Yes I know my enemies, they’re the teachers who taught me to fight me.
Today’s picture comes to us courtesy of popsugar – h/t heartiste and Zelscorpion.
In honor of International Men’s Day, this picture serves as a grim reminder that boys are often pressured to succumb to gendered expectations. Last year, a group of fourth grade boys was asked to list what they don’t like about being male, and the sad results were projected in the classroom. It’s important to consider what we are teaching young boys about what it means to be a man or masculine. How do you approach gender expectations with your children?
I’m leading off with this for the weekend’s discussion post because it encapsulates precisely what I was describing towards the end of my post on Vulnerability, that our modern normative social consciousness is one that is defined by a female-correct, female-beneficial experience. Bear in mind that this projection is from the collected, learned experiences of a group of 9 year old boys who have been conditioned to a self-loathing of masculinity in a feminine-correct social order.
The question, “What I don’t like about being a boy” seems fairly innocuous, but in a feminine-correct social awareness it becomes a litmus test to gauge how well these boys have internalized feminine-correct, conditioned beliefs. Read the list of offending grievances:
- Not being able to be a mother
- Not supposed to cry
- Not allowed to be a cheerleader
- Supposed to do all the work
- Supposed to like violence
- Supposed to play football
- Boys smell bad
- Having an automatic bad reputation
- Grow hair everywhere
The list reads like the table of contents from the textbook of exactly what I’d expect from an organized feminine-primary conditioning, however we need to look deeper. It’s important to bear in mind that these uniquely male attributes are grievances these boys wish they could alter about themselves. These boys believe their lives would be improved (perfected) if they could be less like boys and more like girls. Masculine incorrect, feminine correct.
I’m often criticized of being conspiratorial for my assertion that the Feminine Imperative conditions men from a very early age to accept their eventual Beta supportive role later in life. While this masculine grievance list from 4th grade boys is a good illustration, it’s simply one example of the earliest parts of the feminine-correct landscape men are raised not just to internalize, but to evangelize about to other boys / men as well.
The Patriarchy
Amongst the crown jewels of the most useful of feminine operative social conventions is the meta-contrivance of an ever present, omni-oppressive state of masculine social control – the Patriarchy. The term was coined by the luminaries of second wave feminism to give name to an otherwise ambiguous enemy. That ambiguity was a necessary buffer to mask the real focus of feminism’s intended destructiveness – masculinity.
If you read between the lines of Sarkesian’s tweet here you can see the presumption of experiential feminine-correctness that is her mental point of origin. Her presumed context for all her public interactions is that any normal male reading it, what she believes is logic, will already be prepared to accept that what is in women’s best interests is necessarily what is in men’s best interests.
Thus, deductively, what is perceived by women to be harmful to women is necessarily harmful to men – all because the concept of what is harmful or beneficial to either proceeds from a conditioned understanding of ubiquitous female-correctness.
Hardline feminists, female and male, will rattle this trope off in different varieties, but the message is the same, “the Patriarchy hurts men too.” The reason this is standard boilerplate is because it presumes a shared state of feminine-correctness, and a shared state of mutual oppression whether a man is aware of his Patriarchal oppression or not.
This social convention is really a form of marketeering; selling a solution to a problem it created itself. The true focus isn’t about solving problems created by an imagined male-social dominance, nor is it about marginalizing the less palatable aspects of masculinity. Rather, the true objective is a wholesale elimination of any semblance of conventional masculinity in men.
This learned feminine ‘correctness’ began with the 4th grade (actually before then) boy’s conditioned self-loathing of their masculinity.
“I find myself increasingly shocked at the unthinking and automatic rubbishing of men which is now so part of our culture that it is hardly even noticed.
We have many wonderful, clever, powerful women everywhere, but what is happening to men? Why did this have to be at the cost of men?
I was in a class of nine- and 10-year-olds, girls and boys, and this young woman was telling these kids that the reason for wars was the innately violent nature of men.
You could see the little girls, fat with complacency and conceit while the little boys sat there crumpled, apologizing for their existence, thinking this was going to be the pattern of their lives.
Lessing said the teacher tried to catch my eye, thinking I would approve of this rubbish.
This kind of thing is happening in schools all over the place and no one says a thing.
It has become a kind of religion that you can’t criticize because then you become a traitor to the great cause, which I am not.
It is time we began to ask who are these women who continually rubbish men. The most stupid, ill-educated and nasty woman can rubbish the nicest, kindest and most intelligent man and no one protests.
Men seem to be so cowed that they can’t fight back, and it is time they did.”
– Doris Lessing
While this account is an indictment of the Feminine Imperative, the irony of Lessing’s shock and disgust is that in the feminine-primary social environment she’s contributed to, only a woman can authoritively observe and describe men’s debasement and be taken with any amount of seriousness. No man could’ve written this and been taken as anything but misogyny.
I received a pertinent email from a reader, Dan, this week:
Rollo, why do women raise their sons to be beta?
In my personal experience and from what many men who have made the red pill transition have said, most mothers seem to raise their sons to be beta. From an evolutionary prospective this makes no sense. It would be in the best interest of a woman’s genetics and future bloodline to raise alpha sons who can subsequently attract and impregnate more women, yet it seems women overwhelmingly raise their sons to be beta (“women want a nice guy”, “just be yourself”, and encouraging submissive behavior toward women). I could understand why society as a whole would promote this dynamic because it benefits the female Imperative, but at the individual level, evolution tends to be much more selfish. What gives?
Dan
A woman, your mother, sister, aunt, grandmother and every girl ‘friend’ you think you have are all in on a meta-shit test – they want you, and their sons, to Just Get It in spite of what they mistakenly believe are in your best interests as a man. You must embrace an Alpha mindset without a woman instructing you to be so or by definition you are not Alpha.
Women fundamentally lack an existential male experience, so the advice, the upbringing, to be more Beta, be more compromising of the masculine for the feminine, stems from women’s best guess as to what would make their sons into the best men they believe they themselves would like to pair and bond with.
Women’s sexual strategy is rooted in dualistic hypergamy – Alpha Fucks / Beta Bucks. Women already feel the familial kin-affiliation with their sons (the comforting Beta bucks security side of hypergamy) thus the Alpha Fucks side conflicts with that investment.
In the case of most single mothers, the hindsight regret of having achieved her subconscious goal of securing the Alpha Fucks genetics in her prime fertility years may be distorted by her inability to adequately realize the Beta Bucks side of her Hypergamy when the Alpha father declines the parental investment she thought would be forthcoming from him. Thus, that Beta Bucks idealization gets transferred to her son(s) and is reflected in how she raises him.
Also remember, Hypergamy is based on two parts, sexuality and security. It also stands to reason that by ensuring her son is a good manipulable Beta provider (by both her and any woman he pairs with) that his provisioning would also extend to her in the event that his father dies or abandoned her.
One last thing, human parenting evolved from the parental investment of a complementary masculine influence to balance a feminine influence. When left to a singular feminine influence in upbringing, you’re correct, it makes no evolutionary “sense”. Thus we have our contemporary landscape filled with “men” who are overwhelmingly feminized and ill prepared to lead complementary relationships with women.
Towards the end of my Vulnerability post I tackled a documentary by Jennifer Siebel Newsom called The Masks You Live In. In that part of the essay I described how the Feminine Imperative coordinates social conventions which invalidates the male experience by fostering the idea that conventional masculinity is an act or a front men put on to distract from what really lies behind the mask – a ‘true self’ defined by feminine-correct sensitivities and emotionalism:
Perhaps more damaging though is the effort the Feminine Imperative has made in convincing generations of men that masculinity and its expressions (of any kind) is an act, a front, not the real man behind the mask of masculinity that’s already been predetermined by his feminine-primary upbringing.
You see, it’s not enough to simply raise generations of boys to question what it means to be male, the idea of a male defined masculinity is dangerous to a feminine-primary social order. Boys must be taught to be self-loathing of their maleness, to despise what it is to eventually be a man.
And even that’s not sufficient. Men must be continually reminded that masculinity is ridiculous, pitiable in it’s attempts to understand the feminine, and that men would already be feminine-correct beings if they’d simply drop the facade of their mask of positive masculinity.
Here’s the face of your perfected ‘adult’ male:
“When looking for a life partner, my advice to women is date all of them: the bad boys, the cool boys, the commitment-phobic boys, the crazy boys. But do not marry them. The things that make the bad boys sexy do not make them good husbands. When it comes time to settle down, find someone who wants an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home. These men exist and, trust me, over time, nothing is sexier.”
― Sheryl Sandberg, Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead
These are the men that the Feminine Imperative has created. The men who, “want an equal partner. Someone who thinks women should be smart, opinionated and ambitious. Someone who values fairness and expects or, even better, wants to do his share in the home.” The men the imperative must convince are ‘sexier’ at precisely the concurrent time that their provisioning and security are most important to women at their necessitous phase of life.
These are the men who made the list of things they were taught they shouldn’t like about being a boy when they were 9 years old.
So for this weekend’s discussion question I’ll ask the same thing popsugar did, how do (will) you approach gender expectations with your children?
December 6th, 2014 at 12:39 am
Yep, mothers don’t want their children to leave. It’s an instinct.
Moms have this sort of blindness when it comes to their boys. It makes sense: if the child is a “good boy,” the mother loves him. If he is a “bad boy,” of course, the mother loves him. Good’s always going to be the mother’s definition of “good,” so, femininity.
What’s irresistible for a boy is to replace his father as the alpha of the house. If a woman is complains about her husband, yet in contrast, Johnny is her good boy, well, there you go.
I knew a woman who got a divorce. He wasn’t good to the kids, but there was probably more going on with the story. The second oldest son was clearly her favorite for a while, because he was always doing alpha things. She encouraged him to make giant bonfires in their yard, do life-threatening stunts, and so on. When her son “does something, he does something big!” At the same time, her son was mom-obsessed.
Then the son married, and his mom divorced. His wife disapproved of the divorce, thereby, driving a stake between mother and son. What’s worse, he converted to her religion to marry her, so you can guess who’s the boss. But he was never into submissive types.
Enter the third-born son. This guy has always been a try-hard. His brother can dance? He can DJ. He can juggle. He can unicycle. He can head this and run that. And he absolutely loves his mom. He rubs his love for his mother in everyone’s face. He volunteers for anti-porn stuff and church stuff and dates single moms. He took me out a while back, and his words were, “I’m always on time. My brothers are always late, but I’m always on time if not early.”
Son three’s business is doing significantly better than son two’s, and that’s no accident.
