A dangerous truth.

The Institute for Family Studies has an essay by Professor W. Bradford Wilcox, titled Marriage Facilitates Responsible Fatherhood.  According to the editor’s note the essay is an abbreviated version of Wilcox’s testimony to he House Ways and Means Committee for the Worker and Family Support Subcommittee Hearing in June.  The essay concludes with:

Given all this, federal programs and public policies designed to promote healthy fatherhood should not lose sight of the importance of also strengthening marriage in America. That’s because no other institution is as successful as marriage in connecting fathers to their children.

Wilcox’s closing plea may seem obvious, but the truth he is touching on is a politically dangerous one.  This is because “responsible fatherhood” is a term used to minimize the entirely predictable consequences of reworking our family structure from a marriage based model to a child support model.  The implication is that something mysterious suddenly happened to men, causing fathers to become less engaged with their children.  Politicians promote this implication with organizations like the  National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse, and they do so to distract from their own evil actions.  The reality is that we have created elaborate legal machinery to eject fathers from the home and alienate them from their children.

Professor Willcox urges congress to look for ways to strengthen marriage, but it would be hugely beneficial if the government would simply stop working so diligently to facilitate kicking fathers out of the home, and out of their children’s lives.  But kicking dad out is essential to achieving feminist goals.  The machinery of familial destruction is essential to empower women who are unmarried, divorced, and even married.

In the case of married women, giving mothers the ability to easily eject the father from the home gives wives great power over their husbands.  Professor Martin Halla warns policy makers that joint custody harms married mothers by making it harder for mothers to alienate fathers from their children.  From Do joint custody laws improve family well-being?

The redistribution effect of joint custody laws

The introduction of joint custody improves divorce as an option for men and potentially worsens it for women. The change to joint custody strengthens the bargaining position of men within marriage…  This shift in allocation power should increase the well-being of men and potentially lower it for women.

Policymakers should acknowledge that regulating families’ post-divorce life may affect intact families…

To predict the effects of a planned reform, it would be important to assess how the relative bargaining positions of spouses will be affected. This can be approximated by checking how the reform affects the well-being of each partner in the case of a potential divorce. The party who will benefit from the reform will gain power within the marriage.

Economists Stevenson and Wolfers describe the mechanism Halla is referring to in their paper Bargaining in the Shadow of the Law: Divorce Laws and Family Distress (emphasis mine).

In the literature on the economics of the family there has been growing consensus on the need to take bargaining and distribution within marriage seriously. Such models of the family rely on a threat point to determine distribution within the household. The switch to a unilateral divorce regime redistributes power in a marriage, giving power to the person who wants out, and reducing the power previously held by the partner interested in preserving the marriage.

Alienating children from their fathers isn’t an unintended side effect of our current system.  Giving mothers the power to kick fathers out of their children’s lives is a public policy tool used to strike fear in married fathers.  Again from Professor Halla:

…it is useful to consider that a father’s situation improves on average after a divorce in a joint custody regime compared with the situation before the reform. On average, fathers lose a large share of their parental rights after divorce under sole custody rules, while they still have a good chance of being involved in their children’s upbringing under joint custody rules.

If fathers don’t fear losing access to their children, mothers can’t use this fear to threaten them.  As a sociology professor, Wilcox has to understand the public policy reason fathers are being kicked out of their children’s lives.  Men didn’t suddenly and mysteriously become less responsible;  government kicked fathers out of the home to empower mothers.  Yet Wilcox ignores this elephant in the middle of the room in his testimony to Congress.  This was a shrewd move, because addressing that ugly truth would certainly threaten Wilcox’s career in public policy.  As it stands even stating the painfully obvious, that legally (even if only temporarily) declaring that fathers are part of the family increases fathers’ investment in their families, is a potential threat to the status quo.  For his tepid courage in the service of innocent children, Professor Wilcox deserves tepid praise.  And should he or any of his peers one day develop the courage to speak the more dangerous truth, that alienation of fathers from their children is quite intentional, it would present a serious threat to our current family model.

HT Anon

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Child Custody, Child Support, Denial, Disrespecting Respectability, Fatherhood, Feminists, Marriage, National Marriage Project, National Responsible Fatherhood Clearinghouse, Replacing Marriage, Threatpoint, Traditional Conservatives, W. Bradford Wilcox. Bookmark the permalink.

183 Responses to A dangerous truth.

  1. Anon says:

    Lord have mercy.

  2. locustsplease says:

    Thank you for preaching the truth that they are working deligently and deliberately at this. It is no accident. This war was lost with out so much as anyone even knowing it even happened until decades later. They used peoples nature and good will against them so smoothly while providing cover so well that it is truly devine and from satan himself. No person alive could design such a perfect plan.

  3. John says:

    The US is about to collapse – probably by 2023, 2024.

    Here in Ohio, there is an army of single, angry, armed men, many of whom are PTSD veterans from one of the recent foreign wars. Fewer than half of these 20s and 30s year old men have proper careers. However, most of these men do work, in dangerous cash market jobs, like in construction. Many are separated from their children by the law and their whore girlfriends or ex-wives, and working under-the-table allows them somewhat to control the amount of money they must give outright whores.

    Without going into too much technical jargon, when the US enters the next recession, the interest rates will have to go below zero by a substantial amount to jump start the economy. This will give the government the opportunity to ban cash, and *force* these men, who currently work in the black market economy, to give the full amount of money to degenerate women and their attorneys, social workers, etc. When several hundred thousand justifiable angry men in Ohio are forbidden to work except over-the-table with no more way to avoid subsidizing evil, the systematic and planned violence will likely start. Yes, the tech giants will try to control access to information and communication, but then again, Russia defeated the West in Ukraine by shutting off *all* communication on the battlefield and using motorcycles to deliver orders. These men will be creative to organize, and then they will hit all at once, and then again, and again.

  4. Frank K says:

    The US is about to collapse – probably by 2023, 2024.

    I think it’s possible in that timeframe, but for different reasons. The left seems to be on a collision course with disrupting life in the US if they don’t get their way. I could see them blocking roads, airports, disrupting stores, hospitals, schools, etc. Antifa will be everywhere while the police look the other way. They will dial up the race war, demanding open borders, special white only taxes for “reparations”, etc.. At some point there will be armed push back, and that is when all hell will break loose.

    I’m sure the PTB would love to abolish cash, but when you think about it, they have pretty much already accomplished that. True, you can still get cash, but most people don’t bother and either use plastic or services like PayPal.

    The negative interest rates are problematic of themselves, as they signal that were are going where no economy has gone before (and it’s global). It will exacerbate the “everything bubble” to even more dizzying heights. Think houses are too expensive or that stocks are overvalued? You ain’t seen nothing yet.

  5. vfm7916 says:

    @john

    The tech giants will not “try”, they have already done so to most of the unauthorized Right. Further, the “Russia” part is Cathedral Narrative, and does not square with the main part of your post. Don’t mix that propaganda in with what you’re predicting.

    Your timeline is hasty as well. The 2030’s are a better bet.

  6. Frank K says:

    If fathers don’t fear losing access to their children, mothers can’t use this fear to threaten them.

    The thing about men is that they adapt. Witness the plummeting birth rate, which keeps sinking like a rock in a well. Men understand the peril, and many are reacting in the only rational way they can to protect themselves: fewer are siring children than ever before.

  7. Frank K says:

    Your timeline is hasty as well. The 2030’s are a better bet.

    I’m inclined to think so as well. But I don’t discount the possibility of the Left resorting to unrestrained violence should the 2020 elections not go their way. Think Antifa on steroids.

  8. Anonymous Reader says:

    Herr Doctor Wilcox is so deeply blue-pill / blind / clueless:

    That’s because no other institution is as successful as marriage in connecting fathers to their children.

    I’m sure Wilcox assumes that all levels of government are genuinely concerned about connecting fathers to their children, because that’s what they say. He automatically assumes that all the actions government does to rip children away from their fathers and keep them away is some sort of unfortunate mistake, an accident, perhaps resulting from an overzealous underling.

    Dalrock
    As a sociology professor, Wilcox has to understand the public policy reason fathers are being kicked out of their children’s lives

    No, he does not have to understand any such thing. First of all, his paycheck depends in part of not understanding it. Second of all, we’ve both seen vids of him speaking: he is a deeply betaized man.

    It would hurt his eyes a great deal at this point in his career to actually open them and see what the child-support paradigm of marriage really looks like. Because he might have to admit that he is part of that machine, that he’s been playing his own designated part / role in the Kabuki theater of “Fixing The Family”.

    In First Aid terms: He’s offered a tiny dot-sized band aid to men with arterial bleeding. Feminists hate him anyway, of course, for failing to be on board with whatever “Men Bad!” cause du jour is out there.

  9. vfm7916 says:

    @AR

    He’s Authorized Opposition. He’s there to nobly suffer defeat on behalf of his demographic. Once he’s appropriately tarred and feathered those who would fight can be lumped in with him and officially dismissed.

    He’s a Straw Man, a Tar Baby, or Judas Goat. He knows his function, and at least he gets a paycheck and retirement for it.

  10. Barnie says:

    It has become clear to me that one of the reasons that religious leaders tacitly or explicitly support the marital threat point is that they hope to leverage state power to control the men in the congregation by means of the wives. They view divorce, alimony and child support, and loss of custody of children as potential forms of church discipline.

  11. BillyS says:

    I recently saw the very beginning of a sermon at a local church I was considering preaching the modern mutual submission heresy. At least they saved me the time to check them out. They had male leadership (or it seemed so), but they are clearly quite blue pilled.

    He claimed that it applied to children and slave owner/boss relationships too, but I did not have the stomach to listen enough to figure out how he weaseled out there.

  12. jsolbakken says:

    Too bad Vox Day banned me from his website, Vox Popoli because I told him that the reason I didn’t want to get married was because women have way too much power, or I would share this with him.

    He called me a liar, a coward, and a worshipper of Satan. He said I should not give in to the fear of divorce. When I tried to explain to him that the problem of women having too much power exists during the marriage, before any divorce actually takes place, he deleted my comments, called me a Gamma and told me to get lost.

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/06/mailvox-its-only-fair.html

    I used to be Alphaeus, but not anymore.

    I can’t hate VD because he’s got too much positive going for him, but, it’s frankly unnerving that he so completely lost his mind over the idea of women having the kind of power that Dalrock speaks of in this and his other blog posts. If enough people challenged him to think more objectively on the subject he would be quite a philosophical coup for us, would it not?

  13. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Frank K: At some point there will be armed push back …

    I hope so, but I doubt it. For decades, conservatives have threatened that they will not allow this or that line to be crossed. But the Left keeps crossing the lines, things keep degenerating, and conservatives do nothing.

    As for me, I’m a single, aging urbanite who lives in Los Angeles. I’ll just hunker down, stay silent, and hope to survive as best I can.

  14. Anonymous Reader says:

    VFM7916
    He’s Authorized Opposition.

    Perfect.

  15. Anon says:

    Physiognomy may not always be 100% accurate, but is still a major indicator that one will rarely go wrong with.

    W. Bradford Wilcox :

  16. Pingback: A dangerous truth. | Reaction Times

  17. Frank K says:

    For decades, conservatives have threatened that they will not allow this or that line to be crossed.

    I’m not talking about an ideology or policy that crosses the line. I’m talking about leftist Red Brigades terrorizing anyone, anywhere, with impunity. Currently that is happening on college campuses and cities like Portland. It is possible to push people too far, which is why there is a hysterics based rush to disarm the people. Once they are disarmed, then you can push them as far as you like, as long as you have the stomach to commit mass murder, which I believe the “new Left” possesses.

  18. Frank K says:

    But it is true that as long as there is something left to lose, the people won’t revolt.

  19. Spike says:

    In short, it is well known that divorce harms fathers and children. But we dare not allow the precious damsels to be inconvenienced.
    We can’t ask them to demure from sexual relations prior to marriage. We can ask them to get married, but we can’t ask them to stay married. We can ask them to bear children for us if she wants, but she can murder the child in-utero whenever she wants to with no consequences.
    And this is all well-known, well-understood and tacitly approved of by The State.

    The State is a satanic entity. And its’ vehicle is Woman.

  20. @ jsolbakken
    I saw that thread. I think he also called you a sodomite. VD’s petulant tantrums and rock solid certainty that he already knows everything are insufferable. But yes, he does good work.
    I wouldn’t bother changing his mind. A guy like that only questions himself if reality slaps him in the face, i.e. his own Mrs leaves him. Nothing else will suffice.

  21. Anon says:

    Professor Martin Halla warns policy makers that joint custody harms married mothers by making it harder for mothers to alienate fathers from their children.

    A reminder : In supposedly ultra-feminist Sweden, the default law on custody is joint.

    Hence, the level of jawdropping injustice and gratuitous cruelty towards fathers is vastly lower. Among other things, there is not a major financial transfer over to the mother, nor is it enforced under threat of imputation and imprisonment.

  22. Chairman Miao says:

    Apologies that this is off-topic, but don’t know how to email Dalrock directly.

    My son is 18 and about to join the army (UK) – have you ever written a post with a not too gloomy or too overwhelming list of advice concerning women, sex and marriage (e.g. red flags, hypergamy, single mothers, N counts, tattoos, etc, etc)? Sort of like Polonius’ advice to Laertes but within context of Christianity, Game, and Red Pill awareness, that doesn’t crush him but helps him to interpret and find his way through the maze and maybe help him avoid deceptions and disaster?

    If such a post exists, or a similar post on other sites, I’d be very grateful if someone could link to it.

    Many thanks.

  23. BillyS says:

    jsol,

    Vox does have some decent things, but his certainty he is right and everyone else is not only wrong, but evil, appears to have grown lately. I see this as a “jumping the shark” moment.

    I learned about this site through his posts (there or on alphagame) pointing here. I no longer read his site regularly, though I am sure he would freely insult me for that choice.

    It is his blog and he can do what he wants, but it would be much more effective if he learned a bit more about this area before proclaiming everyone a heretic who doesn’t agree with him.

  24. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Off topic: Jury found a black basketball player who literally dragged a white, semi-nude woman twice into a motel room NOT guilty of rape. The jury was all black, of course.

    I should not laugh at this but this woman is a moron and our court system is so messed up, I have to laugh so not to cry. A couple of inconvenient facts should come into play here:

    1) The woman is clearly some wh0re who went to the room on her own. The video shows that. She later tried to leave (twice) after changing her mind, and clearly, the man held her down and dragged her back into the sleazy motel room by force. SHE is 100% responsible for being willing to go to his room, she is trailer trash and has no sympathy from me.

    And yet, being trailer trash does NOT allow some dude to drag her into a room and rape the woman who is clearly fighting and trying to flee. He clearly did and clearly forced her into a room (btw, in FL it is forcible kidnapping, a 1st degree felony and carries life without parole), but guy was never even charged of that.

    2) Justice in America is now irrelevant when it comes to facts. If you are the right race or wrong race, you will get justice accordingly.

    You are white and in California. You are attacked and almost stabbed to death by a Mexican/Central American, and video shows the attacker almost killing you and you shoot attacker dead, you will be found guilty. Why? Because the jury in California will likely be almost all “minority”.

    Case in point: the illegal Mexican who executed Kate Steinle with a stolen gun. The illegal was caught red-handed, he confessed to the “accidental shooting”, his prints were on the gun. This is a slam dunk case, even a 1st year law student could win this case. And yet the foreign killer was found not guilty because the San Francisco, California jury wanted to “send a message to Trump”.

    This is the type of justice you all should expect in America today. It is race/gender/location based.

    I would advise Americans consider carefully where they live because their fates may one day be judged by “their peers” and if you live in a “minority-majority county”, good luck in prison.

    https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/25/pew-research-109-u-s-counties-become-majority-minority-since-2000/

    See the link above for some data on how to pick where you live and should not live. I strongly advise those wanting a “fair trial” to avoid prison to stick to areas where your fellow, Conservative and same-race Americans live and not foreign barbarians who want to destroy and imprison you.

    Cannot have a bigger warning than this case and Steinle’s case. You have to be crazy to live or spend too much time in “diverse areas”.

  25. Opus says:

    Let me pile in against Vox Day. Hardly a week goes by without some unfortunate commentor (like a French Aristocrat in the 1790s) being led out towards the virtual guillotine. I ceased to comment at Vox Day when one had to first sign in, yet I always read it and a lot of what Vox Day says is excellent stuff – but indeed I thought his hard-line approach to marriage was no matter how heroic and worthy – how can I put it – raising the bar a bit too high and reminded of nothing so much than an officer in WW1 exhorting his men to go over the top into the tender embrace of German machine Gun fire. If I may say so, Vox Day gives me the impression that he has a massive chip on his shoulder as to his intelligence for which banning a commentor provides momentary relief from the pain of suspected inferiority – rather as does a cutter. Then there is all that nonsense about his being an Indian – a nice form of racial aristocracy that – I don’t know just how Cherokee or Apache he might be but to me he looks no less Caucasian than does Elizabeth Warren. Had I not known otherwise I would have mistaken him for an American.

  26. Strike Three says:

    (Opus). Just last week I finally had enough of Vox’s insultingly aggressive comments in his own comments section. He completely eviscerated some poor guy just because the commenter showed a little too much self-confidence in his own assessment of a situation.
    After seeing Vox Day do this for the umpteenth time something in me finally snapped, I wrote a final comment on the website informing them “I’m outta here,” and I haven’t read the blog since.
    I agree with N. Vladivostok above who said that Vox simply won’t learn until reality hits him personally in the face–i.e. when Mrs. Vox Day leaves him. Vox is the quintessential alpha-nerd who only feels fully alive when bullying other nerds. And then I suspected I had become one of his nerdlings and (I think) I have too much self respect to be that sort of guy.
    Dalrock, on the other hand, is a true Christian gentleman, and does not have a fragile ego. Nor does he require sycophancy from anyone.

