Why We Fight

“Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor.” – Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers

In the almost nine years of of this blog I have only hit upon violence on a couple of occasions. I’ve only been in a physical altercation a handful of times in my life. And by that I mean real fights; the kind of violence that requires you to physically harm another person. I’ve been in lots of sparring fights and martial arts tournaments, mostly when I was in my 20s and 30s. While I’ve been hurt and caused hurt to my opponents, I can appreciate that there is a qualified difference between competitive sport fighting and real violence. The one mutual interest my younger brother and I had when we were growing up was beating the shit out of each other. By the time I got to high school I was no stranger to taking a fist to the chops or various headlocks and “wrassling” holds.

Most of the times I’ve been in real fights were in high school. It’s interesting just how Darwinistic our teenage years really are –we’re just too immature to appreciate it then. Unless you grow up in a sheltered family, learning about sex and violence is usually part of our adolescent experiences. After high school I got into a few fights when I was playing gigs in the late 80s-90s Hollywood scene. Depending on where we played and who we happened to piss off, those kind of fights were something you had to keep in the back of your head as being a possibility. Usually you had friends or bandmates who had your back, but not always.

Of those scuffles most of them were versus a drunk guy who presumed he could kick my ass, or my bandmate’s ass, because, well, we weren’t exactly the most physically imposing guys to be honest. And a lot of those fights were initiated in one of two ways; the guy was fed up with guys like us because the women (usually in some sexy outfit) preferred to fuck guys like us – or, the fight was provoked by a woman and the guys fighting were coming to blows over who’d fucked whose girlfriend. Often enough it was the girl herself who’d later admit she “made a mistake” and one or the other found out.

All of that was back in the late 80s and early 90s. Things have definitely changed with respect to how violence is initiated, normalized and respected (or delegitimized) today, but the basis of that violence will never change. Violence is part of human nature. We do ourselves no favors in denying this simple fact. I can remember in 2001-02 when I did casino promotions for this new ‘sport’ called King of the Cage. It was the forerunner for today’s MMA fighting, but back then it wasn’t as socially acceptable as it is now. I believe Nevada was one of the only states that could legally host such an event. The outcry then was that it was an underground ‘bloodsport’ and legitimizing it as a true sport was the first step towards degenerate social savagery. Or something like that. People used to be appalled by it.

Now MMA fighting is something I’ve seen some Evangelical Christian churches use as a draw to get their men to attend a ‘masculine revival’ weekend. Warriors for Jesus with a ‘saved’ MMA fighter speaking about using his sport as a ministry. I think there’s a primal, evolved side of men’s nature that makes violence attractive. And like love and respect, violence is another aspect of the human experience where men and women’s approach and understanding is innately different.

Boys and men are innately drawn to competition, combat and violence. We make ‘guns’ out of our fingers. We craft weapons from scraps we find in the garage to defeat our ‘foes’. We love our plastic army men and G.I. Joes, our cowboys & indians, and we play ‘war’ with our friends. Our video games from the first coin operated arcades to our immersive virtual reality consoles are about combat and strategy. Even sports have been called a “proxy for war”. Team sports are a facsimile of tribal competition. Human males’ physiology, by and large, evolved for combat and physical stresses. I realize that might be hard to believe by today’s standard of masculinity, but the evidence is there.

The male Burden of Performance began with a need for testing that performance against our primal environments and some very real opponents. I have read some interesting research that suggests human beings are innately risk averse. Most humans would rather avoid conflict than voluntarily engage in a fight that they could very well lose, if not die from. The logic is that humans’ success as a species is at least partly due to our evolved sense of caution for life and limb. If you cooperate and play it safe it’s likely your risk-averse genes would propagate into future generations.

Of course the flip side to this can summed up in an old Latin proverb,…

Fortune Favors the Bold

There’s also research that shows men experience a spike in testosterone levels after defeating a rival in combat, and/or killing their opponent. This doesn’t even have to be actual violence; some studies show men experience a similar spike when their sports teams win a significant game. So, while in some instances avoiding conflict and backing down from a dangerous engagement has survival benefits, risk taking and enacting one’s will by force also has some reproductive benefits. 

For as much as they rail to the contrary, women do have an affinity for violent men. Women get turned on by men with a capacity for violence. Modern psychology attempts to pathologize this arousal prompted by dangerous men (hybristophilia), but, by order of degree, women evolved to select for men with at least the perceived capacity to do harm to another man. I would speculate that this attraction stems from women’s evolved need to seek security and protection from men, and sympathetically, men evolved an innate protectionist aspect to our own evolved firmware. Competing with rival men for sexual access, sometimes violently, is part of our ancestral programming. As we developed into a more ‘civilized’ species that competition shifted to contests of performance between men, but the old violent firmware is still part of humans’ starting package.

Let’s You and Him Fight

On Twitter and a few past livestreams, I’ve pointed out that women today have developed a false sense of security with respect to the potential of real violence. This is equally a result of the masculinization of women as it is our accommodating the Feminine Imperative in mainstream cultures. In the age of social media, as the globalization of women’s entitlements have spread, so too has women’s entitlement to personal safety. 

One very real downside to the Fempowerment narrative is that it has convinced women that the fantasy of the “strong female” is something they can aspire to personally. This is what I’ve called the Warrior Princess fallacy: Over the course of generations our feminine-primary social order has convinced women that they can realize the same warrior role as men. Via storytelling in various media the ideal that physical differences in men and women are relative, and women can be “just as tough and dangerous as men” is pervasive. This is a dangerous precedent, and one that is a direct result of old order beliefs in, and popularization of, Blank Slate equals. 

In the idealized fantasy society of equalism, masculinized Amazon Warrior Princesses can give as good as they get from any man. But in the real world, men evolved for physical performance, competition and combat; women evolved to endure the rigors of childbearing and nurturing. And as the introduction of transgendered biological males into biologically female sports divisions is proving, the realities of our physical differences is unavoidable.

However, the idea that women are always entitled to physical protection in the new order presents some interesting dichotomies. Women mix an entitlement to personal safety with an expectation of clichéd female bravado. Remember, this all happens in the context of women’s innate solipsism; add a bit of alcohol and the social posturing of a group of women all vying for attention on a Friday night and you begin to see the volatile potential. Today’s women have grown accustomed to initiating or escalating inherently unsafe circumstances for themselves – to say nothing of the men they’ll involve.

Women have a limbic understanding that, for the most part, they can be violent with relative impunity. If a male ever strikes a female, even in self-defense, she can be assured that a mob of random males, following their evolved protectionist directive, will spontaneously form to beat the shit out of the guy. In today’s Blue Pill engineered society, even the most passive male waits for an opportunity to prove his quality to womankind by becoming ‘justifiably’ violent in defense of a woman. It’s what most men are conditioned for for most of their lives.

“Sorry babe, I don’t know what came over me. I just can’t abide by any man assaulting a woman!”

The old, vestigial, evolved response of violence is something our male hindbrains know will trigger ‘gina tingles in women. The primal ideal of the nobleman with the capacity to unleash justifiable fisticuffs is Blue Pill conditioned psychological red meat. That the woman provoked or escalated an unsafe situation isn’t even an afterthought – the guy raised a hand to a woman, opportunities to prove a legitimate capacity for violence are rare for low SMV men.

As such, women presume safety. Women will raise hell about feeling unsafe around men. They’ll bleat about fantasies of enforcing a ‘male curfew’ (only for undesirable Betas of course) out of safety concerns. We’ll hire security staff to walk a woman across a dark parking lot and install emergency call boxes on college campuses. But in social situations (particularly when drinking) will escalate inherently unsafe situations knowing that men will play by the old order rules.

There is an old PUA maxim that picked up on women’s penchant to provoke men to violence. It was called the Lets You and Him Fight dynamic. Whether women are aware of this and deliberately provoking a fight between men, or, their subconscious motivates the conflict is a debate that’s been around for a while. But the LYHF dynamic is a shit test women will use in assessing a man’s Alpha status. Women need indignation as it is, but in this dynamic is a woman’s hindbrain wants a visceral response from a man.

I first became aware of the LYHF shit test when a friend had told me how annoyed he was by his girlfriend starting fights with guys that she expected him to finish. She would honk the car horn from the passenger seat if someone had even slightly cut them off in traffic. Even flip off other drivers if the opportunity presented itself. She would start fights with other women which would provoke their boyfriends to step in on their behalf and he was tacitly expected to kick their ass to defend her provoking them. “What are you a pussy? Go beat his ass!”

I’ve tackled the subject of shit tests numerous times on this blog so I won’t belabor them here, but this test plays upon some very deep, evolved, intersexual and intersocial dynamics. On some level of consciousness a woman wants to know her man can get violent. Most Blue Pill men find that suggestion appalling. We’re supposed to be “above all of that”, right? For the most part I’m sure the majority of men would rather not be put into a position of taking a fist to the face. As such we build social conventions and rationales around not engaging physically in a real sense. So, to consider a woman might desire a man with a predilection for violence prompts them to qualify that woman for his own safety.

Intrasexual Competition

“Any group is weaker than a man alone unless they are perfectly trained to work together.” – Robert Heinlein, Starship Troopers

When a group (tribe) of primates reaches a certain number of members the potential for ‘hostile takeover’ by lesser males becomes almost a certainty. Beta male primates form coalitions to overthrow an existing Alpha leader. Most dominant Alphas instinctively cull this coalition building to ensure their position. A smackdown, abuse, punishment for anything that looks like a challenge to his position from lesser male troop members is something Alphas do to infrequently teaming up on him. Partially this is a display of dominance (social proof reinforces it), but it is also a curbing function.

Eventually the Alpha becomes weaker and less effective at enforcing his dominance, and the Betas grow in number until such time that they can band together and depose him. Then the cycle repeats with the most dominant male among them assuming the Alpha role. He gets access to the most fertile females, kills off his rivals’ offspring (which prompts the females into estrus) and reproduces for as long as he’s able to remain in that position.

And yes, I’m aware of the theory that pro-social Alphas that build loyalty-exchanges among other males, and display a willingness to share resources with females, tend to make for better ‘leaders’ within a tribe. What most of that research conveniently leaves out is the element of envy and jealousy that develops (even among primates) in the Beta male population until the sentiment reaches a point of challenge. Even the good-guy, prosocial Alpha has to watch his back.

As you might guess, many of these behaviors are paralleled in humans. Alpha displays of violence, even if by proxy, are ‘sexy’, but mostly we manifest male prowess in social displays. Athletics, resource acquisition, peacocking, conspicuous consumption, really any costly signaling of high sexual market value. To compete with these Alpha displays, lesser males must either: 

  • Increase their own value, and learn to display it effectively, 
  • Find ways to convince other men, (coalition building) and reproductively viable women, that those displays are worthless, while propping up his own displays as more valuable.

In the age of social media and mass communication Beta males are constantly reminded of their lesser positions. There’s no respite. Even the most well-meaning, prosocial Alpha’s presence is a reminder of Beta male inadequacies. High school bullies and ‘Jocks vs. Nerds’ is a constant theme across human cultures because the evolved human male experience is always one of competition and a Burden of Performance. To be male is to compete, and as such there will be winners and losers.

Deposing, or disqualifying, an Alpha – much in the same way primates do – is also a constant theme in human cultures. Beta males enacting ‘justice’ on an ‘evil’ Alpha or an Alpha proxy has always been a teenage fantasy for boys. Spiderman, Captain America, the wimp who incredibly transforms into a powerful Alpha himself will prove to the world how that Alpha power should be ethically used. The geek who gets the girl because she magically sees his superior quality that aligns with the terms he’s establishing as valuable is also a fantasy. All of these cast the Alpha as ‘oppressor’.

“O, it is excellent to have a giant’s strength, but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant.” – Shakespeare, Measure for Measure

Why is using strength, displaying value and exercising will an act of ’tyranny’? Why is restraint of power a moral imperative? How did we come to disqualifying value displays? I’ve seen a few talks by Jordan Peterson where he promotes the idea that a real man is a dangerous one who possesses the capacity for violence and oppression, but has the strength of will not to use it. This then begs the question, how does anyone know a man even possesses this capacity if he’s not to display it? Concealing strength is awesome, but it is, by definition, indistinguishable from weakness. No one knows if you’re a black belt or a white belt until you get in the ring and fight. However, the moral consensus is that it’s unacceptable for men to display value.

This then is the global, social coalition that was formed by the majority of lesser men. To continually disqualify the merits of superior men is individually taxing and makes lesser men look worse for doing so. But build a social order around men self-policing their displays of value; then you have higher value men doing the heavy lifting for lesser men. You may be powerful, but the social mores of the time (created to serve the majority of lesser men) will tell you to conceal it. In fact, they’ll build social conventions to convince the whole of men that displaying vulnerability, not strength, is a display of value.

Most of what I’m digging at here is old order thinking. Socially enforced monogamy has primarily served the greatest number of Beta men. And while it’s definitely been a stabilizing factor for civilization, I can’t ignore that the social expectation of monogamy is also the result of society-wide coalition building among lesser men to ensure that greater men wouldn’t out-breed them. Most male-specific social conventions are designed to control men’s innate directives. Their latent purpose is to teach rules that limit displays and usage of strength.

And in the new order we see this old order intersexual competition struggle to keep pace with a global sexual marketplace that centers on women’s innate mating strategies reseting context of intersexual dynamics. Open Hypergamy incentivizes men’s overt displays of higher value – and now on a worldwide scale. In response, men form online coalitions to disqualify those displays in an attempt to devalue the strengths of men they couldn’t hope to compete with in the old order. Meanwhile, women in the global sexual marketplace continue to reward men who display genuine value according to their mating strategy’s needs. 

Published by Rollo Tomassi

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

205 comments on “Why We Fight

  1. Frans de Waal measured stress in male primate troops. He found that the Alpha experienced the same stress levels as the lowest males in the social hierarchy, but for different a little bit different reasons. The Alpha must always being watching his back.

  2. It’s easy enough to look dangerous if you are confident, have experience fighting, and lift heavy. Looking the part and keeping your cool gets you most of the way.

  3. Despite this innate need for violence you’ll still see fighters embrace after beating the crap out of each other.

  4. Starship Troopers is the (un)official story/movie of the Propertarians. Violence (and threats of violence) dictate culture even down to fundamental linguistics. The “Village” campaigns endlessly for a cessation of violence towards all people (excluding white men) or else be subject to “enforcement” by the State.

  5. I’m glad that the author of this article referenced “Starship Troopers”. This story is interesting because the book is completely different from the movie. Technically, that’s not supposed to happen. In the book, there is support for a military style government. It was the idea that male soldiers, with their worldly experience, were uniquely qualified to make tough decisions. For that, Heinlein was labeled a Fascist. In the movie, the argument was made that there should be no distinction between men and women. So it was essentially a communist argument. The exact opposite. So the question is this: Does a patriarchal society succeed better than a communist society? The answer of course, is “Yes.” Females talk a big game, but they don’t really want to play. Every time females get caught committing a crime, they play the sympathy card and escape punishment. They never own up to their actions. And further, females don’t have the guts to run with the big dogs anyway. It’s all just a game of pretend. The result is not stronger females, it’s weaker males. All the men wind up in a political trap, where the wrong word can end a career. Political players succeed, while honest men are run out of town. As the article above states: “It’s the process of disqualifying superior men.” We can’t allow that to continue.

    There are reasons to fight, but most of the “fighting” that we see today is the result of several factors that have nothing to do with gender relations. First of all, black people, both men and women, are extremely violent. It’s not cultural, they are violent no matter where in the world they live. Secondly, our kids are intentionally excluded from the world of gentlemanly behavior. The boys are not dressed properly, fed properly, educated properly, or acculturated properly. Instead, the boys are dipped in pure shit. Rap music, Marijuana, and Pornography. Anything it takes to destroy their character. And don’t believe that “Feminists” are unaware of this; they planned it.
    So most of the fighting that takes place, either to defend a female or not, is the result of the fact that blacks engender violence, and that uneducated boys are unable to understand how to behave well in the first place. They’ve never been given any moral guideposts, or standards of conduct. They’re completely lost. So they believe that physical “strength” as described in the article above, is the definition of a man. They are missing 99% of the story. Feminism is not about gender relations. It’s about creating a perfect political environment, where females will never be held responsible for their actions, because Communist State Agents are legally immune. The only answer is to shut-down the existing political system, expel all of the females from government employment, and media creation. And then begin the long slow task of educating a new generation of young men. Gentlemen.

  6. 😂

    Ron

    The coolest thing about all of that bullshit you said is that when ” violence ” breaks out, pussy fart panty waists like you will be wasted in short order.

    And the world will be better off.

    You desperately need a history lesson. Particularly in the last century ( but feel free to go back a millennia ).

  7. @Ron Lieberman: GTFOH with the racist crap. You’ve clearly never lived in africa if you think black people are violent everywhere. The most violence you are likely to see in any major africa city is mob justice, which few people oppose and is about as redpill as you can get (keeping troublemakers in check). Who does the overwhelming majority of mass shootings in the world? Which countries have been in war most often in history? How often do you hear about war in africa? When was the last time africans invaded another country? Incel shooters are pretty much guaranteed to NOT be black – you know, due to their poor moral goalposts or whatever. Leave your racism out of this; try 4chan or breitbart.