He insists on being the family alpha. It’s the strangest type of alpha I’ve ever seen. He’s full of that drive and masculine energy, yet has a very eccentric way of channeling it. I’m fairly certain that masculine sexuality was shunned in that house of rowdy Native American boys. They grew up in a legalistic environment, parted their hair in the middle, and only listened to Christian music.
t’s as though he’s always competing against a nemesis, and one of them happens to be his sexuality.
December 6th, 2014 at 12:43 am
Men have abdicated in the field of education.
Three of four public school teachers are women.
http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=28
If you want to change the perspective, get more men into education, and don’t crap all over education as a profession like I hear here all the time. Seriously, how many men reading this board would want to go into education after hearing the profession disparaged like it is in the manosphere?
December 6th, 2014 at 1:28 am
Firstly, thanks Rollo for posting this… and for all the commenters here for sharing. This has been very educational and thought inspiring.
Many thoughts come to mind so I’m just going to scatter shoot.
1 – Rollo you don’t realize how skewed your thinking on children is by having only one daughter. I believe if you had a mixed bag of a few son’s and a few daughters … you would probably be a lot less absolute in your assertion that “modeling” works in all cases. And no offense but certainties of how to raise (rear) children usually come from parents with only one kid… just sayin’.
2 – Best advice on raising kids these days. Be _friends_ with the parents of the kids your own kids socialize with. And to take to the extreme that I do, be good friends with the parents of the kids your children are _dating_.
Old school I know but when my daughter or son goes over to see their love interest it’s nice to know that both parents have the same idea of what supervision means. Yes I know this takes *gasp* time and living in a part of the USA that believes in more conservative dating practices. But.. ya know it works.
3 – To the lost daughter or son people who commented here. Have faith.. be friendly send gifts Christmas and Birthdays. Call occasionally and _wait_ until… your no contact son or daughter has children of their own. THEN they will be MUCH more willing to entertain your interest in their lives. Oh and a word to the wise… NEVER underestimate the value of babysitting by Grandparents to a young couple who are new parents.
4 – Boys are different. If there is one constant thing I have noticed is how boys can exasperate their mothers. AND how many times I have had to intervene saying “that’s just how boys are”. Girls are how children act in the movies (fem centric casting perhaps?) oh well girls prior to puberty. At puberty it’s “all bets are off”. Oh and if you have 2-3 daughters in puberty at the same time.. having a summer home in Afghanistan might be wise.
5 – How to raise boys to men in a Woman’s world. … Pretty easy. 1) Teach them to fight martial arts or boxing 2) Teach them to be self reliant boy scouts, camping, hunting etc 3) Teach them to be competitive football, baseball etc. 4) Teach them to love but not respect women… eh – good luck on that one – best advice here: get them to date a homely girl FIRST – no joke.
6 – Men should Have more kids… no joke. If you are commenting here you deserve to populate the USA with more intelligent offspring. Don’t let the lowbrow people win. Keep your woman pregnant and needy it’s good for your relationship AND good for the world.
December 6th, 2014 at 1:52 am
A date was probing about a girl I’d recently dated, and I told of how the girl was a prudish virgin who wanted me to meet her mom before we’d even made out.
“You have to respect girls!” she said, as if that was the obvious solution to the disparate needs of the virgin for security and me for testing for sexual compatibility.
I looked at her like she’d sprouted a second head, twisted up my eyebrows into a look of incredulity, and then exclaimed “No I don’t!”
It took her a pause, and then she laughed.
We have to respect girls?! Wtf. No thanks. That’s not my job at all. My job is to love them up. Respect has nothing to do with it.
Do you “respect” your children? What does that even mean? It usually means whatever the speaker wants it to mean, which is “hand over your authority and decision making power”.
December 6th, 2014 at 2:02 am
It’s very likely that I will go into the education of our youth—very motherfucking likely. It will be in private schools and home schools. When I can make it scalable, it will happen (software guys feel free to help with automation.) Fuck yes, motherfucking yes, some of us older males do ACTUALLY care about raising up our young to be bad-ass motherfuckers. What about you pussy faggots? Are you going to support us? Or just talk shit?
I would right now, today, lay down my life, to educate young men on how to be grown men. What about you, faggot; are you willing to put your money where your mouth is? All you faggots, right NOW, put your money with Rollo as a trustee (in a Kickstarter campaign), and I will personally abandon all my other business pursuits, in exchange for one chance, just one chance, to raise up your little boys into men. I will do it, right now, today. Rollo likes Kickstarter. Pony up, faggots, or do you not actually care about your little boys?
I’m telling you, right now, commit to the future of your boys, and I will commit the rest of my waking life to raising little boys into men, with your parental support. Oh, wait, is this all talk? That’s what I thought.
What? You think I’m joking? Not so. I will right now, today, found a school dedicated to growing little boys into men. I will expect the input of every single one of Rollo’s readers, whether that be money, or time, or connections.
By the way, Cernovich will be my legal counsel. If you don’t like that, stick it where the sun don’t shine.
I am deathly serious about this. I can’t think of a better way to spend my life in the glory of the Creator.
I am right now, today, willing to lay down my life in the service of raising little boys into men. I will organize the whole thing. I will dedicate my life to this.
Oh, wait, you just want to talk big shit from behind keyboard?
Not only all of the above, I WILL SCALE THIS SHIT NATIONALLY.
Coordinate with Tomassi and Cernovich. If those two guys sign off, I’ll do the work.
As re little girls, I’m not built for that. Find a female who you respect, and I’ll work with her under the supervision if Tomassi and Cernovich. No one else.
Your call, talkers. NATIONAL.
By all means, make fun me. Is that all you have to offer your children? YOU are the problem.
December 6th, 2014 at 2:41 am
@Armchair Quarterback
I’ve taught high school students before and thoroughly enjoyed it. Two of the only male figures I ever found I respected in my life were high school teachers. However, I could be making $50k/yr as a teacher, or the current six figure salary I make for engineering. I enjoy both equally. Which should I choose?
If a man wants to do things with his life, have free time, start a business, meet a woman or (as stated here) raise a family, he needs money to do it. That’s all optional for women. Teaching pays fuck-all in the US, and so long as it does men will ignore it for better pay, better lives, and better pussy.
December 6th, 2014 at 3:08 am
Magnifique: we are meant to be explorers. Explore! Then come back, and enrich us with your tales. The fire and ale will always be waiting.
Softek: If you keep trying to get better every single day, critical mass will come. But your background may force some side treks or unconventional approaches, to get you some intermediate things that others have as a matter of course. Lots of places to find help in the Manosphere, but it’s your life – and it’s your own creativity that is ultimately going to free you. It’s in there.
Mark: Lots of truth there. I imagine the Manosphere as the modern Frankfurt School, in an age where the universities those malign Marxists operated from are a ridiculous concept you’d never build from scratch. A distributed MMORE (massive multiplayer online rolling experiment), on the other hand… yeah, that’ll do. :-)
Which also answers Glenn’s question. Manosphere doesn’t need to be the motor, just the transmission gear. Meanwhile, much of the fuel is being provided by our civilization’s enemies.
One day, Glenn, what happened to you will be seen with the full revulsion that should accompany it. Meanwhile, at least there is a Manosphere to help improve your here and now. And we all make mistakes, but you operated out of love and your heart is right. Now we see through a glass, darkly, but who you are is and will be known. May it be many good years for you before that knowing is face to face.
December 6th, 2014 at 3:45 am
Sorry, posted that last in the wrong thread somehow.
Magnifique… charter schools are getting a foothold. First the plan, then the man (commitment), then the money. Tranched like any good VC. Tell us what you need from us to hep with the plan.
December 6th, 2014 at 3:48 am
Magnifique: we are meant to be explorers. Explore! Then come back, and enrich us with your tales. The fire and ale will always be waiting.
Softek: If you keep trying to get better every single day, critical mass will come. But your background may force some side treks or unconventional approaches, to get you some intermediate things that others have as a matter of course. Lots of places to find help in the Manosphere, but it’s your life – and it’s your own creativity that is ultimately going to free you. It’s in there.
Mark: Lots of truth there. I imagine the Manosphere as the modern Frankfurt School, in an age where the universities those malign Marxists operated from are a ridiculous concept you’d never build from scratch. A distributed MMORE (massive multiplayer online rolling experiment), on the other hand… yeah, that’ll do. :-)
Which also answers Glenn’s question. Manosphere doesn’t need to be the motor, just the transmission gear. Meanwhile, much of the fuel is being provided by our civilization’s enemies.
One day, Glenn, what happened to you will be seen with the full revulsion that should accompany it. Meanwhile, at least there is a Manosphere to help improve your here and now. And we all make mistakes, but you operated out of love and your heart is right. Now we see through a glass, darkly, but who you are is and will be known. May it be many good years for you before that knowing is face to face.
December 6th, 2014 at 6:27 am
deti for the win: “To women, his “maleness means aggression, violence, rape and criminal behavior. To women’s way of thinking, the tempering, “civilizing” influence that only she can bring will make him “acceptable” to a woman so he can marry, mate and have offspring. He has to “be nice” so that a woman will stay with him long enough to bear his children.”
Yes! Women in power, i.e. mothers teachers etc., beat down the nonexistent “rapist” tendencies of young men, i.e. treating the young men as potential future pump-and-dumpers. Thus creating the 80% of men who are betas.
December 6th, 2014 at 6:38 am
@TinderMaster re: “When they know their kid has the potential to pull, they won’t purposely push down too many blue pills (beta shit) down his throat.”
See, that’s where you’re wrong. The good boys do what their mommies tell them and swallow their beta meds thereby losing. The bad boys rebel thereby winning.
December 6th, 2014 at 6:42 am
@BP re: “Any sufficiently advanced incompetence is indistinguishable from malice.”
Yes, because advanced incompetence requires deliberately refusing to improve.
December 6th, 2014 at 9:43 am
Parenting:
I am taking the full red pill disclosure approach. It starts with me, I am self assured and confident with my wife and children, I do not suffer fools and I will strongly defend my family if required. My wife and kids know I am on their side even when they do something wrong, “I love you, I just don’t love what you did…” So this builds trust and respect. Part of that is that I must reciprocate trust and respect for the kids, I make the time to hear their concerns, views etc, but as the living breathing embodiment of patriarchy, I always get the last word. This works well. Red pill brought my home to heel, from a land of chaos, mess and unrest, introducing patriarchy in a positive fashion into my home bought peace, stability, justice and progress. No, I am not exaggerating, it really did all these things for all four of us:
So my son. As he is only ten, or now that he is ten, he is on the doorstep of adolescence. He is a “young” ten year old in many ways. He is not in a rush to be a teenager, he still finds girls to be icky, he is somewhat risk averse. I had to put him in private school to deal with his learning disabilities anyhow and at least it staunched the flow of FI programming, which is utterly intolerable and overwhelming in the communes they run in our City, some of the most, “progressive” on the continent.