  27. Scott says:

    While reading through this first time last night, I couldn’t help but think about an analogy I once heard. Basically, there are complex issues in life, and there are simple ones. The trick is to know which are which.Because of something is simple, then a simple solution will suffice. But the more complex ones require a lot more explaining and evidence, and discussing, and so on.

    The political right in this country talks about the benefits of “marriage” quite often, and correctly points one thing about it. That is, all things being equal, children born to an intact family are predicted to succeed on every imaginable variable, even when accounting for race and SES.

    They then extrapolate that marriage, no matter what violence you do to it must be a magic elixir that solves all social ills.

    Its like if I have to explain to someone for the first time that the earth is round. If we walk outside and look out on the horizon, everything points to it being flat. I have to show pictures from outer space, cover bits of astronomy, physics, and so on to make the case for its roundness in the face its obvious flatness.

    LIkewise, there is so much wrong with the approach of trying to fix “marriage” to help children. These guys really don’t know what they are doing with incomplete data.

  28. jbesuden says:

    Women are more likely to attend church regularly and tithe. There might be a financial incentive for churches to encourage divorce, as 10% of the child support and alimony will end up in the pastor’s coffers. It also empowers the church as a replacement father and role model.

  29. 7817 says:

    Right on Scott. It’s not the ignorant ones that are the problem, it’s the ones that know better but still repeat the lies that are the problem.

  30. Liz says:

    Chairman Miao, my spouse has overseen many, many military legal cases and the number one thing he would advise you (and our son, who has also signed on to enter the military) is be careful of everything he texts, and if he is ever questioned by (presumably military) law enforcement ask for an attorney before saying anything. He cannot be too paranoid and they will attempt to make him feel like being helpful will help his case. It won’t.
    Remember, the feds are able to lie as much as they want to obtain a confession…but if he lies to them, it’s a prosecutable offense, even if he wasn’t aware of the lie. This may sound easy, but in reality the situation can be very confusing. For example, imagine he saw someone doing something (technically) wrong….he might not even be the culprit.
    Also, tell him about the pre-text phone call (which most people have never heard of). It is an entrapment device, and completely legal for the federal government (state laws differ). It is natural to apologize to an accuser if they call you on the phone….any apology will be construed as a confession, and the feds are listening and taping. A woman calls him on the phone to complain, tell him to hang up.
    https://www.bhwlawfirm.com/pretext-phone-calls/

  31. cshort says:

    @Liz & @Chairman Miao

    At least in the US, never talk to the police regardless of whether they’re MP’s, a county Sheriff, city cops or whatever. It’s not just the feds that can lie, they all can and will. A good discussion of the topic by both a lawyer and a police officer are in this video from Regent University School of Law.

    In the UK I know that you have the right to silence and not answer questions from the police. However, without the stronger protections of something like the US 5th amendment, I think everyone is at an even greater disadvantage in the UK when dealing with the government.

  32. jsolbakken says:

    My main concern regarding Vox Day is how he makes enemies for no reason and how much damage he inflicts on what he claims to be his cause, i.e., “Nationalism.” He has said that he thinks Anders Behring Breivik will be considered a hero someday soon, like John Brown. But I have several problems with this idea. Brown had an extensive resume as a freedom fighter back in Kansas. He committed atrocities there, but it was in the context of an atrocious guerilla war against equally atrocious enemies. Then when Brown came back to the East he organized his raid on the military installation at Harper’s Ferry, and when it failed he was tried and hanged for it. But it is not reported that John Brown targeted little kids in order to make his political statement.
    Anders Behring Breivik is no John Brown, but poor old Vox Day with his 150 IQ is too stupid to see the difference, and that hurts people who want Nationalism to prosper.
    If he can be that stupid, then it’s unavoidable that others will be likewise, which is annoying.

  33. jsolbakken says:

    I think you can’t go wrong starting with Proverbs 31.
    Proverbs 31
    1 The words of king Lemuel, the prophecy that his mother taught him.
    2 What, my son? and what, the son of my womb? and what, the son of my vows?
    3 Give not thy strength unto women, nor thy ways to that which destroyeth kings.
    4 It is not for kings, O Lemuel, it is not for kings to drink wine; nor for princes strong drink:
    5 Lest they drink, and forget the law, and pervert the judgment of any of the afflicted.
    6 Give strong drink unto him that is ready to perish, and wine unto those that be of heavy hearts.
    7 Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more.
    8 Open thy mouth for the dumb in the cause of all such as are appointed to destruction.
    9 Open thy mouth, judge righteously, and plead the cause of the poor and needy.
    10 Who can find a virtuous woman? for her price is far above rubies.
    11 The heart of her husband doth safely trust in her, so that he shall have no need of spoil.
    12 She will do him good and not evil all the days of her life.
    13 She seeketh wool, and flax, and worketh willingly with her hands.
    14 She is like the merchants’ ships; she bringeth her food from afar.
    15 She riseth also while it is yet night, and giveth meat to her household, and a portion to her maidens.
    16 She considereth a field, and buyeth it: with the fruit of her hands she planteth a vineyard.
    17 She girdeth her loins with strength, and strengtheneth her arms.
    18 She perceiveth that her merchandise is good: her candle goeth not out by night.
    19 She layeth her hands to the spindle, and her hands hold the distaff.
    20 She stretcheth out her hand to the poor; yea, she reacheth forth her hands to the needy.
    21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household: for all her household are clothed with scarlet.
    22 She maketh herself coverings of tapestry; her clothing is silk and purple.
    23 Her husband is known in the gates, when he sitteth among the elders of the land.
    24 She maketh fine linen, and selleth it; and delivereth girdles unto the merchant.
    25 Strength and honour are her clothing; and she shall rejoice in time to come.
    26 She openeth her mouth with wisdom; and in her tongue is the law of kindness.
    27 She looketh well to the ways of her household, and eateth not the bread of idleness.
    28 Her children arise up, and call her blessed; her husband also, and he praiseth her.
    29 Many daughters have done virtuously, but thou excellest them all.
    30 Favour is deceitful, and beauty is vain: but a woman that feareth the LORD, she shall be praised.
    31 Give her of the fruit of her hands; and let her own works praise her in the gates.

  34. purge187 says:

    “A guy like [Vox] only questions himself if reality slaps him in the face, i.e. his own Mrs leaves him.”

    And even then, in one of his streams where he bemoans MGTOW, he said that marriage is a worthwhile endeavor, even if it fails. One of the hallmarks of Narcissism is never admitting when you’re wrong.

    And isn’t this the same Wilcox who made that infamous video shaming men into marriage? He’s a slow learner.

  35. 7817 says:

    Vox Day isn’t the subject of this post.

  36. feeriker says:

    Red Pill Christianity says:
    August 28, 2019 at 2:31 am

    This is what WILL ignite Civil War II, and very much sooner than anybody thinks (anybody predicting +/- 2035 as America’s collapse point isn’t paying attention to just how rapidly things are deteriorating).

    Prediction: Election 2020 will be the USSA’s last, and it very likely won’t even be seen through to completion. The Left is already threatening overt violence if there is a “Trumpslide,” and this is very likely what will force everyone else to confront reality and fight back. It’s going to make the Lebanese and Yugoslav civil wars of the 70s-90s look like schoolyard fights by comparison.

  37. Opus says:

    It may be that I do not understand the extent of the 5th Amendment but why would it be that in England my right to tell the Police to go stuff themselves is somewhat less useful the 5th? I always wonder why if the constitutional Amendments are so wonderful they were not included originally in the Constitution. On balance I much prefer our system which is that unless Parliament decides I must do something I am not obliged to do it – the very definition of Freedom – I do not rely upon some here today gone tomorrow Amendment – and that includes answering questions put to me by the Police or indeed anyone else. My experience for what ti is worth is that in practice most people like to explain themselves and it is comparatively rare for a suspect to simply refuse to speak – speaking can assist where as does happens the Police have simply got the wrong end of the stick. No one is a client of the Police or for that matter a permanent enemy. Everyone hates the Police that is until one needs their help.

    Which reminds me: one inebriated night coming home with my buddy, we noticed that a building was on fire and so we went to investigate. Well, a burning building is just that so we left the scene but by that time the Police had arrived and some Detective Constable roughly ordered me to tell one of his P.C.s my name and address. I told him to go run up his leg and nonchalantly went on my way. My friend stayed behind. When I next saw my friend I asked what happened next. He said he explained that I was a very difficult person – which seemed to satisfy the Detective Constable.

  38. jsolbakken says:

    I apologize for bringing up Vox Day, but, I think he’s relevant because he is the epitome of those who will vociferously disagree with and deny and defame Dalrock and what he wrote about the threat point situation. Vox Day represents a crazy twisted amalgamation of Traditionalist and Pick Up Artist mentalities that for some reason has been effective in confusing people and blinding their eyes to what I think is closer to the truth and makes more sense. I think we have to deal with him and his ilk. But I might be wrong. I’m not trying to be doctrinaire here, like Vox Day.

  39. Liz says:

    “People have completely forgotten that in 1972 we had over nineteen hundred domestic bombings in the United States.” — Max Noel, FBI (ret.)
    I think it unlike things will even be as bad as 1972 in 2020, let alone as bad as the Balkans in the 90s. On the bright side, it’s coming very soon so we get to see who was right! And our family is armed to the teeth.

  40. vandicus says:

    @Opus

    The first Ten Amendments, aka the Bill of Rights, were packaged with the Constitution.

  41. cshort says:

    @Opus

    Because while you can tell the police to go stuff themselves, you can’t do the same thing in court if you agree to testify before the court. If you’re testifying in a UK court you have to answer the questions directed at you truthfully and fully under the law. No equivalent in taking the 5th. In the US we can always tell them to stuff it. Also, look at the different warnings police give regarding right to silence:

    UK – “You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention when questioned something which you later rely on in court. Anything you do say may be given in evidence.”

    US – “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in court.”

    In the UK being silent can be used to actively harm you in court proceedings while in the US silence in and of itself can’t be actively used against you.

    As far as why the bill of rights (first ten amendments) weren’t included originally, you can read some of the American founders arguments on the issue. The main argument was that the Constitution did not need a bill of rights, because the people and the states kept any powers not given to the federal government. Of course today we know how well that’s held up with how the clear limitations on the federal government have been ignored or adjudicated away.

  42. Novaseeker says:

    Opus —

    In the US the entire system is fundamentally adversarial. So the cops here will do everything the law and the constitution arguably permit them, and push as far as they possibly can. If we relied on state and federal statutes, which are heavily influenced by “law and order populism” here, we would all be up the creek without a paddle in the US. The whole system here is a gladiatorial/adversarial relationship between the citizen and the state, as represented by the police. People are framed up all the time by the cops because they were foolish enough to open their mouths here. In the US, you never, ever, ever answer a cop’s question, period. When they are asking you a question, they are not assisting you, they are investigating you.

  43. Novaseeker says:

    Vox has ever been thus. He may have become more shrill in his middle age now, but he was always basically like this, with the same issues at the core.

  44. cshort says:

    @Vandicus

    No, they were ratified after the Constitution. The Constitution went into effect in 1788 after New Hampshire became the 9th state to approve it. The first 10 amendments weren’t ratified until December of 1791. Of the 17 proposed changes passed by the House in 1789 only 12 (with a couple being combined) made it through the Senate in the same year. Only 10 were ratified in 1791 with one later ratified in 1992 (27th Amendment).

  45. 7817 says:

    He may have become more shrill in his middle age now, but he was always basically like this, with the same issues at the core.

    Far better description of the man’s haters than of the man.

    The fantasy about the guy’s wife leaving him is just… appallingly stupid. Hasn’t that happened to enough men around here? It’s not enough that it’s happened to many of us, now we have to hope that tragedy will occur to someone with a successful marriage in order to bring them down to our level? Talk about crab bucket mentality. I’m starting to understand why the “ankle biters” are held in contempt.

  46. dragnet says:

    This thread is becoming hijacked by Vox…but it’s worth saying this: that for all his gamma hate, he pretty much defines the personality type. He’s also a massive dork.

    @ jsolbakken

    No, winning over Vox isn’t a coup or anything like it. He’s not a leader of men and he’s not as smart as he thinks he is. He’s just a decent blogger and a builder of third-rate online products & platforms. Hate to break it to you, but the reality is that he’s someone of very little consequence.

  47. Opus says:

    It was I believe the case that until the Criminal Justice Act of 1898 that a Defendant in a Criminal Trial was unable to give any evidence in his own Defence. It is still the case of course that a Defendant is under no obligation to enter the witness box and may either firstly argue before the presiding Judge that the Prosecution have failed to make a case such that the Case should be dismissed – and that most famously happened in the trial of the late Jeremy Thorpe* for the attempted murder of his alleged boyfriend – or allow other witnesses for the Defence to give their evidence. The Prosecution do not get to call the Defendant. If a Defendant does enter the witness box he will of course answer the questions put to him by his Counsel – that merely opens him up to cross-examination by Prosecuting Counsel. If you do not wish to be Cross-examined do not give evidence-in-chief.

    cshort sets out the present caution used in England. Previously one much like that used in America was what was used and frankly the new caution is both unmemorable and being vaguer lacks clarity.

    *Thorpe was the leader of a political party.

  48. jsolbakken says:

    “The fantasy about the guy’s wife leaving him is just… appallingly stupid. ”

    It was not suggested as a fantasy, it was meant to convey the idea that Vox Day won’t understand the reality of the gynocracy and divorce until he personally experiences it. This is not the same as wishing it upon him, though, if we wish all people to come to a knowledge of the truth, it would make sense to desire that he suffer whatever it takes to get him to pull his head out of his rear end.

    I’m not concerned with Vox Day as a personal thing, myself. I’ve followed him for years and had many negative direct interactions with him about all kinds of things, and I always brushed off his personal insults and focused on the substance at hand. What concerns me is the amount of damage his insanity can do to the cause of common sense in this crazy mixed up clown world.

    It’s like how Augustine felt it necessary to directly confront the heretical ideas of the Arians and the Donatists. I’ve read some of Augustine’s writings about those subjects and I don’t recall his making it personal, it was always about business. It’s hard not to have a personal aspect intrude, however, when Vox Day calls us liars, cowards, Satan worshippers, and sodomites, as his dialectic argument against us.

  49. jsolbakken says:

    I believe that Vox Day does in fact have an IQ of approximately 150, and that means he is dangerous, no matter how much of a gamma dork he is. He knows enough about rhetoric to effectively weaponize it, and while it won’t effect those who know better, most people do not know better. I think it’s worth the effort to confront the things he says and the way he says them. And I say this as a Nationalist who cares about the cause of Nationalism; I don’t want the cause hurt by wackos who commend guys like Anders Breivik and equate him with John Brown.

  50. Frank K says:

    This is what WILL ignite Civil War II, and very much sooner than anybody thinks (anybody predicting +/- 2035 as America’s collapse point isn’t paying attention to just how rapidly things are deteriorating).

    It is easy to not notice if you live in an upscale suburb or a mostly white community. For instance, where I live is about 92% white. We had some out of town visitors last month and one of them commented “Wow, everyone here is white”

    But deteriorating things are. The last time I was in San Diego I saw a black woman go into an apoplectic tirade in a shop in the tourist trap called Seaport Village. She just went on and on about how the shopkeeper handed her change to her. You’d think that the shopkeeper had just told her that she doesn’t serve blacks.

  51. Gunner Q says:

    “Given all this, federal programs and public policies designed to promote healthy fatherhood should not lose sight of the importance of also strengthening marriage in America.”

    Fascinating that Wilcox thinks fatherhood and marriage are two separate concepts.

    If he thinks Big Government can make strong fathers then he’s a total fraud.

    jsolbakken @ 9:01 am:
    “I think we have to deal with [Vox Day] and his ilk.”

    The smarter move is ignoring him.

  52. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Feeriker: the reason why I am so concerned about a potential 2nd civil war (or major civil unrest in America) is because of two things:

    1) The hyper-polarization of the country and the level of distrust we have between “Americans”. The issue is that Conservatives/nationalists/traditional people see America as a big country where sometimes their side wins, sometimes they lose. They ride out the times when the Left is in power and they work to change it, because the country is big enough for all ideas and everyone. But ultimately, everyone should be tolerated, because part of free speech as enshrined in the 1st Amendment is tolerating people you disagree with.
    Leftists see Conservatives as evil, immoral, and irredeemable. They cannot accept or tolerate a country where “Nazis” run the country. Hillary’s “basket of deplorable” was not a gaffe, that was a written speech that was pre-approved. That is what they believe, that millions of Americans MUST be destroyed, they cant be “redeemed” or fixed. They have to be destroyed. They see their political opponents as villains that must be stopped, no matter what. They seek political power above all else. They are willing to open up the Borders and flood the country with crime and fuel flames of hatred and competition for ever more scarce natural resource, jobs, and housing, as long as they can gain political power. The ends justify the means. Or as their hero Robespierre said “you cannot make an omelet without breaking a few eggs”. That is who you end up with Chinese cultural revolution killing 100 millions. Or Stalling killing 20 million outside wartime. Or Pol Pot or the National Socialist Worker’s Party Germany in the 1930s.

    Look around you. Think about how much do you trust your neighbors, for instance. If you live in a homogenous area, you may have good relationships and some trust with neighbors and you likely grew up around same regions or have something in common culturally. If you live in a “diverse” area, like California or Florida, you probably never stop to meet neighbors. Your neighbors probably do not even speak your language. No one around you has anything in common. That is what happened in Brazil, the most racially-mixed, most diverse country on earth. It is also a place where everyone hates each other. You see your neighbors as people who envy you and secretly seek to take you down.

    Diversity creates distrust. Norwegians have always struck me as some of the nicest, most sincere, and most collectivist-thinking people you meet. Today when you go to Oslo for example, you can see the levels of mistrust between people. Norwegians are permanently divided there now because of issue of mass immigration. Their cultural, linguistic, and national identity is now broken due to mass immigration. Not nearly as bad as Sweden, but pretty bad. Now their socialist health system is overwhelmed by foreigners who overuse and abuse the system, causing Norwegians to resent anyone else competing to use ever more limited and decaying health services. Their society has been completely upended.

    I posted above about this white woman who was literally dragged and forced (while half naked) back into a motel room by a black basketball player. It is on video, this is not a “he said, she said” situation. This is factual and provable. There were witnesses that saw the woman being dragged, she was screaming for help as she is forced into a motel room twice by a naked man. And yet a jury of all black found the defendant NOT guilty. No one reviles MeToo and false rape accusations as much as I do. But that is not justice!!! To allow a guilty man to go free does not “rights the wrongs” women make against men on a daily basis. OJ killing two white people and getting away with it does not “rights past wrongs” done against blacks. That is not justice, that is chaos. It causes hate and anger amongst people. We ow have to worry about whether or not we can get justice from a criminal or civil court based on what the race and political affiliation of who is in the jury??? Facts don’t matter, just your race and political views?!

    This type of “justice” is what happens when you have a country where emotion, not facts, controls thinking and the narrative. That is Brazilian justice… no one trust the courts. They have contempt for authority and hate each other all the more.

    Think about how Kate Steinle killer was found not guilty for pure political reasons, when there was overwhelming evidence against the killer, who had a 20-year long prison rap sheet and admitted to the “accidental killing” on a voluntary TV interview. But the jury let a guilty man go free because they made a political decision.

    This polarization used to be restricted to political debates and cable TV shows, like Hanity & Colmes, but now it is literally everywhere. The left has inserted politics into LITERALLY everything in American life. Music, church, movies, books, schools, colleges, TV, news, editorials, legal cases, courtrooms, and more. You name it, the left has politics in it. Even the store you shop at is political (think about big box stores where Hipsters shop at vs middle class shops at. Hipsters/leftists go to Target and middle class goes go Walmart or Costco). Even food choices are political, where leftists go to Starbucks and Chipolte and the rest goes to Chick-Fil-A, for instance. Eve car choices are political with leftists going for Subaru and VW and Conservatives going for Ford, Mazda, Chevy, etc.

    This level of polarization is extremely dangerous. You cannot escape politics, not even reading Archie comic books anymore.

    2) The Left will not accept a 2020 loss and they seem to be headed for another loss. Their “front runner” is completely senile and their 2 other alternatives (Sanders & Warren) are too extreme for most “old school” Democrats. They will terrify the Trump base into turnout levels not seen since the 1860 election.

    And if the left wins, they are promising retribution. They are vowing to retaliate, to “doxx” their opponents, to get them fired from their jobs or to prevent them from being employed again. There are Dem party leaders saying “when we get power back, you mother***s better duck!” And other stuff like that. When the other side uses political reasons to attack their opponents, the opponents may feel they can never relinquish power. That is why the Syrian civil war is still going strong; the side that loses will be killed. It is a fight to the finish. Losing means prison, death, or permanent oppression.

    We are already seeing this in the USA already. The side in power uses prosecutors, for instance, to criminally charge their political opponents. Like in Venezuela or Cuba. We already see this in America done to Trump’s politic advisers. And when the Left is exposed for wrongdoing, dumb Conservatives say “let’s just move on, it is in the past”. Your faith in the criminal justice system evaporates. The “Deep State” burrowed through the prosecutions and law enforcement abused their powers to target their political opponents. Have you noticed how Antifa gets to attack people openly in leftist cities like Portland and Seattle and nothing happens to them? The cops are ordered to “stand down”. FBI guys McCabe, Comey, and Peter Strok all admitted to committing crimes ad abusing their power under color of authority and are never punished. It is total anarchy.

    The Left has decided that if they have to throw America into chaos to gain political power, it is all worth it, so be it. Why do you think the prosecutors in Leftists areas like Chicago, Philly, Baltimore refuse to prosecute criminals and go after the cops? Because they know crime goes up and fear = more power for them. All leftist candidates for 2020 are promising to open up prisons and let out 1/2 of all inmates ins one sort of “retributive justice” plan. That is gonna cause crime to soar, which will mean the govt will need more power to control and monitor citizens for “crime prevention”. Newly released inmates can also increase their voting base (we saw this in FL where Soros group tricked voters into approving “restoration of voting rights to felons”). Bernie is talking about felons voting inside prions, for crying out loud.

    Look at 2018 elections, where at least 18 Republicans won their elections and suddenly, like magic, votes appear and change the final results. They openly tried to do that in Broward and Palm Beach counties in FL, votes were magically appearing all over the place, almost changing a Senate and Governor’s races! If not from Rep. Matt Gaetz and Lou Dobbs going there with cameras to expose the corruption the night of the election, the Left would have produced enough votes to change the results and stolen the election there too. They did it successfully in California’s House races, since the Dems control CA from top to bottom. The Soros Strategy is to create an electoral crisis, by openly stealing an election to stir up popular anger. If you feel completely disenfranchised, you cannot speak, you cannot voice your opinions, then you have no option but to get violent. That is the plan. They want us to get violent.

    Then you have the issue of Amnesty. If the left wins big in 2020, they will do an illegal alien amnesty and will instantly gain another 20-30 million new voters and will open the borders for millions more. Question: how will YOU, an American citizen feel, when our vote has been completely nullified by 20 million new Democrat voters? How will you feel after say 3 election cycles in a row where your party always loses and your taxes keep going up and up to give more and more welfare. How about the fact that you will not be able to say anything against them online or anywhere else, since you will be banned, blocked, put on “black lists” to prevent you from gaining any employment, or threatened with being doxxed and fired, banned form “polite society”.

    How long until they set-up a national gun registry and send police/military teams to your home for confiscation?

    How much more abuse will white males have to endure under this new permanent leftist majority in government? Or for being discriminated for not speaking a foreign language inside their own country? How about being barred form entry into colleges? Or not being given fair shake in court system say in criminal court or civil lawsuits because you are part of an “evil race”?

    You can only beat a dog and push it against a wall so far. At some point, that dog will bite back. This is why my biggest fear is that our country is headed for chaos. And that is truly a terrible thing. But seems inevitable now and it is gonna happen very fast if left goes ape after losing in 2020 or if they win in 2020 and being cracking down against average Conservatives for political reasons. And they will abuse power, they are promising to do so already.

  53. thedeti says:

    Regarding Dalrock’s original post:

    I suppose it’s too easy to be cynical. But the whole thing reminds me that relationships are, at bottom, about power.

    A relationship between a man and woman is about power. Who has it, who wields it, who doesn’t have it, who wants it, and who’s better at getting and wielding it.

    Women’s primary power is in sex – granting, denying, conditioning, and withholding access to it. That power has been weaponized and amplified. Women have also been given the use of “hard power” (brute force, physical strength, deployment and use of material resources) through law and the state. Women can now deputize police, lawyers, and family courts to deploy “hard power” against their husbands. The clear statement/threat is:

    “You will do what I want, or I will divorce you and get a court to make you do it.”

    “You will do what I want, or I will have the courts make you give your money and resources to me.”

    “You will do what I want, or I will call the police and have them come here and make you do it, or take you away so I can do it myself.”

    Relationships between men and women are ultimately about power.

  54. vfm7916 says:

    All those posting here in regard to the Dark Lord:

    If you’re MGTOW you’ve made your choice. Rather than just crawling away most MGTOWs must proselytize MGTOW, otherwise too many rejecting it would indicate a fundamental mistake in premises. Like how wall hitting land whale feminists have to infect young women, otherwise CogDis on how they ruined their lives will cause worse mental degradation than they already have.
    As we say in EVE, die quietly, FFS.

    If the Dark Lord calls you a gamma, it’s because you didn’t shut the fuck up (apologies to Dalrock) when you were asked the first time. ASKED. It’s because the dude that was referenced as being too confident in his own opinion proceeded to email the Dark Lord 6 more times in yet another demonstration of the principles of Gamma found at Alphagameplan. It’s damn near a clinical predictive diagnosis.

    Given how busy the Dark Lord is actually doing something about the globohomo destruction of western civilization, Christianity, deplatforming of Nationalists, and more, do you think he has time to be nice to feelings? Reading the comment section should quickly educate anyone who has awareness that they’re not a snowflake on WHAT NOT TO SAY. I enjoy seeing the evisceration, but the lack of any self-awareness or self-preservation in men could depress me.

    Last, if you’re butthurt over the Dark Lord telling you to shut up, you will never pull a trigger when it matters, never choose Christ when the choice is conversion or death, never have a successful relationship with women, or even stand up to an SJW trying to push you around.

    Those who’ve read my comments on this blog before know where I stand on marriage and children: HTFU, STFU, get married, have 3+ kids, build a life on your own land outside of a major city, homeschool, build skill, pass it all on to your kids, and support those who will have to fight in your stead.

  55. thedeti says:

    It’s pretty much the same way with men. Or used to be with men.

    Men’s clear statements to women before about, oh, 150 years ago, were:

    “Wife, you’ll do what I want, because if you don’t I can beat you or kill you.”

    “Wife, you’ll do what I want, because if you don’t I’ll put you out on the street with little more than the clothes on your back.”

    “Wife, you’ll do what I want, because if you don’t I’ll divorce you, keep the kids, keep the money, and you’ll live in shame and notoriety, probably with your aging mother or your siblings.”

    Needless to say, that first one is out of the question and completely neutralized. Any man who beats or kills his wife, or even hints that he might do that, will find himself frogmarched out of his house, thrown in the back of a squad car, and charged with any number of felonies by the end of the day. Hell, it’s almost a misdemeanor to frown at your wife or even say anything mean or insensitive to her. It’s almost a misdemeanor to raise your voice to her, fight with her, yell at her, or get angry at her.

    And men can’t do either of the other two things anymore. Any man who divorces his wife will be giving her at least half of the marital assets, plus child support, plus alimony for at least a year or two. So “putting her out on the street” or “keeping most of the marital assets” isn’t an option anymore.

    Men’s power, “hard power”, has been almost completely removed, neutralized, and put in the hands of women.

    Women can hit, beat, scratch, kick, abuse, threaten, terrorize, and commit attempted murder upon their husbands, and no one bats an eye. Women can do pretty much anything they want to their husbands, and women will say “well, he’s a man. He can take it.” Women can divorce their husbands and take most of the marital assets and can now put their husbands out on the street with next to nothing. And this is now “normal”.

  56. Red Pill Christianity says:

    John says: The US is about to collapse – probably by 2023, 2024.
    Here in Ohio, there is an army of single, angry, armed men, many of whom are PTSD veterans from one of the recent foreign wars. Fewer than half of these 20s and 30s year old men have proper careers. However, most of these men do work, in dangerous cash market jobs, like in construction. Many are separated from their children by the law and their whore girlfriends or ex-wives, and working under-the-table allows them somewhat to control the amount of money they must give outright whores.

    It should be no surprise Trump won Ohio by +12% despite the Left having taken Ohio 3 elections cycles in a row before that…. the voters are desperate there.

    John, 2023, 2024 for the next US recession is probably too far away. The #1 reason the US economy is on fire now, it is because for the first time in a decade, we have had the govt’s boot off the threat of small businesses and entrepreneurs. Taxes went down. The Trump de-regulatory policies have unleashed the markets and I do not mean only in stocks, I also mean in terms of economic activity. The China trade war has destabilized China further, which is a good thing, because we MUST slow China down so we can try to rebuild some of our middle class and infrastructure (including our military, which if Fabius Maximus is right, it basically an “antique roadshow”.). If Trump did not do this, China was going to be the dominant world power, imposing their totalitarian, anti-religion and anti-freedom views on all of us, globally. The China thing and the tariffs have greatly HELPED the middle class in America. The elites are mad, but the middle class has been given oxygen and CPR thanks to the tariffs. I have relatives in southern Ohio, they said hiring in factories and factories re-opening have been a miracle according to them. They were suffocating before that, so any breath of air helps.

    But most of the world is in recession now, because of a number of factors, but it is mostly centered in the fact that Western Europe is in freefall. They cannot support the welfare systems now that Globocucks Macron, the Swedes, and “Mamma Merkel” have mass imported at least 6 million new violent and lazy Muslim welfare recipients into the EU. Western Europe has become unsustainable and unstable. The only “solutions” the EU central bank has is to have negative interest rates and print paper money like crazy. They cannot raise taxes anymore without their skilled and wealthy fleeing the EU or tax the migrants since they do not work and spend all their time robbing and raping. The EU is finished, no way they can turn it around now short of a military operation to mass deport millions back to Africa no Middle East. Chance of that happening is close to 0%, since Western Europeans are weak, self-loathing, and too socially sensitive to save their own countries.

    Then you have the UK, trying to save what is left of their country. Might be too late, but who knows? The public there seems to be waking up, so we will see. But at least if Brexit goes through, they may have a chance to save what is left of the UK. If Brexit fails, UK will be just another loser country, like France.

    In the USA, when the next recession hits, and it will hit eventually no matter who is in power or their pro-growth policies, since that is the normal Economic Cycle, it repeats itself every so many years. The issue here is that we are a much poorer, much weaker, and much more divided country than ever before.

    Do you all remember 2008, when unemployment reached 10%? Do you all remember the amount of social instability then? A far-left inexperienced Senator from IL won super-majorities in Congress in a single swoop. That is how unstable the country was with 10% unemployment. We spent a decade until early 2017 in a de-facto recession and the almost the complete obliteration of the middle class. Imagine 15% unemployment. Or 20%. Automation and cost-cutting by companies have already strained labor markets. A recession could set off well-above 10% unemployment, making 2008 seem like a pleasure cruise.

    Think about today. Despite the economic recovery after a “lost decade” under Barry, look at our cities… full of homeless and drug addicts. Sky-high crime. Then our small towns were further deprived of coal jobs and factories, sending millions of men into despair, suicide, and opioids. Others just went to jail for months on end for failure to pay child support since there are no jobs. Throw in another 17 million new immigrants (11 million legally and 5 million illegally – at least, if not more – since 2008) who have entered the country since 2008 and a much more divided and angry country. It is a recipe for disaster.

    When you factor in the 20-30 million illegals already living within US borders, right now, the equation gets even worse from 2008. The next recession will be further exacerbated by all these extra new people, further depressing wages and cutting out American workers. Almost all of these illegals are on welfare, sucking off scare resources from America’s poor. They commit a disproportionate amount of crime (64% of all federal crimes according to 2018 data, State is probably around 50%, as I said I have been to jails in 3 States, roughly 1/2 inmates were Central Americans or Caribbean). Just watch any FoxNews evening show, every single night they have to report on batches of new illegals butchering and raping at will. Leftist judges release these illegals with no bond and Sanctuary cities release these animals from jails unimpeded to commit more crimes. Their illegal kids crowd public school and divert funds from at-need US students to fund language classes and other special needs programs for illegals. It is like a pile of sand being dumped on someone already wet and struggling.

    All of these scarce resources have to come from somewhere. They often come from our American seniors and from the angry veterans and unemployed men in Ohio that you describe. If these illegals get amnestied, guess what? They can then buy guns legally. They will get even MORE welfare. They will compete against middle class for jobs previously not available to them!!!!!! And worst of all, they will VOTE, further disenfranchising Americans. They will further disenfranchise the same Americans we see being lectured by Kristen Gillibrand for “being privileged” in the dying community of Youngstown, Ohio.

    If we have the next recession and Dems take over in 2020, it will trigger an instant recession nationally right there and then, the day after the election. Panic will ensure in stock markets, job market, new start-ups will stop forming, companies will stop hiring. Fear of Democrat take over can paralyze and economy.

    If the Conservatives win in 2020, we can still have a recession, even if Trump continues to do everything right economically and fiscally. Social instability from the Left can create a recession. Heck, the media is talking up a recession right now, even though the economy is doing awesome in the US.

    No matter who wins in 2020, the national debt is reaching Greece levels compared to GDP. That is another crisis on the horizon too. This can set-off a currency crisis.

    Our country truly is besieged on all sides. Only The Almighty can help us avoid a catastrophe in the near future, it seems. We need a real miracle to turn this around.

    Be prepared for anything is all I can say.

  57. Opus says:

    One of the things that I like about Vox Day is that he will not tolerate negativity – too much of that in the way-off-subject comments on this thread.

  58. Red Pill Christianity says:

    TheDeti says: “You will do what I want, or I will divorce you and get a court to make you do it.”
    “You will do what I want, or I will have the courts make you give your money and resources to me.”
    “You will do what I want, or I will call the police and have them come here and make you do it, or take you away so I can do it myself.” Relationships between men and women are ultimately about power.

    100% true statements.

    So what do you do as a man in response to this situation:

    1) You keep your own power by NOT getting married. When you get married today KNOWING you are just handing the woman total financial and police powers over you, you volunteer for servitude. So don’t!

    2) You prevent the woman in your life from using the police against you, by recording and video taping everything she does and says.

    3) Turn the tables on her. Fund online false accusations against her if need be, so she is back on her heels. File anonymous complaints against her at work, if need be (deep dread). Get her banned from social media (it is so dang easy)! Isolate her slowly if need be under a divide and conquer strategy, so she feels afraid to pull threats of police and divorce against you. I do not favor isolation strategy in general, BUT some men trapped in marriages where the woman physically and emotionally abuses him using threats of false accusations against the man, you HAVE TO fight back, even if you do discreetly. The goal is to get things back under control and in an acceptable situation. And for the man to stay out of jail and family court.

    4) You learn game strategies, you stay in shape physically, Andy out have to keep at least some degree of Game over time and keep it up indefinitely if you are already married or on an LTR (it is work, but if you make it into a lifestyle, it becomes second nature and normal). You learn how to shift power in the relationship, by deploying one of these proven relationship management strategies as appropriate:
    a) Dread;
    b) Amused Mastery (dismiss her annoying behavior and mock it, if needed);
    c) Holding Frame (you pull her into your ideas, lifestyle, and Red-pill mindset);

    d) Agree and Amplify (mock the absurdity she comes up with and she will get mad initially, but it will go away eventually);

    5) Please, stop worrying about what some pastor tells you and go rub one off watching some video. You will calm down and THINK CLEARLY and without pressure. Take away the “withholding sex” strategy she uses against you!!!!
    When I was in a 2-year LTR with this girl I was engaged to, she decided to pull the “withholding sex” thing on me. I turned it on her, and started to rub off using a Tenga device all the time. We went 5 weeks without a single bang and the more disinterested I seemed, the more she was coming onto me and the more I seemed disinterested I acted. Finally I gave in or she would have freaked out and sought to end things, but from that point on, she realized withholding did not work. She tried again for 2 weeks months later and I started acting disinterested right away when I noticed she was playing hard to get and I became distant again quickly and utilized some dread too (walking away to make calls and when she asked “who was that” I would say “no one important”) and leave her hanging, as I continued to be cagey and distant. She straightened out right away and bought two new outfits for my private, at-home enjoyment. More cooking and text messages followed too.

    Take away the power women have against you and you will have the upper hand in the relationship. If she wants kids, say you want kids too and be sure to use condoms together with spermicidal lubricant and keep delaying whatever she wants to build anticipation and force her to put efforts into relationship to get what’s he wants. Keep her guessing and keep her waiting sometime and keep dangling that carrot in front of her and the power differential will shift fast and furious in your favor. And learn the 3 management skills above, it will be life-changing.

    If life is a power struggle, WIN IT and you will live happily and she will too. Ultimately, women want to be with a man she respects and admires and women admire strength and power, not kindness and meekness. Women are primal and they simply hate any sign of male weakness.

  59. What’s so funny to me is that probably 90%-95% of all of the problems people are complaining about here (leftism, atheism, contamination of the church, the sexual revolutions, STIs, no fault divorce, divorce corp, decline in marriage, birth rates below replacement levels, ballooning welfare state) would pretty much disappear entirely if only MEN had the testicular fortitude to simply take women’s rights away (repeal the 19th).

    And it would be easy to do. And immediate.

    Rights, power, authority and privilege must be commensurate with legal and financial accountability and responsibility.

    Otherwise you have chaos, social breakdown, economic dysfunction and wholesale injustice.

    It would be easy. You don’t have to stock up on guns, ammo, cigarettes, feminine hygiene products, water and MREs.

  60. The irony is that ultimately it doesn’t really matter.
    Men like Wilcox won’t do it.
    Most of the men weened in churches and universities today won’t do it.
    Men with wives, daughters today will likely never do it either.

    But understanding something – the men who are soon coming up will have no qualms about sending your defential Christian niceguyness into oblivion. They are going to do it for you.

    This is something that I think needs more consideration.
    It’s going to happen. It’s not a question of if anymore.
    So do you want to do it and have a hope of saving this ship from going down?
    Or do you want them to come aboard and do it for you (after throwing you overboard)?

  61. jsolbakken says:

    “Last, if you’re butthurt over the Dark Lord telling you to shut up, you will never pull a trigger when it matters, never choose Christ when the choice is conversion or death, never have a successful relationship with women, or even stand up to an SJW trying to push you around. ”

    That makes no sense, vile mindless minion #7916. Since when is “shut up” considered a valid argument, anyway? It’s not even interesting rhetoric. “Shut up,” you explained?

    And, I as a Christian am supposed to take someone who encourages his vile mindless minions to call him “Dark Lord” seriously? When some screwball who calls himself the Dark Lord tells me to shut up, I’m supposed to slink away in shame, having been proven to be a sodomite, because, 150 IQ?

    This is why I think Vox Day and his vile mindless minions are dangerous, because they are ostensibly on my side of the fence. I am a Nationalist, and I feel my first duty as such is to cleanse my movement of psychotic wackos.

    This ain’t about MGTOW, it never was, which you would know if you read my original personal email I sent to VD which he posted with the intent to invite ridicule from his vile mindless minions.

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/2019/06/mailvox-its-only-fair.html

  62. Frank K says:

    Fear of Democrat take over can paralyze and economy.

    Last year Mexico elected its own Obama, Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador (AMLO), and it’s already showing. Prior to his election the Mexican economy is was growing at a healthy clip. Under his watch growth has ground to zero.

    ALMO makes useless virtue signalling gestures, like selling the presidential jet (a 787 Dreamliner) and makes a big fuss over selling cars confiscated from narcos, to fund welfare programs. He claims that he’s cracking down on corruption, but my relatives down there says it’s as bad as ever. And then there’s the near anarchy levels of crime, which has worsened, contrary to AMLO’s claims. It’s so bad that there was a mass protest where national monuments were defaced in anger as people said “basta” (enough).

    AMLO was elected in large part because he promised freebies to the poor, especially farmers. Farmers are now also protesting, blocking highways, as the promised gibmedats have not materialized. People are angry because the state run hospitals, which were not great to begin with, ran out of basic medication and patient’s families have to buy them at pharmacies and bring them to the hospital. Gasoline is far more expensive than in the US and people are resorting to illegally tapping into pipelines, sometimes with lethal results. There is already talk of recalling him.

  63. 7817 says:

    This ain’t about MGTOW, it never was

    Vs

    You’ve stated your case against MGTOW’s like me as liars

    I’m still MGTOW my self, because that’s what works for me, I was MGTOW decades before it had the name

    You called me a liar, but I would be lying if I did not confess and admit that I have made a deliberate and considered choice to eschew relationships with females

    >says it’s not about mgtow

    >immediately starts trying to make the case for mgtow

    >whines when invited to go his own way

    >swears revenge

    >gamma

  64. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Constrainedlocus says: What’s so funny to me is that probably 90%-95% of all of the problems would pretty much disappear entirely if only MEN had the testicular fortitude to simply take women’s rights away (repeal the 19th).

    It is not about lack of balls. It is about MATH! You need 2/3 of the House and Senate and 3/4 of all of the State Legislatures. It is simply impossible. Here is why:

    1. How many fathers who have daughters would support this? Close to zero. No daddy wants his lil princess to lack in anything, much less right to vote!

    2. Not a single politician nationally or Statewide, would even dare say the words “repeal the 19th Amendment” because he/she would be removed from office in a relentless national outcry. The Christian clerk in KY who refused to issue gay marriage licenses was a target of a national frenzy like this, imagine repealing the 19th and ending the Left’s political dominance nationally? Hah!

    3. Women are between 51% and 56% of the vote in every single US State, save for Alaska a few years ago. They are the majority now and you need a super-majority to repeal an Amendment.

    4. Electorally, the Left has won 2 elections in a row using a so-called “war on women” theme. They managed to turn out legions of left wing harpies to vote for them using this false narrative. Do you recall Dem hack George Staphanopolus asking then primary candidate Mitt Romney all of a sudden about “banning birth control”, a non-issue in 2011, over and over again during a debate? Later that week, spoiled rich law student Sandra Fluke was out there in Congress demanding taxpayers cover her $4.99 worth of generic brand birth control pills or it is a “War on women”. She went on to rally feminists into massive turnouts for “reproductive care”.

    Imagine a candidate on a Statewide election suggested banning the 19th!!!! The Dems would seize control of the entire country in a harpy-filed-frenzied turnout model that would eclipse the 1860 election!

    No, it is not about balls. It is about math and numbers. And the numbers just aren’t there, not even close. Not even 1% of elected officials would support this move. They are in the permanent minority.

    Need proof? Can you name just one (just 1) one elected politician, even some obscure one in some state legislature that supports repealing the 19th? You cannot, because such a person cannot be elated anywhere, ever.

    The early 20th Century progressives knew what they were doing when they enacted the 19th Amendment. They knew it would be irreversible and they would permanently divide men and women on many key issues. Divide and conquer is a key tool of the Left, check out Saul Alinky’s Rules for Radical books, he has a whole section on this topic and creating wedge issues to win elections.

    Sorry Constrained, repealing the 19th will never, ever ever happen, short of a national disaster of Biblical proportions or a foreign invasion or something.
    Start considering learning Game, moving abroad, adjusting your relationship/marriage ideas, getting jacked, or whatever. Put your focus and hopes on anything else, except for a repeal of the 19th.
    Zero chance otherwise and I am someone who is always saying “anything is possible”, but a repeal of the 19th is LITERALLY impossible.

  65. Hazelshade says:

    War is Peace.
    Freedom is Slavery.
    Ignorance is Strength.

    Marriage is Child Support.

  66. feeriker says:

    ALMO makes useless virtue signalling gestures, like selling the presidential jet (a 787 Dreamliner) and makes a big fuss over selling cars confiscated from narcos, to fund welfare programs

    I wonder who the moron thinks is buying all these expensive items that the Mexican government is selling off (who are the ONLY people in Mexico nowadays with money to buy luxury items? Hint: it ain’t the law-abiding working and middle classes). And he probably wonders why nothing has changed…

  67. Theo Hux says:

    + 1 for saying that Vox Day is geeky halfwit with an iq half of what he brags about and as Native American as Elizabeth Warren. He’s wrong about marriage and he’s wrong about himself.

  68. Pingback: You better do as she says, or she’ll take away your kids. | Dalrock

  69. Frank K says:

    Being middle class in Mexico has a very different meaning than in the US. In Mexico if you live in an apartment (or a small house in a crummy neighborhood) and have a non beater subcompact car, you are “middle class”. If you have a small house in a decent neighborhood and have 2 or more non beater cars, you are upper middle class. Anything more makes you upper class.

    Anyway, things are unraveling quickly for AMLO. Unfortunately he still has 5 years left in his term, and short of being recalled (which is unlikely) he will serve it out. What might happen next year is that his party (MORENA) will lose it’s congressional majority and he might have to compromise to get things done.

  70. Anonymous Reader says:

    RPL
    You need 2/3 of the House and Senate and 3/4 of all of the State Legislatures. It is simply impossible.

    You could have stopped there, and filled out the rest of the text if and only if anyone asked “why?”.

  71. Athletic and Whitesplosive says:

    Sad that so many manginas itt can’t seem to understand something so very basic re. Vox. The fact that he can be pigheaded and adversarial is irrelevant to the fact that he’s entirely correct on the issue of marriage.

    Depressing white birthrates and destroying Christian marriage are two of the primary objectives of globohomo, being an “mgtow” or any other gay acronym that means you’re willingly opting out of Christian marriage and procreation is nothing but completely surrendering to them. Sorry, but you are a total gamma and a loser if you willing give up and then try to rationalize that as some kind of “win”, surrender is the opposite of strategy.

    He’s also right that it’s fully within your power to choose a wife who won’t flippantly destroy your marriage, the mgtow philosophy is an idiotic error that treats their *particular* wife as one completely random drawn from a pool of hypothetical average wives, as though they’ve got no say in who they marry. And don’t give me “there’s just no quality women!” BS. That again is the rationalization of a loser who would rather declare it impossible than actually put in some effort looking for and learning how to attract decent women.

    Those who willingly deprive themselves of probably the two most fulfilling things in life, holy matrimony and siring children, because they’re scared there might be negative consequences (which they can probably avoid if they’re not a willful idiot) out themselves as cowards who are useless in this or any other fight. You’ve surrendered already just to the idea of a fight! So what if the odds are stacked against men who try to do the right thing? When did God promise doing the right thing would be easy? Maybe the defenders of the gates of Vienna should have just thrown down their arms, they might have been hurt!

  72. thedeti says:

    To all those defending VD:

    Vox Day does not respect married fathers.

    https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2017/12/14/no-respect/

  73. Anon says:

    Athletic and Whitesplosive’s comment above proves the following :

    i) White Nationalism is a Goddess Cult, and is a form of feminism.
    ii) White Nationalists don’t value fathers either. They actually say paternity fraud is OK if it produces a white baby. These nuts are certainly not the friends of white men.

    Everything about his ideology is that others should make sacrifices and take risks for HIS vision. Nowhere does he say that women should be held accountable.

    No wonder their ideology has no takers outside of the bottom 20% of men.

  74. jsolbakken says:

    It’s not about MGTOW because it’s about the derangement of VD and his vile mindless minions. I heard and saw VD stipulate to almost every MGTOW fact, except one. He said that the divorce rate for Christians is only 10%, not 50%, so, on that basis, he called MGTOW’s liars. Then he said that statistics don’t matter. If so, then why bring it up?

    But what really scares me about Vox Day is that he calls Anders Behring Breivik a hero, and yet he still has standing in the Nationalist community. The more I consider the question, the more convinced I am that he is a trojan horse, an infiltrator, a saboteur, intent on destroying Nationalism from the inside.

    So, howabout you, VMM #7817? Do YOU think Anders Behring Breivik is a hero? Is he someone who we should all emulate, and follow?

  75. jsolbakken says:

    “He’s also right that it’s fully within your power to choose a wife who won’t flippantly destroy your marriage, the mgtow philosophy is an idiotic error that treats their *particular* wife as one completely random drawn from a pool of hypothetical average wives, as though they’ve got no say in who they marry. ”

    All women have too much power because the gynocracy gave it to them. Any woman can destroy her family, suddenly and without warning. Merely jawboning and insulting men expecting them to man up and do what you tell them to and get married and give you your babies is of limited utility.

    Did Hungary and Poland increase their birthrates by badmouthing men and calling them cowards and sodomites and worshippers of Satan? Or was it substantive changes in policies that managed the improvment? You tell me.

  76. Anon says:

    jsolbakken,

    But what really scares me about Vox Day is that he calls Anders Behring Breivik a hero, and yet he still has standing in the Nationalist community.

    To be fair, most White Trashionalists think that (and BLM people think the equivalent about B on W murderers). So VD is not atypical for his group.

    Go to Stormfront or even Unz.com for proof of this.

    What is even stranger is how much homosexuality is being normalized into the WN subculture. Since most WNs are incels, many say that they would rather have sex with a white man than a black woman if those were to only two choices available, since racial loyalty trumps sexual orientation, and producing no baby is vastly better than producing a mulatto baby.

    In a recent poll, 40% of Stormfront readers indicated this preference, with only 60% saying that they would prefer a black woman over a white man.

    This is clearly not an ideology that is going to go anywhere, entirely due to the nature of participants it contains.

  77. jsolbakken says:

    Now that you mention it, I did happen to see a picture of Teddy Spaghetti at a gay parade wearing a rainbow tutu. At the time I thought it was a joke. I should have taken it at face value and realized he really is a homosexual.

  78. Anonymous Reader says:

    Chairman Miao
    My son is 18 and about to join the army (UK) –

    This is sort of like jumping off of a cliff into a lake and asking about swimming lessons on the way down. It’s a bit tardy.

    In Basic he won’t have time to be around girls. Once that is done if he finds strange new respect from girls he used to know – maybe while he’s home on leave – he needs to keep his distance, because there are girls who see a meal ticket and start working to get it. It may be a good idea for a young man to marry in his early 20’s, but it’s not necessarily a good idea for a man who isn’t even 20 yet to get tangled up with a girl who may well view him as just a utility.

    Keeping away from hookers and prostitutes is always a prudent idea. By the way, there’s text in the book of Proverbs about that.

    He should keep emotional distance from other men’s girls and wives. One of the ugly truths about the US military is how many wives cheat when their husbands are deployed out of the country – your son really doesn’t’ need to get too close to a married woman whose husband has gone “off to Egypt”, for his own sake. Again, there’s text in Proverbs about that.

    Deep Strength’s book about masculinity and marriage is still available in hard copy and Kindle via Amazon. His website: https://deepstrength.wordpress.com/
    Does not get updated often but there are some essays your son may find useful.

    For a really big source of truth about women’s nature, The Rational Male is hard to beat but it will take time for any man to read that and digest it. It would be good for him to start reading after Basic training ,because it’s currently up to three (3) books.

  79. Dylan Sexton says:

    thedeti says:
    August 28, 2019 at 11:40 am

    >Women’s primary power is in sex – granting, denying, conditioning, and withholding access to it. That power has been weaponized and amplified. Women have also been given the use of “hard power” (brute force, physical strength, deployment and use of material resources) through law and the state. Women can now deputize police, lawyers, and family courts to deploy “hard power” against their husbands.

    in this case the “power” would be the state and the men who run it, not the women who ask for its exercise. same for sex; women are only allowed to deny sex because as a whole men are nice enough not to rape them, and barring that, nice enough to prevent other men from raping them. no matter which way you slice it, it’s not women who have power over men.

    this is important because when the working class men of this country have been completely disempowered, the women will find they are no longer able to exercise the same “power” you say they wield now; once they have fulfilled their purpose, their “power” will be taken from them by the ruling class men.

  80. Red Pill Latecomer says:

    Athletic and Whitesplosive: being an “mgtow” or any other gay acronym that means you’re willingly opting out of Christian marriage and procreation is nothing but completely surrendering to them. Sorry, but you are a total gamma and a loser if you willing give up and then try to rationalize that as some kind of “win”, surrender is the opposite of strategy.

    I don’t claim that MGTOW is a “win.” It simply is.

    I am a reluctant MGTOW. I was a Blue Pill Romantic in my 20s. I wanted marriage and true love. I don’t think my standards were unfairly high, but I did have standards. I wasn’t able to find a woman who met my standards that wanted me.

    I’m average height, average looks. Not obese. Well educated and financially successful. If being unable to find a wife and sire children makes me a gamma and loser, oh well. I am what I am.

    He’s also right that it’s fully within your power to choose a wife who won’t flippantly destroy your marriage

    No, not every man has “the power to choose a wife, etc.” As has repeatedly been stated, women are only attracted to 20% of the men out there. They ride the carousel, then when they’re an aging mess, they bitterly seek to settle, marrying men they don’t really want, and resenting them for it.

  81. jsolbakken says:

    “No, not every man has “the power to choose a wife, etc.””

    Another way of looking at it is, if we choose “None Of The Above” as our wife, we exercise our power to avoid the threat of being treated flippantly.

    After being accused of being butt hurt by all the blue pillers so often, I’m wondering why they all get so severely butt hurt just because I and a few other guys say thanks but no thanks to their demands to obey their diktats?

  82. Anon says:

    I’m wondering why they all get so severely butt hurt just because I and a few other guys say thanks but no thanks to their demands to obey their diktats?

    Because they are just feminists of another stripe. They don’t want male slaves leaving the plantation. Note the utter absence of any demand that (white) women be held accountable for anything.

  83. Anonymous Reader says:

    Butthurt is boring. Really, it is. Sometimes it’s an unpleasant but needed part of unplugging to be butthurt about women, but butthurt because of what someone said about someone else is really boring. Really, really boring.

    The original posting essay had food for thought. It would be good if some men regained their senses and started thinking.

  84. Acksiom says:

    Because your examples of freedom are a threat to their wallets. The more men who opt out, the higher the price the remaining men can demand for their surplus production. They don’t want to pay men what their surplus production is increasingly worth in the socioeconomic marketplace, so they try to bully free men like you with mean girl put-downs. They’re trying to lower every other man’s value to society so that they don’t have to do the hard work on their end of renegotiating a fair contract for those others men’s contributions.

    It’s just that simple. They’re too cheap and lazy for anything beyond juvenile name-calling.

  85. jsolbakken says:

    “They’re too cheap and lazy for anything beyond juvenile name-calling.”

    There is a certain infantile cleverness to it: Call people names and then accuse them of being butt hurt when they protest.

    I am sincerely worried, however, that there will in fact be young men who get manipulated by their scurrilous accusations of cowardice and sodomy who end up making bad decisions on that basis which lead to utter catastrophe in their lives. I don’t think it at all impossible that there will be young men who get married just because some vile mindless minion told him he would be a faggoty coward if he didn’t, and then, all of us here at Dalrock’s know what happens next.

    It’s downright inhumane and diabolical what those creepy creeps are doing; it’s really giving me the creeps by now.

  86. 7817 says:

    @jsolbakken

    I am not a VFM.

    You have an axe to grind because you were publicly humiliated after challenging Vox. For your own sake, face the logic of your loss, or move on as best you can. If you don’t improve, the memory of your failure will consume your mind. Humble yourself and accept it.

    Vox isn’t the issue. The issue is how you respond to this.

  87. 7817 says:

    @Deti:

    Here are some interesting quotes, I wonder what they mean?

    Banning government marriage is the right thing to do on libertarian grounds, on religious grounds, on practical grounds, and on the grounds of sexual fairness. I am pro-marriage but I would not recommend obtaining a marriage license to any unmarried young man or woman these days. 
    _

    Unless you are a Christian and are marrying a woman who is at least as serious about her Christian faith as you are, don’t even think about marriage. If you are both committed Christians who want to start a family, make sure your friends and family carefully check her out and listen to their concerns, if any. It’s better to get married only by the church, not the State, but if that’s not an option for whatever reason, get a Covenant marriage which makes it much more difficult for a woman to run the typical flee-and-fleece with the aid of the so-called Family Courts.
    _

    Literally everything that marriage has to offer a man is on offer these days without it; all marriage adds to the equation is a very high risk of financial and emotional devastation. No one with even one-tenth a brain would consider an investment that came with the same risk-reward ratio of American marriage today.
    _

    The reason men need to be far more careful about deciding to get married doesn’t have anything to do with their feelings for a specific woman or even women in general. It has to do with the wisdom of voluntarily sticking your head into a quasi-legal system that is designed to destroy men and their families.
    _

    Is marriage worth it? Well, I should say it increasingly depends on the sex and religion of the individual. In its present state-dictated form, marriage is very much worth it for women, it is a tolerable and necessary risk for religious men, and it is an incredibly stupid gamble for non-religious men. 
    _

    Obviously, the notion that men must marry is demonstrably unbiblical. And there is clearly nothing wrong with a man taking defensive legal measures once the wife has pursued the unbiblical principle of refusing herself to her husband or violated the Biblical command not to separate from her husband. 
    _

    …God’s concept of marriage is good. But would cZja and others argue that men must accept the harsh realities of civil marriage if it required men to amputate their left hand? Why, then, should they expect men to blithely submit to having their property rights violated at will? For the Biblically minded, it is perhaps worth recalling that those property rights are unalienably endowed by their Creator.

  88. jsolbakken says:

    “I am not a VFM.”

    I guess I confused you with some other VFM#XXXX. I apologize.

    “You have an axe to grind because you were publicly humiliated after challenging Vox. ”

    I have an ax to grind because Vox Day is a psychotic wacko who claims to be a Nationalist but who actually supports terrorists like Breivik and advises people to murder judges and their wives and children if they lose in divorce court.

    “For your own sake, face the logic of your loss, or move on as best you can. If you don’t improve, the memory of your failure will consume your mind. Humble yourself and accept it.”

    It over ’til it’s over, Yogi. How did I lose, exactly? Just because the psychotic wacko banned me from his blog? Just because he deleted my comments and the comments of many others? That doesn’t prove that he’s not a psychotic wacko. And it doesn’t prove I’m a liar, a coward, a Satan worshipper, and a sodomite. So, you need to explain why I should think I “lost?”

    “Vox isn’t the issue. The issue is how you respond to this.”

    I’m responding to Vox Day based on what he is, a dangerously psychotic wacko who promotes terrorists and murder and accuses anyone who balks at such things of being cowards and sodomites and, ironically, worshippers of Satan.

    Logic? You don’t want to bring up logic. If you recall, VD himself admitted he was using rhetoric, not dialectic logic.

    No, really, move on to what? I’m thinking that I need to warn as many people as I can that Vox Day and everybody else who talks like him is a dangerous psychopath. The fact that Vox Day has an IQ of 150 makes him truly dangerous, he’s cunning enough to fool a lot of unwary people. They will get mesmerized by his malarkey and end up doing things that are adverse to their interests.

    I feel pretty stupid my self, not having taken him seriously a long time ago, when I heard him calling himself “The Dark Lord.” My animosity is partly driven by a sense of guilt for having given him the benefit of the doubt for so long. I thought his shtick was pretty funny. Ha ha.

    I have had to humble my self before my little sister, however. She was right about Vox Day, and I was dead wrong. She hated his guts from the first moment she saw him in a video with Stefan Molyneux. She saw his evil and I missed it, so, there’s my humble pie and eating of crow. My little sister told me she told me so, and it stings like hell.

  89. jsolbakken says:

    All those quotes prove that Vox Day is a wacko who contradicts himself. He uses rhetoric to manipulate people. He pretends to make sense, but then he zings you when you’re not expecting it, and people who are susceptible to rhetoric get manipulated. Vox Day is truly and deeply and profoundly evil. He may be a Native American, but he speak with forked tongue like paleface.

  90. SirHamster says:

    @jsolbakken

    So, you need to explain why I should think I “lost?”

    No one needs to explain it, but your emotional reactions on a 3rd party’s blog tells everyone listening that you lost and you feel it.

    If you’re in the right, getting banned from Vox’s blog is a victory, not a defeat. But then you wouldn’t feel a need to explain why Vox is a poopy head on Dalrock’s blog.

  91. 7817 says:

    @jsolbakken

    Your humiliation must be eating you alive, for you to be posting about it this much on a completely different blog.

    You’re obsessed. You sound emotionally unbalanced. Get help.

  92. jsolbakken says:

    “then you wouldn’t feel a need to explain why Vox is a poopy head on Dalrock’s blog.”

    I think calling a terrorist who targeted young children like Anders Behring Breivik a hero is being a bit more than a poopy head.

    I think that people who are concerned with the effects of the gynocracy on society need to be concerned when someone who says that men who lose in divorce court should emulate the ancient Romans and murder the judge, their wife, and their children in retaliation is taken seriously.

    My purpose in bringing him up is that I think he represents a force to be reckoned with, the force of insanity, the power that animates the clown world in which we live. He pretends to be a good guy but he is a saboteur. He destroys. He is the liar, the coward, the worshipper of Satan, and probably the sodomite if the photo of him at a gay pride festival wearing a rainbow tutu is to be believed.

    I feel intense guilt for defending him for so many years. I was never one of his sycophants, but I made plenty of excuses and rationalizations for him when people tried to tell me what a monster he is. I was wrong and they were right. If finding out that someone you sort of respected is a monster, and admitting to the error and trying to rectify it is “butt-hurtedness” then, where is there ever any room for confession and repentance in this world?

    I owe the whole world an apology. I feel compelled to make amends, as an act of contrition and penitence. I harmed innocent people by closing my eyes to a profound wickedness because I was full of my self, insensitive, and lazy. I was worse than a poopy head, and I’m ashamed of my self.

  93. SirHamster says:

    I owe the whole world an apology. I feel compelled to make amends, as an act of contrition and penitence. I harmed innocent people by closing my eyes to a profound wickedness because I was full of my self, insensitive, and lazy. I was worse than a poopy head, and I’m ashamed of my self.

    You’re not remotely serious, because off-topic blog comments are not how you make penance for the thought crime of failing to condemn Vox in the past.

    Quit talking like a woman and start acting like a man. Focus on the things you control. Changing how the world feels about Vox isn’t one of them.

  94. BillyS says:

    Scott,

    LIkewise, there is so much wrong with the approach of trying to fix “marriage” to help children. These guys really don’t know what they are doing with incomplete data.

    The saddest thing is that they are harming children in their attempts, though they won’t admit or even realize it. Intentional blinders on most, unfortunately.

    7817,

    The fantasy about the guy’s wife leaving him is just… appallingly stupid.

    Do you read before posting? No one fantasied for that. They just noted he would be unlikely to change unless that happened. Get a grip on life a bit more.

    dragnet,

    This thread is becoming hijacked by Vox…but it’s worth saying this: that for all his gamma hate, he pretty much defines the personality type. He’s also a massive dork.

    I don’t see the hijack. Haven’t you been around long enough to know threads go onto other topics at times?

    Most don’t even know their neighbors RPC. I know a few of mine, but not deeply past brief conversations out front.

    The political decisions you note are what will ultimately do us in. We are no longer a nation of laws to the detriment of even those who hate them.

    It is quite ironic that many who politically oppose the progressive left still don’t have a clue and fail to fight back, often complaining when Trump does so. Idiots all of them.

    vfm,

    Given how busy the Dark Lord is actually doing something about the globohomo destruction of western civilization, Christianity, deplatforming of Nationalists, and more, do you think he has time to be nice to feelings?

    I recall that he used to post about not shooting your own side, yet he does a lot of that. I am scum to him because my marriage failed and I correctly note that marriage is very dangerous today. That is more than not just being nice. That is complete idiocy and too little compassion on others.

    I adopted kids, since my wife was infertile, but I follow a reasonable script and it failed big time. I don’t eviscerate those who succeeded. People can disagree without being the scum Vox claims and that is his idiocy now. I believe he has gotten worse on it in recent time, though perhaps my tolerance is just lower.

    I don’t share jsol’s view though.

    RPC,

    I used to live in Kasich’s district and thought he was great. I left Ohio a long time ago, but I was seeing he is quite the scum now that he got higher up the food chain.

  95. Opus says:

    @jsolbakken

    It was only a blog: Vox Day is not a Nigerian Scammer. You have lost nothing even though you presently feel pretty stupid. No one reading here thinks the worse of you. Stop wearing a hair-shirt. Every Guru ultimately reveals he has feet of clay; no man is a hero to his valet. (Stop being so emotionally American about it and gain a stiff Upper Lip).

  96. Opus says:

    @jsolbakken

    Take heart! I see Vox Day has performed a further ritual banning – last night at 08.56 pm. He will eventually drive everyone away from his blog and it will then truly be merely an echo chamber. He seems to be losing it.

  97. Paul Barnes says:

    @7817
    @Athletic and Whitesplosive
    @SirHamster

    Are you gents married? Have you sired any white children? If so, can you provide proof, like maybe a photo of your wedding band?

    Call me a gamma, but I can’t help but thinking most of you people shrieking at us to go get married and make white babies aren’t even married yourselves and haven’t sired any white babies.

  98. 7817 says:

    @Paul

    Not interested in proving anything to someone who is so stupid that he has to be convinced that having a heritage is a good thing.

    I don’t care if you want to die in the wilderness alone, I’ve crossed the proverbial river and am fighting the giants to inherit the promises.

    Fix yourself or get lost.

  99. jsolbakken says:

    Who are you to tell people what the topic is? Vox Day’s psychotic megalomania has rubbed off on you. If Dalrock tells me something, I will listen. But you are nothing here, Sir Hamster, go back to your exercise wheel.

  100. jsolbakken says:

    “Vox Day is not a Nigerian Scammer.”

    He may not be Nigerian, but there is something very shady about him. He acts like the sort of “false leadership” that the CIA specializes in. He acts like an FBI informant who infiltrates a group and tries to provoke them in to doing illegal and violent acts. He knows most people won’t emulate Anders Behring Breivik, but he can get one or a few to act out that way, he’ll have earned his black budget paycheck. And if he inspires some dumb slob to kill a judge and his ex-wife and his ex-children in a courtroom, well, he’ll deserve a black budget bonus check.

    Our enemies know that red pill men are naturally inclined to anti-globalist politics, so, what better way to sow discord than to have someone like Vox Day with his 150 IQ and consummate skill at wielding weaponized rhetoric dividing us one against the other.

    It’s not about disagreeing, it’s about the substance of the disagreements. Vox Day is subversive against the cause he claims to support. He attacked MGTOW not because he wanted to harm MGTOW, he attacked it because he wants to harm Nationalism and anti-Globalism.

    You may not believe me, but I challenge you to look at Vox Day with an open mind and then think about it seriously and then tell me you still don’t believe it’s possible.

  101. jsolbakken says:

    “Fix yourself or get lost.”

    Why can’t you just admit you’re impotent and that’s why you’re obsessed with demanding that other men have the white babies you are incapable of siring?

  102. Liz says:

    Occam’s chainsaw applies. Vox isn’t a CIA “mole” (or equivalent).
    He’s just a guy. Nor do we know he has a 150 IQ.

  103. feeriker says:

    He may not be Nigerian, but there is something very shady about him. He acts like the sort of “false leadership” that the CIA specializes in. He acts like an FBI informant who infiltrates a group and tries to provoke them in to doing illegal and violent acts. He knows most people won’t emulate Anders Behring Breivik, but he can get one or a few to act out that way, he’ll have earned his black budget paycheck. And if he inspires some dumb slob to kill a judge and his ex-wife and his ex-children in a courtroom, well, he’ll deserve a black budget bonus check.

    Spot on. Notice that he hasn’t been deplatformed by Blogger, something that happens routinely to people who are far less un-PC and inflammatory than he is. And yes, his alt-right Neo-Nationalist rhetoric follows the Agent Provocateur script to a T. Sure, the guy makes some solidly sane points at times, but that’s what an expert in his field does: “breadcrumb” the rubes with just enough sanity to lead them into the abyss.

    We’ll see what eventually becomes of Teddy Beale, but for now, based on his M.O., I’m putting him in the same camp as Alex Jones: a controlled imposter. And a deranged one at that.

  104. jsolbakken says:

    “Occam’s chainsaw”

    The simplest explanation for why a guy in Vox Day’s position would promote the idea that Anders Behring Breivik is a hero is that he is a subversive provocateur whose intent is to soil the reputation of as many anti-Globalists and Nationalists as possible.

    As for his IQ, the number is not what is important. His deviousness and cunning is what matters.
    Check out his writings regarding Breivik and tell me he doesn’t sound like The Borg: “Your opinion Is Irrelevant.”

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/search?q=Breivik

    “Breivik did not target innocents. He didn’t attack teenagers at a pop concert or families enjoying a night out on a public promenade. He struck a highly effective blow against the political machine that is still actively engaged in attacking his people and attempting to eradicate them. If you don’t believe violence is a legitimate way of resisting invasion, if you don’t think that making war on those making war on you is permissible, that’s your prerogative, but your opinion is both ahistorical and irrelevant.”

    VD is a sick twisted terrorist freak who thinks gunning down kids like dogs is “making war” like any honorable soldier. If you disagree, you and your opinion is irrelevant.

    VD calls the gunning down of those kids like dogs “a highly effective blow.”

    See, VD is a subversive monster because he’s using the idea of unavoidable collateral damage that occurs in modern warfare to justify the deliberate targeting of people for murder.

    So, yeah, I think he is a Deep State operative, and I feel like an idiot for not figuring it out sooner.

  105. Liz says:

    The simplest explanation (snip) is that he is a subversive provocateur whose intent is to soil the reputation of as many anti-Globalists and Nationalists as possible.

    Good grief.

  106. 7817 says:

    When I first read Vox explaining his idea of the gamma male, I thought it was an exaggeration.

    It’s not. This thread is like a case study which proves it.

  107. feministhater says:

    Fix yourself or get lost.

    You’re in no position to be demanding anything. You have nothing to threaten us with. You’re impotent.

  108. feministhater says:

    It’s not. This thread is like a case study which proves it.

    Better start handing out those white feathers….

  109. Opus says:

    I have always found that people obsessed with their supposed high I.Q. were at best really average. Vox Day is I would then say an exception to that rule but the highly intelligent usually have massive blind-spots which the more normal do not have. That appears to be the case with Vox Day for no one can be a master of all subjects and the difference between their expertise and their ordinariness in other matters is the more acutely to be noticed. I am not quite sure why we have an obsession with super intelligence. Those who are super-tall are freaks (and play Basketball), those who are very-short tend likewise and become comedians. Ones teachers tell one how stupid one is as indeed do ones employers but frankly such insults are no better than abusing someone because of the colour of their skin. What is wrong with being normal?

  110. Ranger says:

    Jsolbakken in the beginning of thos thread derailment: “I can’t hate VD because he’s got too much positive going for him, but, it’s frankly unnerving that he so completely lost his mind over the idea of women having the kind of power that Dalrock speaks of in this and his other blog posts. If enough people challenged him to think more objectively on the subject he would be quite a philosophical coup for us, would it not?”

    Jsolbakken right now:”VD is a sick twisted terrorist freak who thinks gunning down kids like dogs is “making war” like any honorable soldier. If you disagree, you and your opinion is irrelevant.

    VD calls the gunning down of those kids like dogs “a highly effective blow.”

    See, VD is a subversive monster because he’s using the idea of unavoidable collateral damage that occurs in modern warfare to justify the deliberate targeting of people for murder.

    So, yeah, I think he is a Deep State operative, and I feel like an idiot for not figuring it out sooner.”

    Jsolbakken in the middle of the thread:” he speak with forked tongue like paleface.”

    Pot, I would like you to meet kettle.

    I thought Vox was doing one of his rhetorical exagerations when he said all proselitizing MGTOWs are liars.

    By the end of the thread, people will be calling for him to be deplatformed for badwrongthink.

  111. jsolbakken says:

    Yes, I kind of changed my mind, as I realized what a gullible fool I have been. I still don’t hate Vox Day personally because his insults are, as he would put it in his Borg-like way, “irrelevant.”

    But discussing him has made me realize that he is worse than I thought he was even just a few moments ago. I went back and re-read his screed on Breivik and I’m appalled at my self for discounting the insanity of what he was expressing.

    So, Mr Ranger Sir, explain to us how supporting Anders Behring Breivik is not solid evidence of the malevolence of Vox Day? Explain to us how it’s not pathological to tell people that, instead of bending over and taking it in the ass like a sodomite, that we should kill judges if they rule against us?

    Yup, Vox Day and his Vile Mindless Minions are worse than my poor little mind was capable of grasping until sick twisted freaks like you pried my eyes open.

  112. Anonymous Reader says:

    jsolbakken says:

    Who are you to tell people what the topic is?

    Irony.

  113. 7817 says:

    Last post in this dumpster fire of a thread:

    The manosphere exists to fix the man. It can’t fix society. All the information necessary to make yourself desirable to women and start making yourself a man worthy of respect is available in the manosophere, much of it is linked from Dalrock’s old posts or comments sections. But you have to do something more than sit and read.

    The manosphere was not originally a place to whine, it was men swapping notes, with an eye towards improvement.

    Mgtows mistake rejection for recruitment. No, mgtows, if you missed the point of the manosphere so badly that you never took any action to improve yourself, we want nothing to do with you. Women don’t want to be your lovers. Men don’t want to be your friends. We’re not recruiting you. We are rejecting you because you are of such low quality you won’t even take any action to improve yourself.

  114. Anonymous Reader says:

    7817
    The manosphere was not originally a place to whine, it was men swapping notes, with an eye towards improvement.

    Caveat: there have always been men arriving into the androsphere deeply angry. In fact, of all the turns of the Kubler-Ross wheel I would bet that anger and depression are the two most commonly found in men who wash up on the shores of the ‘sphere.

    It is also common knowledge that getting stuck in either the anger or the depression phase of unplugging is not just unproductive, it’s harmful. Likewise despair and panic.

    There used to be a placard in some hotels in France on emergency procedures, starting with fire:
    “En caise de incendie, garde’ vous votre sang-froid.”
    “You should guard your cold blood” is a better phrase than “don’t panic”.

  115. feministhater says:

    Mgtows mistake rejection for recruitment. No, mgtows, if you missed the point of the manosphere so badly that you never took any action to improve yourself, we want nothing to do with you. Women don’t want to be your lovers. Men don’t want to be your friends. We’re not recruiting you. We are rejecting you because you are of such low quality you won’t even take any action to improve yourself.

    No one cares bud. No one is moved by your attempts at shame. Go save the world.

  116. Ranger says:

    Excuse me if I can’t take you seriously if your mind changes in a space of a few hours from “great guy, wrong on some points, hopefully we can convince him of his errors” to “satanic deceiver in cahoots with the feds” . You are either a liar (if your mind did not change that quickly) or a fool (if it did).

    I disagree with Vox on Breivik. And no matter how much MGTOWs try to paint him as advocating murder-suicide of judges, kids, and wives, this particular reading of that post is so wrong that, again, it is either deceitful or stupid.

  117. Anonymous Reader says:

    @Ranger

    You’re attempting to reason with someone who is in an emotional turmoil. It isn’t going to work.

  118. goFigure says:

    7817

    Mgtows mistake rejection for recruitment. ………Men don’t want to be your friends. We’re not recruiting you. We are rejecting you because you are of such low quality you won’t even take any action to improve yourself.

    I thing many MGTOW men would say the same to you. You really need to learn how to stop shaming things you don’t like.

  119. BillyS says:

    Wow. I have issues with Vox’s current behavior, but he has been around far too long to be a “Nigerian scammer” as one of the latest claim says. You are losing it jsol.

    Though Opus and feeriker also miss it a bit too. Vox is a human and has human frailties, just as everyone here does. I am not as strong in most ways, but I am sure someone could tear apart what I write here too (and a few have). So?

    I am disappointed with what I see as Vox jumping the shark, though much of it can easily be explained by smart idiocy rather than some malicious undertheme. I was trying to figure out who got banned (VD usually names them, but this time he didn’t that I saw).

    He is fairly consistent over time, just a fair bit less tolerant now. I would likely be too if I were in his shoes with all the anklebiters. Why reply there if you completely disagree anyway? Find someplace else you value instead.

  120. SirHamster says:

    @Paul Barnes

    Call me a gamma, but I can’t help but thinking most of you people shrieking at us to go get married and make white babies aren’t even married yourselves and haven’t sired any white babies.

    Gamma, I’m not shrieking at you to go get married.

    Go be MGTOW all you want. It’s a dead end, but everyone with a brain can figure that part out.

    The future belongs to those who show up for it. If you’re not up for it, you’re not up for it.

  121. jsolbakken says:

    “We’re not recruiting you. We are rejecting you because you are of such low quality you won’t even take any action to improve yourself.”

    Oh, I get it. We’re supposed to be butt hurt because you reject us. I think it’s the other way around. It’s not just MGTOW’s who are rejecting psychotic terrorist supporting wackos like Vox Day and his vile mindless ilk, it’s every Nationalist with a brain and common sense.

    What could be more low quality than saying that Anders Behring Breivik struck an effective blow for the cause of Nationalism?

  122. Anonymous Reader says:

    BillyS
    I have issues with Vox’s current behavior,

    So what?

  123. Ranger says:

    As MGTOWs lie about Vox all the time, I decided to check for myself what he wrote about Breivik, as I hadn’t heard about Vox back then. I went to check on the link that jsolbakken, aka “Alphaeus”, kindly provided. I still disagree with Vox, but I must admit I was somewhat surprised to find this comment on Vox Popoli, by a certain Alphaeus:

    “Clausewitz said that war is politics by other means.

    Our enemies follow the doctrine of Saul Alinsky, which is that politics is war by other means.

    It seems to me that this is what people don’t seem to grasp, that the Globalists and their demon infested winged monkey servants are waging war. Politics is the process of settling public disputes and establishing justice and ensuring domestic tranquility and preserving the blessings of Christian Liberty.

    War, on the other hand, is the process of conquering and subduing and controlling and destroying. The Globalists are not just waging a war of conquest, they are waging a genocidal war of mass murder and annihilation. If Saint Brevik figured that out, no wonder he felt compelled to do something drastic.”

    Fallen idols are a terrible thing to behold.

  124. Anonymous Reader says:

    Ranger
    As MGTOWs lie about Vox all the time

    So what?

  125. jsolbakken says:

    “I disagree with Vox on Breivik. And no matter how much MGTOWs try to paint him as advocating murder-suicide of judges, kids, and wives, this particular reading of that post is so wrong that, again, it is either deceitful or stupid.”

    OK, Mr Ranger Sir, go to Vox Popoli and tell Vox Day that you disagree with him about Breivik. Be civil, be courteous, be on point and be concise, and let’s see how long it takes for him to call you a gamma and ban you. See, he already said that if you disagree with him about Breivik you are anti-historical and your opinion does not matter.

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/search?q=Breivik

    “Breivik did not target innocents. He didn’t attack teenagers at a pop concert or families enjoying a night out on a public promenade. He struck a highly effective blow against the political machine that is still actively engaged in attacking his people and attempting to eradicate them. If you don’t believe violence is a legitimate way of resisting invasion, if you don’t think that making war on those making war on you is permissible, that’s your prerogative, but your opinion is both ahistorical and irrelevant.”

    https://voxday.blogspot.com/2017/12/mailvox-low-morale-men.html
    Again quoting VD

    “And he said that we should be like the ancient Romans, who would never have allowed some punk judge to rule against us in a court of law, but would have slain the judge and the wife and the kids instead of suffering such annoying humiliation.

    If we aren’t sympathetic to soldiers who run the moment they see the first casualties in their unit, we should not be sympathetic to men who run from women because they saw someone taken down by a toxic woman. The truth is that men often suffer the legal order they deserve, because they tolerate it. Would any Roman patrician have meekly submitted to being made an indentured servant at the whim of his wife and the word of a judge?

    No. He would have killed the judge, the wife, and everyone who assisted either of them, then calmly gone home and opened his veins in the bath. That’s why Roman law permitted patriarchs to kill those under their authority who crossed them in any way – because they were going to do it anyway and the maintenance of legal order in their society relied upon acknowledging that reality.”

    What a psychotic dumbass VD is. Roman law most certainly did NOT permit anyone to murder judges, at least not officially.

    So, Mr Ranger Sir, how is it deceitful or stupid to read Vox Day’s words in the plainness of their clear meaning?

    I too downplayed the significance of statements like these . I wish somebody had rubbed my nose in them and made me explain my self for why I chose to blind my self to their true horribleness.

  126. Anonymous Reader says:

    I cannot decide which is the greater comment-clogging useless form of mental masturbation:

    * Arguing about fine points of theology, some of which have been debated for centuries with no resoution.

    or

    *Arguing about who said what to whom and what it all means for someone’s personal butthurt.

    Both topics are useless noise, on a par with replying to featherbrained feminist trolls.
    In my opinion, of course. YMMV.

  127. jsolbakken says:

    “You’re attempting to reason with someone who is in an emotional turmoil. It isn’t going to work.”

    Emotional distress does not mean that my statements are not factual and logically valid. Any normal person who woke up to the reality that he has been following and supporting a dangerous wacko is going to experience an emotional reaction. Why should I apologize for it? Show me where my facts are wrong, show me where my logic is flawed. Don’t waste your time and breath telling us real human beings we have to be robots just to please you, because it wouldn’t please you anyway, you’d just find some other nit to pick.

  128. jsolbakken says:

    Fallen idols are a terrible thing to behold.

    Yes, Mr Ranger Sir, that is an excellent example demonstrating why I’m so deep in mea culpa mode. That SOB Vox Day sucked me in to thinking that Breivik really was rather like John Brown. But thanks be to God my Savior, my eyes are now open and I publicly confess and repent my sins and my errors.

    Actually, if you were capable of thinking about it, and had a heart of flesh rather than a heart of stone, you would realize that that sort of think is the cause of my butthurt, butthurt I did to my own stupid self, and not at all because Vox Day insulted me. I insulted my self. And I’m not trying to blame Vox Day for bamboozling me, I’m just trying to do what I can now to expose the deranged wacko for what he is so that others might have a fighting chance of not getting sucked in. And I mean by others those would be attracted to his ostensible Nationalist pose.

  129. Jacob says:

    All this talk about Vox has been off-topic but it’s useful as a general and timely warning to the vulnerable men who may be reading. It’s not just VD, but all the false propheteering that’s going on in the ‘sphere. Elam, Beale, Peterson, Jones, Shapiro etc.

    In times of distress, men of all kinds look for a savior – an articulate and inspiring man who speaks into their pain and offers a coherent and persuasive action plan. It is very seductive, especially amongst the vulnerable.

    These troubled times for men are a haven for manipulators, shysters and frauds. War propheteers are everywhere on the internet, gaining a following, building platforms, selling fruitless ideologies using tainted rhetoric and distancing themselves ever more from God’s ways for a buck. They siphon out our money and use the weak and dispossessed to turn them into messiahs of their own making. And many know their Bibles. The darkest lord himself – Satan – can draw a crowd and gain a following.

    But there is only one Messiah and He never leads men astray. He does not condemn the sinner or harm the innocent. National borders are no border to Him. He does not revel in, or profit from, men’s pain.

    The good news is that the false prophets of the ‘sphere – the Jordaneticists, the Humanist Counter-Theorists, the InfoWarriors, the Supreme Dark Lords, sooner or later ban hammer their readerships down to Yes men, and become little more than personality cults controlled by fear.

    False prophets are not always easy to spot but there are some common tells. They tend to condemn the worst of their own natures, but only when they see it in others and almost never in themselves. When they do self-reproach, it’s rarely sincere. Another tell is who, how and for what they condemn – that is, they blister with outrage when held to the same standard, thereby revealing themselves. Still another is to follow the money. False prophets have are very good at monetizing iniquity.

    The takeaway is that vulnerable men should take care who they follow. It’s easy to get snared by cults of personality. If you’re caught up in one, get out while you can. Christ is all you need.

  130. Frank K says:

    In times of distress, men of all kinds look for a savior – an articulate and inspiring man who speaks into their pain and offers a coherent and persuasive action plan. It is very seductive, especially amongst the vulnerable.

    This reminds me of Wovoka, a Paiute medicine man who started the Ghostdance cult. Many tribes were feeling so overwhelmed that they bought into his promises of restoration to a time before the white people came. Many even believed that wearing sacred garments would make them bullet proof. Then Wounded Knee happened.

  131. BillyS says:

    Show me a perfect man today and I will grant accusations of “false prophets” some of you are spewing forth. Yeah, Vox jumped the shark, but that doesn’t mean nothing he says has value. I trust him a lot more even so than many of you.

    You guys need to get a life and focus on this blog. Last I checked “correcting Vox Day” was not at the top of the blog. I was wrong earlier, it has now been hijacked to vent jsol’s and others hostility toward Vox.

    How about you and Jacob grow up and act like a man? Start your own blog if you want to go on and on about Vox. I am sure you can start one on blogspot or wordpress at no cost!

    The Vox Haters Club is no better than the Vox Fanboys Club. Both are idiotic.

  132. Jacob says:

    BillyS,

    You occasionally have something pithy to say, I’ll grant you that. This time you’re just being churlish.

    There’s obviously a bigger point being made here, hopefully to help others get back to the point.

    Comprehension.

  133. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Off Topic “moral” dilemma here. Speaking of a “dangerous truth”…..

    A friend of mine came to my office couple days ago and he recognized a white woman I have been working with on and off for like 6.5 years. He told me her name and asked if worked in certain field at the office and I confirmed, it was same woman, he knew a lot about her! He asked me if she was still mudsharking and I said “no, she is engaged now to a light-skinned northern Mexican dude” (I have seen pics on her desk) and my friend pulled her up on FB and saw pics there too. I was surprised about what he said she had been such a mudshark for so many years since her college and definitely for years in her 20s, possibly even into her 30s!

    My friend thinks he should anonymously “inform” her fiance (via online method) that he is dating a major mudshark for years because “the dude has the right to know before he gets trapped”. I asked my friend how he knew this and he said she is friends with his old girlfriend and he had seen her on FB with a bunch of African dudes over the years (of course that profile has been deleted and is gone) and my friend’s old GF used to make fun of this girl about her mudsharking. He knew many details about her, it is the same woman for sure. He was even gonna text his old GF to have her send pics she had copied from her FB!!! 😮

    Now this woman is almost 40, been (predictably) pumpedNdumped all over the place by her African BFs over time and now she has found a very light-skinned patsy to wife her “up” and hide her true past, of whom she really is and types of guys she really likes.

    I asked my friend to please hold off, as this is potentially disastrous to the newly engaged couple (probably will cause break-up since she has left NO trace of her past and the guy is northern Mexican and they are known for being racist – sorry to generalize, but it very often true). I honestly doubt she has told the dude the whole story. I am not friends with this woman and there is zero chance this would be linked to me.

    I was going to bring this up in my small group discussion this weekend, but it is “too close to home” to do so.

    But what do YOU all think? Does this unwitting man have the right to know whom he has recently been engaged to? Or should my friend stay out of this and leave it be now that she has “corrected her ways” and seems happy with this guy? Whose “right” should prevail here?

    What do you all think? Does he have the right to know? Or she has the “right” to conceal her past now that she has “moved on”?

  134. Sharrukin2 says:

    Red Pill Christianity says:

    August 30, 2019 at 6:58 am

    Would you want to know?
    Do unto others…

    She hasn’t moved on, she’s simply found a revenue source. The guy should know what he’s signing up for and then let him make his own decision.

  135. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Sharrukin2, that is exactly what I am thinking too. If I was that guy, I would want to know. It would hurt and I would feel humiliated and disgusted at myself, but at the same time, I would want to know.

    And yet, part of me thinks, as a Christian, she may have legitimately changed her ways, But it should not erase her past. I believe in redemption, but I also believe in full disclosure. (She is not a Christian btw, I know that for a fact. Not sure about her fiance).

    And yet, do I want the “karma” (for lack of a better term this early in the morning) of breaking up an engagement??

    Why am I so conflicted about this? It is weird for me… I guess it is a new situation I never had to deal with before.

  136. Sharrukin2 says:

    Red Pill Christianity says:

    August 30, 2019 at 7:20 am

    Sharrukin2, that is exactly what I am thinking too. If I was that guy, I would want to know. It would hurt and I would feel humiliated and disgusted at myself, but at the same time, I would want to know.

    And yet, part of me thinks, as a Christian, she may have legitimately changed her ways, But it should not erase her past.
    ————–
    She may have changed her ways but deceiving the man she plans to marry suggests otherwise. Why was her FB wiped of that history?

    Because she knows what it would mean and she doesn’t want to deal with the consequences of her own behavior.

  137. Liz says:

    Facts as presented here (unless I’m missing something):
    Mexican dude is planning to marry a woman pushing 40.
    Ethical dilemma: Sending an anonymous message to him to tell him she dated a lot of black guys in the past.
    Rhetorical questions:
    1) Is there any reason to believe the Mexican doesn’t know about her past? It’s pretty normal to delete photos of old boyfriends when one is engaged to another person. It would be odd if she didn’t.
    2) Is this going to backfire on the sender? It might, because anonymous messages seldom reflect well on the person doing the sending. “Hey, yeah, Mexican dude…you don’t know me and I don’t know you but your girlfriend used to date a lot of black guys. Just wanted to give you the heads up”
    I guess it could be finessed a bit more but…

  138. Sharrukin2 says:

    Liz says:

    August 30, 2019 at 8:17 am

    1) Is there any reason to believe the Mexican doesn’t know about her past
    —————
    He’s still with her.

  139. Liz says:

    Sharrukin2 He’s still with her.

    Would you marry a woman who is pushing 40?
    Presumably, a person who would, knows she has a past.
    It is highly likely that your world view (and RPC’s) and this person’s fiancé…are not the same.

  140. jsolbakken says:

    “Whose “right” should prevail here?’

    The first thing I did after realizing that I had no answer was to pray for YOU, RPC. I prayed that God would give you guidance in this matter, and peace with whatever decision you make. Then I prayed for the Mexican dude because we all know how men are manipulated and lied to and taken advantage of in this day and age. And then last of all I prayed for the mudshark, that God would forgive her and help her find true repentance by confessing her sins to God and to the the man who loves her, because if we confess our sins God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us of all our unrighteousness. God can make all things new, but He resists the proud and gives grace to the humble.

    My advice is for you to pray as fervently as you can, and to remember to confess your own sins, and to remember to thank God and give Him glory while you as him what to do in this sensitive and highly charged situation.

    Then I’m am certain that God will use you for good in this situation, according to the saying, all things work together for good for those who love the Lord and are the called according to His purpose.

    What I find interesting is that you did not shrug off the problem because you have other things to do and worry about, and neither did you jump to intruding yourself in the problem without due consideration. This tells us that God is indeed in this situation, even if only as yet another object lesson about life in Clown World.

  141. Sharrukin2 says:

    Liz says:

    August 30, 2019 at 8:43 am

    Sharrukin2 He’s still with her.

    Would you marry a woman who is pushing 40?
    Presumably, a person who would, knows she has a past.
    —————-
    No I would not but he deserves to know the truth and the whole truth. Not just a vague…mistakes were made sort of narrative.

    If he knows it all then no harm is done.
    If he doesn’t know then a great deal of harm is being done.

  142. Liz says:

    When Paula Broadwell sent an anonymous message to Jill Kelley, she sent it in such a way that she thought no one would ever know the origin. And she had a background in intelligence work. But she didn’t know Kelley had contacts who were able to ascertain the origin of the message. And the rest is history (this is the story of Petraeus’ downfall).
    There is the possibility (he is marrying her, after all), Mexican dude will interpret an anonymous message about his fiance…as a threat to his fiancé. Since we know nothing whatsoever about him, this could have bad consequences so I just thought I’d throw it out there.
    But do what you think best.

  143. Sharrukin2 says:

    Liz says:

    August 30, 2019 at 9:02 am

    There is the possibility (he is marrying her, after all), Mexican dude will interpret an anonymous message about his fiance…as a threat
    ————-
    In other words…”don’t do it Billy, no woman should ever be held accountable for her actions.”

  144. Liz says:

    I was married really young, so my past wasn’t much of an issue. My spouse did care a lot about my past…but the race wouldn’t have mattered at all to him.
    As I said, not everyone has this world view and…this sounds a little like Stormfront.
    Think I’ll bail now.

  145. Red Pill Christianity says:

    UPDATE – My dilemma from earlier is over.

    I texted my friend about this issue a while ago and he wrote back “no worries, it is done”. I called him so he could explain and he told me he used his work software (he works in car repos and collections) to get a full report on her and the Mexican dude.

    Some facts: she makes more than him, the report has her pay $22k more than Mex dude. He is not looking for a Green card, he is here legally, as he had social and changed of citizenship status showed on his report, so not a Green card thing for him. So these are off the table.

    After reading the two reports, my friend got on the phone and called the Mex guy at his work this morning and told him everything (using *67 and a throwaway phone they use in collections calls)!! He read names of some of her ex- boyfriends and the dates they were together and the Mexican dude was shocked and crushed but he was writing it all down (probably to confront the woman later about it). The Mex dude and this girl already moved in together already since they got engaged! -_-

    Basically, this girl has been mudsharking and living with sub-Saharan dudes for years (not black Americans, these are full African names), even in college. The names he read to me and they all sound Nigerian or Congolese. Pretty much all of her “known personal associates” all had full African names and she has lived with 4 different dudes like that over the years, including college period (she is now almost 38 now).

    I would rate this woman a solid 4, she is worn out and ugly to me, but she is not obese or anything. But she has hit the wall going at 100MPH without a helmet on for sure. This Mex dude may be her marriage bailout, she seems to have been PnD a lot over the years.

    I conformed with my friend that her current and only FB profile was made using a fake name, her old real profile is down and deleted, along with all photos. But my friend’s texted his old GF and she is gonna send him pics she has of her old FB pics saved up from before. My friend is sending it to the Mex guy using a fake e-mail account he set-up today. I think Mex guy is gonna confront her about it…. oh man.

    I asked my friend about how the conversation ended and he said the guy was distraught and wanting to confront her about this. My friend told him to do it in person and have a camera rolling in case she goes apeshit and gets violent. But she does not seem like violent type to me, but I do not know her personally.

    Sorry to bother you guys with this question, but it has been decided already and out of my hands completely. 🙂 I was gonna tell my friend to e-mail the guy and let him know and see what he says, but too late, he called the guy and gave him 20 minutes worth of pure and cold truth.

    Bottom line: THE MEX GUY DID NOT KNOW! He was gonna wife “up” a woman he truly did not know, even after all this time together. He seemed angry but thanked him for helping him “not make a huge f***ing mistake with a fakeass b!tch”.

    I think every guy should hire a private investigator today to run and give them a full background report and find out what his “future bride” has been up to these days. There is a plethora of info out there, since we live in a zero privacy country and investigators, lawyers, process servers, court workers, even car repo guys and pretty much anyone in legal field has access to insane amounts of info.

    Hard to trust anyone these days. We cringe when we hear about polls showing the Millennials and Gen Z have “lack of trust issues” but when we look at what has happened to our society, it is hard to blame them for it.

    Thanks for all the info and options, folks, but it was taken off my hands already. I feel kinda relieved in some ways, but worry about these two living together this weekend. Sounds like it is gonna be a “stay forever” or break up for good weekend for them. 😮

    Wow…. Get informed about who you are dating or planning to marry these days is all I can say.

  146. Sharrukin2 says:

    Liz says:

    August 30, 2019 at 9:15 am

    I was married really young, so my past wasn’t much of an issue. My spouse did care a lot about my past…but the race wouldn’t have mattered at all to him.
    As I said, not everyone has this world view and…this sounds a little like Stormfront.
    Think I’ll bail now.
    ————-
    It was up to your husband to decide what mattered to him, and it’s up to this Mexican guy marrying the white woman to decide what matters to him. I imagine the advice on Stormfront would be somewhat different, and no I don’t think the guy will think this is a death threat.

    Are there any more hysterical suggestions you want to throw out?

    To decide what actually matters to him he should know the truth which you obviously don’t want him to have.
    What a surprise.

  147. Liz says:

    Well, good on your friend then, RPC. Finding out the facts and making a call is a lot better than sending an anonymous note.

  148. Red Pill Christianity says:

    **jsolbakken says: I’m am certain that God will use you for good in this situation, according to the saying, all things work together for good for those who love the Lord and are the called according to His purpose. What I find interesting is that you did not shrug off the problem because you have other things to do and worry about, and neither did you jump to intruding yourself in the problem without due consideration.

    No doubt about it. The conicidence of a friend coming to my work and seeing this woman and recognizing her and be willing to do this is too much of a coincidence to be “just life”. This has a purpose.

    I am glad it was off my hands, but I thought about it and before I knew, I decided to tell my friend to e-mail the guy and let him know. He HAS to know who he is willing to marry, since he has all the risks and obligations if marriage fails.

    I normally do not intrude into people’s lives too much, but this guy clearly did.

    But he is divorced, red pilled, and kinda MGTOW and no way he was going to let her get away with possibly tricking a guy into marrying someone he does not know completely.
    My friend made this almost personal. He saw a guy getting screwed over and acted. Nothing I could have done or said would have changed his mind, as what he did proved it!

    **Sharrukin2 says: If he knows it all then no harm is done. If he doesn’t know then a great deal of harm is being done.

    Exactly. That is what I thought so too in shower this morning. That is why I texted my friend about e-mailing guy. Never in my wildest dreams did I think he was gonna CALL the dude, but the investigative data report had his employer’s info too.

    Amazing how much data is out there and so easy to obtain! Granted guy does collections and car repos, but still… incredible and frightening!

    **Liz says: Is there any reason to believe the Mexican doesn’t know about her past.

    Yes, it is confirmed. He did NOT know, he asked about past boyfriend she said “guys like you” or something along these lines, so guy never asked again. He was shocked and angry. Mex dude wanted to confront her immediately and my friend advised him how to do this and stay safe, since he himself went through a hellish divorced before.

    **Liz says: My spouse did care a lot about my past…but the race wouldn’t have mattered at all to him.…this sounds a little like Stormfront.

    It is NOT. A pattern of behavior is often predictable of future behavior. A man who only dates Asian women his whole life and suddenly wants to marry a black woman should raise concerns. Why? Because a sudden drastic change like this can only mean desperation or indicate his preference. What if they marry and he wants to go back to Asian women, as he always preferred? The woman has a right to know as well.

    I always and I mean always thinks more info is better than less. A past is one thing but a series of mistakes you are trying to hide should be exposed. The other party has the right to know! Full disclosure is the best way. If a person marries someone he/she knows well, it is more likely to work out than find out things like this later.

    As Jesus said… “There is nothing concealed that will not be disclosed, or hidden that will not be made known.” Luke 12:2

    I thank you all for your ideas and opinions. I feel relived this is a done deal now. Thank you. 🙂

  149. Liz says:

    It is NOT. A pattern of behavior is often predictable of future behavior. A man who only dates Asian women his whole life and suddenly wants to marry a black woman should raise concerns. Why? Because a sudden drastic change like this can only mean desperation or indicate his preference. What if they marry and he wants to go back to Asian women, as he always preferred? The woman has a right to know as well.

    Fair enough. My concern was mainly the “My friend thinks he should anonymously “inform” her fiance (via online method) that he is dating a major mudshark for years” bit.
    I still would say that could come back to bite a person. It can come across as weird by the recipient to get an anonymous message. Phone call is a lot better (has some personal touch, one can gauge the response by voice inflection and all that).

  150. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Trust me, if it was any race between he and she and a sudden change in one’s preference would raise alarm bells for most Red Pilled men. Understand that attraction is irrational. When a woman meets a high-value men and she is attracted to him, she may not even understand why. Same with men, except they each see “value” differently in each other.

    When one of my longtime friends told me he liked some girl, I would often be repulsed by his choices. When I asked him “why her” he often could not explain. He just liked her… then have a reason or two (skin tone, hair type, eyes, butt, etc). But every single woman he liked over the years I was disgusted by, save one. The whole thing was largely irrational.

    That is why “negotiating attraction” never ever works. Women can sometimes do this when trying to marry a man she is not attracted to for a time to then divorce him and raid his wealth, but long-term, it is impossible. True Attraction cannot be taught, cannot be “adjusted”, and cannot be “reasoned with”. it is irrational.

    So yeah, he made the call alright. To my great amazement and surprise. I think it worked out for the best. If she is naturally attracted to African guys, marrying a light-skinned Mexican dude will NOT work, even if she tries to “talk herself into it” in long term. Marriage should be for life, not until she gets tired of it.

    And Sharrukin2 was absolutely correct when he said that “If he knows it all then no harm is done. If he doesn’t know then a great deal of harm is being done.” –> truest statements about this whole thing!!

    This kind of a thing needs to be disclosed between two people willing to marry. The stakes are too high, especially for the man, when it comes to marriage.

    I mean what if she decides to go mudshark again and decide she made a mistake marrying a Mex dude? HE is the one who will be writing the check and losing the shirt off his back. He has the right to know! How did I ever doubt this?! I am getting old and soft, 40 is coming in a couple years…. *dread*

  151. jsolbakken says:

    See, this is why I prayed for you first, RPC. You were the one in the tough position of a moral dilemma not of your own choosing. I’m so glad you escaped unscathed.

    There was another option I thought of, though, which probably would not have been appropriate in this extreme situation, which involved going to the woman and telling her that lots of people know about her previous ways and that means that her fiance was eventually going to find out and that if she was smart she would tell him the truth right away because it’s better coming from her than from others in a context that makes her look dishonest. You could even mention that if she tells the story she can present in a way that is truthful but spun to be more sympathetic to her. If her fiance finds out from others she will not be able to spin it as effectively, so she has motivation to get out in front of it.

    I think it would depend on whether she was a good woman who did bad things in the past, or if she is a bad woman who did bad things and is still doing bad things. That is hard to judge from across cyberspace.

  152. Liz says:

    And Sharrukin2 was absolutely correct when he said that “If he knows it all then no harm is done. If he doesn’t know then a great deal of harm is being done.” –> truest statements about this whole thing!!

    Sure. Once again, I’m glad he knows. I never thought knowledge was the problem, I was concerned about how an anonymous online message might be received and the possible consequences. I’m paranoid about these things for a reason…I’ve seen similar stuff bite people in the backside, so I have a compulsion to warn folks.
    -nuff said

  153. Barnie says:

    Vox Day has an inferiority complex related to growing up as a precocious dweeb. It’s exactly this personality flaw that he projects onto others with the “gamma” tag. It’s just a rhetorical device he employs so he doesn’t ever have to formulate an argument or as he would say, engage in dialects.

  154. jsolbakken says:

    “he projects onto others with the “gamma” tag. ”

    When someone loves the truth, they appreciate how rare and precious and vulnerable it is, and they cherish it no matter where it comes from. Vox Day is a fool because he hates gammas so much that he will not tolerate the truth that may come from them because they are so annoying.

    Vox Day thinks that he can dismiss the truth because a gamma is the source. He thinks that being gamma nullifies any and all truth. Which makes him an enemy of truth.

    If he loved the truth, he would accept the truth, even from gammas. He would content himself to admonish the gammas to please for heaven’s sake stop being so gamma about everything, but thanks for contributing some truth to humanity.

  155. Red Pill Christianity says:

    *jsolbakken says: See, this is why I prayed for you first, RPC. You were the one in the tough position of a moral dilemma not of your own choosing. I’m so glad you escaped unscathed. There was another option I thought of, though, which probably would not have been appropriate in this extreme situation, which involved going to the woman and telling her that lots of people know about her previous ways and that means that her fiance was eventually going to find out and that if she was smart she would tell him the truth right away because it’s better coming from her than from others in a context that makes her look dishonest.

    I appreciate the prayers, of course. 🙂 I feel relived I did not have to “do the dirty” work, but my friend did and he did it on his own, without even giving me a chance to give input. He has been burned by a bad divorce, he calls his ex “an emotion-manipulating terrorist and a liar”, so when he saw this going on, he just had to do. He was determined.

    In this situation, I would never ever bring this up in person in a workplace. She could say I am threatening her or trying to blackmail her (pardon the pun). She could accuse me of releasing the info to her Mex fiancé and then get me fired. She could also claim I was threatening her to rest of female staff and you know how that ends for a man!

    Good intentions and trying to “do the right thing” more often than not backfire in America today. 😦 Sad reality.

    *Liz says: I was concerned about how an anonymous online message might be received and the possible consequences. I’m paranoid about these things for a reason…I’ve seen similar stuff bite people in the backside, so I have a compulsion to warn folks.

    True, but I myself could not make the call. My voice could be recognized and that would really backfire. If I had to do the disclosure, it would have to be e-mail or letter, since I could not call. But she does not know the guy. He called, he did it. Done, bam. And Mex fiance did not know and he was pissed, he had no idea (or was lied to). I am calling my friend tonight to ask more about how the talk went.

    The thing is, my friend had his ex-GF give him pictures of her old FB account this girl had copied. That is what happens when people open themselves online with photos and their name. This is what backfires on people.

    He told me if he had e-mailed this guy anonymously, he would have sent the pictures too. Maybe he would only send the pics. A picture is m any times worth 1,000 words. No way this woman can lie about this, even if she tries.

    I cannot wait for Tuesday morning now and see if she is even shows up for work or if she complains to co-workers about being outted.

  156. SirHamster says:

    Vox Day thinks that he can dismiss the truth because a gamma is the source.

    He’s not trying to dismiss the truth. Gammas always lie, so everything they say is suspect. They’re bad source for truth.

    That gamma source isn’t interested in telling the truth, the gamma is always trying to build a false narrative using half truths and outright fabrications.

    Don’t listen to Gammas.

    Don’t be a Gamma.

  157. jsolbakken says:

    “He’s not trying to dismiss the truth. Gammas always lie, so everything they say is suspect. They’re bad source for truth. ”

    Rational people don’t think that way. Rational people consider the facts and logic that are presented. Perhaps Sir Hamster is ignorant about fallacies, but Vox Day and his 150 IQ are very educated about logical fallacies, and the fallacy here is called “consider the source,” or more pretentious-soundingly, “The Genetic Fallacy.”

    https://www.logicalfallacies.info/relevance/genetic/

    Genetic Fallacy
    Explanation
    The genetic fallacy is committed when an idea is either accepted or rejected because of its source, rather than its merit.
    Even from bad things, good may come; we therefore ought not to reject an idea just because of where it comes from, as ad hominem arguments do.
    Equally, even good sources may sometimes produce bad results; accepting an idea because of the goodness of its source, as in appeals to authority, is therefore no better than rejecting an idea because of the badness of its source. Both types of argument are fallacious.
    Examples
    (1) My mommy told me that the tooth fairy is real.
    Therefore:
    (2) The tooth fairy is real.
    (1) Eugenics was pioneered in Germany during the war.
    Therefore:
    (2) Eugenics is a bad thing.
    Each of these arguments commits the genetic fallacy, because each judges an idea by the goodness or badness of its source, rather than on its own merits.

    Frankly, Sir Hamster, it’s obvious that you KNOW you have no valid argument to present so that’s why you and the rest of your Vile Mindless Dread Ilk push the gamma fallacy.

    Why, for example, is the issue being a gamma, and not being a liar? Why not say, “don’t be a liar?” Why say, “Don’t be a gamma?” Because, you diminutive rodent, you are playing a rhetorical game, and not trying to ascertain the truth about things.

    Nice try, though; do spin again.

  158. SirHamster says:

    Frankly, Sir Hamster, it’s obvious that you KNOW you have no valid argument to present so that’s why you and the rest of your Vile Mindless Dread Ilk push the gamma fallacy.

    No one cares how many arguments you can present to call Vox a doody head. Get over yourself, and get over him.

    Gamma is not a fallacy, it’s a highly accurate stereotype. Stop trying to create fake narratives to make yourself feel better.

    Why, for example, is the issue being a gamma, and not being a liar?

    It’s both. The issue is with being a liar, which is the defining trait of gammas because they try to use a deception to deal with their insecurity and weaknesses. Conveniently, gammas also have very noticeable tells. The lie might not be obvious, but the gamma behavior is, and that is fair warning there’s going to be a lie somewhere.

    Why say, “Don’t be a gamma?”

    Because being gamma is a choice, and being gamma means choosing loser behavior. So stop it. It might hurt now, but it will pay off later.

  159. jsolbakken says:

    ” they try to use a deception to deal with their insecurity and weaknesses. ”

    Howabout your insecurity, and your weakness, especially your intellectual weakness? It’s obvious that you call people gammas because you know you’re a loser yourself and it makes you feel better to project your loserhood on to others.

    The gamma fallacy is about rejecting arguments because you think or pretend to think that someone is a gamma. I think you are a dork, but, if you ever some day eventually say something that makes sense, I would listen, because I’m looking for the truth, which is precious and hard to come by, and I know that God does not let us pick and choose from whence His truth derives.

  160. SirHamster says:

    Howabout your insecurity, and your weakness, especially your intellectual weakness?

    Go ahead and list the insecurity and weaknesses you can derive from my posting history. Put up.

    It’s obvious that you call people gammas because you know you’re a loser yourself and it makes you feel better to project your loserhood on to others.

    I enjoy shredding bad arguments. I don’t care about status. Your projection isn’t working.

    The gamma fallacy is about rejecting arguments because you think or pretend to think that someone is a gamma.

    It’s not a fallacy outside the context of a formal debate. Since the majority of human interactions are NOT debates, calling fallacy is generally pointless. It’s an appeal to an inapplicable authority.

    “Don’t trust that guy, he kills babies.”
    “Genetic fallacy!”
    “… Don’t be an idiot.”

  161. jsolbakken says:

    Can you explain how a gamma differs from everybody else who lies?

  162. SirHamster says:

    Can you explain how a gamma differs from everybody else who lies?

    Yes. And if you’ve ever followed Vox Day, you should already know what a gamma is.

  163. Pingback: What Else Is New? – v5k2c2.com

  164. jsolbakken says:

    Ah, so, you can’t explain what a gamma is supposed to be, much less explain the difference between a gamma and other kinds of liars.

  165. SirHamster says:

    Ah, so, you can’t explain what a gamma is supposed to be, much less explain the difference between a gamma and other kinds of liars.

    Don’t be a stupid liar. I can explain it but didn’t, since you didn’t put in any effort to answer my questions.

    That’s why you’re banned from Vox’s blog. You practice tediously dishonest behavior.

  166. Liz says:

    So…RPC, did she show up to work?

  167. jsolbakken says:

    “Don’t be a stupid liar. I can explain it but didn’t, since you didn’t put in any effort to answer my questions.”

    The problem is that “gamma” is not a real socio-sexual hierarchy category, it is only a list of negative traits that shallow and superficial thinkers like Vox Day came up with to describe people they don’t like. This list of gamma traits I pasted below is nothing but a caricature of a passive-aggressive dork. It is not science at all, and you and VD should be ashamed of your selves for being so pathetic.

    And, the fact remains, calling people “gammas” is not an argument, it is a logical fallacy, as I explained before, and doing it makes you and Vox Day look very stupid, which is a shame, at least for Vox Day, because his 150 IQ leaves him no excuse for being stupid.

    And, what have you to say about this last sentence there: “However, they are sexual rejects, not social rejects.”

    If this is true, then why does VD reject gammas socially, and politically, and philosophically?
    Why doesn’t VD content himself to reject gammas only sexually?

    This is pasted from a Roosh V post which discussed VD’s list, dated Saturday March 5, 2011:
    https://www.rooshvforum.com/thread-57715.html

    “Gamma: The introspective, the unusual, the unattractive, and all too often the bitter. Gammas are often intelligent, usually unsuccessful with women, and not uncommonly all but invisible to them, the gamma alternates between placing women on pedestals and hating the entire sex. This mostly depends upon whether an attractive woman happened to notice his existence or not that day. Too introspective for their own good, gammas are the men who obsess over individual women for extended periods of time and supply the ranks of stalkers, psycho-jealous ex-boyfriends, and the authors of excruciatingly romantic rhyming doggerel. In the unlikely event they are at the party, they are probably in the corner muttering darkly about the behavior of everyone else there… sometimes to themselves. Gammas tend to have have a worship/hate relationship with women, the current direction of which is directly tied to their present situation. However, they are sexual rejects, not social rejects.
    Lifetime voluntary sexual partners = .5x average”

    Finally, VD says this:

    “Now, it is important to keep in mind that it serves absolutely no purpose to identify yourself in some manner that you think is “better” or higher up the hierarchy. No one cares what you think you are and your opinion about your place in the social hierarchy is probably the opinion that matters least. There is no good or bad here, there is only what happens to be observable in social interaction. Consider: alphas seemingly rule the roost and yet they live in a world of constant conflict and status testing. Sigmas usually acquired their outsider status the hard way; one seldom becomes immune to the social hierarchy by virtue of mass popularity in one’s childhood. Betas… okay, betas actually have it pretty good. But the important thing to keep in mind is that you can’t improve your chances of success in the social game if you begin by attempting to deceive yourself as to where you stand vis-a-vis everyone else around you.
    Posted by VD at 7:50 AM
    Email ThisBlogThis!Share to TwitterShare to FacebookShare to Pinterest
    Labels: Theory ”

    “There is no good or bad here, there is only what happens to be observable in social interaction.”

    This is a lie, coming from Vox Day. He hates gammas, and he describes them in such a way that any normal person would hate them. So, there is good and bad, he knows it, but he plays word games, rather like a raging gamma.

  168. SirHamster says:

    And, what have you to say about this last sentence there: “However, they are sexual rejects, not social rejects.”

    If this is true, then why does VD reject gammas socially, and politically, and philosophically?
    Why doesn’t VD content himself to reject gammas only sexually?

    You’re not very smart if you can’t understand that.

    Gammas not being social rejects doesn’t mean they are welcome everywhere. In your case, you acted obnoxiously towards Vox, so Vox banned you from his blog. There are gammas who continue to post on Vox’s blog. They are not social rejects in his circle, because they respect the rules of his blog.

    You aren’t a social reject here on Dalrock’s blog. You aren’t banned. People are embarrassed for you because you can’t shut up about Vox, but that wouldn’t make Dalrock ban you.

    If you can find a social circle that accepts you, you are not a social reject. Gammas, for all their faults, can find a social circle that accepts them. There is a spectrum of rejection, but the point is that this is not a problem with Vox’s SSH.

    This is a lie, coming from Vox Day. He hates gammas, and he describes them in such a way that any normal person would hate them. So, there is good and bad, he knows it, but he plays word games, rather like a raging gamma.

    People hate gammas because gamma behavior is detestable, not because Vox describes them that way.

    The point about good/bad is to separate position on the hierarchy from moral judgement. The omega is a social reject who isn’t even invited to the party. That doesn’t have to be a bad thing. If the party gets busted by the police for illegal substances and noise, the alphas at the party don’t get a free pass just because they’re alphas. Alphas can do the wrong thing. Gammas can do the right thing.

  169. jsolbakken says:

    So, a gamma is anyone that The Supreme DimLord thinks is obnoxious? And anyone who is obnoxious is wrong? And The DimLord is smarter than them, besides?

  170. Pingback: Can a strong America be built with broken families? - Fabius Maximus website

  171. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Liz and Sharrukin2:

    UPDATE ON that mudsharking lady at my office and Mexican guy fiancé:

    I found out Fri that the guy did NOT know about her past. I saw MsMudshark Friday talking to one of the other ‘gossipy ladies’ who work at the office and when she left I asked the lady she was talking to what happened, since she did not look well. She said someone was “spreading lies” about her and her fiancee confronted her and she was moving out (that must mean they broke off engagement). I did not ask much more not to raise alarm.

    “Spreading lies” is code for “he knows whole truth, confronted her about it, and she lied and he showed her the photographic evidence”. I personally saw 4 photos with her and 4 different sub-Saharan dudes at different periods of her life, and it is undoubtedly and definitely her, some of the photos are probably less than 2 years old. 😮

    I am not one to get involved like this, but as I told you all, my friend did it. I actually think he did this guy a solid favor. Women need to start understanding there are consequences in life, and that includes their past choices and behaviors.

    Full disclosure is the only way a man can make an informed decision about marriage and a future life with a woman. He now had full knowledge and made his decision. No wonder women like to hide the truth and deceive guys. This sucker was just her new mark.

  172. OscarWildeLoveChild says:

    I used to read Vox Day’s site, but when he posted a video or whatever it was (think it was one of his videos), saying how Joe Rogan didn’t know how to fight, I knew he had gone full gamma. I’m not a Rogan fan for the most part, but as a BJJ practioner myself, I can tell you that any relatively fit, same-aged guy with a year of BJJ would completely smash Theodore’s body and fragile ego—several people pointed out that he could walk down to any BJJ club in Italy and make the same comments about Rogan not knowing how to fight, and there would be SEVERAL white belts of the same age/demographic that would gladly accept or offer any challenge to good ol’ Vox.

    The guy is a major gamma. He talks about Secret King stuff…it’s all projection. Gamma to the max. His name should be Vox Gamma.

  173. jsolbakken says:

    “saying how Joe Rogan didn’t know how to fight,”

    Isn’t it funny how the DorkLord has a 150 IQ but he doesn’t know what the rest of us learned in
    junior high, or middle school, or in kindergarten like me, that talk is cheaper than dirt?

  174. jsolbakken says:

    “No wonder women like to hide the truth and deceive guys.”

    If I were the devil I would assign my best demon servants to the job of promoting promiscuity in women. Nothing destroys the foundations of a human civilization as well as the chaos and the enmity produced when women run around like whores. The resulting lies alone are worth the investment. If I were Satan I would present the Medal of Dishonor to whoever demon it was that got “Sex in the City” on the air and in to women’s heads, and hearts.

  175. Red Pill Christianity says:

    jsolbakken says: If I were Satan I would present the Medal of Dishonor to whoever demon it was that got “Sex in the City” on the air and in to women’s heads, and hearts.

    That would have to be a tie between Sex & the City and the book “Eat Pray Love” (a/k/a/ the married feminist’s “Bible”). But I agree promiscuity is one of the core principles enshrined in feminist theology, disguised as “freedom”. Sadly, feminists get tons of support by well-meaning weak/tolerant Christians, “nice open-minded folks”, and libertarians also see “freedom” as self-destruct behavior of all kinds (wh0ring, drugs, suicide, etc).

    Bottom line: I think this whole MsMudshark covering up her past and then lying to her fiance and then being exposed ‘episode’ has really re-reminded me of two inter-related critical topics in Red Pill living. Trust and deceit.

    In today’s depraved era, anything and everything (evil) goes. Never ever dismiss the possibility your woman has engaged in behavior AND depravity beyond your wildest dreams.

    Although this woman is not a Christian (that I know of based on her statements in the past), Christian or not, women are almost NEVER as innocent as they try to appear. Appearing to be innocent is a tool women use, very effectively, to get what they want from men.

    That is why 99% of girls lie about their notch count; they know appearing innocent is appealing to a man, especially one with resources. Most “reformed Christian sloots” use fake innocence to trap Christian beta males later in life for financial support and to later divorcerape the suckah later on (or use him as a working mule to support her/her kids in her old age).

    Innocence is a weapon women use against men or for their own benefit.

    Watch her actions, not her words; research her background well. I am at a point if I were a guy willing to marry a woman today, I would hire a private investigator to give me a full report on any woman I considered marrying or living with, because the reports today are so comprehensive, you can see her live-in arrangements with past boyfriends and “lists of associates” and it will reveal tons about her. You should also do a deep dive into her InstaGram and FB posts, especially past ones, and you may need to hire technical help for past deleted posts and images. her travel history will also tell you a lot about her.

    ALWAYS judge a woman by her past, unless she has been “reformed” for years, not months or weeks. Forgiveness takes a lifestyle change and true sincerity and only time can verify such changes.

    That is all I can say. This whole thing was an eye-opener for her now ex-fiancee, it should also be for anyone not tuned-in to what is going on in our societies today.

  176. jsolbakken says:

    I used to say that anyone thinking of getting married needed to consult with an attorney first, but you’ve convinced me that the first thing to do is the extensive private eye background check. I’d suppose that most of the time a private eye will end up saving you the cost of the attorney because you won’t need him any more, if you get my drift.

  177. Red Pill Christianity says:

    Yeah, a full PI report will run you about $250+, if you use one of the major PI companies found in every major city. If they use AutoTrackXP service, for instance, can be as low as $175 and the reports are about 40+ pages of purely useful information. My buddy is auto repo guy, you should see the info he got on MsMudshark. It was unreal. We got the names of every live-in boyfriend she ever had, all her employment history, “known associates”, and much more. .

    If you get a full report on your woman, you will get an invaluable amount of info. Hire a tech expert online to retrieve her now-deleted public FB profile and publicly available InstaGram pics and stuff. You may wanna have her use your home laptop when you walk away (installed with a keylogger) if really you want to see what she is really saying behind the scenes. 😉

    Ultimately, what is the attorney gonna do for you? He might try to get you to place some of your assets into a Trust of some sort. He may try to get a Prenup done. It may all be done perfectly, but the gangsters running the Family Courts today do not care. The “family” law judge can simply order you break-up the Trust and move the assets into your own, because he can say you “created the trust in order to avoid family law review of his assets”, even if you did before marriage. Refuse to comply and you get indefinitely jailed.

    Prenups can help in some States, but she can temp move to another State, gain residency, and file in that State and nullify any Prenuptial clauses. Many judges simply use prenups as “advisory” in many cases. Many attorneys say you should still get a well-done Prenup anyway, because if Supreme Court finally decides to end Family Court abuses later on, you may have an appealable issue with a dismissed Prenup.

    The goal is to get the info before you marry a woman, f that is what you are willing to risk. After you sign that marriage license and it gets filed, your ass his hers and the court’s. By then she can give you a full disclosure of the truth and it will not hurt her theft of your life’s savings and future earnings a single bit.

  178. Liz says:

    I am not one to get involved like this, but as I told you all, my friend did it. I actually think he did this guy a solid favor.
    He definitely did. Well done!
    Women need to start understanding there are consequences in life, and that includes their past choices and behaviors.
    Kinda late for her, but maybe others will learn by watching. I’m surprised she never expected the past to come back, considering it was all out there and the internet is forever.
    She basically did the equivalent of mailing herself a letter bomb.

  179. jsolbakken says:

    Yes, lawyers are essentially worthless because men have no rights in Family Court.

    It’s worse than the situation in Red Friggin’ China, regarding which I tried to warn people who were thinking of investing there that as a foreigner they had no friggin’ rights in a Chinese court, such as they are in any case.

  180. Novaseeker says:

    The “family” law judge can simply order you break-up the Trust and move the assets into your own, because he can say you “created the trust in order to avoid family law review of his assets”, even if you did before marriage. Refuse to comply and you get indefinitely jailed.

    Or, rather than doing that, the court will make an “equitable distribution” of the remainder of the assets and debts in a lop-sided way such as to give your ex the benefit of what she would have gotten from what you placed into the trust to begin with, including additional payments over time that are over and above alimony and CS. If the judge even thinks you have done something to protect assets from distribution that were not totally pre-marital assets, and which therefore are subject to distribution on divorce, this will definitely happen.

  181. BillyS says:

    What appalls me the most is that so many Christians still support this corrupt system.

  182. jsolbakken says:

    “What appalls me the most is that so many Christians still support this corrupt system.”

    The Christians I know that condone the current corrupt system think that the actual laws which control marriage are irrelevant. Marriage is marriage, marriage is a holy sacrament instituted by God, so, therefore, ipso facto, men need to submit to whatever the rules are. If the law says your wife can remove your genitals with a butcher knife at her discretion, too bad, you have to say “I Do” anyway.

    I thank God, my self, that I know differently, that at the very least I have the God granted right to opt out and say “I don’t.” Sure, if I agree to marry, then, I’m obligated to obey the rules, but, I still have the option of not getting married. For some reason this way of thinking goes right over their heads, they can’t grasp it, they look at me like I have 3 heads speaking ancient Sumerian to them.

  183. Pingback: The Definition of Feminism – v5k2c2.com

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.