Cornered!

by Roissy on October 23, 2009

Post image for Cornered!

There comes a time in a man’s life (or a few hundred times) when the sum total of his gathered experiences with women and the wisdom he gained from them is called upon to help him out of a pinch. The pinch I refer to is when a woman accuses your cad ass of sneaking around on the side. There are only three things that drain the blood faster from a man’s face than the thought of erectile dysfunction:

  1. When your wife serves you divorce papers.
  2. When you catch your woman fooling around with another man.
  3. When your woman busts you for cheating.

The first two, luckily, haven’t happened to me, but the last one has… multiple times. And from those trials by ovarian fire I have learned a few valuable lessons. I’m here to tell you what to do — or, more precisely, what *not* to do — when your girl jabs the infidelity finger of accusation in your face.

I’ll illustrate how NOT to handle a suspicious girlfriend with a fairly recent example from my own life (about two years ago). I was three months into a torrid fling with a pretty cable TV channel producer whose sexual appetite rivaled the libidos of the horniest girls in the world — the Russians. She was the one who left streaks of black fingernail polish on my shower tiles, which I did not clean off for months as a tribute to her voracious vagina.

As with most sexual dynamos, she was a Class A attention whore. There are pics of her scattered throughout the web of her literally dancing on bars and hipster doofuses licking her stockinged calves. She is now an NYU business school student. One Friday evening, we were having ice cream and she asked me to join her later at a DC indie club for a fashion show her friends were putting on. I said maybe and made an excuse that I might have to visit my sister, because little did TV producer girl know I hadn’t broken up with the serious girlfriend I had been dating for a year (the GF didn’t know about the fling) and I had made tentative plans to see my girlfriend that night. The option to blow off my girlfriend was not available, as her and I were at a critical juncture where any more asshole behavior on my part (such as not seeing her on a Friday night) would’ve caused her to dump me to avoid further pain. I wished not for that gravy train to end.

Later that night, as I post-coitally lounged in my girlfriend’s bed, the TV producer texted me asking if I was coming to meet her. I didn’t respond. I wanted to see her, but the logistics were horrible. I was stuck.

She texted me the next day asking to meet her at a local bar later that night. Hoping for another brain frying bang, I happily met up with her. The power of Admiral Akhbar was not with me. It was a trap. As soon as I sat down on the stool beside her, the conversation assumed a dark ominous tone:

HER: So why didn’t you come join me last night?

ME: Oh, I had some things come up. A buddy is leaving town and I wanted to see him before he left.

HER: What’s his name?

ME: [I hestitated for that critical split second when a girl can figure something is up] Um… Jerry.

HER: Where did you meet him?

ME: U street.

HER: I thought you told me you were seeing your sister?

ME: Um, oh yeah, well I did see her, then I went to catch up with my buddy.

HER: [long pause, staring intensely into my eyes] Your story’s not consistent. What girl were you with last night?

ME: [thinking: "she'd make a great lawyer"] What?

HER: Why don’t you tell me who you were really with last night.

As suddenly as a tropical squall, her face hardened into a sheet of ice. The love had vanished.

ME: Look, I don’t like talking about this shit in my life, but my ex-girlfriend is going through a tough time and she needed me. [I was hoping to gain points for being compassionate. What a fool I was.] If I didn’t go see her, she might’ve freaked out.

HER: I don’t date cheaters. Or liars. I’m leaving town soon. It was nice knowing you.

Although I tried to smooth the waters, I did not get a bon voyage bang.

Some of you will be able to figure out where I went wrong. Pretty much everywhere. The above vignette is a textbook example of how to bungle the handling of a girl accusing you of cheating. I had violated my own rules for dealing with women.

  • I prevaricated, weakly.
  • I attempted a salvage operation.
  • I played right into her frame.
  • I confessed.

These four bullet points are everything you need to know about what NOT to do when accused by a girlfriend/wife/fling of spreading your man manna. You will want to do the exact opposite of what I did. Namely:

  • Don’t prevaricate.
  • Don’t backpedal or appease.
  • Reframe.
  • Deny deny deny!

Let’s illustrate how to properly handle the above scenario by changing the words I say.

HER: So why didn’t you come join me last night?

ME: I had some personal issues to take care of.

HER: What issues?

ME: It’s personal and nothing to do with you.

HER: Did you meet a girl?

ME: Would you like my bank account number while you’re at it, Inspector Clouseau?

HER: If you’re fucking around with someone else I want to know.

ME: No.

HER: Why don’t you tell me who you were really with last night.

ME: Heidi Klum and Scarlett Johansson. We fucked like rabbits. I had to kick them out. Those girls get clingy.

HER: I don’t date cheaters. Or liars.

ME: I don’t date distrustful girls.

Now there’s no way to know if this would’ve resulted in the bang bus rolling on, but I believe the readers will agree that the odds of retaining the services of the TV producer would have been much higher had I handled it like in the second imagined scenario.

So, to recap:

When accused of cheating:

  1. Pause before answering.
  2. Speak directly. Don’t hem and haw.
  3. Look her in the eyes. Remember, every moment with a girl is a staring contest which you must win.
  4. Don’t appease. Appeasement is the great pussy desiccator.
  5. Don’t fall into her frame. Reframing is king!
  6. And, finally, deny like the sociopath you are. No matter how damning the evidence (she could walk in on you with your cock up to the hilt in strange pussy) if you keep a straight face and firmly deny everything she will rationalize a way to believe you. Yes, even the smart ones who got into NYU business school.

{ 139 comments… read them below or add one }

Brad October 23, 2009 at 16:37

This reminds me of the Asshole game post you did where you talked about a girl coming into the club on a Friday night when you were with anothe girl, and acted as if nohing was wrong. I think you even introduced them.

I cringed at the first conversation, she totally took over the frame and domnated you and the discussion.

I like the second conversation, especially the parts where you playfully call her detective and say you were with heidi/scarlett. After that, if she just kept pressing, I would have totally ignored her question and gone onto something else.

I think the “I don’t date distrustful girls” wouldn’t have gone over we ll, because it is almost submitting to her frame. You also let on that you’re bothered by what she is accusing you of.

The last thing you said doesn’t appeal to her EMOTIONS as much as it appeals to her LOGIC. I would have gone into some diatribe about her being an annoying bratty little sister… gone EMOTIONALLY playful rather than cold, hard and bitter “I don’t date distrustful girls.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Advocatus Diaboli October 23, 2009 at 16:41

The problem is: You care about women.

Why care? Every woman is replacable.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Renee October 23, 2009 at 17:23

And this from a guy who made posts about how easy it is to identify sluts and how double standards are necessary lol.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 3
august15th October 23, 2009 at 17:25

I think the key thing to remember is Roissy’s own advice about imagining all your communication with a woman broadcasting on the Jumbotron at Times Square. This will help keep you from backpedaling, apologizing or, worse, pleading.

We all get blinded by the pussy sometimes. Especially the crazy pussy.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
JackieTreehorn October 23, 2009 at 17:36

I learned long ago to always have an alibi.

I have a childhood friend/drinking buddy who I usually hang out with. We go to dive bars, get drunk, watch sports, etc.

He’s my default alibi, and he knows it. If a girl I’m seeing regularly asks me what I’m doing Friday, I just say “I’m with [drinking buddy] that night, let’s hang out Saturday.”

Then when girl #2 asks me about Saturday, I say “I’m with [drinking buddy], let’s hang out Friday.”

See how that works? Of course, the conversation #2 you posted was good too. Always deflect and tease, but otherwise if you find a good one that you want to keep around for a while, always set up an alibi so that you can bang other girls on the side.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Riff Dog October 23, 2009 at 17:43

I can see how Method #2 would have been more satisfying, but if you were looking for a last bang or to salvage this one, it’s way too smartass to work. The problem is that her pride is involved now, so you don’t want to feed that fire. You want to calm her down. (Unless of course you’re actually innocent and can prove it. In which case you want to let her get as angry and worked up as possible. Then show your proof of innocence and get ready for the best apology sex of your life.)

But assuming you’re actually guilty (if you’re like me, a good assumption 9 out of 10 times,) then you want to avoid any escalating moves, like being a smartass. Or showing anger. Stay calm and confident. Confident because you “know” you didn’t really do anything wrong (it scares me sometimes how good I can be at that.) Deny of course, but don’t pretend to be offended. Just stay calm and let her talk it out.

Riff Dog’s proven method:
1. Deny
2. Defuse
3. Deny
4. Defuse

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Riff Dog October 23, 2009 at 17:48

JackieTreehorn’s comment reminds me of the old comparison between women’s friends and men’s friends:

A husband suspects his wife of cheating the previous night. She says she was with friends, so he calls 10 of her friends and none can confirm her alibi.

A wife suspects her husband of cheating the previous night. He says he was with friends, so she calls 10 of his friends. 7 say they were definitely with him that night. The other 3 say he’s still there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 5 Thumb down 0
julie October 23, 2009 at 17:51

OK, the picture is cool.

I am starting to see as I don’t need the MRM any more that you have to be a sick female to follow this shit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 23, 2009 at 18:03

We finally have a photo of Roissy. :-)

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
by_the_sword October 23, 2009 at 18:12

Julie, you might want to keep paying attention to posts like these in order to protect yourself from the next Pick-Up-Artists who tries to run game on you.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Welmer October 23, 2009 at 18:23

I am starting to see as I don’t need the MRM any more that you have to be a sick female to follow this shit.

-Julie

Hey Julie,

you gals made your bed…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 3
julie October 23, 2009 at 18:31

Puma,

Julie, you might want to keep paying attention to posts like these in order to protect yourself from the next Pick-Up-Artists who tries to run game on you.

Thanks for saying but I am 40 now. I am the old hag who has had her day with men. And TBH, I have caught many men out playing the game in my time.

And it turned on them all the time. They made their bets with other men for fun but when the winner thought they had a chance of something more I just said, “Hey, I have no respect for game players. This was just a game to you. You won, end of our friendship”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
julie October 23, 2009 at 18:39

I just want add that the majority of times game has been played on me, no-one won. I ditch every single guy involved. It is low to play game on females. IMHO.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 2
Puma October 23, 2009 at 18:40

Julie I think someone else said that quote about you and PUAs.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
julie October 23, 2009 at 18:43

Puma,

Julie I think someone else said that quote about you and PUAs.

Oh, gosh, I am so sincerely sorry. I wish I could change it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Puma October 23, 2009 at 18:45

That’s ok. Small mix-up.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 23, 2009 at 18:49

To Puma,

That’s ok. Small mix-up.

Well, now I MUST visit you site and read lots of what you have to say. :D But beware, I will comment. lol

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 23, 2009 at 18:55

Have you just started a blog Puma?

BTW, I thought the article you wrote on Wedded Abyss was fantastic. If we had alimony in New Zealand I would have put it up on my single parent website.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 23, 2009 at 18:58

Thanks Julie. I intend for it to be a sole-essay, and not an ongoing blog, for the time being.

As far as I can tell NZ is a pretty progressive place. It must be nice to live there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
miles October 23, 2009 at 19:04

Ive heard this “saying” on the subject before, repeated in staccato-like fashion which made it seem funny:

Deny it,
Admit nothing,
Demand proof.

The way it was said to me (so fast!) made it seem quite funny, as if it were memorized like fire-drill instructions.

For Julie: We have all been cheated on and had our pride hurt and time wasted. Men and women are both frequent victims in this area Im afraid.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
julie October 23, 2009 at 19:04

To Puma,

As far as I can tell NZ is a pretty progressive place. It must be nice to live there.

Well, it is in a way and it isn’t in another way. You won’t get ex feminist men saying so and you won’t get men right’s activists who are into politics saying so. Both these groups know who is who in the zoo! lol. It is a personal fight.

But I think the ground is trying to move forward. I think that we have a new generation who thinks quite differently that the last. I guess you just have to wait and see. I don’t think you can ever please some men and some women but hey, that’s life. :D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Rollory October 23, 2009 at 19:05

HER: So why didn’t you come join me last night?

ME: I didn’t want to.

There. Done.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 23, 2009 at 19:20

To miles,

For Julie: We have all been cheated on and had our pride hurt and time wasted. Men and women are both frequent victims in this area Im afraid.

Miles, that is a terrible excuse to pass on hurt.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Hux October 23, 2009 at 19:51

A champ would just look at her as if “how dare you fucking even suggest that,” and storm the fuck out. She’ll call.

…If we had alimony in New Zealand…

I’m from/live in New Zealand, and my father’s asshole has been left wide open from the last skank he was engaged to. I don’t know what the technical term for what happened is, but he lost a lot of money.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 23, 2009 at 20:02

To Hux,

I’m from/live in New Zealand, and my father’s asshole has been left wide open from the last skank he was engaged to. I don’t know what the technical term for what happened is, but he lost a lot of money.

When you say the last skank, I can’t help but wonder how many skanks are involved in this story? So do let me know so I can make better judgement.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
someone October 23, 2009 at 20:08

Here’s an innovative solution to the problem: don’t cheat.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Lugo October 23, 2009 at 20:34

Julie is fat, old, and bitter. Why is she even here?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Renee October 23, 2009 at 20:40

Here’s an innovative solution to the problem: don’t cheat.

I know right……

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Renee October 23, 2009 at 20:45

Someone,

Here’s an innovative solution to the problem: don’t cheat.

I know right. I’m left wondering why he even bothered having a girlfriend in the first place. Oh yeah…..for the “gravy train”.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 23, 2009 at 20:50

Lugo October 23, 2009 at 8:34 pm

Julie is fat, old, and bitter. Why is she even here?

Well, I don’t think I am fat or bitter and I don’t think myself old but do accept men think 40 years is old for females. But I was here, ahem I want the WAS bit noted as I wasn’t always 40 years of age….. but I was here because I cared. I did alot as a mother for the cause but her time has come when she needs to let go and let the young just be what they are.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pupu October 23, 2009 at 21:26

What happened to the GF? Did she “dump” Roissy? If yes, it would have been a pity to loose two fun girls even though the loss of the GF was not directly related to cheating. Value judgments aside, 0ne trouble with cheating is that romance may come in feasts and famines.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
piercedhead October 23, 2009 at 22:07

I am starting to see as I don’t need the MRM any more that you have to be a sick female to follow this shit.

It’ll grow on you Julie. It’s the equivalent of women using men. Pretty ugly at first sight, but once you get used to it, why not? Heather takes Paul for 50 mil, Roissy takes Heather’s sister (younger one. of course. Much younger.) And since that’s such a lousy deal, Roissy gets another 100 girls chucked in.

Nature hates suckers. That’s why it deals to them so ruthlessly.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
Gx1080 October 23, 2009 at 22:18

If you are going to be scaly like a snake, act like a big one that sneaks to the prey, lie in big and stick to that story no matter what, don’t, I repeat, don’t act like a small one that goes to the highway and gets squashed by a truck.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
by_the_sword October 23, 2009 at 22:29

Honor…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
kis October 24, 2009 at 01:31

Okay, to have this article posted so quickly after the “Self-control: a Masculine Quality” one is..ironic. I seem to recall someone insisting somewhere here that women have no honor–they lie lie lie–but that men don’t lie.

So here’s what I think the conversation should go like:

Her: So why didn’t you come join me last night?

Him: I had some personal issues to take care of.

Her: What issues?

Him: It’s personal and nothing to do with you.

Her: Did you meet a girl?

Him: Yep. We banged like rabbits. Want to join us tonight?

Her: You’re a piece of shit.

Him: Hey, baby, at least I’m honest.

Her: I don’t date cheaters.

Him: Oh well, your loss. How about a farewell fuck?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
DJDamage October 24, 2009 at 01:39

Women are the masters (or lack of a better word mistresses) of manipulations. If the situation were reveresed and it was a man who would question his woman fidelity then it would sound something like this:

Man: “who and where were you last evening?” (I know I know to even question a woman regarding her fidelity is beta, one must clean house if he suspects his woman his cheating on him because listening to your gut is sometimes the best bet).

Woman: “Gawed you never trust me, you are so jealous of me everytime I talk to a guy, i am soo mad at you now!! (woman storms off leaving the man shocked ) (see what she did?! the woman who is probably cheating but doesn’t want to get caught totaly reversed the blame and it landed right into the Man’s lap thus making him the guilty one for even suggesting she would cheat.)

Maintaining the frame is always the key but also reversing that shit right back at them is the key. The fact that a woman can sit there and accuse you of something she has no evidance for should not be tolerated or discussed.

Sometimes just walking away is a very powerful tool and if she is still into you, then she will chase you down and appologise.

If she doesn’t then good riddance, at least you walked away with your head up high.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 04:51

That pic is the shit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 05:03

””””Advocatus Diaboli October 23, 2009 at 4:41 pm
The problem is: You care about women.

Why care? Every woman is replacable.

””””””

Its an achilles heal from the raising process to care for the little fuckers.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 05:07

Or maybe it is in the soul.

Nice to hear the personnal excerpt roissy. Should reframe and talk about her earning a spot on the team. Why should she be worrying about what another woman can do? She should be confident enough in her abilities to keep your attention for some of the time while others keep your attention for the other part of the time. Unless she is scared that what she offers is the same old same old. Let her rise to the challenge of working her way into your harem and finding ways to get you to parcel out some of your precious time.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
Paul Elam October 24, 2009 at 06:56

LOL! Is this what things have devolved to? Artful sociopathy? Respectfully, this is a crock.

Here are some facts, if you are a man that doesn’t cheat and doesn’t tolerate bullshit interrogations from women who think they run the show, your chances of ending up in any of these conversations is nil.

Men who get interrogated are men who allow it, and men who don’t allow it. period, are men who won’t get far enough in a relationship with the type of woman mentioned above to have to practice any snappy comebacks.

Additionally, if you are the kind of man that makes a commitment, that forms a bond with your word, and then breaks it over a piece of tail, then your conversation needs to be between you and the mirror. You have a lot of growing up to do.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 4 Thumb down 0
lovelysexybeauty October 24, 2009 at 07:51

Hm…seems like no matter how Alpha a guy acts, women with options (“Alpha” women who are attractive) will also want emotional security.

Making her tingly is not enough to keep a woman around for a long time. In just one moment, pride can actually destroy any tingles the Alpha had built it. This is how I’ve felt for a while, and this story seems to support that idea.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 08:24

Not with the right ones lsb

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 24, 2009 at 08:39

I support the hard core PUA wing of the Men’s Awareness movement. Their efforts are essential to bring down the facade of the Victorian “women=angels” paradigm that has permeated our society over the last 130 years. That paradigm was the foundation for all the misandrist laws that have been legislated over the last century.

Even things like no-fault alimony (NFA) where they legislated without a thought thinking: “Yes it has a loophole, but those goodhearted women won’t exploit it”. Guess what Point Dexter? They have exploited it. The 70% female initiated divorce rate is nothing more than the ching! of cash registers being rung across the Anglosphere.

Anyways, our PUA brothers are eating away at this false Victorian foundation one lay at a time, one married-bang at a time, one field report at a time. Go forth and bring down this temple of evil my brothers! Sometimes you have to fight immorality with immorality.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed October 24, 2009 at 09:04

Is this what things have devolved to? Artful sociopathy?

Yes. We’re losing younger men, Paul. Maybe we have already lost them. The chickens are coming home to roost. According to Roosh, one of these guys’ gurus –

“Men’s Rights” Has Become A Euphemism For “Sexual Loser”

http://www.rooshv.com/mens-rights-has-become-a-euphemism-for-sexual-loser

While us older guys have been so busy nit-picking each other to death, life has been going on and things have been changing. The Father’s Rights guys have been screaming for years about being torn out of their families. Well, the first generation of boys raised by single mums is coming on line, and this is what they look like. All they have ever learned about what being a man is “what makes mama happy.” They have been raised on a diet of sex in the media and in advertising 7x24x365. Their goal in life has become getting sex, and it appears that all it takes to get that is to “make mama happy.” They are well trained.

What the hell did you expect? The “nobly masculine” values you are thumping your chest about don’t get added to the water along with fluoride.

I just led julie in comments on the boomer post to admit that women do not need men to care about them. Well, young men don’t. This is what they look like.

The culture has decimated the insitution of marriage, claimed that “fathers” can have meaningful contact with their children via video links and “supervised visitation”, sexualized everything, glorified “sexually empowered” women ala “Sex and the City” and “Cougars”, “outsourced” most ways men could make a living other than corporate theft, borrowed more money than can ever be paid off, put more men in prison than any other country in the world, and for some reason still expects young men act like noble martyrs?

The culture cannot get away with allowing and encouraging women to completely dehumanize men and expect that young men are not going to eventually respond in kind and dehumanize women to the same extent.

Cless Alvein calls it “Combat Dating.” It’s boiling down to “Do them before they do you.”

We are entering Phase II of the gender war, and it’s probably going to start getting really ugly from here.

You’re old enough to remember Vietnam. Remember the term “fragging”?

We’re being fragged, Paul. Because we allowed these guys to get conscripted into a war and then tried to tie their hands so they really could not fight and could not win.

They aren’t going to do it, and they aren’t going to pay any attention to us because the world we handed them is screwed up beyond belief.

They are going guerilla and they are going native. They want to be sexual winners, not sexual losers.

The people who want to hold on to any sort of civilized values need to put down the bong, wake up, and smell the coffee. It may already be too late to salvage things, but we are sure as hell going to lose the whole ball game if we don’t wake up to the fact that it ain’t 1955 any more and everything men got taught about being men then is used as a way to jerk them around today.

Neither you nor I would put up with being jerked around for too long, it’s pretty inane to expect younger men to do so.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 09:15

Rhoosh pretty much seems like he is going expat. Young guys know it is all fucked up because a lot have seen their fathers fucked up by the meat grinder.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 09:16

Or at least know of one guy who has.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Puma October 24, 2009 at 09:27

It is true that the broader Men’s Awareness umbrella includes the group called “Incels” – Involuntary Celibates. But this is a minority. I see no reason to exclude good fellow men from the movement just because they had less sucess in the mating game. It does not diminish their standing as fellow human beings in my eyes. We are all fighting for our rights as a single class. As Men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Fiercely Independent John Nada October 24, 2009 at 09:39

I’d recommend EVERYONE re-read that last post by zed and let that reality really sink in.

“I have been over into the future, and it works.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Fiercely Independent John Nada October 24, 2009 at 09:42

Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 9:15 am

Rhoosh pretty much seems like he is going expat

***
Not quite. He seems to be a Sexpat for the moment. There is a definite distinction between the two.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Puma October 24, 2009 at 09:46

If you momentarily excuse my sin of generalizing of people into groups (which is never 100% accurate as we all change), these are the sub-components of the Men’s Awareness movement that I’ve encountered to date:

- Old School MRAs: Including traditional political/media leaders like Mr. Elam, Mr. Sacks, Dr. Holstein., etc.

- MGTOW: A group that splintered from the above advocating more guerilla, individual, online activism tactics. ZED was part of this group that has now grown to include many of us.

- PUAs: Not really a “rights” movement at all, they have made huge advances in the fields of Ev-Psych, Gender Realism, and Men’s Awareness that has now started to eclipse/merge-with other men’s currents. Their other advantage is massive numbers around the globe, which isn’t surprising since “Sex Sells”. Also as some of these folks get older, and start getting ensnared by various governmental Man-Traps in our laws/society, they are starting to organically incorporate MRA ideas into their movement (at least some of them).

- Ghosts: Seem to have been a component of MGTOW from day one. But while the latter encourages “careful” relations with the other gender, the Ghosts have opted for a no-relations approach. They are voluntary celibates. If you think about it, these type of men have been part of human civilization from days of antiquity (hermits, latter day celibate priests, monks, etc) , and there may be biological roots in their ability to shut off desire so effortlessly.

- Involuntary Celibates (Incels): In PUA lingo these are the lower-Betas/Omegas that find their way into the online communities as they are searching for ways to break out of their rut. I wish them success in their quest, but in the meanwhile I see no problems with them being part of the overall Men’s Awareness umbrella. Especially if they do their part in spreading the word and raising the general populations’ awareness of men’s rights in the process.

Feel free to add to the list.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 10:06

Men who are willing to go to whatever length it takes to not go through what their dads did.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Fiercely Independent John Nada October 24, 2009 at 10:11

- Expat/Marry Foreign–contingent of MGTOW that advocates bypassing Entitlement Materialist Feminism altogether by marrying anti-feminist Foreign women, expatriation altogether or both. We are active in this war lobbying against anti-male legislation like VAWA, IMBRA and the Bradley Amendment as many of us are affected by it (either directly or indirectly).

We also fight by forming families and procreating (the antithesis of EMF) as well as Enlightening astute Men to take action and know that there is a life beyond the punishing downward percussion of feminized societies.

The ancillary effect of our actions is that (as 5th Horseman so astutely noted) we starve the system by denying the looters (the tyrannical misandrist state, the industries, and the women) that benefit from the blanket transfers of wealth. We also create wealth and personal freedom by using its own rules against it. All this accomplished (for fear of oversimplification), by living a happy and stress-free, drama-free life.

Ahhh, effervescence!

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Keep a Movin' Dan October 24, 2009 at 10:52

I’m disappointed. Whatever happened to “lying to women is unnecessary, I tell women I’m dating around”? I would have cut her off early on with “We’re not in a relationship. You don’t have a right to know my every move.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 24, 2009 at 11:02

Men pretty much need to work their asses off save money and drop out of sytem of slavery.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Renee October 24, 2009 at 11:13

Kis,

Okay, to have this article posted so quickly after the “Self-control: a Masculine Quality” one is..ironic. I seem to recall someone insisting somewhere here that women have no honor–they lie lie lie–but that men don’t lie.

Exactly, thank you for mentioning this. I’m sure that Roissy or a few men here have no problem criticizing women who cheat and manipulate, yet we have a post that gives tips on what to do if your girlfriend suspects you of cheating.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Zammo October 24, 2009 at 11:13

While us older guys have been so busy nit-picking each other to death, life has been going on and things have been changing. The Father’s Rights guys have been screaming for years about being torn out of their families. Well, the first generation of boys raised by single mums is coming on line, and this is what they look like. All they have ever learned about what being a man is “what makes mama happy.” They have been raised on a diet of sex in the media and in advertising 7×24×365. Their goal in life has become getting sex, and it appears that all it takes to get that is to “make mama happy.” They are well trained.

This is a brilliant observation on the younger generation of men. Let us also not forget that two generations of women have been swearing up and own that they simply don’t need men. Young men have learned this and PUA is a natural reaction – along with MRM, MGTOW, Incel, Ghost, etc.

Think about how modern women are behaving – they expect to be made happy (by men) and are unwilling to offer anything in return except maybe sex. PUA accepts this one-sided business relationship and teaches men to get the only thing from a woman that she is willing to offer that is valuable to men – sex.

Do bear in mind that I am also of the older generation. I’m 47. I happily encourage younger men to learn PUA, if only to learn the truth about young women.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Renee October 24, 2009 at 11:43

I haven’t been on this board that long, so some of these initials are lost on me. One of them being PUAs. I’m sorry but what does it stand for?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Type 5 October 24, 2009 at 11:45

Exactly, thank you for mentioning this. I’m sure that Roissy or a few men here have no problem criticizing women who cheat and manipulate, yet we have a post that gives tips on what to do if your girlfriend suspects you of cheating.

I have no problem with it. Just as I don’t measure a man by how much or how little he gets laid, I don’t judge him by how he treats women. Rather, I judge him by how he treats other men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
OneSTDV October 24, 2009 at 11:45

Am the only one who doesn’t like the template? Well I think the site looks great, but the organization of the posts (not having them in a simple scroll down format) is really irksome.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Renee October 24, 2009 at 11:47

Nevermind, I just found out. It means Pick Up Artist.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Welmer October 24, 2009 at 11:51

Am the only one who doesn’t like the template? Well I think the site looks great, but the organization of the posts (not having them in a simple scroll down format) is really irksome.

It’s for maximum exposure of articles from our various authors. It’s the best I can come up with for now, but I’ll take your advice under consideration.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 24, 2009 at 11:54

Just as I don’t measure a man by how much or how little he gets laid, I don’t judge him by how he treats women. Rather, I judge him by how he treats other men.

After all, he may be a “seriously troubled” young man who needs our “understanding” rather than our censure and judgement – you know, like the rape-liar Danmell Nondye.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Dat_Truth_Hurts October 24, 2009 at 11:55

The ladies fail once again to realize that sites like The Spearhead do not censor ideas. The articles are different viewpoints, and offer different things to different people. Some of us that visit are successful bachelors that have no intention of marrying (or marrying an American woman) so this article helps. Its a simple matter – in today’s dating culture, handling multiple women is a big part of it.

Now, I’m up front when I start having sexual relationships with girls. I tell them I have many lady friends and none are exclusive. The women in their early 20′s (I am 33) are most accepting of this arrangement. I also let them know if I meet a keeper, I would make it exclusive. Thing is, I haven’t met one and my standards for exclusivity are super steep.

The old morals are dead unless you live in close knit communities with religious overtones (i.e. Mormons, for example). Living by some outdated code of chivalry is foolish and will get you walked over. Those systems of social interaction were born of a time when womens place was rigid and she would be shamed to high heaven for acting so boorish as her modern sisters. Note also that modern “pick-up” practitioners would be also shamed and run out of town for being a rake.

The “equality” movement simply destroyed the complex social order we once had, and has replaced it with a free-for-all dating market full of confusing gender roles, trial lawyer backed divorce industry, and no real system of healthy courtship for young people.

Hookup culture is unbridled human sexuality free of social stigma, with a small percentage of “alpha” men getting a large percent of attractive women during their most fertile years. The Alpha men, and those that work toward being more socially dominant through game, are the winners. The losers? Any attractive woman that waits until her looks fade and eggs wither before attempting to start a family, and most men.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
julie October 24, 2009 at 12:34

Encouraging PUAs is not a positive because it just encourages feminists to make laws to even the playing field.

And besides, men don’t need to lie to women about their cheating. I agree with the comment, “Just be honest”. Most men cheat or if they could they would. Very few men are ready to settle and settle down until they think they are out of the game because younger men have moved in whether the older men have money to buy sex or not. Especially now that women have their own money.

The greeks would never go without prostitutes in their culture because it has been a part of who they are from long ago. And western women used to encourage men to have a mistress and the laws man made deliberately protected the wife because she was the one who was to raise his children. Now the laws women are making are protecting both the wife and the mistress.

There is no, “PUAs are making momma happy”. All PUAs are doing is making the older men in the MRA happy because women are suffering from it and anything an older MRA can use it stick it to a feminist is fair game in their eyes.

I thought about women not needing men but then I also thought about men needing women. Having a mistress was consider a good thing so the wife could get on with raising the children and she had another women help her keep her husband happy.

My ex and I agreed we would not leave each over infidelity when we very first married because he doubted he could have self control. He did it a lot but he never allowed me to do it. Any knowledge of a man taking interest in ME sent him into a state of, “This is MY wife”. He couldn’t handle the thought of me in bed with another man and yet he had no problem being in bed with another woman. But I stuck in there listening to older women telling me, “This will pass, he will settle down at 30″. Nope he never did and then Men’s sites said, “Men don’t settle down till they are 40″. Well, fuck that. I didn’t need a player, I needed a family man. Now he has 2 women. One being me who raises his children and one being another women who takes care of him. And I like her a lot. And I like it that he is now in his early 40′s and he won’t leave her so I can get on with my life now that my job is over.

I am a firm supporter of men having more than one wife now that I passed all this relationship stuff in my life. If you had of asked me this last year, I still would have been “one wife for one man” but I realise that is asking too much. Some men can do it and I think that is wonderful for their wives and children but many can’t.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
kis October 24, 2009 at 12:36

Now, I’m up front when I start having sexual relationships with girls. I tell them I have many lady friends and none are exclusive. The women in their early 20’s (I am 33) are most accepting of this arrangement. I also let them know if I meet a keeper, I would make it exclusive. Thing is, I haven’t met one and my standards for exclusivity are super steep.

I don’t see anything wrong with that at all. Although I hope you’re being smart about safe sex! I’m a serial monogamist myself, always have been. But there were times when I was involved with more than one guy, and they both knew it. It’s only cheating if you’re doing it on the sly.

Cheating irks me. But perhaps that’s the part of me that will go back into the store to pay for the chocolate bar I forgot was in my pocket when I left. There are ways to sleep around without sacrificing your integrity.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker October 24, 2009 at 12:39

They aren’t going to do it, and they aren’t going to pay any attention to us because the world we handed them is screwed up beyond belief.

They are going guerilla and they are going native. They want to be sexual winners, not sexual losers.

The positive side to this, though, lies precisely in its nihilism. In other words, there are aspects of the current culture when it comes to men and women that need to simply be destroyed, obliterated for the good of men. As you say, pegging men in 1955 roles just screws men beyond belief in a society which has tilted severely in favor of women. The women have destroyed their own roles and played the nihilism game, and it took a few generations of men being effed by the system for a younger crowd to come along and play nihilism back. And they’re doing precisely that.

It will be an ugly phase, but also a needed one. We can’t move forward until the male side of the 1950s equation is completely destroyed. That will free men from the nonsense we are exposed to today. And it will open the path to an uncertain future, but one which at least holds greater promise for men than having one foot in the feminist present and another in the chivalrous past, as social conservatives and others want men to continue to do.

Sometimes a little nihilism is a good thing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 1
kis October 24, 2009 at 12:46

I am a firm supporter of men having more than one wife now that I passed all this relationship stuff in my life. If you had of asked me this last year, I still would have been “one wife for one man” but I realise that is asking too much. Some men can do it and I think that is wonderful for their wives and children but many can’t.

Yeah, I wouldn’t have minded mine getting second wife, either–or a mistress, so long as he was open about it. And not just because of any spectacular three-way action that might ensue, heh. I’m not the jealous type, really. If he’d cheated, my only complaint would have been the lying and sneaking, not the presence of another woman in his/our lives.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker October 24, 2009 at 12:49

That’s coming, too, I think. Legalization of polygamous relationships will be inevitable, eventually. And that will lead to a sharpening of the situation, more Game and so on.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
julie October 24, 2009 at 12:52

Oops, I need to change one word.

There is no, “PUAs are making momma happy”. All PUAs are doing is making the older men in the MRA happy because women are suffering from it and anything an older MRA can use it stick it to a female is fair game in their eyes.

I meant to write feminist not female.

[Nova: Okay :) . I changed that word above and will get rid of this comment in due course once it has been seen.]

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 24, 2009 at 13:00

Fierceley Independent John Nada-

Thanks for the addition of the
- Expat/Marry Foreign
contingent of MGTOW to the list. The ones who’ve pulled it off have had the highest returns. Being able to have a normal family, with great kids of their own, a great and loving wife, all without living under the Sword of Damocles that is Anglosphere divorce laws.

Many live in wonderful tropical climates to boost.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Gregory Magarshak October 24, 2009 at 13:08

What roissy have a girlfriend? Selling out eh

That’s the source of your troubles right there Roissy

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Hux October 24, 2009 at 13:44

@Julie –

…I can’t help but wonder how many skanks are involved in this story?

Many. My father is an incorrigible philanderer.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 24, 2009 at 14:08

But I think the ground is trying to move forward. I think that we have a new generation who thinks quite differently that the last.

It may be a while before the new generation gets much political power. The old regime can still do plenty of damage. Are you familiar with the subject of this post on the False Rape Society? –
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2009/10/justice-scale-may-tilt-for-sex-victims.html

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10604923&pnum=0

The justice system could be tilted to make it easier to convict sex offenders if the Government adopts proposals in a controversial taskforce report.

The report from the two-year taskforce for action on sexual violence, issued yesterday, would reverse the usual rules of evidence for sex cases only – disclosing previous offences and complaints against an accused offender, directing juries that they may draw an “adverse inference” if an accused opts to stay silent, and directing them that “beyond reasonable doubt” does not mean “no doubt” that the accused is guilty

.

If I had a son in NZ, I would advise him very strongly to be very cautious in his conduct of sexual relationships. Not that such advice would ever be considered bad advice, but the entire area is getting very gray.

I’m not sure Game would work in NZ anyway, but I think it would be extremely high risk.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 24, 2009 at 14:26

To Kis,

Yeah, I wouldn’t have minded mine getting second wife, either–or a mistress, so long as he was open about it. And not just because of any spectacular three-way action that might ensue, heh. I’m not the jealous type, really. If he’d cheated, my only complaint would have been the lying and sneaking, not the presence of another woman in his/our lives.

I think as long as both women respect each other, it works. I was concerned about one woman and I did visit her and confronted her. She denied it which made me react from a threatening position. “Keep your dirty paws off MY man” is what I said. I also visited another woman I knew whose husband had her also on the sly to ask her how she coped. That was such a bad move because she hadn’t coped and she took off overseas. Her husband took the family on a trip around the world to fix things. I think that men don’t really want to sacrafice their families. I hear many women who have broken up with fathers say, “Yeah, he went all out in the family court to have his rights and won but then he just went back to his life and didn’t keep to the agreements he fought for”.

I also think women feel the same. We don’t mind sharing our men but we absolutely want the best of him. It is family first and everything second. And we don’t mind a second as long as the first is in concrete.

Oh, don’t mind me if you can’t follow this. My mind is still trying to figure it all out. :D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 24, 2009 at 14:30

To Hux,

…I can’t help but wonder how many skanks are involved in this story?

Many. My father is an incorrigible philanderer.

Well, what can I say? What choices do I have with my own personal beliefs? Did your dad just play with fire and eventually got burnt?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech October 24, 2009 at 14:46

That’s coming, too, I think. Legalization of polygamous relationships will be inevitable, eventually. And that will lead to a sharpening of the situation, more Game and so on.

And possibly even a bit of terrorism. While I can’t use the Muslim world as a model for the Anglosphere for a multitude of reasons, the fact of the matter is that legalized and de facto legal polygamy in the Muslim world is a major factor in why so much terrorism comes from there. In Islam, generally, a man can have up to four wives so its possible that 75% of men will have to go completely without. Effectively, it isn’t that high, but a significant fraction of men do have to go without. (Of course, game is not an option there.) This is one reason why its so easy to recruit suicide bombers. Many of them aren’t getting any now, and they’re promised 72 virgins in Heaven.

Like I said, the Muslim world isn’t a good model for the Anglosphere. We do have options like game, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see some suicide bombers sometime after polygamy is legalized. I’m not surprised to see that Kis and Julie don’t have the foresight to see these very real problems.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Hux October 24, 2009 at 15:00

@Julie –

I’m not saying whether it was right or wrong (I called her a skank just ’cause I remember her being kind of a general bitch…South African, ahem). I’m just saying we do have something near enough to alimony ’cause you said we don’t.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
kis October 24, 2009 at 15:18

Like I said, the Muslim world isn’t a good model for the Anglosphere. We do have options like game, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see some suicide bombers sometime after polygamy is legalized. I’m not surprised to see that Kis and Julie don’t have the foresight to see these very real problems.

It’s not that I don’t foresee the problems. I feel as bad for those boys booted off the fundamentalist Mormon compounds when they hit 18 as I do for the girls forced to stay and submit to polygamous marriages with old men.

But if the reality is that men will cheat, polygamy–or a modified form of it, such as mistresses who are known to wives–is at least more honest than sneaking around. Isn’t it?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Bhetti October 24, 2009 at 15:52

In Islam, generally, a man can have up to four wives so its possible that 75% of men will have to go completely without. Effectively, it isn’t that high, but a significant fraction of men do have to go without. (Of course, game is not an option there.) This is one reason why its so easy to recruit suicide bombers. Many of them aren’t getting any now, and they’re promised 72 virgins in Heaven.

A) You’re right, muslim models aren’t quite applicable to the anglosphere.
B) Still, any connection between suicide bombing and polygamy is an unproven hypothesis at best. I remember feeling quite happy with suicide bombing as a concept and I was a non-sexually frustrated female. Also, take into consideration this as well, with a grain of salt: http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/5455
C) Do you have any figures that say where suicide bombers come from, by country? Not all Arab and/or muslim countries have polygamy as a common model. Palestinians, for example, generally do not seem to have a polygamous model, thanks to this which is a stipulation often taken advantage of. Polygamy also not being practical with scarcity of resources. If you want better evidence of this, I can try and see if there is any.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Advocatus Diaboli October 24, 2009 at 16:21

Men deserve the entitled cunts their choices create.

Women deserve the downward spiral created by their choices.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 1
Renee October 24, 2009 at 17:51

Julie,

I also think women feel the same. We don’t mind sharing our men but we absolutely want the best of him. It is family first and everything second. And we don’t mind a second as long as the first is in concrete.

Oh, don’t mind me if you can’t follow this. My mind is still trying to figure it all out.

Lol…..yeah…..I’m one of those people who can’t follow that. But maybe being a Christian and my parents being married for 27 have something to do with it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Pro-male/Anti-feminist Tech October 24, 2009 at 18:41

But if the reality is that men will cheat, polygamy–or a modified form of it, such as mistresses who are known to wives–is at least more honest than sneaking around. Isn’t it?

A more effective solution to this would be sexbots.

I remember feeling quite happy with suicide bombing as a concept and I was a non-sexually frustrated female.

What do you mean by “happy with suicide bombing as a concept”? If you were sexually frustrated and promised 72 virgins for going through with it is the real question.

Regardless, yes, there are more issues than not getting laid (with no prospects of getting laid and the promise of 72 virgins in Heaven) when it comes to terrorism, but it’s certainly a contributing factor.

Do you have any figures that say where suicide bombers come from, by country?

I tried to ask Al-Queda and other terrorists groups, but they told me to go away at gunpoint when I knocked on their doors.

Palestinians, for example, generally do not seem to have a polygamous model, thanks to this which is a stipulation often taken advantage of.

Palestine is an unusual case for everything. Until the Iraq War Saddam was paying the families of suicide bombers lots of money. However, there are real problems of guys not getting any access to women in Palestine (even if polygamy has nothing to do with it) which is porn over cell phones is so popular there.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
spunk October 24, 2009 at 20:59

The man is at fault here.

He shouldn’t have got married, or shared his living space with any woman at all.

Men, if you were wise enough to stay unmarried, there wouldn’t be a constant fear of getting ‘caught in the act’. There wouldn’t be a niggling unease of a sudden serving of divorce papers. You can get poon from various sources without breaking the monogamous(or else!) clause in the marital contract which you have foolishly signed.

DO NOT MARRY. You can screw and discard women, but that’s as far as it should be allowed to go.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
julie October 24, 2009 at 21:02

To zed
But I think the ground is trying to move forward. I think that we have a new generation who thinks quite differently that the last.

It may be a while before the new generation gets much political power. The old regime can still do plenty of damage. Are you familiar with the subject of this post on the False Rape Society? –
http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2009/10/justice-scale-may-tilt-for-sex-victims.html

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10604923&pnum=0

I do know about this.

If I had a son in NZ, I would advise him very strongly to be very cautious in his conduct of sexual relationships. Not that such advice would ever be considered bad advice, but the entire area is getting very gray.

Absolutely essential advice. Thanks.

I’m not sure Game would work in NZ anyway, but I think it would be extremely high risk.

That’s an interesting thought. I’ll have to think about it. :D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Puma October 24, 2009 at 21:05

Julie – Do you have a son? Are you concerned about his future?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
julie October 24, 2009 at 21:27

Puma,

Julie – Do you have a son? Are you concerned about his future?

Thanks for asking Puma. I need to tell you that I know everything when it comes to men’s rights and how radical feminism works and who is who in New Zealand when it comes to gender things.

I had put some effort into helping MRA’s in NZ over the last 3 years. Of course I could have done more but you know, We don’t all agree on what each other wants. I have a wonderful politician representing my area and she is well up on the same play as me and yet far, far further and with far more power which she uses. My city is the most man friendly city in the country.

I do care very much about my sons and I think I have done my best to make them aware of how the law works. If they were to be up on rape charges and defending themselves in court, I would be right by their side and lobbying my heart out for fairness.

It is just that I have to care for my future as well as care what other men and women are doing in their relationship break ups and how they are coping with having and ex and being an ex and having children between them. If anything, I am more into domestic violence than rape or false rape or the other hundreds of issues that come under gender’s rights.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed October 24, 2009 at 22:13

My city is the most man friendly city in the country.

Which city is that? North or South Island?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
julie October 24, 2009 at 22:32

To Zed,

My city is the most man friendly city in the country.

Which city is that? North or South Island?

North Island. The largest city on the North Island is Auckland. It has North, South, East and West. I am West Auckland that has a beautiful name; Waitakere from the Waitakere Ranges.
http://tinyurl.com/ygaztug

Did you visit Auckland?

South Auckland is also male friendly and East Auckland has recently changed too. We are soon to be one big city with no Nth, Sth, West, and East.

You would find all the politics behind men’s rights very interesting Zed. Some of it is very sad. But you would especially like the non feminist male leaders even the Maori ones. But I guess you get a lot of the gossip. :D

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 24, 2009 at 22:41

Did you visit Auckland?

Yes.

You would find all the politics behind men’s rights very interesting Zed. Some of it is very sad. But you would especially like the non feminist male leaders even the Maori ones.

Tell me about the parts you consider sad.

I found the Maori-Pakeha dynamics and issues very interesting. I’m something of an anti-colonialist and view the way European settlers destroyed indigenous cultures and the aftermath on those cultures to have a lot of tragedy to them. The entire NZ culture is enough different from US culture that men’s rights do not mean quite the same there as they do here in the US.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Bhetti October 25, 2009 at 05:56

Pro-male:

I tried to ask Al-Queda and other terrorists groups, but they told me to go away at gunpoint when I knocked on their doors.

Hahaha! Ahem. Right, I’ll look to see if there’re any myself. We’re talking about successful bombing incidents which should be reported, at the very least.

Regardless, yes, there are more issues than not getting laid (with no prospects of getting laid and the promise of 72 virgins in Heaven) when it comes to terrorism, but it’s certainly a contributing factor.

Also need to find proof for this. Porn’s popular everywhere. Men are sexually frustrated in the West as well (but there’s no recruitment for suicide bombing, admittedly).

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
julie October 25, 2009 at 09:18

zed,

Tell me about the parts you consider sad.

It is just that certain people want control of it or at least a stake in it. You have feminist men who want women first and for every thing men gain to fit around what feminists want and then you have men in certain positions who want to gain personally from it for their status and careers, then you have religious men, some even radical, then you have leftwing and rightwing and political groups in between who want it to feed their power and then you have intellects who have a stake in it for their status and careers, and then you have the Maori who want to control it but won’t accept leftwing or rightwing ideology and ……. well, …

There is a political war over men’s rights. At first I thought maybe there will never be a men’s movement, that it is made up of so many smaller groups but I think when it comes to fighting radical feminist ideology, there are a lot of men interested and all have a stake in it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gx1080 October 25, 2009 at 12:08

A polygamy based society, that being Social Darwinism has absolutely no motivation to act better than animals. Feminists are happy with that because it let’s them be free to go to males that make their gina tingle and thell the rest to go to hell. Is ignorant of them to accept that because that¡s the road to CougarTown. But well, Cougars are going to be left to die alone anyways (all retirement funds going to single moms).

With everything, another Middle Ages (because that’s the natural course of this) don’t sound too much tempting. If only because it makes survival of the offspring hard.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Hux October 25, 2009 at 14:44

I’m not sure Game would work in NZ …

It does. This is human nature we’re talking about. It is basically immutable across the globe.

Although one might argue we don’t need Game in NZ as we apparently have the sluttiest women in the world. (I’m sure Zed and Julie heard about that.) John Key even joked about it recently on the David Letterman show. “We have the loosest slot machines in the pacific rim.”

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Blanque October 25, 2009 at 14:49

Like I said, the Muslim world isn’t a good model for the Anglosphere. We do have options like game, but I wouldn’t be surprised to see some suicide bombers sometime after polygamy is legalized. I’m not surprised to see that Kis and Julie don’t have the foresight to see these very real problems.

Are you sure we haven’t seen it already? I think about George Sodini, and I have to wonder.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Marquis October 25, 2009 at 19:45

Deny is the golden rule. period. period. no matter what she says. Deny. Al-fuckin-ways. non-committal answers if anything are best. By your action and tone it must be clear that you do not care if she walks away. At all.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie October 26, 2009 at 06:44

On one level, I agree that this article and many of other PUA tactics are immoral and/or unethical. On the other, I think about all the games girls and girl culture played on me growing up, and I find I have no pity when guys begin to play these social games back. Girls, from a very early age, were more socially sophisticated than boys and never honest about what they wanted. I assume this was so because its hard to admit that you want everything in a man, including the ability to adapt at the snap of a finger in order to fulfill the whim of the moment. It seems many pick up artist were once nerds or geeks, as shown by the system of game being very systematic and analytical by its nature, and as a self identified geek, even when I was very popular with guys, fell hugely short of females desires for a social extrovert with confidence and a devil-may-care attitude. Feeling unloved, unwanted, and unworthy, I relish the days as my female peers age, and now begin to feel the same thing. Resentful….maybe. Pathetic….on a certain level, sure. Priceless….you betcha. Hate bounces.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 0
zed October 26, 2009 at 07:52

On one level, I agree that this article and many of other PUA tactics are immoral and/or unethical.

It’s completely morally and ethically reprehensible. Guess what, so is the world younger guys are living in. The culture cannot make acting morally and ethically into a way to destroy men and expect them to keep doing it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 26, 2009 at 08:07

The culture cannot make acting morally and ethically into a way to destroy men and expect them to keep doing it.

That is correct. Very bad things happen to men who “do the right thing”. As the don’t marry essay says: No Good Deed Goes Unpunished.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker October 26, 2009 at 08:21

It’s the main problem with the current system — playing by the old “rules” leads to men being burned badly. And the younger generation is wising up to that, having witnessed the carnage in their fathers’ generation, as well as hearing it from us at places like this one. It is a small start, but it is nevertheless starting, and causing enough of a concern that articles in the NYT and so on are now complaining about the discourse about women on the internet. Things are changing.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Paul Elam October 26, 2009 at 08:31

@Zed

Very good points. Yes, I remember fragging. And I agree I see it going on all around us today. But such betrayals are not new. I was most fortunate that it was a little too late for me to go, but I am a Viet Nam Era Veteran. That made me a part of a generation of young men similarly sold down the river by their elders.

At my age, it is admittedly hard to give a credible comment on where young men “should” be, and I don’t care much for men peering down their noses, so I won’t offer up more of the same here. Besides, you are correct, we left them with what they have. They should also know, however, that they will ultimately deal with the consequences of how they react to their circumstances, just as we did.

They are, after all, not near the first generation of men raised with “makin’ momma happy” as the benchmark for masculine worth. It has been going on since the industrial revolution and likely before. I remember well, and I am now 52, as a young man you could commit all manners of mistakes in your family, but offending or upsetting your mother was not one you would live through unscathed. Failing to make Momma happy was sacrilege. It was punishable by pain and humiliation, loss of manhood. And our fathers learned that from theirs.

To me, it is just that this new generation is the first one in which the father was both removed and reviled at the same time, all of this of course, just another extension of making momma happy.

“Making Momma Happy” is just a euphemism for gender feminism, or vice versa. And of course both are just euphemisms for miscalled chivalry.

To me, PUA’s, MGTOW’s and the like are just elements of the natural pendulum swing that was bound to occur the moment civilized advances allowed us to quit taking care of women as though they were children, but failed to do so.

The moment women got the vote they should have been forced to take on every hardship faced by men. The draft, compulsory combat, last one in the lifeboat, so to speak. But the moment we gave women freedom and privilege with no corresponding responsibility was the same moment we started fostering their ridiculous levels of privilege and started breeding resentments in men against them. How could it be otherwise?

It is ironic, but not too surprising to me that this may be the first generation of men to fight back effectively in the gender war, though I would wager most of that battle is unconscious on their part.

I never imagined that techniques on lying one’s way through infidelity would be part of the only real reaction of men to generations of being betrayed by other men and being shit on by women, but stranger things have happened.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 26, 2009 at 08:43

Someone good at research should put together a book of mens individual sacrifices so that they do not go unheard into the night of history.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 26, 2009 at 08:43

””I never imagined that techniques on lying one’s way through infidelity would be part of the only real reaction of men to generations of being betrayed by other men and being shit on by women,”””

I mean against this and the sacrifice of their lives.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie October 26, 2009 at 09:00

I agree with the pendulum effect.

At the end of the day, I’m afraid it will have to get even worse before it gets better.

Here’s hoping it gets worse real fast, so the healing can begin in my lifetime.

And here’s hoping we never forget the mistakes that were made, that no matter how advanced and prosperous we become, you cannot just throw thousands of years of cultural wisdom out the window in order to chase our baser instincts.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
zed October 26, 2009 at 09:56

I never imagined that techniques on lying one’s way through infidelity would be part of the only real reaction of men to generations of being betrayed by other men and being shit on by women, but stranger things have happened.

What did you think it might be? Continuing to follow the instructions of their “leaders” and keep going “over the top, one more time” and feeding themselves to the machine guns of the Turks? (reference to Gallipoli.)

Since you are of that era, I’m sure you have seen Apocalypse Now. Two bits of that movie stand out for me in describing the world for young men today. The first is the scene where Willard first confronts Kurtz alone in the hut. Kurtz describes a scene when the US forces had gone in and vaccinated all the children in one of the villages. A little later a man from the village comes after them crying. The Viet Cong had come through and hacked off every vaccinated arm. Their soul-less brutality was something the Americans just could not comprehend. Kurtz in the moment had a blinding flash of insight – (perhaps not an exact quote, but captures the intent of the message), “In that moment I realized that we would lose – because the enemy was always willing to go one step farther than we were willing to go, in order to win.”

The other bit was part of one of Willard’s voiceover narratives, talking about the boys there who just wanted to get it over with and go home – “Charlie can’t go home. ” For the Viet Cong, the choice pretty much boiled down to win or die.

That’s the way the choice looks to a lot of younger men. Many of them have watched their fathers turned into noble zombies – enslaved by the court system, their lying cheating wives, and their own value systems.

Only a fool would swallow it. A lot of older men really have been fools and did swallow it, but younger men have watched, and learned, and are singing the Who now – “Won’t get fooled again.” They aren’t swallowing it.

To me, it is just that this new generation is the first one in which the father was both removed and reviled at the same time,

And this has been the fatal mistake that “the enemy” has made. The Fathers’ Rights guys have been screaming for years about the social pathologies caused by fatherlessness. Put another way, traditionally it has been the job of the fathers to break young men to the saddle and harness. Women simply cannot do it. The developmental step of adulthood and separation from the mother requires assumption of some sort of male identity which is different from female identity. I summarize this as “women emulate, men separate.” Girls become women by becoming more like their mothers, boys become men by “cutting the apron strings” and becoming self-sufficient.

If you look at the older man who has betrayed other men more than just about anyone else, Joe Biden, his stories of abuse at the hands of his sister imply that it was his father who was the enforcer of the exclusive female privilege of violence. Joe Biden’s father has harmed collectively an untold number of men.

So, oddly, it was the severing of the power of fathers to break their sons of their headstrong ways which has created the situation we have today. It might be said that mothers “socialize” their children, but fathers are the ones who “civilize” them.

They should also know, however, that they will ultimately deal with the consequences of how they react to their circumstances, just as we did.

Which was the point of my “Baby Bomb” post (as well as my Living Through History one). I think the best we older guys can do is share what we have learned from our mistakes and at least give younger men the chance to learn from our pain and not have to repeat it on their own in order to learn. How much they will listen is a good question – probably not much more than we did.

But, what the hell else worthwhile do we have to do while we are waiting for our appointment at the crematorium?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker October 26, 2009 at 10:07

The developmental step of adulthood and separation from the mother requires assumption of some sort of male identity which is different from female identity. I summarize this as “women emulate, men separate.” Girls become women by becoming more like their mothers, boys become men by “cutting the apron strings” and becoming self-sufficient.

This is very true, but as you are probably aware, and I’m sure Paul is aware, the professional psych community is now preaching the Gospel that what is screwing up young men is not the lack of fathers but rather the tendency of boys to separate from their mothers. Idiots like William Pollack at Harvard are writing books saying that the tendency of boys to separate from their mothers should be reversed, and boys should instead emulate their mothers and be more emotional and sensitive and so on. This is nothing other than male feminists trying to eliminate masculinity, full stop, by not only ignoring the need for fathers, but stating openly that boys need to be more feminine (in so many words — of course he doesn’t phrase it that way, but in substance this is what he is saying).

It’s an all out war, and our young men are the ones in the cross-hairs today.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Firepower October 26, 2009 at 10:44

way to go.

NYU girls
are stone cold whores

gullible, too

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 26, 2009 at 10:55

Idiots like William Pollack at Harvard are writing books saying that the tendency of boys to separate from their mothers should be reversed, and boys should instead emulate their mothers and be more emotional and sensitive and so on. This is nothing other than male feminists trying to eliminate masculinity, full stop, by not only ignoring the need for fathers, but stating openly that boys need to be more feminine

And here is where the “nature vs nurture” question gets the acid test. If the social deconstructionists’ theory that “gender is a just a social construct” are correct, then all will be groovy. However, if they are wrong, and sex differences are biologically determined, all they will have accomplished is the de(con)struction of all the social values which constrained the negative consequences of purely animal behaviors and made civilization possible.

I’m far more in the biology camp – boys will be boys, unless they take the practice of medicating their boyhood out of them with Ritalin one step further and simply castrate them shortly after birth. But, without the influence of civilization, I think the world of the future is going to look a lot more like Lord of the Flies than the estrogenated Camelot that eunuchs like Pollack envision.

If Harvard disappeared from the face of the earth tomorrow, I think the US in particular and mankind in general would end up being much better off. I really understand why both Mao and Pol Pot drove the “intellectuals” out of the cities where they were able to do so much damage and put them to work in the fields. A few callouses and blisters would teach idiots like Pollack more about life than all their BS “eddikayshun” has.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Sleeper October 26, 2009 at 11:34

Rollory posted….
HER: So why didn’t you come join me last night?
ME: I didn’t want to.
There. Done.

Can somebody tell me if this would work, why or why not.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 26, 2009 at 12:13

Well this worked 2 days ago. Now she already knows we are not steady relationship and that I am married and that it has no future.

Her looking through phone.
Me: what are you doing going through my shit
Her: looking for number of so and so to call them back
Me allright
Her who is (insert female name)
Me don’t ask stupid questions
Her: huffs off to take shower

Not brought up again.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 26, 2009 at 13:00

The Gender War will be won through the Marriage Strike and Pump&Dump.

You want to penalize men who sign marriage contracts? Fine. We won’t sign any.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
yohami October 26, 2009 at 16:50

Dude NEVER LIE NEVER HIDE NEVER CARE if you are striving to become an alpha man. Having multiple girls is part of who you are, if you decided so. We dont expect an alpha male to give his power away so why do you care so much about this girl to betray yourself by lying about who you are and what you do? stupid. Fucking slave.

Her: where were you last night?
Me: banging another girl, oh boy that was fun.
Her: I dont date guys who date other girls!
Me: no big deal, you can do whatever you want
Her: Grrr
Me: honey, I own myself and you are bothering me, go have some fun or something. have a nice night.

Try it.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 26, 2009 at 17:06

The not caring part is the hard part not the philosophy on your way of life but the philosophy and following through on your own personnal set of rules helps with that.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Paul Elam October 26, 2009 at 19:36

@ Zed

What did I imagine it would be?

I think I imagined it to be what it ultimately will have to be to make a difference. And that is indifference. That, to me, is the swing back of the pendulum.

I think it is important to diligently remember that the current state of affairs is not the product of the last 40 years of feminism, but the last 150 years, starting with the industrial revolution. That was the pivotal part of history that began the marginalization of men and was the actual birth of gender feminism as well.

I agree totally that “women emulate and men separate” but I don’t think the picture is complete simply by pointing to men’s recent role to reign in young and rebellious masculinity. I don’t think that model held so true when families were local concerns and sons were raised to follow in their fathers footsteps as a matter of routine. And it seems the “reigning in” role, though I can’t prove it, was just a result of fathers removed from the home to work, whereas they previously did in close proximity.

In that light, we have to consider that most of that post IR “reigning in” was always little more than making young men more quiet and subservient, particularly to women.

Since the IR young men have been raised with multiple forces perverting their identity and individuality: mothers controlling shame, emotional incest with concurrent oedipal manipulation, all backed by fathers brawn and force as the semi-absent controller.

It has destroyed a few generations of men, and as you point out, the observers of the net result, no longer intimidated by male enforcers, are now free to finally respond to the gender war.

But I see PUA’s and their ilk as sociological dead ends on the way to the real indifference. PUA’s are still about, and all about, women.

And I have this theory that when the preponderance of men reach the point in the pendulum swing that say 80% view chivalry, even paying for a date as a joke, then we will actually see women change. That will signal the end of the gender war and the path to a more harmonious paradigm.

To get there, men will have to break the bonds of learned chivalry, emotional incest and matriarchal domination, not just the oppressive mandates of the gender feminism that resulted from all those antecedents.

On the other front, it is interesting you brought up Biden and his abuse at the hands of his sister. I think that is the turning point in his life that lead him to author VAWA and wrote a piece on it recently.

http://www.avoiceformen.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=130:vawa-biden&catid=1:oarticles&Itemid=19

If you get a chance, I’d like your thoughts on it.

I am off to read more of your work. It is good stuff.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 26, 2009 at 19:58

In that light, we have to consider that most of that post IR “reigning in” was always little more than making young men more quiet and subservient, particularly to women.

I don’t think that is necessarily true, Paul. It’s unfortunate that the media did such a hatchet job on the mythopoetic men’s movement – I think classical mythology has a lot of large lessons to teach people, particularly men.

Young men have always been headstrong, impetuous, and tended to overestimate their own abilities. In addtion, they were both selfish and ignorant of the consequences of their ill-chosen actions beyond their own selfish desires.

Thus, there has always been a tension between younger men and older men as the older men sought to tame the wildness of the younger men and channel that energy in socially constructive ways.

For example – the myth of Phaeton and Apollo or Helios. Notice in the story the boy’s concern about his friends and how he appeared to them, as well as gratification of his ego that he could do something so “awesome.” The father tries to tell the boy that it is work, not fun, and has some dangers associated with it. The headstrong boy will have none of the older, wiser, man’s advice, and the Sun God, reluctant to break a promise lets the boy drive.

Of course, the boy cannot control the wild steeds, and causes great damage. Another older, wiser, more powerful male puts things right by killing the boy. A father failing his job to shape a young man’s decisions toward wisdom could result in the boy’s death.

This was written a long time before the IR.

A legend from Greece cautions that we must recognize the difference between harnessing the forces of nature and presuming to be that force.

The palace of the Sun was always bright and radiant, sparkling with jewels. One day a young man named Phaeton set out to reach the palace, and after a long hot journey he found himself before Apollo, the Sun god. Shielding his eyes from Apollo’s brilliant rays, the youth asked, “Is it true that, although my mother is a mortal, you are indeed my father? She said this is so, but when I tell my friends that you are my father, they laugh and make fun of me.” The Sun god smiled brightly and nodded. “Yes, Phaeton, you are my son, and I am pleased that you have come to visit. Ask me anything, and I promise it shall be yours.”

Phaeton was very proud to learn he was truly the son of a god, and he knew right away what he wanted. “Father, let me take your place for one day. I want to command your chariot and pull the sun across the sky, as you do each day. When my friends see me high above them, they will know what I told them is true.”

Apollo realized that he had made a terrible error and tried to change the boy’s mind.” No mortal can drive my chariot, son. In fact, no other god can manage it, for it is not pleasure but hard work. The road from the sea each morning is very steep and difficult for the horses, and when I race down in the afternoon I can barely control them. At midday I am so high that I fear to look down. And all along the way are fierce beasts. The Bull, the Lion, the Scorpion, the Crab – all will seek to harm you. Please, my son, although I made a promise, choose anything but this.”

Of course, Phaeton now wanted to drive the chariot more than ever. Ignoring his father’s words, he stubbornly insisted. And as it was time to start the daily journey, Apollo reluctantly agreed. The chariot was readied and the great horses stamped and blew the morning air from their nostrils. With great pride Phaeton climbed into the chariot and immediately rushed up into the sky, pulling the sun behind him.

The first few moments were great fun for the boy, and he shouted out, “Look, I am Lord of the Sky!” But suddenly he realized that he was out of control. The chariot was swinging wildly from side to side and rushing much too fast. The horses quickly realized that their driver had not the strength, confidence or experience for the task. They raced off the road and galloped madly this way and that, crashing into the Scorpion and butting into the Bull. Phaeton dropped the reins and fell onto the floor of the chariot. Now matters were veering towards chaos. The horses stampeded to the very top of the sky and then plunged straight down towards earth, and the sun set the earth on fire. Phaeton, weeping with terror, screamed for help.

High on Mount Olympus Zeus, ruler of all the gods, awoke to the smell of smoke. Instantly he saw what had happened and wasted no time. Reaching into the clouds he grabbed a bolt of lightning and hurled it at the chariot. Phaeton was destroyed and the horses thrown into the sea. The waves poured over the land and the fires were quenched. No one but Apollo would ever again drive the Sun’s chariot across the sky.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Paul Elam October 27, 2009 at 10:46

As always good points, but I still think you may underestimate the impact of the IR on the family, gender relations and masculinity itself.

What you said about the Mythopoetic Movement is true, but again there is also more to that story. Farrell, when he wrote MOMP, predicted that the Myth-move was on the cusp of turning political and that publications like TIME that had bashed and dismissed them would be “eating their words” within ten years (of publication).

Had Farrell been correct, and had the Myth-move become politically organized, they would be flourishing, IMO. But the problem was then as it is now. The few mentors in the movement sent conformist, ultimately defeating messages. IOW, they taught the exact wrong lessons, just as men post IR have always done.

That did them in much more than the media.

Robert Bly instructed men on how to grieve, but not how to fight for themselves and their sons. Sam Keen openly professed a worship of the “feminine as goddess” regarding childbirth. These are very great men with some keen insights, but they utterly failed to tie everything together into the “correct” conclusions and helpful direction.

The problem here for me is not that there is little value in mentoring. Quite the opposite. But that the mentoring available is offered from an intellectual deficit and is spoken in a castrated voice.

And that again goes back to the IR. Men of the times could not effectively make use of ancient archetypes unless they comprehended their respective context in the times. As far as I am concerned, they never did.

So what the ended up doing was exerting the control of the older masculine on the younger, historically to foster maturity, in a new way to benefit the women they left behind as they went out to slave in factories and mines. They used their children as pawns to address their own absence and in doing so created an explosion of matriarchal power.

Prior to the IR, masculine control was effectively used to promote the family concern, a concern that depended on masculine presence at all times. After the IR that same control was used to parentify male children and make them “serve” on all levels, including that of the emotional husband to the wife and mother. This created a psychological dependence on women that far exceeded normal maternal bonds. And it was the most refined training of women in history to have emotional control over men.

We have been controlled by them ever since.

So now we have the first real generation of fatherless children who are serving as role models to young males. The net result of that will be the most interesting to me because it is very likely that what we are seeing is young men who have naught to rebel against and separate from but their mothers. And in that we may see the chickens come to roost. This appears to be true as we see the emerging reverence for PUA and pump-n-dump approaches to connecting with women.

I think this will result in either a complete breakdown of the social fabric or a new trend toward balancing between the genders. My money is on the latter.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
LIL October 27, 2009 at 11:06

thanks, firepower.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Jabherwochie October 27, 2009 at 11:31

“And that again goes back to the IR. Men of the times could not effectively make use of ancient archetypes unless they comprehended their respective context in the times. As far as I am concerned, they never did.

So what the ended up doing was exerting the control of the older masculine on the younger, historically to foster maturity, in a new way to benefit the women they left behind as they went out to slave in factories and mines. They used their children as pawns to address their own absence and in doing so created an explosion of matriarchal power.

Prior to the IR, masculine control was effectively used to promote the family concern, a concern that depended on masculine presence at all times. After the IR that same control was used to parentify male children and make them “serve” on all levels, including that of the emotional husband to the wife and mother. This created a psychological dependence on women that far exceeded normal maternal bonds. And it was the most refined training of women in history to have emotional control over men.”

From my understanding of the Industrial Revolution, this holds true. The industrial revolution also indirectly yet profoundly influenced how school systems were to be run, and how students were to be taught.

In my mind, this is when men began to be seen as cogs in a machine, instead of individuals. Wage slavery destroys our spirit, rusts our soul. The trinkets and baubles that we make offer little more than temporary distraction, and more often simply accomidates the female incessent drive to “gather”, while men are left with nothing to “hunt” anymore, ……..except females.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 27, 2009 at 12:18

So now we have the first real generation of fatherless children who are serving as role models to young males. The net result of that will be the most interesting to me because it is very likely that what we are seeing is young men who have naught to rebel against and separate from but their mothers. And in that we may see the chickens come to roost. This appears to be true as we see the emerging reverence for PUA and pump-n-dump approaches to connecting with women.

I think this will result in either a complete breakdown of the social fabric or a new trend toward balancing between the genders. My money is on the latter.

I’m betting on the latter as well, although perhaps for different reasons than you are. In systems theory terms, any sufficiently large and complex system cannot go significantly out of balance and remain significantly out of balance for very long. Each local imbalance creates local systemic compensating reactions, and the larger the localized imbalance the larger the correcting mechanisms which come into play.

I have always believed that the fundamental axiom of feminism – that “Patriarchy” was something men did to and enforced on women – was simply wrong. The social order is always a complex implicitly negotiated compromise between men and women which allows the majority of people of both sexes to get some of their needs met at a cost they do not consider excessive. Like the difference between price controls and the free market, excessive costs on one side of the equation or the other can be masked in the short term by outside intervention – by the government for example – but all that does is defer and enlarge the eventual “market correction” which is necessary to bring things back into balance.

I agree with a lot of what you say about the IR. Given your grasp of the MRM literature, I’m sure you have read Kimbrell’s description of “enclosure.” Some of this is what I have been getting at when I have talked about having one’s life and livelihood separated.

The model of industrialization followed the model of the development of agriculture – the means of production had a fixed location and settlements grew up around those locations which housed the workers and served their other needs. Now that western culture is essentially de-industrializing, we are seeing something of a return to a more nomadic or hunter-gatherer type of existance. “Job security” is no longer the “capital” owned by the workers, and employment is becoming more short-term and opportunistic.

So, for that matter, are relationships.

I’m not an absolute believer in the precepts and terminology of Game, but I realize its utility in describing what we observe.

If you look at the remarkable and inexplicable passivity of men over the past half century, one possible explantion for it could be the over-breeding of Betas. Betas were perfect for staffing the factory floor or working the coal mines, but as those functions have been outsourced to other countries we find ourselves way over-supplied with Betas. In just about 50 years, the model of man and manhood which had been adaptive for the previous 250 years suddenly became mal-adaptive.

So, since we already have far more Betas than we need, and they are not very suited to what the culture will most likely look like in the near-term future, there is really no reason to allow them to breed more of themselves.

What we are seing now is the most aggressive, least socialized, males having disproportionately greater breeding success than their more passive counterparts. It’s a lot like basic training in the military or freshman year at a state school in that the process is mostly designed to wash out those who do not make the cut. The efforts to make men more passive – ala Pollack – will simply have the effect of making the most aggressive, and least socialized, who are least susceptible to this type of nonsense, rise to the top even faster.

Some men will choose to become berdache, or “kitchen bitches”, for more masculine women like kis, and allow them to breed by fulfilling the domestic side of duties while their more masculine female counterparts take their places in the cube farms of the corporate and bureaucratic worlds. This does not mean that they will necessarily get to breed, because their Alpha female mates may still choose the genes of more aggressive men who they can’t get to marry them.

Some women will do as julie and kis have already suggested and share an aggressive man among them.

All of this is predicated on complete demolition of the old male breadwinner role. Fathers really were trying to do their sons a service in breaking them to roles which would give them the best shot at earning a living and finding a wife, but these men were so busy doing so that they failed to realize how things were changing around them.

The MRM so far has attempted to deal with changed conditions by using strategies which applied to a world that no longer exists. Younger men are unhampered by the old way of looking at things, and thus are free to innovate and adapt.

And, when they do, so will the women who want to make babies with them.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Paul Elam October 28, 2009 at 07:18

“The MRM so far has attempted to deal with changed conditions by using strategies which applied to a world that no longer exists.”

A thousand possible essays in that very cogent piece of thinking.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Paul Elam October 28, 2009 at 07:23

@ Jabherwochie

“In my mind, this is when men began to be seen as cogs in a machine, instead of individuals.”

Wholeheartedly agree. And therein lies the problem for the MRM. We are the defective cogs, the ones that don’t fit in the current zeitgeist.

But I think Zed has pretty much pegged it. At least as I understand his take on things, men are building a new machine, even if unconscious of why or how. As it grows, it will by definition give the old machine fits and eventually cause it to shut down.

At least one can always hope.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Novaseeker October 28, 2009 at 08:32

So, since we already have far more Betas than we need, and they are not very suited to what the culture will most likely look like in the near-term future, there is really no reason to allow them to breed more of themselves.

What we are seing now is the most aggressive, least socialized, males having disproportionately greater breeding success than their more passive counterparts. It’s a lot like basic training in the military or freshman year at a state school in that the process is mostly designed to wash out those who do not make the cut. The efforts to make men more passive – ala Pollack – will simply have the effect of making the most aggressive, and least socialized, who are least susceptible to this type of nonsense, rise to the top even faster.

Some men will choose to become berdache, or “kitchen bitches”, for more masculine women like kis, and allow them to breed by fulfilling the domestic side of duties while their more masculine female counterparts take their places in the cube farms of the corporate and bureaucratic worlds. This does not mean that they will necessarily get to breed, because their Alpha female mates may still choose the genes of more aggressive men who they can’t get to marry them.

Some women will do as julie and kis have already suggested and share an aggressive man among them.

All of this is predicated on complete demolition of the old male breadwinner role.

All basically correct, in my view.

The uncertainty lies in precisely how it plays out, of course. The male breadwinner role is pretty much dead as of this recession, or at least has been vociferously pronounced dead in various gleefully-toned articles by feminist journalists and academics. My own sense is that the role will survive, but only at the tippity-top (where the mean are earning *serious* “bread”) — which also happens to be the demographic with the highest marriage rate and lowest divorce rate. Funny thing that, eh?

Below that demo is where the uncertainty lies. I’m skeptical that we’re going to see a lot of women opting for domestic kitchen-bitch husbands. I think many more women will prefer to “go it alone” rather than support a dependent male mom. Women are generally not attracted to such men to begin with, even if they have been brainwashed to thinking that they should be. Sandra Tsing-Loh’s article last summer was pretty telling in this regard — she and her friends had a great deal of contempt for their equalist kitchen bitch husbands, and mused about longing for the age when middle aged men chased their secretaries and pondered the trend for Scandinavian women to opt for more masculine Muslim immigrant men over their own feminized men. Quite amazing 40+ years into feminism, really. Of course, not all women agree with Loh, but my sense is that there are more women who are not happy with that kind of man in practice, even if they may be in favor of it on paper.

If you look at the black community, it may hold some predictive ability for larger social trends. Of course one can’t extrapolate too much, because different communities are different. But if we look even at highly educated black people, we can see that the women vastly outnumber the men, and this has *not* resulted in women selecting to marry down, or marry Mr. Mom types. Instead it has resulted in a lot of women foregoing marriage altogether and, in some cases, opting to become single mothers. Again, this is not talking about the ghetto — but about the educated class.

I think relatively few women are very interested in marrying a domestic, supportive man. Instead, I think most women who are educated want to marry another educated man who has a good career and earning capacity and so on — what Penn economist Betsey Stevenson calls the “consumption marriage”. This is, of course, only a tiny demographic relative to the whole pie (15% or less), but it’s a loud, politically and culturally influential demographic. My guess is that the next legal push from the women’s movement will be directed at this demographic in terms of reforms to the workplace and so on to allow such marriages to thrive with fewer couples feeling the need to choose one career over the other — reforms that will probably hurt down the totem pole, where marriage remains much less common and stable, but will benefit this politically influential demographic.

The trouble is, of course, that there aren’t enough educated men to provide equalist, careerist mates in consumption marriages for all of the educated women. So the “excess” women in that demographic are going to have to make some tough choices — go it alone, as has happened with many educated black women already, or marry down, or what have you. In any case, I fully expect that the heat will be turned up on men for slacking and not pulling their weight and so on as the wailing about the lack of good men reaches a kind of fever pitch among the educated class of women in the next 10-20 years.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
zed October 28, 2009 at 08:50

men are building a new machine, even if unconscious of why or how.

For those who believe in evolution, and certainly not all do, the principle is as simple as “What works, survives. What doesn’t work, dies.”

I would speculate that not one single cultural innovation has ever been created by men who were conscious of why or how – they were simply presented with survival challenges and starting coming up with everything they could come up with to deal with them. Some worked and those guys survived, some didn’t and the guys who tried them didn’t.

I think that people put too much emphasis on the purely biological aspect of evolution and don’t consider that cultures evolve as well. Agriculture, the industrial revolution, the internal combustion and steam engines, were all cultural innovations that in turn totally changed the cultures in which they occurred.

When Pasteur introduced his germ theory, existing physicians who had been bleeding their patients to death viciously denounced him. In 50 years all those old farts had died off, quit bleeding their patients to death, and begun the practice of modern medicine.

Us old physicians who have watched men be bled to death by family courts and obsessive-compulsive chivalry tend to denounce these young Pasteurs because their ideas imply that we have been wrong all our lives. Not an easy pill to swallow.

But, just as aboriginal cultures mostly inevitably were overwhelmed by European ideas and weapons technology, the proof of whose ideas are right will be in which ones survive and which succumb.

Yes, Paul, it violates every part of the value system of us older guys. Unfortunately, every part of our value system violates young men. They are not going to go along with those values because they didn’t work for our generation, and these guys have no more desire to be cannon fodder than men of my generation had to be sent to Vietnam and get our asses shot off.

The only constant in life is change, eh?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 28, 2009 at 09:27

Who would you rather be?

A) Swaggering carefree cad?
B) Disrespected, cuckolded, alimony-paying ex-kitchenbitch?

The choice is very simple really.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Single opinion October 29, 2009 at 18:11

Do any of you guys have mothers, sisters, daughters, grandmas, aunts? Would you speak this way in front of them?

Obviously, many of you have been so jaded and are now blaming all women for your own problems, how pathetic.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 2
Single opinion October 29, 2009 at 18:47

Oh, btw… the guy out the window is obviously hiding from the husband/boyfriend of his lover. Otherwise why hide… DUH

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 1
The Equalizer October 29, 2009 at 19:08

Do any of you guys have mothers, sisters, daughters, grandmas, aunts? Would you speak this way in front of them?

Yes we do. As long as these travesty family laws keep doing what they do to our fathers, brothers, sons, grandpas, and uncles – YES WE DO.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 29, 2009 at 19:16

”””””’The Equalizer October 29, 2009 at 7:08 pm
Do any of you guys have mothers, sisters, daughters, grandmas, aunts? Would you speak this way in front of them?

Yes we do. As long as these travesty family laws keep doing what they do to our fathers, brothers, sons, grandpas, and uncles – YES WE DO.
””””””””’

Yea most of our sisters have seen exactly what happened to our dad and know exactly what we are talking about duh

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
The Equalizer October 29, 2009 at 19:16

Look at this cow. Just look at what she is asking:

http://www.freeadvice.com/law-questions/i-am-working-can-i-still–29631.htm

Men – Meet the face of thine enemy. This is how they plot.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 29, 2009 at 19:18

”””””’Obviously, many of you have been so jaded and are now blaming all women for your own problems, how pathetic.”””””’

You obviously need to read the feminist argument thread and maybe come up with some original shit.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Equalizer October 29, 2009 at 19:18

Asked on 10/29/2009

I am working, can I still ask for alimony at a later date?

I plan on retiring in 2 years so I don’t need the alimony now; but I will need it in 2 years. Will I be able to get it then?

COW: How about your husband’s retirement? Does he not have a SOUL inside that wretched beast-of-burden body of his?

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Gunslingergregi October 29, 2009 at 19:19

”””’from the article
I am working, can I still ask for alimony at a later date?

I plan on retiring in 2 years so I don’t need the alimony now; but I will need it in 2 years. Will I be able to get it then?
”””””’

Jesus Christ

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
The Equalizer October 29, 2009 at 19:25

Family laws that cuddle disgusting creatures such as this cow have no legitimacy. None whatsoever. Yet this is exactly where we stand today. This is exactly why this site exists.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma October 29, 2009 at 20:00

COW: How about your husband’s retirement? Does he not have a SOUL inside that wretched beast-of-burden body of his?

Not according to feminist doctrine. Only women have souls. Men are to be used, exploited, and then discarded.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
ghostnation January 3, 2010 at 11:16

Lieing is actually submissive behaviour. It is a form of hiding and basicaly says that one is not OK.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
Middle Class Crunch February 17, 2010 at 15:40

Great post.

But ending up in Roissy’s situation could have easily been avoided had he stayed true to the game in the 1st place. There are 2 solutions to prevent the issue from even happening, and they both rely on not compromising your principles:

1. Be 100% faithful to your girl. This way you simply are untouchable.

2. Be a player, and make it clear from the get-go with the females you meet. You are a ladies man. Advertise it. Females will either accept, or not, to enter your reality.

But you have to pick either option before you play the field – be it to find a girlfriend, or to build a harem – and then stray true to it.

The game is really messed up these days because a lot of men don’t know who they want to be. We men should cut the bullshit. Show who you really are and don’t lie to yourself. Conniving and bickering ultimately is for beta males.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Driver March 21, 2010 at 08:13

I came across this site a few days ago and have been reading the threads extensively.

I guess I come under the category of ‘Incel’ and have pretty much lost all respect and appreciation of women. I’m now in my 40s and have been played by women for years, not knowing the rules of the game. I’m a fairly intelligent and curious man but could just never figure it out. Some of the posters here have opened my eyes to what I’ve failed to see all this time. Being from the generation who never had the internet and all the information available it would have been great to know all this years ago.

My last ‘girlfriend’ was the final straw for me, she pretty much played me over and I don’t even know why I bothered with her. I’ve known her for years and asked her out several times years ago to no avail. Now she’s a 40yo and we met up again recently but it ended again the same way as before. She’s losing her looks and putting on weight now so there’s a certain irony in that. I really should have just told her to p*ss off. I’m now looking to go abroad to seek out women as I’m too set in my thinking to be able to change and play the ‘game’ as you call it. I also think I would just be doing it out of revenge so it’s probably not a good idea. I’m still a good looking man in good shape, a decent job, nice house but have zero confidence.

My generation of men, and those before me, have allowed the feminists to take over and castrate them. I learnt this through bitter experience of my ex and our separation. Altough I wasn’t the type of man to just take it lying down and fought her continuously, unlike a lot men I see who are nothing but whimps. We have pretty much abandoned future generations to their control. So I don’t blame the guys here for treating women of today with the contempt they deserve. Equally the dickless men who pander to them and treat them as princesses, while castigating other men at the same time.

Over the past few years I’ve found myself more and more in the company of younger men and can see the affects it has had on them. I enjoy their company and it has been very informative and a bit sad. I would not like to be in their position the way the world is now and how everything is twisted like Alice in Wonderland.

Any comments on my position would be much appreciated.
Thanks.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0
Puma March 21, 2010 at 22:15

Driver – Welcome to the site. As companion reading to what is here, you may also find “Roissy in DC” interesting. He is one of the contributors here, and his own blog focuses on men-women relationships, or the carnal kind.

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0
TXM March 22, 2010 at 12:03

Like Driver, I am a 40 something Incel. I came here tonight to rant and rave about the Mea Culpas I’ve been watching on TV from both Tiger Woods and Jesse James.

Woods I almost have some sympathy for. He is a perfectionist who exists for control and tries to do everything right. Imagine his suprize to discover the big hairy beast inside him that delights in being a true Alpha Male! He was caught cheating, and he sits there blubbering on TV about it and going to “Sex Rehab”. What should he have said to his wife? Why should he apologize to anyone for his sexuality, his virility, his natural male impulse?! I feel sorry for him because I think he should have never gotten married in the first place, and I think he was unprepared for the powerful dynamic of the Alpha Male and I think he is deluding himself to think that anything less than that status will ever suit him.

Jesse James made me scream when he said, “It’s all my own fault and I deserve all the bad things that are going to happen to me.” He’s no dummy… he knows what comes next. What should this guy have said to his wife? At least Jesse understands that he is an Alpha. I have no sympathy for “nice girl” Sandra Bullock who doubtless found her inner whore while whole-body-tatooed Jesse bent her over the motorcyle and showed her an ass-slapping good time. What did she expect? Monogamy from the guy with a show called “Jesse James is a Dead Man?” She was a fool, and she deserves her pain.

I was getting my rant on, when I read Zed’s post, and then Paul Elam’s… My maturity came back to me and I settled down to being somewhat sad. Why the hell should I, as a self-proclaimed Incel even worry about what the Alphas are up to these days?

I’ve got a 16 year old son. He grew up without me. He appears to be a natural born PUA…

I’ve been a Soldier for 22 years in April, and I’m writing this from Iraq. I don’t believe in lying. Not to a woman, not to anyone. I’ve had 360 degree peer evaluations and I always score high among my peers for honesty, integrity and honor. I grieve that those things that I am so proud of count for so little in this society. I will not teach my son these things, because I think he will be safer as a PUA.

I might be an Incel, but I am really very proud of who I am. Yeah, I’m probably a dinosaur on it’s way to extinction, but I’m not going to change. I think Sandra Bullock will miss me when I’m gone…

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 2 Thumb down 0
Camran Manikfan September 30, 2013 at 00:30

On her first question, wouldn’t it be a good idea to playfully reframe as your Chateau archives suggest – ‘So why didn’t you join me last night?’ ‘Why, were you crying your eyes out over me with a pic clutched to your chest?’

Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Comment

{ 1 trackback }

Previous post:

Next post: