About three years ago I published a post called Remove the Man. That essay was prompted by Washington state Governor Jay Inslee signing on the final installment of a six-year effort to make language in the state’s copious laws gender-neutral.
“It brings us to modern times, to contemporary times, why should we have in statute anything that could be viewed as biased or stereotypical or reflecting any discrimination?”
That was 2013. I’d encourage readers to go over this article again as a frame of reference, but the gist of the idea then was revealing the efforts being made by the Feminine Imperative to remove men (literally and figuratively) not only from the common language but to remove men from defining masculinity altogether. I touched on this as well in Vulnerability. In seizing a monopoly on our very language women are free to redefine not just words but the ideas that those words connote.
“But if thought corrupts language, language can also corrupt thought.” – George Orwell, 1984
It’s an easy jump to associate this word-thought monopolization with political and social justice agendas, and I’m sure there are many examples of it in practice. And while I’ll leave that discussion to other blogs, I do think it’s important in the scope of this blog’s mandate to address how maleness is (and has been) decoupled from masculinity – certainly conventional masculinity – and the redefinition of the concept of masculinity has been surrendered to the feminine in a similar fashion that Hypergamy has been given free reign in society.
In other words, in a feminine-centric social order, men, by and large, have willingly acquiesced the defining power of how they will communicate to the sensibilities of women.
From Remove the Man:
Volumes have been written in the manopshere about how feminine-primary government assumes the masculine providership role in modern relationships, thus freeing an already unhindered hypergamy even more so, but the effort to remove the Man goes far beyond this obvious institution. The fundamental restructuring of gender reference in our very language – as illustrated by the Washington state legislature – attempts to, literally, remove the Man from the equation.
[…]the same social tool has been used by the Feminine Imperative for the past 60 years; inspire self-doubt in male-specific masculinity. By making compliance with the Feminine Imperative a qualification of masculinity, men assign the power to define masculinity to the Feminine Imperative.
[…]For the Feminine Imperative to sustain itself men can never be trusted with masculinity, solution: remove men from being the definers of masculinity and apportion them only enough authority of it that would benefit the Feminine Imperative as necessary.
Control the language and you control the concept. Control the concept, and what is acceptable and what is not about it, and you control the thought before it forms. As I’ve argued in the past, the end state of the Feminine Imperative’s consolidation of social control isn’t the complete elimination of masculinity, but rather that it conveniently conforms to the needs of the imperative as best suits it.
‘Masculinity’ when shame for a lack of performance in desired acts, protection and provisioning are necessary, ‘Misogyny’ when the threat of feminine-primary control is implied in men’s self-esteem, affirmation or reward are attributed to maleness.
For the greater part of men’s upbringing and socialization they are taught that a conventional masculine identity is in fact a fundamentally male weakness that only women have a unique ‘cure’ for. It’s a widely accepted manosphere fact that over the past 60 or so years, conventional masculinity has become a point of ridicule, an anachronism, and every media form from then to now has made a concerted effort to parody and disqualify that masculinity. Men are portrayed as buffoons for attempting to accomplish female-specific roles, but also as “ridiculous men” for playing the conventional ‘macho’ role of masculinity. In both instances, the problems their inadequate maleness creates are only solved by the application of uniquely female talents and intuition.
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.
Women who lack any living experience of the male condition have the calculated temerity to define for men what they should consider manhood – from a feminine-primary context. This is why men’s preconception of vulnerability being a sign of strength is fundamentally flawed. Their concept of vulnerability stems from a feminine pretext.
I’m beginning with this today because it’s necessary to underline the latent purposes behind the cutesy jingoisms the Feminine Imperative likes to use when it finds it necessary to reign in the ‘word-thought’ of men. One of these is the term “Mansplaining.”
I led off with the video of Senator Gallagher being called to the carpet for using ‘Mansplaining’ as her go-to rationale because it illustrates how the jingoism of the imperative is expected to work with men already cowed by a Blue Pill conditioning. She literally expects everyone present to understand what Mansplaining is.
Side note: I also find it ironic that the word “Mansplaining” is not flagged with a red underline by autocorrect as I type this. Womansplaining however, is. It’s kind of spooky how readily the language monopoly of the Feminine Imperative is integrated into our popular consciousness via communications technologies and social media. How quick? Have a look at how ‘Mansplaining’ trends on Google.
Even more ironic is the fact that the common definition of what constitutes ‘mansplaining’ is still up for grabs. According to Wikipedia:
Mansplaining covers a heterogeneous mix of mannerisms in which a speaker’s reduced respect for the stance of a listener, or a person being discussed, appears to have little reason behind it other than the speaker’s assumption that the listener or subject, being female, does not have the same capacity to understand as a man. It also covers situations in which it appears a person is using a conversation primarily for the purpose of self-aggrandizement — holding forth to a female listener, presumed to be less capable, in order to appear knowledgeable by comparison.
Solnit’s original essay went further, discussing the consequences of this gendered behavior and drawing attention to its effect in creating a conspiracy of silence and disempowerment. Solnit later published Men Explain Things To Me, a collection of seven essays on similar themes. Women, including professionals and experts, are routinely seen or treated as less credible than men, she wrote in the title essay, and their insights or even legal testimony are dismissed unless validated by a man. She argued that this was one symptom of a widespread phenomenon that “keeps women from speaking up and from being heard when they dare; that crushes young women into silence by indicating, the way harassment on the street does, that this is not their world. It trains us in self-doubt and self-limitation just as it exercises men’s unsupported overconfidence.”
Mansplaining differs somewhat from other forms of condescension in that it is specifically gender-related, rooted in a sexist assumption that a man will normally be more knowledgeable, or more capable of understanding, than a woman.
Google cuts to the meat of it for simplicity:
Others argue that any information a man relates in a male way of explaining it (i.e. a longwinded description of informational content). Julia Baird’s offering is particularly egregious, citing the amount of lines women get in proportion to those of men in the movies:
The problem is global and endemic across all media. Female characters speak lessin Disney films today than they used to — even princesses get a minority of the speaking lines in films in which they’re the principal: In the 2013 animated movie “Frozen,” for example, male characters get 59 percent of the lines. A quick search for best monologues in film or movies reveals that they are almost all male. If you took Princess Leia out of “Star Wars,” the total speaking time for female characters is 63 seconds out of the original trilogy’s 386 minutes.
This, of course, is in stark contrast to the studies that show women spend more time on their cell phones and text more often than men. Women also use emoticons more often than men, yet men have more variety in emoticon usage. That may seem trivial, but it’s an important aspect to consider in comparing men and women’s preferred intents of communication. Then there are the studies that show women actually do talk more than men – 13,000 words a day.
It’s also important to consider that women dominate the vast majority of social media, unless that social media happens to be something work related like LinkedIn. This is an important distinction to make when we consider how men and women prefer to communicate.
From The Medium is the Message:
We get frustrated because women communicate differently than we do. Women communicate covertly, men communicate overtly. Men convey information, women convey feeling. Men prioritize content, women prioritize context. One of the great obfuscations fostered by feminization in the last quarter-century is this expectation that women are every bit as rational and inclined to analytical problem solving as men. It’s result of an equalist mentality that misguides men into believing that women communicate no differently than men. That’s not to discount women as problem solvers in their own right, but it flies in the face how women set about a specifically feminine form of communication. Scientific study after study illustrating the natural capacity women have for exceptionally complex forms of communication (to the point of proving their neural pathways are wired differently) are proudly waved in by a feminized media as proof of women’s innate merits, yet as men, we’re expected to accept that she “means what she says, and she says what she means.” While more than a few women like to wear this as a badge of some kind of superiority, it doesn’t necessarily mean that what they communicate is more important, or how they communicate it is more efficient, just that they have a greater capacity to understand nuances of communication better than do men. One of the easiest illustrations of this generational gender switch is to observe the communication methods of the “strong” women the media portray in popular fiction today. How do we know she’s a strong woman? The first cue is she communicates in an overt, information centered, masculine manner.
It should come as no surprise to most men in the manosphere that men and women have different means and different priorities in communications. I published that post almost five years ago, but even then I knew that a social order founded on feminine primacy was going to standardize its own way of communicating as the correct way. The ostensible reasoning is that, from a desire for gender parity in society, men must abandon their blunt, artless and simplistic, yet overbearing and egotistic way of communication and adopt women’s more meaningful, emotive and insightful covert way.
Of course, it’s men who see this ruse for what it is and either refuse to capitulate or simply don’t realize they’re supposed to talk like women who set themselves apart from the throngs of Blue Pill men conditioned to identify with the female experience (as a means to become intimate with them). I forget where I read it, but some one said a PUA is a man who pretends he has what a woman pretends she does not want. I may not agree with that in whole, but it certainly describes the social condition that’s been established by the Feminine Imperative over the course of four generations.
When we’re presented with easily digestible terms like Mansplaining, no matter how loosely defined, and it filters into the popular consciousness and lexicon so rapidly, what we’re witnessing is the ease with which the Feminine Imperative expects men to cede to it.
When a woman attempts to cow a man by saying he’s Mansplaining something to her she’s reached a point at which she prefers that man, any man, speak to her as a woman would. In base terms, she shames him for not opting to communicate as a woman would from the outset. He should know better.
The fem-splaining cover story is that men feel some ego-centric need to over-explain something to a woman. For a Blue Pill conditioned man this may even be accurate in that they hope so doing will endear himself to a “rational reasonable” woman by helping her understand a concept he’s educated on. What we’re really looking at is a struggle to control which gender-communication will take precedence. In a feminine primary social order, men’s means of communicating is offensive to women by default. The presumption is that men are being condescending to women by expecting them to communicate as men do, and especially within the political and working spheres.
As women push their way into male spaces, part of assimilating those spaces is to re-standardize how men will appropriately communicate within them. The conflict comes from the expectation on the part of men that women will respect the nature of station she’s been empowered to and be able to weather criticism and reproach as men have always done in those stations. The fallacy is the equalist belief that women will be equal agents while holding the same roles as men; the reality is what we see in the video above today.
So the solution, as always, is to remove the man, remove the masculine influence, change the language and the definitions, to remake the nature of the engagement if not the actual real-world factors that make the game or the politic or the business what it is – to silence the man by telling him to “just shut the hell up” or be tarred with the epithet of being a ‘typical man’.
The content of the communication is of less importance to women than how that communication makes them feel. We see this in no uncertain terms the more women become part of the socio-political/business spheres. When a man needs to explain the importance of content to a woman who is only qualified for her station by virtue of her being female that exchange necessarily is uncomfortable for women. Solution: complain about the delivery of the content and silence the men who would deliver it.
“Side note: I also find it ironic that the word “Mansplaining” is not flagged with a red underline by autocorrect as I type this. Womansplaining however, is.”
That’s because the accepted word for “womansplaining” is “nagging”.
Next article in this series: Manspreading
Thanks Rollo for another insightful article.
[…] Mansplaining […]
[…] Mansplaining […]
The gist of the main characters job in 1984 is changing the words of articles to fit the new language. Why? It’s for the same ultimate reason we see so much focus on PC redefinition of language IOW the feminine imperative- if a man can’t express masculine thought for lack of words to express it ,he is de facto not a threat to the FI. Even if he knows the truth about game and women, the language itself won’t exist to express it. In a fashion, it’s a meta example of female hypergamy adapting to the male operative to reproduce.… Read more »
lol it’s super funny how if you just add ‘shit ALPHA males do’ before most of feminist gripes, things start to make sense. any time a guy opens his mouth to explicate and TRY to use logic, it = mansplaining, esp if it involves invalidating someone’s feelings. but i mean, you can imagine the gregarious alpha male just silencing someone with a bullshit explanation for EVERYTHING to me, that’s a fair charge of ‘mansplaining.’ a lot of the other ones are very hit/miss…mostly miss. the main problem in the FI, and with feminism, anti-racism, is that they just set their… Read more »
Globally there is a movement to make language “Gender neutral”—in English anyway. Wouldn’t work in other languages like Spanish, French, etc. But the debate seems useless. Who are these words and songs and ideas offending? http://globalnews.ca/news/2731475/gender-neutral-lyrics-in-o-canada-up-for-debate-in-house-of-commons/ But I find myself reverting to using these words just because they’ve become more commonly understood. But seeing the roles reversed or taken up by women is ruining the sport. They can’t do the man’s part well so as Rollo or someone here once put it: instead of being better women they’ve focused on being substandard men. The change in “gender neutral” language in… Read more »
Is it an average of 13000 more words used to convey absolutely no useful information? If a woman exists that can read a plan and visualize the outcome,I haven’t met her.I have to show them a picture.Women have half the money and all the pussy in the world. There was this joke going around the fem circle where they give men numbers and assign certain tasks so when they need a man for this task they just ask for someone with this number. Now angies list is more popular than the bbb.It is no longer a joke. I would like… Read more »
I’d like to order a couple thousand of that guy in the video please. Over here in this country, and into political office a.s.a.p.
Trump, supposedly you get the best people, supposedly you know how to hire as well as fire? This nation needs a lot of those men and fast. It’s never too early in the admin to snag good talent.
“and their insights or even legal testimony are dismissed unless validated by a man.”
testimony refers to testicles, as in, a man had to swear on his balls that he was telling the truth. women were never allowed to testify because they don’t have balls to lose.
plus it was recognized thousands of years ago that a woman’s version of the “truth” was clouded by emotion and could not be counted on for shit.
The FI language police are so effective I used to take their concerns to heart and honestly edit my interactions so as to be more respectful and deferential. I figured I hadn’t lived their lives and couldn’t appreciate the constant challenges of living in a man’s world. It took me years and years (and years) to grow out of it. I realized that (1) I had become the most sensitive, gentle man I knew, to no effect, and (2) the FI’s owning an issue didn’t result in gratitude for or happiness over that win, it just led them to find… Read more »
” . . . a counterfort walls necessity . . .”
Fudd’s First Law of Opposition.
The video above strikes me because of the fucking smugness displayed by the broad. ” It’s a word..” bullshit is quite a tell, as is the refusal to retract the offensive word. I must admit that my hackles were sufficiently raised during the discussion. Fortunately I have not yet encountered a woman using this terminology towards me or in my presence. I guess it’s just a matter of time. My company has an absurd amount of female execs. But as I learned in my ” Harassment training “, if a woman should call me anything other than a name that… Read more »
Until human resources laughs you away
Balls! said the queen,
If I had two
I’d be King
and the King just laughed
because he had two.
On a more serious note, I’ve lived in very masculine centric cultures.
There is very little braggadocio. The guys are quiet because their power is understood. Lots to be learned there.
Personally I cannot be bothered to snivel about the FI situation. Read the Laws of Power. Act accordingly.
“Fudd’s First Law of Opposition.” So why not a buttress? Because it would need to be part of an existing interior wall to save space and the only one in the right location is adjacent to the utility room,putting it there would restrict the duct work to half of the building. Could you bring us this material today? I am baking you guys some cookies> If we don’t get the material soon,we will go home and come back when you let us know it is here. I am going to bake some cookies. We don’t need cookies.We need material. Tears!… Read more »
Mansplaining – because somebody needs to.
~20 years ago it occurred to me one day to wonder if there was a male equivalent to the word “misogyny”. I thought I remembered seeing “misandry” somewhere (or maybe I just figured it out, from rudimentary knowledge of how such words are formed from Classical languages). I looked in a lot of dictionaries before I finally found it, in a 6″ thick Unabridged in the local Library. A interesting lesson in language.
“The fem-splaining cover story is that men feel some ego-centric need to over-explain something to a woman. For a Blue Pill conditioned man this may even be accurate in that they hope so doing will endear himself to a “rational reasonable” woman by helping her understand a concept he’s educated on.” I only explain shit when it directly affects me and the woman specifically asks why I want something done a certain way. if she doesn’t ask, as long as she’s doing it correctly, I don’t care if she understands why and I’m not going to waste my energy explaining… Read more »
@yareally “you’re going to end up networking a lot and may run into people who, because you gave them value, drop stuff like that “hey that job opening is available, tell them Bob sent you” or “oh I got a buddy out there who runs a shop, lemme get your number and I’ll hook you up”” I actually had something like a job offer. Son of the couple I met at wine shop told me about an open job position that wasn’t listed to the public. “The worst thing you could do is txt her again apologizing tho, just let… Read more »
Reading these articles, I am frequently reminded that we were warned twenty-two centuries ago: Women want total freedom, or rather – to call things by their names – total license. If you allow them to achieve complete equality with men, do you think they will be easier to live with? Not at all. Once they are your fellows, they will become your masters. — Marcus Porcius Cato (the Elder), 234-149 BCE [A Dead White Man] I actually had a little Latin in high school, 57 years ago; nowadays they’re lucky if they can even speak English on graduation. Not by… Read more »
Female version is “womoaning”. =)
est veritas in lingua mea
And so, gentlemen, feminism must be destroyed, right after Carthage.
Agreed. Whales before Pachyderms !!!
… shit, that’s backwards. Pachyderns before whales… damn.
Here we go again, Rollo mansplaining. He should unbanish Emily (return her from the unicorn field) so she can explain hypergamy to y’all in an inclusive way that makes everyone safe and equal
Mansplaining – Bitchblabber gossiped interpretation of logic.
Not sure how on topic this article is, but I just read it and thought I’d share it with y’all. Feel free to ‘comment’ below the article…
the accepted word for “womansplaining” is “nagging”.
“Bitching”, “moaning”, or “whining” will also do…. There are a lot of words to describe the complaints of women – because they do it so much…
Interesting article, but I wouldn’t want to mansplain to the
littlebig darlin’ how what she’s complaining about was caused by women complaining about what she’s complaining about.
One of my best friends is a woman I play in a band with as a duo, so I get to spend lots of time with her. I have used my Red Pill awareness to observe and understand where she’s at as a woman and it’s amazing, they really have no sense of logic on so many levels. Now this is a chick who is handy mechanically, but when she goes off an illogical female tangent I now know it’s best not to say anything, least of all ‘mansplain’ to her as it just makes her even more irrational. And… Read more »
“..when she goes off ON an illogical female tangent…”
Don’t worry! We won’t have to endure this type of bullshit much longer. Here in Europe the barbarians are amassing at the gate reading taxpayer funded guides on how to interact with European women and laughing. They know what women need and are preparing to “mansplain” it to bitches of both sexes with their cocks! Every society that becomes shaped by allowing the FI to implement unrestrained hypergamy will be crushed by more masculine models. Ironically giving females what they really want and need, men who will lead and dominate them. We have brought this on ourselves by giving away… Read more »
Great post Rollo – thank you. No surprises you’ve used that video as the perfect reference for this post. It also doesn’t surprise me regarding the google ‘mansplaining’ trends, especially by geographical location. This just proves to me what I already knew; that Australia (mainly Sydney & Melbourne) has become one of the worst places for 3rd wave feminism, SJW’s and language policing on the planet. Australian women and blue pill men completely lost their minds when Roosh attempted to organise the ROK tribal meetings here – in fact I think it was an Australian “journalist” that broke the story… Read more »
How about; “Womanstanding” – when a female hears what she wants to hear based on a combination of her mood, insecurities, level of perceived victim-hood and ego/hubris.
Just watched the video.
As much as she tried to insist on her accusation and refuse to reconsider her position, you can bet she sees this man in a different light now after he didn’t crumble under her bullshit.
Working in that type of PC environment must be hell, I wouldn’t last a day before HR would ensure my removal for crimes against the FI.
The male senator in the video may have overplayed being a victim of sexist a bit too much, but I think he managed to flip the script there and put the female senator in the defensive.
“Cuntsplaining” is the word I’d describe stuff like this.
The accusation of mansplaining is, of course, a perfect example of projection. It’s normally women who resort to consescending and patronizing language, usually directed at betas, and it’s women who come up with accusations like “you just don’t get it”, “you just can’t relate to my experience as a woman” etc.
Increasingly obvious that all this PC, feminism, diversity, anti-racist BS is just a ruse by bitter fug hags to force men to like their high status (artificially got) in a passive aggressive way. Pretty girls don’t need to as they have high status. Just look at how most female pols look like Miss Piggy, and how any halfway clever man can see the horrific consequences of their ridiculous PC beliefs.
We don’t need this word..we already have one in our language..it’s called condescending.
Women are attempting to remove themselves from the term condescending (while many of them with their entitled attitudes are just that) – and they are shooting for being the victim status (yet, again). We’ve seen and read this playbook before…it’s their “go to” play whenever they aren’t getting what they want – they shame.
It reminds me of how only white people (usually men) can only be racist.
on a side note: We’re seeing language changed to remove “man” from all positive aspects of our culture or anywhere a woman wants to be involved (i.e. fireman becoming firefighter).
But, if it’s something they want to label a man with, a negative label, then mansplaining is just fine with them. It’s another example of how they are sexist and hypocrites…all at the same time.
Woman: Stop mansplaining!!
Me: Stop womignoring.
Good point.Well taken.
You are right on the money. Feminism doesn’t understand that it can not win. It can only destroy us all. They will blindly push forward thinking they are making progress until they are left standing in a pile of ashes. My question to you is what does the individual man do? Convert to Islam?
Working in a larger IT organization, for a national company, I see a lot of communication difficulties between the sexes. Often I see women have to repeat what you said, then state back what they think you said, then state their understanding of it, all before absorbing it. This is especially frustrating in one of my counterparts here at the company who does all of that, then expects confirmation when her opinion or interpretation of the facts stated back in the third repetition is completely wrong. She becomes frustrated and uses her female initiative to storm out of the room… Read more »
If we are ever faced with an accusation of “mansplaining”, what are some good options?
Flip the script: using such a term is sexist (this was mostly what the Male senator did).
AM / ignore if you can pull it off…
Any good ideas for funny Agree/Disagree and Amplify?
OMG! This is so true: “the accepted word for “womansplaining” is “nagging”.
Thanks for mansplaining that to me, but I feeeelz used because of a lack of emotional context.
“PUA is a man who pretends he has what a woman pretends she does not want.”
I use different tactics if I get a sense that a woman displays that she is thinking I am mansplaining.
Mostly I ignore.
Sometimes I treat them like a 4 year old little girl.
I make sure to drop my voice another couple of Octaves and move closer.
I have no problem perceiving them as a clown if that’s what their behavior is indicating.
Attempt my ” removal ” at your own peril. 😀
” Solution: complain about the delivery of the content and silence the men who would deliver it.”
@becomingamaninmyforties Working in a larger IT organization, for a national company, I see a lot of communication difficulties between the sexes. Often I see women have to repeat what you said, then state back what they think you said, then state their understanding of it, all before absorbing it. This is especially frustrating in one of my counterparts here at the company who does all of that, then expects confirmation when her opinion or interpretation of the facts stated back in the third repetition is completely wrong. She becomes frustrated and uses her female initiative to storm out of the… Read more »
I do sign everything Rolo says in this Post, but i do have a Question. At the Office or in the remains of my still existing SC, i can, have and will overt, straight and speak what i mean. But most of my SC impoaded in the last year, because everyone is going to settle down (30+) and suddenly i was attacked (covert) in everything i was doing. Friends locked down by GFs, Freinds evious by my future Plans and Girlfriend tried to kill my ambitions and secure me as well. It was awful and i went Monk Mode and… Read more »
It would seem to me that all politically-motivated changes to language are ways of severing our ties to history.
What does SC stand for?
You can’t trust wikipedia… From urban dictionary: (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=mansplaining) Mansplaining Stating accurate, verifiable facts. Especially when these facts are inconvenient to the feminist worldview, or contradict feminist talking points. It is often used by a feminists who makes an incorrect claim in support of their narrative, and someone responds with something refuting the feminist’s claim, which she (usually it’s a she) cannot counter. By claiming “mansplaining,” she tries to pretend to have invalidated her opponents claim, even though she has not addressed it at all. Feminists: Women only make 77% of what men make for exactly the same work! Oh the… Read more »
My bad, SC = Social Circle
Serious question. When do men in aggregate just get tired of this shit? If every men unanimously said “enough” it would end tomorrow. What the hell happened to manhood in the west?
“If we are ever faced with an accusation of “mansplaining”, what are some good options? …..Any good ideas for funny Agree/Disagree and Amplify?” Perhaps…… “Hey, thanks for womansplalning your perception of the mansplaining to me! Good on ya lass. It may well be, thanks to you, that we are all learning a small thing or two here, as an aside, but now – enough with your interesting aside – best to get back to the issue at hand now – shall we?” Depending on how she responds, you can just keep having alot more fun with this until she got… Read more »
“because everyone is going to settle down (30+)”
You are in the wrong SC for plates, girl friends, and future mother(s) of your children if all the women are 30+. Avoid women in their 30s like the plague.
Do not go into monk/ghost mode as you climb towards your SMV peak. That’s for guys still getting used to having testosterone. Instead embrace all you are.
@ ITTO Good question. Unless there is some kind of mass movement in social media and popular culture at large, I no longer believe that there will be significant movement by men to reverse the course we are on. It would take effort that younger generation of men no longer are interested in, nor do they possess. This was the intent behind denigrating and outlawing masculinity in the first place. Men are beaten down, confused and unaware. Most will never take the medicine required for cure. Many men are just checking out. Only those that want to be saved, can… Read more »
“It would take effort that younger generation of men no longer are interested in, nor do they possess.”
This is a good summary of what I was trying to ask. Is there no innate spark in men? Are we really so weak that the socialization you talk about can actually win out? It would appear the answer is yes.
It’s easy to look at the millennial generation and lose hope, but that’s just due to a lack of perspective.
Look at the kids currently in grade school – then abandon all hope. When they hit their late teens they’re going to make the millennials look like Sgt. Fucking Rock.
There is an innate spark in the majority of men/boys.
Currently society ridicules, shames and medicates it out of them.
In doing some research lately about happiness, even though in an incorrect frame, I read about remembering when you were happy. So I thought back and I remember being a pre-teen, riding bikes and digging through the woods and creeks, exploring and in general, getting dirty. Is our destiny then, since that has disappeared for today’s kids, that they will never have any ‘boys will be boys’ experiences, that they will have no purely exploratory frame to reference? What I mean is, will they be missing the spark of discovery that would lead them to Alpha some day? Personally, those… Read more »
great OP… and the ‘shaming’ lines up with that evo-psych ‘shame reflex’ paper i linked… the goal of the FI is to ‘devalue’ men in-group by de-valuing their group contribution (content-based language… which is only responsible for the creation/maintenance of western civ…lol), and so should trigger a shame reflex… which looks like supplication/beta behavior…as a method to prevent the group from ‘kicking him out’ (bc he’ll die without the group)… and that’s what we see in situ… and i think most men (at least here at TRM/in the manosphere generally, but even a lot of my BP friends in meat… Read more »
” Solnit’s original essay went further, discussing the consequences of this gendered behavior and drawing attention to its effect in creating aconspiracy of silence and disempowerment.”
Yes, male M.P.O is the rule….
@redlight Thanks for you feedback. Monk Mode: Was really necessary, because Burnout/PTBS, because some heavy Cluster-B-Traits with Ex GF -> needed to get myself straight and did not want to start the next uphill battle aka LTR. SMV peak: gettin there. You know, …dont wish it would be easier… Social Circle: Lesson learned regardin sunk cost and wrong Social Circle…nearly killed me. For real. — On Topic: Central Europe (not Eastern) shows from my perspective serious trends to Wording like Rolo mentioned in this post (in regards to the joe avarage). Quality Women on Decline….we do follow the US-Lead. The… Read more »
I think it heavaly depends on the influence of the Male Part in a family. If he is Beta and is a vehicle for third Wave Fem BS, the Boys will have a hard time.
becomingamaninmyforties – you said: “Personally, those times are the most Alpha I can remember in my life… but no one will pay me to do that… but that is my goal so far, to find what makes me feel like that invincible kid who can do anything again…. ” Hey – for whatever it’s worth, I think they way you are framing it is key. It really is that simple. Do what makes you happy. Men and boys are naturally penetrative, right from the get go of our lives here …… and that masculine drive can find it’s fulfillment in… Read more »
A charge of mansplaining is a Shit Test, nothing more. You can see the Senatorette doesn’t get angry. The old hag was tingling so hard I am surprised she didn’t start diddling herself right at the table. You can bet her husband (or whatever Chad she is fucking right now) got a demand for a good pounding that night. >>>>>”In the 2013 animated movie “Frozen,” for example, male characters get 59 percent of the lines. A quick search for best monologues in film or movies reveals that they are almost all male. If you took Princess Leia out of “Star… Read more »
that Peter Tunney artist that Sentient linked to in the last thread seems to be simply doing that very thing ….. aligning his life with the purity of his first masculine inspirations …. to explore and penetrate the world around him. It was interesting to see that in that short vid, the women were in his thrall about this about him ….. women love this stuff about guys. Exactly The Man… the three ultimate qualities of “alpha” are being dynamic, passionate and authentic. Once the Alpha Triad is reached… you create enough gravitational pull to bring women (and beta’s) naturally… Read more »
” I think that placing a bet on humanity-fail is a very long shot . . .”
To riff off the great philosopher Linus van Pelt, I have no great concerns about the fate of humanity, it’s people I’m worried about.
Solnit’s original essay had the example of some dude who was explaining the content of her own book back to her.
Also the “if you took Princes Leia out” thing. Point in fact: Princes Leia was in the movie. How do the numbers work if you take Luke out? Stupid.
Sentient – yes – this “dynamic, passionate and authentic” as the qualities of “alpha” is really, really good. I first saw you say that over at CH close to a year ago and that impressed me alot at the time, and I still think your way of putting it is pointing to something really profound. For me, absorbing a concept takes better if I can make a narrative out of it, like a story, in which maybe I can identify as one of the characters in the story. That way I get to see all to see all the moving… Read more »
@bluepillprof “A charge of mansplaining is a Shit Test, nothing more” in wat context? i mean, look, if you got a natural alpha who’s pulling frame control bullshit when they’re all out there to build a bridge….it’s actually a problem. or if he’s trying to do the same thing when actual human rights violations are occurring, the same. and in the context of more ‘beta’ males trying to ‘logically’ explain x or y, half the time the logical explanation is a model that doesn’t really fit well with reality, and the beta has no clue about it because he has… Read more »
Welp wordpress ate my comment. Only had time for one longass comment and I haven’t learned to type them elsewhere first yet soooo Responded to a lot of people from the last thread. I’ll give a few of you the cliff notes then I gotta vanish again. @Strongtek (lol) – you have a lot of good thoughts. You’re DONE with that part. More aren’t gonna help you. I’ve learned the past year that state is more important than proper thoughts or even (sometimes) hard work. Work on making your STATE be more consistently the sort that gets stuff done. The… Read more »
@ becomingamaninmyforties “Is our destiny then, since that has disappeared for today’s kids, that they will never have any ‘boys will be boys’ experiences, that they will have no purely exploratory frame to reference? What I mean is, will they be missing the spark of discovery that would lead them to Alpha some day?” I remember crawling through drainage pipes as a kid. You’d go into one, crawl past a bunch of creepy crawlers then end up someplace COMPLETELY different. It was like going through a magic portal. Dangerous shit but that’s the point. See, stuff like this is why… Read more »
@all And I think that’s a really good thing to emphasize to any keyboard jockeys or lurkers — just go out. You CAN learn a lot from just reading, but unless you actually have PERSONAL experiences from THE FIELD of things like AMOGing or going for numbers or escalating you won’t truly get it. But when you read something and go “Oh, shit, that’s how I would solve x problem” its etched in your mind and you are good to go. So still read up and do whatever it takes you to get started, but you really have to just… Read more »
@Sentient The problem most guys have though is the Triad is amoral… and I suspect HABD would say the reason being is guys looking to look to link “good” outcomes with “good” behaviors is the FI being sneaky… that’s part of it…lol… but the real issue is how the FI actually IS sneaky… bc without that understanding you can’t fight back… and that (and i’m pretty sure Rollo has covered this already but i’m too lazy to look it up…lol) is that guys are logical… and overt communicators (bc that’s the only way to work together to bring down that… Read more »
Yes this morality thing is tricky. I don’t really know what to make of it myself. What people call morality is relative, that much is clear. I could be wrong but I think you might be able to make a case for what people call morality actually being something akin to what the good of the species is, which perhaps is somehow encoded in the consensus, and said consensus of course is made up of the differing gendered motivations and focuses, and or course there is also big differences person to person within gender as well wrt what each person… Read more »
Ya Blax – it be me – but I don’t want to cause a bunch of discord no more. I like coming here to talk with you guys every once in awhile. And I’m still trying to figure some shit out.
” – it be me – ”
Well that last comment was pretty much a fingerprint.
“Is there some relatively unbiased studies around this?”
Wrong field. Mathematics – more specifically, game theory.
Who’s the man then?
P.S.; I’ve watched enough Kevin MacDonald videos now to get beyond the white power aspects and deeper into what he’s talking about.
And most of the time when he says “egalitarian” what he means is “meritocratic.”
” if you’ve never heard chicks say witty, insightful, introspective, etc. things then you haven’t gone out enough. ”
Agreed, but it’s getting harder and harder to find these chicks… I imagine.
And if a guy is always looking for the witty, insightful, introspective hb9 – whew!! #Goodluckwitdatshit.
” women are hypergamous and are not unconditional lovers and yes, this means that they are not pretty little angels. ”
The ultimate troof every man needs to grasp from the rip.
Not caught up with this thread or the end of the previous one yet but found my own name on a search (been too busy going out – unfortunately, just a couple more Provider hunting online chicks dates – FRs pending..)
@Forge the Sky: Haha I have a big night scheduled for Sat night provided my wings keep their promise to turn up! Loads of cold approaches planned.
kfg – the game theory – I don’t think it currently has the power to roll up to the meta-upon-meta organizational levels, (that all contain intricate feedback loops) of human society, as of yet – does it? (not sure – I could be wrong), but I believe game theory does show that under some circumstances cooperative behaviors do provide for an exponentially ascending benefit for all, via synergies. What I am instead wondering is – well what is this morality thing? I think it is a much bigger question than game theory can answer as of now. Since there seems… Read more »
Computer modelling has changed everything. Even evolution can be modelled now and made a game element.
“– well what is this morality thing?”
A species level survival strategy.
“I’m really uncertain how to proceed here on this topic man.”
The general rule is: Be fun, Add value and always observe Law #4.
Or you might get banned from an un-moderated forum.
@blax “Agreed, but it’s getting harder and harder to find these chicks… I imagine.” lol nah dude most chicks are just getting their asses kissed 24/7 so it’s like ‘why would i even waste any of my wit/time/higher thought on YOU?’ ‘The ultimate troof every man needs to grasp from the rip’ the manosphere grasps it and takes it way too far and all of this talk about how irrational women are also misses the point women can and will be rational WHEN THEY NEED to be most of the time, thanks to HUGE SMV power imbalances, it’s a fucking… Read more »
Shit, I just got a comment eaten by WordPress also. I did save it by composing it on Microsoft Wordpad first.
I’d be interested in seeing Forge the Sky’s earlier post in moderation because of his excellent writing skills and style.
As for my comment it could be revised a fourth time, so if it doesn’t get released, there is alway that.
@Culum Here’s my recent FR. One of the few times I went out with a girl and didn’t bang her that night. Part of the reason was that I didn’t sexualize it early over text. She’s HB7, cute, met her at a party and number closed her. When we met up she was looking hot: short skirt, heels. We ordered drinks and started bantering. For her it was a mountain of shit tests: she was keen to know how old I am, where I work, and more personal details. I held back and teased her. She was pushing back saying… Read more »
kfg – OK thanks for the input. As per your input, I just took a look at the wikipedia article “Evolutionary game theory”, and I can see that your hypothesis (which is also the hypothesis I was putting forth above), hypothesis: human morality = a species level survival strategy is in fact implied as possible and maybe even probable, by way of the EGT math as it stand now. But I don’t think we know much about the actual dynamical operation of human morality as of yet (but once again I could be wrong – and if you know otherwise… Read more »
Mansplaining is as sinister in intent as affirmative consent laws, it just isn’t as potent…yet. Affirmative consent is about giving women power and instilling fear to act in men. Mansplaining is the same, except it is about instilling fear to speak and think, in men. The two together give women total power to define and un-define what thoughts and behaviors are acceptable or deviant. Women have always had this power to a degree, but it was subtle and shame based. Now it is overt and based in laws. Fear and power. First men will cower and apologize. Then they will… Read more »
@walawala at 6:26 pm You neglected to mention how old she was. What was her station in life and what schedule of mating she was following. “She wanted to invite her friend out later on. I told her that she couldn’t come. I left it there. She said her friend was “hot”. Later the friend didn’t show up.” Simple shit test to test your mettle? How do you feel about how you passed that test of her recruiting a HB friend. Your date was attempting to keep frame by bringing artillery (pre-selection) and trying to get you to flinch to… Read more »