  8. In my gym there are a very large number of females into Karate (more so than boxing). I get the physical fitness aspect of martial arts, as it’s great cardio, and obviously there is the self-defense benefit. Some of these ladies are into fighting too and there motivation I don’t understand as much. Most of them seem to share in common lots of tats and a femi-machoness. There boyfriends tend to also be in martial arts at a similar or higher level. From an RP perspective these women are following the warrior princess narrative but hypergamy is also manifesting itself in their mate selection.

  9. “Which countries have been in war most often in history?”

    Egypt, China, Persia, Vietnam, Siam, Burma. For geographic reasons Japan has perhaps had the most civil wars and Poland the most purely defensive.

    India, Jesus, there’s simply no accounting for the nations and wars.

    Basically stay out of Asia if you don’t want to get caught up in shit.

  10. @Rollo: “” For as much as they rail to the contrary, women do have an affinity for violent men. Women get turned on by men with a capacity for violence.””

    I don’t agree both from an evolutionary psy standpoint and from personal experience.

    Women don’t have an affinity for hot-heads, overly emotional men, men who lose their cool for no reason, jealous men.

    Equating violent men with strong men is wrong. Women favour men who can think their way through things. Hitting someone could land you in jail or cost you thousands in legal fees even if it’s in self-defense.

    Now from personal experience, women in their 20’s are not turned on by boys in their 20’s. They find them immature, emotional, passive and overall feminized. That means if you’ve got decent game, take care of yourself and can carry yourself authoritatively you don’t ever need to resort to physical situations.

  11. “i like the old times… when a guy would fight with the guy i cheated with, but now, these young guys don’t care about showing how much they like you.”

    this is something i overheard one day at a family gathering.

    i hope young men today don’t resort to violence over women seeking attention or women with feral vaginas. they just need to walk off… both of them.

  12. Authority cannot exist without at a minimum an ability to do violence.

    Violence doesn’t have anything to do with being a hot head or jealous.

    Where are you guys growing up?

    Most chicks do not get tingles for outright punks. This ain’t conjecture. I understand a lot of dudes can barely defend themselves in the world, but facts are facts no matter how afraid one is that he might get hammered.

    Girls aren’t attracted to a man’s ability to ” think “. initially. That’s dog thinking. They don’t see you and admire your brain from across the room.

    Long term they don’t want a dumb ass ( so don’t be that….for yourself at least ), but if you give them a choice, they at least want to know that you are competent enough to provide protection.

    But nerdy couples can work out fine. That’s not maximizing your potential as a man. I believe the idea is to be able to ” get ” any woman you choose, and not just any woman you can manage to get.

    Rollo, great subject.😂 The comments are informative as hell. You’re 100% correct, but you are evidently a dying breed.

  13. Interesting thing about the British Empire is that, unlike the Egyptians, Persians and Romans, the British basically came to it by chance and against their will. They are a nation of shopkeepers who just wanted to keep shops, but found themselves having to defend them by force of arms.

    In no small part because it was the Iberians who actually set out to conquer the world.

  14. Spot on. In the old order (and this is, I think, what Dr. Peterson was referring to), there were acceptable outlets for masculine displays. There was a reason that it became a cliche for the captain of the football team to marry the head cheerleader. Sports actually WERE a way to display physical, tactical, and strategic prowess. Also, men could join the military or become a cop or a firefighter (there’s also a reason that it became a cultural cliche to have calendars with shirtless firefighters). All of these things involved the need for physical strength and were linked to physical risk. And to this day, women are absolutely turned on by a man in uniform.

    The problem has become that Marxist feminism tries to teach women that even the capacity for violence is bad, like you said. For a man with proper frame, this isn’t a real problem unless he wants an LTR, or like in your examples, if a man is dumb enough to fall for “lets you and him fight.” In reality, this is women’s problem. Feminism has them fighting their own nature. If women are dumb enough to start a fight, let them finish it themselves. And if they’re dumb enough to buy into that crap about the mere capacity for violence being bad, remember the quote apocryphally attributed to General James Mattis: “When you men get home and face an anti-war protester, look at him in the eyes and shake his hand. Then, wink at his girlfriend because she knows she’s dating a pussy.”

  15. Another interesting thing about the British Empire is that it tended to reduce body counts wherever it went.

    It makes for more efficient and profitable operations of the shops.

  16. Wala

    I don’t agree both from an evolutionary psy standpoint and from personal experience.

    Let’s discuss both, the evo-bio argument and your personal experience. What evo-bio basis for this stance?

    Do you know any guys who’ve beat the shit out of someone with their girl around? I’ve been around that a few times. Chicks definitely dig it, you know about TINGLES and EMOTIONAL SPIKES so you should agree.

    Women don’t have an affinity for hot-heads, overly emotional men, men who lose their cool for no reason, jealous men.

    “no reason” is a reason for them to not like it. But generally these women are either turned off by “teh neediness” OR do not want constraints placed on their behaviors.

    Blax

    Girls aren’t attracted to a man’s ability to ” think “. initially. That’s dog thinking. They don’t see you and admire your brain from across the room.

    Indeed. But flip it around a bit. If you were tough enough but also smart, how much better?

    Long term they don’t want a dumb ass ( so don’t be that….for yourself at least ), but if you give them a choice, they at least want to know that you are competent enough to provide protection.

    Definitely this. Oh they will complain, that’s just what cats do. It’s actually a form of humble bragging. But we watch what they do not what they say.

  17. @Sentient:

    “”Do you know any guys who’ve beat the shit out of someone with their girl around? I’ve been around that a few times. Chicks definitely dig it, you know about TINGLES and EMOTIONAL SPIKES so you should agree.””

    Yes and what I noticed was how the girls suddenly felt embarrassed and would then side, try to protect or otherwise freak out on their bf.

    But I should qualify this…that reaction was one of pity for the guy being beaten IF their BF was bigger and IF the smackdown was perceived to be undeserved.

    Do chicks dig it when their bf beats on another guy when it’s about them? Definitely YES.

  18. @kfg

    “Another interesting thing about the British Empire is that it tended to reduce body counts wherever it went.”

    Native Americans would probably agree with you – if we use the phrase “British Empire” (essentially the English at this stage) to mean the activities of English colonists and their heirs and descendants.

    The Irish and the Scots (highland clearances) might also agree.

  19. Blaximus
    Even more interesting, what countries have amassed the highest body counts?

    On a percentage basis or raw numbers? Does killing your own people count?

    Of course this whole line of banter usually devolves quickly into autistic rants, so maybe it’s not worth pursuing.

  20. Thomas P Seager
    Frans de Waal measured stress in male primate troops.

    How did he do that? I’m searching but so far not finding the method he used. I assume some form of behavior, because ain’t nobody testing blood on a gang of baboons or chimps.

  21. Smallpox kills quicker than syphilis, but syphilis kills nonetheless. In any case these are deaths of happenstance rather than intent. If you travel to a foreign land you are likely to get sick from it. Their pathogens are foreign to you as well.

    Where I live the Native Americans were expunged after the Revolution – because they fought on the side of the British. They felt that under British law they were treated decently and were afraid that under American law they would not be. There may have been something of a self-fulfilling prophecy in that.

  22. Sentient to walawala
    Do you know any guys who’ve beat the shit out of someone with their girl around?

    That’s a strong display of dominance, and speaks directly to the female hindbrain. Lesser displays of dominance such as angry words, shouting etc. when properly directed also work.

    Men who come from sociial/cultural backgrounds where self-control is not just taught but enforced tend to get confused by this. When losing your temper is regarded as a childish thing, yet letting a bit of the “madman” out gets girls or even wives to perk up, cognitive dissonance is just moments away.

  23. “O, it is excellent to have a giant’s strength, but it is tyrannous to use it like a giant.” – Shakespeare, Measure for Measure

    Funny thing about that, the subreddit r/bjj for grappling and brasilian jiu jitsu is full of soy boys complaining about bigger guys using strength when sparring lol.There are threads where they shame them ( big guys ) and complain about them ( they are not the majority, but still significant % )

    Where bjj was started by savages in Rio fighting in street fights on the beach by the Gracies, nowadays its nerdy soy boys complaining about guys using too much strength :D. Sure, a big guy might need to dial down the strength a bit to learn the technique, but strength is part of his skillset so to speak, just like a small light guy is quick and agile. Plus, when i spar with bigger guys i want to experience the real thing, not have a false sense of security, cuz one day i get on the street and turns out i can’t take down/choke out the guy. Sparring needs to be realistic as possible whilst accounting for injuries.

    Regarding women wanting to fight men:

    I think if more women joined legit martial arts , they’d know that they can’t fight with men. A guy with 3 months exp, will still defeat a girl with 4-5 years exp. Whereas the same guy will get absolutely ragdolled by a guy with 4-5 years exp ( assuming size difference is not too big, e.g. 130 lbs exp guy vs 250+ lbs newb ).

    I have grappled with amateur female mma fighters and had to use 60-70% of my strength to keep it fun and competitive lol. And also grappled with amateur and pro mma fighters where i felt like a child being ragdolled by a gorilla, lol, it was quite the humbling experience.

  24. @Anonymous Reader

    “Of course this whole line of banter usually devolves quickly into autistic rants, so maybe it’s not worth pursuing.”

    You’re probably right. I’ve seen people come to metaphorical blows on youtube about who is the best band.

    Never underestimate human capacity to argue over very little at all.

    A simple difference of opinion…that’s why we fight.

  25. Wow, some weird responses. I enjoyed the article. Hard to get everything in re: violence, historically, culturally, etc., tho. But this touched upon some good stuff. Thanks Rollo.

    Has anyone read Tribe by Junger? Recommended.

    For the guy who’s says black people are the most violent etc., whatever, read Hillbilly Elegy, and the essay the Thomas Sowell wrote about “rednecks.”

    The insight is this: the ways and forms of violence change according to culture and class. Violence is ever present, physical, social, economic, and otherwise.

    Women too, of course, demonstrate violence all the time. As is usually the case, tho, it’s sneaky, behind the back stuff.

  26. https://www.reddit.com/r/fightporn/comments/f7kso9/machete_baseball_bat_wrestling_moves_and_ice/

    😂

    I’ve actually seen quite a few skirmishes where a guy picked up and body slammed another dude. Maybe it’s a jersey thing?

    That’s one reason that as I get older I try to avoid fights/arguments with young guys that look strong enough to lift me off the ground. Occasionally my nephews used to sneak up on me and gently, lol, body slam me.

    Life requires more thought at 58 and 190 pounds than it did at even 48 and 240. As and older more.brittle fart, I have to get them in close enough for a body blow combination, but not close enough that they grab me and suplex my ass into the emergency room.😂

    Thankfully the average man on the street can’t body slam anyone. If everybody could do it I’d go outside less often.

  27. I was a wimp in high school and the few fights I was involved with usually resulted in blood on both sides. I went to Vietnam and learned what real violence was all about. I was in a weight room in the early 70’s after I started college and a couple of jocks tried to beef with me. I was still physically unimposing but had some interesting scars and some tattoos (this was way before tattoos were cool). I distinctly remember going very cold and planning how I would kill, not hurt, but kill, these two boys. I picked up a steel bar and walked into it without saying a word. The smarter one backed his friend off and they left, leaving me in peace.

    This was the gift that the war gave me and it’s still there as an old man. Over my life there have been several instances where something bad might have happened but didn’t. Never been in jail nor do I want to experience it. This is a part of me that I have to tamp down hard in order to not frighten people but I’m always aware that it’s there.

    Most American men have never, ever experienced true violence and with the exception of martial artists, have never been punched in the nose although the “I can take this guy” thought runs through our heads….all the time. For this reason, controlled violence through learning a martial art, is probably one of the most useful skill sets a man can acquire. Learning it through the military is also a good way but most American men avoid this these days. I think it’s a great tool if it’s disciplined.

  28. I’ve been involved in one fight during the same time. A 350# guy was pushing a couple of bouncers all over the bar and they ended up where I was. I just braced the bouncers and the guy quit.

    Once a very tall guy looked at me like he wanted to hit me. I smiled at him and looked him over to figure out my optimum fighting distance and stepping distance and for any obvious signs of weakness. But he just looked mean at me, lol.

    I’m still not afraid to run from a fight. I’ve got nothing to prove and I’m a lot more brittle now than when I was younger.

  29. Hmmmm. Idk, there are a dozen mma training facilities in my city, and they are doing bang up business and always packed.

    And the thing about this is, guys learn and then teach/practice what they learned on guys in the neighborhood. A good body slam takes practice.

    I have 2 nephews that are amateur mma fighters, and they practice all day every day. Even on their sisters, lol. So these chicks understand how a body slam works from getting thrown all over the furniture in the house.

  30. I think, Rollo, you are seriously understating the Alpha’s own role in creating this moral imperative for restraint or the need for this restraint in creating civilization in the first place. If nothing is left for the lesser males they have no choice but to team up to depose/overthrow the Alpha. Restraint of power is to prevent more violence so the Alpha might retain his place or simply ending up King of The Ashes.

    The Alpha also has a motivation in creating or enforcing this restraint of not seeing his offspring killed. This restraint may have been created at the threat of lesser males but it is the Alphas that see it is enforced.

    I also think the feminine imperative comes in to this with its need for useful Betas and with women’s own need for status. Not all women are willing to share a top man. First to the second guy may be a better proposition than third or fourth to the top guy.

    I’m no anthropologist but it certainly seems you’re over-simplifying things in that last section.

  31. I, for one, am finding it incredibly entertaining as TERFs are beginning to openly display their self-contradictions in response to trans athletes. It’s as though all the dominant ones are MtF trans and not the other way around for some reason. What could that possibly be? 🤔

  32. It’s so weird there are men over a certain intelligence and sensibility “bar” who still think about women, and have an interest in them.

    Before the Internet, when each man (less a few exceptions) didn’t experience the behaviour and “thinking ways” of many women, it wasn’t weird. But with experienced females (if only through short exchanges online) numbering in the dozens/hundreds/thousands, it’s very, very weird.

  33. The framing here of some men as “lesser” is, well…problematic. It gives into the feminine-primary frame.

    I’m not denying that some men are more desirable than others. But taking this as the most important variable on which to rank men ends up with gladiators fighting each other for the affection of queens—and women suck at ruling.

    While I’m not dumb enough to say that “all men are equal,” I will say that Michael Jordan was a better basketball player than Babe Ruth, and a worse baseball player.

    Why do we have to rank men? Women do because they have to make a choice, and men have to for specific endeavors, but why do we have to treat these things like they matter outside their sphere?

    If it’s beta to form a coalition, count me as a beta.

  34. @Just Beers

    Yes.

    Sebastian Junger’s book Tribes was all about cooperation in small tribes working for the same thing.

    Junger’s book explores what we can learn from tribal societies about loyalty, belonging, and the eternal human quest for meaning

    And the concept of working together pre-dated civilizations and large groups–large groups of people rather than small groups of people. And that makes all the difference in the world.

    Jack Donovan’s The Way of Men also dealt with the same themes. Belonging and cooperation against out group tribes.

    Simply stated as: in-group altruism and out-group malice. A concept that brings sanity to fighting and not fighting. Before large groups of people that were heterogenous, small group tribes, worked together in harmony. It was seen in native American (Indians) and in the military.

    The concept of Alpha’s against Beta’s in contemporary society–as if AMOG’s like Jordan Belfort (Leonardo DiCaprio) in the Wolf of Wall Street, can’t co-exist with Beta boyfriends is missing a bigger picture.

    Sure, people fight. But they also co-operate in certain merit hierarchies.

    Finding the balance is important. And there is room for everyone. In smaller groups.

    “Ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country. –JFK”

    “Strength, courage, mastery, and honor are the Alpha Virtues of men all over the world. They are the fundamental virtues of men, because without them no other higher virtues can be entertained. You need to be alive to philosophize.”
    _____
    “If you want to create a society of listless anti-social losers, convince the majority of your men that they are already losing and no matter what they do they will never be able to win. What is the point trying if you know the game is rigged? For the satisfaction of knowing you are contributing to the greater good? That is just the kind of stupid thing an intellectual would say.”– Jack Donovan, The Way of Men

    More important, and baked into masculine firmware is: what can you do with your family, close friends, neighbors, and club members to advance each other’s cause and not have predatory influences on you and them… Including being a leader. Being a leader, not just a fighter is attractive. And will get you laid.

    Actionable advice: stay in your small group and work together. Ignore the noise of larger group infighting. Don’t overthink the larger problem. Take good action in your smaller tribal group.

    And that’s not a call to selfishness. It never was in Junger’s thesis.

    Rollo spoke of it too, MAY 15, 2016:

    https://therationalmale.com/2016/05/15/tribes/

    https://i1.wp.com/therationalmale.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/tribes.jpg

    And this discussion is a PRIME example of what happened with the manosphere in the last couple years, esp. in 2019. Out-group malice of tribes.

    And it has to do with masculine merit. And not just one knock out punch.

  35. “Why do we have to rank men? ”

    Because we are men. It is men who form hierarchies and collaborate within and between them. No alpha stands alone. Most of “his” work is done by his seconds.

    It is the discomfort with hierarchy that is feminine, a feature of the Women’s Circle.

    Ergo, it is the man who expresses discomfort with hierarchy who is giving in to the feminine-primacy. It mostly happens when boys are raised with an absence of masculine presence, like in kindergarten where the feminine is strictly enforced these days, right at the age when boys need to remove from their mother’s and be put under the guidance of men.

    See also the anti-male Gillette commercial where two boys having a splendid time play fighting are remonstrated for it. Even for rat pups and kittens play fighting is an essential for proper social development and learning hierarchy.

  36. Blaximus
    Hmmmm. Idk, there are a dozen mma training facilities in my city, and they are doing bang up business and always packed.

    And the thing about this is, guys learn and then teach/practice what they learned on guys in the neighborhood. A good body slam takes practice.

    What’s it for? I get that a body slam looks cool on cable TV WWE, and can look cool in MMA, but what’s it for in real life? There’s easier ways to put a man on the ground. Even I know that.

    Body slamming someone to the concrete is looking for any of several central nervous system damages. Could get expensive in damages and/or time consuming in terms of grey-bar hotel days, if someone’s skull hits the curb. But also body slamming someone to the concrete is not a sure incapacitation, there are better ways to do that, too. It looks like lots of show to me. Dramatic, but not very efficient, with a distinct possiiblity of causing grave bodily harm or death.

    So again I ask, what’s it for?

    BTW in that goombah video I noted with amusement the young man who’d brought a baseball bat with him, and how it got taken away from him. Practice with a tool makes it easier to retain.

    All this verbiage aside, watching MMA matches and classes is very educational. A lot of those sparring / matches go to the mat fairly quickly, either because one fighter is a grappler who takes the fight to the ground deliberately OR because the feet / fists aren’t conclusive enough and someone falls over while hanging on to someone else.

    I’m aware of some mugging styles in some cities that appear to be influenced by MMA because they open negotiations with a bum-rush, preferably blindsiding the target.

    Always something new to learn, or some version of something older to re-learn.

  37. “Why do we have to rank men? Women do because they have to make a choice, and men have to for specific endeavors, but why do we have to treat these things like they matter outside their sphere?”

    They don’t matter outside their sphere.

    They do matter within your sphere.

    A distinction with a huge difference.

    It is your job to ignore why it matters outside your sphere.

  38. 😑

    Sjf

    I know you are a giant fan of Jack Donovan and the whole ” outgroup malice ” thing, but I don’t get the promotion of ” malice “.

    Having malice towards others simply because they don’t belong to what you’d consider your group or tribe smacks of being irrationally fearful – only having a perception of strength in numbers as opposed to having strength as a man. One man.

    So basically are you.advocating for a love of your small group and suspicion of everyone outside of it? In a nation of 300+ million people?

    I don’t get it.

  39. @Sentient…. Dude! I’m trying to have breakfast here. The Downs Syndrome kid giving it to his homies…noooooooooo

    But on the issue of arguing with women…DON’T. I’ve now been a lot more successful at avoiding this through gaming them early.

    When they get used to your agree and amplifying, constant teasing and turnaways….it’s a stark contrast to the gameless losers who feel they need to discuss why they forgot the chocolate icecream and decided instead on popsicles.

    Reminds me of an old joke which you may feel free to use if this ever happens:

    Old woman walks into an ice cream parlour on Monday, asks for chocolate ice cream.
    Guy behind the counter says “Sorry lady we’re short, we don’t have any chocolate this week.” She leaves.

    She returns the next day and asks for chocolate ice cream, Dude behind the counter looks puzzled but answers: “Sorry we don’t have any chocolate this week…” She thanks him and leaves.

    She returns again in the afternoon just as she’s about to speak the dude behind the counter stops her:

    “Lady…spell dog as in Dogmatic…”

    “D-O-G” she says…

    “Now spell cat as in catastrophic” he says…

    “C-A-T” she says…

    “Now spell “fuck” as in ‘chocolate'”…

    She looks at him puzzled and says “But there is no fuckin chocolate”

    “That’s what I’ve been trying to tell you all week!”

  40. @seriouslypleasedropit

    You stated a comment. How about you state your Frame and tell us who you are (in general terms) and what you believe in and where you are in life. For the sake of discussion.

    The thing is: narratives are a thing that was described as driving forces in large societies. Jordan Peterson, before he became a vegetable, raged against narratives of what Vadim Zeland of Transurfing Reality book fame, out of Russia, talked about in great detail. Dealing with that shit.

    Peterson raged against: “Peterson’s critiques of political correctness range over issues such as postmodernism, postmodern feminism, so called white privilege, cultural appropriation, and environmentalism.”

    All of which were: outside of your personal narrative–Noise. And of what Zeland called “Pendulums” which is a unique abstract construct. It is similar to social constructs (fake moral law) and The Feminine Imperative.

    Here is a glossary term from Zeland’s book:

    Pendulum

    Thought energy is material and does not totally disappear without trace. When a group of people begin to think in a similar way their “thought waves” accumulate in layers and invisible but real energy-information structures – pendulums are created in the greater ocean of energy. The structures begin to evolve independently until they reach a stage at which they are able to subject people to their own laws. When a person comes under the influence of a destructive pendulum they lose their freedom and are forced to become a small cog in a large machine.

    The more people – adherents – feed the pendulum with their energy, the more forceful its “sway”. Every pendulum has its characteristic oscillation frequency. For example, a swing will gain height only if you apply effort to pushing it with a certain frequency. This is what is meant by the resonant frequency. If the number of a pendulum’s adherents decreases its sway becomes weaker. If the number of adherents declines to zero the pendulum dies and ceases to exist as a separate entity.

    In order to pump energy from people a pendulum hooks into their emotions and reactions: indignation, dissatisfaction, hate, irritation, anxiety, worry, depression, confusion, despair, fear, pity, attachment, admiration, tenderness, idealization, adulation, delight, disappointment, pride, arrogance, contempt, aversion, insult, duty, guilt etc.

    The greatest threat of the pendulum’s suppressive influence is that it leads its victim away from life lines in which that person would have been truly happy. It is essential to free oneself from imposed goals after which one battles straying ever further from one’s own true path in life.

    In essence the pendulum is an “egregore” and yet it is much more than this. The notion of the “egregore” does not reflect the entire range of subtle interaction between the individual and the energy-information structures referred to here as pendulums.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egregore

    Separately:

    https://medium.com/@chengeerlee/transurfing-of-reality-in-a-nutshell-a73b162fff85

    In accordance to Transurfing, people who think in the same direction create invisible energy-informational structures that directly affect us in a daily life.

    They are called “pendulums” or “egregores”.

    Essentially pendulum is sort of a “thought condensate” — a soul of a thing, idea, doctrine, organization, ideology or anything that has admirers, supporters, followers, and fanatics.
    There are many different kinds of pendulums.

    Pendulums can be religious, political, familial, national or corporate. A pendulum can reveal itself during some massive public event, a football game for example. Many material things that we value start to have pendulums, for example, new iPhone or money.

    Once they appear pendulums can put people that created them under control. They don’t have a consciousness. Their sole purpose of existence is to draw energy from the followers.

    The bigger the followership that feeds the pendulum with energy the more powerful is the pendulum. If the amount of followers decreases its vibrations die out and it dissipates.
    Most of the pendulums have destructive nature because they drain energy from their followers and oppress them. Pronounced examples of pendulums are the pendulums of war, economic crisis, and criminal gangs.

    A pendulum opposes its followers to other groups (We are good and they are bad). A pendulum aggressively accuses everyone that didn’t decide to become a follower and tries either to attract or to neutralize/destroy him.

    It doesn’t matter whether you love or hate something, it doesn’t matter if you fight for it or against it. In both cases, you are swinging a pendulum and it becomes stronger by feeding on your energy. A pendulum doesn’t care if the energy is negative or positive, both work equally well.

    The main objective of the pendulum is to hook you up. The means are not important, the goal is to keep you busy thinking about it giving away your mental energy. The most common method of getting access to your energy by pendulum is disbalancing you. When you lose your balance you start to “swing” on the frequency of a pendulum allowing it to gain more momentum. A pendulum may control you with fear, inferiority complexes, sense of guilt, and false importance.

    For instance, when a pendulum captures your mental energy, your attention in a loop and you tune into its resonance frequency — you get mad, annoyed, feel anger and resent. By doing this you give away your energy at the same time moving to the variation where there is an excess of the things that you are futilely trying to avoid. You start to have a feeling that things that you afraid of, despise, or hate, chase you everywhere.

    You can’t fight a pendulum. There are only two ways to get out of the influence of a pendulum: cause it to collapse or extinguish it.

    So the second rule of Transerfing is:

    In order to get rid of a pendulum, first, you need to admit that it exists and it has a right to do so. You have to calm down and lose interest towards it i.e. ignore it. By doing so you will deprive it of your mental energy.

    When you are calm and indifferent towards it you can save your energy and use it to transfer to positive variations of life. If you start to get annoyed simply “rent yourself out”, step outside of the situation and become an observer, not an active participant.

    Extinguishing of a pendulum requires certain mastery. Basically, you have to start doing offbeat unpredictable actions that will cause a dissonance and disrupt the scenario of a pendulum.
    Of course, not all pendulums are destructive. There are many harmless pendulums like a pendulum of sport and healthy lifestyle.

    Medium is a pendulum too. It has its gravity, and many people including me feed it with energy of attention. But energy structures like this are beneficial for followers on an individual level and as a group.

    The Red Pill is a Pendulum also. Watch out for how it serves you. That’s not a criticism at all. After all: enlightened self interest, with the emphasis on enlightened. Enlightened is why you are here. But don’t take all as dogma, unless it resonates with you, or you have the fortitude to act for you and your family. Your relationship, your kids, your friend and your community. To do best for you. And Them.

    Take not that you will lie to yourself on who you are and you will engage in grandiosity and narcissism when you are not in a place where you want to be. And you will lie and DEER (Defend, explain, excuse your behaviors, and rationalize) till you are blue in the face to not change your habits. You are habitual and your mission if you choose to accept it is to break out of your habit ruts, and engage in acts that improve your masculine self. Leadership and not whining about how things should be. To be attractive not unattractive.

    Use your group to run up your mountain.

    Don’t sit there and whine about outside influences.

    I’ve seen a million things in my life. And I can discriminate between this and that. And was trained to do so. So I do that.

    Peace, out. I wish you the best.

  41. ” Labeling sets up an expectation of life that is often so compelling we can no longer see things as they really are. The expectation often gives us a false sense of familiarity toward something that is really new and unprecedented. We are in relationship with our expectations and not with life itself.
    … a label is an attempt to assert control and manage uncertainty. It may allow us the security and comfort of a mental closure and encourage us not to think about things again. But life is known only by those who have found a way to be comfortable with change and the unknown. Given the nature of life, there may be no security, but only adventure. “

  42. Hey Blax

    “I don’t get it.”

    Of course you don’t. Because you are missing the point of the whole deal.

    It’s not about out-group malice.

    That is the whole fucking point: It is Moral Law Evil. And always will be.

    It’s all about In-Group Altruism. You know that and will do that. Your corporation job, your wife, your daughters, your buddies, your extended family, your former lovers. That is where it is at.

    Out-group malice is drawing a line and having standards. Out groups don’t fuck with you. Why would they, our why would you let them? You don’t and you never have.

    All those prosecutors in your jurisdiction? The out-group wishing you malice.

    You are right to fight. Them when they are over-reaching and vindictive.

    The point is: Don’t let them get to you and your standards.

    I don’t get what you don’t get about the narratives, including Rollo’s takedown on The First Woman President narrative. And PoundMeToo. It’s all a big fucking pendulum to control those that adhere to that Pendulum, that narrative, that noise. It doesn’t even compute on the small level in the tribe of your life. It’s a above the level of you and us.

    And don’t judge me. I lived all my life in communities that are 95% white. Which never let me hate black people. Or persons of color.

    And here’s my “I know a black friend batman story”: I just took on a job, in my profession where 98% of the patients are “skin of color”. For extra cash. And so far they like me. And I like them. They are appreciative. But not that my goal is external gratification. My job is making them better. For their sake. And for me giving them a better life. Go figure.

    I don’t have cognitive racism. And I resent that you figure so.

    Having malice towards others simply because they don’t belong to what you’d consider your group or tribe smacks of being irrationally fearful – only having a perception of strength in numbers as opposed to having strength as a man. One man.

    So basically are you.advocating for a love of your small group and suspicion of everyone outside of it? In a nation of 300+ million people?

    I don’t disagree. Revenge or malice is also a simple waste of time.

    It’s not a thing to dread others, overtly. Ham-handed-ly its wrong. The trick is to make it natural charm. And you have that naturally Blax. And that’s a good thing. Keep it up. And so will I. It’s a virtue.

    I went off this reservation when MRP devolved into doing that to to relationship game. I’m not a fan of the anti-Rollo group or of ADJ or his compadres. Or the anti-Rollo group.

    And also, I went in to my wife, and kids, and community and friends and neighbors.

    Unlike you, I wasn’t like that. I had to change habits. And biases and suspicion.

    And things are fine with me. They always were.

    Don’t map my territory for me. Because you are dead wrong. Your labels don’t fit. And don’t be racist towards me. And don’t wish I come down with a setback to prove you right. It’s unbecoming of you.

    I could get cancer tomorrow and I’d deal with it. As I’ve said four years ago, I’m not good at denial, anger, bargaining or depression. I’m good at getting to acceptance.

    Peace.

  43. Blaximus quoting

    ” Labeling sets up an expectation of life that is often so compelling we can no longer see things as they really are. The expectation often gives us a false sense of familiarity toward something that is really new and unprecedented. We are in relationship with our expectations and not with life itself.

    Well, ok. That rabbit trail has no real end, there’s no “done” to it. Eventually all communication ceases because “labels bad!’ means no common points of reference. Been there, done that.

    On the other hand, if I need a gallon of primer to get a wall ready for painting, someone needs to read the label. Because I have an expectation of life that I get a gallon of primer, and not a gallon of gloss oil paint or spackle. Because failure to read the label…that’s not how stuff gets done.

    I’m reminded of the concluding pages of Candide.

  44. Funny thing about that, the subreddit r/bjj for grappling and brasilian jiu jitsu is full of soy boys complaining about bigger guys using strength when sparring lol.

    Some men just have to take a fighting form and make it into a game. The divide between the serious and the gamesmen is just a piece of life. This is how we wind up with “martial” arts that are more like ballroom dance. It’s inherent in the nature of human relations.

  45. walawala
    I’ve now been a lot more successful at avoiding this through gaming them early.

    Great news. Huge improvement from back when. Congrats.

    When they get used to your agree and amplifying, constant teasing and turnaways….it’s a stark contrast to the gameless losers who feel they need to discuss why they forgot the chocolate icecream and decided instead on popsicles.

    Exactly.
    Always Be Gaming. Life is more entertaining that way.

  46. SJF

    C’mon man. We’ve been going back and forth here for more than half a decade. I’ve never called you racist ( and would not), and you can count on one hand the times I’ve called anyone here, present or past that word.

    I didn’t even call Ron Lieberman that after his ” blacks violent ” shit he wrote.😂

    It’s easier to correct what he said than it is to ” correct ” a grown ass man who’s entitled to his opinion.

    Re: prosecutors. I don’t dislike nor mistrust prosecutors. I’m making the effort to understand what many of them think, and to bounce ideas around to stop ” stacking charges ” and throwing felonies just because they can and felony convictions ” look ” good.

    Everybody has reasons and motivation, and it’s not always nefarious even if the consequences are. District attorneys have discretion. I’d like that taken away, mandatory charges for everybody, so Melman and Yankovitz can’t get anyone off.

    Or

    Use that discretion more widely. One of the other. Drug charges? Cool. Sentence everyone to rehab, or sentence no one to rehab. Not enough here in rehab? Everyone goes to jail. Sentence accordingly ( and build more jails )

    I don’t have ” malice ” at my age.

    Lol, as long as we’ve chatted online here, you still don’t really understand me.

  47. Irony, Anonymous Reader

    You want real paint to paint with (and shouldn’t eat lead paint). Yet you cite the end of Candide.

    That’s satire. Which is opinion. And not real.

    “A feature of satire is strong irony or sarcasm—”in satire, irony is militant”—but parody, burlesque, exaggeration, juxtaposition, comparison, analogy, and double entendre are all frequently used in satirical speech and writing. This “militant” irony or sarcasm often professes to approve of (or at least accept as natural) the very things the satirist wishes to question.”

    Good luck with that.

    And you guys should stop making things up. And realize you do on occasion.

  48. “Re: prosecutors. I don’t dislike nor mistrust prosecutors. I’m making the effort to understand what many of them think, and to bounce ideas around to stop ” stacking charges ” and throwing felonies just because they can and felony convictions ” look ” good.”

    Well I just binge watched “Suits” and it wasn’t at all pretty in regards to prosecutors.
    And I’m not a fan of them.

    Nor did I like “the system” six years ago when my son fucked up. (He’s in great shape now. And he just bought a cool car.)

    “Lol, as long as we’ve chatted online here, you still don’t really understand me.”

    But, also, I’m not used to being understood. So we are equal.

    BTW. I may not understand you, yet I do. You lay yourself out there. It is just that I am judgmental about you judging me. There is a difference.

    And I have a bad habit. It is called DEERing. It’s brain wiring.

    So sue me.

    And I love you Blax. And I love your style. And I’ve learned a lot from you.

    I just don’t agree with your not understanding where I’m coming from. And that is not a criticism. You do you. And I love how you do it well. And I’m not lying.

    This is the thing: You are a great example of Masculine Leadership.

    No lie. Honest. And I respect it without a punch being thrown.

    My life-style is an enigma. I’ve never seen it in the manosphere. It is unique. And it is an outlier. On Nassim Taleb’s tails. And it can’t be replicated ever. So don’t actually try to understand it. And I don’t blame you or any other reader.

    And I’m not disappointed in life. And you can count on one finger, when I have ever whined here in comments. And that will continue. I have had a lot of brain fog. And my comments years ago were myself, but overwhelmed with too much noise. And I do quote people too often to a fault. Because I am brain faulty. And I have explained why that is between the lines.

    Cheers.

    My family life is magical. We went out with my wife, daughter, son-in-law and son to celebrate my daughter’s upcoming 2/29 birthday. Oh, my gosh, they are good people and deserve to be celebrated.

    If things turn sour? So what?

  49. Lol.

    Does anyone disagree that the red pill and the manosphere satirizes healthy inter-sexual manophere relationships. Which by my book should be a goal. Not a shit-show?

    Including regular sex in a long term relationship. Without contempt, stonewalling, criticism or defensiveness?

    And why don’t you guys go and critique a girl that posted about six youtube videos on her take on Rollo’s book. And which Rollo might collaborate with in a video blog.

    Long story short (she speaks too much, beating around her bush): wild child woman, got lucky and married an adorable Alpha, non blue husband. She’s solipsistic to the max, but gives insight into what to focus on :

    https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCAvCKML_JUXi4jfUdFz7LGg/videos

    She voices yes, to Rollo, but is still a Sister of the Sisterhood. And is grappling with her understanding while being a good wife.

    And what it takes to not fuck up in a long term relationship, meanwhile, posted Feb 25:

    https://www.prevention.com/sex/relationships/a31085838/reasons-for-divorce/

  50. Men fight to resolve conflicts. What makes a “conflict” worth fighting over varies from place to place, time to time, man to man and varies in a man’s life over time and place. But it’s one way to resolve a conflict.

    Forming hierarchies can create conflict, not just who should lead but who should do what, who gives orders, who takes orders from whom, and so forth. Physical fighting is one way to sort this out and it’s still a method used in various places and subcultures.

    In a hierarchy different privileges are seen at different levels. Women want as much privilege as they can get, because babies live longer that way, so there is hindbrain hardwiring driving not just hypergamy but pinging for Alpha as having a bad day puts it. In a rule-by-fathers society there’s not gonna be much monkeybranching, but being able to find a new man to replace one that died is still a reproductive advantage to a woman. Therefore Let’s You And Him Fight is not just a shit test, it’s also a way to improve a woman’s material situation. Because the winner will be better off materially, no matter which one wins. It’s not necessarily conscious, although fiction is full of conniving bitches who do exactly that…MacBeth for example.

    Men fight to protect their own, to get more stuff, for the good of the tribe..it comes down to resolving a conflict every time, especially “Your stuff or your blood” conflicts. As genetic science continues to improve, and the ability to get DNA out of graves improves, we learn some really incredible stuff, such as the massacre all across Iberia 4,000 years ago.

    tl;dr
    Men fight to resolve / solve conflicts, women want to be at the finish line to get fucked by the winners, have their babies and get taken care of by those winners. Not complicated, Evo-Psych 201.

  51. Rollo

    Women have a limbic understanding that, for the most part, they can be violent with relative impunity. If a male ever strikes a female, even in self-defense, she can be assured that a mob of random males, following their evolved protectionist directive, will spontaneously form to beat the shit out of the guy. In today’s Blue Pill engineered society, even the most passive male waits for an opportunity to prove his quality to womankind by becoming ‘justifiably’ violent in defense of a woman. It’s what most men are conditioned for for most of their lives.

    This is restricted to not just the current time but also space. It’s a cultural artifact of the West that’s been growing since the 14th century or so, and gotten really obvious in the last 50 years, but it’s not universal. It’s limited to portions of the industrialized countries IMO.

    That said, the Blue Pill White Knight is always out there, waiting to risk his precious fedora for a chance to save-serve m’Lady. Gaming the gormless is useful and can be a source of entertainment. Not necessarily mean entertainment at the expense of the blue-pilled gormless, either.

    Great leaders have probably always been able to read other men and fit them into a hierarchy without too much conflict.

  52. “In group preference does not imply out group malice.

    Heh.

    My sentiments exactly.

    In civilized society, of which I am an afficianato of, and of which my declarative above is to embrace a job in which I love my patients and medical assistants and receptionists and owners of the practice? Heh. I love the patients. The Hippocratic Oath is bullshit. The SJF oath is do what is in the best interest of the patient.

    OoH, And god forbid we go all M. Scott. Peck and do what is in the best interest of the girl we are fucking for 30 years. Without consequence.

    I see husband and wife patients all the time. And they have an Anna Karenina alliance over and over and over.

    Even when Sebastian Junger’s protagonists, in his writings/books, were going at it. And then came back from war and said: “what the fuck is going on here?…”

    We know tribes, and tribal behavior among men. And you guys in the USA, with your fucking big groups are not doing this thing right.

    They got confused on it. And a lot of them had a legit reason to get PSTD. Because of the cognitive dissonance. Which was there in spades when they returned from fraternity/brotherhood and purpose.

    And if we would drill down. Clumsy Red Pill dread? Guess what that that implies?

    It goes to intent…

    I didn’t listen to Rollo’s Dread YouTube tonight.

    Does anyone want to summarize his take on it?

    If a guy isn’t a leader/masculine and attractive, not unattractive. Or has any of the habits or loss leaders listed in that link, I think I linked about why women seek divorce. Then good night Moon.

    And don’t associate any of my thoughts with anything less than LTR’s and marriage. Pffft. I’m not talking about single man game, of which I’m not dismissive, of.

    Disagree all you want about how the Bell Curve works. I refuse to be on the left side of it.

  53. Kill da beta posted this in “About”

    https://amp.nine.com.au/article/3e40d68c-2db9-4df8-9c72-d85cc54e87cf

    Reynolds was relieved to get to the end of a dark chapter in his life after his relationship with Del Busso turned sour when it was revealed that the 30-year-old had faked several pregnancies and fabricated other tragic life events as a way to ask Reynolds for money.

    BPD? Is there something in Cluster B that’s loonier?

    Something loonier than BPD? .

  54. Speaking of BPD.

    More and more is coming out about that. So the good thing is it becomes more transparent in the vetting.

    And we’ve heard a lot about that here.

    Rollo had a horrible experiment with a BPD chick because he was caught unaware of it’s trap when he was 24 to 28 y.o.

    I had a experience with a BPD chick when I was 23 y.o. but it was just a fling. And it was fun and full of sex. And it only lasted nine months. And it was good. She was not more than a HB. six. So no harm done. Could be worse if she was more attractive..

    And my ball sack ran dry on her seeing her in 1984.

    And one of my good buddies got blindsided by a BPD chick 5 years ago. Is third marriage. And he ditched her with a pre-nup and with her dig-nigh-nity. And hers. No harm done in the end.

    The bottom line: Know what you are dealing with before, during or after the fact…

    And I had a non-sexual experience with a medical receptionist of mine in my office who was certifiable. Of it. She couldn’t take boundaries or no for an answer. And she quit on me. And she claimed quit for cause. And wanted to claim/collect unemployment benefits. And it dings you. And I argued and won. Her claims. Including harassment. It wasn’t even close. She was certifiable BPD, but in a non sexual environs.

    More stuff comes out about that. BPB in general…

    And rather than post it in Rollo’s old BPD post.

    This posted yesterday on Psychology Today:

    https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/fulfillment-any-age/202002/borderline-personality-disorders-links-early-attachment

    It doesn’t hurt to vet some girl on mommy and daddy questions in a Shawn T. Smith fashion.

    <blockquote.
    Among the symptoms of borderline personality disorder (BPD), insecurity in one's sense of self and relationships can be seen as a fundamental feature. Fearing abandonment, alternating between idealizing and devaluing others, and having wide variations in their moods, people with BPD seem to share some of the basic elements of individuals with what’s known as insecure attachment style.

    He wrote a good book on it.

    https://www.amazon.com/Tactical-Guide-Women-Manage-Marriage/dp/0990686442

    Rian Stone wrote essays on how vetting is for shit. And his advice in my opinion is Sterling.

    https://www.rianstone.com/blog/vetting1

    You do you.

    And God be with your best efforts. Meaning: everyone hope for your bestest.

  55. Deposing, or disqualifying, an Alpha – much in the same way primates do – is also a constant theme in human cultures.

    We can learn from stage theater. Keith Johnstone in Impro on the genre of tragedy:

    “Tragedy also works on the see-saw principle: its subject is the ousting of a high-status animal from the pack. Super-intelligent wolves might have invented this form of theatre, and the lupine Oedipus would play high status at all times. Even when he was being led into the wilderness he wouldn’t whine, and he’d keep his tail up. If he crumbled into low-status posture and voice the audience wouldn’t get the necessary catharsis. The effect wouldn’t be tragic, but pathetic. Even criminals about to be executed were supposed to make a ‘good end’, i.e. to play high status. When the executioner asked Raleigh if he wouldn’t rather face the light of the dawn he said something like ‘What matter how the head lie, if the heart be right’, which is still remembered.

    When a very high-status person is wiped out, everyone feels pleasure as they experience the feeling of moving up a step. This is why tragedy has always been concerned with kings and princes, and why we have a special high-status style for playing tragedy. I’ve seen a misguided Faustus writhing on the floor at the end of the play, which is bad for the verse, and pretty ineffective. Terrible things can happen to the high-status animal, he can poke his eyes out with his wife’s brooch, but he must never look as if he could accept a position lower. in the pecking order. He has to be ejected from it. “

  56. They just don’t get it.

    I had something like this happen: my ex was 8 months pregnant, a guy cuts us off in a crosswalk, we yell at him and spit on his car, he pulls around, gets out, does some posturing.

    My ex gets in his face, nose to nose, and screams at him, he pushes her.

    It’s on.

    He and I do a little pushing, a few punches and kicks. Routine stuff. I get my nose bloodied and maybe broken (who can tell with this ugly beak?), patrons come out of a store to break it up.

    We get home, and she cannot understand why I’m pissed at her. Does not see her role in this. Does not understand how she could have gotten us both killed if the guy was just a little more of a crazy ass.

    Reason #324 she’s my ex.

  57. “Re: prosecutors. I don’t dislike nor mistrust prosecutors. I’m making the effort to understand what many of them think, and to bounce ideas around to stop ” stacking charges ” and throwing felonies just because they can and felony convictions ” look ” good.”

    Prosecutors have nothing to lose if they lose a case. Real justice would require them to undergo the same penalty that the accused would receive if he lost if the prosecutors lost. That way everyone has skin in the game.

  58. Blax, mma is better than nothing, but if you want to be an effective street fighter, you have to fight in the streets.

    Thanks . I’ll keep that in mind .

  59. Lol, kind of.

    I’m all for people experiencing consequences for their actions. Sometimes, people just need a good ass kicking.

    But I must admit, in the video above, if I was there, I would have stepped in after the chick was on the ground semi conscious. I don’t believe one should kick and punch people in the head once they are down. You’ll fuck around and kill somebody in that defenseless position, and an ass kicking isn’t supposed to equal murder.

    No WK. I’d step in for a man or a woman.

  60. “I don’t believe one should kick and punch people in the head once they are down.”

    I believe it is a felony – one that destroys any claim of self defense that might have been valid up to that point.

  61. Blaximus
    “I don’t believe one should kick and punch people in the head once they are down.”

    kfg
    I believe it is a felony – one that destroys any claim of self defense that might have been valid up to that point.

    Pretty much. Which gets back to my question about WWE / MMA style body slams in the street. What’s that for?

  62. “Which gets back to my question about WWE / MMA style body slams in the street. What’s that for?”

    Self defense and ( hopefully ) ending the conflict. The streets aren’t WWE/MMA rings.

    But if a guy body slams a guy multiple times, he’s doing it wrong and he’s going too far. Conversely if you are the ” slamee”, maybe you should rethink your attitude.

    Imo, the objective in a street level conflict is to end it asap. Although I cannot not confirm it, I’m pretty certain that at least 2 combatants who attacked me received broken ribs. It happened because they weren’t trained fighters and walked right into body shot combos that most 1st year amateurs could have seen coming.

    2 things I’ve yet to see irl: A guy get body slammed and rise back to his feet, and anyone kicking an unconscious person in the head. But hey, times change I guess.

    I was taught ( by a multitude of caring men ..lol), to END the fight as soon as possible, lest the tide turn against you….and you get body slammed. I dig the fight videos, but in at least half of them I can’t understand what the point is. Maybe you have a point about the current generation watching too much television/videos or something. Fighting is only done out of necessity and self protection, or in some cases the protection of others. But I have broken my hand(s) more often outside of a ring than I have inside one. Too many people around That misread situations, lol.

    My other point I was gonna comment on, the whole ” Let’s you and him fight ” thing.

    I had to think a couple of days ( because old and metric tons of memories to sift through ), but I can’t really recall any time I was involved with a woman that provoked or urged a conflict between me and another man. I have been with women that have tried to spin situations up, but a well placed ” Shut the fuck up!! ” usually quiets things down. I have on occasion been set upon by guys while in the presence of women, without provocation from the women. When I was a pup, dudes would challenge you ( for the female ), right in front of her. This happened often when I was with chicks older than myself. That’s another reason I don’t care for bullies. If I’m banging a 23 years old at 17, and some 20 something year old guy takes offense, why attack ” a kid “??

    Females cannot give direction or control circumstances that way. Even the young chicks in my social circle understand that that attitude can be deadly for both.

    Ime, the women in my life that know me well will actively de-escalate conflicts.

    A few years back I posted a comment here about when my daughter was sexually assaulted at her airport job. A guy reached across a counter, and pulled her shirt down exposing her breasts, and fondled them before running off. Mind you, my daughter was around 15 years old at the time. Airport security never located the guy, an indian dude who probably boarded a plane while they were trying to find him.

    My daughter called he mother, then me. While I was on my way to the airport, she spoke to security ( lol, airport security can be serious ) and the police, and asked them to be tolerant of me and my attitude when I arrived, and not to let things get out of hand because she knew I was gonna be irate.

    So when I got there I immediately grabbed my daughter in a bear hug, and ….I don’t even remember what I was yelling… but the cops and security stood back and kinda waited for me to run out of steam. My daughter just kept saying into my chest, ” I’m okay, it’s over, calm down “.

    ( Wifey arrived with my stepdaughter, 3 coworkers, 4 goddaughters, her sister and brother inlaw, a neighbor ( lol ), my daughter’s bf showed up with 3 of his brothers,his sister , an aunt and uncle, and 6 or my daughter’s higschool classmates came along as well.)

    I think that was about 4-5 years ago, and that was the last time I was actually afraid I was going to seriously hurt someone, or much worse.

    Later wifey and daughter were talking. Wifey told her ” your father would have beaten that man to death with his bare hands, and happily gone to prison “, and daughter replied ” I know he would, and I would have tried to stop him because It would kill me for him to go to jail “.

    I see that there are women out there that like to see men in conflict, and that they will instigate such. But they are just girls. Unfortunately, some men will be goaded into fighting because of her. That’s a really bad look, control your bitch. That will wet her panties too.

    Recognize crazy, and eject from those situations asap. Or pay for her to have some martial arts classes and let her fight it out.

    Lol, who wants angry hoes anyway?

  63. Seriously tho, I think all boys should have mandatory fighting lessons taught by qualified professionals. It sounds counter-intuitive , but that would eliminate most of this crazy random street/bar/parking lot bullshit fighting. People don’t understand the damage that is possible, or how quickly a life can be taken.

  64. Last one,

    Remember, sometimes you won’t be able to de-escalate. You will have no control. And some dudes have no problem pumping multiple bullets into you.

    Be safe.

    ( as you can )

  65. Vidoes like these make me reconsider visiting US, lol. Too many guys are walking time bombs, the elliot roger type of guy, the middle aged guy who got fired and wants revenge, the crazy cop,etc.
    America is scary man. Sure, knife crime is crazy lately in UK, but what you have in US… I think maybe only Brazil might be worse,lol.

Leave a Reply to Thomas P Seager Cancel reply

%d bloggers like this: