The Red Pill Parent

red_pill_parent

This week I’ll be exploring a new angle in the Red Pill: how parenting and family relations influence and direct the Blue Pill conditioning of a generation, and what Red Pill aware men can do to redirect this. It was encouraging to see fathers and sons together at the Man In Demand conference. I honestly wasn’t expecting this, but it was a humbling experience to see fathers and sons coming to a Red Pill awareness together. I also met with a few men who told me their sons had either turned them on to my books or that they would be required reading for their sons before they got out of their teens.

One of the greatest benefits of the conference was the inspiration and material I got from the men attending. A particular aspect of this was addressing how men might educate and help others to unplug and in that lay a wealth of observations about how these men’s upbringings had brought them to both their Blue Pill idealisms and ultimately their Red Pill awareness.

I’m beginning this series with some of these observations, but I plan to break protocol and be a bit more proscriptive in the last essay with regard to what I think may be beneficial ways to be a Red Pill parent. In The Rational Male – Preventive Medicine I included a chapter which outlined how men are primarily conditioned for lives and ego-investments in a Blue Pill idealism that ultimately prepares them for better serving the Feminine Imperative when their usefulness is necessary to fulfill women’s sexual (and really lifetime) strategies.

That chapter is only available in the book, but if you have it, it might be helpful to review it after you read this.

Reader (and MiD conference attendee) Jeremy had an excellent observation from Solipsism II:

@Capper

The only thing I take issue with is the advice, from the book that his wife read, which told her to place her husband above her children. Children come first for a mother, and they should for the father too. I’m not advocating to neglect her husband, but he needs to accept some biological facts and not be hurt because of it

What you’re repeating there is actually the first steps of a hostage crisis. That is first-wave-feminism boilerplate response. It is the first redirection in a misdirection perpetuated by women in order to sink any notion that men should have some authority on matters. Think of the children. It’s been repeated for so long, it’s a cliche…

It’s typical crab-basket behavior. Women seek power over their lives and somehow instinctively believe that the only way to achieve power is to take someone else’s power away. So they attack male authority by placing children above the man. This then becomes a stick with which to beat male authority into submission, as the woman is allowed to speak for the needs of the children. This is literally textbook subversion, and plays out on so many levels of human culture it tends to make one consider how boring humanity must look to any alien life that happens to stumble across our unremarkable corner of the universe.

When the children’s needs become the “throne” of the household, and the wife is allowed to speak for the children’s needs, then the authority of the household becomes a rather grotesque combination of immediate child needs and female manipulation. Worse still, the children are now effectively captives of the wife, because at any time she can accuse the husband of anything the law is forced to throw him in handcuffs for, and take away the kids.

What you’re repeating is the first steps in that hostage situation. Equalists will try to convince you of the logic that children come first, that children are the future, that all of that which makes them better is more important than anything else. This is bullshit.

Do you think cavemen sat around in caves all day playing and socially interacting with their babies? Do you think they had some kind of fresh-gazelle-delivery service that allowed him to interact with the children directly? Do you think the mothers were not under exactly the same survival condition, needing to forage for carrots, potatoes, berries, etc, while the men hunted and built structures? Do you think the “children” came first in any other era of humanity? If so, you are very sadly mistaken.

Children are more than capable of getting everything they need to know about how to live simply by watching their parents live a happy life together. This is how humans did things for eons, changing that order and putting the “children first” is frankly perverse and the beginning of the destruction of the family. Children are more than information sponges, they are blank minds that want desperately to be adult. Children want to understand everything that everyone around them understands, which is why a parent telling a child that you’re “disappointed” in them is more effective than a paddling. If you focus on children, you are frankly just spoiling them with attention that they will never receive in the real world. If instead you focus on yourself and your spouse, you will raise children that see you putting yourself as the MPO (as Rollo calls it), and your marriage/partnership as an important part of what you do each day.

Don’t put the children first. That’s essentially like negotiating with a terrorist, they’ll only make more demands on you until the cops storm the plane and lots of people get shot.

Your Mental Point of Origin should never waver from yourself.

American Parenting is Killing American Marriage

Of course, Ayelet Waldman’s blasphemy was not admitting that her kids were less than completely wonderful, only that she loved her husband more than them. This falls into the category of thou-shalt-have-no-other-gods-before-me. As with many religious crimes, judgment is not applied evenly across the sexes. Mothers must devote themselves to their children above anyone or anything else, but many wives would be offended if their husbands said, “You’re pretty great, but my love for you will never hold a candle to the love I have for John Junior.”

Mothers are also holy in a way that fathers are not expected to be. Mothers live in a clean, cheerful world filled with primary colors and children’s songs, and they don’t think about sex. A father could admit to desiring his wife without seeming like a distracted parent, but society is not as willing to cut Ms. Waldman that same slack. It is unseemly for a mother to enjoy pleasures that don’t involve her children.
There are doubtless benefits that come from elevating parenthood to the status of a religion, but there are obvious pitfalls as well. Parents who do not feel free to express their feelings honestly are less likely to resolve problems at home. Children who are raised to believe that they are the center of the universe have a tough time when their special status erodes as they approach adulthood. Most troubling of all, couples who live entirely child-centric lives can lose touch with one another to the point where they have nothing left to say to one another when the kids leave home.
In the 21st century, most Americans marry for love. We choose partners who we hope will be our soulmates for life. When children come along, we believe that we can press pause on the soulmate narrative, because parenthood has become our new priority and religion. We raise our children as best we can, and we know that we have succeeded if they leave us, going out into the world to find partners and have children of their own. Once our gods have left us, we try to pick up the pieces of our long neglected marriages and find new purpose. Is it surprising that divorce rates are rising fastest for new empty nesters? Perhaps it is time that we gave the parenthood religion a second thought.

I think these quotes outline the dynamic rather well; a method of control women can use to distract and defer away from Beta husbands is a simple appeal to their children’s interests as being the tantamount to their own or their husbands. If the child sits at the top of that love hierarchy and that child’s wellbeing and best interests can be defined by the mother, the father/husband is relegated to subservience to both the child and the mother.

This gets back to the preternatural Empathy myth that women, by virtue of just being a woman, has some instinctual, empathetic insight about placing that child above all else. That child becomes a failsafe and a buffer against having to entertain a real relationship with the father/husband and really consider his position in her Hypergamous estimate of him.

If that man isn’t what her Hypergamous instinct estimates him being as optimal (he’s the unfortunate Beta), then “she’s tolerating his presence for the kids’ sake.” Jeremy was responding to a comment made by Capper about an incident where a woman was being encouraged to put her husband before her kids in that love hierarchy priority. The fact that this is so unnatural for a woman that it would need to be something necessary to train a woman to speaks volumes about the facility with which women presume that their default priority ought to be for her kids.

Most men buy into this prioritization as well. It seems deductively logical that a woman would necessarily need to put her child’s attention priorities well above her husband’s. What’s counterintuitive to both parents is that it’s the health of their relationship (or lack) that defines and exemplifies the complementary gender understanding of the child. Women default to using their children as cats paws to assume primary authority of the family, and men are already preconditioned to accept this as the normative frame for the family.

As with all your relations with women, establishing a strong Frame is essential. The problem for men with even the strongest initial Frame with their wives is that they cede that Frame to their kids. Most men want the very best for their children; or there may be a Promise Keepers dynamic that guy is dealing with an makes every effort to outdo, and make up for, the sins of his father by sacrificing everything, but in so doing he loses sight of creating and maintaining a dominant Frame for not just his wife, but the state of his family.

It’s important to bear in mind that when you set the Frame of your relationship, whether it’s a first night lay or a marriage prospect, women enter your reality and your frame – the same needs to apply to any children within that relationship. Far too many fathers are afraid to embody that strong authority and expect their wives (and children) to recognize what should be his primary place in the family.

The fear is that by assuming this position they become the typical asshole father they hoped to avoid for most of their formative years. Even for men with strong masculine role models in their lives, the hesitation comes from a culture that ridicules fathers, or presumes they are potentially violent towards children. Thus the abdication of fatherly authority, in as positive a tense as possible, is abdicated before that child is even born.

Ectogenesis

At the Man in Demand conference last weekend I had a young guy ask me what my thoughts were about a man’s being interested in becoming a single parent of his own accord. I had this same question posed to me during my second interview with Christian McQueen and essentially it breaks down to a man supplying his own sperm, buying a suitable woman’s viable ovum to fertilize himself, and, I presume, hire a surrogate mother to carry that child to term. Thereupon he takes custody of that child and raises it himself as a single father.

In theory this arrangement should work out to something similar to a woman heading off the the sperm bank to (once again Hypergamously) select a suitable sperm donor and become a single parent of her own accord. It’s interesting that we have institutions and facilities like sperm banks to ensure women’s Hypergamy, but men, much less heterosexual men, must have exceptional strength of purpose and determination to do so.

Despite dealing with the very likely inability of the surrogate mother to disentangle her emotional investment in giving birth to a child she will never raise (hormones predispose women to this) a man must be very determined financially and legally to become a single father by choice. In principle I understand the sentiment of Red Pill men wanting to raise a child on their own. The idea is to do so free from the (at least direct) influence of the Feminine Imperative. However, I think this is in error.

My feelings on this are two part. First, being a complementarian, it is my belief that a child requires two healthy adult parents, male and female, with a firm, mature grasp of the importance, strengths and weaknesses of their respective gender roles (based on biological and evolutionary standards). Ideally they should exemplify and demonstrate those roles in a healthy fashion so as a boy or a girl can learn about masculinity and femininity from their respective parents’ examples.

Several generations after the sexual revolution, and after several generations of venerating feminine social primacy, we’ve arrived at a default collective belief that single mothers can perform the function of modeling and shaping masculinity in boys as well as femininity in girls equally well. The underlying social message in that is that women/mothers can be a one woman show with regard to parenting and thus men, fathers or the buffoons mainstream culture portrays them as, are superfluous to parenting – nice to have around, but not vital. This belief also finds fertile ground in the notion that men are obsolete.

Secondly, for all the equalist emphasis of Jungian gender theories about anima/animus and balancing feminine and masculine personality interests, it is evidence of an agenda to suggest that a woman is equally efficient in teaching and modeling masculine aspects to children as well as any positively masculine man. With that in mind, I think the reverse would be true for a deliberately single father – even with the best of initial intents.

Thus, I think a father might serve as a poor substitute for a woman when it comes to exemplifying a feminine ideal. The argument then of course is that, courtesy of a feminine-centric social order, women have so divorced themselves of conventional femininity that perhaps a father might teach a daughter (if not demonstrate for her) a better feminine ideal than a woman. Conventional, complementary femininity is so lost on a majority of women it certainly seems like logic for a man to teach his daughter how to recapture it.

Raising Betas

This was the trap that 3rd wave feminism fell into; the belief that they knew how best to raise a boy into their disempowered and emasculated ideal of their redefined masculinity. Teach that boy a default deference and sublimation to feminine authority, redefine it as respect, teach him to pee sitting down and share in his part of the choreplay, and well, the world is bound to be a better more cooperative place right?

So it is for these reason I think that the evolved, conventional, two-parent heterosexual model serves best for raising a child. I cannot endorse single parenthood for either sex. Parenting should be as collaborative and as complementary a partnership as is reflected in the complementary relationship between a mother and father.

It’s the height of gender-supremacism to be so arrogantly self-convinced as to deliberately choose to birth a child and attempt to raise it into the contrived ideal of what that “parent” believes the other gender’s role ought to be.

This should put the institutionalized social engineering agenda of the Feminine Imperative into stark contrast for anyone considering intentional single parenthood. Now consider that sperm banks and feminine-specific fertility institutions have been part of normalized society for over 60 years and you can see that Hypergamy has dictated the course of parenting for some time now. This is the definition of social engineering.

I’ll admit that when I got the question of single fatherhood I was a bit incredulous of the mechanics of it. Naturally it would be an expense most men couldn’t entertain. However, as promised, I did my homework on it, and found out that ectogenesis was yet another science-fiction-come-reality that feminists have already considered and have planned for:

Prominent feminists and activists, including Andrea Dworkin and Janice Raymond, have concluded that not only will women be further marginalized and oppressed by this eventuality, but they will become obsolete.

Fertility, and the ability to be the species’ reproductive engine, are virtually the only resources that women collectively control, they argue. And, although women do have other “value” in a patriarchal society–child rearing, for example–gestation remains, worldwide, the most important.  Even in the most female-denigrating cultures women are prized, if only, for their childbearing. If you take that away, then what? This technology becomes another form of violence.

Women already have the power to eliminate men and in their collective wisdom have decided to keep them. The real question now is, will men, once the artificial womb is perfected, want to keep women around?

[…]“We may find ourselves without a product of any kind with which to bargain,” she writes. “We have to ask, if that last power is taken and controlled by men, what role is envisaged for women in the new world? Will women become obsolete?”

This was a great article and it came at an auspicious time – the time we find women sweating about having their sexual market leverage with men potentially being undercut by sex-bots and/or immersive virtual sex substitutes.

Published by Rollo Tomassi

Author of The Rational Male and The Rational Male, Preventive Medicine

421 comments on “The Red Pill Parent

  1. There are scientific subjects where actual progress is still being made, but most of them are where people just don’t understand the subject matter and can’t be arsed to.

  2. Of course, there’s a way to induce dissonance among the tradcons: quote the Bible.

    Yes, that is one way. But women have an uncanny ability to rationalize even the most straightforward of text. Just look at, who is it, Sheila Gregoire or something like that, that Dalrock links to? “Only submit under your own conditions!!!”

    What works best on trad women is the AMOG. Even when this man seriously ticks her off, she is drawn to him. She will keep coming back for more. But when this man comes around, he is kicked out because he is too dangerous (like Joseph of Jackson, if I recall correctly). The white knights will not tolerate losing their women, even if the man is speaking the truth. And pulling any woman back in is easy peasy with women grouping and men tsking.

  3. ” I used to find it harmless until I realized how damaging that can be if say, a boy’s mom, filters everything through that lens. Or a wife, who now sees her husband and 4 y/o as occupying the same space in which her need to mother and instruct operates from a moral and emotionally superior position”

    I remember as a kid that my mom used to play the Billy Dean country song, “Men’ll be boys” A LOT.

    “Only difference between the men and the boys, is the size of their feet and the price of their toys…”

    “…when it comes time to make a choice, most men just as soon be boys”

    This was the same time period she made me grow my hair out like a chick and told me she wishes I had been a girl so that there was one less dick in the world.

    Amazing the stuff you don’t see being blue pill.

  4. @Stingray

    What works best on trad women is the AMOG. Even when this man seriously ticks her off, she is drawn to him. She will keep coming back for more.

    This can’t be overstated. As an atheist, the standard churchian beta is so easily AMOG’d it isn’t even funny. My religious views have built in indignation with “religious” women, so they seek out contact with me even if they’re married and I have no intention of getting involved with them. This happened repeatedly before TRP, and I couldn’t figure out why. It seemed like a sort of “bad boy” appeal to them, but I wasn’t sure. I kept thinking maybe they just genuinely wanted to “save” me.

    Nope, their beta husbands just didn’t have the built in tingles I did when I’d tell them their views were horse shit then have an amused laugh at their reaction.

  5. @Sun Wukong

    There are scientific subjects where actual progress is still being made, but most of them are where people just don’t understand the subject matter and can’t be arsed to.

    Yes. I was fortunate in college. I got associated with a physics professor who loved materials research. I’ve been to a few conferences. Where physics and chemistry meet is probably the most important area of human investigation at the moment. Though it receives absolutely no acclaim in the public eye, this field has been responsible for every single major human advance since the silicon diode. Our modern world would simply not exist without it.

  6. “Of course, there’s a way to induce dissonance among the tradcons: quote the Bible.”

    Riiiiight.

    My favorite rationalization I have heard from the church chicks, wife included, is that it is their duty to support their husband. This includes times where he may not be “up to par” with his headship and so she has to “step in” and “help him” while he is unable to rightly captain the ship.

    Athol Kay teaches that shit too.

    Of course the interpretation of what is “up to par” is at her sole discretion.

    Basically if she disagrees with him at all, he is not up to snuff.

  7. @CaveClown

    My favorite rationalization I have heard from the church chicks, wife included, is that it is their duty to support their husband.

    This is why religion is used as a piss poor crutch for weak men and has little success in actually curbing female behavior. A lot of tradcon men expect to just quote the Bible and the woman falls in line. It doesn’t work that way. Establish frame and be the Alpha, and she’ll fall in line whether you’re reading from a book or just spouting whatever shit comes in to your head.

    With or without the Bible, it’s all about your frame. Hypergamy doesn’t give a flying fuck about God.

  8. benfromtexas,

    He was a commenter at Dalrock’s a few years ago. My recollection of details tends to be abysmal, so hopefully Anonymous Reader will help me out if I get it wrong. The basics: he attended a church and began to make waves by talking to men about the actual truth of the Bible. Husband’s headship and wives to be submissive helpmeets. More than that he talked to the men about masculinity. Man’s masculinity, not the FI female taught masculinity that we are familiar with today.

    The church kicked him out.

    He found a new church and tried a new tactic. He found some men who were willing to listen and kept it quiet this time and mentored these men on his own. Unfortunately, I’m not sure what became of him.

    He was a good commenter at Dalrock’s and really worked hard IRL to help men to the best of his ability. He paid for it and he just kept right on teaching.

  9. Stingray
    Yes, that is one way. But women have an uncanny ability to rationalize even the most straightforward of text. Just look at, who is it, Sheila Gregoire or something like that, that Dalrock links to? “Only submit under your own conditions!!!”

    She’s one of the major offenders, her blog is To Love, Honor and Vacuum, tee hee hee spot the obviousness.

    What works best on trad women is the AMOG. Even when this man seriously ticks her off, she is drawn to him.

    True. Very true. In fact….

    Sun Wukong
    This can’t be overstated. As an atheist, the standard churchian beta is so easily AMOG’d it isn’t even funny.

    Nope, their beta husbands just didn’t have the built in tingles I did when I’d tell them their views were horse shit then have an amused laugh at their reaction.

    I’ve been the AMOG unintentionally more than once at some church function or other. One time a married woman handed her purse to her husband, who dutifully held it, then she marched across the room to chat me up, twirling her hair as she did so. A bucket full of IOI’s on the floor, and apparently only I noted what was going on. I don’t mess around with married women, and steered her back to her DH, who was still holding her purse, for crying out loud.

    Feminized church => seriously betaized men.

    I suppose a really heavy duty AMOG preacher could turn a church in a different direction, but it seems those kind of men are often Driscoll clones, so it never works out in the long run.

  10. Stingray – close enough on J of J. One of the deal killers for J of J was when he started teaching Game to church betas, who were all of a sudden very visible in a positive way to the young women of the church. The leadership really wanted to know what was going on, and I do recall that when J of J was called on the carpet by the church leadership a number of leader’s wives were essentially in on the deal.

    By teaching Game to beta men, who then became more Alpha to the daughters of the leadership, he was undercutting the power of the leadership’s wives. IMO. That was what really set things in motion leading to his expulsion.

    It could be that he’s still out there, just under deep cover. I hope so.

    Stingray, Cave Clown, etc. all make valid points that it’s way too easy for people to re-re interpret Bible quotes or take them out of context to justify bad behavior by women & betaization of men. Cripes, there’s entire fora full of women rewriting the Bible to suit themselves.

  11. Stingray, Cave Clown, etc. all make valid points that it’s way too easy for people to re-re interpret Bible quotes or take them out of context to justify bad behavior by women & betaization of men. Cripes, there’s entire fora full of women rewriting the Bible to suit themselves.

    This is why I tell all moderates that only fundamentalists are following an actual religion. If exactly what’s in that book is what you’re supposed to follow, then the fundies are right and moderates are wrong. If the book is open to interpretation, then the fundie interpretation is just as valid as any moderate interpretation and the fundies are still doing it right. You just now find yourself in the uncomfortable position of everyone else being right too.

    If you want to consider it open to interpretation then there are no solid tenets and there’s no longer a religion, just a bunch of people making their own shit up.

    Granted, it obviously doesn’t worry me since I’ve got no dog in the fight. It just irks me when moderates try to lord their moral superiority over me since I don’t follow a religion.

  12. “One of the deal killers for J of J was when he started teaching Game to church betas, who were all of a sudden very visible in a positive way to the young women of the church. ”

    The last time I was separated from the wife, I started going to church.

    I almost doubled my (admittedly low) N count.

    Beta men would actually introduce me to their wives. The “new guy at church” game…

    Evil, but it works.

    Her, “I heard you are really helping the guys in the men’s group. I have some ideas about the next meeting, wanna come over to my house and talk about it?”

    Me, “Only if you promise to make me cookies and coffee”

    Her, “ok”

    Me, “I didn’t hear a promise in there”

    Giggles. Her, “I promise…what kind of cookies do you like?”

    Coffee, bang, cookie…in that order. lol

  13. In fact, thinking about it, maybe what J of J demonstrated was a reaction by the wimmenz of the church that could be called Hypergamy by proxy. Rollo probably has already written on it, and I’m too lazy…er…busy right now to search.

  14. Wow. Thread taking an interesting turn.

    Real quick, my .12 cents ( adjusted for inflation and all..)

    I will always, always be amazed at how a lot of men are so subservient to various organizations or social constructs.

    For the record, I am a believer. I am spiritual as part of who I am. never, ever considered converting anyone, and in my personal life my preferences ( usually ) remain private. Believing doesn’t make me more of anything compared to the general population. It’s a personal thing.

    The whole ” husbands holding purses while wifey bounces off in the direction of another man “…holy shit. If this is what organized religion, which I refuse to have any part of, does to men/people…. how the fuck do men stand for it? I’ve never seen or experienced much of what’s being talked about concerning women/religion or whatever, and I CAN’T STOP READING!!!!

    I know most men are Blue Pill, but damn!!!! It’s a fucking navy blue pill.

    But men have too much acquiescence in general, imo.

    Too much bowing down to authority and going along with things that they don’t fully understand. This is true in religion, work, dealing with law enforcement or any type of authoritarian organization.

    A bit more active rebellion is good for the soul. The FI has been able to hit a fucking reset button on all of society. Don’t give in so easily and thoroughly. All of this talk of women controlling and demanding and being gigantic assholes…. in the end they are just delusional people when they act like that. Like a child throwing a tantrum. How seriously would you take a child rolling around on the floor crying?

    We all have to give into structures in life, but develop a boundary for how far you’re willing to bend or what your willing to accept. No one else can set those boundaries for you and others will only go as far as you let them really. Even women. Unless they’ve tied you to a chair in a basement, you free to walk away and ignore.

    I’m not advocating getting locked up for anything ( although….sometimes..), obey laws where applicable, but any motherfucker that steps to you is just flesh and bone. Preacher/minister/priest, cop, CEO…. just men. No better than anyone else in the long run.

    It’s about fear. Loss of material things, loss of freedom. Believe me when I tell you that I understand this more than words can describe. Fear is how others control.

    I don’t believe in fear. Stopped doing so in the 70’s. I do not follow. I may join, but I don’t follow.

    . Ima shut up now and go back to reading. Best way to learn and understand.

  15. “Insanity, speaking as the only male authority you acknowledge…”

    I don’t acknowledge your authority Tomassi, I’m terribly sorry. I do my best to be polite to you because this is your blog, your books, your ideas. I can respect that.

  16. Where men find themselves now is in a position where they cannot be a Red Pill parent without facing push back from all angles, their wife, school, friends and ultimately the courts. With about half the boys now growing up in homes with no fathers there are no male role models to follow which completes the cycle…

    That said, it appears the pendulum has swung about as far as it can go, the whole transgender Bruce/Caitlyn thing has pushed even many liberal minded people to the edge and over. With Feminist demands now so far fetched the satirical articles on “The Onion” can’t keep ahead of them, can the end of this self destructiveness not be far behind?

  17. Anonymous Reader “I do recall that when J of J was called on the carpet by the church leadership a number of leader’s wives were essentially in on the deal.”

    If you mind… what do you mean by that? About the wives being against him (or were they really against the young women being turned on by the more masculine men)?

    Glen – your thing did make me reconsider the importance of modesty… but I think, in your anger back then, you totally misunderstood what I said. I don’t go out in clothes that my husband doesn’t first approve of. A lot of times (almost all the time) I actually ask him if it’s ok or if it’s too tight or too low, etc. Sometimes he does tell me to change, and I always do without a fight at all. I know there’s no way for you to really know for sure, but many readers of my blog are real life friends that see me all the time, so I do have an accountability between my online “life” and my real everyday life.

    1. @dragonfly

      I don’t know this story. I just found out about it, but I could probably answer you. The “threat” to the leadership wives was that by teaching the boys it undermined their authority of having power. J of J was shifting power to the boys and the mother hens would then lose power of influence. The boys are to be Betas in their female frame. If the boys got more Alpha, then what if that caught on? What if the men started doing that as well? J of J was a threat to them & they are to control Hypergamy the way they want it. Men can’t have that power of influence, and the threat must be destroyed.

      1. @benfromtexas – that makes sense also… the fear of them being a threat. Fear of loss of power, and jealousy of them gaining the power that they once had. Those two things right there, drive some of the most disgusting behavior.

        1. @dragonfly

          Yep. Women with power instinctively protect it for survival reasons. Even if it destroys the men in their lives. They could care less.

  18. Wtf? I have been married almost 30 years the last thing I want to read is a string of arguements with women and women bitching about cleaning houses….get back to some depressing divorce shit…..and successful banging….

  19. “They don’t tie you to a chair in the attic. They kill you to it.”

    Surely you people have seen the movie Gaslight? 1944, Ingrid Bergman? So many of your red pill tropes have to do with gas lighting not only women, but your very own selves.

    “Bad smells in the attic” and “fertilizing the rose bushes,” are phrases from Gaslight and Arsenic and Old Lace.

    1. Did you have something to contribute to the conversation IB, or were you just going to continue insulting my readers?

      It’s hard to tell which personality I’m dealing with online.

  20. If you mind… what do you mean by that? About the wives being against him

    I had forgotten that bit about the wives. Imagine if you will, Dragonfly, a church being led by the neck by the leaders wives. Most likely middle age women, post wall. They have much influence in the church through their husbands and in walks this man who leads the young man down a decidedly masculine path. A masculine path not defined by them.

    The anger is two fold. It is a usurpation of their power. Young men who define masculinity on their own do not care what these old women have to say. It is a severe loss of power.

    It is also a harsh reminder of their post wall situation. They would not only lose their influence over the young women to these men (not to mention other young men), it is a very harsh reminder of the loss of their youth and the truth of their own marriages. Being married to beta bucks white knights.

    Now, I don’t believe for most women (yet) that these are conscious thoughts. It is a feeling of fear and anger that they likely won’t think on too much. Their best solution is to get their husbands to kick out the interloper.

  21. Dat bitch don’t even recognize her own shit when we’ve been using it for like… two or three fucking weeks now.

    IB, I’ve changed my mind about you. You’re not a troll. You’re not mentally ill. You’re just a fucking idiot.

  22. @Anonymous Reader, it’s curious you keep mentioning Elspeth… I was looking for her blog the other day, and found that she has also deleted her blog, 🙁 . I don’t know exactly why, and I do know she is still around – she likes things and comments, I’ve seen that she reads and comments at Insanity’s blog and appears to agree with her (?).

    I do know that the same group of women who claim they started the manosphere (lol), the ones who hated Sunshine Mary and were constantly criticizing her blog and content, have also in the past, given Elspeth a very hard time. You probably haven’t seen it, but I’ve even seen nasty dialogue back and forth where they heavily criticized her blog, called her an “Attention Whore” (which is insane), and ridiculing/mocking her blog and content. I recently saw a comment from her that was maybe from the beginning of Summer on Feminine But Not Feminist blog, saying something to the effect that she was tired of constantly being criticized or held in suspicion of having the life that she wrote about (she said different words and I might be totally off in interpreting it so disclaimer here… that’s just what I got from it). She wanted to surround herself with other women who are happy in their marriage (and it sounded like get away from all these women who constantly criticize her and run her down for being happy in her marriage).

    It amazed me that someone that wonderful could receive so much harsh, unnecessary criticism of her blog and her happiness in her marriage. And it wasn’t just criticism… this was mocking and bashing kind of criticism. Her personality is not one that craves that kind of contention constantly… so it might have been easily for her to just delete and move on to better things in her life. I just don’t get it – why she received that much backlash for merely existing in the sphere. And it was only backlash from this certain group of drama seeking women. She was doing good… I’m sure lots of people (as you noted) miss her content and comments. But it looks as thought she’s fallen prey to the same thing the other ones did (to a greater or lesser degree),

  23. @ The Ronin

    “Where men find themselves now is in a position where they cannot be a Red Pill parent without facing push back from all angles, their wife, school, friends and ultimately the courts. With about half the boys now growing up in homes with no fathers there are no male role models to follow which completes the cycle…”

    All true, but Red Pill should make you impervious to the pushback. It is to be expected. I get zero pushback at home and I couldn’t care less what others think or say. The courts…now that’s a problem. This is why it’s important that a mate be in your frame. It doesn’t mean that you’ll never find yourself in front of some kind of judge at some point, but it heavily shifts the odds in your favor.

    Boys growing up in homes with no father is a complete disaster that we will be dealing with for generations to come. Their role models are women or heavily feminized males. They are influenced by a femcentric media or even worse, by criminals.

    Will we reach a tipping point? Will we get to FI maximum velocity? I’d like to think that with all of the gargantuan silliness that is unfolding right before our eyes, we will see the FI jump the shark. The manosphere is growing and for many it is feeding a hunger that they never even knew they had.

  24. @Stingray “Young men who define masculinity on their own do not care what these old women have to say. It is a severe loss of power.
    It is also a harsh reminder of their post wall situation. They would not only lose their influence over the young women to these men (not to mention other young men), it is a very harsh reminder of the loss of their youth and the truth of their own marriages.”

    So it was jealousy of the power these young men had in church, among other things… that does make sense, and I’ve seen that other places with older women who are extremely controlling.

  25. Drafonfly – “So it was jealousy of the power these young men had in church, among other things…”

    Envious of the increased power of the younger men vs. women generally. Jealously defending their own power, fearing that the older men (their husbands) will stop following their lead. Finally fearing the loss of influence they have on younger women who represent their social legacy.

  26. Anonymous Reader “I do recall that when J of J was called on the carpet by the church leadership a number of leader’s wives were essentially in on the deal.”

    Dragonfly
    If you mind… what do you mean by that? About the wives being against him (or were they really against the young women being turned on by the more masculine men)?

    IMO, based on my recollection, the wives of the leadership of the church were up in arms over J of J training Beta men in Game, because some of their daughters were now being attracted to those men. And IMNSHO those wives regarded their daughters as “too good for those young men”.

    Just my opinion, based on another man’s report. But I’ve seen similar things in my own life.

    1. @Rollo Tommasi
      “Nature experiments more freely with males than females. Thus we are the disposable sex and women the protected one.”
      https://m.soundcloud.com/hughlaurieblues/st-james-infirmary

      @kfg
      “But his wrong belief is largely extinct proof, because no matter how many times women demonstrate to him that he is wrong he defends his position by projecting the error onto the women.”

      My sister had my nephew by doing exactly this. Women never want full discloser and they never want to be reminded if hypergamy. They just want us to “get it” I used to defend my position by projecting onto women all the time. I was wrong.

      “This is already one of the foundational tenets of post modern, cultural Marxist thought, hence a foundational tenet of Patriarchy Theory.

      When science supports the narrative they will wield it as a weapon, but when it does not they will disqualify it. To them it’s just a rhetorical tool of the revolution, not something they believe in.”

      On point.

      “There is only one God, and his name is History.”

      @Guy
      “If a child faces only criticism, it may have lasting effects on their self esteem. If a child is never criticized, they may never grow up into an adult.”

      As much as my life is difficult this is observably true. Accomplishment and self worth are things that bulls you up for social pressures and life’s most ruthless challenges.

      @Atticus
      “It all seems so simple now.”
      This entire site is a framework for males in society. It’s a place of sheer brutal truth that doesn’t sit well with everything I’ve learned and was forced to witness destructive contradictions to.

      @Anonymous Reader
      Frame is to me the biological push back from a shit test.
      Frame=male
      Shit test=female
      1+1=2
      XX+XY=creation of human
      “If you are not actively rejecting feminism and all its cowshit tenets, you are passively accepting it.”
      Learned that the hard way.
      “The actions of people show what’s important to them, no matter what their words.”
      That’s gold especially concerning a farther and a son and how TIME expresses that importance.

      @benfromtexas
      “They also know that they can get more “control” over a lot of those men via having the church members help them out via peer pressure & male stupidity.”

      Seen this my whole life in a religion the god all the gory details while demanding the effects to be hiding until it was convenient to talk about them.

      “Yep. Women with power instinctively protect it for survival reasons. Even if it destroys the men in their lives. They could care less.”
      http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=RgH_OnrYlCk

      @Blaximus
      “Life. Is. Fucking. Short.”

      It is every moment is beautiful because of it. Especially when you die and know you did your best.

      “I will always, always be amazed at how a lot of men are so subservient to various organizations or social constructs.”

      Being red pill me as well. Not growing up however.

      “Boys growing up in homes with no father is a complete disaster that we will be dealing with for generations to come. Their role models are women or heavily feminized males. They are influenced by a femcentric media or even worse, by criminals.”

      You just describe my entire childhood.

      @Jeremy
      “It’s getting to a point where I’d rather call myself an engineer in public, just so I’m not associating myself with a field that is ever-more a servant of political winds rather than its own master.”
      Harsh yet true in the world where living in.

      “Yes. I was fortunate in college. I got associated with a physics professor who loved materials research. I’ve been to a few conferences. Where physics and chemistry meet is probably the most important area of human investigation at the moment. Though it receives absolutely no acclaim in the public eye, this field has been responsible for every single major human advance since the silicon diode. Our modern world would simply not exist without it.”

      Meant with a buddy and went over physics an chemistry this evening. Best day of my life.

      @Razorwire
      “that kind of condescending and marginalizing tone that is akin to tolerating the whims of a child, as opposed to the actual desires of a man (her “equal”, right?).”

      Weird how when in a church setting when I hear equal I leave. That place scared the hell out of me. I was told I had power while seining women show me power in hard brutal physically scary ways.

      @Caveclown
      “This was the same time period she made me grow my hair out like a chick and told me she wishes I had been a girl so that there was one less dick in the world.

      Amazing the stuff you don’t see being blue pill.”

      That happened a lot with me as well my mom had harsh conditions of obedience.

      “I almost doubled my (admittedly low) N count.

      Beta men would actually introduce me to their wives. The “new guy at church” game…

      Evil, but it works.”

      Ahahhahahhah

      @Sun Wukong
      “With or without the Bible, it’s all about your frame. Hypergamy doesn’t give a flying fuck about God.”

      I concur

      @Stingray
      That guy resembles parts of me in my church going days. Yet I got kicked out by choice.

  27. “It amazed me that someone that wonderful could receive so much harsh, unnecessary criticism of her blog and her happiness in her marriage. And it wasn’t just criticism… this was mocking and bashing kind of criticism…”

    Wowser, you’re quite the piece of work, Dragonfly. As if you don’t know why??? How many women have you yourself attacked, betrayed, stabbed in the back, threatened to call the cops on? How many women have you gone around bad mouthing, posting things about them on other blogs, warning people about “what she’s really like,” just like you did to me?

    Some of these men may be dumber than a box of rocks Dragonfly, but I am not.

  28. @dragonfly – Lol. My anger didn’t cloud my reasoning or understanding of what you said back then. Interesting that you took it to heart, as I figured you might have as I know you are serious about your faith and the red pill. It is interesting though that you couched your response I terms of your husbands approval. I mean, you can figure this out for yourself, right? You should know the difference between looking nice and dressing in a way attracts sexual attention without having to ask anyone.

    I am less angry for sure though. Being a selfish prick is much more enjoyable than being a “good man”. Being a sucker made me very angry. All the church talk here is getting boring… It’s 2015 and God died a long time ago folks.

  29. “warning people about “what she’s really like,” just like you did to me?”

    You are a fraud, IB, better get used to people pointing it out now and forever. Slandering me around the internet DID call for me to have to contact people I write for, that thought you were an authentic Christian, and didn’t understand the context and had no clue what you were doing or saying here. You tried to ruin my reputation.

    You need to apologize to your followers for misleading them, lying about other people accusing them of things they’ve never done, being a fake, and actually own up to your actions.

  30. And IB, maybe if you had actually done the RIGHT thing, and given people the context of my quote when they asked for it, the link to my comment, I would not have had to defend myself against your slander to people we mutually know.

    You REFUSED to give the context or even a link, because you KNEW it would out you and that what you were doing first to me was wrong.

  31. If you were a woman of integrity, you would give people the context they’re asking for, especially when they ask for a link. You knew who I wrote for, and that they would see your post, you knew exactly what you were doing. They asked for the context. They asked for a link. You told them you didn’t wan to give it and feigned being the victim. And then you get mad when I give them the links.

    And then deleting or spamming Rollo’s comments that revealed you weren’t what you said you were… how can you justify all this fraudulent behavior to yourself?

  32. “Slandering me around the internet DID call for me to have to contact people I write for, that thought you were an authentic Christian, and didn’t understand the context and had no clue what you were doing or saying here.”

    I never said a word to you until the third time you attacked me, Dragonfly, You operate from a scarcity mentality, constantly trying to compete with other women for what you perceive to be limited male approval. I call it the pretty princess syndrome and there can only be one. I’ve never given a crap for such little girls games, nor am I the least bit concerned about what people think of me. However, there are other women you have hurt deeply and I don’t think that is right. Some are no longer blogging because of your actions and I think that is incredibly cruel on your part.

  33. “I don’t acknowledge your authority Tomassi, I’m terribly sorry. I do my best to be polite to you because this is your blog, your books, your ideas. I can respect that.”

    Authority acknowledged!

  34. Links IB… there is no one I’ve caused to stop blogging. You are again, lying more about me.

    It’s ironic how you tried to ruin my reputation, and ended up ruining yours in the eyes of people who actually wanted to search out the truth. The people I write for immediately could see what had went down and warned me to temper my responses with grace (and duly noted… otherwise it will be used against me by frauds like you).

    Keep going… you are the one acting like a 13 year old playing games

  35. Methinks the Dragonfly doth protest too much! 😀

    Great entertainment here.

    IB has you all in thrall.

    Even Rollo is compelled to respond.

  36. All Frame has been lost…You will never get satisfaction or the response you want to achieve once a live or internet argument starts with a women. I have finally learned that, took 25 years or so and was reinforced with RM. It goes to show that Frame can be lost by anyone.

  37. “It’s ironic how you tried to ruin my reputation, and ended up ruining yours in the eyes of people who actually wanted to search out the truth…”

    I did no such thing. If your so called reputation has been harmed, it is entirely your own doing. As to links, those would be what several people have sent to me, your very own words saying ugly things about me to others, while pretending to my face that you were being kind to me. You actually posted to Biblical that you believed some people should secretly call the cops and report me. Astounding and pathetic, my dear. Also, been there and done that. There is noting new under the sun when it comes to the foolishness of girls.

    Something you apparently do not get here, I don’t give two figs about the drama of women, their endless shaming tactics, or my so called reputation. As my husband who always keeps me humble has so often quipped, “what reputation??” Amen, sweetheart.

  38. As much as I appreciate the kind words (and I sincerely do), I’m not particularly comfortable with being spoken for by unauthorized representatives.

    Yes, I deleted LITR. Not because I was run off, but because the blog was crap. The writing was terrible and there was too much pandering to a particular narrative.

    I’m not sure who these unnamed women are who supposedly ran me off. If I had to hazard a guess, it was one of those self same women who bothered to alert me that I was a topic of conversation here because I very rarely visit this site. Water, bridges, bygones, and all that good stuff. Makes life so much easier.

    I realized that carving out a choir to preach to on wordpress is not what Titus 2 means. Further, setting up said outfit in a way where men other than my husband are privy to the conversation while praising my wonderfulness is the antithesis of Titus 2. Better to be involved with women in flesh, and if it must be done online (and I still do occasionally) do it privately.

    I am a follower of no online personalities. My husband tells me what I think, 😉 .There is no one online with whom I agree on everything. Commenting is no indication of being a supporter or a groupie. It’s just a comment.

    GBFM is right on the money that there is nothing being said by the screeds of online commentators that hasn’t already been said before but with far more beauty, balance, and sanity. So I review books. I have not slinked off because some mean girls criticized me and hurt my feelings. That did not happen. Sometimes it really is just time to move on.

    There you go, Anonymous Reader. Elspeth has spoken.

    1. @Elspeth

      Titus 2?
      Is that where it says women shouldn’t be winos & gossip so they are role models for future women?

  39. There you go, Anonymous Reader. Elspeth has spoken.

    Good enough. Thanks for clearing all that up, Elspeth. I fully understand that what you were doing and likely are doing now is best done face to face, or mouth to ear, not in text on the web where anyone and everyone can see someone else’s mess. And it’s got to be easier on you to deal with, because if someone just wants to complain and never do better, you don’ t have to put up with it face to face. Not that I’m naming any names from that old blog, mind you…

    I’m glad that you haven’t given up, but rather are doing the same thing in a different way. Do carry on.

    Now, I disagree with GBFM, because I’ve been around the androsphere long enough to have seen some men go pretty far through the “anger – resignation – resolve – improvement” cycle. Yeah, the faces change and the anger & anguish stays the same in some blogs…but the faces do change. Men come into the androsphere dazed and confused, and over time they sort their stuff out, and in a lot of cases move on. That’s success, even if it looks like a treadmill some times.

    The same things are being said over and over again by different men or in some cases (Rollo, for example) by the same man to different men. I know a man who works in the E.R. and he rarely has a dull shift. He’s doing many of the same things every shift, but each case is a little bit or maybe a whole lot different. Maybe emergency medicine isn’t the best analogy, though. I got another. Heck, I got a zillion.

    I have some friends in the physical therapy world. They see pretty much the same problems over and over again. Their job is to cheerfully and competently get hurting people fixed up so they don’t hurt nearly as much, and to give those people the tools to keep from hurting themselves again. Things like pulled connective tissue, inflamed tendons, etc. caused by overstraining weak muscles, and a lot of other things etc. get fixed up. PT techniques work. Their stuff works, because it’s not about drugs or cutting, it’s about working with the body to heal itself. Anyway, to a casual observer, the therapists are doing the same stuff over and over, they aren’t doing anything that they haven’t done before. GBFM’s totally right, eh?

    No. Not even close.

    Because look closer: they are fixing up different people on different days. A stream of hurt people come into the therapists world, spend some amount of time there, and go back out better able to cope with life. So it’s not mindless repetition, as GBFM might claim (via his mindless repetitive spam, ironically) it’s mindful, careful endless variations on a theme. Each case is a little different, so each client gets a slightly customized variation on the standard physical therapy.

    They fix people up, and teach them how to protect themselves in the future. They do it over and over, because the supply of hurt people is effectively unlimited. By now my analogy should be totally, painfull obvious, but because GBFM may be lurking I must spell it completely out.

    This is what is now happening in at least parts of androsphere in my opinion. Some sites have become places where men can learn first of all what went wrong, second of all what can go right, and third of all how they can fix stuff by themselves and protect themselves in the future. Because the alternative is to leave other men in deep, unexplained pain, and men are problem solvers. That’s why the probability of suicide in a divorcing / divorced man is 4X higher than a “regular” man, because it’s one way to stop the buzzing.

    The androsphere has a lot of the same words over and over for good reason. It is repetition, but it ain’t mindless.

  40. IB more lies!!!!! “You actually posted to Biblical that you believed some people should secretly call the cops and report me. Astounding and pathetic, my dear. Also, been there and done that. ”

    What on earth??? I searched to see what I said to him, and found no such thing! Link (evidence) http://biblicalgenderroles.com/2015/09/16/4-steps-to-confronting-your-husbands-sexual-refusal/

    Again IB … you have no links, because you’re making all this sh-t up.

  41. Dragonfly, I don’t lie. You continued your nonsense on your very own blog, “..Then I tell rollo ur taking him for a ride… That he could probably get u for online harassment, and u go full psycho mode, cussing at me a.d acting like some drunk from hell…”

    Stop the drama and grow the hell up. I don’t play games.

  42. Dragonfly, I don’t lie.

    I’ve proven you’re a fraud over and over again, IB.

    1) Deleting comments on your blog so that your followers are ignorant of what you say over here to us.

    2)Constant false accusations.

    3)Refusal to give links even to third parties asking for them (because you want to keep them in the dark).

    4) And refusal to back ANY of your claims with links to prove what you’re saying about me.

    I don’t play games.

    Oh yea, so then your threats are real I suppose? … you like to threaten to make the men here a stench in your attic or fertilizer for your garden, and then play pretend with your commenters that you’re a nice Christian. Meanwhile they trust that everything you say is true.

    “I don’t lie Dragonfly”

    So. Hollow.

  43. “I’ve proven you’re a fraud over and over again, IB.”

    No love, you’ve proven you are. Which validates everything these men say about Christian women, which seems to excite you immensely.

    You need to learn that it’s not all about you, all of the time, especially if you’re going to serve Christ. It is not His will that leads you to run around bad mouthing other women, it is your own.

  44. You need to learn that it’s not all about you, all of the time

    Writing a post about me, constantly making false accusations against me… apparently it’s YOU who is thinking it’s all about me LOL.

    It is not His will that leads you to run around bad mouthing other women, it is your own.

    Oh so that is why you slandered me on your blog, refused to produce links to where my comment came from because it would expose you. You were doing HIS will? LOL

    From Vox Day (someone I never thought I’d ever be quoting…):

    SJWs always lie… always project onto others what they actually think or do… and always double down digging themselves further into the grave.

    You’re not only a fraud IB, you’re following the pattern of a SJW.

  45. And again… for cross-examining purposes…

    5) Answer my question of where I said to Biblical that someone needed to secretly call the cops on you?

    Why are you making these lies up?

    1. @Dragonfly

      I’d drop it. Go Alpha & walk away. This chick is weird by the way she talks. My specialty is Orthopedics, but I know not much about psychology, but she doesn’t make sense rationally. Walk away from her.

  46. It’s time that women start understanding their true value. Far too long the whole society has been brainwashed by giving women such hight credits, they do not deserve. It’s time for realism again and looking at our true nature. The idea of “construction” reality is nonsense (at least in the way we are told to). What a great conference! Great that more and more man are waking up and take the red pill!

    Oliver from http://freedompowerandwealth.com

  47. @ AR:

    Anyway, to a casual observer, the therapists are doing the same stuff over and over, they aren’t doing anything that they haven’t done before. GBFM’s totally right, eh?

    I didn’t say GBFM was “totally right”. I said he is right because he is. For example, I just reviewed a book written by a woman in 1937. The second paragraph of the book reads:

    Now, women forget all those things they don’t want to remember, and remember everything they don’t want to forget. The dream is the truth. Then they act and do things accordingly.

    She (a poor black woman whose parents were slaves) figured this out sans computers, sans television, sans therapists, and she wrote it down in 1937. Pause and think about that for a moment. You should read the plot of the book as I go into great detail. See what you see. Again, written in 1937. Nothing new under the sun, AR.

    What we have now is a education which only assigns reading which sanitizes human nature, a populace without the wherewithal to read anything deeper than a thimble, and a bunch of therapists, and the result is a lot of people shocked (shocked I say!) to realize that people can truly suck, and having ovaries and breasts doesn’t reduce the possibility of said human being behaving deplorably.

    So perhaps there is a need for all this hand holding, therapy and extra care. But that is because of family break down, community breakdown, and wide spread illiteracy bolstered by “special-snowflake-everyone-deserves-a-trophy-and-no-one-should-ever-experience-unhappiness” seasoned with “girls-are-made-of-sugar-and-spice-and-everything-nice”, and we suddenly need all these online ER docs.

    Been real, AR. I’m out.

  48. Elspeth
    I didn’t say GBFM was “totally right”. I said he is right because he is.

    GBFM routinely claims all we men need to do is read the classics. He’s a one-trick pony. More on that in a minute.

    For example, I just reviewed a book written by a woman in 1937. The second paragraph of the book reads:

    Now, women forget all those things they don’t want to remember, and remember everything they don’t want to forget. The dream is the truth. Then they act and do things accordingly.

    I’m familiar with the authoress, and the quote, plus her book is on my reading list, maybe I’ll pair it with Iceberg Slim’s autobio.

    She (a poor black woman whose parents were slaves) figured this out sans computers, sans television, sans therapists, and she wrote it down in 1937. Pause and think about that for a moment. You should read the plot of the book as I go into great detail. See what you see. Again, written in 1937. Nothing new under the sun, AR.

    No argument that men are men and women are women. But. A man who is contemplating suicide because of what the divorce industry is doing to him might just need something besides GBFM nattering about Homer.

    What we have now is a education which only assigns reading which sanitizes human nature, a populace without the wherewithal to read anything deeper than a thimble, and a bunch of therapists, and the result is a lot of people shocked (shocked I say!) to realize that people can truly suck, and having ovaries and breasts doesn’t reduce the possibility of said human being behaving deplorably.

    Elspeth, it is not just “education … that sanitizes human nature”, as you well know. It’s an active program of propaganda that lies to men. “Modern Family” doesn’t sanitize things, it does lie.

    40% of college men come from divorced families. Who do they turn to? The fathers that their mother likely kept from them? Teachers in K-12? College professors? The nattering betas and AMOG’s of the churches?

    So perhaps there is a need for all this hand holding, therapy and extra care. But that is because of family break down, community breakdown, and wide spread illiteracy bolstered by “special-snowflake-everyone-deserves-a-trophy-and-no-one-should-ever-experience-unhappiness” seasoned with “girls-are-made-of-sugar-and-spice-and-everything-nice”, and we suddenly need all these online ER docs.

    Not suddenly. If the androsphere had existed back in the 80’s, maybe VAWA would never have been rammed through into law. We didn’t get into this mess overnight, we won’t get out overnight.

    Yeah, we say the same things over and over. Because they have to be said, and because nobody else is saying them.

    Been real, AR. I’m out.

    Good of you to drop by, take care.

  49. So let’s say a man is lying on the sidewalk bleeding out through his trouser leg. A 2nd stage feminist might stop by mutter about how he deserves this, but at least she won’t have to waste her attic space on him. A 3rd stage feminist might stop by and remind him that if he’d opposted Teh Patriarchy he probably wouldn’t be bleeding, and besides women bleed every month so it’s only fair that his blood trail now has crossed the sidewalk and is heading into the gutter.

    Some Tradcon would probably urge him to man up and just stop bleeding. A church guy might stop and pray for the bleeding to stop. Of course then another church guy would stop and tell the first one how he’s praying all wrong, and then a third church guy would start arguing with the first two about some miniscule Bible fact, and then there’d be the Catholic guy going on about some patron saint of bleeding or other, then yet another church guy would start to AMOG the whole group, insisting that all of them were wrong and only HE knows how to read the Bible and pray the right way. GBFM would come along, to sit down and tell this man all about the history of medicine, starting with Hippocrates.

    What this man needs is someone like Badger or Deti or Rollo or Nova or Cail or Roissy or Blaximus. Someone who will get down on the ground, in the blood, and help him to stop the bleeding.

    Because the classics are fine, but the don’t stop the bleeding.
    Prayer may well be a good thing but it won’t stop the bleeding
    Being manly is a good thing but it won’t stop the bleeding

    A pressure bandage, or a tourniquet is what’s needed to stop the bleeding.

    Once the bleeding is stopped, then other means can be applied. Until the bleeding is stopped, the most urgent thing to do is stop the bleeding.

    First aid, then rehab and training, that’s what men need. First things first.

  50. @CaveClown

    “Her, “I heard you are really helping the guys in the men’s group. I have some ideas about the next meeting, wanna come over to my house and talk about it?”
    Me, “Only if you promise to make me cookies and coffee”
    Her, “ok”
    Me, “I didn’t hear a promise in there”
    Giggles. Her, “I promise…what kind of cookies do you like?”
    Coffee, bang, cookie…in that order. lol”

    This was a married chick that just blatantly invited you to her house to fuck? Holy shit.

  51. Rollo:

    I don’t know if this is something you’ve already addressed – I’m fairly new to the RP. I was talking with a female work friend a couple of months ago, and she asked me if I planned to have children. My response was that I liked the idea, but was afraid of having a son, as I simply have never felt qualified to raise a boy. She was shocked, as her partner (who was previously married to an abusive woman) mentioned that he always feared having to raise a son and actually had a nervous breakdown when his ex-wife gave birth to a boy.

    The background to this is that I’ve grown quite bitter over the years, in that my own father (who undoubtedly tried hard to do a good job) was quite the beta and didn’t really impart any helpful skills, knowledge or behaviours to me.

    I’m curious to know if you find this occurs in the men whom you consult (i.e. they fear having to raise a son).

  52. Pingback: Complementarity |
  53. So what’s your opinion on abusive men and men who claim to be red pill but are abusive? Is it ever ok to abandon your child because the woman decided to leave an abusive relationship? Is that what red pill supports?

Speak your mind

%d bloggers like this: