be one of them. So it’s a painful thing to watch. I mean I get it, but. …

If you believe marriage has to do with love, if also, by the way, at the risk of sounding a bit conservative, you believe that sex has to do with love, or ought to, then I think it takes you to a pretty specific place. I’ve learned that it’s an expression of love, at least it can be. And I guess I believe it ought to be.

Related:  Light years closer to God.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in C.S. Lewis, Chivalry, Courtly Love, New Morality, Romantic Love, Traditional Conservatives, Wife worship. Bookmark the permalink.

225 Responses to Chivalry just got even gayer.

  1. Wagner Tench says:

    I’m a young man at a prominent California Christian college, and the expectation for “chivalry” is rather high. The girls often want to get married quickly despite being steeped in debt, and even if they are more focused on their career, they still usually treat dating/courtship as a huge deal, with “dtr” meetings taking place as little as two or three weeks in.

    Consequently, very few men are willing to jump through the necessary hoops just for the slight chance at getting either a typical mainstream Christian marriage or a girlfriend who expects commitment and investment but brings little to the table herself.

    The girls here are some of the prettiest I’ve ever seen. Lots of adorable blondes and redheads, and most dress reasonably modestly by modern standards. But the combination of student debt (for both men and women), unreasonable female expectations, men’s lack of willingness to risk rejection and coming across as desperate, and men’s increasing realization that investing in even conservative Christian girls is not usually worth the investment in college has made a lot of girls (and men) here very lonely. Even still, the girls here by and large just sit around wondering why men won’t ask them out. They don’t lower their standards or take initiative, and if they can’t find a man at school, they’ll sometimes find a guy outside the school. Also, I have noticed a massive increase in interracial dating because white men are increasingly ignoring romance with white girls, and there was already a surplus of white girls here.

    One of my baby boomer professors goes on rants blaming it all on technology, and I just laugh. Maybe if college wasn’t so damn expensive and more men could have a relationship/marriage without debasing themselves and risking emasculation, the marriage rates would go up.

  2. Novaseeker says:

    Ah, so now we know that his “husband” is really the gay wife in the situation.

  3. Damn Crackers says:

    “…it has moved me closer to God.”

    What god does he mean? Priapus?

  4. What god does he mean? Priapus?

    Hahaha.

    But yeah. Try to tell people that no, God does not find you to be perfect and precious as you are, and that you – and all of us – are fallen creatures who must strive to be better and avoid evil, and they freak out. Christians in particular.

    How did the God of Christianity turn from ‘The God who loves us in spite of it all, who graciously wishes to save us, and who will condemn those who turn away from Him’ into a giant teddy bear who thinks ATM is super so long as it’s *loving* ATM?

  5. Hmm says:

    I strongly suspect his gay mirage hasn’t moved God closer to him – at least not the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

  6. JRob says:

    With forked tongue this man attempts to juxtapose his view of marriage onto holiness, as well as travelling the courtly love road. Butt sex brings him closer to God. Co-opt it all, prepare the culture for pederasty acceptance. Why not use chivalry to sell this filth to the pew warmers? It worked for feminists who without a doubt left the door open behind them.

    https://www-m.cnn.com/2019/04/02/opinions/buttigieg-and-religion-qa-beck/index.html?r=https%3A%2F%2Fduckduckgo.com%2F&rm=1

    [D: Great find. I’ve added a link and quote to the OP.]

  7. dragnet says:

    Pete Buttigieg is having his moment in the sun, but I’m inclined to think the Left will discard him as soon as he’s no longer needed to troll conservatives with his religious left schtick.

    Time will tell.

  8. Bart says:

    I understand Buttigieg’s temptation to run a campaign based on his own victimization as it’s become so profitable in general, but even he can’t think this is a winning strategy in a presidential campaign. *You’re already married.* You won. Go home. Trannies surpassed you in the hierarchy awhile ago. There are, what, 20 Dem candidates now for 2020? This is just brand building for 2028 or 2032 once he’s done more than helm a college town. Talk about topping from the bottom.

  9. Joe2 says:

    @Wagner Tench

    “they still usually treat dating/courtship as a huge deal, with “dtr” meetings taking place as little as two or three weeks in.”

    What is a “dtr” meeting?

  10. Lexet Blog says:

    Define the relationship

  11. MattyIce says:

    The lie works on all fronts:
    It saddens me because when I think about the blessings of marriage. First of all, it’s one of the most conservative things about my life, very conventional. It is morally one of the best things in my life. Being married to [insert any tangible object] makes me a better person. I would even say it moves me closer to God. And so the idea that this of all things is what people are attacking each other over and excluding each other over, when God is love, we are taught. Of all the things to beat people up over on theological grounds, it just seems to me that loving shouldn’t be one of them. So it’s a painful thing to watch

  12. Frank K says:

    “Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!” Isaiah 5:20

  13. DA GBFM lzzzlzloozozozlzlzoz says:

    llzozozl

    about ten years or so, da gbfm warned of da butthextzlzlzlzozo

    lzloozlzlzo

  14. @WagnerTench, I went through the exact same thing over a decade ago at a large Christian university in Texas.

    Evangelical [courtship? mating? not sure what the word is anymore] is oddly mechanical, it’s just weird no matter how you look at it, dare I say, unnatural. A huge part of the reason that men aren’t asking women out in an environment like that is obvious on it’s face but nobody has the guts there to talk about it…
    Men aren’t asking women out because it doesn’t “work”. Asking a girl out on a date actually leading to a date just doesn’t happen to any kind of scale where it makes sense as a strategy. Onesies and twosies, it “works” but by and large it’s not happening. You can’t blame people for not playing a game they always lose.

    Now here’s my experience please tell me if it’s like that still. You have groups, for the sake of math let’s say 10 guys and 10 girls. What happens is the group hangs out, and doesn’t pair off because basically 8 of the girls are all auditioning for one guy and enjoying attention from the rest. Eventually around senior year top dog picks one and they start dating. Maybe one more couple materializes, and the remainder don’t really get together as graduation approaches and no one wants to start anything. About right?

  15. Anonymous Reader says:

    A homosexual named Buttigieg who is “married” to another man named Chasten. The jokes just write themselves.

    But seriously, as Dalrock and others have noted, Buttigieg is using the exact same language that was instrumental in bringing feminism into the churches. It is also the exact same language that has led a lot of churches to declare support for open borders / massive migration from not just Latin America but also Africa and Asia. Rep. Omar from Minnesota is just one result.

    Since Buttigieg was a mayor in the state of Indiana, I must ask this:

    If Chasten is the “wife”, does Chasten discipline Buttigieg?

  16. Anonymous Reader says:

    Wagner, greenmantle:

    I will wager that the dtr meeting is almost always “called” by the college girl. Not by the college man. This signals who has the upper hand in the current relationship and thus who will have it in the future.

    Am I correct, sorta correct or way wrong?

  17. Jesus Rodriguez de la Torre says:

    Pure evil cannot exist. On this I agree with Augustine (though on almost everything about sex I find him horribly wrong), evil is the lack of Good, a parasite. I find that some of the homosexual and especially “trans” madness effects a positive outcome by showing the inconsistent misandry of feminism and it’s ancestor, courtly love. This is why I cheer whenever a “trans” man wins at women’s sports, and he remains a man despite his mental illness, hormones or surgery. The entire promotion of female sports is an inversion of the natural inclination of the sexes. I do not oppose women doing sports, but the injustice of title 9 which sucks money out of what most men want to do to promote what most women do not want to do is not only unjust, it promotes an inversion of the natural order. This is clear from the fact that if a woman becomes too muscular, and not fat enough, her body becomes sterile.
    As a jeweler displays a diamond on a black background; the madness of the current age makes my own 37 year marriage and that of my daughters shine brighter.

  18. dragnet says:

    The update bolsters my point: Buttigeig exists solely to troll the religious Right. He’s going nowhere this time around because he’s too new and the Left will have tired of his religiosity by 2024 when they will have total demographic supremacy anyhow.

  19. Novaseeker says:

    Also, I have noticed a massive increase in interracial dating because white men are increasingly ignoring romance with white girls, and there was already a surplus of white girls here.

    This is an overall trend. Here in the DC region, the incidence of interracial couples (almost all of the increase being BM/WW) has, compared to say 10 years ago, increased by 2 or 3 times. It’s still not a uge number, but it’s common enough so as to be unremarkable. Another thing that has changed is that the women involved are not what they used to be — it used to be less attractive women, and that’s now flipped so that most of the BM/WW couples I see now feature really quite hot white women. Black guys are “in” now with really attractive white girls.

    I think there are many reasons for this, but overall the main one is that white men’s status continues to deteriorate, making them less attractive to women in general and white women in particular. Again, this is on the margins — almost all white women you see in couples are with white men. But the percentage who are not has noticeably increased, and the kind of woman who is involved has changed a lot.

  20. Novaseeker says:

    Buttigieg even notes that he is co-opting a conservative sensibility in his CNN interview with Father Edward Beck

    Well, yes, he is just pointing out the reason why gay marriage succeeded: people have redefined sex and marriage as being morally justified by love (as you have pointed out many times). Once gay people came out in droves and showed straight people that they, too, fall in love, then the case for gay marriage made itself … you just had to get people past the “ick” factor of buttsex between men, which is mostly an “ick” for men and not for women. I think that’s why the percentage support for gay marriage is lower among men than it is among women (much lower) as well, but that’s neither here nor there at the end of the day. They won because of how heterosexual marriage was redefined, and he’s just rubbing it in there in the update.

  21. dragnet says:

    @ Anonymous Reader

    “A homosexual named Buttigieg who is “married” to another man named Chasten. The jokes just write themselves.”

    Yes, but you know the late night comedy guys aren’t going to touch it with a 30 foot pole.

    Everything about this guy is just a massive troll, really.

  22. Pingback: Chivalry just got even gayer. | Reaction Times

  23. vfm7916 says:

    Soon it will be an act of rebellion to practice Game. Good examples given about the Christian colleges. I wonder how successful a man would be if he maintained frame and hand in that kind of environment?

    Also, from personal observation, most young people coming out of christian churches now internalize the purity message too much. The communication that a young woman should get married to a career stable man, have sex and children, avoid the college trap and build a home has been lost to the “be married to jesus” and “you can be anything!” message.

    Those christian college women mentioned in the above examples would be far better off if their fathers had defined the proper scope of their lives.

    Then again, when the fathers fear to tell their wives what to do or how to behave, they’ll fear to tell their daughters what they should and should not do.

  24. @vfm7916, I’m going to say something controversial. “Game” is both real and not real. I’m talking 80% of the time, we’ve all known the “one guy who” breaks all the rules and still lucks out. I’m talking generalities.

    Every woman especially attractive ones have been sizing up men since they were 14. The idea that you could fake it till you make it “maintaining frame” “push/pull”, “neg” whatever and have her not see past it is close to zero. At best it could get guys who are actually attractive off the dime and approaching who weren’t before and it’ll “work”.

    The truth is if any man actually switches on he’ll see who’s open to him and who’s not. Depending on how attractive he is he will see greater or lesser numbers of women attracted to him. If by game we mean a man doing things that maximize his attractiveness, then yeah, that kind of game is real. Being real it comes with hard limits, and those limits are defined by others, see the next paragraph. Hint, when women say “confidence” they mean looks. When they say “he makes me laugh”, they mean their own nervous laughter because they find him attractive, not actually being funny.

    The next step is that the same way women don’t define what’s attractive to men, men don’t define what’s attractive to women. There are some baseline things that are universal, but by and large it’s all in women’s hands and there is a cultural element. In my own life, I’ve been in cultural groups where I was absolutely invisible as a mate, and others where I was surprisingly competitive. The idea that a guy can learn game and really move the needle isn’t as real as we want to think. Women are setting the terms here and they can be incredibly adept at sussing out who has what they want and who doesn’t. Same way most normal men can see past make up and flattering clothes and tell if it is what it says on the tin.

  25. Opus says:

    As Prime Minister Blair rightly said, in England politicians – even messianic ones like him – do NOT do God. In England a political candidate saying the boldened part of the quote would be election toast. No one wants to know about your relationship with the almighty – funny how God always seems to be pleased with such people at least that is what they tell us – and pretty much the same goes for ones sexual habits. The highly religious break that unwritten rule when they thrust it in your face as do the Homosexualists.

    Am I the only one to suspect that the ever growing number of same-sex enthusiasts in your country is a fair reflection on the awfulness of your females?- or is it that airing ones dirty-washing is something Americans who have never been famed for being backwards in coming forward are unable to cease from desisting?

    I will not become engaged in your political life which seems to go on 24/7 non-stop. I thought everything was settled in November 2017 – give the rest of us some breathing space. Really the way your President has been treated leaves the rest of us a bit speechless.

  26. Warthog says:

    @Wagner Tench “Also, I have noticed a massive increase in interracial dating because white men are increasingly ignoring romance with white girls, and there was already a surplus of white girls here.”

    White men are dating black girls instead, or just not dating at all?

  27. Anonymous Reader says:

    vfm7916
    Those christian college women mentioned in the above examples would be far better off if their fathers had defined the proper scope of their lives.

    They’d have to get permission from their wives and religious leaders first…

  28. Anonymous Reader says:

    Opus
    Am I the only one to suspect that the ever growing number of same-sex enthusiasts in your country is a fair reflection on the awfulness of your females?-

    Only indirectly. It is surely much easier for a homosexual predator to get some private time with a 10 to 15 year old boy when Mom is working full time, or better still divorced.

    The growing interest in sexbots, on the other hand, is a direct reflection of some aspects of the sexual market place and marriage market place (SMP / MMP) that no one outside the androsphere wants to even think about.

  29. tteclod says:

    Booty Judge has never once cracked open a Bible else he would know it prohibits ass-fucking.

    I miss the days of my youth when faggots opposed Christianity rather than coopted it with the encouragement of “Christians.”

  30. dpmonahan says:

    “What happens is the group hangs out, and doesn’t pair off…”
    I’ve noticed this with a couple of groups of young professional Christians. I would always wonder why they didn’t create couples, they were all attractive enough people. Eventually one of the guys might halfheartedly ask and get politely shot down.
    “You can’t blame people for not playing a game they always lose.” Exactly.

  31. JRob says:

    “What happens is the group hangs out, and doesn’t pair off…”

    This means Sufficient Church Tingles weren’t generated.

  32. Novaseeker says:

    This means Sufficient Church Tingles weren’t generated.

    Oh they’re generated, but what happens is that in, say a group of 10 people, 5 of each sex, all 5 women want the same 1-2 of the guys, and the other 3-4 guys are seen as “friend only” guys. That’s the dynamic. I saw it myself in college back in the 1980s. The group “hangout” thing generally doesn’t lead to more than 1-2 couples forming from it because only 1-2 guys in any group are the guys the girls want.

  33. Joe2 says:

    The girls here are some of the prettiest I’ve ever seen. Lots of adorable blondes and redheads, and most dress reasonably modestly by modern standards. But the combination of student debt (for both men and women), unreasonable female expectations, men’s lack of willingness to risk rejection and coming across as desperate, and men’s increasing realization that investing in even conservative Christian girls is not usually worth the investment in college has made a lot of girls (and men) here very lonely. Even still, the girls here by and large just sit around wondering why men won’t ask them out.

    If the ratio of girls to guys at the college is roughly in balance, it seems there would be ample expressions of interest from the girls. The guys just have to be able to pick up and recognize the interest before asking them out. Fear of rejection and coming across as desperate is simply blue pill thinking. And just what are these unreasonable female expectations on the campus? Debt is real and needs to be addressed, but I sense a defeatist attitude which is a stumbling block to asking these girls out and learning about how they plan to pay back the loans.

    I don’t want to come across as desperate, I fear rejection, there are unreasonable female expectations (which are undefined), there is student debt, etc. are just excuses and not red pill thinking.

  34. feeriker says:

    If the ratio of girls to guys at the college is roughly in balance, it seems there would be ample expressions of interest from the girls.

    No. As others here have pointed out, the Pareto Rule is in effect, just like it is in the secular world: 80-plus percent of the women are attracted to 20 percent (or fewer) of the men. That majority of men aren’t getting ANY “expressions of interest” from ANY of the women.

  35. @Novaseeker, exactly that’s exactly what I was talking about. I am shocked to hear it was going down like that in the 80s though.

  36. @Joe2, also,not to be too harsh on you, there’s an element of red pill game thinking that strikes me exactly like fraudulent faith healing. There’s always an out for the charlatan, he can always say “you didn’t have enough faith”. I think I see the same thing with “game”, whenever it fails, it didn’t really fail you just didn’t have enough game. See what I mean?

    It’s not about being defeatist, and honestly whenever I hear the words “just making excuses”, I have to ask how would you know? Can’t make bricks without straw? I don’t wanna hear excuses. See what I mean? Not saying excuses don’t exist but past a certain point, you have to say that something’s broken. “Working hard” is good advice, but you can wind up like Boxer in Animal Farm, hard work can’t replace hard thought.

  37. Anonymous Reader says:

    greenmantle
    @Novaseeker, exactly that’s exactly what I was talking about. I am shocked to hear it was going down like that in the 80s though.

    Why? Hypergamy isn’t new, you know. I’m pretty sure that if we got into a time machine and went back to the 1950’s we’d find 80% of the college girls on a campus pining after 20% of the men, then when Mr. Perfect marries someone else, all the other girls getting their MRS degree with Mr. Good Enough. “Settling” is not a new concept. Of course prior to 1970 or so, a married woman couldn’t detonate a marriage for ca$h and prizes because she was unhaaapy. Prior to the mid 1970’s there wasn’t an entire industry devoted to the task, and prior to 1994 she couldn’t just pick up the phone and mutter “I’m afraid” in order to have her soon-to-be-ex-husband removed by force.

    But hypergamy hasn’t changed. That 80 / 20 rule of attraction just was hidden better, that’s all.

  38. Anonymous Reader says:

    vfm7916
    Soon it will be an act of rebellion to practice Game.

    It’s already an act of rebellion to practice Game that isn’t “good enough”.

    Good examples given about the Christian colleges. I wonder how successful a man would be if he maintained frame and hand in that kind of environment?

    Very much so. He would have his pick of the women. The same is true to a lesser extent on other campuses, even Enormous State U. A lot of college aged men are like whipped dogs, for various reasons, and the girls are hungry for masculinity.

    This situation prompts the aging Boomer pastors to — shame the men, whipping them even more. The beatings (of men) will continue until morale improves.

    Teaching any sort of basic masculinity (i.e. Game) to a college man, especially a churchgoing one, is a subversive act. Subvert your nearest college soon!

  39. TheTraveler says:

    Extremes are no good, especiallyfor marriage..

    The guy in this article…that’s not marriage, regardless what he calls it. And I doubt it’s even remotely plrleasing to the Almighty. That’s the liberal side.

    Then again, super-religious people are in danger of winding up in loveless, joyless marriages. This is especially true of people devoted to very strict rules based on an almost masochistically grim interpretation of the Bible. They have tons of kids (often horrid brats, interestingly), but mom and dad don’t even look at each other. You can tell there’s no affection there, no spark. They have all the outward trappings of holiness, in dress, manner, speech.
    But all religiosity, zero joy. I watched one such miserable union, seemingly based on religious-rules, fall apart in slow motion. Sad…mom sits with 3 of the kids, dad with 2, and the spouses never talk to each other in public.

  40. Frank K says:

    Really the way your President has been treated leaves the rest of us a bit speechless.

    You have to understand that we are in the middle of a cold civil war over here. Unfortunately, the leftists are winning.

  41. Frank K says:

    Extremes are no good, especiallyfor marriage.

    That’s the argument that gave us no fault divorce, high divorce rates, same sex marriage and 50% of all children born out of wedlock All of these things have been sold to us as being “reasonable”, the results be damned.

  42. Anon Joe says:

    I’m not sure this is the best place for this, but its something I want to send Dalrock’s way. I’ll relate it to this post by saying that the dude in the following link is trying to signal MAXIMUM Chivalry as a ploy to gain fame….

    https://nypost.com/2019/04/06/family-of-elizabeth-holmes-fiance-worry-she-has-brainwashed-him-source/

    My take away is how striking the similarly is between this dude and Paris Hilton. He must be aware that he is following her playbook. But instead of posting a sex tape, this hotel hier is using a wedding (a female fantasy) to rase his star. In some ways its brilliant every woman who ever took financial advantage of a man, iethor through devorce of other means, can (subcontiosly?) point to Elizabeth Holmes and think….. “Look, that bitch can defraud thousands of invesors (men) of millions of dollars…. and she can still have a story book engagement/wedding…. …. then surely with my past, ai can do the same.”

    This assumes that he is “using her,” as the very end of the article implies….. its possible he’s just a rich idiot.

  43. TheTraveler says:

    Why don’t guys ask out girls?

    Girl flirts with guy. Spends all evening, or several weeks, talking to him. He asks her for her number. She shoots him down: “I have a boyfriend,” or just laughs, “No.” Sometimes some guy, like an “ex”-bf she still “hangs out” with appears.

    Online is even worse. 15 years ago, if she wrote back (15 to 20% of the time), 70% chance of a number, and almost certainly a date. Now that women have discovered online dating as an ego-booster, if she writes back (<10%), she's probably trolling for attention and will ghost you. Getting her number (<10% of those who respond) and a date…maybe 5% of those who respond.

  44. Anonymous Reader says:

    Opus
    I thought everything was settled in November 2017 – give the rest of us some breathing space.

    Of course not. Because the Party must win every election. It’s like the way the EU was created; how many times was Ireland required to vote? As many as it took for “progress” to win, of course. Or take Brexit – I thought everything was settled summer 2016, but no? Not yet? Soon, maybe? Mayb not?

    Trump over here, Brexit over there…the fury from certain parties is the same. IMO it is the same group of Davos-rich, throwing their toys out of the pram in a temper tantrum because someone said “no” to them about something, and is trying to make it stick.

    In fact, Soros…eh, never mind. Let’s not go there.

  45. Dalrock says:

    @greenmantlehoyos

    @Novaseeker, exactly that’s exactly what I was talking about. I am shocked to hear it was going down like that in the 80s though.

    @Anon Reader

    Why? Hypergamy isn’t new, you know. I’m pretty sure that if we got into a time machine and went back to the 1950’s we’d find 80% of the college girls on a campus pining after 20% of the men, then when Mr. Perfect marries someone else, all the other girls getting their MRS degree with Mr. Good Enough. “Settling” is not a new concept.

    What has changed over time is the timing of women competing to pair off with the best husband material man they could pair off with. When I was in college in the late eighties/early nineties, this happened (for men) around the last two years of college. That suggests the goal was to have a husband or husband placeholder picked out by graduation, with a target wedding date shortly after graduation. This also fits with the median age of marriage in the 1990s at age 24. Back in the 50s and 60s the median age of marriage for women in the US was age 20, so I expect the pairing off started in high school.

    I’ve written about the missing signal for men, but there is also a problem of a missing signal for women. In the past there were clear milestones when the women around them were pairing off with real life husband suitable (for the most part) men. They gleaned real MMV information from observing and participating in this intra-sexual competition. Now the median age of marriage for women is pushed out to just shy of their 28th birthday. Not only does this occur after their pool of comparable age men is much smaller (out of school, etc), but the process is also much more spread out compared to the past, diluting the amount of information they have at their disposal.

    The modern Christian game of make believe that men are driving this by not asking out the women all around them who are dying to marry them only makes this worse. While the process is being driven primarily by the collective choices of women, the lack of information exacerbated by active disinformation really is harmful to women. Most Christian women still muddle through and don’t fail spectacularly in this regard, but the ones who do fail spectacularly are considered the wise experts and write books on how young women should follow their lead.

  46. Anonymous Reader says:

    TheTraveler
    Why don’t guys ask out girls?

    How old are you?

  47. Dalrock says:

    Adding a bit more to the above, I think there was a qualitative difference to the process when women for the most part married in their early 20s. This greatly limited the AF part of the AF/BB strategy, and actually excluded the AF phase for a large number of young women. Now they marinate in the AF stage for over a decade, competing with other women for slots on the rotating cock carousel. It has to really impair their ability to accurately understand their MMV. While it is true that women can and do marry men they aren’t attracted to, I also think in a well functioning society with early marriage women can be and often are attracted to their beta husbands.

  48. Novaseeker says:

    What has changed over time was the timing of women competing to pair off with the best husband material man they could pair off with. When I was in college in the late eighties/early nineties, this happened (for men) around the last two years of college. That suggests the goal was to have a husband or husband placeholder picked out by graduation, with a target wedding date shortly after graduation. This also fits with the median age of marriage in the 1990s at age 24.

    In general that was the case then, yes.

    At my university (one of the “elite private research” ones), the girls were not interested in getting married that young even back then (I graduated in the late 80s). They were interested in grad and professional school, and building a career and marrying later … so I guess I got a preview of coming attractions in terms of how the women in my school (and similar ones) were behaving even then, before it spread to the wider culture. We also had very little actual dating on our campus, because many people were reluctant to get “involved” too much because they wanted to keep options open for grad/prof school and so on — lots of hooking up, lots of “hanging out” (regular hookups without dating and without a “relationship”) … again all early instances of what became normalized throughout the culture decades later, I suppose. Of the few actual “relationships” I knew of my senior year, almost all of them broke up in the second half of the year — amicably as far as I could tell in most cases — because of different plans for the next step of the career building exercise, while a few couples coordinated their plans and ended up marrying a few years later — that was extremely uncommon, however.

    Again, my school was an outlier at the time, I think, because of the kind of students there, but it turns out that the kind of sex/dating(not) culture we had then has been what has later spread throughout the culture as most women, not just the “gunners” like the ones at my school, delayed marriage.

  49. TheTraveler says:

    @Frank K
    Extremes are NOT good. That doesn’t mean that “the middle” is the happy medium.

    Christ himself embodied this. He prayed, He fasted. He also went to civilized dinner parties for wholesome FUN (a dirty word across Christianity) with decent, upright folk.

    Helpmeet doesn’t mean equal partner. It doesn’t mean abject servant, either.

  50. Anonymous Reader says:

    Dalrock, if I read Wagner Tench correctly, he is at a church-oriented school where men and women paring up to marry while still in college is the norm, or at least held up as the norm. More like the experience of previous generations in culturally conservative colleges. So the amount of carousel riding isn’t zero, but it’s lower than the standard secular track of “school – grad school / internship / first job / second job / husband hunting begins at 27”.

    Within my social circle some churchgoing people send their children to private schools for K – 12 and then to a Christian college afterwards; the expectation is strong for those children to meet someone and mate before the senior year of college. Typical colleges are small (1,000 to 5,000 students) humanities focused, with a number of men planning to become pastors.

    I believe that’s what Wagner Trench is describing. So our standard model doesn’t quite apply.

  51. BillyS says:

    Traveler,

    I would bet most of the women in the examples of “bad marriages” you gave are really harpies underneath. They may keep it in check, but they never support their husband (as a helpmeet should) and he has learned to not bother trying to reach out.

    That requires a simple fix, but I suspect even you would not support it.

  52. Joe2 says:

    @feeriker, greenmantlehoyos

    Thanks for the responses.

    I thought that “Wagner Tench” was extremely vague in the description of his campus life and was relying on the reader to fill in the details. Sorry, but I don’t interpret vagueness and omissions in the writer’s favor. He concludes,

    One of my baby boomer professors goes on rants blaming it all on technology, and I just laugh. Maybe if college wasn’t so damn expensive and more men could have a relationship/marriage without debasing themselves and risking emasculation, the marriage rates would go up.

    Again, there are no details. Did Wagner Tench bring these reasons to the attention of the baby boom professor? What was the professor’s response? We don’t know.

  53. Anonymous Reader says:

    Joe2
    I thought that “Wagner Tench” was extremely vague in the description of his campus life and was relying on the reader to fill in the details.

    Likely he isn’t interested in doxxing his college for some reason or other. Can you guess why that might be? Plus he is assuming that readers have enough common experience to fill in the gaps, but most people over 40 had a very different college experience.

    Again, there are no details.

    Possibly because he didn’t see a reason for them, and again does not want to end up on the spit of a Twitter / Instagram mob.

    Did Wagner Tench bring these reasons to the attention of the baby boom professor?

    LOL! Almost certainly not. When you were in college back in the previous century, would you have done so? C’mon, most likely the classes at that college are 10 to 30 people, so anyone who challenges the Old Steer Boomer will stand out like a road flare.

    What was the professor’s response?

    Either more mooooos or a torrent of verbal diarrhea would be options. There are others, but the “listens to student, thinks then responds” is off the table. It would be like trying to talk to Tim Bayly or Doug Wilson about “women and marriage”, you see?

    We don’t know.

    Who’s “we”?

    C’mon, when was the last time you were on a college campus with your eyes and ears open, wearing The Glasses to see interactions clearly, and your mouth shut? That’s a good way to learn what reality actually looks like: see what’s there, listen, don’t talk. I’m guessing you were in college 20 – 30 years ago. You can’t relate to a 20-something man on a small church-college campus because your own personal experiences were nothing like that.
    Am I correct?

  54. Frank K says:

    Extremes are NOT good. That doesn’t mean that “the middle” is the happy medium.

    You are being purposefully vague.

  55. seventiesjason says:

    My undergrad was about 600 students, you had to be careful who you hooked up with because the whole campus would know by 6am the next morning, and it was in the middle of nowhere (a very beautiful nowhere I might add, but the nearest city…Rutland was a 45 minute drive)….and Rutland was maybe 20 thousand people. I never had these problems with hooking up…….but that night about 90% of the campus got dosed on high grade LSD in early 1991 was a night no one who was there will ever forget…..and then skiing all day at Killington, a short drive away.

    Back at the end of the 1980’s / early 1990’s people still had to talk to each other. You had to meet people. Mixer dances, campus activities…….clubs…..go to other dorms and just hang out. There was no cable TV or phone lines in our dorms (not enough lines in the state of Vermont to do this at that time). There was the common room in every dorm……TV…fire blazing in the fireplace……everyone chain smoking, slagging the famous, usually it was snowing outside…..you just had to talk to people. You were *forced* to.

    Grad school was 95% men, and the women were there hardly drove you mad with desire……and the nine women that were decent looking were dating the hockey players and only hung at the Poly Fieldhouse.

    Different times. So glad I am not a college student today.

  56. Darwinian Arminian says:

    @Novaseeker
    “. . . But what happens is that in, say a group of 10 people, 5 of each sex, all 5 women want the same 1-2 of the guys, and the other 3-4 guys are seen as “friend only” guys. That’s the dynamic.”

    When we’re considering single men and women in a church context, I’d suggest that there’s another factor that exacerbates this trend even further: The single men can often expect the clergy to actively work against any romantic ambitions they might have, even if they have to do so right from the pulpit. Just think about what you usually hear when pastors direct a sermon towards young, unmarried men in their congregation. How are these men going to be addressed by the ranking alpha in the room? Most of the time as “Boys Who Can Shave,” “Peter Pan Man-Boys,” “Kidults,” and “Porn-heads” that have to be told one thing: “You need to grow up!” For a single man interested in finding a woman, just sitting in the pews to hear a message like this will be a demonstration of low sexual market value, and why not? It’s not like the pastor isn’t using his platform to tell the church’s single women what a terrible relationship prospect you would be.

    Wagner Tech mentioned that he’d seen a rise in interracial dating with more white men deciding to sit out the dating game in situations like this but in a lot of the churches I’ve attended there’s a similar pattern that follows: Women will still seek out lovers, but they’ll often choose to select one from outside the population that attends their house of worship. It often won’t even be an obstacle if their chosen suitor doesn’t share the faith — just keep in mind that church polling has often found that women in church are more likely than men to marry a nonbeliever, and that after the marriage their husbands are statistically unlikely to convert (which also means that when she continues attending without him, the church’s imbalanced gender ratio will only skew even further towards an excess of women).

    It’s not uncommon to see modern church leaders wonder in public why the men of their congregations aren’t pairing off with the “godly single women” that they seem to have in abundance. To “leaders” such as this, I’d like to offer some food for thought: When you’re taking public dumps in the local well, you shouldn’t be horribly surprised to discover that people are no longer interested in drinking from it.

  57. TheTraveler says:

    @BillyS

    I have no idea about their homelife. You may be right, the woman may well be a fake-helpmeet.

    Or maybe both parties are too into the churchian appearances–dowdy clothing, pious expressions, too many kids (yes, there is such a thing: don’t have more than you can control; that’s what NFP is for), and general air Following The Rules, even those rules are man-made churchian, and not actual Christian.

    As for fixes, it’s simple. Live a pious life without making a show of it — analagous to the “glum expression” of fasting hypocrites from the Bible.

  58. Wagner Tench says:

    @greenmantlehoyos

    Actually, the best looking/most attractive men (typically tall, muscular guys) will typically just have girls gravitate toward them in a casual social setting, although they often end up pairing off. I’ve seen athletes with as many as five girls talking with them and looking at them with doe eyes as they giggle at a mediocre joke.

    To be fair, I had a few socially awkward girls try to either ask me out or hint at it, but they’ve always been noticeably crazy, and they are an extreme exception.

    What you described happens sometimes, but the 80% guys have actually largely given up or are unwilling to risk the social ramifications of being unsuccessful at dating at this verrrry marriage-minded school. It is a very big deal here to ask someone on a date, so you can’t just “move on” from a rejection or breakup, even if it was only a few weeks long.

    If two students want to get serious, iy actuslly tends to happen quickly, but it’s EXTREMELY rare.

  59. locustyears says:

    @Hmm his gay marriage has moved home closer to God and to
    God’s hand of wrathful judgement.

  60. Wagner Tench says:

    @Joe2

    The ratio at my school is closer to 60% female to 40% male. It’s true that some men are oblivious or wimps, but the truth is that a lot of people are either too busy or unwilling to date the people available within the university’s culture.

    In fact, the culture is a massive hindrance here. If a man dates a girl and it doesn’t work out, now all of her friends are off limits and they all know what happened (and it’s all taken too seriously because of social shaming). Guys here can’t run game unless they are natural alphas, and even then they’re in for a lot of resistance. Chivalry is the standard, and if a guy tries dating casually just to get to know girls (even without premarital sex), he is promptly labeled a player. Of course, if he is already part of the top 10-20%, the really cute girls don’t particularly care. I have a friend who had a bad breakup, and his entire social circle split in two. There are still friends of his ex who really dislike him, and it was a really shitty ordeal for him. This is a big deal for men. We don’t have the same support networks that girls do.

    As far as unreasonable demands, most girls here demand full “relationship” status too fast and want to rush into marriage, unless they want to wait on marriage, in which case the man might be expected to wait around for several years before being allowed sexual access. In the meantime, she receives social status from him and often financial support. Additionally, they typically expect their boyfriends to act “whipped” in general (I shouldn’t need to explain that), and of course, hypergamy means that it is extremely difficult for even an above average man to find a marriageable woman. And that’s not even mentioning the Christian feminists, of which there are many. Of course, many people here do have premarital sex. I confess I have been one of them. It is done on the down-low, and it is kept quiet, but it happens. And it is not uncommon.

    Debt is a HUGE and underrated issue here. Many girls are over $50,000 in debt. Heck, I’m over $50,000 in debt. Thank God my parents support me. Also a plus that I have a friend in the entertainment industry who has promised me a decent job of some sort. She isn’t a Christian, though. I had to look outside the church to get that sort of help, of course.

    I’ve tentatively brought up the issues with my baby boomer professor later on in a private conversation. Of course, that didn’t change his mind. He nodded and acknowledged me, but it didn’t change his rhetoric. He really is a great guy, but he’s blindly harping on guys, and he’s obviously easier on the girls.

    I’m really trying very hard not to dox my college. I apologize for the vagueness.

  61. Karl says:

    The idea that even real, heterosexual marriage brings us closer to God is a falsehood in itself:

    “I want you to be free from anxieties. The unmarried man is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to please the Lord. But the married man is anxious about worldly things, how to please his wife, and his interests are divided. And the unmarried or betrothed woman is anxious about the things of the Lord, how to be holy in body and spirit. But the married woman is anxious about worldly things, how to please her husband.”
    1 Corinthians 7:32-34 (ESV)

    Marriage has never been about “mov[ing] closer to God.”

    They are trying to copy a virtue of heterosexual marriage that never existed in the first place. The whole “my wife brings me closer to God” (it’s always the wife, isn’t it, unless it’s a gay marriage apparently…) idea is probably rooted in courtly love. It’s definitely not rooted in the Bible.

  62. Spike says:

    Buttigieg has a critique written about him on PJ media. In that analysis, the author rightly points out that Buttigieg uses selecto-Christianity: He will attack Christianity because it is ”anti-gay”, despite the Bible being anti-sin-of-every-type. He has omitted repentance, cross-bearing and spiritual sacrifice and Judgement of God – not His servants – on sin.
    This is simply another extrapolation of Buttigieg’s reasoning and it is feminist /dialectic/bitchy in nature. I don’t doubt it ”has brought him closer to God”, except that ”God” in this case is Dionysius or Baphomet not Yahweh.
    At the heart of Buttigieg is his idolatry. His idol is sex and he is not going to let that go. We should not ever be surprised, since it is exactly what ”christian” feminists and ”christian” lesbians have been saying in order to get accepted.
    Ultimately, he is on the side of the 3 governors of the states who legalized birth-day abortion legislation. He isn’t in good shape to criticise anyone’s spiritual choices.

  63. TheTraveler says:

    @Karl

    Gen 2:18, KJV:
    “And the LORD God said, It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”

    Traditional Wedding Language:
    “…holy matrimony, which is an honorable estate, instituted of God in the time of man’s innocency, signifying to us the mystical union which is between Christ and His Church.”

    Many Christian denominations regard marriage as a sacrament, given by man and woman to each other; unlike the (normal form) of all other sacraments, in matrimony, the clergyman is merely a witness.

    If all that doesn’t convince someone that marriage brings one closer to God, I don’t know what does.

  64. Anon says:

    Both the correct and incorrect pronunciations of his last name are quite apt for a gay man.

    That said, I am actually glad that he is checkmating cuckservatives so skillfully. In a way, they are more loathsome than he is.

  65. Lost Patrol says:

    @ Wagner Tench

    I’m really trying very hard not to dox my college.

    What you’ve reported so far is likely true at all of them. You’re not doxxing your particular school so much as the entire industry of Christian colleges, and none of it is surprising in the least to most men reading here.

    This website ranks 36 of them in CA. It’s probably not all inclusive.

    https://www.niche.com/colleges/search/best-christian-colleges/s/california/

  66. Anon says:

    For gay men to bring the idea into their marriages is a fully logical next step.

    I stand by my prediction that cuckservative men will shame normal XY men for their unwillingness to marry XY transgendered ‘women’. This will happen as soon as 2021 or 2022.

    Cuckservatives will do this and claim that this proves how pro-marriage they are.

  67. Novaseeker,

    This is an overall trend. Here in the DC region, the incidence of interracial couples (almost all of the increase being BM/WW) has, compared to say 10 years ago, increased by 2 or 3 times. It’s still not a huge number, but it’s common enough so as to be unremarkable…..

    I think there are many reasons for this, but overall the main one is that white men’s status continues to deteriorate, making them less attractive to women in general and white women in particular.

    I don’t care that white women are increasingly choosing black men. But I have to (very respectfully) disagree with the reason you gave. Having been intimate with quite a few white women who were with black men before they were with me, they admitted (somewhat reluctantly) that the main reason they chose black men over white men was…. the physical.

    That is all I’m going to say about that.

  68. Joe2 says:

    @Wagner Tench

    Of course, many people here do have premarital sex. I confess I have been one of them. It is done on the down-low, and it is kept quiet, but it happens.

    All hope isn’t lost! You just might have what it takes to cultivate a long term friend with benefits relationship with one or more of the adorable blondes and redheads you have seen on campus.

  69. Anon says:

    Novaseeker,

    Here in the DC region, the incidence of interracial couples (almost all of the increase being BM/WW) has, compared to say 10 years ago, increased by 2 or 3 times.

    I told you this would happen. Several years ago, you noted that in NoVa, there was almost none of this.

    At that time, I pointed out that as California goes, so goes the nation. California, even then (more so now), on account of a low number of black people, has very high incidence of white with Hispanic or Asian pairings.

    So much so, that in urban CA :

    Half of all young people are in no relationship.
    A quarter are in a relationship with someone of a different race.
    A quarter are in a relationship with someone of the same race.

  70. BillyS says:

    Or maybe both parties are too into the churchian appearances–dowdy clothing, pious expressions, too many kids (yes, there is such a thing: don’t have more than you can control; that’s what NFP is for), and general air Following The Rules, even those rules are man-made churchian, and not actual Christian.

    So you buy into the modern myth that is leading toward the extinction of those who follow it.

    Any couple working together can “control” far more children than most realize. Many today cringe from it, but that is more their own selfishness than anything else. You may not need 8 or 12, but 3-6 is quite doable for all but very exceptional cases. You may not get to have them involved with as many events as many think necessary today, but family is far more important than those events.

    You would be one of the people I would despise for denigrating our ability to live up to what God has provided. I am not a strong adherent to RCC teaching on this, but I can’t help but think that we are really messing with things with a lot of modern birth control and I bet some even leads to the abortion/murder so many Christians claim to oppose but still support in practice.

    Perhaps I am colored by not having any children with my genes on this earth, but arbitrarily stopping for foolish reasons is idiotic.

  71. Opus says:

    What I, over brunch, would like to have asked the potential Democratic candidate was ‘so you tell me that you have been married to Chasten for some two years (that-don’t-impressa-me-much) and in that time how many other men have you indulged with, sexually?’

    I first discovered the concept of brunch when I sojourned in the District of Colombia and as power town is full of young childless professionals who are not native to D.C. I came to the view that brunch exists and only because Sunday mornings are free for them to engage sexually with whomsoever they went to bed with the previous night. Since departing form D.C. I have never come across the concept or the term, Brunch and I am sure it is unknown over here. Take yesterday when – it was about mid-day – I was at the cafeteria of a large store (I was picking up my e-bay purchase) and I asked for Ham Egg and Chips and a cup of tea. Sorry Luv, I am told, no Ham. That I replied is what you also told me yesterday. I can do you Bacon was the response. I declined and said that as there was no bacon I would have the All-Day breakfast – does America have the concept All-Day-Breakfast? It reminds me somewhat of this

    which is what happens when you are the world greatest empire = ever – but pick a fight with the Germans.

  72. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Wegner Tench: I’m really trying very hard not to dox my college.

    Pepperdine?

  73. Opus says:

    I need to add a little to the Dalrock/Novaseeker discussion of marrying age and the consequences thereof. America as a country had a large undergraduate population even when in my day in England the minimum school leaving age at which most people left school was fifteen – consider the Lucille Ball/Richard Carlson flick Too Many Girls from 1940 set at at Pottawatomie College – quite unthinkable for the England of the day or any day until very recently. In the days of which I recall (the 1970s) the average marrying age for a woman was 20.8 years. In consequence as most people do not meet on a Monday and marry the following Saturday but date for a year or two, most women had met and were dating their future husband whilst still at secondary school – some even had their first child whilst still at school. This was not a wholly unalloyed pleasure for the middle-class aspiring professional male because being stuck at college and without any income and usually any access to females (college being almost entirely male) by the time he had embarked on working life (say in his mid-twenties) he not did not know but would have been far too old for the teenagers then marrying – and with some it would have also been illegal. Such men would then, few women being left over, often marry a typist or aging spinster type – the first person ever to show any interest in them. I saw these phenomena up-close on far too many occasions.

    Of the females who married at or straight out of school most were marrying their first boyfriend and as Dalrock indicates (I think) knowing nothing better were head-over-heels in love with their man! This was how it worked in the inter-sexual war between these school girls. The first thing to do was to acquire a boyfriend, then after holding out for a suitable time, to do it (!!!!), Time would pass and then the next thing that had to happen so as to demonstrate that they were not the dreaded slut, it being their female peers who would cast that aspersion, they had to indicate that at some future date which was set that they would then become engaged to their boyfriend. On reaching that time they then became engaged to be married both events showing that they were not sluts. They then had to marry proving ditto. Once having married of course they quickly headed for the divorce courts but Divorce did not mean that they were sluts merely that their husband was after all a terrible person and that they were entitled to someone better.

    It is arguable that the sending of women to college, the invention of the pill, the legalisation of abortion and so on is a devious plot by men to ensure that they too have the ability to be their own Casanova and once again women being the hardest hit.

  74. TheTraveler says:

    @BillyS

    So I “would be” someone you “despise.”

    Those who claim most loudly to be sounding Gabriel’s trumpet, I have found, are the least charitable. In fact, “charity” (the quality of forgiving love) seems aggressively absent from their pronouncements.

  75. Scott says:

    Now here’s my experience please tell me if it’s like that still. You have groups, for the sake of math let’s say 10 guys and 10 girls. What happens is the group hangs out, and doesn’t pair off because basically 8 of the girls are all auditioning for one guy and enjoying attention from the rest. Eventually around senior year top dog picks one and they start dating. Maybe one more couple materializes, and the remainder don’t really get together as graduation approaches and no one wants to start anything. About right?

    Yes.

    Pepperdine University was like this in the 90s. Only, in my case there was a twist. I played the “bad boy” who didn’t actually go to college because I was a working class guy who came to campus on weekends to pick up my girfriend and hang out with her (and the group you desribed). I was in night school trying to scrap out a bachelors degree but you know, not an elite college. I never really fit into the group but that’s what my girlfriend actually liked about it. My existence really pissed off her parents and her friends thought I was trash.

    And at the end, when the one guy they all liked got married, the rest took the orbiters one by one. And pretty much all of them are divorced now.

  76. feministhater says:

    And at the end, when the one guy they all liked got married, the rest took the orbiters one by one. And pretty much all of them are divorced now.

    Yay! Go team! I just could not be bothered trying to ‘find the one’ when this is the outcome. Marriage is done. In the shitter. Down in the toilet bowl, being shat on by one and all until, finally..mercifully, being flushed down into the vile, putrid and toxic sewer system where it belongs.

  77. Novaseeker says:

    At that time, I pointed out that as California goes, so goes the nation. California, even then (more so now), on account of a low number of black people, has very high incidence of white with Hispanic or Asian pairings.

    Perhaps, but we aren’t seeing what California has. Here almost all of the increase is with BM/WW pairings. The number of AW/WM pairings is stable. The number of AM/WW pairings hasn’t budged and is very low, as is the number of BW/WM pairings. Hispanic/white pairings are always hard to judge because Hispanics are not one “race” — there were always a lot of pairings between “white” Hispanics and whites of both sexes (more on the HF/WM side somewhat), and almost no pairings between “mestizo” Hispanics and whites of either sex — that is still the case here. What’s changed dramatically is that white girls are dating black men much, much more often than even in the recent past.

  78. Novaseeker says:

    they admitted (somewhat reluctantly) that the main reason they chose black men over white men was…. the physical.

    Sure, but that doesn’t explain the increase. That preference has long been the case, and is well known — no reason to be shy about it, we are all well aware of it. But what we are seeing, at least in DC in the last 5-10 years, is a substantial increase in these pairings. BM’s “physicality” hasn’t changed in that period. Women’s preferences for that “physicality” haven’t changed, either, and are constant. What has changed is that WM’s status is decreasing, in relative terms. This is therefore a much more likely explanation for the increase in the incidence of these relationships than the physical issue is … unless you have a plausible explanation for why increasing numbers of women are suddenly prioritizing that physical preference today as compared with ten years ago?

  79. Novaseeker says:

    If a man dates a girl and it doesn’t work out, now all of her friends are off limits and they all know what happened (and it’s all taken too seriously because of social shaming). Guys here can’t run game unless they are natural alphas, and even then they’re in for a lot of resistance. Chivalry is the standard, and if a guy tries dating casually just to get to know girls (even without premarital sex), he is promptly labeled a player. Of course, if he is already part of the top 10-20%, the really cute girls don’t particularly care. I have a friend who had a bad breakup, and his entire social circle split in two. There are still friends of his ex who really dislike him, and it was a really shitty ordeal for him. This is a big deal for men. We don’t have the same support networks that girls do.

    Yes, this is exactly the dynamic in churches as well. Basically it’s a “one and done” system, such that if you go on a couple of dates and it goes nowhere, you’re done in the whole church — no other woman there will date you because you are now “damaged”. You get one shot, and if it doesn’t work, you need to move on to another church entirely. One and done — that’s how it is socially in most churches. Obviously on a campus you can’t just “move on”, so you’re more stuck in the dynamic. Luckily my own campus did not have this dynamic, but it isn’t surprising that it’s the dynamic on a Christian campus, because it’s the same dynamic in most churches.

  80. Tim from Nashua says:

    Marriage is as the Bible states: one man and one man, for life. Should we be blessed, God confirms the marriage with children. What God has joined/yoked together, let no man put asunder. The yoked together means pulling in the same direction. The struggle to pull in different directions is a result of sin in our lives, even those in Christ. The Churchian ritual of marriage means little to God. The one man and one woman joined together for life means a lot to Him.

    This obviously leaves Ghey Mirage ( I like whoever used that first ) on the outside, unable to look in.
    Peter ButtGig may be deluded, or he may be brazenly lying. DemocRats are known for both.

  81. Scott says:

    FH

    It was actually pretty profound/abrupt after the one or two top dogs got married

    There was this one guy who was rutting after a girl hard all four years. He later became a prominent orthodontist and dental professor in Southern California

    All of the sudden they were getting married. It was like “you? And him? 6 months ago you wouldn’t piss on him if he was on fire.”

    Weird

  82. Scott says:

    I hadnt t thought of that in a long time.

    We’re all in our late 40s now. It all seems so stupid. Life passes by in an instant.

  83. chronoblip says:

    “While it is true that women can and do marry men they aren’t attracted to, I also think in a well functioning society with early marriage women can be and often are attracted to their beta husbands.”

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/09/110922134617.htm

    “Some brain wiring continues to develop well into our 20s…”

    What’s possible is that when a young woman’s brain development includes “being married” and “having children”, not to mention growing up being primed for what what to expect and her own parents behavior providing a “default” template, her brain is permanently shaped to make dealing with the inevitable struggles of such things easier and “feel right” or “feel natural”.

    This could be rationalized afterwards by her conscious brain as “attraction”, when logically prior to that it’s really just her subconscious desire to exist in a familiar place, and men who can evoke that sense of familiarity will then come across as more attractive.

  84. feeriker says:

    What’s changed dramatically is that white girls are dating black men much, much more often than even in the recent past.

    Some would say that black men are suffering the punishment they deserve (even though, difficult as it is to believe, the white slags are a half step above the black ones they’re forsaking).

  85. seventiesjason says:

    I am a Californian……plenty of american blacks out here, and when you watch the TV……oh you know….50% of the commericals now have a black in them…every news station has a black anchor, co-anchor and several “out on the street reporters”…you would think the state or the nation is 50% black.

    Been to LA? I have. Been to Oakland? I live a short 45 minutes drive away. Richmond? Hunters Point? For a state that has “few” blacks, many of the larger cities do have a significant population.

    As for white women dating a black men? I have no problem with interacial dating or marriage. What I do notice from a large segment of the “younger white women” doing this is to “prove” or “virtue signal” on how “un-racist” they are…………true love? Sure, maybe some.

    SInce I moved out here in 1994, I have seen a huge increase of the white guy / asian girl thing…..and it’s not because of ‘yellow fever’

    It’s because many Asian women are actually femme, and a lot of the men with them are “average guys” who were frozen out of market to even *dare* talk to a white woman, being the entitled princess that she is……….a tall, slender dorky white guy gets shot down a trillion times by white girls, asks out an Asian girl……she says “sure” and love happens.

  86. Opus says:

    Why so coy Novaseeker? Explain yourself! Are you referring to the phenomena of BBC or something else? Is it also the case (as you all know) that D.C., itself, is a 97% black city and thus the women are rather spoiled for choice. I have been romantically linked to a few black girls and have had the opportunity; in fact one not just begging me but grabbing me and pulling me towards the bed but whether Asian or Black and much to my surprise with them I just can’t… That was the case years before I became a paid-up Racist and so it must be something internal and thus I cannot understand how a white woman can go with a black man but then I am equally lost as to how two men could fall for each other. I am still not sure I believe it – my theory being that Gay is merely a political and not a true sexual movement. What I have noticed is that in black male/white female couples where there is a child it is always the black male and not the white woman who is seen pushing the perambulator. Perhaps these women just want an unpaid servant – in short a house nigel.

  87. Novaseeker says:

    @Opus —

    Is it also the case (as you all know) that D.C., itself, is a 97% black city and thus the women are rather spoiled for choice.

    DC isn’t 97% black lol. It’s been a while since you’ve lived here, I think. As of 2019, 50.1% black, 42.9% white (35.5 non-Hispanic white), 3.8% Asian, rest is trace. But of course DC itself is ~600,000 people in a metro area of around 6 million (no, that doesn’t include Baltimore … if you include Baltimore and its burbclaves it jumps to around 9 million). The black population among that larger group, other than a large percentage of middle class black people in Prince George’s County Maryland, is not high: (per US census, Fairfax County VA 10.4% black, 67% white, 20% Asian, Arlington County 9.5% black, 75% white, Montgomery County MD, black 20%, white 60%, Asian 16% — these are all 2017/18 numbers …). The phenomenon is notable throughout the mostly white suburbias, and the guys involved aren’t the black guys who live in the “District” per se … it’s the black guys from the burbs.

    Are you referring to the phenomena of BBC or something else?

    It’s everything under the rubric physical — height, build, and yes “BBC”. It’s the entire rubric. But it isn’t new, and it doesn’t explain the recent change — that’s my point.

  88. Frank K says:

    You may not need 8 or 12, but 3-6 is quite doable

    I was once berated by a coworker when he learned that we have 3. He asked me if I had ever heard of a condom. I burst out laughing. And yes, he and his wife were childless.

    I often wish that we had had at least one more. Too late for that now.

  89. Frank K says:

    I bet some even leads to the abortion/murder so many Christians claim to oppose but still support in practice

    While the pill primarily works by preventing ovulation, my understanding is that there is also an abortifacent facet to it, where it can prevent an embryo from attaching to the uterus.

  90. Damn Crackers says:

    The left-hand path always leads to “unnatural” pairings. How many laws, prophets, commandments of God warn believers to stay away from sex magic?

    To paraphrase Ecclesiastes there is a time and place for everything.

  91. Frank K says:

    What I do notice from a large segment of the “younger white women” doing this is to “prove” or “virtue signal” on how “un-racist” they are

    I find this explanation to be very plausible, plus the fact that they wanted to do it in the first place, and now they can claim they’re uber cool.

  92. Damn Crackers says:

    @Frank K – “You may not need 8 or 12, but 3-6 is quite doable.”

    I read this and thought this was part of the BBC discussion.

  93. Gunner Q says:

    Wagner Tench @ April 9, 2019 at 8:49 pm:
    “I’ve tentatively brought up the issues with my baby boomer professor later on in a private conversation. Of course, that didn’t change his mind. He nodded and acknowledged me, but it didn’t change his rhetoric.”

    Credit for trying. You’ve already done more than most students ever will.

  94. Anonymous Reader says:

    Leaving aside the — interests — of IBB, Novaseeker has pointed out one reason why white women are now more prone to pair up with black men. Partly it’s due to the society-wide denigration of white men; Google’s games with image search should be well known by now, most common entertainments feature mixed couples far out of proportion to reality, and frankly on average men of African descent tend to run higher in testosterone. Young men of any race should seek to improve themselves physically and mentally…

    The “one and done” problem in churches and small colleges won’t go away any time soon. Men will have to adapt to the situation to their advantage. Understanding the deep differences between men and women is a big part of that adaptation. A man with little Game would be better off looking for social companions outside of such a “greenhouse”. This isn’t good news for parents who send their daughters to such schools expecting marriage, either.

  95. Wagner Tench says:

    Thanks, Gunner Q

    Like I said, he’s a good professor. Extremely caring and empathetic to people in general. Most people love him, and despite his empathy and gentleness, he still manages to ride motorcycles and be manly. He just doesn’t understand the world of romance being faced by people of my generation.

    I think of him like I think of Dennis Prager: a well-meaning, smart, older guy whom I would trust to teach me some things, but whom I would never listen to regarding my romantic life. It’s like Aaron Clarey says: he’s a general located far behind the front lines, and he has no idea what’s actually going on in the majority of America. He’s largely insulated by the Christian bubble and doesn’t see the roles women play in modern America’s problems. He also loves to praise women for their greater involvement in church and missions than men’s. I like him, but his in-class rants are some of the most quintessentially Christian boomer doctrine I’ve ever heard.

    I do have to hand it to him, though: he seems to have a very happy marriage.

  96. Opus says:

    I read somewhere that on average the African male is only half an inch longer than the caucasian which of course much surprised me given the videos I have seen but then I have never seen a black penis in the wild and hardly ever even spoken to a black male. I have one next door and he is a lot smaller (height I mean) than me and always with a smile on his face – you have to like that.

    It is clear that Novaseeker does not live in D.C. for he conflates P.G. County, Fairfax county and others which are to my mind suburbias in Maryland and Virginia with D.C. which as I recall it last had a population in its ten square miles of about 660,000 and a murder rate of about twenty a week so I was lucky to survive and frankly crazy to even go there – ah the enthusiasms of youth.

  97. Wagner Tench says:

    @ Joe2

    Haha you’re funny. Actually, I have a personal policy that I
    A) Never date girls in my classes or at my work, and
    B) Avoid dating at my school entirely unless it’s one of those girls that is just way to good to pass up and is obviously into me. It’s not worth the potential ramifications (we’ve even had some #metoo-ing at my school recently) to have a relationship go south with a girl from here. FWB is possible, but not very likely, and to be honest, I’m just too busy with my classes and work to deal with the hassle. It doesn’t help that I’m pretty poor by the standards of my school.

    @ Warthog

    A lot of white guys are just staying single. I know some who have found white girls, and I know some who have started dating outside their race (mainly Hispanic and Asian girls), but I can’t think of any WM/BF couples off the top of my head. There are plenty of very cute white girls who date black and Hispanic men here, though. Personally, I don’t mind interracial dating, and I wouldn’t care if a girl dated men of other races, but if a girl is showing an obvious preference for a specific type of guy that I don’t fit and then suddenly “switches” to me as if I’m the exception to the rule, I’m naturally a bit suspicious of her motives. I’m a handsome guy, and I’m in good shape, but guys like me are common here, and we aren’t getting nearly as much female attention as the athletes.

  98. Wagner Tench says:

    @ Dalrock

    I’ve been a lurker here for a while, and this is the first time I’ve really entered the discussion. I want to say thank you for all the work you’ve been doing. God bless your efforts and your family.

  99. Novaseeker says:

    It is clear that Novaseeker does not live in D.C. for he conflates P.G. County, Fairfax county and others which are to my mind suburbias in Maryland and Virginia with D.C. which as I recall it last had a population in its ten square miles of about 660,000 and a murder rate of about twenty a week

    Eh, you’re knowledge is out of date, which isn’t surprising — the surprising thing is your apparent need to repeat out of date information.

    In the US, “DC” refers to the DC region (as “LA” refers to the LA area, not just the “City of Los Angeles”, and “Boston” refers to the whole area, not just the City of Boston, etc. We call the District of Columbia itself the “District”. So today when someone says they are from DC, they mean from the DC Metro, not necessarily the District — often a follow on question is “Oh, you mean the District?”, and the answer clarifies, if one is interested in delving that deeply. I am not sure if it was like this when you lived here, but it’s grown a lot in the last few decades so that likely has something to do with how out of date your knowledge is. In a region where ~650,000 live in the District, and 5.4 million live in the suburbs around it (certainly a lot more than when you were here), it’s simply dumb to not look at the entire region when assessing things like this.

    As for the “murder rate”, we measure it per 100,000 people, and in the District itself it was most recently 17 per 100,000 (see here: https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/44/ ). In 2017 there were 114 homicides, while in 2018 there were quite a few more — 159 — mostly in “wards” 7 and 8, which are collectively “Anacostia”, which is the worst area of the city. In any case, even if you split 159, which is as high as it has been in a while here, by 52, you don’t get 20 per week, you get 3.

    I know you like to make flippant comments, Opus, but don’t talk about things you really don’t understand well, or where your knowledge is outdated. Thanks.

  100. colojohn says:

    @Red Pill Latecomer asked “Pepperdine?”

    That’s my guess too.

  101. Paul says:

    @TT If all that doesn’t convince someone that marriage brings one closer to God, I don’t know what does.

    Of course marriage does not bring one closer to God:
    “Now to the unmarried and the widows I say: It is good for them to stay unmarried, as I do. But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.” [..] “But those who marry will face many troubles in this life, and I want to spare you this.”

    NT marriage is for ONE explicit purpose only: to quench your sexual passion by giving your spouse sex-on-demand:

    “But if they cannot control themselves, they should marry, for it is better to marry than to burn with passion.”

    Else you should stay single and live celibate.

  102. BillyS says:

    Traveler,

    Those who claim most loudly to be sounding Gabriel’s trumpet, I have found, are the least charitable. In fact, “charity” (the quality of forgiving love) seems aggressively absent from their pronouncements.

    You are in league with those who helped destroy my marriage and show no compassion now. Don’t whine if I dislike that.

  103. BillyS says:

    Frank,

    While the pill primarily works by preventing ovulation, my understanding is that there is also an abortifacent facet to it, where it can prevent an embryo from attaching to the uterus.

    I was not noting that aspect, though it is true. I was thinking of accepting the mindset that children are not really a blessing. Killing them off (using “nicer terms”) is far easier when you see them as a problem.

  104. BillyS says:

    Modern Christians, including leaders, have little to no compassion for men. They don’t give one hoot about their struggles, just telling men to “man up” in so many ways. (Not just to marry sluts/reformed sluts)

    They have far more compassion on women and will encourage even the ones who are unrepentant.

    Even men who have been messed over often remain quite blue pill. They don’t see how God could hold anything against a woman. I had one man who was divorced note that he had no problem with men only being challenged/accused in sermons. Yet this same man couldn’t accept that Jesus had called a woman a “dog” even though it was written right their in the Scriptures. His training overrode everything else.

  105. Anonymous Reader says:

    The phenomenon of “5 girls all enthralled with 1 guy while the other 4 are just friends” is very typical in the modern world. The girls are exercised by both hypergamy and preselection: Mr. Perfect is perceived by each girl as “great” and the best (hypergamy), but the fact that other girls also think he’s “great” removes doubts (preselection). The situation and the results are completely predictable when wearing The Glasses / viewed in a Red Pill manner.

    Because women are hypergamous for a reason. Preselection is a feature of female psychology for a reason. One does not have to believe in evolutionary psychology, or even evolution, to see this. Given these and other aspects of female psychology, a man should plan accordingly; never make pleasing a woman your “mission” just for a start.

    The young men at Wegner T’s school should improve themselves physically, and mentally. The latter ought to include basic knowledge of Game. This shouldn’t be controversial in the least.

  106. Scott says:

    BillyS

    One of things I’ve been trying to explore with my coaching/therapy clients is related to WHY that level of Uber-accountability happens and why it is so effective.

    Accountability is a hard-wired masculine trait. And those church leaders (and everyone else) absolutely rely on it to keep men behaving.

    It is a trait that can produce such beauty and such orderly systems and civilizations!

    And I’ve seen the same thing you describe. Even for years after my divorce all I did was parrot the lines to everyone around about what a shitty servant leader I was.

    This issue needs to be addressed carefully and with great deference to why men were created to shoulder everything. MGTOW is an absolutely understandable reaction to the current state of things, but it leads to destruction and I don’t know what comes next.

  107. Oscar says:

    @ Novaseeker

    BM’s “physicality” hasn’t changed in that period. Women’s preferences for that “physicality” haven’t changed, either, and are constant. What has changed is that WM’s status is decreasing, in relative terms. This is therefore a much more likely explanation for the increase in the incidence of these relationships than the physical issue is … unless you have a plausible explanation for why increasing numbers of women are suddenly prioritizing that physical preference today as compared with ten years ago?

    Fewer women feel the need to secure a stable, loyal provider, so they prioritize other criteria.

  108. seventiesjason says:

    Scott, sadly MGTOW is the only solution for many………….and not a “chest thumping” of MGTOW per say.

    MGTOW has become a penis measuring contest and mostly a bunch of men telling each other how much more MGTOW they are than somebody else. I suppose I fall into the MGTOW category, but a bout a year or so ago, I quit supporting channels and the like because it was:

    *women evil. hope they all die, and get STD’s, get raped

    or

    *PUA redux….full of men talking about how amazing they are with women. Getting sex 24hrs a day, hooking up, but they are so strong now, so “going their own way” now that they just have to come to MGTOW and tell every guy who isn’t a ladies man, or pumpin’ and dumpin’ *how* to become one by just following foolproof easy steps……….

    and finally

    *Men who are indeed just doing what they can, getting by and indeed are going their own way.

    It’s now a cottage industry, “YouTube is feminist, and hates men…so I need you to donate so I can keep making excellent content to keep all men informed”

    The men who did really get something from it, got it, applied it to their situation and left.
    What comes after? The men who are leaders, real ones are gonna have to step up and actually lead instead of “funny tweets” quit insulting fellow men they supposedly “love and want to encourage” and put their talk and make it action.

    I know that will never happen in our superficial Ego driven culture (even with men) so the best thing to do is indeed……enjoy the decline and fall.

  109. Oscar says:

    @ Scott

    Accountability is a hard-wired masculine trait. And those church leaders (and everyone else) absolutely rely on it to keep men behaving.

    The same is true of women, but their system of accountability looks very different from ours.

  110. Frank K says:

    MGTOW is an absolutely understandable reaction to the current state of things, but it leads to destruction and I don’t know what comes next.

    I also think it leads to the wrong place, but from what I have seen many MGTOW types simply don’t care. “Let it burn”, “enjoy the decline”, etc.are common attitudes, and are understandable as they see the status quo as beyond repair, hence the outlook. As for what comes next, hard to say, though some believe that after everything burns to the ground that we start over with a clean slate.

  111. Anonymous Reader says:

    In the larger picture, it is insane for most people to take on large amounts of debt for a college degree. That may seem harsh and judgemental, but it is a fact. Borrowing $100,000 to buy a degree that repays $40,000 per year is economically foolish. College girls with debt have a negative dowry, it costs money for a man to marry them. Parents should plan accordingly. A full-ride scholarship at a 4th tier institution might be a better deal than borrowing the price of a starter house at a 2nd tier college.

    At the undergraduate level most colleges teach the same stuff. The purpose of going to an elite school is to form the social links with members of the social elite. Not everyone can do that, and it’s a dirty trick to encourage Suzy Average from flyoverAmerica to go to a coastal elite college if she’s not up to the challenge of living that UMC life.

    IMO.

  112. anonymous_ng says:

    I’m not even sure that the MGTOW desire to let it burn arises from the idea that things are beyond repair, or that a reset will be better, but is perhaps more a desire to bring the shiny, happy people low.

    I remember a short while post-divorce where I was quite willing to spread the wealth of pain and hurt should the opportunity arise. Thing is, I’m introspective enough to understand that indulging those impulses was unlikely to help my situation.

  113. BillyS says:

    That is good Scott. It is obvious men need to take responsibility for what they control, but hitting them in the face with things all the time is not productive, even in the cases when it is accurate. It is worse of course when they are not responsible.

  114. Frank K says:

    A full-ride scholarship at a 4th tier institution might be a better deal than borrowing the price of a starter house at a 2nd tier college.

    FWIW, 100K won’t buy a starter home in most metro areas, not even close (which is also a big problem). That said, 100K of student loan debt is simply insane. Even if the kid goes to state U and borrows “only” 20K, it’s still an onerous debt for most grads. Sadly, most state schools are now so expensive that you can’t pay the tuition with money saved from a summer job. At many tuition is $10K per year, or ever higher. It’s sad, especially since most of the degrees are worthless.

  115. feministhater says:

    I’m not even sure that the MGTOW desire to let it burn arises from the idea that things are beyond repair, or that a reset will be better, but is perhaps more a desire to bring the shiny, happy people low.

    It could never just be a decision to forgo that which is damaging to the man. Nope, always the angry man scenario to explain it all away.

    We keep hearing how MGTOW is so few, only incels, only incapable and inferior men, but yet it is to blame for society falling apart, the lack of options for women to get married to. It’s to blame for the sky falling.

    Choose one or the other. If MGTOW is only for losers, stop blaming it for society’s decline. If it causing society’s decline, then by its own destructive capabilities, by doing literally nothing I might add, it’s men that you need and want.

  116. Frank K says:

    College girls with debt have a negative dowry, it costs money for a man to marry them.

    Of course the guys are also up to their eyeballs in student loan debt. Sure, some majored in something useful and might have $100K+ paychecks, but most don’t.

  117. Novaseeker says:

    Fewer women feel the need to secure a stable, loyal provider, so they prioritize other criteria.

    That also hasn’t changed much in the last ten years. In the last 30, yes, but not 10 years ago as compared to now. 10 years ago we had just as many go-go-go independent career girls here in DC as we do today, but fewer of them dating black guys. Something else has changed.

  118. Anonymous Reader says:

    I wrote

    College girls with debt have a negative dowry, it costs money for a man to marry them.

    Frank K
    Of course the guys are also up to their eyeballs in student loan debt.

    Men Do That Too isn’t an argument, although women and TradCons are fond of it.
    If you intended to refute my assertion, you failed.

    “Negative dowry” is something any college student should understand. Parents of college students even more so. It is hugely important, given the cost of debt service.

  119. BillyS says:

    Teaching fire safety has merit and is quite worthwhile, but it is useless when someone is in the middle of a burning house. It does no good to rail at them about how much they helped cause the burning house, however true that may or may not be. Focus on stopping the flames in the house, then work on restoring it. You can only push hard on the one stuck in the house about being safer in the future at that point.

    Railing against MGTOW is not the solution. It is a natural reaction to a house burning around them. They can’t stop the burning, so why should they sacrifice their lives to the flames?

    And no Jason, MGTOW is a lot more than your limited understanding.

    I disagree with his atheism, but Sandman on YouTube is worth listening to in most cases. (At least I was told he is an atheist.)

  120. anonymous_ng says:

    @FeministHater It could never just be a decision to forgo that which is damaging to the man. Nope, always the angry man scenario to explain it all away.

    We keep hearing how MGTOW is so few, only incels, only incapable and inferior men, but yet it is to blame for society falling apart, the lack of options for women to get married to. It’s to blame for the sky falling.

    Choose one or the other. If MGTOW is only for losers, stop blaming it for society’s decline. If it causing society’s decline, then by its own destructive capabilities, by doing literally nothing I might add, it’s men that you need and want.

    I don’t pay attention to the arguments surrounding MGTOW to know whether what you’re saying is a common thing, but it’s not something I’d considered before either. Perhaps I/we must attribute a cause that seems more reasonable to minds socialized by our current system.

    Shrug.

    I don’t consider MGTOW to be a cause of social decline, but instead a symptom. The causes are IMO, systemic things that likely cannot be undone. Technology can’t be put back into the box.

  121. feministhater says:

    I don’t consider MGTOW to be a cause of social decline, but instead a symptom. The causes are IMO, systemic things that likely cannot be undone. Technology can’t be put back into the box.

    If that is what you believe, it necessitates that a man find his own path. It’s MGTOW or bust for most men, you simply don’t realise it yet.

  122. Scott says:

    Anonymous_ng

    That’s about my take on it. But I would this wrinkle. Any time I want to know if an action is moral or not, (and the usual sources are not giving me much guidance) I ask “what if everyone did this?”

    I’m not exactly sure what would happen if every man did MGTOW, but my gut tells me it would be miserable— for everyone, even the innocent.

    So, it seems unsustainable as a morally justified philosophy. It may act as a good place holder for now— a strike until it gets noticed to the point where it can’t be ignored. After that, I’m not sure.

  123. feministhater says:

    Shrug.

    Funny. When a MGTOW states ‘let it burn’ it is literally a form of ‘shrugging’.

    A MGTOW sees that he does not have an impact on the world around him to any significant degree and cannot change the continual decline into madness, thus he seeks to separate himself from this madness, focus on things he can change, mainly himself, and then live his life as he sees fit.

    As a man I cannot change marriage laws, I cannot change women, I cannot change society. These things are all set against me. They seek to stifle and control me through my sex drive. The only way to be free from that form of control is to go MGTOW.

  124. Frank K says:

    If you intended to refute my assertion, you failed.

    Au contraire, I was adding to it. Since the guys are also in debt, they already have problems of their own, and shouldn’t be keen on taking on a negative dowry, whereas some loaded sugar daddy might be willing to make her monthly payments for a while in exchange for some “fun”.

    Why did you assume I was trying to contradict you?

  125. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Every MGTOW is MGTOW in his own way. That’s what MGTOW mean.

    I’m MGTOW. I don’t hate all women. I don’t want to let civilization burn. But it probably will. Nothing I can do about it. I’m a single, childless man in his 50s. I have no power or influence. May as well accept the decline, while I insulate myself in as nice a home, in as a nice neighborhood, as I can afford.

    Most Americans don’t even want to be saved. They think Trump is too extreme, never mind the policies this country actually needs.

  126. Anonymous Reader says:

    Scott to BillyS

    One of things I’ve been trying to explore with my coaching/therapy clients is related to WHY that level of Uber-accountability happens and why it is so effective.

    Accountability is a hard-wired masculine trait. And those church leaders (and everyone else) absolutely rely on it to keep men behaving.

    That’s a really interesting and deeply provocative thought, Scott. Thanks for posting it.

    We could go around for a long time about nature vs. nurture, but I believe most men who gravitate to this part of the androsphere would at least agree that accountability is to some degree inherent in being male. Uber-accountability in some men may be a combination of
    (a) Natural masculinity
    (b) Additional training / socialization on top of that
    (c) A desire to help people around them who have problems.

    But is it something that comes from inside a man, or is it imposed on him from outside? Could be a mix of both, but let’s focus on the “outside” for now.

    Clearly, in too many areas of life especially in the churches we’ve gone far beyond the notions of manly responsibility that were common 30 or more years ago. Jordan Peterson’s trite cliche of “Clean your room” is closer to that than many of the “ManUP” rants. If we get in the time machine and go back to 1958, a man who brings home resources to care for his wife and children, who doesn’t chase skirts, who is kind to his wife – he’s doing the job. He doesn’t need to “manUP’ more than that. He’s accountable in the cultural sense of the day.

    Now, though, that’s just the bare minimum. Is he spending any time on his own life? ManUP! Pour yourself into your children (like a mother) and pass out at the end of the day spent. Choreplay and flowers and Date Night and on and on to make your wife haaaaapy.

    It’s not enough to feed house and cloth a wife. Uper-accountability makes every married man responsible for the slightest negative change in his wife’s mood. The “aroma” of her mood must be perfect at all times, lest the house not have enough “love aroma” to suit the pastor. Not only that, Uber-accountability can even make every man responsible for every woman around, including the ones that flip him off in a feminist huff.

    It’s pretty obvious to me now – this is a way of controlling and manipulating men.

    This analogy may not work but I’ll try it.
    Assuming that some degree of responsiblity is inborn to men and it develops more and more after puberty, it’s similar to the normal male sex drive. When a married woman plays “hide the vagina” or “vagina as doggie treat”, she is manipulating her husband via his inborn nature. Controlling him via cock-teasing.

    When women and other men play “Man UP!” cards to men, demanding more and more responsibility while removing authority, they are also manipulating men via their inborn nature. Controlling them by misusing emotions. This is an abuse of power, and an abuse of the inherent nature of men. I use the word ‘abuse” with care here, not just randomly. It is abusive.

    In the Bible perspective, sexual drives and emotions are good things, put into men for a reason. But controlling men by manipulating them, using sex and/ or emotions to get them to do things, this is flat out bad.

    I’m sure that any pastor would hotly reject the notion that he is seeking to control other men by manipulating their emotions, by abusing those men’s inherent drive to be responsible. Well, yah, and there’s not a woman alive who would admit to cock-teasing her husband, either…doesn’t make it right.

  127. Frank K says:

    I’m not exactly sure what would happen if every man did MGTOW, but my gut tells me it would be miserable— for everyone, even the innocent.

    1) There would be no marriages
    2) All children would born out of wedlock
    3) Taxation would be even more onerous to support all the single mothers and their offspring
    4) Men would probably stop volunteering for the military, so the draft would be reinstated.
    5) Many, if not most men would not work as hard as they do now, as they would need less money to get by, though #3 could negate that.

    Anyway, it won’t happen, though enough men might “flee the plantation” to have an effect.

  128. feministhater says:

    Bravo Anonymous Reader! That was a great post!

  129. Frank K says:

    Most Americans don’t even want to be saved. They think Trump is too extreme, never mind the policies this country actually needs.

    As long as they can borrow to fund their consumerist lifestyles, most don’t care who is in charge. And as the millions who sit in gridlocked freeways show, people can get accustomed to all kinds of crap, as long as they have the latest iPhone and can eat out (and become obese) they’re fine.

  130. The Lone Planet says:

    About the uptick in interracial dating (ww/bm), it’s about going to where you are wanted. Black men who aren’t thugs aren’t appreciated by the majority of black woman (because 50 years of welfare and single motherhood), so they find love elsewhere. The dating world is more open than ever. It’s about finding a feminine woman no matter what color or nationality she is. And if you still believe in the BBC myth, you watch way too much porn. Find a woman who is right for you.

  131. seventiesjason says:

    anony-ng

    There is that element there in MGTOW, especially in the chats on Dischord, and in the comment sections of much content………bringing the shiny-happy-people low that is.

    What a large swath of it is now, in 2019…….men who were never anybody…….and they would not have been anybody in 1950, 1742, or 1965……have now found a place that indirectly justifies their “nobody” status, thus making them a “somebody” and forgives any of their shortcomings on feminism, hypergamy, because they didn’t make the basketball team when they were in high school, or some girl in jr high made fun of them…….

    Now in MGTOW, they are a “real man who is going his own way” and all in name only. Still talking about all the strikes…..and if only it was “1950” or whatever…..complaining about how they were wronged by this girl, or that girl…..their mom, their jr. high english teacher…..a neighbor…….the girl down the street when they were nine.

    There is good info out there, and some good advice on much of the content…..but it gets old talking about the same thing over and over again. Great, yes….please go your own way and let it be.

  132. TheTraveler says:

    @Paul
    What a grim, joyless interpretation of marriage. If we can’t agree after a direct quote about an act of God from the book of Genesis, let’s agree to disagree.

    @BillyS
    It sounds like you’re a victim of both a bad woman and “false comforters” straight from the Book of Job, all spewing brutality, the latter disguising it as “comfort” or “guidance,” even (infuriatingly!) “the Lord’s wisdom.”

    That said, I’m describing people in my own experience. You are hurting, and are projecting your own horrors onto my narrative. I presume you’re not a pharasaical churchian, which is who I’m talking about. The women may well be awful–in fact, I’m sure they are. But in the cases I’ve seen, the men are no prize, either.

  133. seventiesjason says:

    Billy, how is MGTOW more than my limited understanding? It’s turned into a bunch of men who say “f*ck women” and then proceed to talk about them 23 out of 24 hours a day.

    Back in 2012, 2011 there was actually some useful advice about budgeting……how to clean up debt, asking the right questions and giving solid, basic good answers.

    No more. Not for a bit.

  134. feministhater says:

    There is good info out there, and some good advice on much of the content…..but it gets old talking about the same thing over and over again. Great, yes….please go your own way and let it be.

    Jason, what business is it of yours what men do? Stop telling others what to do, they can go their own way and share it in anyway they please. That is all there is to it. If you don’t like it… meh. I don’t care. I hope they continue to spread it far and wide, to your utter contemptuousness. You cannot fathom that the very things you dislike about MGTOW are the cause of its continued rise.

    They need to said over and over again. Over and over and over and over. What doesn’t need to be heard over and over again is your constant inability to get it into your head that your opinion doesn’t matter.

  135. OKRickety says:

    “Fewer women feel the need to secure a stable, loyal provider, so they prioritize other criteria.”

    “That also hasn’t changed much in the last ten years. … Something else has changed.”

    I suspect this could be discussed all day as there are many factors involved.

    Per Time Magazine, Study: Young, Single, Childless Women Earn More Than Men:

    “according to a new analysis of 2,000 communities by a market research company, in 147 out of 150 of the biggest cities in the U.S., the median full-time salaries of young women are 8% higher than those of the guys in their peer group. …And it also holds true even in reasonably small areas like the Raleigh-Durham region and Charlotte in North Carolina (both 14% more), and Jacksonville, Fla. (6%).”

    If this study’s results are a turn-around from, say, 10 years ago (and I suspect they are), then this is a change and it is one that I think would decrease the perceived need to secure a stable, loyal provider.

    I also suspect that there is a form of social inertia involved. That is, it takes time for changes in society’s views to permeate more fully. So, for example, it has taken time for BM/WW coupling to become acceptable to most of the general population or, at least, the parts that matter to the BM and WW in these relationships.

  136. seventiesjason says:

    Femhater,

    What needs to be said, has been said and there is TONS of info out there despite the “mass conspiracy” by the Jews, feminists, SJW’s at Youtube, Google, and WordPress to silence them all, and make men go back to the plantation.

    First, MGTOW isn’t that organized, and it will never be. Nor should it be. It’s just a philosophy, a code, a way to help you turn your back on women……no matter how far or near you take it. Some men date still. Some don’t. Many can’t….no matter *what* they do or try. A large swath of men on the comments sections just hate women, they just do. Many don’t. Some go monk. Most mock those that do go monk “But Roosh says….have you read this book? Here is a foolproof method about dating……You’re a fag!”

    You can live off the grid or be an urbane city dweller. It casts a wide net, and that is what MGTOW is supposed to be.

    The problems? Women hate it because they cannot “point” a finger at their advertising. They can’t organize a protest in front of the local “MGTOW Regional Office” and virtue signal of how “strong, bold and activist” they are. They cannot pin down who is the “leader” and drag them into the public square……..though many men have *tried* to indirectly ‘co-opt’ leadership of MGTOW (MGTOW John being the latest……facepalm)

    The structure of it, to its credit does not allow this. More men though will try to “justify” that they somehow are the boss……..

    It’s turned into a place for men to complain about women all day with zero solutions, again talking about Hypergamy………..hitting the wall, PUA redux, how I am more MGTOW than you endless debates………

    And Christians are HATED on MGTOW because “you are following something” have had my life threatened more than a few times over the years for professing my Christian faith.

    So much for “brotherhood”

  137. BillyS says:

    FH,

    The difference I see is men who see a mass local fire and realize that they can’t do anything productive and therefore let it burn vs. those who decide to loot the shops in the area since “it is all going to burn anyway.” The latter idea may or may not be true, but is very destructive and bad for any society, even one like ours. It is quite immoral as well.

    The ones who don’t try to put out the fire by spitting or otherwise putting liquid on it are perfectly rational and I have no general problem with them.

  138. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Jason: What a large swath of it is now, in 2019…….men who were never anybody…….and they would not have been anybody in 1950, 1742, or 1965 …

    Not true. Ordinary men were “somebody” in the old days. Not lauded heroes, but not “nobody.”

    If an ordinary man worked for a living, provided for his family, was law-abiding and moral, he was accorded basic respect. He could expect to find a wife. Women and children called his “Sir.” Not always, but as the norm.

    He was not jailed merely on the accusation of a woman. He might get in trouble for insulting the king, but his life was not destroyed for calling a freak a freak.

  139. seventiesjason says:

    RPL. Nonsense. Many of the men on MGTOW if they were around in 1950….they would be in the same situation they are in now…….instead of women they would have found someone or something else to blame why they did not succeed at something or anything.

    Most men in MGTOW are like myself….we never have had a gf or have had sex…..let alone endearment…..and as I get wiser and older….even if I was back in 1950, I probably would have been single then too. You can’t cure ugly, autistic and just “odd”

    Myself…..I know where the blame lies, and there is not a thing I can do about it. Why hate women for that? Why be angry at them? Would I date an “ugly” girl even if she had the “best personality in the world??????”

    Probably not, and neither would all these “awesome” men in that swath MGTOW.

  140. feministhater says:

    First, MGTOW isn’t that organized, and it will never be. Nor should it be. It’s just a philosophy, a code, a way to help you turn your back on women……no matter how far or near you take it. Some men date still. Some don’t. Many can’t….no matter *what* they do or try. A large swath of men on the comments sections just hate women, they just do. Many don’t. Some go monk. Most mock those that do go monk “But Roosh says….have you read this book? Here is a foolproof method about dating……You’re a fag!”

    Gosh, your disorganized, whinging is hard to follow. It doesn’t matter what your opinion of them is. If they want to hate women, they can hate women, it’s none of your business. Get that through your head. That is the point of MGTOW, to go your own way. If you don’t like what they think, then go somewhere else. I don’t visit MGTOW reddit, I don’t watch most videos, I don’t care to. I do my own thing and live my own life.

    Roosh is Roosh, why do you care what he thinks about your decision? He ‘banged’ his way all around the world and now is the most hated man on the interwebs. You get to live your life free of that. Rejoice!

    MGTOW doesn’t need to organise. It’s just men deciding for themselves what is in their best interest. I don’t care if they shout, hatemonger, talk dirty, swear or preach love and kindness. It is their decision.

    Learn to let go. What others think about you truly don’t matter. You are your own person, own what you are and live with it. Once you have accepted who you are, nothing anyone thinks of you will matter because you will be free from their clutches.

  141. hipster8me says:

    Also RPL……to get respect it has to be earned. At my job, I am the boss…but that doesn’t mean my team respects me. It had to be earned in my decisions, how I treat them, by my actions and attitude towards the clients we serve here and am I doing my part? Am I getting their paychecks correct? Are their personal requests being at least actively listened to? Do I use general manners to al my team? Do I hold my cool? Do I stand up for them, and am I honest with them about what I can or cannot do….and do I explain some of the decisions I make to the proper people on the team when I make them?

    I don’t have to respect a man when I don’t know him. A plenty of men in MGTOW are more crass and entitled than the women they berate. They would have been single in 1950 as well. I should have general decorum to a person….but if I say “excuse me” when I accidently bump into someone on the bus doesn’t mean I respect them, or I should….

    They could be a tyrant at home, or blow all their money on cocaine, or are cheating on their wife right now? They also could be the most upstanding person in the world.

    Most of these men. Yes, I said most would be pretty terrifying dictators and leaders if they were indeed in charge. Lots of real tough talk on these chats and forums…..and ZERO action.

  142. seventiesjason says:

    Also RPL……to get respect it has to be earned. At my job, I am the boss…but that doesn’t mean my team respects me. It had to be earned in my decisions, how I treat them, by my actions and attitude towards the clients we serve here and am I doing my part? Am I getting their paychecks correct? Are their personal requests being at least actively listened to? Do I use general manners to al my team? Do I hold my cool? Do I stand up for them, and am I honest with them about what I can or cannot do….and do I explain some of the decisions I make to the proper people on the team when I make them?

    I don’t have to respect a man when I don’t know him. A plenty of men in MGTOW are more crass and entitled than the women they berate. They would have been single in 1950 as well. I should have general decorum to a person….but if I say “excuse me” when I accidently bump into someone on the bus doesn’t mean I respect them, or I should….

    They could be a tyrant at home, or blow all their money on cocaine, or are cheating on their wife right now? They also could be the most upstanding person in the world.

    Most of these men. Yes, I said most would be pretty terrifying dictators and leaders if they were indeed in charge. Lots of real tough talk on these chats and forums…..and ZERO action.

  143. seventiesjason says:

    Femhater

    HUH?? I f you were following the conversation, you would know I was commenting on it. Giving my take. Cut back on the caffiene and the crack jerk.

  144. feministhater says:

    Jason. Here’s a thought. Don’t be MGTOW. Marry a single mom, there’s plenty around, just dumpster dive a bit further and you’ll find one, but stop telling other men what to think, feel or do. Your opinions are baseless. They are unfounded. You are projecting your insecurities onto others who have decided against your preferred path.

  145. feministhater says:

    HUH?? I f you were following the conversation, you would know I was commenting on it. Giving my take. Cut back on the caffiene and the crack jerk.

    Take your own advice. Lay off the whinging and be your own man.

  146. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Jason, you are a MGTOW.

    MGTOW doesn’t have to be a conscious choice. The world is full of MGTOW men who’ve never heard the term.

    MGTOW isn’t a philosophy or a movement. It’s a phenomenon. It’s happening in the same way that most societal evolutions and revolutions occur. A confluence of independent actors and semi-random events.

    By the time people discover the phenomenon, and invent a term for it, and discuss it, its effects are already deeply rooted and widespread.

  147. feministhater says:

    Also RPL……to get respect it has to be earned. At my job, I am the boss…but that doesn’t mean my team respects me. It had to be earned in my decisions, how I treat them, by my actions and attitude towards the clients we serve here and am I doing my part? Am I getting their paychecks correct? Are their personal requests being at least actively listened to? Do I use general manners to al my team? Do I hold my cool? Do I stand up for them, and am I honest with them about what I can or cannot do….and do I explain some of the decisions I make to the proper people on the team when I make them?

    None of this had anything to do with the idea of ‘basic respect’ of which RPL referred to. For a man to become a father and husband he would have had to have earned a modicum of respect from the woman’s father, from the Church that married them and from the place of work that paid him to support that family anyway, your point is moot.

  148. feministhater says:

    The difference I see is men who see a mass local fire and realize that they can’t do anything productive and therefore let it burn vs. those who decide to loot the shops in the area since “it is all going to burn anyway.” The latter idea may or may not be true, but is very destructive and bad for any society, even one like ours. It is quite immoral as well.

    This would happen irregardless or whether MGTOW existed or not. Criminals exist. That is all.

  149. seventiesjason says:

    Femhater stated:

    “Jason. Here’s a thought. Don’t be MGTOW. Marry a single mom, there’s plenty around, just dumpster dive a bit further and you’ll find one, but stop telling other men what to think, feel or do. Your opinions are baseless. They are unfounded. You are projecting your insecurities onto others who have decided against your preferred path

    Spoken textbook from a comment from any given MGTOW page, content, chat, or forum

    Don’t agree with me? Point something out? Here come the insults. textbook. Hence why MGTOW will be a “curiosity” when looked back at in history. Hence why it will never be anything and why many an average man who probably is MGTOW would want nothing to do with the scene. Hence why men like Scott and others are “wondering what comes after” because commentary like this in MGTOW is pretty much the norm.

    “Im more MGTOW than you!” and “I know more what it is than you…….so here here is my insult to prove my manhood of going my own way”

  150. feministhater says:

    Spoken textbook from a comment from any given MGTOW page, content, chat, or forum.

    This coming from one who describes MGTOW, men he doesn’t know in anyway at all as the lowest form of people on the Earth who are so incapable of being anything or of any success at all that they would never have made it at anytime in history because of their pathetic selves and then thinks it’s an ‘insult’ to be told rather not to join the said group the person spoke ill of.

    Jason, you truly are wise beyond your years.

  151. feministhater says:

    I’m off to bed. Good night, Jason, may your unfulfilled dreams torment your days for the rest of your unlived life.

  152. seventiesjason says:

    RPL…….I agree that I am a MGTOW if I wear the label or not……..I liked some of the stuff I read a decade ago……I really liked the “how” aspects of “interviewing for a better job” or “balancing a budget after a frivorce” (now, I was never frivorced, but my financial situation in 2009 was dire….breadline and less). I liked the humor in it too…….and some of the basic info on hypergamy, female nature…….and looking in the mirror on how to fix a bad situation in your life…….and there were guys who lived it. It was helpful.

    It’s PUA redux now…….bragging, the Game industry collapsed and all those swinging dicks showed up telling “all we need to do is……….and we’ll all be cassinovas!’ Content providers no longer humble and and funny……but “I’m the guy with all the answers / I only bang virgins / I am a badass”

    It’s full of incels….not the kind who are just going their own way, or who are blackpilled…the kind that think ‘Star Trek’ is real and talk about Animee aside from how unfair women have been to them.

    Everyone is am amazing leader…..is awesome…….and yet………and yet………no one really is. Get the decent info and basics from Sandman, and few others (Stardusk and crew) but its a place full of vampires. If women disappeared tomorrow. Most of these guys would spend the next twenty years debating who should be in charge, who is a beta, who is a gamma, who is purple pilled still….who should do what job…and how everyone *should* be the leader because of their brilliance.

  153. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    In the old days, unless they were an obvious drunkard or a bum, men were accorded basic respect as the default. Women too. Either could lose that respect if their negative behavior became known. But respect was the default.

    Today, men are regarded as sexual predators, basement dwellers, or at best, doofus dads — as the default. A man must practice ceaseless, virtue-signaling, self-abasement to earn a crumb of respect.

    Women, OTOH, not only enjoy extreme respect as the default — but it’s very hard for them to lose it, regardless of behavior. They can cover themselves with piercings and tattoos, overeat, dress like whores, regularly get drunk in public, fornicate with dozens of men, birth a brood of bastards, and live off of their ex-husbands and/or public assistance — and still one must refer to them as “ladies.”

    In the old days, women knew that to be called a lady, one had to at least pretend to be lady. Now it’s the default. For men, behaving decently often only gets contempt.

  154. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    I would be a MGTOW now, since I am facing life completely alone. Not even the friends you have noted at times. I don’t hate women, nor do I spool vile things, but I am alone, so I have no choice to go my own way. (Technically I seek to go God’s way, but that is rougher than it may seem.)

    Traveler,

    I certainly don’t hate all women, though I am not sure I trust any of them now. The incentives for them to do poorly, and get rewarded for it, are just too large.

    The Christians I have talked with are the run-of-the-mill kinds. Not the fully self righteous ones, just the ones who have too much of the spirit of our age, especially in the US. They have a lie too ingrained in them and can’t see past it.

    I knew some of this ahead of time, but it hit me earlier this week how Christian leaders will respond to a man having a challenge with their message and a woman with the same. The man will quickly be told he is just not applying it correctly. I am not a woman, so I could be incorrect, but I expect that a woman would be dealt with much software with encouragement instead of blaming her for the problem. They might even attempt to hook someone up with her, though not always.

    I do suspect fewer women will challenge things are attempt to bring a new perspective. They may complain and be down (as my wife was), but that does frequently get ignored or dealt with “compassion” instead of positive action.

    It falls back to the problem of holding men accountable for everything. You do that because only men can change things, at least in your eyes, even if it is not true.

  155. BillyS says:

    BTW Jason,

    Plenty of resources exist about budgeting and just about any other topic you could name. Why would every man need to be putting forth that message. Watch some Dave Ramsey if you really want that.

  156. seventiesjason says:

    feministhater.

    My dreams were unfulfilled when I wasted a vast amount of time in places (MGTOW) where most of the men there would have been nothing 50, 100, or 500 years ago. If it wasn’t “women” it would have been something else holding them back as to why they did not have this or that.

    Unlived life. Going to Britain in a few short weeks for a month….paid for….no credit or dent. Preparing to ascend Mt. Whitney next summer (lots of training for that, going by myself). Hiked a really cool trail in the Adirondacks in 2017 of 133 miles alone in a very remote section of that beautiful state park. few see what I saw. Overcame a drug addiction, alcohol too…no relapses.

    I did this without the validation of a woman, women, men like you, or encouragement from this forum, or any of them in fact.

    So…..the joke is on you. You just don’t like the fact a “nobody” like me called out MGTOW for what it mostly is. What do you care anyway what I think????????

    Good night

  157. BillyS says:

    Jason,

    I was married for almost 30 years, so I wasn’t the category you love to denigrate. You are such a laugh. One minute you agree with MGTOW ideas (whining quite a bit yourself), the next you complain about anyone MGTOW. Start listening more. I assume you do/did that for your job. You would not find a job if you had this kind of attitude at work, even if you have accomplished things.

    (Though perhaps you could make it in management, but even they don’t like helpless whiners.)

  158. Ray6777 says:

    Talking about what would happen if every guy went MGTOW is like talking about what would happen if the Earth crashed into Jupiter. It’s meaningless because it will never happen. Civilization is declining because of unrestrained hypergamy, not MGTOW. The men that keep civilization going don’t produce tingles and aren’t naturally picked by women to be mates and have families. When these men don’t have that incentive, your civilization degrades which is what has been happening in the US for decades. It’s easy to get mad at lonely men on the internet but that won’t change anything because they aren’t the problem.

  159. BillyS says:

    FH,

    This would happen irregardless or whether MGTOW existed or not. Criminals exist. That is all.

    That is true. I was just using an analogy of different MGTOW types. Some PUAs would consider themselves as MGTOWs, whether that is completely accurate or not. Terms saying “enjoy the decline” means you are enjoying the mass fire. I can’t find anything moral about enjoying massive destruction. It may happen and even be necessary, but don’t rejoice in it. The Scriptures are fairly clear on that.

  160. seventiesjason says:

    Dave Ramsey: rice and beans, beans and rice….work really hard, bathe and you will get a good job and get out of debt…oh, by the way walk with Christ Jesus everyday.

    MGTOW frivorce budgeting 2008????

    A very detailed way of making every penny count. lots of humor, lots of hey “it’s over” and “you have to face reality” and tangible ways to save money……Ramsey never accounts for a minimum wage guy who is 75K in debt is barely paying the rent, and now needs dental work.

    Dave Ramsey: rice and beans, beans and rice.

    I have other things to do now than go to a MGTOW video content and AGAIN see / hear / read about another story about female nature.

    Only twelve years of content about that…..if men have not “got it” yet in those forums, they never will. They will never get much of anything, including a better job, life long learning or anything else for that matter

  161. Long-time lurker here. I don’t think it is right to define MGTOW as a movement or a set of beliefs, it is just a reality. In my experience there are just not that many decent Christian women of marrying age, and the ones I meet (average of about 1 a year) are either not attracted to me or vice versa, and I don’t think my standards are unrealistic. Turning myself into some kind of Christian pick-up-artist just to get married is absurd. It is also absurd to ask me to “man up” and face polite rejection after polite rejection, or marry down to someone who does not take their faith seriously or that I’m just not attracted to.
    I guess I still hope of one day marrying but in the meantime I cannot base my self-esteem or sense of purpose on that. I have to make my own way. That makes me MGTOW. Is it a social problem? Sure, no one reproducing in the confines of Christian marriage is a huge problem for the church and the nation. Am I responsible for it? Not at all. These are social realities out of my control.

  162. feministhater says:

    My dreams were unfulfilled when I wasted a vast amount of time in places (MGTOW) where most of the men there would have been nothing 50, 100, or 500 years ago. If it wasn’t “women” it would have been something else holding them back as to why they did not have this or that.

    Then why do you bicker when I tell you rather not to join MGTOW? That is the obvious answer to all your quibbling. To go live your life instead. You disparage people you do not know at all. You call them worthless in so many words and expect what? A red carpet welcoming?

    Everyone Jason, that’s everyone with a capital ‘E’ has disparaged, insulted and demeaned MGTOW. You’re nothing special, you’re just the next inline of the same old arguments.

    I hope you enjoy your trip to England. There is no joke here, Jason. I live my life and enjoy the small things that bring me happiness and I hope you do to. Stop complaining about other men.

  163. feministhater says:

    Terms saying “enjoy the decline” means you are enjoying the mass fire. I can’t find anything moral about enjoying massive destruction.

    I disagree completely. If one knows Aaron Clarey, it is not enjoying mass fire or joining in looting or killing or any of that. It is the idea of unplugging from the stupidity of modern life, of enjoying the life of minimalism, of cutting down working long hours and instead spending more time with friends, family and enjoying active activities.

    I sometimes do not know where people get their ideas from, they certainly aren’t from the same place I’m getting them from.

  164. seventiesjason says:

    These men are disparaging themselves Femhater…and you don’t know every man who sits in a Trancons church every week…….and a plenty of disparaging comes from your keyboard here about these pastors, and these men.

    Take your own advice.

  165. feministhater says:

    These men are disparaging themselves Femhater…and you don’t know every man who sits in a Trancons church every week…….and a plenty of disparaging comes from your keyboard here about these pastors, and these men.

    Jason. You are the one here doing the disparaging, no one else. What any of this has to do with me and telling tradcons to take a flying jump off a tall building, no one knows.

    You see Jason, I’m not telling tradcons to go do things. I’m telling them to leave me alone. That I don’t have to listen or do as they say. I’m at war with them. Do you get that?

  166. Anonymous Reader says:

    Jason, what is it that you want? Do you want pity from other men? Do you want people to agree with you? Do you want to be seen as “right”? You’re writing a lot of emotional text about how no one helps you, yet when men try to help you reject them with anger.

    What is it that you are looking for here?

  167. seventiesjason says:

    I agree Anon what you have stated. I have not lately. I am striving to change. Someone one made a comment above about MGTOW….have read just about all the material, and spend (wasted) countless hours watching (and wasting) hours it. I have seen it change vastly. I made a comment about my opinions. That’s all. Femhater doesn’t like it. Great, he’ll get over it or he’ll die, or just not care (as he really shouldn’t)

    That’s all.

  168. feministhater says:

    Great, he’ll get over it or he’ll die, or just not care (as he really shouldn’t)

    LOL! I’m dead Jason! You got me!

  169. feministhater says:

    It was Jason, in the Blog-o-Sphere Room, with Razor-Sharp wit…. he’s the one that did it, Sir!

  170. Gunner Q says:

    BillyS @ 2:33 pm:
    “I disagree with his atheism, but Sandman on YouTube is worth listening to in most cases. (At least I was told he is an atheist.)”

    Sandman is atheist but also experiments with Native American spirit guides. I’m waiting for him to go off the deep end like Turd Flinging Monkey did with his sex doll.

    People are searching for spiritual alternatives. Many will get burned.

  171. seventiesjason says:

    Sandman has spent plenty commentary trashing Christianity over years…..but he likes to quote wisdom about female nature “witnessed” first hand when he was a kid watching the GI Joe cartoon in the 1980’s…..because the character “The Baroness” had a thing for “Destro” and in one video he spent an enormous amount of time explaining female nature and how deep and complex the show actaully was.

    I took a dump a few days ago….I could explain the “deep and complex” thoughts that went through my mind as I was doing this, but I never took a creative writing class while in college.

    He deleted my comment “Ummmm Sandman, GI Joe was a cartoon that marketed merchandise for young boys…..not real life”

    He has produced some very solid content over the years…….and I admire him for indeed “making lemonade” when life gave him lemons (photography business, other side projects, and was one of the first MGTOW content providers that got support from his viewers” (oh, gonna demonetize me? Fine. I’ll find a way).

    The folks who write in questions with a dantion are a real crew…..”Hi Sandman, just to let you know……I am 6’5″ and have a 10″ penis, women have told me I have the girth of a coke can, I am way above average looking and I make a decent living. I am pretty old (25) and I was wondering if you could do a video about why women pull the “fat grenande” the second I have sex with them and and try to have a realtionship……you see my past fifteen girlfriends have all been pretty much nines, but the second I call them my girlfriend….they immediately start gaining weight. Can you tell me why this happens???” Signed Mr. MGTOW For Life

    “Well Mr MGTOW for life…its becaiuse…………”

    hilarious

  172. JRob says:

    Feminists have taken over Churchianity to the point you have to use entertainment to try to keep them from paying* (we pay for most with taxes) a disinterested third party to tear their babies out of them limb from limb. And never forget, it’s ***their*** babies but never their fault when the piper needs paid.

    https://www.mnnonline.org/news/if-abortion-is-to-end-are-you-ready-to-love-the-unplanned-pregnancies-in-your-church/

    A couple gems among many:

    However, according to a survey by LifeWay Research, 43 percent of women who have had an abortion in the US attended a church once a month or more at the time.

    “I think the reason these churched women are going is because of the shame they have felt from churches.

    “Statistics will tell you that if churched women stopped going to have abortions, the abortion industry would lose $250 million this next year. I don’t know of another organization that would be able to survive if all of a sudden they lost $250 million.”

    You can’t unsee this drivel after The Goggles. Ten years ago I would’ve accepted it all without pause.

  173. JRob says:

    Disclaimer, I fully understand “LifeWay Research” is an oxymoron. A fully pozzed and Woke one at that.

  174. BillyS says:

    Thanks for the clarification Gunner Q. Kind of funny how someone can insist he knows God doesn’t exist.

    Though then dabbling in any kind of “god” kind of goes against the principle. Not surprising however.

  175. feeriker says:

    Feminists have taken over Churchianity to the point you have to use entertainment to try to keep them from paying* (we pay for most with taxes) a disinterested third party to tear their babies out of them limb from limb.

    Who more appropriate to be in charge of a heretical, world-loving, Scripture-rejecting pseudo-Christian religion like churchianity than feminists (of both sexes)?

    Better they be in charge of that than the REAL Church, the Body of Christ. Now if only we could find a more prominent example of the latter…

  176. AnonS says:

    1950s is still a terrible time to compare to. By then we had women entering the workforce (lowering male wages) and 30 years of women voting in the welfare state.

    It was natural to find a women in 1890 to get married as the treat of being a spinster was real and women responded to the incentives that reality provides.

  177. Name (required) says:

    “Billy, how is MGTOW more than my limited understanding? It’s turned into a bunch of men who say “f*ck women” and then proceed to talk about them 23 out of 24 hours a day.”

    I don’t always agree with Seventiesjason, but he’s on to something here.

    Most American women have little potential to be helpmeets for men, and they mostly recoil in horror from the prospect of developing that little bit of potential. Most American men are probably better off not getting hitched to most American women. We get all that, and we get that moving on to other pursuits – other than chasing tail, other than looking for love from unloving harpies – is the rational response. That kind of MGTOW makes sense, and no one is down on you who are doing that.

    What everyone reacts badly to is the butthurt boys who are focused on women as intently as any pickup artist, and can’t stop crying for us to notice how they TOTALLY aren’t interested in those women they can’t stop talking about.

    Respectable MGTOW aren’t going to be very noticeable. You probably won’t hear them describe themselves that way. They’re going to be pleasantly busy having lives, and they aren’t going to be spouting off about why they don’t have a girl friend.

  178. nikolibandingo says:

    Let me tell you, I go to a Christian college in SoCal as well. Every since the school moved up levels in the sports world, they’ve started recruiting most of their athletes without any regard for faith. Needless to say, for the greed of moving closer to the NCAA, our school has now imported ~50-100 athletes that are non-christian “chads”.
    These Christian girls go crazy for them, because, like Trench says, the bible professors waste no time in humiliating the average men in class. Porn addict this, abuse, blah fricking blah. Look prof, we’re not getting action, don’t need to worry about abuse. These girls get their full of abuse through off campus meets from bumble and tindr. I think it may be apart of the basic Christian girls life plan to get pumped and dumped through bumble just to have a redemption story at bible college to cry to her professor about in office hours. Ex-sluts are exhaulted, while no praise is ever encouraged for girls who have been on a noble path shunning sluthood and the carousel. So of course, the nonchristian guys appear more masculine. Never mind these guys are athletes and effectively the Big Men on campus, which just exponentially magnifies the problem.
    10 of these guys can easilly hold the attention of a combined 300 or so girls, who otherwise might have found a suitable beta male partner. Oh well, the jokes on you sweetheart. Enjoy getting pumped and dumped in your crappy LA apartment with your Mcjob paying 16/hour, but I’m not coming to save you when you post a Beta male mating call on your instagram in 5 years.

    Oh, and let me tell you about dating culture. I know for a fact that several girls have, and any girl can, make a claim of rape or abuse on a date, and get tests and assignments extended. Consider it every girls get out of jail free card. Of, but the guy will be kicked out of school because she couldn’t budget her study hours. That’s one reason guys are afraid to date. Approaching a group of girls at bible college – have you ever heard of nuclear rejection.
    Your only hope is developing relationships with girls as friends, and basically asking them to refer you to their single friends.

  179. feministhater says:

    Respectable MGTOW aren’t going to be very noticeable. You probably won’t hear them describe themselves that way. They’re going to be pleasantly busy having lives, and they aren’t going to be spouting off about why they don’t have a girl friend.

    Your opinion matters not. What is ‘respectable’ isn’t even a matter for debate. MGTOW don’t care what you think is respectable or not. You miss the wood for the trees. If a man wants to spend 24 hours each day, every day for the rest of his life talking about women or frogs or trees or whatever, that’s his business.

    It’s just so much easier to categorise MGTOW into the loser box but it just keeps growing so now you want to separate it into the ‘real’ MGTOW camp, who conveniently for you MUST keep quiet just to qualify as ‘real’ MGTOW, and those loser MGTOW whiners who refuse to shut up and go away.

    I don’t care what you think. I will do as I please. I ain’t harming anyone.

  180. 7817 says:

    We get all that, and we get that moving on to other pursuits – other than chasing tail, other than looking for love from unloving harpies – is the rational response. That kind of MGTOW makes sense, and no one is down on you who are doing that.

    Right on, Name.

  181. Otto Lamp says:

    Plenty of resources exist about budgeting… Watch some Dave Ramsey if you really want that.

    As long as you don’t follow his advice on tithing (which he teaches, because few churches would allow him to speak if he came out against mandatory Christian tithing). I’ve yet to meet a person who has looked into it, and hasn’t come to the conclusion that tithing isn’t required for Christians (other than professional pastors, who are on the receiving end). The quickest way for Christians to get out of debt is to stop giving away 10% of their income, and instead put that income to getting out of debt.

    I prefer John Wesley’s position on money (which, unlike Christian tithing, is actually biblical):

    Do not stint yourself, like a Jew rather than a Christian, to this or that proportion.

    First, provide things needful for yourself; food to eat, raiment to put on, whatever nature moderately requires for preserving the body in health and strength.

    Secondly, provide these for your wife, your children, your servants, or any others who pertain to your household.

    If when this is done there be an overplus left, then “do good to them that are of the household of faith.

    If there be an overplus still, “as you have opportunity, do good unto all men.

    And yet, how many Wesleyan and Methodist churches today teach mandatory tithing, even though their founder frowned upon the practice? Instead, Wesley’s advice has been turned on its head. Making the financial well being of the (brick and mortar) Church the primary concern, and the well being of the Body of Christ (the actual Church) of secondary concern.

    John McArthur has a good series of sermons on giving that explain why Christian tithing isn’t biblical, and explains what is expected of Christians. https://www.gty.org/library/topical-series-library/123/gods-plan-for-giving

  182. Damn Crackers says:

    @nikolibandingo-

    My advice to you would to hire a model, actress, or even a real prostitute to dress in whore garb and accompany you to every campus event. If any girl/professor/dean calls you out, just mention she is setting a better example of womanhood than the coeds on campus.

  183. feeriker says:

    nikolibandingo says:
    April 11, 2019 at 8:00 am

    Stories like yours and Wegner’s serve as solid evidence to me that churchian institutions have ALWAYS been slaves to the worldly culture where intersexual relationships are concerned.

    I remember spending a couple of weeks during two consecutive Summers between my sophomore and junior years in high school in the mid 1970s at a churchian retreat camp in California’s Sierra Nevada mountains. At the mid point of BOTH stays, the camp sponsors staged a “date night” between the guys and girls in which it was all but mandatory that everyone “pair up.” How or why they considered that to be even remotely appropriate for the setting and purpose of the gathering is anybody’s wild guess.

    What was most amazing to me, however, was that despite two years of complete DISASTER surrounding this shameful event, the adults who should have known better continued to push it (friends who attended this camp even five years after my last visit said that it was still a thing). Leaving aside the fact that the ratios between the two sexes were never close to even (each of the two years I attended saw a different imbalance in favor of one of the two sexes), teenagers being teenagers, the Pareto Rule ALWAYS prevailed, leaving both many boys and many girls hurt, alone, and angry. Disgusting, but hardly surprising if you’ve shed the thick scales from your eyes and realize what churchianity really is.

    My point in sharing this is that if ostensibly “Christian” institutions tasked with the spiritual and intellectual “care and feeding” of Christian youth not only can’t “get it right,” but are positively negligent, harmful, and abusive with those in their charge, should ANYONE be surprised at the current dismal, toxic state of affairs?

    Once again: a whole new city in Hell is under construction right now that in size will dwarf all of the temporal world’s major metropolitan areas combined. It will be needed to house all of the shallow, arrogant, world-worshipping churchians who have caused so much damage and destruction to the Body, particular to its children. Millstones around their necks, indeed!

  184. LastStand says:

    @ Wagner Tench

    When I was reading your comments, I thought you were describing my school. Small, expensive, religious school with emphasis on “chivalry”.

    The female students were some of the best looking white girls I have ever seen. Unfortunately, my only model and my advice for dealing with women came from my domineering narcissistic mother and my passive, beta father, (my siblings and I were homeschooled and no opportunity to date) so I was clueless and had no game. At least I avoided doing anything too cringey though.

  185. feeriker says:

    My advice to you would to hire a model, actress, or even a real prostitute to dress in whore garb and accompany you to every campus event. If any girl/professor/dean calls you out, just mention she is setting a better example of womanhood than the coeds on campus.

    Or better yet, say that, unlike the “Christian” girls on campus, at least the professional whore is being HONEST about what she’s doing.

  186. BillyS says:

    Otto,

    You are correct that tithing is not required in the NT, contrary to the claims of most modern Christian teachers. The verses supporting the idea are completely pulled out of context. It was also not one of the things the Jerusalem Church said applied to non-Jewish believers, further solidifying the idea it is not as important as some claim.

    (Giving abundantly is, but that is a different concept and doesn’t fit the fear of most that people won’t give without a requirement.)

    I have either written a blog post about this or will at some point in the future.

    FH,

    It’s just so much easier to categorise MGTOW into the loser box

    Not so ironic that Jason does that. He has had many examples of MGTOWs that don’t fit his box, but he continues to ignore them. I would ask him how his mom’s basement is since he certainly fits that profile, whatever his claims otherwise.

    He regularly whines about being in the loser box and then projects that onto everyone. He is as controlling as any SJW and very likely is a kindred soul to them, if not one himself.

  187. seventiesjason says:

    Well feeriker…..

    It wasn’t a problem for the most popular boys or girls at this camp……..those other young boys should have just “maned up” and just “be alpha”, and learn game!!! Shame on them!

    All joking aside…….we expect boys to just “become” and know what to do when they hit 13 now. If they don’t? Well, it’s their own fault…..or they just don’t have confidence. Just go up to girls and talk to them. They don’t bite! We all know for a fact they in many cases they indeed do.

    I don’t think that boys as early teens or as teens who are doing well with dating had a “talk” and were told “when she does this, it means this” kind of thing by their dad. Some of it is just pure physically maturity for their age. Some of it is seeing or learning at a younger age that in order to get ahead in a school / youth / peer caste-system that indeed you have to be everything that the world tells you you should not be. Bully. Put down, shame, make fun of, fight…..and it does seem to be rewarded. Greatly and liberally by the same adults who speak differently.

    When I was running a Boy Scout Troop…….I allowed some razzing…not hazing. The boys *had* to learn how to take a joke. I had a few more *tender* boys who were not sissies….but their mentality just did not match their physical age yet. They had to learn. Now…one boy was giving a newer Scout a bit of a hard time…..making fun of him for being afraid of the dark. Remember….my Scouts were inner city kids. For all of them…..the first time camping was at the age of 12, 13, or 14. It can be a different and a little bit of a scary experience when it is really, really DARK. REALLY DARK.

    I just smiled at the Scout giving the razzing….smiling I said to the boy get “razzed”
    “hey, you should have seen him on his first camping trip………he was afraid of the dark and was convinced pirranahs were in the lake, so he wouldn’t swim…..but it was okay wasn’t it?” I said looking at the boy doing the razzing…….never saw a Scout get so quiet so fast. Blushing too? What’s that!?lol! Not so tough anymore 🙂

  188. Joe2 says:

    Leaving aside the fact that the ratios between the two sexes were never close to even (each of the two years I attended saw a different imbalance in favor of one of the two sexes), teenagers being teenagers, the Pareto Rule ALWAYS prevailed, leaving both many boys and many girls hurt, alone, and angry.

    True, but the goal of the pairing may have been to better prepare the youth for the real world through this experience. Thus, they may have been made aware that the real world is not fair, they can not always get what they want and there is the Pareto Rule even though they may have never heard of it. There should have been a follow-up discussion addressing how to handle such disappointments.

  189. Anonymous Reader says:

    seventiesjason
    It wasn’t a problem for the most popular boys or girls at this camp

    But it clearly is a problem for you years and years later.
    You hold on to a lot of hurts from the past.
    Why?

  190. An says:

    @wagnertench, I think you are being a whiner here.
    1. Christian girls should define the relationship early. That says they know they don’t have time to waste. They should not be spending months with a man who does not want marriage.
    2. Debt isn’t ideal but there are far more important things.
    3. All 20 year olds are pretty unrealistic. These are still girls looking to marry young so that makes them a lot better than most.
    4. Marriage is a huge risk. Its bigger now but its always been a jump into the unknown. You never know who your wife is going to become.
    5. You are a soldier in the fight to save Christianity and western heritage. Court the girl by doing real work together where you can see her character, then take your best guess after consulting with a trusted older man. It is not required that she be a 9. Put character and faith first.

    One problem with this blog is that since its spending time on the problems in Christian marriage, it comes across as real negative. Lots of couples manage to have wonderful Christian marriages despite everything we are fighting against. Despair is a sin. If your vocation is marriage then follow it and trust God.

  191. feeriker says:

    True, but the goal of the pairing may have been to better prepare the youth for the real world through this experience. Thus, they may have been made aware that the real world is not fair, they can not always get what they want and there is the Pareto Rule even though they may have never heard of it. There should have been a follow-up discussion addressing how to handle such disappointments.

    No, there was nothing visibly or demonstrably instructive about this event, at least not in any identifiably biblical context. As you mentioned, had there been some intended lessons to be learned from this experience, the (supposedly) mature Christian adults in charge would have followed it up with something that would have made clear the purpose of the disaster that preceded it (think in terms of debriefings following a military event or exercise). Then again, maybe I’m falling back into the fallacious assumption that “grownups” actually know what the hell they’re doing or are acting with good intent.

  192. MKT says:

    In another sad victory for SJWs, AD Robles (a Puerto Rican pastor/businessman who’s been a staunch “woke” critic on YouTube and Twitter) was told to shut up and had to resign as pastor from his church. For now, he’s under a gag order of sorts.
    https://pulpitandpen.org/2019/04/11/swinging-from-the-gallows-a-d-robles-goes-down/

    “The reason for his resignation is because (A) his stance against Social Justice and (B) because a prominent Southern Baptist leader convinced his co-elder that “criticizing someone who claims the name of Christ” is wrong.”

  193. OKRickety says:

    nikolibandingo,

    ‘Needless to say, for the greed of moving closer to the NCAA, our school has now imported ~50-100 athletes that are non-christian “chads”.’

    Out of curiosity, are these “imported non-christian” athletes predominantly non-white?

  194. The Inimitable NEET says:

    @innocentbystanderboston

    Black men don’t have a noticeable average advantage in “size” over white men. That is a myth refuted several times over in studies. Women in general are terrible at judging “physical” attributes of men; I know this from collective experience and outside testimony.

  195. feeriker says:

    “criticizing someone who claims the name of Christ” is wrong.”

    My devious mind can think of some truly amazing ways to prove the obvious, utter absurdity of that idea.

  196. The Inimitable NEET says:

    @Novaseeker

    I suspect the increased pairing of white women + black men stems from as well as the latter’s slow decoupling from black women.

    So far, black men have avoided public belittlement of outward displays of masculinity due to their status as an outgroup. One walks on the razor’s edge when criticizing a brotha: for the foreseeable future, racism supersedes toxic masculinity on the PC hierarchy. Rancor is generally directed towards their irresponsibility towards family formation and child-rearing (this is usually the province of black women for the same reason, and restricted to poorer demographics). The rest of the progressive outlets/cheerleaders direct their efforts towards ostracizing timid and subservient white boys. Black men not only enjoy a healthier allowance to act classically masculine, they also willingly play into expectations e.g. the penis size myth.

    I’m also assuming white women – the attractive, healthy subtype – function as implicit status symbols and more convenient partners (the first claim is hard to tease out without relying on outdated racial stereotypes). Poor black men were among the first to swallow the Red Pill, having witnessed unrestrained hypergamy among their fellow women. Seeing their potential future companions turn into contentious, entitled, disrespectful harpies proportionally increased the appeal of white women, especially among men with the status + social mobility to date exclusively within the professional sphere. The resultant stigma lingers: we don’t see noticeable strides in the area of white men/asian men + black women couplings.

  197. The Inimitable NEET says:

    “stems from their relatively untouched image as masculine archetypes”

  198. BillyS says:

    An,

    You need to study reality a bit more instead of your internal fantasy.

  199. Joe2 says:

    1. Christian girls should define the relationship early. That says they know they don’t have time to waste. They should not be spending months with a man who does not want marriage.

    Shouldn’t it be the guys who define the relationship and then determine whether the girls fit into their plans?

  200. Anonymous Reader says:

    An
    @wagnertench, I think you are being a whiner here.
    1. Christian girls should define the relationship early. That says they know they don’t have time to waste. They should not be spending months with a man who does not want marriage.

    Well, sure, a Daughter of the King doesn’t need to let any mere male define anything, right?

    2. Debt isn’t ideal but there are far more important things.

    True. However, many young men prefer debt-free virgins with no tattoos. Who are you to tell those men they are wrong?

    3. All 20 year olds are pretty unrealistic. These are still girls looking to marry young so that makes them a lot better than most.

    See above.

    4. Marriage is a huge risk. Its bigger now but its always been a jump into the unknown. You never know who your wife is going to become.

    It is indeed a huge risk. Women who actually want to get married should have some idea about this; men risk far, far more in marriage now than women do.

    5. You are a soldier in the fight to save Christianity and western heritage. Court the girl by doing real work together where you can see her character, then take your best guess after consulting with a trusted older man. It is not required that she be a 9. Put character and faith first.

    You are suggesting that men should become “friends”, i.e. beta orbiters. That doesn’t work in the real world.

    “Put character and faith first” doesn’t fit very well with “you never know who your wife is going to become”, now does it? There is a way to do that, but I do not think you know what it is, and possibly you would not approve of it.

    HINT Deep Strength wrote a book about it.

    So tell us, An, does the idea that men prefer debt-free virgins without tattoos bother you ?
    Does it offend you?

    Just asking.

  201. JRob says:

    If Christian men would just man-up and dtr, churched women would stop being shamed into dumping $250 million into the abortion industry because they wouldn’t be shamed anymore and reasons and stuff. /s

    Is this the clown world thread?

  202. Name (required) says:

    “MGTOW don’t care what you think is respectable or not. If a man wants to spend 24 hours each day, every day for the rest of his life talking about women or frogs or trees or whatever, that’s his business. ”

    Fair enough. And if some of us laugh at the ones who keep insisting that they TOTALLY DON’T CARE about the women or frogs or trees or whatever they can’t shut up about, that’s our business.

  203. BillyS says:

    So they are guilty if they respond to accusations, and guilty if they do not.

    I think Proverbs says something similar to answering a fool in his folly Name.

  204. Name (required) says:

    Nobody is guilty, BillyS. Some look silly, though.

  205. seventiesjason says:

    The way I see it….MGTOW will continue to grow…….for both right and wrong reasons…….it will never be taken seriously by most men (even red pilled ones), or the culture at large for the fact after red pill is swallowed….many men after awhile have a “now what?” moment……they move on to things that actually make them happy. They get tired of vicious incels, PUA-redux (which has a huge segment as well there). They get older, they have a career change……they may date or may not. Their view of women becomes really indifferent to them…especially the older guys………the younger set in MGTOW *firmly* believes that they will never grow old……yet discuss frequently that once all these hot women hit 30, they are just going to be “begging” an awesome guy like themselves to date them…..and they of course are gonna “throw it in their face”

    Reminds me of most preppers I have met. Most talk nonstop about how when SHTF happens, hot women are gonna be “knocking on their bunker” and will give them the best sex of a lifetime. You would think this is not the case…..but for a good many preppers, they firmly believe this. They finally will be a “ladies man”

    No, you will spend most of your days working hard from sunup to sunset, longing for the world that was lost.

    MGTOW is a phase for most men. No, not going back to the plantation…..but they get what they need from it. They grow. They understand. They were grateful for it being there at the time, and move on.

    Kind of like AA and NA. Helped me. I am grateful. I still check in now and then……….the program did what it was supposed to do. Then you have “those people” who spend their whole life day in, day out……week in and week out at meeting, after meeting, after meeting……..never growing, or learning. Never changing for the better. Still stuck about how they “cannot drink” and are not a “normie” or cannot do cocaine like their friends and not have a problem. Still stuck about when they were seven…..and grandpa gave them a beer….and then they became an alcoholic….and grandpa who has been dead for thirty years is STILL blamed for his problem.

    Kind of like MGTOW

  206. TheTraveler says:

    Enough of this Greek alphabet stuff (alpha, beta, etc.) These are leftist style labels and highly inflexible ones at that, not to mention pernicious.

    There are tremendously successful men who aren’t good with women: scientific types, entrepreneurs, leaders, tradesmen, from tycoons to ordinary guys.

    In days past, some sweet young thing would have found a way to get the attention of a clueless good guy and maneuver him into asking them out, and make the man feel it was his idea. Today, they tease and torment them. Judging by observed interactions, girls actually like these guys, but it’s not “cool,” so being pack animals and slaves to culture, such women mock, tease, and emotionally brutalize “beta” men to prevent themselves falling for them. There are very few sweet young things–and it’s not the men’s fault these girls are chasing bad boys, riding the carousel, chasing careers and education that, in the long run, prove unfulfilling and worthless.

    Blame feminism. Blame the spineless so-called leaders of Christianity. Blame the culture of virtue signaling. But stop blaming the decent guys who are the good, sometimes heroic, foot soldiers of life.

    The fallacy of alpha men being superior beings is a lot like the idea, starting with WWII, that pro athletes make the most heroic, admirable soldiers. Sometimes it’s true, usually it isn’t; most are ok, neither great nor poor. A lot of the self-described alphas I’ve seen, especially online, are one dimensional: they’re good at seducing women and self promotion.

    A number of women have admitted as much to me. Many so-called alphas are exciting and fun (initially, anyway) and good in bed–and that’s it. There’s no depth, no real long term qualities, and the women admit it, know it, and most will dump a perfectly decent guy when the jerk who wronged them–whom they condemn bitterly and sincerely–invites them back for round 2, or round 6 of usage.

    Absence of “game” and marriage is a reality of our screwed-up culture, not a reflection of a man’s worth. It is contradictory to condemn the pickup/carousel/alpha culture and belittle good, decent, solid good guys who can’t get “8s” as no-game, inferior sub-men–“betas.”

    For most men, “Game” is tiresome. It’s ok not to go for 8s, especially if you happen to be attracted to different types (tall/short, fat/thin, pretty/plain). I’ve known 8s and 9s whom I would enjoy being around–and just as many who become 2s the instant they open their mouths.

    No decent man, especially a Christian, jeers at someone who can’t pull in “at least a [insert number here].”

  207. Anonymous Reader says:

    TheTraveler
    Enough of this Greek alphabet stuff (alpha, beta, etc.) These are leftist style labels and highly inflexible ones at that, not to mention pernicious.

    Those terms are useful for description and communication. They are in common use within the androsphere, and many men find them useful in solving problems. If you do not like them then don’t use them.

    There are tremendously successful men who aren’t good with women: scientific types, entrepreneurs, leaders, tradesmen, from tycoons to ordinary guys.

    We know. Elon Musk has been divorced more than once. Jeff Bezos is being divorced by his wife because he cheated on her with a woman maybe 5 years younger than she. Both men are clearly leaders of industry, but are clueless about women – they are Betas in that sense.

    Blame feminism. Blame the spineless so-called leaders of Christianity. Blame the culture of virtue signaling. But stop blaming the decent guys who are the good, sometimes heroic, foot soldiers of life.

    No one here is blaming ordinary men. No one here has ever done that, at least not since I’ve been reading. Perhaps you could consider actually reading the last few years of Dalrock’s essays before writing such sweeping generalizations? At least you would not look so foolish.

    For most men, “Game” is tiresome

    For most men the applied psychology known as Game is a mystery. Fortunately the problem of lack of knowledge can be solved.

  208. TheTraveler says:

    @Anonymous Reader

    I have been following the andro- (mano-? hard to keep track) for years. Full of pointless anti-Semitism. RooshV lost his audience (constatly banning regular commenters but not nasty trolls may have led to that). Heartiste has become a stew of incoherent (dare I say, childish) resentment.

    The Greek alphabet stuff — yes, let’s use a pernicious, meant-to-be-insulting epithet. Because it’s easy and convenient.

    You lurk here and demolish anyone who thinks differently than you. Are you actively trying to run people off?

  209. Paul says:

    @TT What a grim, joyless interpretation of marriage. If we can’t agree after a direct quote about an act of God from the book of Genesis, let’s agree to disagree.

    What a shallow response, you do not even try to put forth an argument. Maybe because I directly quoted Scripture where the apostle Paul teaches the NT view on choosing singleness over marriage? You have failed to show that it is marriage itself that does bring someone closer to God.

  210. TheTraveler says:

    @Paul

    God gave marriage to Adam and Eve, before sin happened. You quote Paul addressing marriage as an antidote to immoral living, seemingly a strongly divine purpose. But marriage doesn’t bring you closer to God. Lol, right.

    Sorry your experience of matrimony has been bad. Sorry your perceptions are we what they are. But just because you say it’s so, doesn’t make it so.

    Marriage was given by God, and is an important Christian sacrament. Regardless WHY you get married (unless it’s for immoral purposes like money or power). So OF COURSE it brings you closer to God.

  211. Anonymous Reader says:

    TheTraveler
    I have been following the andro- (mano-? hard to keep track) for years.

    Yet you don’t seem to have learned much of anything. That’s odd.

    Full of pointless anti-Semitism.

    Nice broad brush you paint with. So why are you here, again?

    RooshV lost his audience (constatly banning regular commenters but not nasty trolls may have led to that).

    RooshV never had much to say, and his grand experiment with the “meet up” was a disaster that resulted in being chased by Canadian feminists. His Game in Europe was mainly “exotic foreigner”, Return of Kings had a number of issues such as “inferior content”.

    Heartiste has become a stew of incoherent (dare I say, childish) resentment.

    Whoever is operating Heartiste has opted to jump with both feet into politics, and it’s been downhill from there.

    Fortunately the androsphere / manosphere is bigger than just to sites.

    The Greek alphabet stuff — yes, let’s use a pernicious, meant-to-be-insulting epithet. Because it’s easy and convenient.

    What’s your alternative?

    You lurk here and demolish anyone who thinks differently than you.

    LOL! My, you are sensitive.

    Are you actively trying to run people off?

    I’m actively trying to discuss ideas, but will admit that I do not always have a lot of patience with people who are just trolling for flames, or seeking to jam all discussion. Do you choose to fit into either of those categories?

  212. Paul says:

    @TT

    Although you’ve stated some biblical truths, you have not shown in any way how marriage brings one closer to God. Unless you have a very peculiar way of defining “closer to God”.

    Looking for example at the apostle Paul, was he close to God? Would marriage have brought him closer to God? Or look at the Lord Jesus Christ, He was the closest to God we can possibly imagine. Would marriage have brought Him more closer?

  213. Novaseeker says:

    Traveller —

    A lot of the self-described alphas I’ve seen, especially online, are one dimensional: they’re good at seducing women and self promotion.

    When used in the manosphere, the term alpha means one thing: level of success with women. Period. We know that there are “business alphas who are not good with women”. They’re not alphas as used in the manosphere, because the manosphere-based use of the term refers to sexual success with women, and that’s it. Not how smart you are, how good you are at business, what a scientific leader you are, or anything else — it’s how good you are with women. That’s the entire frame of the discussion. To come along and say “but, but, but … there are these like business alphas who aren’t good with women, so how can you be talking about alphas” just makes it obvious that you don’t understand what the manosphere is actually discussing when it uses the term.

    Judging by observed interactions, girls actually like these guys, but it’s not “cool,” so being pack animals and slaves to culture, such women mock, tease, and emotionally brutalize “beta” men to prevent themselves falling for them.

    and

    Many so-called alphas are exciting and fun (initially, anyway) and good in bed–and that’s it. There’s no depth, no real long term qualities, and the women admit it, know it, and most will dump a perfectly decent guy when the jerk who wronged them–whom they condemn bitterly and sincerely–invites them back for round 2, or round 6 of usage.

    Which is precisely the point: women prefer alphas. Even when the alphas are faithless “jerks”, women prefer them to betas. As Roissy used to say back in the old days before he went all alt-right all the time, 5 minutes of Alpha is better than a lifetime of beta for women. Betas do get sexual access, but it is negotiated like a trade: sex for relationship, sex for provision, etc. It isn’t “pure desire sex” — alphas are given sexual access just because women are turned on by them and want to have sex with them, without an exchange of anything — his presence himself is the exchange, it is what women “get” from the sex with him. Betas get sexual access, but it isn’t “desire” sex, only alphas get “desire” sex.

    It is contradictory to condemn the pickup/carousel/alpha culture and belittle good, decent, solid good guys who can’t get “8s” as no-game, inferior sub-men–“betas.”

    They’re not inferior sub men, they just don’t have access to desire sex with women. Not just 8+. Any attractive woman (5+) will require an exchange to have sex with a beta, but will have sex with an alpha just because she wants to. As for unattractive women, well … of course what is less desirable is easier to come by, a life reality that is not limited to women.

    Blame feminism. Blame the spineless so-called leaders of Christianity. Blame the culture of virtue signaling. But stop blaming the decent guys who are the good, sometimes heroic, foot soldiers of life.

    For guys who are older now and got screwed in divorce from a marriage that took place years ago, of course it is appropriate to have sympathy for that decision that was made years ago in the absence of proper information. For men today, however, the information is out there. I have very little sympathy for men who refuse to find it or, more commonly, refuse to accept it. They deserve what they get.

  214. JRob says:

    For men today, however, the information is out there. I have very little sympathy for men who refuse to find it or, more commonly, refuse to accept it. They deserve what they get.

    Understand TT, this is what brought many of us here. The search for information after nothing in our cultural programming worked or made any sense.

    The information is here and elsewhere in the ‘sphere, well presented and discussed. We came here after being repeatedly BOHICAed by church leadership. BOHICAed by Family Life Today, FotF, etc.; by the jackbooted “family” courts and the Penultimate Chad also known as the government.

    After a man is destitute for a time and fights a shrew for the very souls of his children due to societal BOHICA, and sees this happen to countless other men he knows, he recognizes a pattern.

  215. Pingback: Information Mismatch | Spawny's Space

  216. TheTraveler says:

    Seems like I’ve hit some nerves. Hard.

    Good.

  217. JRob says:

    “Seems like I’ve AMOGed. Hard.”

    FIFY

  218. feministhater says:

    God gave marriage to Adam and Eve, before sin happened. You quote Paul addressing marriage as an antidote to immoral living, seemingly a strongly divine purpose. But marriage doesn’t bring you closer to God. Lol, right.

    I agree with you. Biblical Marriage does indeed bring you closer to God than a multitude of other options. It is only one type of antidote to immoral living though.

    I’ve looked and only found a few places one could have a Biblical Marriage in the modern world. They all happen to be highly close knit communities (can’t blame them) and tend to reject those like me from the outside (don’t blame them). In most cases, the marriage options open to men like me are solely lacking, they are risky, dangerous and place men in a precarious situation, completely open to government abuse and sanction.

    I realise I will not be able to keep the attraction of a woman for a lifetime, thus the risk of divorce is high. I realise I will not be able to compete against all the alpha Chads looking to pump and dump her. I realise she will choose them over me time and time again. I ain’t an alpha, I am merely me. Not ugly but not in the top 20%. It does me zero benefit to get married, it does not solve any underlying issues I have, nor does it solve any sexual issues either, she is free at anytime to cut off sex and abuse me for her own amusement by limiting affection. Any children would be used as pawns. Used against me in court if she were to divorce me. I have no protection against these eventualities.

    The only avenue that is open to a man like me is to learn to control my sexual urges. To focus on other aspects of my life other than a wife and children. Marriage is no longer open to me. I’ve realised that and decided on a different course of action.

    Please understand, there is no returning to a sane society, not until we have gone through the insanity and emerged on the other side. I’m thankful to have realised this before real damage to my life was caused.

    If you have a plan to save society, I suggest you get right on that and spread the message far and wide and fight the state till it caves under your righteousness and vigor. I will not stand in your way. I’ve merely decided my energy is better spent elsewhere. I wish you the very best.

  219. BillyS says:

    I am not normally as radical as FH, but his points are completely valid. I thought I had a stable long term marriage. I married a Christian woman, right? I was faithful? We might have bumps and unhappiness, but she would never leave, right?

    Well, she finally did decide to blow things up. She has no problem proclaiming “God hates divorce” even now as she still attends church. She never was a helpmeet in her heart, so she has loads of anger since I “kept her enslaved all those years” (my words, but her feelings).

    Like most today in churches, introspection is not possible. Too many in church also supported her in blowing up her marriage. What exact obligation do I have for marriage now? The only ones attracted to me are older and not attractive to me at all. I would be very skeptical of anyone who I was attracted to since I would wonder why they were interested in me in the first place.

    I have strengths, but not in today’s society, including the church. Churches are too busy building women up and tearing men down, lacking any compassion to do the right thing. This is even true in churches. They have no compassion for males who have been through hell. They have little for women either, in reality, but they will at least speak nicer to women.

    You can’t shame me into caring more. I remain too much of a civilizationist at heart, but modern western civilization is hosed. Too many believe too many things that undermine it. We will have to have a very painful crash before we can get the reset and start over with something more sane. I am unlikely to make it that far, for better or worse.

    Lets here some practical solutions for men like me (closer to 60 than 50) that are alone. What do we do? We are going to be what younger men look at to some point as well and it will not encourage them to do better.

  220. Opus says:

    @Novaseeker

    The past is truly a different country and I am thus indebted to you for bringing me entirely up to speed as to the demographics and indeed murder rate in ‘D,C.’ It is difficult, very difficult to get tone-of-voice purely from writing and that combined with what is at the least a trans-atlantic difference in sense of humour – I put that as politely as I can – only adds to the difficuties of comprehension.

  221. a bee ee? says:

    I love that: his husband Chasten. Snork, snork.

  222. JD says:

    ‘Devout Episcopalian’ = polite atheist who knows his way around a sailboat.

  223. Pingback: Dissident Write II: Dissident Boogaloo – The Portly Politico

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 )

Connecting to %s

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