At his small school I am a known provocateur who does not suffer any kind of feminist musings around my child.
As I have fully ingested my RP and re-discovered my proper masculinity, I simply make sure to give positive reinforcement for his boyish tendencies and a classical frown for any FI like tendencies, which is thankfully just about never. I find RP really comes up at certain junctures in life, where judgement is required, teachable moments. So for example when a few kids get in an argument, you can lay down justice for all as the patriarch, in an FI motivated way (Barf, fuck that) or you can go old school, and let them work it out as boys should and always have. Can it be rough sometimes? Yes of course, and that’s the point of the learning moment.
A way that I accelerate the “teachable moments” is when driving my son to school. It’s just the two if us in the car and I make him listen to 10 minutes of news with me, and we always have the chance to talk about current events. He is very bright, and he always asks good questions about what is going on. Right there, that is the moment when you can steer that thinking. I am speaking from a place of love and respect and we have our safe man space inside the car, just the two of us. It’s a very powerful tool I use to guide him along a path to personal agency and critical thinking.
Then we switch over to a pop music channel and listen to one of two shows, “Bad boyfriend poker” or “Roses”. In the first, two callers, girls, regale the audience with tales of the horrible ways they were treated and compete to see who had it worse. In the second, a disgruntled woman, hoe, whatever, has the station call the unwitting cad at home early in the day and says, “We have 12 roses free for you to send to anyone you like, who do you want to send them too?”. More often than not he sends them to the wrong “plate” and hilarity ensues when they cut in with the disgruntled parmour on the line.
These are also great teachable moments. Son and I unpack the mistakes both sides made. “She expected him to do WHAT!, WTF?” Or, “If you get caught, never apologize, E.g. bend to the FI”. Really the second part of our drive is far more about teaching game or the tactics of the red pill with women. We learn by deconstructing the mistakes of hapless AFC’s or cads on the radio, we cheer the cad who gets caught “cheating” and say, “Whatever bitch deal with it”. As there are no girls around, he knows he can talk freely.
He also now intuitively understands the existence of the FI. In a room full of people if some woman blurts out an obvious FI canard he’ll actually glance at me with a smirk on his face in a knowing way. “I know what you know and we all know more then these guys!!!”
The final piece to the pie, he insisted that we watch the Matrix the other day, he had never seen it and I insisted that he had to watch it from the beginning of the series to get it. So now he can understand the metaphor we all use.
December 6th, 2014 at 9:50 am
For little girl, it’s trickier to teach. I stick to the patriarch model and have to triple down on the “I love you but I don’t always love what you do”. She is naturally magnetic in her personality and a very pretty blonde. If not managed properly she could easily grow into the very embodiment of entitled bitch that we so revile here. So my principal focus with her is one of teaching humility.
As she is far more adept at social situations then her brother, I sometimes have to run interference for him. I try not to do it too often and I am quick to call her on her manipulations. I also game the fuck out of her with teasing etc and it works a charm.
The plan is to teach her red pill fully, right down to Rollo’s chart so she can understand she has a precious resource that must be used wisely for it has an expiry date. She will have great power over men and women with her looks and charm, but with that comes great responsibility. She will need to learn to spot playas and chumps and think carefully about how she deals with them.
Above all, she knows I as her father will not have much patience for the usual female solipsism. I will not look kindly upon her shooting arrows and painting targets around them, for she will know that I her father am always judging her performance, even if nobody else ever is as they are only acting as cheer leaders. I will be the one unfailing voice in her head of both loving father, but also critical man, who takes her to account for her actions.
December 6th, 2014 at 9:52 am
[…] is a list of answers from 4th grade boys when asked what they don’t like about being male. (H/T Rollo Tomassi and originally found at […]
December 6th, 2014 at 10:07 am
Rollo posted this 10 months ago:
http://therationalmale.com/2014/02/07/lessons-for-my-son/
I have no idea if it’s the right set of lessons or not, but I can say that 10 months later after reading this and putting some of it to use, my 13 year old son seems to be absorbing age-appropriate RP lessons quite well. I haven’t imparted all of these lessons, but have been easing into them slowly. I actually have to go pick him up from a birthday party here shortly and plan to have a “man to man” talk with him about some of these things.
Here’s what I’ve noticed…Sons really do work hard for the approval of their fathers — especially when you encourage them to do so and reward masculine behaviors. So, the types of behaviors I reward now:
Slap boxing: We do a lot of it and he loves it. I don’t hold back and neither does he, and we pop each pretty good in the face. I always let him know when he tags me good. Wife just rolls her eyes.
Shooting guns: The kids loves to shoot things. I take him spearfishing. We go to the shooting range. Trap and sporting clays. We watch shooting videos.
Girls: He’s admitted that he’s at the point where he’s starting to be interested in girls. I’ve explained to him the importance of teasing and being aloof and to always recognize that he’s the prize. He’s taken to it like a fish to water. He has a natural playfulness and a sly smirk around girls that is a pleasure to watch. Not surprisingly, a few of the girls his age are quite smitten with him. One of the mother’s told me recently that she thinks her daughter has a crush on him… I passed this along to him and he gave me a wicked smirk and said, “Yeah, I know.”
Leadership: I’m watching him develop as a leader. He’s almost always the kid organizing the games at recess or taking a leadership role in school projects. That makes me super proud, and I make sure to tell him so.
There is an idea that I read on one of the RP blogs several months ago that I am seriously thinking about trying with him at the right age… Take him to a shopping mall and offer him $10 for every number close he gets with a girl. It’s unconventional for sure, but what a great way to kill approach anxiety and build confidence. Do that a few weekends in a row, and the kid would be a stone cold lady-killer in no time.
December 6th, 2014 at 11:15 am
@ Glenn, December 5th, 2014 at 11:20 am
Did all of you miss the actual underlying messages in the first part of Glenn’s comment, and his overall theme, that it is impossible to “Teach Your Children Well” and so you shouldn’t even bother?
Yeah, I read (only) his stuff from a different perspective, because I see him as an (at least) inconsistent fuck, who zigs and zags all over the place.
He goes on and on, repeating tangential information, or ordinary and (Red Pill) accepted stuff, and then inserts something that seems out of place (the actual message), or that would seem out of place if you weren’t so caught up with going along with his flow that you swallow it without actually thinking about it.
But he occasionally reveals himself openly, like in his Truth About The Manosphere (y’all are a bunch of Sociopaths, Spergs, and Real Misogynists, if you didn’t know). [/2014/07/30/game-changers/comment-page-2/#comment-49287]
.
“You kid yourself if you think you can shield your children – male or female – from this. If you think so, you don’t understand the nature of the problem. The FI is everywhere – it’s in your fucking head. It’s on the TV, in the music videos they’ll watch thousands of times with their friends, in school, at the dance class – you get my point? There is no insulating your kids from it.”
I get his actual point: the idea that nothing potentially mitigating should be considered, because it is an absolute certainty that nothing can ever be successful.
(And his further comments show that my initial assessment was correct.)
But “shielding”, in this sense, is not the only possibility.
When parents talk to their children early, and first, they erect mental barriers, in the form of verifiable objective truths, which impede destructive (but actually baseless) ideas, and prevent them from entering young minds, unopposed.
Nevertheless, it can still be extremely difficult, as kfg has explained.
.
“Someone up above claimed he was terrified of the cock carousel for his daughter. Here’s a hint – she’s not your girlfriend, she’s your daughter. She will have whatever sex she wants to, without consulting you because she shouldn’t. And if she’s attractive – which you should pray for – she will have her choice of many men to fuck and have fun with. Why would you take that away from your daughter? Why do you think you have a stake in her sexual behavior? Is this a Beta thing? I don’t really care how man men a woman has fucked. Someone else mentioned Gwyneth’s “1000 cock stare” – uhh, I’m not sure what the fuck any of you are talking about. In this, women are right about men – we need to stop being hypocrites about this. Put simply, your daughter is not going to stop before sucking her first cock at 14 and call you and ask, “Dad, should I go down on this guy?” If you can’t deal with that, you need to grow the fuck up. Every women you ever fucked or splattered is someone’s daughter. Your’s is not a special case.”
So, according to Glenn:
1) If you don’t want your daughter to become an emotionally and physically devastated slut, it is because you are an incestuous father who wants to keep her sexuality for your own use.
2) You should not raise your daughter in a truthful, secure and nurturing environment that will enable and inspire her to confide in you, and to look to you for advice, because she should only want to seek counsel from sources that are working against her best interests.
3) You should not show your daughter all of the paths that are available to her, and explain their costs and benefits (which is something that she will never learn on her own, at least not before it is too late), because fucking as many men as possible must be made inevitable for her.
4) You do not have a stake in her sexual behavior, because you do not have a stake in her future or her well-being (not as her parent, not as her family, and certainly not as a decent human being).
5) If you care about the well-being and future of your daughter, and have the courage of your convictions and the strength to be her protector, then you are weak, a Beta.
6) If you feel that your daughter is a special case, deserving of special time and effort, because she belongs to you, and because it is not inevitable that she will make the most damaging choices, then “you need to grow the fuck up”.
7) It doesn’t matter how many men a woman has fucked *, and the “1000 cock stare” [an indicator of emotional damage caused by riding the cock carousel] does not exist**.
* Glenn apparently cannot imagine that some men feel that they are of sufficient value to deserve more than sloppy seconds (or sloppy umpteenths), or want to enter into a long-term relationship with an emotionally healthy woman, or are concerned about latent diseases, or are aware of male microchimerism in the brains of women even without sons, and the emerging evidence supporting telegony (neither of which is removed by abortion), and so on.
** If this is what Glenn actually believes (instead of just being a cynic with an agenda), in spite of all the verifiable information available throughout the Manosphere, then he is the delusional one (and not everyone else, as he implied).
.
“They are societies [sic] children by the age of 10 or so, not yours. Your ability to influence their behavior after that age is very limited, as you’ll find out if you don’t already have adolescent children. This is normal.”
The underlying message: “You inevitably have almost no influence over your children, from an early age. Your children are the property of everyone except you, and this is normal (so stop objecting).”
The influence that you can establish from an early age depends on your parenting style, to a significant extent: whether you are a parent or a try-hard friend; whether you have your children’s best interests at heart, or are “self centered and self serving”, and see them as your personal proxies (and children figure this one out rather quickly); whether you are calm and fair, but firm, or act like an unjust, unpredictable, and unreliable female or mangina; and so on.
Girls, and young women throughout their teenage years (and even thereafter), remain quite open and psychologically receptive to fathers who fulfilled the masculine role, during their formative years, which female “evolved psychological firmware” expects (strong and truthful leader and protector, as well as “daddy”).
This is also equivalently true for sons, especially since “teenage rebellion”, as it is understood now, is a result of the relatively recent, and artificial, extended adolescence that prevents young men and women (those who have completed puberty) from integrating into adult society at their natural, individual pace.
.
“Your daughters are women. There is something innate about that which you can’t control. I realized by 13 that my daughter was one of them now. I joked about it with her at the time, saying, “You’re on their side now, aren’t you?” She would laugh and admit it. But get this, men, every women you know is someone’s daughter. Much of what’s going on is due to culture and biology being at odds with each other, and no matter what you teach your daughter, nothing will change the basics. Your daughter is likely to grow up to be awful in the way many woman are – deal with it. Keep gaming her and never let down your guard or show vulnerability. That is your only chance, and the sooner you do it, the better off you will be.”
So, according to Glenn:
1) Because you cannot prevent your daughter from being innately susceptible to female weaknesses, there is nothing wrong with voicing negative expectations and giving tacit approval to the worst path, in a joking manner that gives further subtle endorsement, and at an age when she is still innately receptive to your influence, at least subconsciously, regardless of her bravado.
2) Even though “she’s not your girlfriend, she’s your daughter”, you should “game her”, instead of being her father, the leader and protector in her life (with authority that supersedes “game”), who guides her to develop internal forces to oppose her natural weaknesses, and shows her, through his example, what she should seek in her future husband.
And notice how Glenn is also trying to shove your subconscious down the worst path, and thus help create another self-fulfilling prophesy: “Your daughter is likely to grow up to be awful in the way many woman are – deal with it”.
Unless you realize that negative drivers are being implanted, and take steps to counter them, they will subconsciously color your perception of your daughter and every interaction with her, by creating an artificial negative haze over whatever you see as her true being, beyond that of being simply female.
.
But then, in a later comment, Glenn proclaims that he “… always chose to do the right thing for her …”, LOL. So he didn’t live what he is preaching to others?
I am not at all surprised that his daughter can’t stand him.
December 6th, 2014 at 1:55 pm
@Armchair QB, one of the few times I ever agreed with LivingTroll was on her point about men fleeing teaching. She of course proposed that this was due to Society® under-appreciating women and relegating teaching to ‘women’s work’, but I think it’s due more to simple male pragmatism.
Generally teachers get paid shit and the environment is already hostile and risky for men. It’s a sacrifice of male potential to get into teaching, particularly in a world where men are expected to be entertainers to be attractive to women. Teaching is not glamorous, it’s mundane.
Next consider that the social environment has become one of male suspicion without any plausible cause:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2154868/Dr-Omar-Amin-Man-73-kicked-Barnes–Noble-bookstore-childrens-section.html
Men who want to work with kids are suspect from the start.
Granted all of this has come in small steps to feminize education, but that’s where we are now. I agree, men need to get back into the classroom particularly in STEM fields, but also and maybe more importantly the humanities to serve as a buffer against that feminization.
My concern then would be that any man protesting something like the “what I don’t like about being a boy” lists would be reprimanded and possibly lose his profession for doing so.
December 6th, 2014 at 2:53 pm
I think that type of instruction is an intentional infliction of emotional distress- a soft form of child abuse.
Besides- it is awesome time to be a man.
December 6th, 2014 at 3:01 pm
Rollo, a slow pitch here for a post, chest high, right across the plate, for a post that will generate much, much traffic and comments.
“The Man to Avioid at all Costs”
http://bodycrimes.com/2014/12/05/the-man-to-avoid-at-all-costs/#comments
She says stay away from divorced men, statistically verified by 60% of second marriages ending in divorce, those “men are damaged goods”. It reeks of entitlement, meaning husbands as good “work horses”, and whether or not, they will wear the yoke well, respond to the lash, and properly pull the plow, or whether they have “baggage”, are bad eggs, and were “ran off the farm” (my words, not hers).
“In almost every case, cats are a better option than a divorced man.”
There is this unified chorus of entitlement from the women of the blog, and when you read many of these female blogs, you can hear the choir, singing in unison, all the same lyrics, completely unrehearsed, yet all managing to sing the same lyrics, with the blog writer acting as choir director.
Of key interest, down in the comments,
“I would only add, if they are divorced Red Pill Manospherians, run away screaming.
If they use any Manosphere sour grapes, pouty, entitled cult lingo, or “Game” (pathetic & manipulative, false) run away screaming.
If they suspiciously demand to know all past details & sexual history as the Manosphere requires, run away screaming.”
(Of course it fine for them to demand, require, and evaluate on “worthiness for service”, income, debt, habits (some comments posit that internet usage monitoring is absolutely a requisite, a girl must know, you know) but if a man probes too heavily into the identified traits that might enable him to determine suitability, or even if he is “clued” in via Red Pill as to the real “real deal” then our man shopper should “run away screaming” to “cats”, the better deal.
They begin to name Red Pill people ….
“Feminism is Empathological seems to be still married, with a bunch of kids (homeschooled.) To me, his “writing” is comparable to “Rollo” or “Cane Caldo” in that the babbling is incomprehensible. It’s so funny when it’s so obvious that someone thinks they’re such a special, great writer, but it’s really Just Unreadable.”
Just Unreadable, heh? Is it a problem with your syntax, or your semantics?
Give them something they might read, they all need a good holiday serving of indignation, which they all so love …
December 6th, 2014 at 4:21 pm
I was hoping he would start crying like the “Best Cry Ever” guy, but silent crocodile tears and eyefucking the camera is fine too I guess.
As men we can only watch as our culture grows ever more androgynous. One day the societal conditions in the US will become so backwards that the majority of masculine men will have no other choice but to relocate to one of the few remaining bastions of traditional values.
December 6th, 2014 at 7:07 pm
I am raising my sons so they will never have to date/marry women like this – http://elitedaily.com/dating/marry-complicated-girl/858579/
F.I in full swing right there….what absolute fuck-nuttery!!
December 6th, 2014 at 7:46 pm
I don’t like being such a good looking man, I constantly need a stick for self defense.
I don’t like being such a smart man, people always feel inferior to me.
I don’t like being such a strong man, I’m always breaking stuff.
December 6th, 2014 at 7:50 pm
As men we can only watch as our culture grows ever more androgynous. One day the societal conditions in the US will become so backwards that the majority of masculine men will have no other choice but to relocate to one of the few remaining bastions of traditional values
~Wolf
No, when the money runs out the immigrants will go buck wild pillaging and raping white women. Ball less males won’t have the strength to defend the women, and the women will wonder how they all become slaves. The red pill men will laugh at poolside
December 6th, 2014 at 8:17 pm
What I don’t like about being a boy:
1. Not as strong as my dad.
2. Not as tall as my dad.
3. Not as smart as my dad.
4. All those women telling me what to do.
5. Can’t smoke yet.
6. Can’t drive yet.
7. Can’t grow an awesome mustache.
8. Only my little brother does what I tell him.
9. Don’t have my own money.
10. Haven’t ever shot a deer.
…and, would any of these answers have been projected on the screen?
December 6th, 2014 at 11:27 pm
Nathan
December 5th, 2014 at 10:36 am
The loss of Religion ushered in this insanity. Feminism is a religion substitute w women as false god
It wasn’t loss of religion as much as a change of religion. Religion stopped teaching women that when they find the man they want she should submit. And teaching men to dominate.
But it is an old problem. See “Taming of the Shrew” over 400 years old.
We now ALL have the problem these upper classes had. Abundant resources. Add in birth control and there is nothing religion can do. Especially churches run by Betas.
And of course we have lost the ultimate. “Let God show you the way.” We get instead “Let me show you the way”. God – “I have an individual plan for everyone.” The Church – “We have ONE plan for everyone.”
Socialism is a disease of the church.
December 7th, 2014 at 12:35 am
kobayashii1681
December 6th, 2014 at 7:07 pm
I wrote a comment there that cut right to the chase:
It is easy to catch a man – just want him more than any other woman does. Of course than might require a degree of submissiveness you do not wish to exhibit. Then go after a man no other woman wants.
So what do you really want?
December 7th, 2014 at 12:44 am
@kobayashii1681
It’s really hard to believe that’s not a troll post. Women actually believe that men want a woman that’s a pain in the ass? Like we actually are the kind of dopey, useless, fat, slovenly idiots everything on TV portrays us to be (or weak-minded dullards, if we’re good looking) that should be looking for a woman that acts like the other man of the house? They actually believe this horse shit?
I’ve never found myself attracted to a “challenging” woman. The more sweet, friendly, accommodating, kind, thoughtful, and loving she is, the more likely I am to really want to be around her. But they think we want to date alpha males. Headstrong, powerful alpha males in female bodies.
Sex and the City was one of the worst things to happen to American culture. Every woman I’ve ever met that was a fan of it managed to turn me off to the idea of keeping her within five minutes, even if I managed to bang her once or twice in the end.
December 7th, 2014 at 12:59 am
“Don’t get me wrong; a complicated girl who is not yet mature will be a pain in the ass. She will pick fights with you about everything, and you will always feel like a failure in her presence because you won’t know how to make her happy.
But, with a little experience and wisdom, this is the girl who will become wife material. And, once she’s at that point, you better never let her get away, or you’ll risk losing the best thing you ever had.”
That conclusion makes my fucking head hurt. “I can’t wait to marry a woman who’s a pain in the ass so I can argue with her all the time, making home just as stressful as work!” said no man ever.
Why would I want that? In what world would any guy who first discovers girls say he wants that? Why make life at home as rough as life in the rest of the world on purpose? Truly a meta-shit test on a societal scale. Makes me think of every cunt that walks around parroting Marilyn Monroe with her “I’m selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can’t handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don’t deserve me at my best.”
1) 99% of the women parroting that don’t look anywhere near as good as her, so where they get off thinking they get to apply her standards I’m not sure.
2) That attitude is shit even coming out of Monroe’s mouth. Even if I had a chance with a 10, if that were the first thing out of her mouth I’d be telling her to get lost and looking for a chick without such a shit attitude.
A man saying that shit will be instantly dismissed as a misogynist and an asshole. A woman is “empowered”. Ugh.
December 7th, 2014 at 1:40 am
“Women actually believe that men want a woman that’s a pain in the ass? ”
No, most women believe that men “can’t handle” a woman that’s a pain in the ass. Like that’s a bad thing or something, but send all the white knights to some other continent and I’d manage; although I still have no idea why would I want to.
What this particular, batshit insane woman believes is that the man she wants, who ran away from her because she was batshit insane (excuse me, “complicated”), would have been better off with her because she’s batshit insane.
The article is her method of explaining this to the voices in her head.
December 7th, 2014 at 3:19 am
http://www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/84376533/
19 People Who Think Feminism Is For Conquering Men
Number 7. Jesus Fucking Christ.
December 7th, 2014 at 3:20 am
Makes me think of every cunt that walks around parroting Marilyn Monroe with her “I’m selfish, impatient and a little insecure. I make mistakes, I am out of control and at times hard to handle. But if you can’t handle me at my worst, then you sure as hell don’t deserve me at my best.”
Any woman who says (brags?) that most likely doesn’t have a “best”.
December 7th, 2014 at 4:48 am
@chris
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law
I find myself calling Poe’s Law a lot these days…
December 7th, 2014 at 7:34 am
Joe Katzman
December 6th, 2014 at 3:48 am
… you operated out of love…
Excellent! It is not often said around here but I think that is essential. You can’t have a black heart (be a blaggard) and do it right. You dominate her to make her (and you) happy. There HAS to be something in it for her.
I remind the first mate (FM) all the time (especially when she lights up) how much happier she is with my domination. It is part of the deconditioning process.
The Red Pill has not quite taken yet with the first daughter. She wants an “equal” relationship. FM and I were discussing that. She – “That is the way it is supposed to be.” Me – “You never got that from me and even trying didn’t make you happy. Because ultimately my meeting your demands was impossible. No matter how much there is, there is never enough.” She had to agree, although reluctantly. Then to relieve the discomfort I played through our usual dominance games (rituals) until she lit up. Takes about 30 seconds or a minute these days.
December 7th, 2014 at 8:11 am
“The Man to Avoid at all Costs”, from “bodycrimes”, Minter?
Chuffing heck. Blast from the past. Cynthia “Cinzia la Strega” Gockley, by all that is drunk, lonely, washed-up and bloated.
You havin’ a giraffe, pal? Madder than a box of frogs and older than dirt (but not me), that one. Has only one other pastime not exclusively involving Chardonnay, which is OCD-level manosphere tracking (I nearly said “dogging” lol).
http://mattforney.com/2014/02/09/is-feminist-blogger-cynthia-gockley-a-dangerous-stalker/
December 7th, 2014 at 8:19 am
” – Being sent to the back of the line by Miss when birthday cake is being shared out”
” – Being constantly criticised and belittled by pig-ignorant cat-ladies posing as educators”
December 7th, 2014 at 8:33 am
One of my oldest mates (brit sense, ok?), film-editor of distinction, worked on it early on. Once told me with a straight face it was initially pitched as a sanitised urban soap-u-drama involving .. gay men .. and suddenly it all made sense.
The purchasers of course were all “This is great, love it! Love it!! Of course, you’re gonna hafta switch the characters into women or it’s unbroadcastable ..” so the bathhouse/poppers element was jettisoned, and the rest is herstory. Everything else was retained.
December 7th, 2014 at 8:40 am
that was re SunW’s invocation of the devil aka SATC.
I think my head is frozen, although I’m wearing a ushanka and Canuck surplus rifleman’s gloves (suits my 2-finger-typing) indoors (heavily insulated shop).
December 7th, 2014 at 8:51 am
Tam the Bam
December 7th, 2014 at 8:11 am
And your point is?
I’ll never get that time back.
I like this place because there is considerable evidence of thought. Other places? Not so much.
December 7th, 2014 at 8:57 am
Holy shit man! Rollo Tomassi, you have stated in words what will take academic culture 1000 years to “discover/prove/hypothesize”. That is if academic culture ever actually wants to “discover/prove/hypothesize”. My theory is that, this raising children to be beta only occurs when the mother is around to actually raise the children into good children. In many many situations, where children do not have a mother figure, or the mother figure is completely unable to keep their boy children away from “trouble, and real world experience” this “rasing boys to be beta/girls” NEVER occurs.
“trouble, and real world experience” QUICKLY teaches even the “most intelligent and risk adverse ‘good’ boys” that “being nice” and “playing it safe” is a fail strategy 99% of the time when dealing with women.
This presents a dangerous cultural situation where the “bad” boy who often are in drug/crime/violent/reallife situations NEVER accept the “beta male/female imperative” and are able to exploit the natural hypergamy of curious adventureous naive girls.
Obviously when these curious adventureous naive girls, get pregnant, abandoned, tired of the bad boy alpha carsel, they will turn to beta bux strategy probably years after their peak sexual value.
tldr; good boys are taught to be “kind/generous/supplicating/AND100%unattractive” to good girls, bad boys move in and fill that “gap/hole/niche” in society..BTW this is the exact theme of pride/prejudice written over 100 years ago. I would love to see you do an analysis of pride/prejudice from from the red pill standpoint.
thank you for your post and sharing of knowledge, you Rollo Tomassi are on another level in this world compared to mere mortals.(i want to offer a way to help, MAKE A POST ON HOW WE CAN HELP THIS BLOG, THIS INFORMATION NEEDS TO BE SHARED BEFORE EVEN MORE “good boys” FALL INTO THE BETA BUX TRAP)
December 7th, 2014 at 9:05 am
Re my: M Simon
December 6th, 2014 at 11:27 pm
Socialism is a disease of the church.
========
Stalin was educated in a Church School. Tiflis Spiritual Seminary.
December 7th, 2014 at 9:20 am
njanssen
December 7th, 2014 at 8:57 am
drug/crime/violent/reallife situations
You ought to study PTSD. And add in alcohol to “drug”. I have some acquaintance with all those things having at one time been an outlaw biker.
In my experience all the people involved were abused children with the genes for long term PTSD.
What makes the bad boys attractive? The ability to deal with violence. My method (somewhat unusual) was to be able to see it coming far off (most of the time) and avoiding it. The first mate loves that because I am her protector. The bedrock of what every woman wants in a man. She is quite disdainful of men who don’t know what to do in violent situations. You know. Betas.
December 7th, 2014 at 9:29 am
“And your point is? “
Citing a nutty rageblogger as representing anything other than a moonbeam from a larger lunacy is a waste of everyone’s time.
I could go on ..
December 7th, 2014 at 9:55 am
@kobayashii1681 re: complicated woman.
Thanks for giving me something to SMH about. My neck was stiff.
December 7th, 2014 at 9:57 am
@ Eon – If nothing else, you make me feel less badly about going on so long, lol.
A few thoughts for your Sunday pleasure:
1. Female Imperative Soaked Society/Culture/State – Feminism has simply weaponized female power.The FI informs the state and education and the arts, the news media. you guys know the story. But somehow, many of you also think that if you just “build a better alpha” out of your sons, they will escape or rise above all the rest of this stuff. Go read up on “sexy sons” sexual selection theory to get a sense of what’s really running you here. You are still playing the pack mule role and are teaching your son to play the pack mule role, only better.
2. The “problem” – To me, the core effect and danger of the FI running amok due to the political and economic empowerment of women is the destruction of the family as the central, common organizing unit of society. From a purely biological/evolutionary perspective, this is anathema and reproductive rates of groups that adopt these ideas are below replacement rates. The family is where so much of humanity used to be shaped and men had a central role in families. But now? At best, with a family not torn apart by a woman up and leaving with the kids, a man is expected to “Beta up” and carry his share of the load and be very careful where and when he uses that whole “dominance’ thing.
It’s also a violation of a basic social compact. Given that 80%+ of marriages with young children that end up in divorce do so due to the women initiating it, one would think that “society” would be having a “conversation” about this. Or that so many women are raising women without fathers at all. Why does society not at least shame such behavior? Nope, it cheers it on. From “cougars” to family courts, women are cheered on. “You go gurl” – with no price to pay in society for turning their backs on men they promised before their family, friends and God to dedicate themselves to for life.
Men on the other hand are still stuck being “creeps” or having a midlife crisis or going for trophy wives – nothing that is about our sexual agency is acceptable.
Even worse, the culture still wants men to be good providers and protectors and machinists and coal miners and working oil rigs. The brass ring of all that was winning a women who will appreciate your hard work and dedication and respect it and return it, but that’s gone yet the entire culture wants men to put the bits in their mouths and pull, pull, pull.
But the payoff isn’t there anymore. So yes, teach your kids to be masculine – this is needed. But don’t think that will allow them to escape the larger forces at work, or overcome them. If we were frogs in the proverbial pot of boiling water, we’d already be at a slow simmer, guys.
And don’t me wrong – I don’t have a solution. That’s my point, actually – you guys think you have a solution to all this. Or at least a strategy to combat it. I disagree as I think we are being overwhelmed by forces that are so much more powerful than any individual man.
How many of you here have read The Red Queen? If not, you should. It’s likely that our large forebrains are essentially an artifact of runaway selection, driven by sexual selection. Essentially, we invented consciousness as a way to get laid, yeah? That our entire linguistic and imaginative abilities have been selected due to seduction, and that these abilities were rewarded. By both sexes, as sexual selection is bidirectional (men choose too – gasp!).
I mean, if you want to tell your sons that traditional roles can still be observed in our society without great damage to them, are you really looking at the situation and adapting effectively? The knowledge that I’m an animal biologically programmed to want to fuck a lot doesn’t destine me to play the game the way women want it – by providing and protecting etc. In fact, the RP allows me to pursue my ends much more efficiently and without pretense.
The shift that changed everything for me was when I got that I had internalized an FI informed “score sheet” on myself wrt provider/protector/dad/husband etc. I was always falling short in my head, and as a well trained man, I always asked myself – what can I do to change it? It never occurred to me that i was running uphill, both ways, all day long. Now I know that and I just laugh at it. You see, now I score myself and I like who I am. I in fact was a good Dad. Perhaps I was not the best husband, but still, I wasn’t a loser.
This is my point. I bought the old deal under the new terms and it sucked. It sucks for most men. It seems that many of you here are saying, no, WE can make it work because we are better than other men. Lol – I’ve had more pussy and made more money than most of you on this thread, and have a 26 year old daughter. I’ve fucked a porn star, flown on private jets, made an audience dance with my music, written books and am have done many exciting things from sailboat racing to motorcycles to ice climbing.
I’ve been the “alpha male” at 38 with the 23 yr old hottie hanging off his arm, more than a couple of times. I’ve been the non-custodial Dad. I’ve seen how society is so permissive and inviting to women, and have watched it take my daughter and turn her into something i don’t recognize. Dismiss what I say here at your own peril – this is not sour grapes from a man who couldn’t get laid, quite the opposite. Remember, I married a fucking homequeen/promqueen – how many of you even ever talked to the prom queen from your high school? No less fucked her on the second date? So all you self-designated alphas out there just consider who is saying this to you.
You see, I’m fine. I’ve figured it out. And the best strategy any man can adopt is being a selfish prick. Spit the fucking bit out and do what you do in life for yourself – the world and those who depend on you don’t appreciate it.
I mean, there are all these happily married guys here, having the time of their lives, gaming their wives. Jeez, I guess we should just set up schools to train boys to live as you all do and be done with it. Lol, wake the fuck up – is the problem really male behavior? Can it really be best addressed by alphaing up your sons?
I’ll close with this. Before I got married, I went around to 10 men I knew, young and old, respected family members (my Uncle Joe the family scion) and professoinals etc. People who’d been married a couple of years and some over 30. I sat them down privately and told them I really wanted the truth, that I was making perhaps the most important decision of my life and I didn’t want to make a mistake.
I asked them all if they had it to do over again, would they get married? All ten said no. And I got married anyway – I’m sorry, isn’t this the reality we are trying to deal with in the first place? Or is this just an “alpha up” cheering section?
December 7th, 2014 at 10:44 am
Glenn
December 7th, 2014 at 9:57 am
You are still playing the pack mule role and are teaching your son to play the pack mule role, only better.
Well yeah. What did you expect? Men are expendable. By design (or evolution – take your pick).
Some of us don’t mind and do what Krishna advised Arjuna. “Get up an fight.” Others prefer to avoid the fights and wait to side with the victors.
The fighters who win (or just survive) get the pick of the women. The rest get the leftovers.
It is our lot in life.
Who will stand with me?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Crispin%27s_Day_Speech
The fewer men, the greater share of honour.
God’s will! I pray thee, wish not one man more.
By Jove, I am not covetous for gold,
Nor care I who doth feed upon my cost;
It yearns me not if men my garments wear;
Such outward things dwell not in my desires.
But if it be a sin to covet honour,
I am the most offending soul alive.
December 7th, 2014 at 10:50 am
The video:
December 7th, 2014 at 11:23 am
I bought the old deal under the new terms and it sucked.
The answer is to stop being attached to the old deal. It is unlikely to be offered again. At least for a while.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:49 am
I asked them all if they had it to do over again, would they get married?
My answer is yes. One of the most interesting adventures of an adventurous life.
I wouldn’t recommend it to any Beta.
So what do I tell my sons? Two wives or none. #2 son who is very Red Pill laughed. The first mate who was listening laughed. Nervously.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:53 am
Having been A Team since 18 I never noticed the deal change. I never expected the old deal. Never bought it. So its disappearance was invisible until I started visiting places like this.
December 7th, 2014 at 2:12 pm
You’ve partly got it, Rollo, and partly missed it. IMHO it’s not that they expect their sons to just get it. It’s that they think that ALL men just get it naturally. They think that all men have it better than any given woman, that men wake up in the morning naturally feeling confident and awesome and…..alpha. What they are trying to do is domesticate their boys – in the same way that any woman who marries an alpha will try to domesticate him. They think they are doing the world (and their sons future wives) a favor by doing so. In their minds, the end result will be a young man with natural male (alpha) tendencies, but just a bit of a beta side. They aren’t trying to make full betas.
What they don’t understand is that most men are not alphas who require just a bit of domestication to take their edge off. Rather, most boys and men internalize what they are taught and learn self deprecation – the least attractive thing in a man, and the opposite of confidence.
It is the ultimate irony that the men that women are most attracted to are specifically the ones who ignored the advice of females as they grew up.
December 7th, 2014 at 2:47 pm
1. You kid yourself if you think you can shield your children – male or female – from this. If you think so, you don’t understand the nature of the problem. The FI is everywhere – it’s in your fucking head. It’s on the TV, in the music videos they’ll watch thousands of times with their friends, in school, at the dance class – you get my point? There is no insulating your kids from it.
2. Sex – Someone up above claimed he was terrified of the cock carousel for his daughter. Here’s a hint – she’s not your girlfriend, she’s your daughter. She will have whatever sex she wants to, without consulting you because she shouldn’t. And if she’s attractive – which you should pray for – she will have her choice of many men to fuck and have fun with. Why would you take that away from your daughter? Why do you think you have a stake in her sexual behavior? Is this a Beta thing? I don’t really care how man men a woman has fucked. Someone else mentioned Gwyneth’s “1000 cock stare” – uhh, I’m not sure what the fuck any of you are talking about. In this, women are right about men – we need to stop being hypocrites about this. Put simply, your daughter is not going to stop before sucking her first cock at 14 and call you and ask, “Dad, should I go down on this guy?” If you can’t deal with that, you need to grow the fuck up. Every women you ever fucked or splattered is someone’s daughter. Your’s is not a special case.
+1
Some of you think that there will be an economic reset and that will change things, and I used to think that too.
Yup. Even more comical is that at bottom, it would simply be saying “OK, now man up and marry those sluts.”
———-
I live an example of the positive masculine decisiveness I’d expect her to look for in a man.
At 16 she’s already broken up with her first boyfriend because he’s ambitionless and indecisive. It didn’t take more than 3 months. Yes, it sucked and she had the predictable emotional reactions, but to her credit she saw him as what he was and how she didn’t want it to go any further.
Bwahaha. Your readers must be brain-dead to have not jumped on this classic already. Here’s a quote of yours about the FI…
For one gender to realize their sexual imperative the other must sacrifice their own. This is the root source of power the feminine imperative uses to establish its own reality as the normative one. From this flows the rules of engagement for dating / mating, operative social conventions used to maintain cognitive dominance, and laws and legalities that bind society to the benefit of the feminine. From this is derived men’s default status as the ‘disposable’ sex, while women are the protected sex.
Your daughter is the judge and the decision maker. Beautiful.
When I type “therat” into my browser, it knows exactly where to go.
December 7th, 2014 at 2:55 pm
@Jeremy re: “They think that all men … wake up in the morning naturally feeling confident and awesome and…..alpha.”
Yes. Deti said the same thing. Every woman suffers from the apex fallacy.
The big wakeup call to women is each of them recognizing that she ought to treat her man as if he were her alpha. It has to be repeated over and over to women because each can ONLY see alpha males, so the fact she fails to treat her man as alpha is identical with her failing to treat him as a man.
December 7th, 2014 at 3:25 pm
I suppose my big questions in all this are some simple ones I’ve failed to ask previously so that I might fill in some important blanks. Modern misandrist feminism became a force right about the time I was born, maybe a couple years before. Who were the big names behind it, what were their writings I might read to try and understand what their actual end game intentions are (I’m honestly curious *exactly* where they expect the complete destruction of long functioning social structures to actually lead to and how out of whack or perfectly aligned with the current failure it might be), and is there short version of that intention verbatim from the mouth of one of those influential figures?
In my mind, the first step to utterly annihilating an enemy is to first understand exactly what they want in no uncertain terms, and the second is to know how they plan to achieve it. These people, many of them most likely dead already, are my enemy and the enemies of the modern armies of harpies that they’ve brainwashed in to believing this horse shit. It would help everyone, both male and female, to utterly obliterate their plans. The answers to these questions would be the place to start.
December 7th, 2014 at 3:35 pm
Jeremy – “They think they are doing the world (and their sons future wives) a favor by doing so. In their minds, the end result will be a young man with natural male (alpha) tendencies, but just a bit of a beta side. They aren’t trying to make full betas.”
Either by malice or incompetence the results are the same. Just because they weren’t “trying to make full betas” is not an acceptable defense, or reason, or excuse. Intentions matter not at all when the results are totally for shit.
December 7th, 2014 at 3:41 pm
Sun Wukong – “I’m honestly curious *exactly* where they expect the complete destruction of long functioning social structures to actually lead to and how out of whack or perfectly aligned with the current failure it might be”
The ultimate goal of feminism is : from each man by his ability to each woman according to her need/want/whim.
December 7th, 2014 at 6:28 pm
@ M Simon: St Crispin’s is one of my favorites, though it points up how far my dear English kindred have fallen. Compare Shakespeare’s Henry with the responses to the Rotherham rape-ring, or even with the conviction of Emma West just for talking straight.
December 7th, 2014 at 6:37 pm
Badpainter: You beat me to it. however I’ll go over it again in my own words.
They seek a communist utopia, which will actually work this time because every person will cooperate perfectly in order to maintain it.
Its maxim is: To each woman according to her percieved need; from each man according to the ability a woman demands of him.
The reading list is long, but to start at the modern beginnings with important names you probably haven’t hear of:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caroline_Norton
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Josephine_Butler
Follow the biblographies.
December 7th, 2014 at 7:06 pm
They are brain-dead. Zombie apocalypse wins again..
December 7th, 2014 at 8:48 pm
Re: Caroline Norton – she married a jerk and got her revenge.
Re: Josephine Butler – women were mistreated and the early feminists did have a point.
=======================
I think “Taming of the Shrew” got it right. The first thing men need to learn is how to tame a woman. Feminism isn’t going back in a bottle. The law is not going to support men. And (heresy alert) it shouldn’t.
======================
Where it all went bad wrong is socialism. And the problem is that we have two socialist parties. The easiest to cure (it will not be easy) will be the Republicans. And the fist step is to get them to give up socialism for criminals. Prohibition. Once they have taken that hit and are reeling we can go after White Knighting.
If they stopped destroying families with Prohibition we can then cut back welfare socialism. It is a 50 year project.
If you are looking for some one to blame in the modern age it is Nixon. Here is what one of his henchmen said about their goals.
“Look, we understood we couldn’t make it illegal to be young or poor or black in the United States, but we could criminalize their common pleasure. We understood that drugs were not the health problem we were making them out to be, but it was such a perfect issue…that we couldn’t resist it.” – John Ehrlichman, White House counsel to President Nixon on the rationale of the War on Drugs.
Eventually they made it a values issue and the collateral damage was the family. The “Family Values” people were directly engaged in destroying families. Pat Robertson has repented. The rest of that lot is at it as strong as ever. They must be destroyed politically.
Prohibition by destroying families greatly enhanced the welfare state. “Think of the children”. And that enhancement made it easier for women to divorce (welfare – greatly strengthened by Prohibition – will back me up) .
The one thing we must remember is that it is never going back to the way it used to be. Nostalgia is useless. We must “innovate, adapt, overcome.” Forward. Further.
What this site represents is the core of an effective movement. “How to get a woman to WANT to stay with you.” (HTGAWTWTSWY) MGTOW is not a long term strategy. It is acceptance of defeat. Passive resistance. It is not of no value at this time. But it does not have near the value of HTGAWTWTSWY.
December 7th, 2014 at 8:59 pm
It’s amazing how early the female shit tests start. My son is 4. He was playing with a 4 year old girl one time. I told him he had to help her pick up the toys they were playing with as we were about to leave. I turned around for a moment. When I looked back, the 4 year old girl was purposely throwing her toys on the floor as he dutifully ran around and picked them up. Needless to say, I put a stop to it and he had his first red pill lecture. Just try to boil this stuff down to 4 year old terms. It’s hard.
Needless to say, I’m less concerned about our daughters. They will be who they are regardless of what we tell them. The FI is way to strong to affect them IMHO. Our sons though, they need to be given this wisdom as early as possible. I would rather my son grow up red pill than to have to “take the red pill” later in life.
December 7th, 2014 at 9:07 pm
In addition to the Marxist political agenda feminism seeks to hoard and distribute the highest SMV men and women amongst all (approved) women as desired so that even the fugos won’t be sexually deprived. The unapproved men are labor slaves to all women and are encouraged to go fuck themselves thus the convenvient alliance with gay men.
Ideally feminism is a lesbian conspiracy to designed to improve lesbian access to higher SMV women by both making women generally unattractive to men and by making men generally useless to women except as beasts of burden. At the same time feminism seeks the masculinization of women to further reduce the need and thus desire for men. This has been quite successful as far as marginalizing the betas.
To accomplish this feminists have to destroy the existing sexual order, and the traditional family. They’ve really done a bang up job. What we haven’t seen yet is a reaction from men in the aggregate, there may never be one. Men being more individualistic are more likely to drop out and focus on personal survival the extremes of which are MGTOW or PUA.
December 7th, 2014 at 9:16 pm
This article made me cringe. If there was ever a better argument for sticking in there for your boys I don’t know of it. Brothers, if you’ve married and have boys, you know you don’t really owe it to anyone but yourself but it sure would be a help to your boys for you to learn whatever game you need to establish a proper frame in your marriage so you can be there for them. It’s a rough world and they need your example–provided your example is worth a damn.
December 7th, 2014 at 10:05 pm
when i saw chris carter’s behavior in the commercial, an enormous red flag went off in my head – i just knew the manosphere would pick it apart. the sexual assault and such isnt anything to make light off, im not saying that but i am saying – grab your balls carter (or buckeyes), my lord!!
i love the practical example rollo. its my GUT reaction to it, then seeing it on here, that helps me KNOW ive internalized the Alpha mindset.
“Perhaps more damaging though is the effort the Feminine Imperative has made in convincing generations of men that masculinity and its expressions (of any kind) is an act, a front, not the real man behind the mask of masculinity that’s already been predetermined by his feminine-primary upbringing.”
so damn true. before i unplugged, i nearly laughed at myself for my occasional outburst of testosterone, thinking i need to take a chill pill. not anymore, baby!!
but how on earth, are we going to communicate this message, on a wide scale? i know i feel like a BILLION dollars after unplugging and coming to terms with my new responsibility but any of my friends ive even hinted at with this priceless information, just argue it with me and then go back to their bitchy girlfriends, who are just dying to be put in their place by a strong man.
December 7th, 2014 at 10:22 pm
“Where it all went bad wrong is socialism. ”
And everyone should read Marx and Engles. It is worth noting in the current context that the reason Engles leveraged feminism into socialism is because; socialism is the woman’s social order. Without the women behind it socialism will fail, and the women are behind it because socialism is what women want.
To try to seperate them is to miss the point.
People who evade the point and come out of the box white knighting for Norton and Butler are generally trying avoid facing the fact that there is an issue with the general nature of women, and the feminzied metrosexual men that they raise as their toy dogs.
You can’t defeat socialism by defeating congress. You have to defeat the women. If you can’t, get used to “If Mama ain’t happy, nobody is happy” socialism.
HTGAWTWTSWY is an individual tactic, not a long term strategy. Some men will be able to pull it off with some women, but it will have no effect on the wider social order. None.
That would require some form of strong patriarchy (not to be confused with Patriarchy(tm)), which you began by throwing under the bus. Did Norton marry a jerk. Sure. Was she just getting her revenge? Absolutely:
Just like every other damned woman divorce raping a man and willing to tear down the very roots of civilization to do it.
December 7th, 2014 at 10:27 pm
What hope do Men and Boys have when they search online for answers and this is the rubbish being peddled by so called Manhood experts;
http://www.actlikeaman.org/top-10-teach-son-manhood/
http://stronglovingman.com/
(for a real good laugh read the “women tell all” section)
December 7th, 2014 at 10:35 pm
What hope do Men and boys have looking online for answers when they might stumble on these so called “manhood” sites.
http://www.actlikeaman.org/top-10-teach-son-manhood/
http://stronglovingman.com/ (for a good laugh read the “women tell all” section)
December 7th, 2014 at 10:43 pm
rwnarrator – “but how on earth, are we going to communicate this message, on a wide scale? i know i feel like a BILLION dollars after unplugging and coming to terms with my new responsibility but any of my friends ive even hinted at with this priceless information, just argue it with me and then go back to their bitchy girlfriends…”
The current phase of counter reaction to the feminist status quo is much akin to the political situation in the colonies around 1760. We the reactionaries are in the learning and sharing phase. The manosphere is similar to the Committee of correspondence, though not organizing collective action, but spreading information, and encouraging individual action.
Proper revolutions take time and patience.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:03 pm
kfg – “…socialism is the woman’s social order. Without the women behind it socialism will fail, and the women are behind it because socialism is what women want.”
Where men were initially fooled was when women said they wanted equality. Equality to men means clearly defined rules, objective and transparent procedures, and systemic predictibility so that all MEN may compete on a level playing field. Equality defines process, and metrics and doesn’t care one bit about an individuals feelz.
Women don’t care about process no matter how equitable. They only want equal results. They want the system to handicapp them and provide different tees. They don’t want to compete honestly or openly no matter how equitable the process. They want results that are equitable, and fair no matter how arbitrary and capricious the process. As long as the results feel like equality then it’s all good, because women (collectively) have no grasp of objective reality ad refuse to set aside pernicious feelz for objective truth.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:06 pm
HTGAWTWTSWY is an individual tactic, not a long term strategy. Some men will be able to pull it off with some women, but it will have no effect on the wider social order. None.
If men as a whole can’t domesticate women then there is absolutely no hope.
Every man an alpha should be our marching cry.
I didn’t join the alpha club until age 18 (’62). I was taught by my first GF. It can be taught.
Law is nice. But individual action on a mass scale is much more durable. Just ask the Alcohol Prohibition folks.
===================
As to White Knighting Norton and Butler. They corrected obvious injustices. Has it gone too far? Of course. The answer is to redomesticate women. The hell with the law. Law is a crutch.
The more laws you have the more police you need. And pretty soon you have a police state. That police state was once upon a time used against women. Now it is used against men. Turn about sucks. But the answer is not a return to the former kind of police state. The answer is that men MUST redomesticate women. Then no law is required. Or at least very little.
We have a very difficult task on our hands. Change the culture. But it is much more durable than changing the laws.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:20 pm
And the interesting thing about changing the culture is that you do not need 51% assent. It can be done one individual at a time.
Just look at what the pot people did with on the order of 10% favoring legalization around 1970. The % is now around 55% and still rising. In only 45 or so years.
Having seen that I’m very hopeful about men’s future.
“How to get a woman to WANT to stay with you.” (HTGAWTWTSWY) is what we should be teaching. If we do that we will not only get men on our side but women as well. Cooptation is more effective than simple defeat.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:42 pm
Badpainter
December 7th, 2014 at 10:43 pm
Proper revolutions take time and patience.
Well said.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:44 pm
@badpainter
i understand what youre saying and i really like the way you put it, but ive never ran into a single guy (at least i dont think) who is aware of the manosphere.
ive told friends and some associates about CH and Rollo and they reject the material right away, as some women hating bullshit. could they be anymore wrong, haha?
sure, ive known a FEW naturals but even they seemed to fall into the beta provider role near the ages of 26 – 30. the sad thing too, they gave off the impression they HAD to turn into a provider and their pussy hunting days, were done right before they were going to get real good (SMW peaks).
i had a buddy who asked me advice on a 22 year old chick who wanted to fuck his brains out because and i quote – “how could a girl that age want a 30 year old guy”!!!
it really seems like “this thing of ours”, is still very secret society and tyler’s article is still dead on – it SCREAMS of truths – i dont even have to talk, i just walk into the room and women just know “i get it”. i receive a lot of “well, he doesnt count, so we can fuck” feeling from girls, all the time!! also, the sub communication comments tyler makes in that post are SCARY accurate – ive had pretty so-so conversations with girls but then had their panties off in my car, in the parking lot, two hours later, because they knew “i just got it” through sub-communication.
my point is the secret society post by tyler and the “truth about women” post are old but still nowhere close to common knowledge. 99.99999% of guys will still read it and laugh their asses off because it goes so against the grain of what guys are taugh in regards to “treating” a women.
its going to take time, true, but i think guys putting their ego’s to the side and being opened minded, will be even more difficult. until then, “a small number of guys, will get the vast amount of women”.
December 7th, 2014 at 11:56 pm
@ rwnarrator – can you post the link to Tyler’s article?
December 8th, 2014 at 12:31 am
Like it or not, human beings are hardwired to want to pair bond just as much as they are hardwired to want to fuck. The chemical catalyst for love (oxytocin) has a dilutionary effect on testosterone, thus reducing desire for other potential mates. The red pill is not about forsaking love and pair bonding. It is about understanding your nature and doing it on YOUR TERMS for the life that you want. That can be done in any number of ways but pretty much every man is going to want to fall in love and have a family. That will never change.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:34 am
Here is my somewhat kid-friendly explanation of what appropriate masculinity.
http://davidvs.net/hobbies/index.shtml#Masculinity
December 8th, 2014 at 12:44 am
“If men as a whole can’t domesticate women then there is absolutely no hope.”
Pandora opened the box and all the ills of the world began to fly out. She tried to slam it shut, but being startled reacted slowly. And so only one thing remained in the box by the time lid was closed again.
She had held on to Hope. As so, what women can hold out to men to this day is: Hope. And so he suffers.
“Every man an alpha should be our marching cry.”
Or, to phrase it another way: Liberté, égalité, fraternité.
Where have I heard before?
” . . .the Alcohol Prohibition folks. ”
Or, as they were known at the time: Battle Axes.
I detect a flaw in your model here.
“The answer is to redomesticate women.”
Where on Earth did you ever get the idea that women have ever been domesticated? Women have only ever been constrained by force. Men have only ever been constrained by paternity.
Women are ‘domesticated’ only by forcing them to cede paternity.
Every man can do his best to enforce it with his own club, which was found not to work very well and certainly didn’t make every man an alpha, or he can do it with a policeman’s club according to mutually agreed upon rules, which while not perfect makes every man a member of a civilization.
Under anarchy women will simply do as they damn well please, and pleasing men will not be high on the list of what pleases them. It never has been.
Babies please women, and women don’t even have to know who the father is to have babies.
And fathers can’t do a damned thing about that.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:45 am
” . . . human beings are hardwired to want to pair bond . . .”
For a time. What’s more, the time is different for men and women.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:51 am
Heh – Shouldn’t the ‘leave a comment’ thingy be at the bottom? My few cents – 1st some context – 51 year old divorced father – About a year of solid amused mastery frame & various other techniques with my daughters (& a couple of plates). 17 year old is quite entitled, 13 year old quite a bit less so, trend is good but the 17 year old is probably gonna learn some lessons the hard way. 3 points – especially for new parents, check out loveandlogic.com. also look for “Raising Self Reliant Children in a Self Indulgent World” neither of those address gender but finally, anyone else see the value of under investing in female progeny – seems to align with two larger principles – one is that if daddy (or mommy) gives too much, will be that much harder for the spoiled princess (that shoe fit Glenn?) to ever be satisfied or happy with the available males, other is the fundamental power of working for what you get: http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2013/03/28/the-incomparable-advantage-of-having-to-work-for-what-you-get/ – and no, there is no guarantee that what we model for our children will innoculate them from consumer culture caplitalism and FI/SJW overreach but when I look back, I know I will be able to say I was in the fight. Thanks for hosting Rollo & thanks to all for contributing to the conversation.
December 8th, 2014 at 3:09 am
@kfg
Thanks, I’ll look in to both of those.
December 8th, 2014 at 5:22 am
@kfg re: “To each woman according to her percieved need; from each man according to the ability a woman demands of him.”
From each man according to his ability as perceived by women. TIFIFY
Your maxim is an open-ended braid, i.e. partially symplectic.
December 8th, 2014 at 5:25 am
” . . .the Alcohol Prohibition folks. ”
Or, as they were known at the time: Battle Axes.
I detect a flaw in your model here.
I didn’t make myself clear. The Battle Axes were defeated by individual action that turned into a mass movement.
December 8th, 2014 at 5:32 am
“The answer is to redomesticate women.”
Where on Earth did you ever get the idea that women have ever been domesticated?
I have domesticated mine. Without the need to resort to government force. Why is she domesticated? Because submitting to me makes her feel good. I ask her about that several ties a day (as a reminder).
The need to resort to government is a sign of weakness. Women hate weakness. In addition – why in hell would I want some other man keeping my woman in line?
December 8th, 2014 at 5:37 am
Now I agree that the laws on paternity need to change. DNA testing now makes that feasible. But that is the only thing I see needing to be done. And it will not be done for a while. In the mean time learn to get her to submit. Willingly.
December 8th, 2014 at 5:43 am
kfg
December 8th, 2014 at 12:45 am
” . . . human beings are hardwired to want to pair bond . . .”
For a time. What’s more, the time is different for men and women.
Could you expand on that? And especially links if you have them.
December 8th, 2014 at 6:01 am
M.Simon – “The need to resort to government is a sign of weakness. Women hate weakness.”
But women love government.
Law exists and only by government can it be changed. I doubt anyone is asking for more government and more law, except women and weak men. However to get less governent intrusion the laws must be changed, or repealed. Or perhaps anarchy and vioent rule by local strong men is the answer.
Important to note when thinking about this the last thing we need is for government to legalize activity because by doing so it is thereby regulating, or reserving the prerogative to regulate activity. What we need is decriminalization or for the government to no longer be involved with activity.
December 8th, 2014 at 6:11 am
The need to resort to government (laws) to keep women in line means men get lazy because if they screw up the law can be relied on. That is no longer possible. And I’d say it is a good thing. It forces men to learn how to domesticate women. And the domestication must be willing. A good thing all around.
There is way too much resort to government to paper over inadequacy. In this case adequacy can be learned. No need for government.
Men have never been in a better position. Because unlike women we have the ability to learn – learn willing social control. Women need government because men are not hardwired to submit. The answer to that is to weaken government. Now about Prohibition… past and present.
The Revolution starts here (it has already started) with me (and a few other who have gotten there first).
Are we not MEN? http://therationalmale.com/2014/12/05/teach-your-children-well/comment-page-2/#comment-72506
Or as another fellow once said, “Never tell me the odds.”
December 8th, 2014 at 6:17 am
Badpainter
December 8th, 2014 at 6:01 am
M.Simon – “The need to resort to government is a sign of weakness. Women hate weakness.”
But women love government.
Because they are weak. By resorting to government they admit their weakness. They want men with (icky) guns to enforce their idea of society. It is our love of government that empowers them. And that is true of the Right just as much as it is true of the Left.
“Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.” attributed to Geo. Washington
December 8th, 2014 at 6:35 am
What we need is decriminalization or for the government to no longer be involved with activity.
Totally agree. And that is the strategic aim. But tactically it may be necessary to go through a period of regulation to end Prohibition. The period of regulation should be as short and as local as possible.
You have to bring people along.
I do tell my friends in the anti-Prohibition movement, “No more regulated and taxed than tomatoes.” But they are ahead of the general population. Make provision for homegrown – is the tactic for now.
Generally – we must do everything we can to weaken government. Deny women the tools to use against us. It will not happen all at once. But Prohibition is already weak so it is a very good place to start.
Always attack weakness. Frontal assaults on well held positions are suicide.
December 8th, 2014 at 12:54 pm
Not sure if this is apropos to this discussion, but:
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2014/12/sperm-donor-life-partner/383421/?google_editors_picks=true
Let’s see how we do with this one…
December 8th, 2014 at 9:14 pm
From the article:
“They met in person for the first time in downtown Omaha on Thanksgiving 2011, when he pulled up in a horse-drawn Cinderella carriage, handed her a bouquet of red roses, and asked, “Will you be my baby mama?” ”
WTF?
Let’s assume this gay guy was not a blue pill beta trying to court her. He was nonetheless giving her something she must have communicated that she wanted.
She did not go to a sperm bank for an anonymous donor.
This sounds to me like she wants the benefits of a husband without any of the responsibilities. She’s just a modern woman.
December 9th, 2014 at 9:40 am
Over the holidays, I was finishing the book “Manliness” by Harvey Mansfield, where he makes the point that the safest kind of masculinity is the one where the man is surgically removed from the attributes that are desired. And in reading the article I reference above, I can help thinking what a fail this is all around on every single level, but mostly for the father in this situation.
While his instincts may be right (wanting to be a father to his child), even as a gay man he has to admit he put his neck in a noose of his own making for this, and a very poor model of masculinity for the child, regardless of its sex. You can’t give the gift of positive manly virtue and ethics when it’s not present in yourself, and I think all of us can predict the exact kind of upbringing this kid is going to have. If it’s a boy, I can already see the relentless shaming and denigration of his boyishness / manliness from the get-go. Poor kid.
Great article and a lot to think about over the holidays.
December 9th, 2014 at 4:14 pm
She looks plenty manly enough.
David Deida said that while most men have a dominant masculine essence and most women have a dominant feminine essence, some people are naturally reverse polarized and the masculine and feminine in them still attract.
I figured something was wrong with the story that from the ages of 20-40 she couldn’t find a man who wanted to have children with her. Her pics hint at what that might be.
December 10th, 2014 at 1:00 am
[…] defence of patriarchy. Related: The sexodus,Part 2. Related: The emasculation of boys. Related: The decline of young people’s economic prospects. Related:The future of permanent […]
December 11th, 2014 at 2:17 am
Rollo,
why would feminists want to raise boys to be betas if that’s not really what they want.
December 11th, 2014 at 11:27 am
why indeed,..
http://www.rollingstone.com/culture/news/about-a-girl-coy-mathis-fight-to-change-change-gender-20131028
December 11th, 2014 at 12:22 pm
Rollo Tomassi
December 11th, 2014 at 11:27 am
I used to like playing “girl” until I was about 5 or 6. I don’t see how it is possible to be sure until the hormones kick in.
December 11th, 2014 at 12:35 pm
BTW the sex mix up is most common in rats living in overcrowded conditions. Which is why city life has often been described as perverted.
It is also a matter of ecological niches.
http://classicalvalues.com/2013/11/behavioral-sink-behavior-and-thermodynamics/
December 15th, 2014 at 3:49 pm
I have a would be Alpha teenage son, Captain of the football team, pretty much a Machiavellian bad ass who I introduced to the manosphere a year ago or so. The kid surfs, flies planes, you name it. Unfortunately, despite his aggressive nature, he has my approach anxiety with women and (after skimming through The Rational Male) he recognized his “pedastalization” right away. Since then he decided on his own to go into Monk Mode for the rest of High School saying things like: “I am not going to hook up with any of these entitled cunts” and “They are disgusting Facebook validation rats” and my favorite “All of these girls my age are little children acting like adults but with tiny little minds. No thanks.”
I am torn between encouraging this and encouraging him to start approaching. I showed him a basic book on PUA and it totally freaked him out with him saying things like: “Are you fucking kidding me that this is all you have to do?” and “Yes, it works like catnip, Dad. What the ever living Hell is wrong with girls” and of course: “They are easier to train than dogs so how can you ever trust a girl if this is how they act?”
That’s not from me telling him this stuff guys. That is from him running a little tiny bit of confident/cocky game and having the High School girlies fall all over him and surround him like flies on shit. Having been ignored and rudely dismissed his entire life by these same girls and seeing how they react with a smidgen of fake game was pretty traumatizing.
I also have an elementary aged son who I am carefully watching. I think he is going to go through the girls like Buffalo snow plow. He is pure dark triad who already games his mom using asshole game AND chick game simultaneously- complete a deep, commanding voice and fake tears and hysterics. He even admits he is faking later, and will laugh and smile deviously at me behind his mothers back when she jumps up to take care of him.
That is how I am raising two red pill boys. That and demanding respect from my own wife, passing shit tests, and showing them what a positive, in charge, competent Captain might look like.
December 24th, 2014 at 10:18 am
[…] defence of patriarchy. Related: The sexodus,Part 2. Related: The emasculation of boys. Related: The decline of young people’s economic prospects. Related:The future of permanent […]