Another Conservative Traditionalist Gets It Wrong About Men And Women

Bill Bennett, former Secretary of Education and Drug Czar, correctly identifies and laments the declining fortunes of men…

The data does not bode well for men. In 1970, men earned 60% of all college degrees. In 1980, the figure fell to 50%, by 2006 it was 43%. Women now surpass men in college degrees by almost three to two. Women’s earnings grew 44% in real dollars from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men.

…but then reverts to blind, deaf and dumb traditionalist form by laying the blame for men’s ailments at the feet of… I know the suspense is killing you!… men.

If you don’t believe the numbers, just ask young women about men today. You will find them talking about prolonged adolescence and men who refuse to grow up. I’ve heard too many young women asking, “Where are the decent single men?” There is a maturity deficit among men out there, and men are falling behind. […]

Man’s response has been pathetic. Today, 18-to- 34-year-old men spend more time playing video games a day than 12-to- 17-year-old boys. While women are graduating college and finding good jobs, too many men are not going to work, not getting married and not raising families. Women are beginning to take the place of men in many ways. This has led some to ask: do we even need men? […]

Movies are filled with stories of men who refuse to grow up and refuse to take responsibility in relationships. Men, some obsessed with sex, treat women as toys to be discarded when things get complicated. Through all these different and conflicting signals, our boys must decipher what it means to be a man, and for many of them it is harder to figure out.

Oh, those precious, pedestalized princesses, incorruptible vessels of Mother Mary love, doing what’s right and suffering the slings and arrows of men’s failings in reward. What’s a haloed lady to do when her heart is open to the love of a good man and all she gets is a parade of losers in her bed? The burdens of her gilded womb she will bear in martyrdom.

The bubble boy boundaries of the conservative imagination are never more evident than in its grappling with the sociosexual differences between men and women and the workings of the dating market. An appalling lack of understanding, of even a tangential blow with the truth about female nature, suggests that traditionalists and their offspring — Promise Keepers, Iron Johns, (some) MRAs, evangelists, etc. — have an allergic reaction to plumbing the depths of the human sexual soul, a revulsion likely concocted in a cauldron of sheltered life experiences and morbid fear of their own temptations.

Someone, anyone, has to pull the wool from their eyes, because their ignorance compounds a problem they rightly see as anathema to civilized prosperity. Their haste to lay the fault at the feet of men and to wholly absolve women of any responsibility gives the id monster free reign to lay waste to their utopian ideal. This is because it is the shackling or the unleashing of the female id, not the male id, that ultimately controls the destiny of a society.

So, a sincere plea to Bennett and his ilk: Get your heads out of the sand. You can start by repeating the following to yourself every morning in the mirror:

What’s wrong with men? Nothing that isn’t also wrong with women.

Men don’t “refuse to grow up”. They drop out, (or rather, beta males drop out), and with good reason, because the sexual market has been reconstructed to pander to female hypergamous impulses. Men can no longer achieve the clearly-defined status over hypergamous women they once could because the traditional field of battle that afforded them relative supremacy and, thus, attractiveness, to women — the corporate office — has, via managerial despotism strengthening PC and diversity to a state religion, lopped their balls clean off. And so men retreat from the corporate drone working world to achieve their status elsewhere.

Men don’t avoid marriage and family because they have a “maturity deficit”. They rationally avoid marriage and family because, as the institutions are currently constituted, they are a raw deal for men. Marriage is a risk made too great by misandrist divorce laws, and kids are a cost made too high by falling wages and tightening housing markets, of which part of the blame must go to women who have been voting for increasingly leftie and feminist-friendly governments since suffrage.

Men don’t play the field because they “avoid responsibility”. Men play the field because they can; because women, in their zeal to delay marriage until their careers have been established, to hop a parade of alpha cock during their roaring twenties, and to reward the players over the providers with their prime sexual access, have opened the field to men.

Men don’t “treat women as toys”. Men get the sex while the getting’s good because women allow — nay, PREFER — themselves to be toyed with by the kinds of men who are good at it.

In other words, Mr. Bennett, women GET EXACTLY THE KINDS OF MEN they deserve. Even more dispiriting to your conception of the universe, women get the men they WANT.

Women are the gatekeepers and the hadron collider tubes of sexuality. This has never changed, and likely never will as long as our biology remains rooted in the material world. The shape and direction of man is primarily an effect, not a cause, of the pathway laid out by women. The ancients you revere knew this, which is why they found it perfectly natural to restrict female power where they could.

For boys to become men, they need to be guided through advice, habit, instruction, example and correction.

Nice sentiment. But guidance and advice are worse than useless when they lead astray. Your advice should be customized to the reality you live in, not the comforting unreality you wish were real.

Someone once characterized the two essential questions Plato posed as: Who teaches the children,

Stone cold experience.

and what do we teach them?

To accept the darkness.

We need to respond to this culture that sends confusing signals to young men, a culture that is agnostic about what it wants men to be, with a clear and achievable notion of manhood.

The lunacy of thinking the culture is ultimately well-intentioned and all it needs is a proper scolding is the mindset of the fool, or a pity whore. What good is a “clear and achievable notion of manhood” if such a notion is unvalued by women? How achievable is this notion in a culture dictated by a cognoelite that has no use for it?

The Founding Fathers believed, and the evidence still shows, that industriousness, marriage and religion are a very important basis for male empowerment and achievement.

If conservatives are serious about restoring a traditional concept of manhood to the modern man, I have a few suggestions for them.

1. Industriousness will only be a worthwhile pursuit for men if they can extract some real status out of it to satisfy their guiding compulsion to attract women. This means removing women from the workplace, where female career growth acts indirectly to undermine male provider and leadership status, and directly through the feminization of the workplace.

2. Marriage will only be a worthwhile goal for men when divorce laws are gutted and reinvented to stop massively favoring women at the expense of men. No-fault divorce should be abolished. Child support changed so that men and women have automatic equal share of custody if the man wants it. Alimony abolished so that we never again see a callous situation where the ex-husband is writing checks to an ex-wife who initiated divorce and is now banging a new lover. Women who initiate divorce for any reason other than provable physical abuse should be kicked out of the house and made to get by living in an apartment.

3. Religion is dead in the water. The fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil has been bitten, and no one who matters in the developed nations can take it seriously again until they and their shrinking descendants have been purged from the human pool. But if you want a fighting chance to return religion to some honorable place in society, and to have men return to the fold, the constant, sanctimonious drumbeat of chiding men to behave must stop, and be replaced with sermons that take into account the fallen nature of women. Remember, women WANT to be led. They won’t abandon the church if their natures are examined candidly and honestly, and without fear.

Now naturally, few conservatives will take up this call to arms. Have you heard any of them discussing the possibility of rearranging contractual marriage, the workplace, and religion to make it easier for men to ascend to a gloried position in society? Have you heard any discuss the natural disposition women have toward men of higher status, and that catering to this disposition will result in healthier relationships? I haven’t. That’s because most conservatives are pussies. “From a pussy, ye shall stay a pussy” would be an accurate conservative credo.

Since none of the above recommendations will ever see the light of day, let alone become the law of the land, the Chateau counsel to forge a new creation by learning game remains unchallenged in its effectiveness and its nobility. The map men navigate has changed; their status and their honor now issue from a wickedly precise understanding of women’s sexual natures, an acceptance of the new culture that pervades, and a fearlessness in exploiting what was bequeathed them to personal advantage.

The answers conservatives do have are laughable. Bill Bennett gives his:

We may need to say to a number of our twenty-something men, “Get off the video games five hours a day, get yourself together, get a challenging job and get married.” It’s time for men to man up.

Yes, men, man up. That’s the ticket. When she cuckolds you, man up. When she rejects your gentlemanly kindness for an aloof badboy, man up. When she unceremoniously files for divorce because she got bored of your beta personality after she went off the pill, man up. When she takes the house, car, dog and half to fund her live-in boyfriend’s porn habit, man up. When she writes love letters to terrorists and serial killers on death row because her honorable hubby doesn’t amuse her anymore, man up. When she boffs the first douchebag DJ who comes along but makes a courteous accountant wait three months for sex, man up. When she devours pulp romance novels and vacuous feminized trash that desensitizes her to the value of real life men she can reasonably hope to attract, man up. When she gets aroused by a backhanded compliment but remains unmoved by a sincere compliment, man up. When she cries to HR about what she thinks was an inappropriate flirtation, man up. When she “forgets” to take the Pill and puts you on the hook for the 18 year enslavement, man up. When she gets multiple degrees that price her out of the mating market, man up. When she gets legal protections and favors that aren’t given to men, man up. When her every misdeed and misbehavior and poor choice is excused, man the fuck up.

Wow. What man wouldn’t want to sign up for this program?

Men will man up when women man down. The one must follow the other. The polarity cannot be reversed.





Comments


  1. on October 28, 2011 at 2:51 pm So, Do the Zonk

    Absolutely right.

    Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 11:32 am greatbooksformen GBFM

      lzozozlzozlzlzlzz

      bill benenetetet blames it on videogames zlzolllzlzlzzol videogamzesss

      (well i needss something 2 do when my three hotttities are *ALL* out at da opeing night of breaking dawn twilight vampire porn and btw neoocn conservtaive mariam grossman says that vampire bloodsucking undead makeup wearing men are good for womenz to like:)

      why is sit ok and good for womenz to worship vampires and waste years of their life in undead beastiality werefolf fanatasies, but a guy can’t play a viedeogame?
      http://townhall.com/columnists/miriamgrossmanmd/2008/12/08/what_girls_want_an_edward_cullen_to_love_them/page/full/

      how about womenz woman up and tsop with vampire werefolrm bestiality beastiality asscocking crap (which neoonc s have replaced russel kirk and cs lewis and homer and jesus and virgil with) and woman up and make da gbfm some nachos and stop riding da cock carousel with thier gina holes and buttholes and beocme more than the vehicle o welath tranfer that the fedeeral reserve transofmroed an entire genertaion of woman into by berbeenkifiying bernakifying bernankifying them with xxsecrteiev tpappings offf butthexing from tucker max rhyems with godlman sax lzzolzozozzlzo

      well, why doesn;t fat fatty william bennett invest his millions ooffo neocon fiat dollars lost gambling in vegas in buiodling new vidoegame ocmcpnies celebrating the great books and classicslslsl and heoric actcions instead of hriinig and kiling hooker like da neoencs gta grand theft auto which trainss teh children to accept grand theft wall street and grand theft washingtss butehxeers? zlzozozozol

      System and method for creating exalted video games and virtual realities wherein ideas have consequences

      http://www.google.com/patents/about/12_218_255_System_and_method_for_creatin.html?id=aAuzAAAAEBAJ

      A video game method and system for creating games where ideas have consequences, incorporating branching paths that correspond to a player’s choices, wherein paths correspond to decisions founded upon ideals, resulting in exalted games with deeper soul and story, enhanced characters and meanings, and exalted gameplay. The classical hero’s journey may be rendered, as the journey hinges on choices pivoting on classical ideals. Ideas that are rendered in word and deed will have consequences in the gameworld. Historical events such as The American Revolution may be brought to life, as players listen to famous speeches and choose sides. As great works of literature and dramatic art center around characters rendering ideals real, both internally and externally, in word and deed, in love and war, the present invention will afford video games that exalt the classical soul, as well as the great books, classics, and epic films—past, present, and future.

      What is claimed is:
      1. A method for creating video games and virtual realities wherein ideas have consequences.

      2. The method in claim 1 where said ideas are rooted in classical, epic precepts such as those found in the Great Books and Classics, and exalted at the pinnacles of Western culture and history.

      3. The method in claim 1 where said ideas are manifested in the words the player or non-player characters, write, speak, read, disseminate, congregate about, fight for, and/or associate with.

      4. The method in claim 1 where said ideas are manifested in the actions the player, non-player characters, and/or monsters act out.

      5. The method in claim 1 where said ideas spread like viruses, by being spoken, written, or disseminated in some other manner, transforming characters who come in contact with said ideas into vampires, zombies, or other forms of monsters.

      6. The method in claim 1 where said ideas spread like viruses, by being spoken, written, or disseminated in some other manner, transforming characters who come in contact with said ideas into vampires, zombies, or other forms of monsters, and where said vampires, zombies, and monsters may be saved or converted back to normal by coming in contact with ideas that oppose the ideas that made them vampires, zombies, and other forms of monsters.

      7. The method in claim 1 where said ideas must be fought for via words and dialogue, before they have exalted consequences.

      8. The method in claim 1 where said ideas must be fought for via deeds and actions, before they have exalted consequences.

      9. The method in claim 1 where the player can fight for said ideas in word and deed, and witness the exalted consequences of those ideals, including liberty, freedom, and justice, when they succeed, and the dire consequences of tyranny, domination, and intimidation, when they fail to render exalted ideas, as ideas have consequences.

      10. The method in claim 1 where the character can fight for said ideas such as marriage, the Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and right to life in word and deed, and witness the exalted consequences of those ideals, including a stable and enduring society should they succeed, and a declining, bankrupt civilization, should they fail.

      11. The method in claim 1 where the character can battle for said ideas that are based upon classical moral and economic principles of famous philosophers, prophets, poets, statesmen, and economists including Plato, Moses, Jesus, Gandhi Sun Tzu, Buda, Jefferson, Aristotle, F. A. Hayek, Martin Luther King Jr., Homer, Ludwig Von Mises, Adam Smith, and others, and witness the consequences of both their success and failure of their battle, as the consequences are rendered in the game’s physical world.

      12. The method in claim 1 where the character can battle for said ideas via both word and deed, using a combination of words and action, witnessing the consequences of their balance between word and deed, between reasoning and partaking in violence, thusly bringing to life epic classical works of film and literature wherein the hero must balance word and deed.

      13. The method in claim 1 where fighting for said ideas in word and/or deed will have consequences regarding the operation of a weapon, which will operate at its full potential for the players and characters who are the most successful in serving ideals and ideas, and rendering them in word and deed.

      14. The method in claim 1 wherein said ideas may be based upon Constitutional ideals and ideas underlying the American Founding, including the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, sound currency, the right to bear arms, the freedom of speech, the right of the artist, author, and inventor to own their creations and inventions; and wherein the player could fight for sound money in word and deed and witness the consequences of their successes and failures, including liberty, wealth creation, capitalism, freedom, private property, peace, and prosperity or rapid inflation, deflation, theft via the inflation tax, massive debt, empire, long lines, wealth transfer to the rich, depressions, corruption, and war.

      15. The method in claim 1 where the said ideas will be supported or opposed by in-game characters, and the player will have to choose how to interact with the said in-game characters, based on their ideas, including but not limited to whether or not to befriend them, agree with them, disagree with them, ignore them, recruit them, shoot them, save them, judge them, or forgive them.

      16. The method in claim 1 where the said ideas are based upon the pivotal plot points of the great books and classics.

      17. The method in claim 1 where said ideas spread like viruses, by being spoken, written, or disseminated in some other manner, transforming characters who come in contact with said ideas into vampires, zombies, or other forms of monsters; and when bad ideas have infected too many in-game characters, the consequences are dire, including the loss of life, liberty, happiness, freedom, and security.

      18. The method in claim 1 wherein said ideas may be related to economics and monetary policy, and wherein the player could fight for sound money in words echoing the classical economists and deed and witness the consequences of their successes and failures, including liberty, freedom, peace and prosperity or rapid inflation, deflation, theft via the inflation tax, massive debt, empire, long lines, depressions, corruption, and war.

      19. The method in claim 1 wherein moral ideas have moral consequences in the evolution of the gameworld.

      20. The method in claim 1 where said ideas in the video game world are founded upon the natural ideas and ideals occurring at the plot points in great works of literature and film where a character must choose whether to serve an ideal or not serve an ideal, thusly rendering or not rendering ideals real by their actions, and influencing the greater outcome and state of the game world, as ideas have consequences.

      21. The method in claim 1 where said ideas in the video game world are used to exalt the classic hero’s journey, and where a player’s success and progress at every stage or step or plot point of said hero’s journey is defined by said player’s service or disservice to said ideas and ideals, and where by said player’s serving said ideas and classical ideals, said hero’s journey advances towards ultimate victory and triumph, while by said character’s failing to serve said ideas and classical ideals, progress in said hero’s journey is retarded or reversed.

      Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 12:29 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

      “Men will man up when women man down. The one must follow the other. The polarity cannot be reversed.”

      “My losta cokas will man up rise up bing boing boing boing when women go down on my losttas cocksa lzozlzlz oyummy yummy gbfm spermeeieatozaas in my tummy zzlzlzo. The one must follow the other. The polarity cannot be reversed.”

      werewolvesss vampires women are trained to worship honor bnoeocnss beastsisiality zlozzollzz zlzozlzzozozzlzoz http://www.mtv.com/videos/beavis-and-butt-head-season-9-ep-1-werewolves-of-highland-crying/1673228/playlist.jhtml#series=2211&seriesId=37392&channelId=1

      Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 7:52 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      when bill bennett & kay hymowitz say “man up,” what they reallys meanz is “lube up.” “Bend over–you and your future wife–and take it ike a man form our neoocn heroic tucker max rhymes with godmans sax assocking mahcinesz zzlooxozlzllz”

      AN OPEN LETTER to BILL BENNET & NEBEN BERNENKE BEN BERNANKE

      Dear sirs of estimabel repute,

      I have erecenly been doing a lot of htinking and on behlaf of me and bmy bortherssz i was wondering if u could please hold back on the assocking of our future wives in secretey tapped sessions during college and stop wiring fiat dollarz to assockers for ther assocking feats, and laos please stop laoading epic unprecedednt asscocking debt on our future wifves wihile senidng forth neoconalphas to asscokc them in the buttocks and thsly deosul them zlzolzzlz. Mr. Bernanke and Mr. BEennett–dear sirs with all due repsects–you are really old like thomas jeffersons era s so your wives probably were no deosuled and assocked in college and taught in their feminist literature courses how to intinaiteate doivi divorce and transfeer a mans assetts to bernnake and his neoocn divorce regime zlzzlzllz. See, pardon my englisshsh but when a omwan is assockced in college, even if just th tipppy tip of a cock goes in da anuth, a piece of her soul is deousled and shaved off, and thus she is far more likeley to be loyal to fait dolalrs and work for the fed instad of honorainig her husband family schildren. and as broken homes are the leading cause of fucked up childrens, by assocking womenz in colle,e by da eonoens and even when it is not secretly taped teh womene ez is still deosuled, which adversley aeffects the future of our country, and as mr. bennets said with his moral compass, america is out last , best hope zlzolzzllz

      sincerly,

      da GB4M
      p.s. pleasee support the heartistse gb4m presidential ticket in 2010, with heartiste being the predsidental candiidtae bring forth his humor, love, compaassion leader, insights, and me backing it up with my cheneyesque gravitas lzozlzlz ytahanks in advancnened!!!

      Like


  2. That last paragraph is the key to ending this whole forty year debacle: women must stop acting like men and letting their vaginas lead them into the abusive arms of an asshole. Until that time, men have little to no reason to “man up” since they risk everything for precious little in return.

    Like


    • I would put it differently: MEN need to be responsible for women in their sphere of influence– their daughters, sisters, and so forth. We cannot leave women’s sexual behavior to the discretion of women, but must monitor and influence it within a patriarchical system.

      So I agree with Bennett that men are ultimately accountable for this mess, but only in our acceding to feminism and “liberation” (aka sluttification) of women.

      Like


      • You are only responsible for what you have control over.

        Techological issues have made it too difficult to control women. Women are no longer afraid of getting pregnant. Women have urban anonymity. Woman have personal income.

        Like


      • Lame excuses. We are still smarter and stronger than they are. Plus, technology can also HELP keep track of the young lasses:

        http://www.brickhousesecurity.com/teen-driving-tracking.html

        Like


      • Ok, in the magic land that exists only inside your head, sure, because men are smarter and stronger, that means this gives us enough power and real world coordination to put the genie back in the bottle.

        In consensual reality, you are only dreaming.

        Like


      • Men put the genie in the bottle in the first place.

        Feminism and the matriarchy are the original, primeval condition of the animal world and of primitive human tribes. Men created civilization and the patriarchy. Haven’t you read Amneus’ book?

        We put the genie in the bottle, we got sloppy and let it back out, now we have to put it back in again. It should be easier this time with the Internet. We just have to stop fighting each other and get our act together.

        Like


      • And what do you think the real world chances are of that happening, outside of your pipe dream, Meyer?

        Like


  3. No where does pedestalization seem more prevalent than in the christian west.

    Dueling needs to be brought back to society for men to have honor again. Then I can legally give this bennet fuck and every other white knighter out there the dirt nap they need.

    Like


    • Are you being serious with this?

      Like


      • Dueling would help solve the problem because you could challenge to a duel any man who is living on your ex-wife’s alimony, or soaking up your kids child support.

        Like


      • Dueling isn’t as easy you seem to think. The accepted practice was the man that was challenged got to choose weapons, to hedge against the number of challenges issued.

        This man who is living off of one’s redistributed income, are they both an inferior marksman and swordsman? A worse wrestler? A worse boxer? Worse at sitting on a lit powder keg until one chickens out? All of the above?

        Like


      • This is incorrect. Historically, the conditions of the duel were up to the offended person, specifically, the person who demands satisfaction. An interloper would not be able to abscond with your lady AND be allowed to choose weapons after you demand satisfaction. In this context, the offended is the husband/father.

        Like


      • Yeah!

        Like


      • You seem to think it went away. We call it “gang shootings” nowadays. You know, young men fighting over obscure points of honor.

        Like


      • Gang thugs shooting rivals over 20 dollar bills do not equate to men of title dueling over their honor.

        Like


      • So very wrong, honor doesn’t have a price tag. Is it worth dying over $5, damn right it is cause it aint the $5. that matters, (jews seem to have a problem conceptualizing this)

        Like


      • Either that or some people can conceptualize it fine, but just realize when a concept is stupid and doesn’t serve their interest.

        Like


      • Had to bring the Jews into huh? Dicks like you must see Jews everywhere. You probably think Chris Jericho is a Jew because he was born on Long Island. Get a life>

        Like


      • As an afterthought, yes. In simplest terms it’s jew versus roman thing, a warrior ethos versus a banker?intellectual?parasite? ethos. It’s really not my fault jews are known more for being crafty than being brave and I will not allow your bigotry to silence me.

        Like


      • You don’t know your history. Jews were one of the few people to wipe out a legion and that was during a full on assault (about 6 full legions were being used at the time, with auxilliars from another 6, as well as lots of mercenaries.) without an inside man. The Germans took out three in an ambush with an inside man.

        The warriors fighting on the walls at Jerusalem were literally starving to death but kept holding out, it got to the point where Titus began screaming at his own troops at the embarrassment of being held off by walking skeletons. This is according to records made by a man in his employ and given the Roman seal of approval, so you can guess that things were probably a lot worse.

        Suggestion: After you finish sucking your lovers cock, wipe the cum off your mouth and pick up an actual book with pages. Something with lots of words written by a historian who has more credentials than just being white and blond and related to your inbred sister.

        Like


      • Keep talking eze. At least this way we know who the bigots are. This post is about men and women, not Jews. Only a loser would let his hate show through on a subject that aint even related. Its getting old already.

        Like


      • lion –

        Would you care to explore why you so manifestly enjoy demonizing one of your own (if you are white) to defend Jews who, you ought to know, care nothing for you?

        I shan’t bother with your highly fallacious isolation of ancient Jewish military skirmishes from the main thrust of their sociobiology, as any Jewish historian would think it ludicrous to deny, which is mercantilism. By which is meant trading, counting money, taking inventory, levying tariffs, lending, and reporting defaulters to elites who allow and sponsor such activities.

        Or have you not read Max Weber? No, of course you haven’t. Three-thousand years of Jewish mercantilism obliterated to score a pyrrhic point against a member of your race, whom you then utterly dehumanize with the sort of sadistic homosexual rape fantasies employed by women to shame men who deviate from script.

        I mean you no embarrassment, understand. The question is why you would indulge in such rhetoric. Or perhaps you are Jewish?

        Like


      • Ha ha, no, heavens no!

        Serious would be purdah. But leave it to post-christing whitey to come up with the sex-suicidal response: dueling.

        Like


    • And thus is the great conundrum of modern man. Never before has man been such a slave to another’s beliefs. The modern state is so effective in punishing dissidence, that any man who disagrees is jailed or relegated to a neutered “protest”, forced to battle the dominant forces at their own game. That is why the elite scoffs at OWS and similar protests: it is their game, and one they have mastered completely through countless victories.

      The founding fathers foresaw that the state would outlaw the use of force to contain revolutionary pressure as it grew towards totalitarianism. Yet, even though the right to armed protest was enshrined in the second amendment, the state systematically suppressed and circumvented this right until it was void. Ironically, Americans can no longer defend their own interpretation of the amendments without being jailed. Thus, your desire to duel should be expanded to include your desire to exercise your second amendment rights.

      Man’s most basic freedom is his ability to exercise force in upholding his beliefs. For all the hymns of the intelligentsia, this one violation strips a man of the only freedom that has any meaning. The men’s movement, at its core, is based upon this principle. A man can no longer be master of his estate, his family, or even his own liberty. Defending yourself can lead to imprisonment; you are at the mercy of outsiders for your most basic survival. This an insult to the very definition of masculinity; a man unable to defend his views through force is a neutered man. Force is the ultimate expression of liberty; those who exercise force will always control the destiny of those who do not.

      Like


      • And since force against the government is not an option, that leaves one to consider getting off the grid and living in complete anonymity.

        Like


      • Please be more precise with your definition of freedom/liberty, because what you have stated is all wrong.

        Man’s most basic freedom is to peacefully take actions (voluntarily chosen by him from a variety of choices) that help him survive and prosper in life. He does not have the right to use force against others who hold the exact same right to peacefully pursue values in their lives. Force is only appropriate as self-defense when another tries to coercively interfere with one’s peaceful actions.

        Force is NOT the ultimate expression of liberty. Don’t say crap like that. Force is ANTI-liberty, except only when used in legitimate self-defense. Defensive force is OK but not offensive.

        Like


      • “Man’s most basic freedom is to peacefully take actions (voluntarily chosen by him from a variety of choices) that help him survive and prosper in life. He does not have the right to use force against others who hold the exact same right to peacefully pursue values in their lives. Force is only appropriate as self-defense when another tries to coercively interfere with one’s peaceful actions.”

        I am sorry my friend, but you live in a dream world. Once you see the world as it is, then we may have a cogent discussion. Constructing reality based upon your personal ideology is the surest path to insanity.

        Like


      • “Thus, your desire to duel should be expanded to include your desire to exercise your second amendment rights.”

        the whole point of a “**well regulated** militia” is to not have vengeful vigilante hicks having gunfights in the streets. last i checked, it was legal to have concealed permits in many states, so your NRA fearmongering doesn’t withstand the light of even basic scrutiny.

        “Man’s most basic freedom is his ability to exercise force in upholding his beliefs.”

        ok, but as usual there is as much truth in this (freedom fighters like IRA, the original Minutemen) as there is lies (terrorists like mcveigh, bin laden, breivik). yet again, DT, you speak in platitudes that at best have no meaning in that they are as wrong as they are right.

        we can agree that the OWS folk are onto something, however. but GBFM had that covered ages ago.

        Like


      • Hi, Student. I wonder if you would care to explain your anti-white bias?

        Like


    • I don’t think it really goes far enough. We need to reintroduce the rights of Paterfamilias.

      Like


    • on October 30, 2011 at 12:03 am Ed the Department Head

      God Bless you Rambo! You are totally right! The White Knighters are a scorge on our society. They allow the women to behave as the evil whores so many of them are deep down and for all their fictionation with their “old time religion” are scared to tell the truth to women and leftists. People like Bennet are really a fake opposition keep around to fool the public into thinking democracy is real and not a propaganda front for plutocratic oligrachy. The meanstream conservatives are the equivalent of the legal alternative parties in the German Democratic Republic.
      Relegalized dueling would be a dream come true. America has an asshole problem. “Democratic” government has allowed evil and dishonorable assholes to have no predators and this has to stop. Either we have the type of totalitarian regime that cleans house on these scum or we go the Old West route and relegalize dueling. Being able to legally take care of those who do you wrong, as Heinlein noted, would lead to a WAY more polite and virtuous society.

      Like


  4. I think the host protests too much. I think he’s never experienced the love of a magnetic, vivacious, experienced, lively, cultured, highly educated older woman.

    Like


    • on October 28, 2011 at 3:43 pm John Norman Howard

      Nor, I venture, has he ever ridden a rainbow-colored unicorn shooting Skittles from its backside.

      Like


    • And where would one find those women again? Here, let me answer that with a thought experiment. What is the similarity between Santa Claus, an ethical lawyer, a girl that you just described, and Optimus Prime? The answer: THEY DON’T FUCKING EXIST!

      That’s if one takes your words at face value. I’ll let others translate your description into what the words REALLY meant, as they can have more fun with it than I.

      Like


      • TO: Diabolos
        RE: Where?

        And where would one find those women again?….The answer: THEY DON’T FUCKING EXIST! — Diabolos

        I found one. But we both are somewhat more ‘mature’ that I suspect someone with the nom des blogs YOU have are.

        Still and all, she reminds me of the female lead in Life Force.

        They ARE out there. And they ARE REAL Christians. They are described in Proverbs 31.

        Don’t lose heart. Try not to be overly angry. But DO (1) become a man worthy of such a woman, i.e., become a REAL Christian yourself and (2) seek such women where they might be found. Three guesses….first two don’t count. [NOTE: But it has to be a REAL Christian church. Not these classic examples of ‘Having the form but denying the power’, e.g., Episcopalian, Methodist, etc., etc., etc.]

        Regards,

        Chuck(le)
        [Who can find a virtuous woman. Her worth is greater than rubies.]

        Like


      • Did your “virtuous woman” have a hymen when you married her?

        Like


      • on October 31, 2011 at 3:00 pm Chuck Pelto's Id

        “Still and all, she reminds me of the female lead in Life Force.”

        Mathilda lost her hymen, but she does have a perfect mid-1980s rack.

        Like


    • That’s great,you think so much!

      Like


  5. Gold

    Like


  6. “An appalling lack of understanding, of even a tangential blow with the truth about female nature, suggests that . . . (some) MRAs . . . have an allergic reaction to plumbing the depths of the human sexual soul, a revulsion likely concocted in a cauldron of sheltered life experiences and morbid fear of their own temptations.”

    Wait … I thought mens rights advocates were exactly the group taking on the fight for men against feminism. If MRAs are blind, too, then who’s championing our cause?

    [Heartiste: I said “some”. Their ranks are infused with many white knighters.]

    Like


  7. Good post. Bennett is pushing 80 though, and I doubt he knows what these princesses are like these days. Most of my friends play video games, yes. But they also know how to load a dish washer, put shit away when they’re done with it, are able to hold down a job without constant freakouts, and have a grip on the economic realities of normal life. Bennett probably assumes that women of today also do these things. But the fact is that is just not the case. If Bill were younger and saw it for himself, he’d be playing xbox and drinking a beer too.

    Like


    • Most of my friends play video games, yes. But they also know how to load a dish washer, put shit away when they’re done with it, are able to hold down a job without constant freakouts, and have a grip on the economic realities of normal life

      Exactly, girls aren’t good at anything except getting older and fat, bitches can’t even load dishwashers these days without putting supervision.

      Like


      • Too true. It seems most college age girls these days can’t even boil water. Forget about sewing or any other household choir.

        Like


      • Amen. I’d say roughly 90% of the woman I’ve been involved with can’t cook or do dishes. I just found out today my wife has no idea how to grill chicken (which I explained to her). What’s the point of a binding legal obligation to another person when I can do these things myself and won’t lose 50% of my money if things end badly?

        Like


      • I’ve discovered that a live in girlfriend can be a workable situation in which the man maintains supreme amounts of hand. Some key elements involved are total financial supremacy, and the ability to cut out at a moments notice.

        Living comfortably off of the grid can enable the man to maintain power in a domestic situation.

        Like


      • That’s why you need to start calling them out on it as being frivolous and useless.

        Like


      • I’ll second that motion, my current girl has taken a keener interest in cooking because of my negs – speaking to her as if she were 5 and asking if she knew how to make toast or coffee, as well as showing appreciation when she makes something good, toning down the appreciation when it’s not. Every now and again I’ll take over and prepare something that’s lightyears ahead in taste and complexity and make it look like childs play, to let her know where her skills are relative to the bar.

        Girls of today are literally useless at taking care of even themselves and given half the chance will avoid any work so that they can sit on the couch or go out and play. You have to lead by example, carrots & sticks etc.

        Like


      • Yes, I agree whole heartedly with the negs. My favorite is something along the lines of “Youre sister knows how to cook. Maybe she’ll be free later tonight”.
        I have a close coworker from Latvia who has only been in the USA for a few years now. Tonight we were talking about the differences in American women and women in his country. He said his observation of women here are that they don’t care about having families and have no desire to learn how to cook, clean or care for a husband.

        Like


      • Ha! Speaking of dishwahsers. This past weekend, I had to help the thirty year old woman tenant next door who has a master’s degree (and excellent hip to waist ratio, btw) turn on her dishwasher!

        Her landlord who lives on the premises usually does the dishes but was away for a few days due to a family emergency, so this woman actually had to do a load of dishes on her own. Oh, the horror.

        She apparently “tried everything” and couldn’t get it to work.

        Click, click boom. It’s on. I’m in and out of her kitchen in less than 20 seconds. She was really embarassed. And, I thought, “Yeah, you should be.”

        Like


  8. Bill Bennett is a tool of a conservative and fell for the standard BS lines when making those statements. The real conservatives are the fiscal ones who seek to drive positive changes like lower taxes, ending entitlements, strengthening the dollar and creating positive incentive. If only Steve Forbes had more charisma he would have been president.

    Like


    • Perry’s new tax plan is no half bad. Best of all, it ends US tax dominion internationally. Right now, if you earn money on an asteroid orbiting off of Mars, you still owe US tax for anything over about $95k. Forbes endorsed it. He also wants to put men back to work with the energy push. I also trust Perry to push for tort reform. Lord knows we need it. I think he would also see the point of an article like this one.

      Like


  9. To change the World is a beta excuse not to change himself.

    Like


    • AWESOMENESS!

      This is why so many fembots are Jewish. They grew up in female-oppressive households, and so they turned their anger against humanity rather than against Jewish traditions. You can’t change religion, so they try to change the planet.

      Hippies: ditto.

      When you can’t change the problem, you change something else to mask your impotence.

      Like


      • Women on crusades is an old theme. What we are discussing in this thread and many others are in the end all reasons why women should not be given political power. Free diapers for everyone!

        Like


      • tikkuning the ha-olam ha-lo yehudi

        also why jewesses were always communists and anarchists in the old world

        Like


    • Brilliant.

      Like


  10. Insert GBFM Template:

    lolzzzzz. Bernanke. Butthex. Comment about conservatives and Bernanke ruining America. asscocked. lzlozlzl. Enter misspelled word. two more mispelled words. T-Shirt mention.

    zlzoozozozzozozzozozzl

    Like


    • on October 28, 2011 at 8:45 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

      lzoozolzoolzl u forgot 2 link 2 y geniuses geneneiusess zlozlzlz

      http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com

      lzozozolzoz butthhexual neoncnc bill benenete doesn;t know what the hot tart tars taste liek these dayyzyz i wonder if bill beneneter ever hooked up with a bernankified woman bernnakikified in da butt secrteteely taped by eneocn fsvoriete tucker max rheyms iwth godlman xasax lzolzlz heralded in the conserveietve weekly standatdtdh celeeteberatered fundede financinced by da neocnsnsns lzlzllz

      Like


      • Touche!

        Like


      • @GBFM—
        When I first started reading your posts I really didn’t understand your message you were conveying but I’m starting to get it now. May I ask what your profession is? I find your arguments enlightening.

        Like


      • on October 31, 2011 at 10:18 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

        professisosnal swimsuit model ppphphh zlzlolozlozo and pro taco master

        Like


  11. Marriage will only be a worthwhile goal for men when divorce laws are gutted and reinvented to stop massively favoring women at the expense of men. No-fault divorce should be abolished. Child support changed so that men and women have automatic equal share of custody if the man wants it. Alimony abolished so that we never again see a callous situation where the ex-husband is writing checks to an ex-wife who initiated divorce and is now banging a new lover. Women who initiate divorce for any reason other than provable physical abuse should be kicked out of the house and made to get by living in an apartment.

    So men can choose whether they want custody but if they walk away women are stuck don’t matter what?

    It seems here you are writing the rules so that the man can do whatever he wants and the women is stuck with the outcome.

    [Heartiste: Doesn’t feel good, does it?]

    Like


    • I don’t see any unfairness in what he is proposing at all. Why wouldn’t a father be entitled to equal time with his kids? That we would allow a woman (or man in theory but never practice) to unilaterally terminate a marriage involving children FOR NO SUBSTANTIAL REASON WHATSOEVER and then be entitled to collect a monthly child support check from the guy is insane. Is it any wonder that women are the moving force in the vast majority of divorces right now?

      Like


    • [Heartiste: Doesn’t feel good, does it?]

      More like you being a deliberate asshole. It’s not about what’s good for everyone. It’s what’s good for you and the select few. There is a difference between advocating for equal custody, education for boys, etc. and rigging the system so that you always benefit regardless of outcome.

      [Heartiste: The system has been rigged against men for quite some time now. A little taste of your own medicine helps wonderfully focus the mind.
      As for actual policy, I’ll quote a Chateau post from the archives that lays out the position in more detail:

      Absent children and proof of fault, there is no good reason a man should owe his ex-wife ONE RED CENT in the event of a divorce. If she stayed at home becoming best friends with Oprah instead of advancing in a pointless public relations career, that is her body her choice, and the consequences are hers to grapple with. To believe otherwise is to believe that the state should treat women like children, incapable of accounting for their own life choices. And if that’s the standard by which the state will act with regards to women’s post-marital entitlements, then I suggest the state extend its paternalistic logic to other realms in which women operate. A repeal of female voting rights would be a good start.

      If a woman initiates divorce from a man and children are involved, unless she can prove fault by her husband she should not even get child support. I can already hear the disingenuous whining. “But the children will suffer! Think of the children!” If the children are suffering she can always stay with her husband, give them to the husband if she decides to ditch him, or put the kids up for adoption. If she wishes to give the kids to the ex-husband, but he’d rather not have his freedom and funtime curtailed by babysitting duties (and I wouldn’t blame him), *and* the divorce was his fault, he can have the option of paying child support in lieu of physically raising them.

      hthurts.]

      Like


      • And now your contradictions are coming into the surface.

        [Heartiste: Hey, no one said life is fair, or that choices are stark.]

        Take this, for example:

        If she stayed at home becoming best friends with Oprah instead of advancing in a pointless public relations career, that is her body her choice, and the consequences are hers to grapple with.

        How does that square with this?

        Industriousness will only be a worthwhile pursuit for men if they can extract some real status out of it to satisfy their guiding compulsion to attract women. This means removing women from the workplace, where female career growth acts indirectly to undermine male provider and leadership status, and directly through the feminization of the workplace.

        If the husband initiates divorce, she’s fucked either way, heh?

        [Your reading comprehension is poor. The abolishment of no-fault divorce means that a husband initiating divorce would have to prove neglect by his wife, or some other nullifying factor caused by her actions that renders the marriage insoluble. If proven, the wife suffers the consequence.]

        The only way it does is if the woman is at the complete mercy of the man, which is what you are alluding to. Your solution just really sounds like revenge.

        [Marriage under my system would not prohibit women from seeking employment, or earning skills that can be used later to find employment should the marriage fail. Pointing out the fact that a decline in female workforce participation would redound to the benefit of relationships and marriage by reestablishing a sexual tension between hypergamous women and higher status men does not remove the choice from women to pursue skills acquisition in anticipation of potential divorce. As the post stated, there is really no way to forcibly remove women from the workforce, not at this late date. You can only apply incentives and disincentives. Should more women leave the workforce to rely on their husbands earnings, they would be incentivized to behave better within marriage. Or at least to stop seeing divorce as a convenient escape from boredom with a beta provider.]

        Like


      • And now you are a liar.

        [Heartiste: And you are a pedophile..]

        The whole point of removing women from the workforce (deincentives as you put it now that I pointed that out) is to make them dependent on men.

        [No, that is not the point, dumbass. It’s to reestablish beta male status and widen the acceptable dating pool for beta females. Dependency is just femcunt talk by people who only see the issues in terms of oppressed and oppressor.]

        How can they find skills and employment if the system is already rigged to force them to find another man?

        [Are you high? What, women can’t take a class while married?]

        Truth is you could care less about what happens to those people.

        [Whose “those people”? Lying cunts like yourself? True.]

        Your only concern was how to find and trap young girls into a rigged system.

        [Jesus fuckin krist, we’ve got a weiner here. No woman is “trapped” into anything. Where in this post does it say women should be forced into marriage?]

        As for your divorce bullshit, on what grounds will divorce be nullified?

        [Cheating, for one. Physical violence. I’m sure your pea brain could come up with a few more.]

        Assholes like you won’t extend neglect to mean anything you want. Please.

        [I can tell you what won’t qualify as legit grounds to seek divorce: a wife getting the itch to eat pray love her way into self-fulfillment.]

        Like


      • Moreover womens’ participation in the workforce is heavily subsidized by law and public funds. How many women have a state job as social workers or public school teachers, etc. The entire social welfare industry was created in the 60s and 70s to make work for all the new female college grads with degrees in social work and psychology that were unemployable in an industry tha actually made things. Lefties won’t quit until we have an economy that exists solely from giving therapy to one another and litigation. Now it has become institutionalized and politicized so we have congresswomen from Connecticut proposing that the state pay for diapers for welfare women, many of whom have 10 or more children in order to collect more money. Men are ultimately the ones who pay for this absurd largesse in any socialist society because men are the most productive members of society. That is the ultimate meaning of “From each according to their ability to each, according to their needs.” Marx and Engels were big cock hounds and I often think they dreamt their clap trap up in order to party like rock stars, which they did.

        Like


    • It seems here you are writing the rules so that the man can do whatever he wants and the women is stuck with the outcome.

      For decades now the rules have been written so the woman can do whatever she wants and the man is stuck with the outcome. Men have zero reproductive rights. I wonder if that bothered you and have ever spoken up about it. Doubt it.

      Like


    • it’s a moot goddamn point. even heartiste admits that nothing he’s proposing will ever come to fruition, so who cares if it’s a good or bad policy in the abstract? all you need to do is learn game (if you’re a man)

      Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 11:14 am John Norman Howard

      And you guys are debating with this cunt why?

      Like


  12. Bill Bennett is indistinguishable from just another CHICK complaining that there are no good men and that the cads that pump & dump her need to marry her and stop using her.

    Conservatives & liberals are just different sides of the same coin that is pushing American down the slope of decline:

    Liberals fight to make new laws and introduce norms that FREE WOMEN from the chains of responsibility, while conservatives fight to keep the laws and norms that ENSLAVE MEN with responsibility. It’s a double whammy against men.

    Conservative or liberal, republic or democrat — they are all full of shit. America is a plague on the world. We need regime change in America.

    Like


    • Bennett is indeed acting like a “CHICK,” but that can be strategic. If you make a frontal assault on the idols of the age, you will have to remain in anonymity, like CH. Otherwise you stick up like the nail that begs to be hammered by the full force of the culture.

      For Bennett to speak pure, unalloyed truth would be to invite the full wrath of the commissars of the commanding heights, and he would cease to exist as a factor in the culture, like Michael Richards saying “nigger,” or Harvard President Larry Summers saying “math is hard” for girls, or Jimmy The Greek remarking that blacks are naturally good athletes.

      At least I hope Bennett’s is a deliberate strategy. And if it isn’t, he’ll be dead soon anyway.

      Either way, your mediocrity is no solution as forces are gathering for the decisive conflict.

      Like


      • I think you’re scrambling to make excuses for Bill. Its good he started the debate, but the general argument he makes finds no fault at all with women. He could have accomplished your stated objectives and still criticized women just a wee bit.

        Like


    • @Anon

      perfect comment

      Like


  13. This goes for white men especially; man up.

    The bastard, white children of today are literally the only off-spring the world-wide white community will have a generation from now.

    Fuck ’em. Fuck ’em all.

    wake up white mannnnnnn

    Like


  14. – men commit suicide at a rate of 4 to 1 over women. man up.
    – men die on average 5 years earlier. man up.
    – over 90% of workplace deaths are men. man up.
    – men do almost all of the dirty, dangerous, and manually difficult jobs. man up.

    – false accusations against men of sexual harassment and rape will rise in our Feminist Indoctrination Centers known as colleges because the standard of evidence has been lowered to “preponderance of evidence”, the lowest standard of proving guilt. man up.

    – television is largely misandrist, especially commercials. man up. you can laugh about chopping a man penis off on television and suffer no consequences. man up.
    – there are 8 million programs, groups, associations, and organizations to help and support women, about 3 for men. man up.
    – more men are homeless than women. man up.
    – most war deaths are men. man up.
    – women have hordes of white knight pussy slaves and male feminist morons on their side. men don’t have the equivalent. man up.

    – don’t ever mention any of the above in front of other men. that’s whining. man up.

    Like


    • CastleD, and to the Fmudd bud;

      Last week there was this news item about women earning less than 18%, was on the first national channel and, the Gender Pay Gap was defined as:

      “This does not mean that women are paid less than men for carrying out exactly the same tasks. Rather, jobs in sectors dominated by women tend to bring in worse salaries than jobs in industries dominated by men.”

      So I wrote a post http://finndistan.blogspot.com/2011/10/smelly-media-morons-dictionary-gender.html; and posted an abbreviated version as a comment on facebook.

      I will report on other replies later, but this one girl, a girl that I am actually involved with, starts to comment back. The usual stuff.

      Until I ask her, “So our problem is that women earn 18% less for doing different jobs, while men miss on seven full years of their life by death, and while alive pay 30-40% more tax (progressive theft)…?”

      Some blabla later, she drops the bomb:

      “In case of dying young and paying more taxes maybe the person who died earlier than average can be happy to have his taxes used for taking care of another human being”

      Any reply I would have given that I thought about would burn bridges with more people than I am willing to; so I asked her to look in the mirror and reverse the genders.

      Just now I was commented that I am exxagerating.

      Now, this is not a feminasty, it is not a lawyer cunt.

      These words came from one of the most feminine and girlfriendly kind of girl that I met in the last years.

      If even the feminine ones think like this, I got nothing more to say.

      Today I threw the towel. A young man has got nothing, nothing he owes to the society or women in general. Going to the army, rescuing dimsels, being whiteknights (like few commenters I got); stupid. Idiotic.

      Young man, pump and dump. As even for the sweet ones, your death is a happy thing because some ungrateful old bitchhag can buy a pimped walker.

      Like


      • You don’t have to win arguments with females in order to fully and properly control them.

        It’s not in your best interest to come to a negotiated agreement with girls.

        Your plan is to get them to fall in love with you, and have economic and emotional control over their lives.

        You don’t negotiate agreements with them.

        Like


      • Unfortunately what we’re seeing in our society is the politicization of women’s primal fears of abandonment coupled with their natural solipsism regarding mens’ perspective on life. They think we’re infinitely more capable than they are at a basic level they can’t imagine otherwise.

        The best way to combat this thinking is as above, with clever ripostes. In future interactions wih this woman, simply state in an oblique way via humor or refusal to do some task that she sees you as less valuable to the universe and that you reached that conclusion because of the statement above and countless other times or you’re too primitive, etc. You simply call her on her moral vanity and blindness. Women can’t run a technically advanced civilization and know it. You have to make them aware of their basic ignorance of technology.With a straight face, I tell my wife things like the computer runs on magic and she must appease the spirits in the box if she wants it to work. I can’t fix it because I’m tainted by bad juju. My wife has come to appreciate technical skills now that she has become less urbanized. In one sense Bennett has a point, most young men today don’t have any practical skills. Like being able to fight or shoot, having practical skills gives one a lot of natural confidence. They save a lot of money too.

        Like


      • @Finndistan

        most women feel entitled to enslave most men (which makes King A’s shaming of the comment above white-knighting bs)

        Like


      • K.A thinks with his agenda. He starts with his end result, and thinks backwards from that.

        Like


    • CastleD wrote: “men commit suicide … man up. … men die on average … man up. … over 90% of workplace deaths … man up.”

      Wah.

      This sounds like a press release from a battered women’s shelter. What nuts you might have had just shriveled back into your body cavity.

      You’re damn right you’re “whining,” and a particularly pitiable brand of whining at that, you weak little sarcastic ectomorph.

      Here is a hint: Men don’t assemble grievances into a litany and embark on awareness campaigns. We assemble men and go on scorched earth campaigns until there are no more dissidents to throttle or awe into submission. Any man who still retains a testicular capacity already intuits the imbalance without your list of squeaky MRA faggotry.

      Women/leftists: “What do we want?” “JUSTICE!” “When do we want it?” “NOW.” Teargas. Exeunt.

      Men/conservatives: The basso profundo symphony of artillery, followed by the report of talking .50 cals, then the cleansing heat of hydrogen fusing brightly across the horizon… THEN: “What do we want? Glad you asked…”

      You are actively at odds with the solution. You are part of the problem.

      Like


      • “Men don’t assemble grievances into a litany and embark on awareness campaigns.”

        Then why do you leave retarded diatribes here?

        Like


      • Thanks.

        Like


      • Nice try.

        I write for amusement. I write for the same reason I hit the driving range, for practice and routine, but more importantly to indulge the force beneath all vitality: will to power.

        These higher needs are inexplicable (or “retarded”) to those who have no reference to a comparable ability. You’re the type of omega or woman who needs to be told why Hillary climbed Everest or why men approach tens rather than settling for sevens — but forever consigned to never getting it.

        You think I would embark on an awareness campaign from the bowels of an internet comment section? Of course you do: that’s the simple calculus a mind like yours makes. It’s what L would do. And you’re deluded to imagine your unexamined pedestrian urges comprise the potential of man, and immodest enough to spew them anonymously without any self-mediation.

        Yours was an honest curiosity, slave-mind. But like the contingent being you are, you couldn’t help but cloak it in uppity criticism born from cowardice.

        Or, to put it in terms you might understand: I do what I do because I can, and you squeak in protest because you can only squeak.

        Like


      • We are all contingent beings.

        Your “scorched earth” fantasy is no more real than the “awareness campaign”, though it would much sooner come to pass, but not for your own purpose. It’s fine to speak in symbols but be aware you do so just like anyone else.

        Like


      • Yeah, except their “awareness campaign” isn’t a metaphor. They really think this is how substantial change is effected. Which is a tolerable misconception as far as it goes, except that it dissipates frustration rather than sublimating it into something effective.

        When I speak about “scorched earth,” I’m not talking about buildings and people. I’m talking about the U.S. Code and the official culture. Their overturning requires a flamethrower, not an AIDS protest quilt.

        Flamethrower: also not literal.

        Like


      • When I speak about “scorched earth,” I’m not talking about buildings and people.

        That is a pity. I might have agreed with you.

        I don’t know. You are a very clever guy. I’m sure you have big plans to set the world on fire, metaphorically, and whilst at bottom I do agree that whinging is whinging, I again invite you to consider that bellowing is also just bellowing. Bashing other men with your betterdom is no way to metaphorically ignite the non-literal fires of allegorical war.

        Like


      • Showing people part of the double standard is not whining, it is a chance to open the eyes of a few clueless.

        After stating the double standard like CastleD did, one just has to say “now reverse the genders”.

        If that blatant double standard does not open the persons eyes, then they are not worthy of your help, sympathy or empathy.

        If they even stop even for a second, then there is hope. One man at a time; this will multiply geometrically.

        Like


      • Stalin sure knew how to use artillery and machine guns. Was he a conservative?

        I’ve noticed that people on here tend to equate “right wing” with “violent” and “manly.” not necessarily the same thing.

        Like


      • You couldn’t have proven his point any more perfectly.

        Like


      • Well I don’t see you wielding an AK-47, assembling a small warband and going on a rampage taking on the establishment either you twat. So quit your whining, at least the MRAs are doing what they can with their means, and using the enemy’s very own weapons against it.

        Like


    • well said.

      that this situation is true will be over looked of course.

      all I can say is Thank God for whores

      when you pay them

      they actually LEAVE afterwards.

      and a “real man” DOES do his own laundry. cooks for himself, sews or has his clothes sewn, maintains his residence and transportation, AND tends to his own health and fitness, AND hangs out with friends, (which always goes reasonably well until some nasty “privileged women show up), and … the list is endless.

      nowadays, this is NO practicable reason for a man to marry anyone.

      none whatsoever.

      the AMerican women, particularly the college educated ones, are ever so slowly beginning to realize that.

      after all

      at the end of the day,

      how many Alpha Males are there REALLY?

      I mean to say , just how many?

      I’ll hazard a guess and say not enough. UH-oh !!

      ha ha ha ha ha .

      Like


  15. Someone print this out and tape it inside high school textbooks all over the country…..it’s a moral imperative!

    Like


  16. Carrots and Sticks.

    In a less backwards time, the ‘stick’, having to work a tough job and stay legally tied to one woman, was worth it for the ‘carrot’, a steady wage and someone to help you raise your children and take care of you.

    These days, the carrot of ‘manning up’ (marriage, children, home ownership, money) just isn’t worth the stick that pushes it in front of your face (a greater than half-chance of divorce, child-support, alimony [all for someone who might be already making more money than you], cuckolding, outsourcing of your job, foreclosure).

    You say ‘Man up!’, I say ‘What’s in it for me?’

    Like


    • on October 28, 2011 at 5:51 pm Reality Check

      Well put. Play the field and don’t make any major commitments to any woman.

      Men who enter into modern marriage are fools who have no inkling of the legal ass rape that awaits them.

      Maybe after they’ve lost everything (including their kids) and are funding their aging cougar of a wife’s lifestyle, they’ll finally wake up. But realistically, most of these guys will probably go to their graves still blaming themselves.

      Beta 4 lyfe, indeed.

      Like


  17. I think the host protests too much. I think he’s never experienced the love of a magnetic, vivacious, experienced, lively, cultured, highly educated older woman.

    You forgot the smooth texture of wrinkles and that lovely elasticity of overused p*ssies!

    Like


  18. “Men will man up when women man down. The one must follow the other. The polarity cannot be reversed.”

    In the meantime, men must play the hand they’ve been dealt. We can point the finger of blame at various people, and for the most part we’d be right to do this, but actions speak louder than words.

    Our time in this life is short, don’t waste your time trying to convince people who can’t and won’t be changed, lead by example.

    I’ve spent the last few years of my life fighting various political and social causes, trying to get my voice heard, but I feel like the whole thing was a waste of time, my efforts trying to make other people change are far more inefficient than enacting change in my own life.

    You’ve got two basic decisions, will you change yourself and will you change your surroundings? I’ve chosen both, I’ve been making a positive effort to change myself for a few years, the result of which being that I now have a well-paying job and far more success with the opposite sex, not to mention I am also much wiser now, and I am making plans to change my surroundings. As much as game has improved my life, I still can’t ever hope to find a woman worth my love in a western nation, and here in the UK the ever-expanding police state only gives me more incentive to get away sooner rather than later (not to mention the terrible weather).

    You’re one of the fortunate ones, you know what’s really happening in this world we live in, you can do something about it by changing your life, if you’re waiting for the world to change to suit you you’re going to be waiting until you’re dead.

    Like


  19. on October 28, 2011 at 3:43 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    When Bill Bennett & Kay Hymowitztitz tell men they need to “man up,” what they are saying is that “men need to take it in the ass, like a man.” lzozozozoolz “men need to say, oooo yahhh i like da butthex from my fiat masters zlzozozlo ya gimme more tucker max rhymes wityh goldman sax butthex in my butthole and in my future wife’s butthole funded by the cenrtal beenrnkaee bankers zlozlzolzoz more harder faster harder faster for butthe defineth a man and manliness and the more butthex one gets fomr in the -betway neooconsths, the manlier one is.”

    lzozozooz

    dante placed the usuers–the fiat masters–in the same level of hell as the sodomites–the butthexers and secretive tapers of butthex without the girlths ocnthent like tucker max rhymes iwth goldman sax who teh weekly standadth reeates the lies of that he is six feet tall as he is aan heoric assocker lzozzllzoo

    usury and sodomy were senee as crimes agaiants art and nature zzooozozlz no the neoocns reasoned that if they could get everyone to accept sododymy as a conservative tenet and if they could fund the assockcing of future wives and desoul them ,they could make the wivees fuyture wives loyal not to dante, god, hjesuss , chcildreren hudsband, but to the fiat masters, whereyupon she oculd destryoy the fmaily and assrape her husband in diveorce coutrrt and edleiver the proceddes to beernekeeks cneetral bankers zlzozollzzlo

    Neo: What is the butthex fiat Mathrix?
    Trinity: The answer is out there, Neo, and it’s looking for you, and it will butthex you if you want it to, and tape it secretely witoout your conthent, as goldman sax rhymes with tucker max lzozlzlzl.

    many of scratch your head (or your balls lzozlz same diff) lzozlzl and go “wha hw hwat do tucker max and ben bernanke have in common?)

    obviously you fucktwits have been too busy ploaying your xbox to read dante’s inferno lzozlzlzlzlzlzl

    tucker max and ben bernanke would be right next to each otehr in hell according to dante, in butthexing distance.

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/in-dante%E2%80%99s-inferno-the-fiat-masters-were-in-teh-same-level-of-hell-as-teh-butthexers-i-ma-not-making-this-up-omg-lzozllzlzlz/

    in dante’s inferno the fiat masters were in teh same level of hell as teh butthexers!!! i ma not making this up!!! omg lzozllzlzlz

    the raison dat roissy and i gets along so wells is dat i play the striaght man to his funniness lzozlzllz

    like he talks about all teh light hearted subjsted like game and betaherb h8ers lzozlzlz and i cover all teh dark things descening into hell like dante did in the inferno and shuddering at all teh secretive tapers and tapinsg off butthex underway.

    hey you know whas funny?

    i dant’es inferno the usuers were in the same level as heel as the butthexers.

    in dante’s inferno the fiat masters were in teh same level of hell as teh butthexers!!! i ma not making this up!!!

    the fiat masters were right next to the butthexers lzozlzlzl!!!

    (14), Sodomy (15-16), Usury (17)

    no wonder they hate the greta books in colleges lzozlzlzllz and prefer tucker max sodomites lzozlzl

    http://danteworlds.laits.utexas.edu/circle7.html#violence

    “those who violate nature, God’s offspring (sodomites: Inferno 15-16); and those who harm industry and the economy, offspring of nature and therefore grandchild of God (usurers: Inferno 17). Identifying the sins of these last two groups with Sodom and Cahors (Inf. 11.49-50), Dante draws on the biblical destruction of Sodom (and Gomorrah) by fire and brimstone (Genesis 19:24-5) and the medieval condemnations of citizens of Cahors (a city in southern France) for usury. Dante’s emotional reactions to the shades in the seventh circle range from neutral observation of the murderers and compassion for a suicide to respect for several Florentine sodomites and revulsion at the sight and behavior of the lewd usurers. ”

    lolzozlzlzozozlzlzlzozlzzlzlzzozlzlz neocons hate dantes infrmnoo oolzozlzl

    read da rest of my brillaine here: zlozlzzl

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2010/05/28/in-dante%E2%80%99s-inferno-the-fiat-masters-were-in-teh-same-level-of-hell-as-teh-butthexers-i-ma-not-making-this-up-omg-lzozllzlzlz/

    i hope they serve butthex in hell!! lzozlzlzl

    Like


    • You know I worry about you, I really do.

      Like


      • No need to. He has good moral compasses.

        Like


      • GBFM is a Christian agent provocateur. He is slowly converting many of you even as you deny his power over your thoughts.

        Like


      • on October 29, 2011 at 7:54 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

        blessed are the meek who are tomemrnet by the buttcockers who buttcoke their future wife in college
        for they shall inhereit the alimionies patyements of their deosuled wive to fund her future assocking sesisosn whichn she was adidtctced to in coleleges lzlzlz

        Like


      • Butt cock or butt *coke*? Because they’re both pretty different (one inevitably leads to the other though.)

        Like


      • on October 28, 2011 at 8:46 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

        do you worry about dante, homer, virgil, jesuisu , moses, and mises?

        den you SHOUlD worry about da GBFM lzozlz

        for i am them and tehy are i lzozlzlzlozo

        Like


      • Don’t worry, much to your dismay you will one day understand him. I tend to think of him as some sort of modern day Cassandra.

        Like


      • a voice crying in the wilderness.

        Like


      • on October 30, 2011 at 4:26 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

        vox clamainatants en deserto lzozoooozozozz –da GB4M lzozlz

        Like


    • GBFM wrote:

      When Bill Bennett & Kay Hymowitztitz [sic] tell men they need to “man up,” what they are saying is that “men need to take it in the ass, like a man.”

      … da [sic] butthex [sic] … fiat masters zlzozozlo [sic] … rhymes wityh [sic] goldman sax [sic] butthex [sic] … cenrtal [sic] beenrnkaee [sic] bankers zlozlzolzoz [sic] … butthe [sic] defineth [sic] a man and manliness and the more butthex [sic] one gets fomr [sic] in the -betway [sic] neooconsths [sic] …

      No, Jack Torrance. Bennett and Hymowitz are conservatively testing the integrity of the ÜberBitchShield built over The Feminist Century with minor sallies. They are lasing the target, as it were, for our (my) generation’s forthcoming broadsides.

      But no. Purity, not results, is the zealot-ideologue’s true aim. Temporary alliance, strategic retreat, heck smart warfare itself isn’t just impossible for them to effect, it’s impossible for them to conceive.

      With preposterous realities like these in your midst (and worse, regarded as perfectly normal):
      http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1730927,00.html
      http://tinyurl.com/3cdkckf

      … you pick useless fights with an octogenarian radio host and a modest contributing writer of an obscure journal.

      Like


    • GBFM, just wondering if analingus is considered sodomy..

      Then again, given your comment above, maybe its best if I just don’t know.

      Like


      • Actually these severe prohibitions against sodomy in Dante during the Renaissance were in support of a Church reaction to a growing fashion for it in the 15th -17th centuries. Homosexuality had grown in popularity during that period of time and was greeted with alarm by the Papacy.

        Like


      • on October 29, 2011 at 7:55 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

        lzozozllzolz

        your name is almosst DICK JOHNSON zlzoozllzlzlz

        god it’s so painful when somethhing is
        sososo close and yet soo far away
        yeah yeah
        all right
        take it easy baby
        make it ast all night!
        she was an emaricna girl zlzolzllz

        Like


  20. on October 28, 2011 at 3:46 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    GBFM vs. fatass gambler Bill Bennett lzozllzlzozozllzzozozo (hey bill-instead of gambling away millions, why don’t you invest the moneys in great books for men programs at univeresties, you fat fiat fuck?)

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/04/opinion/bennett-men-in-trouble/index.html

    Editor’s note: William J. Bennett, a CNN (communist neocon neoconning) contributor, is the author of “The Book of Man (lozozlzl he stole my title great books for men zlzoozlzzo butethexxx): Readings on the Path to Manhood. (to betahood mroe liekeit lzozlzlo)” Bennett is the Washington (inside the belytway with pro feminsist honah goldberg lzozozlz) fellow of the Claremont Institute. He was U.S. secretary of education from 1985 to 1988 and was director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George H.W. Bush.
    (CNN) — For the first time in history, women are better educated, more ambitious and arguably more successful than men.

    (FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY YOU AASSSUFCK, THE WESTERN WORLD IS MIRED IN DEBT UNSEEN UNKNOWN UNDHEARD OF EVER BEFORE AS WOMENZ CREATE DEBT Lzozoozolozoozozo)

    Now, society has rightly celebrated the ascension of one sex. We said, “You go girl,” and they went. We celebrate the ascension of women but what will we do about what appears to be the very real decline of the other sex?
    The data does not bode well for men. In 1970, men earned 60% of all college degrees. In 1980, the figure fell to 50%, by 2006 it was 43%. Women now surpass men in college degrees by almost three to two. Women’s earnings grew 44% in real dollars from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men.

    (THE IS BECAUSE THE CNETRAL BANKS FUNDED FEMINSMS TO RANSFER ASSETTS FROM MEN AS ONLY MEN CREATE PHYSICAL WELATH AND ASSETTSS LZOZOZOZZ SO THEY TIAGHT WOMEN TO BE ENTITLED AND SEIZE PROPRTY FROM MEN AND BRIG IT TO BEN BERNAKENEK AS BEN CAN ONLY CREATE DEBT WITH HIS PRINTING PRESS AND THEY NEEDED WOMEN TO CONVERT IT INTO PHYSICAL PROPERTY WHILE ALSO SPYING ON THEIR MEN, ASSCOKCING THEM IN DIVORCE COURT AND ALSO WOEMN ARE MOR ELIKELY TO RAISE SLUTTY GIRLS AND VIOLIENET GANG BANGERS WHICH THE NEONCS LOVE AS IT HELPS THEM GROW THE STSTETA STEATETET STATE zlzozolzzolozllz)

    William J. Bennett
    In 1950, 5% of men at the prime working age were unemployed. As of last year, 20% were not working, the highest ever recorded. Men still maintain a majority of the highest paid and most powerful occupations, but women are catching them and will soon be passing them if this trend continues.

    (YES YOUA SOSSOCUK AS THE WESTERN WORLD GROWN BANKRUPT AS WOMEN CREATE MORE DEBT THAN WELATH IN THIER JOBS OF DESECRATIATIN< DEOCNSTRICTION AND DEBUCAHERY lzozozloz)

    The warning signs for men stretch far beyond their wallets. Men are more distant from a family or their children then they have ever been. The out-of-wedlock birthrate is more than 40% in America. In 1960, only 11% of children in the U.S. lived apart from their fathers. In 2010, that share had risen to 27%. Men are also less religious than ever before. According to Gallup polling, 39% of men reported attending church regularly in 2010, compared to 47% of women.

    (THAT"S BECUASE JESUS CHRIST AS BEEN USSIFIED AND lzozozlzl OGH WAIT I WORTE ABOUT tHIS:

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/wonce-upon-a-time-mens-wents-2-church-2-find-a-good-wownenez-lzozlzlzloz/

    "wonce upon a time mens wents 2 church 2 find a good wownenez lzozlzlzloz

    wonce upon a time mens wents 2 church 2 find a good wownenez lzozlzlzloz to be a wife and mother and faithful honor cherish lzozlzzozlolzozlz

    today woemnz go 2 churrhc 2 find a beta or gammamale to pay for their three children forrm three fatehrs who pumped dand dudmped theier zazzez afetr asszzcockcing them lzozlzlzlzo"

    lzozozolooz you fuckcity neocon fucktRAD

    If you don't believe the numbers, just ask young women about men today. You will find them talking about prolonged adolescence and men who refuse to grow up. I've heard too many young women asking, "Where are the decent single men?" There is a maturity deficit among men out there, and men are falling behind.

    "NOMEN ARE NOT CFALLING BEHIND!! IT IS WOMEN WHO ARE GETETING ASSOCKED N THEIR BEHIND BY NEOOCN HEROES LIKE TUCKER MAX RHYMES WITH GOLD MAN SAX WHO TAPES SODOMY SESSIONS ASSCKCOING TEITH GIRLS IN SCERTET AND IS PUBLISHED SIMON AND SHUSTER WOMENZ PORMOETED BY THE NEOCNCON WEEKLY STANDARDTH WHO HERALSDS HIM AS A SIX FOOT TALL HERO repeating his lies about his heiaght as neoncsn like lies exalting assockers zlzozllz!! LOZOZOZOO WHIL IGHNORIG THE TRUE HEROES DYING ON FOREIGN SHOERES IN FORENIGN NEOCN WARS WHILE TH ENOEONCNS TEAHC THE MILITARY WIVES OT LIE CHEAT AND STEAL zlzlollzloolz"

    This decline in founding virtues — work, marriage, and religion — has caught the eye of social commentators from all corners. In her seminal article, "The End of Men," Hanna Rosin unearthed the unprecedented role reversal that is taking place today. "Man has been the dominant sex since, well, the dawn of mankind. But for the first time in human history, that is changing—and with shocking speed," writes Rosin. The changes in modern labor — from backs to brains — have catapulted women to the top of the work force, leaving men in their dust.

    FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY TEHE WORLD IS BEING CONQUERED BY LEFTIST CRETAORS OF DEBT AND DEBAUCHERY!! LEFTISTS NEOCN CREATORS OF DEBT AND DEBAUCHERY LOOZOZOZO LZOZOZO OMG LEFTIS CRETAORS OF DEBT AND DEBAUCHERY ZLOZOOZOZOZOZOZ Buttehehxtxujiajaja

    IN WAR THE MEN WOULD RAID A COUNTRY, KILL THE MEN, AND SLEEP WITH ALL THE WOEMN lzozozl. TODAY THE BNANKERS SLEEP WITH ALL THE OWMENZ IN COLLEGE ASSOCCKING THEM LIKE TUCKER MAX RHYMES WITHGOLDMAN SAX AND TAPING IT SECRTEELEEY ZLOZOOZO, AND THEN INSTEAD OF KILLING THE MEN THEY LET THEM LIVE AS WAGE SLEAVES TO SOOMIZED, DEOSULED WOMENZ WHOE HAD THEIR SOULS ASSOCKED OUT OTHEM BY NEOCONS BUTTSECUAL ""ALPHA MALE (As they define aplha male as the ability to assock others oand place others in debt zlzlzozlz)" zlzoll HEROES LZOZOOZZZOOZOZ

    Hanna Rosin: Are women leaving men behind?
    Man's response has been pathetic. Today, 18-to- 34-year-old men spend more time playing video games a day than 12-to- 17-year-old boys.
    (THATS VBECAUSE THE UNIVERISTIES DEOCNSTRUCTED AND SDESTORYED THE GREAT BOOKS CURRICUCLUME LZOZOZOZLZLZOZOZO THE GREAT BOOSK FOR MEN INSTEAD PRESCIBING MEN RITALIN AND DRUGGIG THME UP AND DUMOPBING THEMD DOWN YOU ASSWIPE GANGLER GAMBLER BENENET G"AMBLING AWAY MILIOPNS INSTEAD OF INEVESTING MILLIONS IN GREAT BOOKS PROGRAMS WHAT" AN NEOCON LIBERAL LZOZZLZOOZ DC STatISTSIT ASSOCKER OF THE GEENRLA PUBLIC VIA FIAT DEBTGTHN lzzlzozozozo)

    While women are graduating college and finding good jobs, too many men are not going to work, not getting married and not raising families. Women are beginning to take the place of men in many ways. This has led some to ask: do we even need men?

    (LZOZOZLZ YOU NEED MEN TO WORK AS LIFELONG SLAVES TO MPAY OFF THE MASISVE DEBT INCURRED BY THE FMEINISTS "BENAKNKING "REGIMES OF THE WETSTS LZOZOZOZO)

    So what's wrong? Increasingly, the messages to boys about what it means to be a man are confusing. The machismo of the street gang calls out with a swagger. (AS THE WEKLY STANDARD EXLATS SECTRIVE TAPER OF BUTTHEX AND BULLY TUCKE RMAX RHYMES IWTH GOLDMAN SAX WHILE JONAH GOLDEBER AEXLATS FMEINSISMS ZLOZOZOZ) Video games, television and music (CRETAED BY LEFTIST NEOEONCS LIKE BILL BENNETT) offer dubious lessons to boys who have been abandoned by their fathers. Some coaches and drill sergeants bark, "What kind of man are you?" but don't explain.

    Movies (CREATED BY BULL EBEBNENETES NEOCON FRIENDS LZOZOZ) are filled with stories of men who refuse to grow up and refuse to take responsibility in relationships. Men, some obsessed with sex (SOME OBSESED WIT BUTTHEX LILKKE THE ONES THE NEONECS PUBISH AND WIRE FIAT CASH ADVACED STOO), treat women as toys to be discarded when things get complicated (THIS IS BEVCAUSE THE WOMEN HAVE BEEN ASSOCKED AND DEOSULED BY NEOCNS). Through all these different and conflicting signals, our boys must decipher what it means to be a man, and for many of them it is harder to figure out.

    (DUDE__BEING A MAN IS ALL ABOUT CLALING OUT FATSASS BILL BENNTETETS WHO ARE GAMBLERS AND WHO HATE THE SPIRIT OF JESUS AND MOSES AND HOMER AND THE HOERES WAND WHO PRETENDS TO LOVE THEM BY WIRTING A BOOK OF VIRTUES WHICH HE JUST PLAGIAIRZED COPIED FRO OTHERS TO MAKE A PROFIT NEOCONS LIKE THEIR PROFITS FIAT DOLALRS ASSOCKING zlzoozooz)

    For boys to become men, they need to be guided through advice, habit, instruction, example and correction. It is true in all ages. Someone once characterized the two essential questions Plato posed as: Who teaches the children, and what do we teach them? Each generation of men and women have an obligation to teach the younger males (and females of course) coming behind them. William Wordsworth said, "What we have loved, others will love, and we will teach them how." When they fail in that obligation, trouble surely follows.
    We need to respond to this culture that sends confusing signals to young men, a culture that is agnostic about what it wants men to be, with a clear and achievable notion of manhood.
    The Founding Fathers believed, and the evidence still shows, that industriousness, marriage and religion are a very important basis for male empowerment and achievement. We may need to say to a number of our twenty-something men, "Get off the video games five hours a day, get yourself together, get a challenging job and get married." It's time for men to man up.

    HY YOU FUCKATRD! THE FOUNDING FTAHERS ALSO BELEIVED TAHT WOMEN SHOULD NOT BE ASSCOKED BEFORE< DURING, AND AFTER MARRIAGE. BUT TODAYS WEEKLY SYTANDADATH REPORTS ON ASSOCKCKERS OF WOMEN AS HEROES< ASND THE WOMENSZ CHOOSE THE ASSOCKOEOEROS BUTTHEXUAL HEROES TUCKER MAX RHYMES WITH GODLMAN SAX LZozOOOZOOZOZL

    BAsiclaly the fiat banking masters sned for their tucker mx rhyes with goldman sax asscocker to assock women and deosul them and beernaniky them, making women loyal firtst and ofoertemost to the fita dollar instaed of to man god and family. Then they banking masters ocmmand the owmens to assock their huds=pand in divorce court and transfer mens asseeettss to the nabnking centeral banking firat masters zzoozllzlzlzl

    read all about it!!!!

    http://www.cruelhoax.ca/#top

    lzozolzlzlozlo

    Like


    • “Buttehehxtxujiajaja”

      it’s metastasized, and I like it!

      Like


      • on October 29, 2011 at 8:02 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

        Buthexxhallejua!!! is where its st was giing.

        wriet enow in my free time i am comopisng the Buthexhallejueueallla chorus in honor of our leaderz.

        Buthexhallejueueallla! Buthexhallejueueallla!

        Buthexhallejueueallla! Buthexhallejueueallla!

        Buthexhallejueueallla! Buthexhallejueueallla!

        Buthexhallellelelelelel—jueuea————lllllolllla!

        For our secretive tapers of butthex, it feels good.
        rhymes with goldman sax
        Buthexhallejueueallla! Buthexhallejueueallla!

        Buthexhallejueueallla! Buthexhallejueueallla!
        neocons shall reign for-ever and ever.

        king of lzozozll and lzozozllz of lords!
        lzozoo lzozoo lzozozo lzozoo

        Like


  21. His comment,

    “For boys to become men, they need to be guided through advice, habit, instruction, example and correction.”

    Is completely true. You dismiss it as nonsense that will quickly be destroyed by experience, and that is true to some degree. But I think it’s important to note that boys have terrible examples and advice.

    The teachers who raise them are mostly female and try to educate them out of manliness and favour girls over boys. Boys are taught that competition is wrong, and humanities are emphasized over subjects that men tend to like, such as computer studies, maths, and sports. Plus because it’s sexist to do anything against a female teacher a lot are utterly incompetent and just spend their lessons gossiping with students or playing with their nails.

    Maybe guys could man up and stop being irresponsible if women would stop teaching them that they’re worthless and inferior to the women who are getting 60% of college places. Maybe men would marry more if their teachers stopped punishing guys for enjoying competition.

    Like


    • Good post. I see it as well. You can easily tell the men who had fathers from those that didn’t if you also grew up with a strong father.

      Like


  22. on October 28, 2011 at 3:57 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    time to women up and close your gina holes and butthole backfoor holes to douchtard asscockers!!! lzozozlzzooz

    time to woman up and serve god man family children instead of asscoking god man family children and deconstructing the great books and classics!! ! !lzozlzloossl

    GBFM vs. fatass gambler Bill Bennett lzozllzlzozozllzzozozo (hey bill-instead of gambling away millions, why don’t you invest the moneys in great books for men programs at univeresties, you fat fiat fuck?)

    http://www.cnn.com/2011/10/04/opinion/bennett-men-in-trouble/index.html

    Editor’s note: William J. Bennett, a CNN (communist neocon neoconning) contributor, is the author of “The Book of Man (lozozlzl he stole my title great books for men zlzoozlzzo butethexxx): Readings on the Path to Manhood. (to betahood mroe liekeit lzozlzlo)” Bennett is the Washington (inside the belytway with pro feminsist honah goldberg lzozozlz) fellow of the Claremont Institute. He was U.S. secretary of education from 1985 to 1988 and was director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy under President George H.W. Bush.
    (CNN) — For the first time in history, women are better educated, more ambitious and arguably more successful than men.

    (FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY YOU AASSSUFCK, THE WESTERN WORLD IS MIRED IN DEBT UNSEEN UNKNOWN UNDHEARD OF EVER BEFORE AS WOMENZ CREATE DEBT Lzozoozolozoozozo)

    Now, society has rightly celebrated the ascension of one sex. We said, “You go girl,” and they went. We celebrate the ascension of women but what will we do about what appears to be the very real decline of the other sex?
    The data does not bode well for men. In 1970, men earned 60% of all college degrees. In 1980, the figure fell to 50%, by 2006 it was 43%. Women now surpass men in college degrees by almost three to two. Women’s earnings grew 44% in real dollars from 1970 to 2007, compared with 6% growth for men.

    (THE IS BECAUSE THE CNETRAL BANKS FUNDED FEMINSMS TO RANSFER ASSETTS FROM MEN AS ONLY MEN CREATE PHYSICAL WELATH AND ASSETTSS LZOZOZOZZ SO THEY TIAGHT WOMEN TO BE ENTITLED AND SEIZE PROPRTY FROM MEN AND BRIG IT TO BEN BERNAKENEK AS BEN CAN ONLY CREATE DEBT WITH HIS PRINTING PRESS AND THEY NEEDED WOMEN TO CONVERT IT INTO PHYSICAL PROPERTY WHILE ALSO SPYING ON THEIR MEN, ASSCOKCING THEM IN DIVORCE COURT AND ALSO WOEMN ARE MOR ELIKELY TO RAISE SLUTTY GIRLS AND VIOLIENET GANG BANGERS WHICH THE NEONCS LOVE AS IT HELPS THEM GROW THE STSTETA STEATETET STATE zlzozolzzolozllz)

    William J. Bennett
    In 1950, 5% of men at the prime working age were unemployed. As of last year, 20% were not working, the highest ever recorded. Men still maintain a majority of the highest paid and most powerful occupations, but women are catching them and will soon be passing them if this trend continues.

    (YES YOUA SOSSOCUK AS THE WESTERN WORLD GROWN BANKRUPT AS WOMEN CREATE MORE DEBT THAN WELATH IN THIER JOBS OF DESECRATIATIN< DEOCNSTRICTION AND DEBUCAHERY lzozozloz)

    The warning signs for men stretch far beyond their wallets. Men are more distant from a family or their children then they have ever been. The out-of-wedlock birthrate is more than 40% in America. In 1960, only 11% of children in the U.S. lived apart from their fathers. In 2010, that share had risen to 27%. Men are also less religious than ever before. According to Gallup polling, 39% of men reported attending church regularly in 2010, compared to 47% of women.

    (THAT"S BECUASE JESUS CHRIST AS BEEN USSIFIED AND lzozozlzl OGH WAIT I WORTE ABOUT tHIS:

    http://greatbooksformen.wordpress.com/2011/08/14/wonce-upon-a-time-mens-wents-2-church-2-find-a-good-wownenez-lzozlzlzloz/

    "wonce upon a time mens wents 2 church 2 find a good wownenez lzozlzlzloz

    wonce upon a time mens wents 2 church 2 find a good wownenez lzozlzlzloz to be a wife and mother and faithful honor cherish lzozlzzozlolzozlz

    today woemnz go 2 churrhc 2 find a beta or gammamale to pay for their three children forrm three fatehrs who pumped dand dudmped theier zazzez afetr asszzcockcing them lzozlzlzlzo"

    lzozozolooz you fuckcity neocon fucktRAD

    If you don't believe the numbers, just ask young women about men today. You will find them talking about prolonged adolescence and men who refuse to grow up. I've heard too many young women asking, "Where are the decent single men?" There is a maturity deficit among men out there, and men are falling behind.

    "NOMEN ARE NOT CFALLING BEHIND!! IT IS WOMEN WHO ARE GETETING ASSOCKED N THEIR BEHIND BY NEOOCN HEROES LIKE TUCKER MAX RHYMES WITH GOLD MAN SAX WHO TAPES SODOMY SESSIONS ASSCKCOING TEITH GIRLS IN SCERTET AND IS PUBLISHED SIMON AND SHUSTER WOMENZ PORMOETED BY THE NEOCNCON WEEKLY STANDARDTH WHO HERALSDS HIM AS A SIX FOOT TALL HERO repeating his lies about his heiaght as neoncsn like lies exalting assockers zlzozllz!! LOZOZOZOO WHIL IGHNORIG THE TRUE HEROES DYING ON FOREIGN SHOERES IN FORENIGN NEOCN WARS WHILE TH ENOEONCNS TEAHC THE MILITARY WIVES OT LIE CHEAT AND STEAL zlzlollzloolz"

    This decline in founding virtues — work, marriage, and religion — has caught the eye of social commentators from all corners. In her seminal article, "The End of Men," Hanna Rosin unearthed the unprecedented role reversal that is taking place today. "Man has been the dominant sex since, well, the dawn of mankind. But for the first time in human history, that is changing—and with shocking speed," writes Rosin. The changes in modern labor — from backs to brains — have catapulted women to the top of the work force, leaving men in their dust.

    FOR THE FIRST TIME IN HISTORY TEHE WORLD IS BEING CONQUERED BY LEFTIST CRETAORS OF DEBT AND DEBAUCHERY!! LEFTISTS NEOCN CREATORS OF DEBT AND DEBAUCHERY LOOZOZOZO LZOZOZO OMG LEFTIS CRETAORS OF DEBT AND DEBAUCHERY ZLOZOOZOZOZOZOZ Buttehehxtxujiajaja

    IN WAR THE MEN WOULD RAID A COUNTRY, KILL THE MEN, AND SLEEP WITH ALL THE WOEMN lzozozl. TODAY THE BNANKERS SLEEP WITH ALL THE OWMENZ IN COLLEGE ASSOCCKING THEM LIKE TUCKER MAX RHYMES WITHGOLDMAN SAX AND TAPING IT SECRTEELEEY ZLOZOOZO, AND THEN INSTEAD OF KILLING THE MEN THEY LET THEM LIVE AS WAGE SLEAVES TO SOOMIZED, DEOSULED WOMENZ WHOE HAD THEIR SOULS ASSOCKED OUT OTHEM BY NEOCONS BUTTSECUAL ""ALPHA MALE (As they define aplha male as the ability to assock others oand place others in debt zlzlzozlz)" zlzoll HEROES LZOZOOZZZOOZOZ

    Hanna Rosin: Are women leaving men behind?
    Man's response has been pathetic. Today, 18-to- 34-year-old men spend more time playing video games a day than 12-to- 17-year-old boys.
    (THATS VBECAUSE THE UNIVERISTIES DEOCNSTRUCTED AND SDESTORYED THE GREAT BOOKS CURRICUCLUME LZOZOZOZLZLZOZOZO THE GREAT BOOSK FOR MEN INSTEAD PRESCIBING MEN RITALIN AND DRUGGIG THME UP AND DUMOPBING THEMD DOWN YOU ASSWIPE GANGLER GAMBLER BENENET G"AMBLING AWAY MILIOPNS INSTEAD OF INEVESTING MILLIONS IN GREAT BOOKS PROGRAMS WHAT" AN NEOCON LIBERAL LZOZZLZOOZ DC STatISTSIT ASSOCKER OF THE GEENRLA PUBLIC VIA FIAT DEBTGTHN lzzlzozozozo)

    While women are graduating college and finding good jobs, too many men are not going to work, not getting married and not raising families. Women are beginning to take the place of men in many ways. This has led some to ask: do we even need men?

    (LZOZOZLZ YOU NEED MEN TO WORK AS LIFELONG SLAVES TO MPAY OFF THE MASISVE DEBT INCURRED BY THE FMEINISTS "BENAKNKING "REGIMES OF THE WETSTS LZOZOZOZO)

    So what's wrong? Increasingly, the messages to boys about what it means to be a man are confusing. The machismo of the street gang calls out with a swagger. (AS THE WEKLY STANDARD EXLATS SECTRIVE TAPER OF BUTTHEX AND BULLY TUCKE RMAX RHYMES IWTH GOLDMAN SAX WHILE JONAH GOLDEBER AEXLATS FMEINSISMS ZLOZOZOZ) Video games, television and music (CRETAED BY LEFTIST NEOEONCS LIKE BILL BENNETT) offer dubious lessons to boys who have been abandoned by their fathers. Some coaches and drill sergeants bark, "What kind of man are you?" but don't explain.

    Movies (CREATED BY BULL EBEBNENETES NEOCON FRIENDS LZOZOZ) are filled with stories of men who refuse to grow up and refuse to take responsibility in relationships. Men, some obsessed with sex (SOME OBSESED WIT BUTTHEX LILKKE THE ONES THE NEONECS PUBISH AND WIRE FIAT CASH ADVACED STOO), treat women as toys to be discarded when things get complicated (THIS IS BEVCAUSE THE WOMEN HAVE BEEN ASSOCKED AND DEOSULED BY NEOCNS). Through all these different and conflicting signals, our boys must decipher what it means to be a man, and for many of them it is harder to figure out.

    (DUDE__BEING A MAN IS ALL ABOUT CLALING OUT FATSASS BILL BENNTETETS WHO ARE GAMBLERS AND WHO HATE THE SPIRIT OF JESUS AND MOSES AND HOMER AND THE HOERES WAND WHO PRETENDS TO LOVE THEM BY WIRTING A BOOK OF VIRTUES WHICH HE JUST PLAGIAIRZED COPIED FRO OTHERS TO MAKE A PROFIT NEOCONS LIKE THEIR PROFITS FIAT DOLALRS ASSOCKING zlzoozooz)

    For boys to become men, they need to be guided through advice, habit, instruction, example and correction. It is true in all ages. Someone once characterized the two essential questions Plato posed as: Who teaches the children, and what do we teach them? Each generation of men and women have an obligation to teach the younger males (and females of course) coming behind them. William Wordsworth said, "What we have loved, others will love, and we will teach them how." When they fail in that obligation, trouble surely follows.
    We need to respond to this culture that sends confusing signals to young men, a culture that is agnostic about what it wants men to be, with a clear and achievable notion of manhood.
    The Founding Fathers believed, and the evidence still shows, that industriousness, marriage and religion are a very important basis for male empowerment and achievement. We may need to say to a number of our twenty-something men, "Get off the video games five hours a day, get yourself together, get a challenging job and get married." It's time for men to man up.

    HY YOU FUCKATRD! THE FOUNDING FTAHERS ALSO BELEIVED TAHT WOMEN SHOULD NOT BE ASSCOKED BEFORE< DURING, AND AFTER MARRIAGE. BUT TODAYS WEEKLY SYTANDADATH REPORTS ON ASSOCKCKERS OF WOMEN AS HEROES< ASND THE WOMENSZ CHOOSE THE ASSOCKOEOEROS BUTTHEXUAL HEROES TUCKER MAX RHYMES WITH GODLMAN SAX LZozOOOZOOZOZL

    BAsiclaly the fiat banking masters sned for their tucker mx rhyes with goldman sax asscocker to assock women and deosul them and beernaniky them, making women loyal firtst and ofoertemost to the fita dollar instaed of to man god and family. Then they banking masters ocmmand the owmens to assock their huds=pand in divorce court and transfer mens asseeettss to the nabnking centeral banking firat masters zzoozllzlzlzl

    read all about it!!!!

    http://www.cruelhoax.ca/#top

    lzozolzlzlozlo

    Like


  23. heartiste

    Men will man up when women man down. The one must follow the other. The polarity cannot be reversed.

    A lovely thought.
    In reality, the die is cast for American Entropy.

    Change is not even close to happenin’
    For when we leave the lucid confines of the chateau
    displaying Common Sense in the outside world leaves one outnumbered 300,000,000 to one.

    Until you change THOSE odds –
    I think you called it “poolside?”

    Like


  24. The most poignant example is the unfairness in the divorce system, and it is very suspect that conservative politicians have not taken up the cause of reforming these laws. But I don’t think its because they are pussies. I think its more likely that there are a lot of men that like that they can leave their wife and kids with relative ease.

    I think the author is correct in pointing out that whatever is wrong with men is also wrong with women. I think that goes both ways. Currently, there is a sizeable population within both genders that has normalized divorce as an acceptable relationship choice that should not be judged by other people or society as a whole. They feel any attempt to make divorce more difficult, or discouraged, is a form of discrimmination against their me-first worldview. “Me-first worldview” is exactly the personality of every politician i’ve even known. Conservative men want to keep divorce easy.

    Like


  25. Why is it when young men waste their time on video games it’s a societal catastrophe, but when women waste infinitely more time on shit like Twilight it’s a cultural phenomenon?

    [Heartiste: Because your overlords want to keep you a nice obedient cog in the globalist machine. Chick pastimes are harmless from their point of view, because they will be valuable for their sex no matter what slop they squirt into their brains.]

    Like


  26. This quite frankly is one of the best articles I have read ever. Fucking bravo.

    Like


  27. When people accuse me of being a conservative — largely because I consider myself a small L libertarian — I am amused. Bill Bennet is a conservative, and conservatives like him are idiots. Though other conservative principles — live within your means, take individual responsibility, don’t suck on the tit of the government — worthwhile.

    But the social, cultural side of conservatism? Fuggedaboutit!!

    Meanwhile, here I am, approaching 60, now unmarried, and a child of the feminist 70s (where, let me tell you the pussy pickings were UNbelievable)…I LOVE the world of feminism. I am banging married yoga princesses in their 30s and 40s, tired of their beta husbands many of whom have bought into the the bogus cultural norms espoused by Bennett and his tight-sphinctered co-religionists.

    I love the combination of feminism and hypergamy. Just love it.

    Like


    • tenderman100 wrote: “I consider myself a small L libertarian … other conservative principles — live within your means, take individual responsibility, don’t suck on the tit of the government — [are] worthwhile. But the social, cultural side of conservatism? Fuggedaboutit!”

      There is no “fiscal” conservatism without “social, cultural” conservatism. Eventually the cultural “liberties” that the dipshit libertarian worships necessitates protection and advocacy (and financing) from a central authority to shelter it from encroaching majoritarianism.

      Devolution of power, as opposed to its centralization, allows for a consistent liberty. You can’t centralize some preferences while respecting the independent sovereignty of others, especially since your laundry list of which liberties deserve protection are preferential — i.e., made up according to your personal whim. (Unless you keep it short and sweet and self evident — life, liberty, property — as the founders did.)

      In other words, if you insist the laws against, say, sodomy be repealed everywhere, you have to empower some authority to enforce it everywhere. If you conservatively allow polities to govern themselves, they will have to oversee (and fund) their own laws against drugs or polygamy or Happy Meals — or for mandatory church service or single-payer health care.

      Turning every personal preference into a “right” is the libertardian’s favorite fetish, but that requires universalizing such preferences, which requires a universal authority. But these so-called “liberty” lovers are too busy protesting every minor deviation in their vision of perfect freedom to ever examine the deep incoherence of their thinking.

      Like


      • Wow, that is the most incoherent piece of rambling bullshit I have heard in a long long time.

        Like


      • … which is why you’re a libertarian.

        It comes down to basic reading comprehension. And when that fails you, you fall back on the inane tropes of absolute liberty, which are self-contradicting.

        But hey, you just work here man. You make the protest placards your boss told you to write. Keep those Sharpies fresh! We want those signs bold, intern.

        Like


      • thanks I thought it was just cause I was high

        Like


      • Fool, what tripe. You have no understanding of libertarianism so better to not open your mouth on this topic.

        Indeed, libertarians favor total decentralization of power in order to protect the individual’s ability to make choices and take action (peacefully without interfering with the same rights of others). But we don’t want or need a 1000 laws just to protect our preferences. Please show us where a libertarian wants to “centralize preferences” against a Happy Meal or for mandatory church service.

        No, we don’t want laws protecting “rights”, that is a positive view of rights not a negative view of rights, which is that we just want to be left alone from coercion by others. You don’t fuck with me and I won’t fuck with you, got that? Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, full stop.

        Real libertarians want nothing to do with politics (not moral or useful whatsoever). The only right we want is to be left alone to live our lives free of other people’s bullshit imposed on us. We demand that actions and the consequences of such actions be borne by the same person.

        Why you spend a few hours this weekend reading Mises or Rothbard to deprogram your dopey views about libertarianism?

        Like


      • I think you misunderstand what a Libertarian is. Most Libertarians could live fine with a system that allows for local jurisdiction of such issues. It’s what we had in the 19th Century where we had legalized prostitution and drugs, to include opium. Back then, partying was limited by imagination and technology. Guess who put a stop to it and guess who comprised the early Progressive movement? An alliance of women and Christian ministers seeking to outlaw sin once and for all and thereby create a utopia on earth. Sound familiar? Most Libertarians would complain loudly about California exporting their economic shackles to neighboring states as blue states have long attempted to do. There’s no need to call everyone an ass hat to make your point.

        Like


      • ” Turning every personal preference into a “right” is the libertardian’s favorite fetish,”

        KA, you’re confusing liberties for rights, and misunderstanding that the two are complementary but distinct. a libertarians ethos is simple; do whatever the fuck you want as long as it does not harm others. liberties are a freedom to act without state interference. a right (more accurately a “right to”, at least in the legal sense), on the other hand, properly understood, refers to the obligations of a state to an individual. such as, right to life, liberty, property. you can easily square the two by remembering that the state has an *obligation* to block barriers to liberties that do not hurt others (EG moral issues like violent entertainment, blasphemy, sodomy etc). it also has a corresponding obligation to block -through law and its various enforcement mechanisms – liberties that harm others (EG crime, fraud, negligence etc). as such, “every personal preference” is not a right (to) per se, but just falls w/i a greater framework of liberty.

        polygamy is an interesting issue. an example of a “right” is a legally sanctioned polygamous marriage. a liberty to same would be state allowing it to happen (without granting the corresponding tax benefits). another one is drugs: while marijuana does little to no harm individually and socially, meth does. this is also why many jurisdictions are decriminalizing marijuana on a de facto basis; they do not necessarily grant a *right to*, but understand it is a liberty that should not be interfered with in most cases for practical purposes.

        Like


    • If you don’t mind me asking–were you ever married? I’m 28 and wonder where I’ll find women at 60. Is that a challenge? I also wonder who I’ll leave my money to because I don’t plan on having children.

      Like


      • Married twice. One kid who is 23.

        At 60 you will no longer bang the 20 somethings on a regular basis, though it may happen occaisionally with the ones with serious daddy issues.

        My preference? Hypergamous women in their late 30s and early 40s with Beta Husbands. POF, OKCupid, yoga classes. You need, however to be financially independent, workout aggressively so you have have a reasonable physique, sex drive and testosterone level, see a good dermatologist to keep your skin reasonable youthful.

        And you game, Game, game, game.

        I don’t want a “girl friend.” I want “fuck friends.”

        Two things. First, the 20 somethings, once they get laid, are way more likely to be promiscuous. They’re at the bars, the clubs, the parties. The asses may be nice and tight but they are fucking this guy, and that guy, and some other guy. When you get around to them, they have been passed around like a beach ball at a bad rock concert.

        Second, the married women who take care of themselves — yoga, pilates, etc. — have both quite nice bodies AND a desire for great sex, assuming the beta husband isn’t doing it for them. The relationships eventually become almost exclusively about sex. And they are at their sexual peak — horny as hell and ready for it. One married woman I was fucking had her tubes tied — two years we went at it, unbelievable porn like sex. One I have going now, a hairdresser and on her 10th year of yoga, can put her feet behind her head.

        So, yeah, I am older, so my options are somewhat constrained. But let me tell you — it can be very satisfying, even now.

        Like


      • Good post and one of the reasons I consider women as you describe to be among the best lovers. They have learned to be comfortable as women. I urge all young men to have an affair wih such a woman. We denigrate them here needlessly and they can teach you so much in the sack.

        Like


      • The other advantage of married women is that if they get pregnant, it’s not your problem.

        Like


      • Sometimes my health gets a bit iffy, and that question comes up. My family doesn’t really need my money or business, and I have no kids. I could give some dough to the girlfriend, but the business is worth too much to just hand over to a companion of a year.

        All those years off effort, but I go, I really see no one to give it to.

        I don’t like having kids. I do like planning to have kids.

        So my plan now is to get fucking rich as hell – rich enough to own many houses, and then as I’ll have nothing else to do with all that money, to squeeze out some kids here and there.

        Finding candidate mothers is actually quite easy.

        Like


      • To tell you the truth, I have no idea if I’m just leading my girl on with false promises, or not.

        But today I told her I can’t marry her until she learns to give better head. So, whatever I’m doing, it’s working for now. There are happy dreams in the future and happy times every day. All at my direction.

        Like


  28. I manned up, already. I learned game, I get my balls drained more regularly, and everytime, I operate a tactical withdrawal back into my mini-kingdom of gadgetry and porn… (yes, porn, I’m not a mPUA… yet).

    No man in his right state of mind would want anything to do with modern chicks, especially the attractive young ones, except hot wet casual sex.

    Fuck love, fuck civilization, fuck bill fucking bennett. I didn’t ask for any of that shit.

    Like


    • on October 28, 2011 at 6:34 pm (R)evoluzione

      You can love. Love is not evil. Love won’t ever be corrupted.

      It just can’t be bought, corralled, Bernankified, butthexed, or harassed in any way by modern fascist social engineering tools like marriage.

      Just tell her that “Love remains at its purest when it is most free. Chaining my love with the shackles of government intrusion will diminish it.”

      Like


      • But don’t say “I do” because she’ll STILL take your kids and half your money in divorce court to go screw some surly bartender who treats her like crap and dumps her for a new f*ckbuddy in six months.

        Like


      • I may love a virgin if i ever meet her. The damaged goods can find another chump to fill their emotional needs.

        Like


      • Exactly.

        Like


    • I’ll agree with Rev. Love is still an option. You just have to be more creative and skilled now that social institutions don’t institutionalize your entire family architecture for you.

      Like


    • Then prepare to kneel before your Muslim Overlords. Your women certainly will, while sucking their cocks.

      Don’t see women as anything to make you feel good emotionally. Only things to shit out your kids, thus furthering civilization, and holes for you to fuck.

      Men have become too romantic. Erase that lovey dovey nonsense from your mind and it will much easier to game these stupid sluts. Might even make a somewhat responsible mother out of one of them.

      Like


  29. because they will be valuable for their sex no matter what slop they squirt into their brains

    thank God I wasn’t taking a drink when I read that.
    Unfortunately, some women want to be valuable because of what their brain contains, and women seem willing to ingest many different strains of crazy, from gay besties to yoga to dog yoga to voting rights for dogs, and blind devotion to a certain disaster of a president as he leads us into the next depression and dissolution of our borders.

    Like


  30. The USA is simply too large and too heterogeneous to have a meaningful cultural definition of masculinity which applies to the entire society. Things barely held together before when America was 130 million, 90% European extraction: imagine how pointless it is today when we have 330 million with every possible, language, culture, religion, ethnicity, hue, color and shade under the sun.

    You can’t maintain the old notion of masculinity without also maintaining the actual population which gave it life…

    Like


  31. Bennett is a turd that just won’t flush. He is a little nugget of floating shit that just goes around and around the bowl. No one cares what he says about anything.

    It’s not as if any man will say “Bill is right! I must man up and get married ASAP!”

    Like


  32. money, man, money

    Like


  33. Nice rant.

    Now, learning game is a fine pursuit in and of itself; but for those who still harbor some hope that the traditional West will get a seat at the table when the Muslims (and perhaps Mormons), arrange the new world; putting at least some slight effort towards undermining the Leviathan governments that enable this sorry state is a worthy undertaking, too.

    Blaming women is about as useful as blaming a dog for barking. As is blaming alphas for ascending to the top of social hierarchies, and acting like self centered assholes. Duh!

    What is needed, is the destruction of the hierarchies themselves, without replacing them with any new ones. Even those, like Bennet I’m sure, who erroneously believe chucking 5-10 pound, sharp edged rocks at adulteresses until their cranium cracks, is somehow a bad thing; ought to at least recognize that forcing third parties to pay up to hire someone to protect said adulteresses is even worse. Internalize that, and all the wisdom that flows from it, and we’ll go toe to toe with the Muslims again in no time.

    Like


    • ” Even those, like Bennet I’m sure, who erroneously believe chucking 5-10 pound, sharp edged rocks at adulteresses until their cranium cracks, is somehow a bad thing;”

      holy hell. and i thought you were mortgaging your future to protect afghan chicks from honor killings. no fucking wonder i kno of SEALs who question why theyre still playing capture the flag there. and yet you speak of “muslim world orders” as if u have a clue.

      Like


      • They’re pretty determined. I used to know a man who worked on the Iranian nuke plant in Buschehr Iran as a foreman and saw the revolution there first hand in 1979. He even showed me plans of the sections he was responsible for building. He predicted our current troubles with them in the mid 90s. “My home is where my Mosque is.” They’re very determined. This will be a long and fateful war. We will find our manhood again in it. The cost will be high. Remember, however, that one Norman knight was worth ten Turks. Our Geoffrey of Bohemond and Baldwin the 1st will come as well.

        Like


      • “We will find our manhood again in it. The cost will be high”

        Bullshit. Just like we found it in Irak and Afghanistan. An asymetrical war doesn’t cut it, son. We won’t find our manhood when the B2s and the F16s do all the dirty work.

        Like


      • right about asymmetric war. the airpower is actually the main reason the afghan war is hopeless. you had the support of the entire country until you started killing more civilians w errant airstrikes than taliban do.

        which is a shame because afghanistan had women in med schools in miniskirts in the 1950s. how popular do you think the paki and saudi mullahs that forbade lobster, curtains and dancing were?

        Like


      • What makes you think it would stay assymetrical? What makes you think it will stay overseas?

        Like


      • “They’re pretty determined.”

        oh yeah? what makes you say that; the fact they have invaded and occupied numerous oil wealthy nations and others of geostrategic importance?

        heres another clue: iran has a nuclear program because the Shah was encouraged to get one going by the people who overthrew Mossadegh. the revolution happened for the same fucking reasons you guys went to war w the brits back in the day. you guys are run by bernankified neocons, iranians by fundamentalist mullahs. think you’re really so much better?

        Like


      • You’re right. Go to Tehran and see how much better they live. Return and teach us their way.

        Like


      • The fact that they systematically infiltrate and demand to redefine their host countries along Islamic lines. They have chosen us in the West as their benchmark for success- the enemy they need to define themselves. They attack us but cannot match us. They are nations of overpopulated, sexually frustrated and angry young men with no hope for the future because their economies are stifled by cronyism based on proximity to a dictatorial oligarchical class. They have been told for decades that the US and Israel prevent their happiness and the nation’s prosperity. The Arab Spring will end up being controlled by the most ruthless and best organized faction, most likely the Fundamentalists. The fact that the Islamic World is gripped by a phenomenon called Pan-Arab nationalism and that they look back to their siege of Vienna as their finest hour. The fact that Europeans are not breeding. Europe will become Muslim or there will be a race war to prevent it. I bet you’re not a Norman knight, are you?

        Like


      • Muslim/Afghan Tribal customs for dealing with infidelity, saves many more women from death by VDs alone, than they ever manage to cull by honor killings. Just one more reason why some cultures experience growing populations, while others do not. Guess which ones will inherit the earth.

        Like


    • “Blaming women is about as useful as blaming a dog for barking. As is blaming alphas for ascending to the top of social hierarchies, and acting like self centered assholes. Duh!”

      Yeah, unless you think that people should be held accountable for their actions. The difference between the dog and the human female or alpha is that humans have the capacity for reason and to understand the effects of their actions on others. Some choose to utilize this capacity and some don’t.

      Like


      • Power corrupts.

        Those without power are communists. Those with power are commissars.

        Like


      • If you think that women have that capacity, you’re part of the problem.

        Like


      • And when the felt effects, to themselves, of what women and amoral alphas do, is that someone else picks up the pieces and pay for them; and those who do so are the 85+% of males who are “betas”?

        If you want women and alphas top behave differently, stop making excuses for supporting the results of their lifestyles. Or more specifically, get the hell out of the way of the kind of mate and property guarding that once enabled the West to become civilized.

        A society where the expected outcome of a cuckolding is a shot cad, a stoned whore and a bludgeoned to death bastard, is a good, just, righteous and civilized one. Ours is not. Work to rectify that, instead of making mealy mouthed excuses about “that’s going too far, blah, blah.” If we don’t, those societies that do will inherit the earth. And justly so.

        Like


  34. GBFM,

    Would you please provide us some of your thoughts on marijuana?

    Love,
    Lolzlozlol

    Like


    • on October 28, 2011 at 8:48 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

      smoke ’em if you’ve got ’em lzozlzlzlzlozlzl !!! lzozolzlzol

      but i don’t smoke nor toke personally lzozoz

      true FACT:

      i have never done any drugs, but i have hooked up with chicks on every single drug zlozozlzlzl ecstacy chix are orgasmsmsmsinsisnicicic lzozlzl shiny clotehss ogrgrasmssiiicc!!!

      i mean really do u think i need drugssss lzollzllzl?zlzoolz

      Like


  35. Remove women from the workplace?? What a ridiculous waste of economic resources!

    [Heartiste: Funny. Men’s wages were high and the country was doing fine when women were largely absent from the workforce.]

    If men want to retain their leadership and economic status, they need to step it up and out compete women in the office. Or better yet, start your own business.

    [So men should refuse to cooperate with female coworkers?]

    Like


    • “[So men should refuse to cooperate with female coworkers?]”

      No, they should just do a better job (and if they don’t, not bitch about those who get promoted over them). We don’t live in a “may the best *man* win” world anymore.

      Like


      • What an excellent idea! Gee! /sarcasm
        Women don’t have to do a better job, they have the government backing them whenever they cry about discrimination in the workplace. Corporations have learned to promote these women rather than deal with the lawsuits. I was accused of lying, proved that the woman co-worker was the liar, and then had to apologize to that woman for hurting her feelings (and got a do-not-promote tag on my file in HR). I would have quit rather than do it, but my wife was dying of cancer, and I had to have the health insurance.
        Doing a better job matters little, unless you’re your own boss.

        Like


      • I would ignore Student. He consistently proves his covert anti-male / anti-white biases. Reckon it’s a chick — or a Portlander.

        Like


      • In my experience, women (especially the middle-aged ones) are the most incompetent co-workers. Complainers, schemers backstabbers. They flourish under current workplace harassment environments where false accusation is their modus operandi.

        Oh the day when men would be truly valued based on actual work performance. They would leave the wimminz in the dust.

        Like


    • not sure if serious, but if:

      http://whatmenthinkofwomen.blogspot.com/2011/09/womens-issuespriority-mens-issues-erm.html

      http://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=1319665&postcount=39

      and the boardroom quotas in norway

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/jul/18/diversity-boardroom-corporate-decisions.

      the shit flies everywhere.

      http://www.vdare.com/articles/criminalizing-masculinity

      why women didn’t start their own army? What! That’s misogynistic, the right question is why men were so sexist and didn’t allow women in the armies and garnered all the glory of dying in the battle exclusively for only themselves.

      iow, why are you hitting that poor woman’s fist with your face you misogynist!

      Like


    • “Outcompete women,”

      Hey man I totally hear what you’re saying, but have you heard about affirmative action?

      Do women “outcompete” men in physical labor jobs? Or the deadliest jobs? Or in the military? The police? Firefighting? Logging? Oil industries?

      Wait I forgot what we were talking about. Could you say your argument again?

      Like


    • Moreover, what’s always conveniently ignored by feminists about the bad old days, is that women really liked being home. For one, they spent their days as they do at work gossiping and doing minimal work, watching the kids play outside. They were happier. Women who stay at home have more energy for sex and usually fuck more and nag less because they aren’t stressed. Women fall into housewife mode rather easily, even today, I find. Kids played outside all day and thought being indoors was torture. Women in state and local government jobs supervising the famliy combined with Feminist jurisprudence changed all that.

      Like


  36. Heartiste for President, GBFM for Vice President

    Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 9:09 am So, do the Zonk

      This is an idea whose time has come!

      The first VP press conference alone would be worth the effort and expense.

      Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 8:08 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      i think that would be a coo ticket as hearteiste brings th cheerful humor happy go lucky outlook to da presdianental seat and i bring da weighty cheneyesque gravitas 2 the VP role lzozozllzl

      Like


  37. I’ve been lurking here for a couple of weeks. Where the fuck was this site when I was a kid?

    Anyway, I could give a fuck about what this fat fuck has a to say about anything. He is one of those conservatives who would take men back 50 years as well as women. And he is just your typical main stream media hypocrite. He writes books about virtues, but goes to Vegas and gambles thousands of dollars in a night. And he is a fat fucking pig. Apparently this fat religious fuck hasn’t thought of the cardinal sin, gluttony.

    In another life, I practice as an attorney in family law. I can attest that men get fucked in divorces. Economically speaking, there is rarely a winner, male or female in a divorce. But courts are still biased. I’ve never seen a man awarded spousal maintenance. And when it comes to custody, there is still the default position that women should be given primary physical custody. There have been advances though, depending on your jurisdiction. It is not always automatic that a woman will get sole custody. Having said that, in reference to custody, women have the advantage.

    I definitely agree with the conclusion of this entry. Women not have gotten the men they deserve, they got the men they want. So they need to just shut the fuck up and take a valium to slow the hamster down.

    Like


    • Absolutely right: “Women not have gotten the men they deserve, they got the men they want. So they need to just shut the fuck up and take a valium to slow the hamster down.”

      Like


  38. I stole this off Reason’s Hit N Run blog:

    Society has changed. Women have more power over their own life, and there is less pressure to conform to expectations from family, religion, society at large, etc. So now with more choice on how to life their lives, many women are deciding to do something with their lives other than be the traditional housewife of 50 years ago. It sucks to be a guy today who wants the housewife of 50 years ago, since there are less of them, but people have more choice on how to live their lives now, and that’s a good thing.Many women fought hard for this. Some would even call it “feminism”.

    But guess what? Men also have more power over their own life, and there is less pressure to conform to expectations from family, religion, society at large, etc. So now with more choice on how to life their lives, many men are deciding to do something with their lives other than be the traditional husband of 50 years ago. It sucks to be a women today who wants the husband of 50 years ago, since there are less of them, but people have more choice on how to live their lives now, and that’s a good thing……and women hate that!!!!

    Like


  39. What female productivity? The wasted resources that women use and many times disregard when they want to be SAHM’s could go to somewhere more useful. Not saying all of them because there are some damn good women out there that are good at what they do. But by and far are outweighed by those that aren’t.

    People like Bennett aren’t going to listen to your arguments Roisy. Then they’d have to eat the proverbial crow because they won’t admit they were wrong all along. Republican or Democrat, liberal or conservative they are all one in the same.

    Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 8:10 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      Women create more debt than wealth.

      The women’z movement coincided with largest increase in debt ever known to mankind.

      Next time you drive an hour to work, count the things you see that were built, made, innvented, paved, or erected by womennz zlzollzl.

      the owooemnz movement was basically the deousling of womenz and the conversion of womenz into finaincial vehicles of welath transfer from men to da bernakewites zlzllz

      Like


  40. “Now naturally, few conservatives will take up this call to arms.”

    Some do. They are known as the alt-Right.

    I wrote recently on other blogs that Alt-Right is best understood as the Old Right, resurrected for and in part by the GenY/Millennials generation.

    By the way, when a long time ago you wrote of “chipmunk-cheeked conservatives, I always had Nil Bennett in mind.

    Fun fact: I lived in DC in 1997 and attended the Promise Keepers’ rally, out of curiosity. Man, what a mega mangina-fest it was.

    Like


    • And still,the fem-cunts were wild with rage and anger at even THESE belly crawling pussies getting 2gether–for the express purpose of being sniveling pussies!!! And the media did their ussual bit too. “Oh gee what is this danger??” Just a bunch of fags,half or more of whom have been dumped by the pig wives they pledge to serve. Oh brother.

      Like


  41. Heartiste, you are mostly right, in my opinion. No, no humble. I’m not humble.

    You do have one major problem with your practical solution. It doesn’t change anything. Men rolling from bed to bed, as fun as it is, don’t change anything. Men abdicated responsibility in the first place (passing idiot laws like affirmative action and no fault divorce), and it is up to us to take it back. Yes, actually, guys, we do need to man up. We need to man up and be the men they want us to be, and then refuse to act the way they want us to act. Be successful, fulfill your dreams, be a high status man. Sure, game helps (a lot; you don’t actually need status to be successful with women, but I’m preaching to the choir there), but what bigger slap in the face to women than a (genuinely) high status man who refuses to commit? We need to make the hard choices, if we genuinely want society to move forward. Men need to choose to be better for their own sakes, not to be better for the sake of a woman, or to seem better for the sake of sex. That is the ONLY way we are going to make progress.

    Like


    • “but what bigger slap in the face to women than a (genuinely) high status man who refuses to commit?”

      Shit, that’s the most motivating thing i ever read on this blog.

      Like


    • GG.

      Like


    • Keep in mind that to most who practice it, game is more than just “men rolling from bed to bed.” It indeed encompasses all of the high-status pursuits that you mentioned. Through insightful blogs like this one (which covers much more than just pick-up tactics), men learn to “be better for their own sakes,” as you said. Sure, the learning of alpha characteristics by these men is mimicry at first, once it is ingested and consistently displayed it becomes part of the man’s being– and as more men succeed, society will ultimately benefit. How could it not?

      Like


    • REALLY?

      “Men” did not pass those laws. Nor did they pass any laws that changed them further. Nor did “men” argue for them in the first place.

      You misplace political power and funding for “men.”

      Thank you come again.

      Like


      • Who else passed them? Men once were the only ones with the franchise. The votes that enabled women to vote initially, abdicating political power (probably permanently) were cast by men. It doesn’t matter what pressures were being applied, or where the money was coming from, the voice that said “aye” was a male’s voice in every case. Responsibility lies firmly on men.

        And you mistake ‘misplace’ for ‘mistake’.

        Like


  42. Fuck reacting, just do what produces the greatest result with the least amount of effort with no corners cut and wait for everyone to bow to you. Parsimony is the path of the modern man.

    It’s not rocket science — yeah shit looks bad for everyone, and this old guy literally has no connection with the meta or the real world for that matter. He is lost in a fantasy. He’s 80. Why is he even allowed to talk about pussy? He bought his supply with cash and status for the last 20 years and that’s if his dick still works science willing.

    The good readers know that women are horrid creatures right now. Horrid, beautiful shells of what they once were. We all are in different ways. The increasing demands on our EVERYTHING has created agitated time starved specialists with little to no souls. They can’t dance, but shamble to the unconscious music of the brand; the tramp stamp and the gamertag.

    For these people it’s avoiding the demons of introspection at all costs. These are the people suffering and these people are at one time or another WERE US. It’s a response to lack of an unsafe lack of reward and meaning.

    When you keep promising an ENTIRE GENERATION something, and they never get it…they break.

    The forgotten, the first group of people to suffer silently as completely brainwashed denizens of the corporate architecture. Millions caught the matrix. If only they knew they were better then their idols, their kill streaks, and the cumshots they just drained in the last “configured to spec” girls throat. Noone can risk anything because they don’t have anything to risk.

    This, and the generations after are broke gamblers sitting outside of the casino of fate. No dice to cast, desperately grasping to play the only game left they think they can win at and what history forgets to remind you of, is that game is the easiest to play.

    Were literally all designed to win. Maybe that’s the joke.

    Like


  43. The elephant in the room is that women’s productivity is best put to marrying young and having children.

    Like


  44. Another great post for the archives.

    Bennett has been old and out of touch for decades, if not longer. His “merits” are laughable. The fact that so many people out there actually listen to this fool is further proof of the sad state of our country.

    Like


    • I’m not sure the book is a huge seller. I also think it will be mostly parents with adult men living in the basement who would be inclined to read the book.

      Like


  45. Heartiste wrote: “Bennett … reverts to blind, deaf and dumb traditionalist form by laying the blame for men’s ailments at the feet of… men.”

    What Bennett is peddling might be “blind, deaf and dumb,” but it isn’t “traditionalist” except by assertion (or by conservative reputation).

    Most of this Male-Rights Activist bitchery is female at its core. When women see difficulties, they whine and complain to power. When men see difficulties, they seek power and act directly. Bennett and everyone else might be forgiven for going along with this feminine M.O. since boys have been raised for a century to seek girly compromise/collusion/cooperation solutions to problems, rather than the manly killing of (or credibly threatening to kill) people. In other words, “men” are chicks today.

    A man doesn’t seek committees and bake sales and petitions and complaints. He organizes fellow fighters below him (or acknowledges the leaders above him) to directly effect change. The only compromise or cooperation is internal to his fighting society. In other words, he makes war on that which opposes him until the enemy or he yields.

    There’s a reason “manliness” manifestos and even game blogs to a certain degree carry a whiff of fruitiness about them. These are kaffeeklatches where we let out frustrations in speech rather than silently acting and bending the opposition to our will. Women (and former education “czars”) talk. Men act.

    The traditionalist seeks to rediscover and resurrect the male prerogative that was abandoned since we so stupidly, unconditionally surrendered to the Chicks With Dicks suffragette brigade. Bennett’s solution (Man up, bratboys!) presumes the permanence of feminist hegemony and how we might rearrange deck chairs.

    Yes, there is some manning up to be done. The overgrown manchildren who waste away their maturity in escapist fantasy are pathetic creatures indeed, and that fact shouldn’t be ignored. But the first “man-up” is to squarely address the absurd feminist presumptions that a “conservative” like Bennett hasn’t courage to do.

    It’s been a long century. The aged ideologues are slowly dropping off the scene and leaving the field to us, the clear-eyed generation entering its political and cultural prime.

    Like


    • “It’s been a long century. The aged ideologues are slowly dropping off the scene and leaving the field to us, the clear-eyed generation entering its political and cultural prime.”

      Who is us?

      Like


    • Yeah, it’s very pathetic for young men to pursue activities like videogaming, model building or whatever. They ought to be no more than worker bees who must find themselves a mate to provide for. What a great life indeed.

      Like


    • “leaving the field to us, the clear-eyed generation entering its political and cultural prime.”

      Wow, is this a clue about your age? I always thought you were 80 years old or something?
      Might King A be a young stud?

      Like


      • Funny how that pseudonymity works. Assumptions are a bitch.

        Sow the straw, reap the straw man.

        Like


      • King A,

        Even as I scroll through these comments, your pose becomes ever more intolerable to me. Are you Alex Kurtagic’s alter-ego? The one grandstands to chide men that they are insufficiently worshipful of women; this one to chide men that they are too downtrodden to live up to his ethos. At root the same tiresome grandstanding of the practical nietzschean. Why not save yourself this time slapping the whinging coterie upon their wrists and just say what you really mean,

        “I am better than you. So better than you. You are inferior. I am better. Better, better, better.”

        I find it significant that Student, the crypto-beta / anti-white provocateur, agrees with you here. At root, then, we have the able chap dumping on the unable for social limitations to success (which is the organic norm anyhow) and a little crony who bids us make peace with the times by recognizing women as our new masters. “There is no *place*. There is only being and adaptation.” — So true, yet what kind of psychology is speaking there?

        The intolerable thing about a poser is not his posing; it’s that he regards himself without irony. I am torn between enjoying everything King A writes and rolling my eyes at all the easy ubermensch moralizing. There’s one in every bunch. Better off at Spearhead and OccidentalObserver, where such freikorps fantasists flourish.

        Like


      • “who bids us make peace with the times by recognizing women as our new masters.”

        you twit. i do no such thing. furthermore, you allege i am “anti-white”, even after i call the IRA freedom fighters! you could learn a lot w even a touch of humility. but your pride will scuttle any chances that you evolve beyond an intellectual troglodyte with an oppressed-white-male inferiority complex.

        Like


      • “Inferiority complex” is the right phrase, Student.

        uh says this …
        “Why not save yourself this time … and just say what you really mean, ‘I am better than you. So better than you. You are inferior. I am better. Better, better, better.'”

        and I hear him whimpering his personal version of this song …
        http://tinyurl.com/He-Is-Too-Good-For-Everyone

        … and I take it for the unintended veneration that it is.

        Knock me over with a feather: I’m still surprised that pointed commentary will inspire a whiny refutation of imagined claims of superiority. It’s like the regular complaining about my using proper grammar and 11th grade vocabulary words. You’d think these spastic tics of theirs would eventually exhaust themselves, but there are always fresh recruits to pick up the standard (and fancy themselves pioneers).

        I’m better than everyone. Or maybe I’m not. I’ll concede either way if it knocks uh and his ilk off that stupid fucking hobbyhorse and helps them stick to the matter in contention.

        As for the rest of his filler-criticism, it is barely coherent ad hominem. I’m a Jew-loving pseudoübermensch because I haven’t seig heiled some crackpot Theory of Führer Game? What? And is anyone other than an obsessive child of arcana and ressentiment supposed to know who in the name of Gott in Himmler “Alex Kurtagic” is?

        Does Alex Kuntmagic have a ten inch cock? If he doesn’t then it can’t be me. Try again.

        Like


    • “Most of this Male-Rights Activist bitchery is female at its core. When women see difficulties, they whine and complain to power. When men see difficulties, they seek power and act directly.”

      exactly. and you can either grapple (fruitlessly) w the emerging power of women or use it to your advantage.

      Like


    • You ignore the fact that mens’ scope of action has been severely limited and they are in fact doing what is allowed with the least risk in the current environment. It is actually bringing results too.You want violent revolution? You go first, ok?

      Like


      • Exactly. This guy is completely off his rocker.

        Like


      • Violent revolution is the last resort, but it always must remain an option to keep our efforts honest. “War is an ugly thing, but not the ugliest of things.” Etc.

        Regardless, it won’t come to violence. Women have no stomach for war and will capitulate at the first whiff of real possibility.

        Finally, it’s called etaphor. We talk a lot about a “war on” this or that because man’s character is martial in nature. I’m not advocating you go flash mob your mall and chain yourself to the Orange Julius until they pass an Equal Rights for Men Amendment. I’m saying we should approach the matter with the clarity and discipline and cooperative efficiency of a military objective. It so happens to be what we men do best.

        As far as me “go[ing] first”: no shit, Sherlock. Revolutions aren’t for the faint-hearted. We early adopters won’t mind when you self-absorbed couch potatoes, cock-for-brains players, and while-Rome-burns fiddlers fall in line the day before the victory parade. The Revolutionary War hardly ever enjoyed more than 30% colonial support — but what quality of support! Most will sit on the sidelines, bide their time, and align with the victors at the last possible moment. C’est la guerre. Courage is no more equally distributed than female beauty is.

        “[D]oing what is allowed with the least risk” isn’t going to cut it, timid tiptoer Timmy.

        Like


      • etaphor = metaphor

        No, that’s not a new vocab word for you to look up. It’s a typo.

        Like


      • And what’s your plan?
        Show us a detailed plan, convince us with facts and figures. Otherwise we will assume that you can’t do shit.

        Like


      • He’s just a keyboard jockey with delusions of grandeur, so be prepared for a long wait.

        Like


    • Beowulf, a Saxon song-master, apostrophising ‘the Sword,’ voices
      this primeval Organon, as it was instinctively understood by our ancestors.
      “The war-thing! the comrade! father of honor, and giver of kingship!
      the fame-smith! — the songmaster! Clear singing! clean slicing! sweet
      spoken! soft finishing! making death beautiful — life but a coin — to be
      staked in the pastime; whose playing is more than transfer of being. Arch-
      anarch! chief builder! prince and evangelist! I am the will of God! I am the
      Sword!”

      “It is only in ages saturated in atmospheres of brain wrecking
      artificialism — in consumptive communities steeped to the very lips in
      elemental error — that senile, degrading, anthropomorphic myths and
      manias are substituted for hard, bitter Common-Sense. (All great truths are
      ‘hard’ and ‘bitter,’ but Lies, to the morbidly inclined, are sweeter than wild
      honey.)

      One by one we abandon Realisms — to follow FATA MORGANAS.
      We are mortgaging our destiny to the Pawnbrokers of Decadence. Behold!
      — the legerdemain of the Orient demonetized the Manhood of the West!

      “We fight like women, and feel as much,
      The thoughts of our heart we guard —
      Where scarcely the scorn of a god could touch,
      The sneer of a fool hits hard,
      The treacherous tongue and the cowardly pen,
      The weapons of curs decide —
      They faced each other and fought like men;
      In the days when the world was wide.”
      [Henry Lawson]

      And yet the world is beautiful — as a blushing maiden dreaming of
      her first lover. “Fair laughs the morn and soft the breezes blow” and men only await captaining to — capture and possess.

      – Ragnar Redbeard

      Like


      • We all ought to read, or reread that book. In its way it is everything CH has written or could ever write in two-hundred pages.

        Whenever a Briton or some other not-American claims America has no great literature, I list three books that singly and together make 99% of European output redundant:

        1. Leaves of Grass
        2. Might is Right
        3. The Nigger Bible

        A+.

        Like


      • Two quotes from MIR’s chapter on women:

        Young women have an instinctive detestation for the ‘good young man that died’ kind of adorer, and they positively abhor the pale coward — even though he be a blood relation. Strength, energy-of-character, ferocity, and courage, she admires in her possible husband, above all other qualities combined. Even to be carried-off by force, is not repugnant to her feelings, if the ‘bold bad man’ is in other respects acceptable.

        She pines to be ‘wooed and won,’ (or as it were) she likes to feel that she has been mastered, conquered, taken possession of — that the man who has stormed her heart is in all respects, a man among men. This suggestive female idiosyncrasy is rhythmically set forth by an anonymous writer thus: —

        “Down a winding pathway in a garden old,
        tripped a beauteous maiden, but her heart was cold.
        Came a prince to woo her, said he loved her true;
        maiden said he didn’t, so he ceased to woo.

        Came a perfumed noble — dropping on one knee;
        Said his love was deeper, than the deepest sea.
        But the winsome maiden, said his love was dead,
        and the perfumed noble, accepted what she said.

        Came a dashing Stranger, took her off by force;
        said he’d make her love him, and she did — of course.”

        But whether a criminal is successful or not, he seems to have a peculiar fascination for women. He who ‘risks his life to advance his fortunes’ may reckon beforehand upon unlimited feminine approval. If he succeeds and becomes a millionaire, a chancellor, a president, or a king; he has only to ‘hold up his hand’ to be literally ‘rushed’ by the handsomest feminines in the land; and even if he fails bravely, women will gather in shoals to visit him in gaol, besieging him with bouquets and proposals of marriage, even at the gallows. In Michigan a law has lately been enacted, to prohibit female adorers, from sending flowers to condemned murderers, burglars, and bank wreckers. Lombroso says somewhere that ‘good and passionate women have a fatal propensity to love bad men,’ but with characteristic want of the logical faculty, he abstains enthusiastically, from defining ‘good’ and ‘bad.’

        -circa 1890’s

        …Sounds familiar… there’s nothing new under the sun.

        Another excellent American book that deals with women (among other things) is Which Way Western Man by William Gayley Simpson. WWWM is pretty much a how-to guide for building a great civilization and a great race.

        Both MIR and WWWM can be downloaded free at archive.org

        Like


  46. I rolled my eyes when I read the review of this book and what it was about, but then this is typical Bennett. He has figured out the problem, but has no clue as to its real cause or solution. I think he needs to talk to some young men rather than women. I’m sure he was trying to score some pussy at least vacariously with this book.

    Like


  47. 2/3rds of divorces are initiated by women. However that’s the national average, taking all possible demographics into account. For educated couples (ie higher than high school) divorce is initiated by the woman 90% of the time.

    Why would any man in his right mind get married?

    Like


    • Because these divorced men are most likely pussywhipped betas who fell in love with a reformed cock carousel rider.

      First, love is not enough to get married, you need to have the visceral need to have babies.
      Marriage can still be an option if you have game, if you understand women (not difficult if you’re a regular reader of this blog), if you have experience with them, and if you screen out the cunts, the slutty tarts, the fembots and the drama queens (non-exhaustive list).

      There is a (very) small pool of marriage material girls, but they’re still out there.
      I’m all for the player lifestyle, but there are family men who cannot pull it off without feeling unfulfilled. Given the legal climate etc… their only shot at marital bliss is through swallowing a red pill (or two).

      Like


  48. I’m white, and male. I have a steady job, pay my taxes, don’t steal, and spend less than I earn.

    In other words, I’m a n—-r in modern-day Amerika.

    So forgive me, Mr. Bennett, and my kind, if we don’t seem to be investing too much into the system.

    Like


  49. That gets my vote for the best post ever written. This is your “An American Crisis.” This was beautiful, worthy of Thomas Paine’s best. Hats off! Bravo! I hope Bill sees it.

    Like


  50. Good post. Don’t know how can we remove women from the workplace though. Any practical ideas? You CAN’T convince girls that they shouldn’t study law, medicine, go to grad school etc.

    “When she gets aroused by a backhanded compliment but remains unmoved by a sincere compliment, man up.”

    We can’t help!

    “When she “forgets” to take the Pill and puts you on the hook for the 18 year enslavement, man up.”

    Stupid. Don’t have sex if you hate babies, loser.

    Like


    • Fuck off bitch, you don’t get a free pass to deceive men into having a child. You whores have “reproductive rights” and are allowed to spread your legs open with impunity, whereas a man’s only recourse is “keep it in your pants”?. Get bent!

      Like


      • Having sex=making babies, it ALWAYS was like that. Also, keep in mind that no contraceptive method is 100,00% reliable and sometimes it’s possible that it fails without forgetting anything. If you want to have sex, accept the risks that come with this.

        Like


      • and that makes it ok to “forget” going off the pill without telling your boyfriend… how?

        Like


      • Have never said that. But the responsibility is still not 100% on the female side.

        I don’t really understand why anyone would have sex with a girl he doesn’t love and doesn’t want to have babies with.

        [Heartiste: You see, this is why I have correctly identified you as a troll. No one says stupid shit like this and means it.]

        Pregnancy should be a pleasant surprise after sleeping with someone you love. So if you hate kids, just don’t have sex then.

        [Why unnecessarily deny oneself pleasure? If you hate kids, use a contraceptive. Even the Catholic church advocates the rhythm method.]

        Like


      • Relax, I’m gonna fuck you up the ass, that’s all.
        And i promise not to cum inside, how contraceptive does that sound?

        Like


      • no toots, I have taken to anal sodomy with women. first of all, it makes them realize or experience SOME sort of passive femininity. secondly, last I heard, even women can’t squat down and shit out a 18 year of commitment.

        but mutual ORAL sodomy will do, if the anal thang turns one off.

        nowadays, a guy storing some of his sperms then having HIS tubes tied off is also a very fine tactic.

        women want to , and have HAD the ability, to both HAVE and eat their cake. it’s high time that this unfairness is brought to a short and sudden stop.

        a note aside:

        I have seen some marvelous posters, (photos with captions) representative of the following statement

        “Ass, the Other PUSSY”

        you can find this sentiment on various pornography web sites.

        I humbly suggest you check some out.

        a 21st “New Paradigm” perhaps.

        plus it keeps the population down as well

        win-win IMHO

        tyr it some time , why don’t ya?

        Like


    • “Stupid. Don’t have sex if you hate babies, loser.”

      are you insane?

      don’t answer that.

      Like


    • “Convince” has nothing to do with it.

      Like


      • Then, King A, explain, what other options do we have?

        Like


      • your other option is to spend your twenties at the gym tightening up your ass so you can dupe some poor asshole into marrying you, rather than studying psychology.

        Like


      • Maya wrote: “Then, King A, explain, what other options do we have?”

        You’re clinging to the myth that women are rational actors and predisposed to persuasion by syllogism. Women are slaves to pathos and bathos, not logos.

        The option you have is obedience. Now, that very word has just caused you to bear your little pussycat claws in outrage, but that is an artificial, learned habit that can be eradicated across the generations through concerted effort as surely as small pox.

        Luckily, obedience is the inescapably natural state of woman, and “convincing” a girl to return to her essence takes all the sophistication of street magic, as game has conclusively demonstrated (cf. negs, kino, aloofness). So conclusively that “the crimson arts” have become quietly operable in a few short years against the background of untouchable, omnipresent, feminist agitprop.

        Now as for the reasons why I will not demonstrate to you the logic of this female “option,” return my first paragraph. Reread until you absorb it hysternally.

        Like


      • And how would you make women obedient again? 😛

        “Now, that very word has just caused you to bear your little pussycat claws in outrage, but that is an artificial, learned habit …”

        Artificial, learned habit? Mind explaining this a bit?

        Like


      • “…how would you make women obedient again?”

        Intergenerationally. As men have made the small pox pathogen “obedient.” In gradual, comprehensive steps, with the long view in mind, such as the dismantling of the paternal welfare/female-equalist state that will culminate in elimination of the franchise (quelle horreur!).

        And individually. As game has only just begun doing, soul by soul.

        Like I said above.

        (When speaking to a woman, every logical component must be said twice, at a minimum.)

        “Artificial, learned habit?”

        The “untouchable, omnipresent, feminist agitprop” convinces you to react viscerally against the suggestion of submission. This is a purposeful brainwashing because, without a hardcore reprogramming backed up by omnipresent cultural reinforcers (“he or she,” “chairperson,” First Woman this or that, etc.), you will revert to your nature. Your deepest feminine nature can only find rest in complete submission. Everything else is pretty lies. And because those pretty lies are officially “untouchable,” its subverters like Roissy must remain in the shadows for now.

        You underestimate how much you have internalized the ancient agitprop. Which is why I suggested you internalize a different mantra (“return my first paragraph. Reread until you absorb it hysternally”). Stop pretending you can challenge the truth with your inadequate tools. Your sisters have been trying for a century, and wrecking civilization in a spoiled-girl temper tantrum.

        The reign of Varuca is coming to its climax.

        Like


      • I see what you want to say but the problem is that women will not accept this unless men become worth again to submit to. They are not right now (of course this is all our fault! ;)).

        [Heartiste: The sexual market feedback loop indicts everyone, but as women are the gatekeepers of sex it is their actions and behaviors that are more responsible for their dating misery.]

        BTW, by being angry and repeating how stupid us women are in every second post, you evoke the reaction just the opposite to what you want. You have a lot of anti-game, King A.

        “The “untouchable, omnipresent, feminist agitprop” convinces you to react viscerally against the suggestion of submission.”

        Nope. I’m very open to the idea of submission but I only want to submit to ONE man – I see no purpose in being submissive to ALL men (and especially not to neurotics like you). Could you explain it further? What can I do? I’m kind to everyone but I viscerally feel it’s very wrong to be overly submissive to every lazy guy I meet.

        “Your deepest feminine nature can only find rest in complete submission.”

        Sounds cool.

        Like


      • LOL, King A, I said you are a neurotic and in the next sentence I said that I’m kind to everyone 😀 SORRY! (Like everyone here I’m too childish to be able to write without insulting other people everywhere I have chance)

        Like


      • Maya wrote: BTW, by being angry … you evoke the reaction just the opposite to what you want. … neurotics like you …”

        You demonstrate my point by example. There is no anger or neurosis, at all. I even wonder how you conjure the idea from what I write. But, for women, everything is attributable to neurosis. As I said, women speak in the language of pathos, and so they must translate every idea into a corresponding emotion. In the absence of emotion, they will invent them just to keep up with the conversation.

        Who says you would be “submissive to ALL men”?

        “women will not accept this unless men become worth again to submit to”

        True enough. That’s the necessary condition for the project to be successful. Which is why the undiscipline and mediocrity and mimicry of game will only get us so far. Which is further why PUAs instinctively mock the very idea of “manning up.” Their trade is deception, the appearance of virtue rather than its presence.

        It doesn’t matter whose “fault” it is — that’s a chicken or egg question irrelevant to the issue. What matters is the beta male unconsciously feeds his submission by applying the virtues of discipline and patience and industry toward a continuation of his voluntary slavery rather than its destruction. Rather than call for those virtues to be applied to proper ends, the PUA mocks the very idea of virtue itself as the mark of the beta. And their less subtle groupies see all direct, undeceptive, and salutary behavior — a rapprochement in the war of the sexes — as the very mark of White Knightism.

        If “man up” means suck up the unworkable feminist subversion of reality so as to perpetuate it — then, no shit, don’t do that. Rather, “man up” to gain the instruments of your oppressor’s destruction. Right now, lazy manchildren playing Xbox in mom’s basement aren’t just terrible candidates for feminist marriage, they are lousy foot-soldiers for revolutionary causes. They are wastes of flesh, unmanned for the purposes of domestic docility. Der letzte Mensch is useful to nobody, and a threat to nobody.

        St. Paul doesn’t just say, “Wives submit to your husbands,” full stop. He immediately qualifies it with, “Husbands love your wives.” If either sex goes rogue, it doesn’t work. In fact, nothing in civilization works. And note well the division of sexual labor there. “Husbands submit to your wives” not only fails internal to the dynamic, it subverts the entire social project, creating perverse results well beyond the nutshell of Susan B. Anthony’s imagination.

        Like


      • I’ll keep it simple:

        Women today are damaged goods

        I won’t man up for the sake of damaged goods

        You are asking us to man up, and try to transform the damaged goods into respectable housewives, I can dig that

        The problem is not that we can’t, it’s that damaged goods are disgusting

        Get this, King A: No one wants to be a Capt’n Save-A-Hoe, especially when the ugly female hindbrain is exposed

        The problem won’t be solved within generations, because every generation is worse than the former

        We’re all doomed. Deal with it.

        Like


      • @Anonymous,

        “I won’t man up for the sake of damaged goods.”

        Not ALL women are damaged goods. If you think you’re too good for girls who are not young enough anymore or who had too many lovers in the past or who are feminists – why don’t you find someone who’s good enough for you, then? Just ignore “sluts” and feminist and focus on other girls instead.

        @King A,

        “Who says you would be “submissive to ALL men”?”

        Oh, OK, so we probably agree … As I said I’d be perfectly happy if I could submit to a man who loved me. It most likely won’t happen though.

        @Heartiste,

        “… but as women are the gatekeepers of sex it is their actions and behaviors that are more responsible for their dating misery.”

        Who’s responsible for dating misery of those girls who are not willing to have casual sex but just want to find a normal man (=one who’s not a player/PUA and not lazy/depressed/childish on the other side)?

        Like


    • We can’t remove women from the workplace? REALLY? Sure we can; start having actual standards. Don’t let people into engineering and computer science programs just because of their plumbing. Do it because of their math and science scores. Don’t promote people based on affirmative action, do it based on their work records. These two policies (actually, just one; repeal affirmative action) will cull an easy two thirds of women from the workforce overnight.

      Like


  51. “Men will man up when women man down. The one must follow the other. The polarity cannot be reversed.”

    The assumption that women are capable of acting responsibly or with self-awareness is what got us into this mess in the first place. Women can’t fix anything on their own. Bennett is right about one thing; detoxing American culture is men’s work.

    Like


    • Yup: “The assumption that women are capable of acting responsibly or with self-awareness is what got us into this mess in the first place.”

      Like


  52. Heartiste wrote: “traditionalists and their offspring — Promise Keepers, Iron Johns, (some) MRAs, evangelists, etc. — have an allergic reaction to plumbing the depths of the human sexual soul, a revulsion likely concocted in a cauldron of sheltered life experiences and morbid fear of their own temptations.”

    Your understanding of conservatives is cartoonish. You sound like women who consider all men rapists, or Hollywood leftists who portray every southerner as a Klan member. Caricatures can apply to you too, as you must have been made aware by those who oppose you. Straw men are the easiest people to discredit.

    Not that many here have the most rudimentary catechesis to understand, but I’ll offer it anyway: religion, and specifically Christianity, is all about “plumbing the depths of the human … soul”, and the “sexual soul,” whatever that is, must necessarily be a part of the general psyche logos. Absent this literal psychology, our other, more familiar manifestations such as theology, worship, and dogma will remain unintelligible to the uninitiated. Familiarize yourself with the doctrine of original sin — and not a crayon drawing of it — or other notions like total depravity. We faithful are sin scientists. We are intimate with that which we seek to vanquish: evil. It requires a “depth” of which your readers-digest “biomechanics is god” ontology cannot conceive.

    When it comes down to it, you’re going to have to make a choice, unpalatable either way: ally yourself with the regnant progressive feminism or with the revolutionary traditionalists. Your middle-way opportunism is the false pragmatism of moderation.

    Another word for it is mediocrity. If the feminist progressives say 2+2=10, and the traditionalists say 2+2=4, the mediocre problem-solver splits the difference and insists everyone’s wrong! a pox on both houses! Truth will be found by declaring 2+2 to be 7. Such quisling behavior is not only intellectually risible and cowardly, but also practically unsustainable in that it makes more enemies than you can handle from all sides. (The substantial reason you maintain anonymity.)

    My hunch is that the libertinism so inextricable from your working-philosophy will ultimately dictate the choice for you. The femmcunts are bossy and fat and wrong in every way, but at least they’re too stupid to see the connection between sexual anomie and general cultural collapse, and so they will defend your “liberties” to the end. But you must know that The End is Nigh. Isn’t that obvious from the sounds of war on the far side of the pool?

    No matter: you and your philosophaster digressions are destined to be engulfed by the aftershocks of a war waged well above your pay grade. Until then, have a good guerrilla sniping campaign against feminist targets of opportunity. I won’t complain. But don’t mistake us conservatives for the deluded blowhard leftist fools whose pretensions are so easily punctured by an honest observer such as yourself with a minimal connection to reality.

    No, in fact, quite the opposite. In your occasional excursions beyond the shores of game, you have wandered well out of your “depth.”

    Like


    • Sexual Devolution is the infection.

      Heartiste et. al. is the fever.

      If you’ve got the cure, you best get busy bringing it, because the patient ain’t looking so good…

      Like


    • When I use big words instead of little words it makes me smart. Smart!

      Like


    • with respect, KA, i disagree very strongly with your conclusions and the premises behind them.

      “When it comes down to it, you’re going to have to make a choice, unpalatable either way: ally yourself with the regnant progressive feminism or with the revolutionary traditionalists. Your middle-way opportunism is the false pragmatism of moderation.”

      No. The middle ground-smart and strategic compromise- is a win-win. Its a win for girls because it placates them in their currently ascendant will to power and it benefits males because our masculine polarity can and will regulate if the such women respect us enough to submit.

      “Another word for it is mediocrity. If the feminist progressives say 2+2=10, and the traditionalists say 2+2=4, the mediocre problem-solver splits the difference and insists everyone’s wrong! a pox on both houses! Truth will be found by declaring 2+2 to be 7.”

      Wrong again. You fail by assuming your belief to be simple, unassailable truth distillable to mathematical perfection. The traditionalists being good at math does not mean that their theory is a perfect mathematical equation. remember what i posted earlier about men’s fatal flaw being hubris?

      this is a complex and highly dynamic area of human endeavour. one thing that *is* for certain is that we must adapt and change. roll with the punches and turbulence that we currently face. a return to old business models will cause those who do to be overtaken by those who innovate.

      Like


      • Student wrote: “with respect, KA, i disagree very strongly with your conclusions and the premises behind them.”

        I guess that “with respect” makes us frenemies! But we couldn’t be more fundamentally at odds.

        I suspect this is inevitable — you are a man of the left, if I’m not confusing you with another poster.

        “…placates [girls] in their currently ascendant will to power….”

        We can’t stipulate on the facts, much less the “premises,” still much less the “conclusions.” Women are no longer ascendant. We got over that hump at some point in the last forty years, and we are now experiencing the long, slow regression. All of the signs of ascendancy (e.g., NFL wearing pink) are in fact last frantic convulsions of a moribund phenomenon.

        “You fail by assuming your belief to be simple, unassailable truth distillable to mathematical perfection.”

        I’m glad for your ability to boil it down to first principles, an ability sorely lacking in most critics. This will help us retain “respect” for each other through the temporary alliances of convenience.

        No, I am not a relativist. But neither do I believe that truth is always expressible in mathematically precise terms, like some analytic philosopher — the great intellectual “hubris” of the 20th century. Our difference, and your mistake, lies within this misinterpretation. The truth can indeed be simple and unassailable, and yet ineffable. Truth is truth whether we can express it simply with our simplistic tools of language or not.

        “a return to old business models will cause those who do to be overtaken by those who innovate”

        Here is another grand misconception of the traditionalist. We are not simply revanchist or reactionary. The best of us, the most aware and the most practical, are dialecticians. “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it rhymes.” We don’t seek restoration of the status quo ante, we seek synthesis. The traditionalist “middle way” is the true middle way: neither the wholesale Maoist/French Revolution/Year Zero wipe and reboot, nor the assumptions of permanence of the current regime. We synthesize thesis (the extant) with antithesis (the new).

        Creative destruction in a sense isn’t “conservative” at all, but to pursue this truth we would have to venture into the semantic weeds. Rather than go off on that tangent, it would be more efficient for you to realize that the ideological categories largely do not apply during paradigm shifts. All definitions are subject to redefinition. The conservative in me advocates for “conserving” those definitions that have proven to work. And not only do they work, we could not redefine them if we wanted to, since human nature is permanent and unchanging. (Which is our disagreement reduced its essence.)

        Like


    • I find your teachings intriguing and I wish to learn more.

      Can you cite to any more detailed prescription for reform from the perspective of a revolutionary traditionalist, a paleconservative, or an orthodox reformed theological tradition?

      Like


      • Read all the great Ancient writers you can get your hands on, especially the historians. Values wise, start with Tacitus and Epictetus. Tacitus is the Victorian blueprint for excellent and concise writing. Men he praises deserve it, men he reviles deserve it.

        Like


      • Yes, anon-4444, what tyrone said. I don’t know, I’d have to contemplate my bookshelf. There aren’t many modern orthodox resources that haven’t been sissified, so my references are necessarily piecemeal. And I’m no expert in the derivative stuff, having purposely focused my education around primary material. You have to combine the clarity and power of Nietzsche with the truth of Augustine and Aquinas, a near impossible task for the uninitated. Who has done that? Chesterton maybe? Ya got me. There’s no easy substitution for a comprehensive education in the classics.

        The “detailed prescription for reform” is the end-product of this early revolutionary process, not the starting point. The heavy-lifting has been left to us, hasn’t it? There is no single golden book or systematic philosophy that takes us from A to Z, just endless blogs of valuable nuggets among the bric-a-brac. Let’s hope the manifesto is being written as we speak. I don’t see any evidence of it.

        I have found the indispensable 21st century guide to be Harvey Mansfield’s Manliness. It isn’t perfect, but it is a decent primer in the ancient and modern sources of our predicament. It should be enough to get you off square one.

        http://www.amazon.com/Manliness-Professor-Harvey-C-Mansfield/dp/0300122543

        Until the definitive guidance emerges, we will speak to each other and develop the dialectic that yields practical wisdom for our age. Roisy is off to a gangbusters start. He is the only one in his field — by far — who even approaches the rigor and articulation and tactical instinct required for the project ahead. And we owe the self-initiating pioneers like Devlin and Farrell and Jeffries and Mystery much for being brave John the Baptists making straight the paths. (et. al. — I’m not a philologist of the genre)

        As for the vanguard? Who knows when it will reveal itself. All we know is: not yet.

        Then he strictly charged the disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ. … “Go to the feast yourselves; I am not going up to this feast, for my time has not yet fully come.”

        Like


      • Tyrone & King A:

        Thank you. I will add these authors to my (ever-growing) reading list.

        As an aside, I note that it is difficult to suppress the rage that comes from finding that the education for which you (and/or others) have sacrificed has been corrupted by contemporary politics and has ignored the tried, trusted, and proven wisdom of the pillars of western civilization. Gen X has been ripped off over and over again. It is sickening.

        Clearly, (as King A notes) a great deal of heavy lifting awaits us, particularly in discerning a prescription for improvement that is consistent with scripture.

        We can only toil in the vineyard and pray that generations yet to come can implement such a plan. If we’re fortunate, we may see the tide turn before our own time ends.

        I hope that the Chateau Heartiste blog is, for feminism, the horrifying retreat of the waters before the furious tsunami reshapes the landscape. But there’s no telling what that new landscape may look like. The pendulum could certainly swing too far in the opposite direction (e.g. the “Ummah”) given the horrendous outrages inflicted upon western huMANity.

        But I also hope that my daughter will come of age in a landscape which values femininity in ladies, masculinity in gentlemen, and which has little patience for those who pursue Satan’s errand to rob either of the privileges God has intended for them.

        Life could be so much better. We could honor each other; particularly if we made honoring God a priority. But it seems that every institution (even the Church and the military — to say nothing of the popular culture, the academy, the fourth estate, and government) has turned against natural law.

        We are living in the Cultural Dark Ages.

        Like


      • “Toil in the vineyard” is the perfect parable, anon-4444.

        You wanted an orthodox source? Can’t get orthodoxer than this recent proclamation of the word:

        http://new.usccb.org/bible/readings/100211.cfm

        Did you never read that the stone which the builders rejected has become the cornerstone?

        But do keep your voice down. Citing the book that defined western civilization will mark you as anathema in these parts, rather like Mystery with his feather boa and aviator goggles trolling a feminist colloquy. I’m not sure which brings out the more jealous fangs, a believer among the game-boys or a believer among the fembots.

        “But it seems that every institution has turned against natural law.”

        All the better a circumstance to rebuild them, and properly. The despond has no power and no place in our mission. Nils desperandum.

        Like


      • I would almost accuse you of being Wintermute if you were not so utterly race-blind. At least that punk had his “first principles” in order.

        On that subject: your race defined “Western civilization”. Christianity was its ideational garb.

        You have to combine the clarity and power of Nietzsche with the truth of Augustine and Aquinas, a near impossible task for the uninitated. Who has done that?

        The Augustine and Aquinas whom Nietzsche suggested were eunuchs — those men?

        Like


      • uh wrote: “The Augustine and Aquinas whom Nietzsche suggested were eunuchs — those men?”

        Yup.

        Nietzsche is a masterful diagnostician. But his attempts at re-mythologizing were early-syphilitic, comic-book crap. Zarathustra and his zoo and his tablets, come down the mountain with the Gospel of the Eternal Return. The Marvel Universe is more compelling.

        “Zarathustra, however, turned sad, and said to his heart: ‘They understand me not: I am not the mouth for these ears.'”

        Great movie. When I saw it the first time. Two thousand years ago.

        http://bible.cc/matthew/13-13.htm

        Okay? You may now go back to your library of carbon-copy pamphlets.

        Like


    • on October 30, 2011 at 1:30 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      lozlzozo i ama at a holloween party
      but i was reading heatristse at a holloween party
      and i jsut showed my firend
      you used to be an eidtor
      editor at the utne reader
      your post i showed him your post
      and now he exceused himself
      to go jerk off
      to your jerkoff utne reader sophiststry lzlzzlozzoolzlozol
      tansk and happy halloweene as he makes his weenie hallow hollow as he jerks off to your insisdi[pid utne reder prose! lzozlozloz

      Like


    • Offering a doctrine that talks about the human soul does not mean you are curious about the human soul, human nature or whatever you want to call it.
      Religion does not drive the changes in the human understanding of these things. Religious understanding is a reaction to scientific breakthroughs. It modifies and shifts as humans go along in time.

      Creating a false choice then saying H is the middle way is just blather.

      “Straw men are the easiest people to discredit.”

      Read the sentences you wrote above that line and see how hilarious that line is coming from you.

      “you’re going to have to make a choice, unpalatable either way: ally yourself with the regnant progressive feminism or with the revolutionary traditionalists”

      Revolutionary traditionalists is a brilliant contradiction. The two are almost polar opposites. Also, use of big words, not impressive. It’s like you are hiding behind them. With all the railing on about not know what he’s talking about, I smell projection.

      Like


    • Christianity is all about appeasing a fictional character from 2000 years ago. You rail against escapist fantasy but you want to restore the biggest escapist fantasy of all, the fact that God killed himself to appease himself so he wouldn’t have to roast us, his beloved creations, in hell for all eternity, but in order to have the “gift” we have to believe this ludicrous nonsense.

      An escapist fantasy where when you die you get to go to “heaven” and all the “bad” people go to “hell”.

      Fuck you and your invisible sky wizard. I’ll play my video games and whack to my porn and eat my cheetos and fuck the occasional hooker without a shred of guilt.

      Like


  53. The boys playing video games all day and night in their rooms? Are they avoiding women because they are afraid of them?

    Nope. Make no mistake – they are hunting, just like they were born to do. Women have quickly moved into traditional male areas because these fields are now routinized, pacified and made safe by incredible experience and technology. When the women move in, it is because the danger and adventure has long since moved out.

    As far as the brains watching the engrossing video games, it is like being there. It’s called “savannah brain” where the mind treats compelling audio/visual stimuli like reality. That’s also why modern porn is so addicting.

    In the first world, technology has overtaken the need for hunting and danger. And hunting is really the search for solutions to new problems.

    Women are fine administrators of the tried and true.

    When I see a large company like IBM or HP being run by women, I know to get out of the stock. Women CEO’s are caretakers, managing the long slow windup of an enterprise that has lost its fire.

    We are (maybe) temporarily in a situation of lost horizons for young men. They really, really don’t want to be doing the same job that a girl can do.

    Like


    • Good post. Ultimately, this is what advances the species: men innovating and women following close behind. Whenever men innovate, women instinctively fall in line and cooperate with them. When there is no innovation taking place at all, women fall to pieces (and ‘excel’ at learning the same tried and true routines in the meantime).

      The sad thing is, there is actually plenty of room for innovation, but in many ways our society is set up to discourage it from young men. What happens if a man tries to innovate? Typically he’s viewed with suspicion, hostility, etc.

      Our society is devolving into a firmly stratified oligarchy in which the only meaningful characteristic is title at birth rather than performance afterwards. Interestingly, sex is playing a part in this, because non-elite males have less and less incentive to innovate even if they have the required mental and psychological abilities to do so.

      Like


      • I agree with you. I’m not sure that there is a stratified oligarchy in North America – yet. It may be the natural trajectory for a powerful advanced society.

        “non-elite males have less and less incentive to innovate even if they have the required mental and psychological abilities to do so.”

        This is interesting. There used to be the concept of a “muse” which was a romantic interest (real or imagined) for a male creator that would inspire him to do great works. My take is that males, especially young ones, need to feel deeply “valued” by society in order to quell the inborn anxiety and fear of being abandoned by the tribe if they are not valued. So when one does not feel particularly valued, there is a great waste of psychic energy to distract oneself from this vague feeling of insecurity.

        On great way to feel valued is to hold the love and affection of a good woman. This is a direct validation of a man’s worth.

        BTW, I think one compelling reason many “beta” males cave in and marry single moms and the like is due to the overwhelming anxiety of continuing in adulthood without feeling useful or valued. For many, its like trying to hold your breath forever. It is inborn anxiety of possibly being left out in the cold by the tribe wins out due to the energy drain. And distractions (addictions) can help only so much.

        Like


    • Great post. Great observations.

      Like


    • Hamsta wrote:

      The boys playing video games all day and night in their rooms? Are they avoiding women because they are afraid of them?

      Nope. Make no mistake – they are hunting, just like they were born to do. Women have quickly moved into traditional male areas because these fields are now routinized, pacified and made safe by incredible experience and technology. When the women move in, it is because the danger and adventure has long since moved out.

      Brilliant observation.

      Like


    • More on the stock returns correlating to female CEO performance: http://archive.nyu.edu/bitstream/2451/25949/2/Srelcova_2005.pdf

      Of note: ”
      Studying a sample of 58 companies run by female CEOs over the 20-year period between January, 1985 and December 2004, I find that the stock price returns of the companies run by newly appointed female CEOs, are significantly lower then the stock price returns of comparable companies run by male CEOs during the year following the female CEO appointment. Moreover, this paper doesn’t find evidence of leverage differences between the female CEO and male CEO run companies”

      Like


      • This Rosenberg woman who is running Kraft seems to be doing a good job. But the company is splitting into two. Dont know if thats good or bad. My point tho is,have you seen a picture of this dame? I would almost expect to feel a dick if I ran my hand up her skirt.!! She’s man,baby! ugly as hell,but so high T. Much of “feminism” amd promoting women is of course just giving special priviliges to the dyke queers.

        Like


  54. The day when i receive a full report made by the fbi, certified by the cia, and rechecked by fucking nasa indicating that female infidelity has stopped, I might start to consider marriage and manning up like that gambling fatass suggests.

    Until then, fuck y’all bitches.

    Like


    • Add in the male veto right to declare any pregnancy subject to abortion on his 51% vote. Sure women have to bear the child in her body, but the man has to pay for it and raise it for the following 18 years. 51% is fair to offset the natural advantage women have as gatekeepers.

      Like


  55. Not this topic again. Let’s get back to bangin them broads, hey?

    Like


  56. “most conservatives are pussies”

    They are hopeless betas and white knights — to which you’ll probably say, “same thing.”

    Like


    • Don’t confuse empathy or congeniality with weakness. Some say a conservative is a liberal mugged, well, I am sure the white knighting will also end once they get in on the truth about wimmen.

      Like


  57. Men will man up when women will need them. It has been said here before, but i’ll happily overstate it: women in a prosperous society don’t need beta providers.

    The 2008 financial crisis provoked a slight shift in women’s mating preferences. Betas had a glimpse on what’s awaiting them if society goes through an area of turbulence: the (mercenary) loving attention of women who were previously out of their league.

    So as long as we are living in abundance, men have little choice but to thug it up/learn game if they want to have a shot with (the attractive) females.

    I hear a lot of world-enders these days, who see in OWS, the debt crisis… signs of an imminent collapse. I’m a little bit more optimist, but only for a few more decades, when more serious issues begin to emerge (demographic pressure, peak oil, water wars…).

    As the eternal optimist that i am, and apart from cataclysmic events, I don’t see these challenges as fundamental threats to civilization, but they will force harsh adjustments, which may induce enough pressure on hamsters to direct their (mercenary) loving attention on betas.

    Men will man up and will assume their responsibilities, if they sense that their average status is enough to attract women. It won’t be a comeback to the old days, but nothing is anymore as efficient as harsh times to tame hypergamy.
    Until then, PUAs will have a blast and those in the dark will keep jerking off between two episodes of Stargate.

    Like


    • women in a prosperous society don’t need beta providers.

      This follows closely to my recomendation for men wanting a live in or a wife to do 2 things first as architecture to support your lifestyle.

      1) Earn enough to support the both of you in a portable job where she has no access to your funds and can’t threaten your income or steal it.
      2) Get her to quit her job and spend time attending to your needs.

      You must get her to rely on you, but at the same time must be able to cut out and leave her with nothing at any moment. You must financially have all the hand.

      Like


      • i suppose that works for keeping her with you. but what if _you_ want to leave? wouldn’t that leave her in the lurch with nothing to fall back on? it’d be better if the person you once loved had a job as a fallback.

        Like


      • What I’ve done in the past is to set the girl up in a small business as I leave.

        Also, house-wifey skills are transferable, and it is a noble occupation.

        Like


      • fair enough.

        Like


      • You do make a point about competing agendas between men and women, and how it can be in the best interest of women to be economically self sufficient.

        But I’m a man. So I do my job as a man. It’s in my best interest to get the girl to focus on attending to me.

        You are right that it might not be in her best interest.

        I still have my job to do.

        Like


      • Well, it does create an incentive for her to keep you happy enough that you don’t want to leave, now doesn’t it?

        Like


  58. I’d hate to be burdened with the musical score to go with such an anthem without the requisite talent keep up with the lyricist.

    Like


  59. My dad has made a life of manning up as Bill Bennett wishes, and where has it gotten him? My parents have been married for 38 years and together for 45. They are lifelong Catholics. Through it all my mother has absolutely owned my father. It started with her issuing an ultimatum about marriage. When she realized that he did not care about acquiring wealth or status (content to be a cable guy despite his country club upbringing), she “found” religion and precipitated a desperate move to a Rust Belt shithole to join a cult.

    11 years later, when it was clear he was being passed over for advancement in the cult, she forced a confrontational exit. Because of his union job, he didn’t want to move back to the New England town where they grew up, but she worked on him and he acquiesced. But then she realized that her best friend back home was married to a banker and she would look bad in comparison, so she agreed to remain, but not without exacting a further concession to go back to school to get her degree (she dropped out of college after 1 semester) because the family needed a “second income”– including $10,000+ in student loans — so she could teach at a Catholic school for $11,000 a year. Of course their plan to save enough to retire comfortably failed when my father got shunted off to a desk job that contributed to 2 strokes and an early retirement (thankfully, he’s okay for now).

    Because my father lacked a vision and a plan, my mother filled the leadership void (with a big assist from her closeted gay brother) and the results aren’t pretty. She got everything she asked for, but nothing she wanted. And the next generation, and the next, suffers.

    Like


    • interesting story. my take away is to always be hustling. you dont need to be king-of-the-castle, but you should never give up or settle in the pursuit. women can be quite flexible in this regard.

      more importantly, never submit to ultimatums, especially when they come from a woman.

      don’t let this sad experience be a tunnel-vision lesson for your future endeavors. take the hints but do so humbly and supplementing it with the wisdom (ill leave it to you to decide who to learn from) found within this venerable chateau.

      Like


      • The way you are writing, it is obvious that you are a woman.

        You are try to be conciliatory and emotionally empathic, then you give some meaningless general advice that has no actual context and probably even less value, but does have the benefit of implying you care for his well being.

        The irony is that if he follows your idiotic advice he may very well end up ignoring an ultimatum that has value, eg. “Tom, if you go into business with that loanshark I’m going to take the kids and leave!”

        After you have framed him emotionally, you encourage him to ignore everything his experiences draw him to conclude by using shaming language.

        The sort of manipulation you are employing is extremely disgusting and repellent.

        Like


      • “ill leave it to you to decide who to learn from”

        *Not this guy, who is so clueless he thinks I am a girl. See also:

        “You are try to be conciliatory and emotionally empathic”

        empathy is by definition emotional. lion might think his use of a redundant adjective makes him seem intellectual, but what it actually proves is that he does not even have a basic competence w gr 10 vocab or grammar. not to mention the use of two adjectives concurrently. “stupid asinine”, in other words.

        Like


  60. I thought women want to be led by men. Why is the solution for men to wait for women to man down? Leaders act first, or get others to act. They don’t wait for their subjects to do anything.

    Like


    • In case you havent noticed, the few of us who want to force women to man down dont have the manpower to overpower the beta white knights in the military who will gladly defend women’s “right” to act like men. Leaders strike when they want and when the time is right. They don’t commit suicide following some bullshit absolute like “leaders act first.”

      Like


  61. on October 28, 2011 at 8:55 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    http://hawaiianlibertarian.blogspot.com/2011/10/those-who-are-responsible.html

    loozozozozlz lzozozlzlzozozlzo

    *By making the following section of his comment a list, I think the meaning is very easy to discern, so I only offer minor grammatical editing here:

    1. deconstruct the great books on university campuses
    2. tell men they need to man up
    3. dumb down the entire schools system
    4. tell men they need to man up
    5. ass-rape men in divorce court
    6. tell men they need to man up
    7. send men to die on foreign shores in foreign neo-con wars
    8. tell men they need to man up
    9. drug boys with ritalin/adderoll for being boys
    10. tell men they need to man up
    11. encourage women to give their a-holes and ‘gina-holes early and often to douchebags
    12. tell men they need to man up
    13. destroy the classical, heroic character in their neo-con movies, replacing them with ass-cocking gay cowboys
    14. tell men they need to man up
    15. print money from thin air and inflate and deflate bubbles to seize a man’s home and property
    16. tell men they need to man up
    17. encourage women to become fat, whiny bitches
    18. tell men they need to man up
    19. publish, promote, fund, and finance ass-cockers like tucker max who film secretive taping of ass-cocking sessions without the girl’s consent (tucker max rhymes with goldman sachs), repeating tucker’s lies that he is six feet tall in the neo-con mag, the weekly standard.
    20. tell men they need to man up
    21. transform the church from an institution where a man could once go to meet a virginal, exalted wife, into a front for the divorce industry, where single mothers with three children from three ass-cockers go to rope in a beta male to pay for the ass-cocker’s spawn
    22. tell men they need to man up
    23. castigate, attack, and impugn men for acting like men
    24. tell men they need to man up
    25. transform the noble, exalted university into a nursery, ruled by neo-con women exalting ass-cockers, asscocking, and good grammar, exiling and deconstructing the great books and men, and rewarding the servile future nannies of the nanny state with fiat dollars delivered fresh from ben beranke’s helicopter
    26. tell men they need to man up
    27. remove all men from the publishing industry, so that priscialla painton of simon and schuster sodom and scheister can publish tucker max rhymes iwth godlman sax’s stories on how he asscoked a girl (somone’s future wife who will asscock her future huspband in divorce coutrt as revenge for having been assocked by a neocon) and taped it secretly without her consent. Remove all men from the publishing industry and replace deep, profound, real great books for men, with twilight vampire asscocking female rape fanasty “romance” novels.
    28. tell men they need to man up
    29. conceive of a hundred government programs to criminalize men and force them to hand over their assets to women
    30. tell men they need to man up
    31. financially incentivize womem to file for divorce, promising them that their former husdband will have to pay for all their future assocking sessions, and that they get the kids/house/car/assets
    32. tell men they need to ma up
    33. fill the law schools with fat, embittered, burned-out, nasty (in looks and spirit) post-asscoked lawyeresses, and replace Moses’ and Zeus’s law with Bernake’s Banker laws which exlats theft via the inflation tax
    34. tell men they need to man up.

    lzozoozozol

    what aalalz am i mizssing here:???

    lzozozozoloz

    Like


  62. on October 28, 2011 at 8:57 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    zlzoozlzlzlzzlzzlzl omg zlozlzzozozoz omg zlzoozlzlzlz buhthteuxuxallaal

    here is my ororiginal version!!!!

    lzlzozozlzzozozllzzlozozol

    yes all the wall streeteetetet nitwit proetestors

    are forgetting to

    protest

    the right people

    the neoconc warmonhgering, debt-creating, honor-hating federal reserver private bankers who create moneyz
    out of thin air by placing everyone in debt
    who
    privatievze protssics and socialize risk
    who
    fund
    feminism and war (as feminism is war)
    who fund
    asscocking in spirit and in literal cockckass in assess zlzozolz
    who finance
    tucker max rhyme sitwh goldman sax secretive tapers of butthex (with your future wife who they need to desoul to make her loyal to the fita doallr and not god man family) to get the world used to being butthexed as once you are butthexed by the neoocn cockas you are more servile obedienet will die in tehir wars
    who fund
    the phahameecuatical companies who drug up all our boys
    who funed fund the fmeinsit movement
    to deconstruct the great books and classics on all our campuses
    hollow them out and get rid of homer and dante and shakespeare an dthe bible
    leave them with noting but femlit classes on entitlement and welath transfer lzozlzl

    the federal resvere private banksters

    implementing the ten planks of ths e communist manifesto

    who created
    the welath transferirng dot com bubble
    the welath transferirng dot com bubble real estate bubble marriage bubble college studnet loan bubble funding professors who agree with the fiat dolalrz and degreess until the fiat degreees only funcion is to put the studnet in debt while dumbing them down teahcing them to obery horrid ugly evil dsoulles harpy womenz zlzozl
    the welath transferirng dot com bubble

    detsorying the family
    butteheinxnxin

    llzozozlzlzlzl

    how the fatassed in the beltway neocon jonah goldber william benenetes operate lzozllzlzlzlzlzozo:

    1. deconstruct the great books on univeristy campuses
    2. tell men they need to man up
    3. dumb down the entire schools system
    4. tell men they need to man up
    5. assrape men in divorce court
    6. tell men they need to man up
    7. send men to die on foreign shores in foreign neoocn wars
    8. tell men they need to man up
    9. drug boys with ritalin/adderoll for being boys
    10. tell men they need to man up
    11. encourage woem to giver thie aholes and ginaholes early and often to douchebags
    12. tell men they need to man up
    13. destroy the classical, heroic character in their neocon movies, replacing them with asscocking gay cowboys
    14. tell men they need to man up
    15. print money from thin air and inflate and dlate bubbes to seize a man’s home and property
    16. tell men they need to man up
    17. enocurage women to become fat, whiney bitches
    18. tell men they need to man up
    19. publish, promote, fund, and finance asscokers licke tucker max who film secrtive tap9ng of assockinhg session without the girl’s consent, tucker ma rhymes with goldam sax, repeating tucker’s lies that he is six fet tall inthe neocon weekly standadth .
    20. tell men they need to man up
    21. transofrm the church from an instititution where a man coul once go to meet a virginal, exalted wife, into a front for the divorce industry, where single mothers with three children from three asscockers go to rope in a betabmale to pay for the assocker’s spawn
    22. tell men they need to man up
    23. castigate, attack, and impugn men for acting like men
    24. tell men they need to man up
    25. transform the noble, exalted university into a nursery, ruled by neocon women exalting asscockers, asscokcing, and good grammar, exiling and deconstructing the great book and men, and rewading the servile future nannies of teh nanny state with fiat dollars delivered fresh from ben beranke’s helicopter
    26. tell men they need to man up
    27. remove all men from the publishing industry, so that priscialla painton of simon and schuster sodom and scheister can publish tucker max rhymes iwth godlman sax’s stories on how he asscoked a girl (somone’s future wife who will asscock her future huspband in divorce coutrt as revenge for having been assocked by a neocns) and taped it secrtly without her conthent lzozozlzoo. remove all men form the publishing industry and repalce deep, prodoufn real great books for men with twilight vampire asscocking female rape fanasty rape fanatsatsy “roamance” novels
    28. tell men they need to man up
    29. conceive of a hundred government programs to criminalzize men and force them o hand over their assetts to women
    30. tell men they need to man up
    31. financially incentivizee womem to file for divorce, promising them that their former husdband will have to pay for all their futrue assocking sessions, and that they get the kids/house/car/assetts
    32. tell men they need to ma up
    33. fill the law schools with fatm, embittered, burned-out, nasty (in looks an spirit) post-asscoked lawyeresses, an replace Moses’ and Zeus’s law with bernake’s banker laws whichexlats theft via the inflation tax
    34. tell men they need to man up.

    lzozoozozo

    what aalalz am i mizssing here:???

    feel free to addodoon ti oit! lzozlzl

    Like


  63. on October 28, 2011 at 9:03 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    here’ss bernanke neoenconss fiat funded debt funded police state forces shooting canstsiers of tear gas and throwiwnwg flash grenades into our ev very own marines peacefully protetststing no lzozzozozozing

    http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlla/marines-storm-reddit-after-occupy-oakland-shooting-of-scott-olson_b43369

    semper fi 2 the usmc

    soooo sad that so many young men are made to go die on foreign shores in the fiat master’s awars and then are shot at by the fiat state police in their very own home 😦

    no lzozozozoing here

    Like


  64. on October 28, 2011 at 9:04 pm greatbooksformen GBFM

    http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlla/marines-storm-reddit-after-occupy-oakland-shooting-of-scott-olson_b43369

    reddit user:

    “Marines have been flocking to the social networking/aggregator site Reddit to voice their anger at the life-threatening injury inflicted on 24-year-old Iraqi war veteran Scott Olsen by Oakland police during the recent Occupy protests. Video showed Olsen go down after taking a tear gas canister to the head. As fellow protesters tried to assist him, police lobbed a flash grenade into their midst–right next to Olsen’s already fractured skull.

    The picture above, submitted by Reddit user aburger, has generated well over 1,000 comments on the site–many from fellow Marines who are absolutely livid at the injury to one of their own by police.

    Here’s one from Reddit user 0311kilo33:

    As God is my witness. I will fight tooth and nail to restore the decency this country was founded upon. The politicians, banks and large corporations have ruined this country. I find it difficult to notice any sense of politeness on the streets anymore. But it goes farther. As a Marine and a citizen I am outraged. I am sick to death of the world my children are being raised in.

    So I ask all of you, can you too sense the tipping point? When will enough be enough? If not now, when? I feel the problem is that the average Joe citizen is ignorant and comfortable. These, in addition to selfishness have become the standard for the majority of the population. As long as people are comfortable they remain silent. Well, I’m really fucking uncomfortable and I’m sick of seeing this sort of shit happening. The Occupy protests that are going on are our first glimmer of hope. If we can take this and move it further, get every lazy ass off their rocker and open their eyes; then maybe, just maybe we have a chance.

    Semper Fi brothers, and remember who you are. Protectors of a great nation, not politicians or wealthy money grubbing bankers and the like. When it comes time, I know we’ll stand strong.

    If online reaction is any indication, it’s not a stretch to think Olsen’s injury could be the start of something very big. We have a lot of military combat veterans in this country who haven’t been treated very well since they left the service. No job prospects. Inadequate medical coverage. If they take their anger offline and into the streets, the OWS movement will become an extremely potent, and WELL TRAINED force.”

    Like


    • Cut and pasted from another venue. I read the same post five hours ago. Mediat Matters or MoveOn trying to gin up support for the anarcho-socialist revolution. . . .

      Like


      • Uh huh. GBFM hasn’t figured out that I can scroll down to skip a drooler’s comments faster than even GBFM can type.

        Like


  65. “the corporate office — has, via managerial despotism strengthening PC and diversity to a state religion, lopped their balls clean off.”

    Precisely what I have described in my Employment Game essays, and dovetails nicely with Elmer’s Law :

    Women are competing for jobs but are not creating them. Other than providing a mass market for their vanity products, they are not forging new industries or technologies. They are marginalizing that small percentage of men who passionately innovate, destroy, and create ideas and take the risks to drive them to actualization

    Though men shank me and insult me, only men provide me with opportunity. Women can only insult me and deprive me of opportunity. Only men, and only a small fraction of them, take the risks that create industry and opportunity.

    Women can only serve as mere functionaries in man-created structures. When an organization becomes feminized, priority shifts from efficient and profitable production of goods and services to development of labyrinthine rules for the comfort and security of women. Ossification and organizational death are inevitable.

    Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 8:35 pm Frank Meyer Lives

      Uncle Elmer,

      I’ve observed the “development of labyrinthine rules” that kill a company firsthand, and agree it’s a problem, but are you sure it’s a masculine/feminine thing?

      Where I’ve seen it, it’s been initiated by executives who show alpha-level schmoozing skills when it comes to interacting with “the right people” for climbing titles on the corporate ladder, but who lack any skill, charisma or ability for really leading a team of men in a production organization, and the rules are an elaborate scam that allow them to take credit for any sucesses, while pinning the failures on someone else.

      Like


    • I don’t have the corporate experience to weigh in on this assessment, but I do have experience with females, and I agree because I know from experience – women are rarely creative in any way. And even more rarely technically creative.

      Like


  66. Hey, case in point…

    “CDC Exec and Night Watchman Boyfriend Arrested on Bestiality, Child Molestation Charges,” 10 Oct 2011
    http://www.ibtimes.com/articles/228464/20111010/cdc-executive-dr-kimberly-quinlan-lindsey-thomas-westerman-official-bestiality-child-molestation-abu.htm

    Highly accomplished PhD executive female… male security guard with multiple firings for insubordination and sexual harrassment (badly-behaving authority figure) before they hooked-up. You do the math.

    Like


  67. Maybe the whole problem is way simpler than this Roisy.

    Maybe the problem isn’t Men Or Women.

    Maybe….the reason why finding people is hard is because….

    Our society is too big and too diverse (and I’m not just saying non-whites..even different white ethnics)

    Think about it, whites are highly individualistic…So now that the majority of us are cosmopolitans living the ‘cosmopolitan’ life…instead of being in small communities attending Sunday church with people who are probably our 6th cousin to begin with who we have known since the 1st grade….

    Maybe because we have lost the bonds of tight-knit community it’s just Really Really Hard and no one, not even men or women….Know what to do??

    Like


  68. @ Heartiste
    I think this was an excellent article, but I do have one point of contention. Few in the forseeable future want to get rid of No Fault Divorce. Too many people think marriage should be free. A real sollution might be found if we say if you are the first to file for divorce, you will lose the house and children and be paying child support to the remaining spouse/parent be you man or woman in a No Fault Divorce. If you want to prove fault in order to get the house and children, real fault must be found such as physical abuse, adultry,Drug addiction, alcoholism, abandonment, and you must produce solid evidence. See how many women will file for divorce when they realize they can’t get the house and children with child support just because they filed for divorce. The number who do so will drop.

    American women file 70% of the Divorces and the American divorce rate is 50%,, man up. South Korea had a 1% divorce rate up until 1990. Until that time Korean men would get the house and children if he wanted them, and women would rarely if ever pay child support, but she would be forced to leave the marriage house unless she proved that there was something seriously wrong with the man. Until 1990, men usually filed for divorce and had to to prove fault with the wife. Since 1990, South Korean divorce laws became more similar to the USA. Since 2000, the South Korean divorce rate has been 45%, and Korean women file 65% of the divorces, man up.

    Like


    • I’d just like to know. is The Chateau officially for or against the downfall of civilization?

      On the one hand we get lamentations of the decadence (like, say, calls for the end of no-fault divorce!). On the other hand we get celebrations.

      Is it CH’s contention that they’re not all connected? Or is he a simple fatalist who has conclusively determined that there is nothing to be done except brace for impact?

      It’s intellectually inconsistent or dishonest to fob it all off on the distinction between alpha and beta, as though he were a magnanimous alpha lamenting the predicament of his inferiors while enjoying unprecedented social advantage. In that calculation, what’s bad for beta is good for alpha, so wherefore the concern for his unenlightened brothers born to a lower station?

      One of the poses has to be a bluff. Either he wants to retain the advantages of decadence in the final analysis, or he wants to reverse the decadence. And it’s not a moot point given the collapse’s apparent inevitability because our attitude dictates our behavior while everything melts down. Why waste time complaining against feminism or cuckoldry or false rape when it all will be tossed into the apocalyptic hopper the same.

      In CHs’s perfect world, would there be a cock carousel or not?

      I know the right answer, “NO!” — but I have to admit to my greater ambivalence. Ninety percent of me secretly cheers the carousel, to spin on and on and on and on and on. Yes, yes, yes. It’s a hell of a ride after all.

      Like


    • “South Korea had a 1% divorce rate up until 1990. Until that time Korean men would get the house and children if he wanted them, and women would rarely if ever pay child support, but she would be forced to leave the marriage house unless she proved that there was something seriously wrong with the man. Until 1990, men usually filed for divorce and had to to prove fault with the wife. Since 1990, South Korean divorce laws became more similar to the USA. Since 2000, the South Korean divorce rate has been 45%, and Korean women file 65% of the divorces, man up.”

      citation/source please…

      Like


    • I’m divorced. Not a day went by during that period that I wasn’t thankful that divorce had no legal requirement to initiate.

      I wanted out. I needed out. What if the law said I had no choice but to remain married, as my spouse had no fault and didn’t want out?

      Someone would have been shot.

      Like


      • Which is why I say marriage should still be free and have the no fault divorce option, but you leave it all behind not take it just because you’re a woman. The children and house are left behind if a woman initiates divorce and she makes child support payments. I’m all for equality ladies, and here is my brand of equality. I’d do the same to men, so the ladies can shut the hell up about misogyny, and realize that we live ina a time of misandry which needs to end.

        Like


  69. on October 28, 2011 at 10:17 pm Large Hardon Collider

    I like how everyone cites the same broad statistics about undergraduate degrees and demographics of college students.

    It has always been the case that some men went to college, others did not and pursued careers in areas like construction, manufacturing, or other vocational jobs. Now that women are as motivated to pursue higher education as men, what do you expect? An influx of female plumbers and construction workers? It should be completely expected that women begin to outnumber men at universities.

    Regarding money … well, women spend most of it anyways. Men are the ones who derive hours of enjoyment from a soccer ball or video game. Through training men earn their way into being physically attractive; through cosmetics, women buy the same privilege.

    Ask men if they really care that women are plowing headfirst into social, accounting, or managerial desk jobs. The only downside is that women become even more self-important because they think they’ve become more intelligent through higher education and their career as being a “professional” foot soldier, before coming home and watching reality TV while reading their horoscope.

    Like


  70. This makes me feel violent.

    Like


  71. Granted, Bill Bennett has been out of the loop for far too many years to know the facts on the ground. But he is pointing in the right direction and I think his heart is in the right direction.

    Plus, give him credit forgetting SOMETHING out on the street for us to chew on.

    Responding with bitterness and rebelliousness won’t advance our civilization.

    Calm don a bit and write a clear, cogent, reasoned response and get it into circulation in the same outlets as Bennett and let’s see if we can advance the social debate.

    Like


    • and get it into circulation in the same outlets as Bennett

      There’s your mistake right there.

      That’s like entering the circle of a clutch of hens and trying to get them agree with a masculine point of view.

      Fuck the hens point of view. Let em make their funny hen noises. Let em create all the social rules and regulations that they want. Let them shame and manipulate. What’s it to us?

      We don’t care what they say.

      They’re just hens.

      Like


  72. You are a stone cold righteous fucker. You are jacked in veritate. You’re right about women and religion.

    Like


  73. Bill Bennett – a fat, bloated old blowhard who became a gambling junkie and may have lost millions in Vegas. Another example of a clueless old political hack, ex dem now republican.

    Thanks for the lecture, fatty.

    Like


  74. PA

    Fun fact: I lived in DC in 1997 and attended the Promise Keepers’ rally, out of curiosity. Man, what a mega mangina-fest it was.

    What, you didn’t like the part where Whitey washed some black guy’s feet to atone for the sins of White racism and slavery?

    By the way the football coach who started that thing, McCarthey???, has an interesting daughter. She took one of her father’s Samoan football players home, fucked him in her daddy’s bed and later gave birth to the child.

    How’s that for baby daughter getting back at beta daddy!!!

    Like


  75. […] BENNETT not making inroads into the Pickup Artist community. “So, a sincere plea to Bennett and his ilk: Get your heads out of the sand. You can start by […]

    Like


  76. Does “The Gambler” really believe what he writes? Most of his article is garbage but the worst part is the feeling that clean, sober, moral and vital women are just waiting for these fine chaps to settle down and raise a family.

    What would Bennett say if he went to some of the parties I have gone to where women are all making out with each other and having threesomes with everyone watching?

    What about all the damsels and homemakers on Ashley Madison?

    What about the dainty ladies who file false rape charges and bogus sex crime charges when a guy refuses their advances?

    What about all the female substitute teachers who have ham hands for their 12 and 13 year old students?

    Or the growing legion of female sex tourists? Or the married ones who go to Vegas with their girlfriends since what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas?

    The list goes on but why does anybody view women as sexual innocents when they are undoubtedly worse than men when it comes to sex and basic human decency?

    Like


    • What men fail to notice is that even virgins are not innocents.

      Women are born with innate talents of cunning and conniving manipulation, and their pussy is never innocent.

      Like


  77. Bill, don’t ignore the feminist trash induced skank factor. We’ve marinated in that for decades. What man wants a well used woman for the long haul?

    Like


    • This is what I would argue. If something is rare, you tend to place a high level of value on it. When something becomes a commodity, you don’t value it as much. Simple supply and demand, which is why women have devalued themselves to the point that one hole is the same as any other.

      Like


  78. Why did you take a few weeks to make this post?

    Like


  79. Men will continue to get what they tolerate. That’s the bottom line. We all know that men built the modern world – we designed it, we invented it, we built it, we maintain it. We also know that men are the real protectors of society – a tiny fraction of a percent of women have died as soldiers, cops, firefighters, and in the like; the rest has been done by men. Now that America is a post-industrial society, and not so many things as before need to be built, the powers-that-be and their feminist pals feel free to cut us loose. That’s why it is called the “Mancession.”

    The traditional world of our fathers and grandfathers worked, my friends. They were righteous, strong, free men. People mock the “Ozzie and Harriett: world they lived in, but ask yourself, given the choice between living now and in the 1930s or 40s, what would you choose? If I could go back to those times, which were before my birth, I’d do it in a heartbeat. A man could be a man in those times, and feminism hadn’t been invented yet. Women still aspired to be ladies.
    The traditional roles still applied, and men and women seemed happier with one another. Good-paying jobs were plentiful, and men didn’t have to spent half their lives in school to get them. Our country was ledf by men who knew who America was, and what it stood for. When we went to war, we fought to win.
    The courts actually dispensed justice, not politically-correct nonsense.

    Maybe it’s time for a strike, for men to withdraw not only their approval from this brave new world feminism has created, but their particiaption. If all the men who keep this country running – building, repairing, fixing and otherwise maintaining things – quit all at once, the effect would be quite dramatic, trust me. Although we’ve been hurt, we still have some powerful cards yet to play. So let’s play ’em. What you tolerate, you get more of. Let’s refuse to tolerate it anymore.

    Like


  80. on October 29, 2011 at 12:53 am Erudite Caveman

    THANK YOU! THANK YOU! THANK YOU!

    Like


  81. What we’re seeing is a Masculine Atlas Shrugged.

    Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 2:39 pm (r)Evoluzione

      We’re all just looking for, or creating, our version of Galt’s Gulch up in here. Some of us already live there.

      Like


      • Exactly! Bennett is lamenting SOME of the consequences of that widespread individual choice. “Shrugging” by men is really being “pro-choice for men.” However, he dis-diagnoses the causes and so mis-prescribes cures.

        Note that Bennett and his female colloborator are high visibility pro-life advocates.

        His goal is a better society for men, women, and children. He just needs help understanding how to achieve that common goal.

        Like


  82. on October 29, 2011 at 1:35 am thatstheway it is

    I am a scientist, male, with over 40 publications, some in Science, JBC, PNAS, Cell, in other words excellent journals. I never got a job offer from a university. Any woman who had my resume would have been fallen over like the second coming of Madame Curie. But for a man, nada. Then, the women I knew who did get positions, most quit in a few years, to go be with a boyfriend, have a baby, etc. So the position goes to a woman over and over again because they don’t have enough women on the faculty to keep the regulators away. My old boss told me he went to a meeting between the university committee on compliance and the gov’t NIH/EEOC people. One of the gov’t people literally lost it and started screaming, ” If you don’t get more women I will cut off all NIH funding to the university!” I don’t know whether he had that ability but that is the environment that universities are operating in. I could go on but you get the picture. So yes, men have turned into beta males. I consider us a lost generation. I never did get married. I have been able to get by, moving from here to there, made some cool discoveries, made some good friends. Good luck to all you men out there, I know its a struggle.

    Like


    • When the system can’t be gamed, create a different system.

      Get off the grid, step out, do something else.

      Fuck university. Smart guys are able to be autodidacts and entrepreneurs anyway.

      Like


    • It’s pretty much the same in the corporate world. The company I work for (fortune 200, note I didn’t say “my company”) is big on diversity, of course, and an email went out the other day touting the diversity programs, I think I counted 7, gay, lesbian, black, pacific islander no less, and so on. The one group that stood out like a sore thumb because of it’s absence- white men.

      No diversity for you schlubs now man the fuck up.

      We don’t have clubs, or focus groups for Excellence though.

      If you want to be successful in the corporate world, be a black woman, if not that, a black man or minority woman, can’t do that? go for white woman, no go? how about fag? stuck with being a straight white man? too fucking bad unless you somehow built up a strong enough resume elsewhere and know the right people, then you can jump the middle range easy enough into the upper.

      We’re shipping jobs to India to save around 20 cents on the dollar, get rid of ten upper management minorities and you will have made the savings. When it was announced, (second round of layoffs) we were admonished not to lessen our world class customer service (and it actually is) in other words “Don’t slack off loser”.

      Bennett, Limbaugh and all the rest of the Captain Americas can go fuck themselves for all I care. They’re the ones actively promoting the job loss, the misandry, etc all because they’ve figure out a way to profit off it, everybody else can go get fucked.

      See, I’m what would be considered a “stalwart” employee, man, which is similar to being a beta I suppose but lacks the neediness I think. You alpha dogs may sneer at me but the fact is you need lots of stalwarts to get shit done. Unfortunately, we’re waking up. We’re not in the Tea Party (no use for those slavers), we’re not OWSer’s, we actually don’t give a fuck about the minorities and Love “Our Country”? “Our Country” sure as fuck don’t love us.

      Guys like me, I don’t play video games cause they get boring, I like to do stuff. Eventually, when I’ve been unemployed three + years, when I see the dullard minorities get hired over me while I’m sleeping in my car, when I see the middle aged broads who rejected me when I was younger not even acknowledge that I’m a human, much less a man.

      Well, there comes a point, you know?

      The thing is, the blacks riot; give em a bucket of chicken and they settle down. The Tea Party white knights march, can’t get their dainty hands dirty you know; up their mortgage deduction, they’ll go home and spend more than the deduction in celebration, the kids; just threaten to cut off the student loans, they’ll shut up but the middle aged white man who realizes just how badly he’s been fucked over his whole life? How it’s not ending? When it get’s to the point that it doesn’t matter anyway? He’s the guy who’s gonna burn the motherfucker down.

      It’s like a guy who catches his wife in bed with another man after coming home from work, happens enough times, eventually he starts to keep a gun on him when he comes home.

      Like


      • The situation you describe is a direct result of White women’s preference for the equivalent of peacock feathers or Antlers. White guys alone do not organize, act as a political block, and express group identity. Black guys and Black people, Hispanic guys and Hispanic people, Asian guys and Asian people, all express group identity and practice group identity politics and spoils division.

        Black women don’t penalize Black men for it, nor do Hispanic women penalize Hispanic men for it, nor do Asian women penalize Asian women for it. But White Women DO PENALIZE WHITE GUYS FOR EXPRESSING WHITE GROUP IDENTITY. And do so in sexual marketplace views: loser, uneducated, “racist” etc. as some low-life hillbilly. In ways that would never be acceptable applied to Blacks or Hispanics.

        White women want basically the equivalent of antlers. Guys so reproductively fit that they can afford huge penalties. You find that when women have endless choice and can seek out the “sexiest” rather than the most able to provide. This is why White guys will NEVER EVER express group identity and do anything. Because to do so is to have small antlers, or none. A small peacock tail or none at all. Too costly in the sexual marketplace.

        You wonder why you are basically considered sub-human? That’s the cost of an unrestricted sexual marketplace, based on White female desires, basically.

        Like


    • Holy shit, I’m a scientist in training and at this rate I might end up exactly like you.

      Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 3:12 pm Professor Beta

      thatstheway it is,

      The employment prospects for a white male are even worse in the humanities, including the more difficult fields that require the mastery of multiple languages. Departments in the humanities have to make up for the relative lack of female applicants in the hard sciences.

      Like


    • This is great, great stuff, the article and the comments.

      “I consider us a lost generation.”

      It’s worse than that. I assume you’re Gen X or Gen Y. There’s no one left after you. There’s not even going to be an archaeologist to pick thru the ruins because only a certain kind of society ever even bothered to develop things like ‘archeology.’

      And when it’s gone, it’s gone.

      Like


    • Great post by Heartiste, but thatsthewayitis adds the one thing you missed.

      The gov has to stop requiring employers to pretend that we’re all equally capable. If everyone was held to the same standard, white males (and north Asians) would be over-represented in good jobs and positions of decision-making power.

      Most of the middle-class jobs that have been off-shored were the ones suited to men, as employers were forced to look abroad for men who could do things the employers needed done, that women can’t.

      Like


    • The gov has to stop requiring employers to pretend we’re all equally capable of doing all jobs; the full gamut of abilities are in both genders and all races, but the distribution is not equal. If everyone is held to the same standard, White males and north Asians will be over-represented in the good jobs and positions of power.

      This change is essential to bringing middle-class jobs back to the U.S.A., as most of the jobs that have been off-shored were those most suited to men.

      Like


    • Send me your resume on Facebook, I may be able to find you something in Texas.

      Like


    • thatstheway it is wrote: “I am a scientist, male, with over 40 publications… I never got a job offer from a university. …”

      I got off of that track long ago, brother. I saw the beta spider-hole they had outfitted for me there and bolted. My condolences.

      xsplat is perfectly correct. Our salvation lies in autodidacticism and entrepreneurialism. With the expanding access to information (if not knowledge, much less wisdom), and the contracting but still viable opportunity of free enterprise, it is possible to carve out some manly independence as the rest of the culture commits suicide.

      Oh, and “higher” education is the next bubble, by the way. Dot-com, subprime mortgages, and school loans make three.

      Eject! Eject! Eject!

      Like


  83. Men are lovers. Women are money grubbers. Nature at its finest.

    Women can love. But it doesn’t last long. It is men who are the true romantics. But happily ever after? Not in the cards.

    Still. If you can pull it off and keep the woman in train the children are worth it.

    The only way to keep a woman in check is to remain attractive to other women all your life. In fact my mate has told me she enjoys my flirting around because it makes her hot for me. Always keep your alphaness handy.

    And you don’t have to look good to do it – I’m 67 – all you need to do is to keep your self confidence. I was at a hardware store the other day with the mate and some 19 year old chick was giving me the eye. When we got home the mate was properly submissive and all over me. Because like all women she is super competitive and hates to lose. Especially to a chick.

    Women want a Master and to be mastered. But it is a fight with the modern woman. I LOVE a good fight because I expect to win. Kiss Me Kate.

    Like


  84. on October 29, 2011 at 3:06 am John C. Randolph

    Anyone who has participated in the War on Drugs has nothing whatsoever to teach anyone regarding morality. To hell with Bill Bennett.

    Like


  85. I’m a former engineer, male, who went into high school teaching nearly five-years ago. I jumped through the 467-bullet-point checklist the NEA has set up to become a highly qualified teacher, at great cost to myself, but am still stuck being a substitute. I’m scraping by enough to live but not even think about establishing a family on three jobs.

    I’ve scored in the 99th percentile on every standardized test I ever took. I have strong recommendations from several outstanding teachers, and students frequently request that I be hired immediately, often directly to administrators. There were six new teachers hired in my area of certification last year in my metropolitan area – all females just out of ed school. I got one interview.

    It is a slow motion Killing Fields for beta males.

    Like


    • Pretend to be gay. You’ll get hired immediately. As a straight White guy, you are perceived as a threat to girls. Therefore the likelihood of you getting hired is pretty low.

      Women and gay guys only prey on boys, and nobody cares about them. Seriously, pretend to be gay. Lithp a lot, make your wrists limp, refer to your “partner” and say loudly how great gay marriage is.

      Like


      • This is actually a truth that should be thought of as a First Principle. There is literally no downside to self identifying as gay. Even if you were married, you could come up with some bullshit answer and no one would have the balls to call you on it. The only possible downside is if you wanted to game some bird at work but if the office is typical, there are only about 5 per 200 worth considering, easy loss. Self declare as gay at every possible opportunity, except redneck bars ( but even then…)
        I hereby declare myself to be gay, I’m here, I’m queer, love me goddammit.

        Like


      • “There is literally no downside to self identifying as gay.”

        Except for incidental airborne AIDS.

        Like


      • “There is literally no downside to self identifying as gay.”

        Or giving up any sense of honor.

        Like


      • An untested hypothesis here.

        Will remain so.

        Like


  86. Telling either men or women how to behave is a laughably impotent attempt at cultural manipulation.

    People follow opportunity.

    People follow opportunity.

    People follow opportunity.

    People don’t follow advice. People barely follow social pressure. They follow opportunity.

    If you want to manipulate people, manipulate either their rewards, their ability to get rewards, or their perceptions of rewards.

    Conservatives or liberals or anyone with a social agenda who comes up with a big shame stick to wave around is just waving around their own cock.

    At the very best you’ll get people who already agree with you to cheer you on. You won’t manipulate anyone or alter any balance.

    Like


    • I agree 100%. Incentives are everything. Why is this so hard for people to figure out? I think there is joy in denying others opportunity through the exercise of naked power, no matter how petty or abstract.

      Like


  87. on October 29, 2011 at 4:46 am Bobby Henderson

    This is the problem with this blog: among the genuine good advice and worry over the gender problems of the West is some real twisted crap. It takes some care to separate the two. Take this gem: “automatic equal shared custody if the man wants it” – it’s like you don’t know abusive men even exist. I’m not advocating the feminazi bullshit where you automatically assume anything is the man’s fault, but you have to allow that some cases will actually be that. Also, lots of commenters appear to be insane: “maybe society would be fixed if ritualistic combat to the death were brought back!” Yeah, that’ll do it. That’ll do it just fine. Maybe after that we could bring back trial by ordeal and the fun will REALLY begin.

    On the other hand, eliminating alimony is solid, especially now that workplace equality laws are in full force – the ex-wife should be able to support herself now, thank you.

    I think Bennett’s main point was a warning that the US could soon see the coming of the “herbivorous men”, which to be fair is a totally legitimate worry, disregarding his ignorance of the actual psychology behind the dating market.

    Like


    • “I saw the best minds of my generation destroyed by madness, starving hysterical naked,…”

      Like


    • So Bobby, you think that a decent, hard working man like myself deserved to have my child taken away from me for no other reason than her mother’s vindictiveness, all because there are some other abusive men out there?
      Because I’ll tell you something, the system that is supposed to halt abuse by men in its tracks is way overkill, and there is a lot of collateral damage out there.

      It’s simply making it near impossible for a man to be a father.

      Like


  88. What does it actually mean to man up if I treat her as the gentleman I am and she still fucks some douche? Should I ignore her?

    Like


  89. “Now naturally, few conservatives will take up this call to arms. Have you heard any of them discussing the possibility of rearranging contractual marriage, the workplace, and religion to make it easier for men to ascend to a gloried position in society?”

    Actually, yes. Traditionalists and reactionaries have harbored such fantasies for a long time. When that brinksmanship spoof about outlawing divorce went up in the wake of the victory of Prop 8 in California, my friends and I thought we’d donate, just to show these assclowns that, yes, outlawing divorce is something we’d support in order to save marriage.

    The problem is, these traditionalists are considered the “dirty secret” of the mainstream conservative movement. They don’t get the media time guys like Bennett do.

    Like


  90. Man up for this:
    http://izismile.com/2011/10/27/what_junk_food_does_to_girls_part_3_28_pics.html

    “I’d like to order a #2, the Bait-n-Switch Combo”

    Like


  91. on October 29, 2011 at 8:43 am Rocket Science

    If you haven’t noticed, our society has always been a mechanism to transfer wealth from men to women. In the past, men obtained value from this transfer.

    Now, the wealth transfer has become exaggerated (think Social Security and all pension systems, and health care). Don’t forget the lower productivity of most women in real jobs (about 10% or less output in medicine, when they used to measure such stuff.)

    In addition, men still earn more than women in aggregate but women own more of the national wealth. Women call this unfair.

    And, nowadays, men get almost nothing from most forms of wealth transfer to women.

    Imagine the consternation if some group of men decided to start a health care system just for men. The cost would be about 25% or less than it costs to cover women and children, by rough estimate. Imagine this men. You could afford to pay for health care, instead of begging your employer or government to give it to you. And, you could retire several years younger if you were not supporting aging, worthless (to you) females.

    Naturally, the govt would outlaw such efforts. Which, tell me everything I need to know about this govt. Meanwhile, we have Women’s Health Centers, Women’s Pavilions, and Breast Centers. The last is a wildly expensive form of cosmetic breast surgery.

    Now, men who make a lot of money can tolerate this nonsense if they have a sense of humor or irony. (It gets harder as you get older.) But average guys are just getting screwed by the system. Why the hell should they get married or make themselves useful in any way to a female unless she provides the one thing a male really needs from a woman?

    Like


    • “but women own more of the national wealth”

      rocket science from the village idiot.

      “Imagine the consternation if some group of men decided to start a health care system just for men… Naturally, the govt would outlaw such efforts. Which, tell me everything I need to know about this govt.”

      it would be outlawed for the same reason a health care syst for women only would be outlawed. isn’t that the whole point of your gender jihad; the inequality of one gender over another on a systemic basis?

      Like


      • Student!

        It’s time to come out of the walk-in closet. You’re either a twat, or a licksmegma for twat.

        Every one of your comments is basically anti-male. About half are anti-white. Why is this? You claim to redress the dreadful imbalance of the “gender jihad” in the commentary; yet all you do is offer fallacies and attitude. For example, you make the usual error of ignoring de facto evidence of grossly skewed health care by taking refuge in nominalism — of course there is no legally delimited “women only” health care system. That is still nominally illegal. But there are those things this “village idiot” pointed out, which you cannot address, only ignore.

        Tell us why you are anti-male and anti-white. Be honest; don’t hide in a flurry of ad homines and so on. You may be as forthright as you please. What is your stake in this crypto-manginatude you display for your brothers? are you married? are you a Jew? do you have a girlfriend you worry about losing if you aren’t “fair” in your opinions? are you single and on that lonely track where you believe being “fair” will get you pussy? if you are European, have you ever been to Europe, seen the birthplace of your kind — seen your own features reflected in theirs? what does your heritage mean to you? have you ever called yourself “just a mutt” when someone asked your race? ARE you a mutt? do you like being white? do you ever give it thought, or are your thoughts on the subject got straight from popular opinion?

        Answer just one of these questions. It will tell us all we need to know of your position. You must understand the first axiom of Sexual Polarization as it reflects in human behavior patterns: Men measure; women equalize.

        We see that you like to equalize. You have a strong desire to “be fair”, to berate us for being “gender jihadis”, though it is precisely a sexual war upon men that has brought us all here to pool our grievances and sharpen our wits in self-defense. You speak counter to that self-defense. Why is that?

        What’s your stake in the offensive?

        Like


      • alright uh, ill humour your inquiries, if only to appease your interest in me.

        What is your stake in this crypto-manginatude you display for your brothers?

        what?

        are you married?

        no

        are you a Jew?

        no. but funny how the dumbest ppl I’ve known often assume i was (including the ones when i went to a private catholic school). i take it as a compliment tho.

        do you have a girlfriend you worry about losing if you aren’t “fair” in your opinions?

        nah. she doesn’t give a shit about any of this.

        are you single and on that lonely track where you believe being “fair” will get you pussy?

        see above.

        if you are European, have you ever been to Europe, seen the birthplace of your kind — seen your own features reflected in theirs? what does your heritage mean to you?

        euro passport. been a bunch. love it. btw most there would agree nazis are the most hated european minority group. they tend to be ugly and poor as well. ring a bell?

        have you ever called yourself “just a mutt” when someone asked your race?

        a mutt is a dog. in person form it refers to someone stupid and incoherent. see above

        ARE you a mutt?

        is a doberman?

        do you like being white?

        am i white? if you are referring to caucasians properly understood, then im probly “whiter” than you.

        do you ever give it thought, or are your thoughts on the subject got straight from popular opinion?

        actually i decipher truth from secret patterns in WSJ obituaries. see below.

        What’s your stake in the offensive?

        my stake is to help the elders of zion establish a feminist sharia caliphate. shit, i shouldn’t have said that..

        Like


    • Wouldn’t it be nice to get off the grid?

      Like


  92. beautiful

    Like


  93. […] From a comment at Roissy/Heartiste on Bill Bennett’s recent man up BS: – men commit suicide at a rate of 4 to 1 over women. man up. – men die on average 5 years earlier. man up. – over 90% of workplace deaths are men. man up. – men do almost all of the dirty, dangerous, and manually difficult jobs. man up. […]

    Like


  94. Amen Brother!!! You have got it 100% right.

    Like


  95. […] NOW IT’S FASHIONABLE TO SAY “MAN UP” – BUT THIS IS THE MACHO RESPONSE: Get your heads out of the sand. You can start by repeating the following to yourself every morning in the […]

    Like


  96. “Oh, those precious, pedestalized princesses, incorruptible vessels of Mother Mary love, doing what’s right and suffering the slings and arrows of men’s failings in reward. What’s a haloed lady to do when her heart is open to the love of a good man and all she gets is a parade of losers in her bed? The burdens of her gilded womb she will bear in martyrdom.”

    Now this is the reason to read Chateau Heartiste. Anyone can write on this topic, but the witty prose of Heartiste are the reason I read this blog. I mean that paragraph is just pure gold! That last paragraph could even be read as a rousing speech for cryin’ out loud.

    Sir, your writing has improved markedly over time. Kudos and keep it up.

    Like


    • “Oh, those precious, pedestalized princesses, incorruptible vessels of Mother Mary love…”

      His pretty prose notwithstanding, Heartiste is unfamiliar with the archetype of femininity, Eve, in perhaps the most famous story in all of scripture. Female nature turns on — and indeed the very origin of all pain, sin, death, and vexation finds its genesis in — the opposite of the notion of women as “incorruptible.”

      So for him to regard us Christians and conservatives as unaware of this foundational fact of the universe is willfully stupid. More than that, it’s plagiarism. As if he were the discoverer/inventor of ideas we have recognized since history immemorial.

      You’re better off familiarizing yourself with the basics. Then the legitimate criticism against timorous critics like Bennett might find purchase. Until then we will have to sort through cringing, rudimentary errors, painted though they are in attractive word-pictures, for the good stuff.

      Like


      • What’s the comment count for this thread? 500-something?

        Seems to me he’s found plenty of “purchase” without your christly mutterings.

        I fear you will at last oblige us “rudimentary” philistines, with our abysmal lack of “catachesis”, to drive your priestly ass off with pitchforks & tar for treating us to all this snooty christing cant.

        I mean, Christ. Shit, wait, I mean for fuck’s sake — the SIXTEEN COMMANDMENTS OF POON isn’t systematic enough?

        But you said it yourself, King-o: you do what you do in service of your will to power. Which means EVERYTHING IN THE WORLD must be reduced to symbolism got from the Big Book of Sumero-Jewish Fables and the Slave Revolt Addendum. And how have you squared that circle, by the way — calling other men “slave-mind”, cribbing from Nietzsche, yet demanding of your host deference to the slavish “archetypes” forced upon generations of Europeans by priests and marauders to reduce them to ideological servitude and the bent knee? A Nietzschean who loveth the Cross! who mocks men for being slaves, yet suggests we all hit the Book to reach his presumed heights! What wonders to be found in this internet; I thought nothing could top “Two Girls, One Cup” and ‘Der Untergang’ mash-ups.

        RRaaaaaAHAHHHHHH. There. I just stood up, cracked me fookin’ knee joints, in defiance of your recommended posture for the old holy assocking.

        Buthexhallejueueallla! Buthexhallejueueallla!

        A big rabelaisian fart your way as well, you afterworlder.

        Like


  97. “Religion is dead in the water.”

    You clearly haven’t done an ethnography of Mormonism (but who has?) If you did, you’d fine that innate gender differences, and corresponding optimal roles, are still taught and maintained, much to the criticism and condemnation of the popular secular and feminist mindset.

    Like


  98. […] (typeof(addthis_share) == "undefined"){ addthis_share = [];}by SmittyVia Insty, we have Chateau HeartisteMen don’t “treat women as toys”. Men get the sex while the getting’s good because women […]

    Like


  99. 100% CORRECT. TO HELL WITH THIS SHIT!

    Anyone who listens to Bill Bennet, a rambling, gambling hypocrite of the highest order, is nothing but a damned idiot.

    Further, when the author points out that conservatives and nothing but pussies, he’s absolutely correct. Big talk and worthless posturing isn’t shit. After reading an essay by a twenty-something man a few months back, I concluded that the pussy assertion is a truism of the first order. The fellow made the argument that the opposition, “radical” regardless of their public posturing, has basically achieved every damned thing they wanted over the last five decades, let alone those preceding them. Why?

    Because conservatives are pussies. PUSSIES! I don’t give a shit about some assholes exploits in the weight room or on the playing field somewhere, or the size of his house or what he drives. I don’t care about his worthless gun collection either or whether he “Served” himself up for the Vaginocracy. “CONservatives” will never put any of their personal shit at risk over any supposed principle they supposedly believe in. Ever. They are the biggest compromising, situation ethics rationalizers I’ve ever seen in my life. A more pathetic lot hasn’t ever existed. They do nothing but backslide on everything. Everything.

    In the young man’s piece he pointed out that “Until conservatives are willing to go out and slit throats, their cause is doomed.” Not only is that the damn 100% truth, it’s the 110% damn truth. What sort of opposition fears an opponent who will meet you at midfield and immediately cede to your demands, then just walk away whimpering and whining about what they themselves just did? None. And that is what conservatives do, concede, ergo, they’re screwed. They cede everything, then wring their hands in dismay and whine about it. They are a pathetic lot and about as pussy-whipped a bunch as I’ve ever seen. The meekest Muslim has better control over his household than damn near any so-called “Conservative Christian” man out there. They’re posers. Nothing but a bunch of fucking worthless posers.

    “Yes, dear.”

    I brought the fellow’s argument up to a married “conservative” couple and her snide little reaction was, “Well, I can’t do that!”

    No shit, bitch.

    No one is asking you to do so. I’m basically telling her to shut the fuck up, and, God Forbid, even “woman up” and support her husband 110% if and when the social conservative-types ever decide that it is actually time to go slit throats and make shit actually happen. Sometimes I too have a dream.

    Nope. Not gonna happen. She’s a “professional woman” with two-cents worth of worthless “grrrl power”, and if she can’t play then nobody gets to play.

    The deal is that since “She” can’t do that throat slitting thing, the instant the compromising, i.e., “political” aspect gets tossed out the damn window and it’s men doing the “Git-R-Done” thing, she has effectively become powerless. These so-called “CONservative” women aren’t about to give up their illusionary power even if the whole of society has smoothly slid right down into the septic tank. Their imagined position and place is far more important to them than anything else, and forcing the men who could actually make a damn difference to lose their balls and be forced to listen to more decades of their useless and pointless bullshit is all that matters to them. Besides, “What would Jesus do?” (Gag reflex happening)

    “Shut the fuck up, bitch!” That’s what Jesus would tell you, Honey. It’s right there in the Bible you supposedly love so much and have repeatedly read cover to cover and ignore every command the God has given you. Shut the fuck up. He said so, so shut the fuck up. You aren’t supposed to tell me shit, and since the lot of you have decided that you can defy both God and nature, well, look where in the hell we have ended up. So shut the fuck up, “Eve.”

    Doubt me? Look at the fucking evidence!

    Shut the fuck up, bitch.

    Like


  100. Who thinks GBFM is actually Roisy/Heartiste’s alter ego? Sort of a modern day philosophical Jekyll and Hyde. . .

    Like


    • on October 30, 2011 at 3:38 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      dats actaully a ghge comp;imement zlzlzlzozzo

      ch heartisste though is a better pateienter writer as he puts out more than the enite mens health and eqsquire and huffington post and the atlantic monthly combined lzlzlzlzl

      ch deserves volumes and voumes in da bookstoress zlzoz

      but like jesustsh and soctrateststs, rossiy heartistsstet teaches for free

      so thank u for comparing me to heartistse but he is da alpha and i am da beta

      he is da president–and i am the vice presidnet

      HEARTISTE & GB4M 2012: “lozozlzlz you can believe in”

      http://www.cafepress.com/greatbooksformen.588144545

      Like


  101. A quick point about the disparity in college enrollment and degrees granted between the sexes – this is probably them most commonly cited evidence of men’s failings, and serves as the basis for all sorts of pessimistic projections.

    BUT if you look more closely at the data, you’ll recognize that much of this gap can be explained by the fact that vocational and technical education in female dominated areas has largely been absorbed by degree granting institutions. This trend coincides precisely with women’s numerical ascendency in academic institutions and has had far less impact on similar training in male dominated areas.

    Also women tend to work in areas where there are significant, often ornamental, credentialing requirements, such as primary education, public administration, and Human Resources. So you see many more women returning to school in order to obtain additional credentials because they work in jobs that require these credentials for each promotion or change in job role.

    If you look at enrollment, and degrees granted for the same subset of programs that were part of the ‘traditional’ 1970 university, you’ll find that the gap between the sexes is much less pronounced and often favors men.

    Like


    • Men are much more practical when it comes to education. Even in areas where there is plenty of theory and the linguistic demands are relatively high (such as the traditional humanities disciplines), men only tend to gravitate toward them when they feel that they possess enough talent to make a meaningful original contribution. In other words, if they don’t feel as though their talents will lead to special recognition, they back away. This is totally different from the mentality of the majority of females, who oftentimes get ‘degrees’ even though they haven’t the slightest chance of offering anything new or really distinguishing themselves. Many females have gotten degrees in ‘sociology’ or ‘history’ even though they have mediocre analytical abilities and little genuine interest in the given subject.

      Most men would say: ‘If you can’t distinguish yourself, what’s the point?’

      It’s more realistic, and ultimately it explains why men have been more likely to excel at the highest levels.

      Like


  102. WRONG WRONG WRONG.

    Yes, women are out of control, but Game is about taming the wild beast and bringing her to heel. Marriage becomes viable when you know Game. You can control your wife and you can marry the right one (feminine, traditional, nonslutty). Game is necessary because feminism has made relationships more challenging in the face of narcissistic/empowered women chasing their impulses and alphas.

    Game allows men to be happily married in the face of a society that hates marriage.

    Like


    • on October 29, 2011 at 9:17 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      lozozllzl

      yah–game–wearing furry hats and negging womenz–can save marriage and stop the 50%+ divorce rate in its tracks lzlzlzlzllzl

      thanks for tis tibdidibit zlozooz

      Like


    • Game plus a lifestyle architecture that supports the woman being dependent on you and being unable to steal your shit.

      Game alone is not enough.

      Like


  103. I found your site on technorati and read a few of your other posts. Keep up the good work. I just added your RSS feed to my Google News Reader. Looking forward to reading more from you down the road!

    Like


  104. Game rules.

    Like


  105. I fully agree with avoiding mentally defecting women, through years of alchohol hanging around bars & clubs

    Th description of mra’s applying feminist tactics is clearly wrong, mra’s & mgtow are specifically designed to give men a viable option without women, so damaged by courts & their children, homes & families stripped from them, contact with women & the society which legally allowed it to occur, is all but a reminder of how they were destroyed

    Men so destroyed have literally no other choice, but to become mgtow, other men seeing the same choose mgtow, to prevent it from happening to them

    Trying to imply feminist tactics to mra’s, is ridiculous, as women have never been assraped in court & society the way men have been for centuries, first by traditionalists as fodder for governments & stayathome moms, & now complete & outright destruction of men even wanting to participate in raising a family or making a living, ie rampant affirmative action in universities & stem industries

    MRA’s & MGTOW dont want equality for men, they dont want affirmative action for men, or politically correct grovelling by manginas, they want freedom to raise their families & earn a living, something men have always fought for

    Societies have always had MRA’s, but as men arent retards like most women, they didnt give themselves a gender specific title, they chose to call themselves, militias, or minute men & chose to fight for the rights of everyone

    It is only because women, being the morons they are chose to instead of fighting for the rights of society, they chose blindly to demand rights be enabled for a single gender, ie them the women, they betrayed the men who have always fought for the rights of society, regardless of the poverty & lack of political power men have had for centuries

    Men getting screwed by elites & aristocrats is legendary compared to the relatively cushy, sex slaves & glass ceiling & other retarded crap women chose to use to screw over men, & the rights they fought for society to have at large

    Like


  106. […] seeing some interesting parallels. In particular, both groups have legitimate grievances, but the legitimate grievances aren’t what’s driving most of those in both […]

    Like


  107. on October 29, 2011 at 12:27 pm Abelard Lindsey

    The issue is more fundamental than just the family courts or the attitude of many women. Both Bennett as well as many of the people here seem to be unaware of such fundamentals.

    Getting married and having kids represents 20 plus years of wage/debt slavery for 90% of the male populace, regardless of the attitude of the women. Many of us do not consider this to a rational choice, especially considering the stagnant, no-growth economy that we have these days. Being a slacker is a rational choice in a zero-sum, no-growth economy. It may be the most optimal choice.

    There is another factor to consider as well. Many people loose their ability to maintain their careers starting around age 40. This is the result of the “up or out” policies that seem to be the norm today in the business world as well as the lack of opportunities to start ones own company. Career tracks are becoming shorter and it would appear that living a low-cost life-style, avoiding the expensive overhead associated with having a family and being able to retire to some tropical place is the more rational choice.

    Like


    • I understand this thinking.

      I also have that feeling that family formation only makes personal sense if it’s not a financial burden, but if you have so much money that there is nothing better to spend it on.

      Like


  108. So we’ve been commanded to man up, mature, stop enjoying life and go back to paying child support and alimony. My response is NO, now do something about it.

    Like


  109. […] addthis_config = {"data_track_clickback":true};Or whatever he calls himself this days, use to write like this all the time, the conclusion: Men will man up when women man down. The one must follow the other. The polarity […]

    Like


  110. on October 29, 2011 at 1:09 pm Rant Casey - BR

    3. Religion is dead in the water. The fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil has been bitten, and no one who matters in the developed nations can take it seriously again until they and their shrinking descendants have been purged from the human pool. But if you want a fighting chance to return religion to some honorable place in society, and to have men return to the fold, the constant, sanctimonious drumbeat of chiding men to behave must stop, and be replaced with sermons that take into account the fallen nature of women. Remember, women WANT to be led. They won’t abandon the church if their natures are examined candidly and honestly, and without fear.

    With Protestantism you wont make it.

    I sugest the Orthodox Church.

    ***

    But there is stil a problem with Chateau’s assessment.

    Basically, he sugests that the system is rigged back in favour of men. Wich is the same as saying: “Look, these losers wont make it anyway, so we better now start treating them the same way feminism sees women, and level the field because these idiots can’t climb”.

    The traditionalist advice to encourage men to get fucked is suicidal, but Chateau’s advice to traditionalists to pamper men is derrotist.

    Consider this: things got where they are BECAUSE men refused to “man up” long before THIS generation. Men still need to “man up”, just not in Bennets terms.

    Let the chips fall where they may. Perhaps the solution will come in Tyler Durden’s style (not the PUA). Let enough men get angry and maybe they’ll decide to torch corporative dystopia. And if not, they deserve this destiniy.

    I’m not speaking against game. To me its non-issue. It makes no diference bedding a slut here and there. It would be asinine to confine things in terms of immediate sexual gratification.

    I have sex anytime I want and it didnt solve my problems – or made them worse. Its just a distraction.

    Like


    • Let enough men get angry and maybe they’ll decide to torch corporative dystopia.

      I understand the violent sentiment. Are you going to arm yourself and start the revolution?

      It’s a sentiment. That’s all.

      However it is practical to opt out of the system.

      Like


      • on October 31, 2011 at 12:17 pm Rant Casey - BR

        There is still the practical question of how to maintain oneself “outside the system”.

        Personally I’m not angry, or apathetic. I choose to be cynical about “the system” (whatever the hell it means, I supose its the result of collective dumbness rather than an intrincate design by a Caligulean elite).

        Like


      • There is still the practical question of how to maintain oneself “outside the system”.

        You may be sure, xsplat (who is a genius) will never make the appropriate sacrifices of lifestyle to achieve this. Hot girlfriends don’t carry off the grid well.

        There is, however, a one word answer to your question: SIMPLIFY.

        The less you want, the easier it becomes to break your fetters.

        First things first though, as King A reminds us — you gotta know how to clean a rabbit:

        Like


    • Heartiste wrote: “The fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil has been bitten, and no one who matters in the developed nations can take it seriously again…”

      Rant Casey – BR replied: “I suggest the Orthodox Church.”

      Yeah. It’s as if Heartiste is unaware that there was a sequel to the old testament. Eve bit the apple. Oh well, humanity, it’s a wrap.

      The New Adam? The New Eve? What’s that?

      Is it possible that anyone in the west missed the follow-up story, which did a thousand times the box office of the original?

      Of course he has heard the good news. But he makes his nut on promoting the bad. Despair is his business, and business has been good. So good that he thinks the rest of the world will indulge his ignorance. What’s with all that bother about the Gospel? Everyone knows the past two thousand years didn’t exist. In fact, nothing existed until The Chateau sprung sui generis from the nihil.

      This seriously is the mythos he is trying to peddle, and far worse, earnestly believes. The Gospel According to CH. That there are so many takers of this fraudulence — and so indignant about the dissenting view — tells us just how thirsty men are for the living water, and how credulously they keep returning to dry wells.

      Like


      • ‘tells us just how thirsty men are for the living water, and how credulously they keep returning to dry wells.’

        iow, the blue pill.

        Like


  111. Female suffrage may have to be revoked. After 90 years, they have made it very clear that they will always vote to have the state take money from betas to pay for the bastard spawn of bad boy alphas.

    Like


    • on October 30, 2011 at 12:06 pm rocket science

      Thanks for the links. Everybody should view those pictures.

      I think obesity is a physical manifestation of a serious character flaw.

      Like


  112. The solution to this problem is simple, men pick up guns and put down the gynarchy, it could be done very easily. Either Western men do it, or they will have it done for them by others. So the answer really is to “man up,” just not in the way Bennett imagines. Game is a waste of time, I have no special interest in sex.

    Like


  113. […] genius perspective on what’s wrong with American society in perspective of gender today.  A must read. Men don’t avoid marriage and family because they have a “maturity deficit”. They rationally […]

    Like


  114. I don’t think it’s fair to address this at all conservatives and traditionalists.

    If you go back 200 years, you’ll find conservatives and traditionalists who didn’t pedestalise women. In fact, women were rightly the property of their men. No suffrage. Heaven.

    You’re talking about modern conservatives. There’s an important difference. Even modern conservatives though are a million times better than filthy leftist scum.

    Like


    • Any social philosophy that does not take into account the motivations that acrue from technology is divorced from reality.

      Like


      • Have to be careful not to start thinking like pro(re)gressive. Technological advancement or not, culture, as heartiste rightly points out, is based on biological truths–until tech. fundamentally changes that that is.

        Like


      • Tech has fundamentally changed a great deal of how our biological truths play out.

        Any social philosophy that does not incorporate the effects of the pill, anonymous urban living, and a service economy that allows women to earn their own money is a platonic ideal in a vacuum divorced from reality.

        Like


      • Who has failed to “incorporate the effects of the pill, anonymous urban living, and a service economy”? They are part of the analytical picture, just not the chief part, as you fantasize them to be. Social technologies are contingent on more fundamental subterranean tectonics with which you seem to be wholly unfamiliar. Third-order contingencies are solved when causes are addressed, and fixating on side-effects asks us to manage symptoms rather than cure diseases.

        The only “divorce[] from reality” is your superficial understanding of the conflict above your pay grade. Like a trench soldier pontificating about strategic maneuvers and supply. You’re in decent company, but leave the weird digressions to my pet gerbil.

        Like


      • That’s not such a bad point, Anonymous makes the point that I would have made in response. By tech changing our biological truths, I meant where our genetics are changed and the “underlying tectonic plates” as Anon. puts it are no longer relevant.

        The pill, and the other horsemen of the sexual apocalypse, is the reality we face now, but it can be changed. If the goal is a culture that provides the greatest utility to the greatest amount of people, then I don’t think you can work around the pill, etc. It’ll simply destroy what you construct. Like the filth that destroyed 1000’s of years of cultural evolution during the counter culture of the 1960’s.

        Like


      • Ben, technology is xsplat’s religion. Or at least a temporary place holder when we get down to the nitty gritty. It’s as if all nature and natural law becomes immaterial in the era of the iPhone, or something with an equal intellectual rigor to that. His conditional belief in the technological singularity allows him a brusque wave of his hand against your far more intelligent observations. He’s just not playing with the full deck, so don’t waste too much time on him.

        Now he will follow up with some NAWALTian “I didn’t say that” sophistry that once again evades the need for an examination of first principles. Which is the point.

        Like


      • We all need to get a society going. That’s how they did it. Some kind of club dedicated to working from the inside. People who only employ like minded men, create power structures to further these politics.

        Like


      • In the christer’s language, nothing predates his “first principles” — not even the humans bidden to copy them in service to his Sumero-Hebraic symbology.

        King, you do understand that ch is a Jew? As an anti-Semite whowantstokillsixmillionjews, I am not bothered by this as his priorities are relatively straight for the age. As are yours. ch does not let his Jew “come between me and you”. Yet here you are interposing this superannuated Hebrew rubbish all over the place.

        What’s a hapless goy to think!Es is ach so schver, ein goylein zu sayn!!

        Like


      • That’s it, uh. I’m sneaking into your basement apartment and baptizing you while you sleep. I’ll bring along my buddy Lev who’s a Mohel to complete the indignity. We will break this fever of yours, by Jove!

        I’m glad for the internet. I otherwise wouldn’t have believed dupes like you existed except in the recesses of some paranoid limousine liberal’s nightmares.

        Dude, step away from the Jew obsession. You’re like the Arabs and every other loser backwater in history, too fixated on phantoms to realize what a shitty life they’ve carved out for themselves. Because if it weren’t so shitty you’d have no fuel for your holocausts, and so the paranoia from which your identity takes its cue must be preserved, and so the shitty life must continue to justify the heart-warming paranoia.

        “… who want everything as it was and is back again, back forever and ever, insatiably calling da capo, not only to himself but to the whole spectacle and performance …”

        Like


  115. I agree with this article’s description of modern women and our feminist culture. But, Bennet has a point. Men these days are pathetic. Almost every guy I know from highschool is now in his late 20’s. They are almost all working at dead end jobs for a little above minimum wage. They spend hours a day playing video games. They are obsessed with professional sports and actually wear football jerseys (like children). They spend their nights getting wasted playing beer pong. They are all fat and out of shape. They don’t take care of themselves and dress like children (jean shorts and t-shirts). Many still live with their mothers. They are incapable of having an intelligent conversation about anything and many haven’t read a book since highschool. If you don’t think this is a serious problem, I don’t know what you are smoking.

    Like


    • You’re describing a class problem, IMO, not a ‘gender’ problem.

      One of the big problems of ‘feminism’ is that it mistakenly focuses on ‘gender’ in an isolated, context-free way, instead of seeing it as one piece of the overall puzzle. You could easily point to the behavior of lower class women and say the same thing (dressing like sluts, poor manners, bad diet, etc.). There are plenty of men who don’t act the way you describe, and if you focused on them in isolation you would have the opposite impression of ‘men’ in American society.

      Besides, most people have always been incapable of thinking abstractly, discussing literature, or having exceptional motivation. The only difference today is that the overall ‘average’ has fallen somewhat, and people take less care of themselves physically and mentally.

      Like


    • Most people are vapid. Was it ever otherwise?

      Unmotivated and vapid, or motivated and vapid. The human condition is such that 90% of anything is crap.

      I’d be open to a different interpretation, but my guess is that if you look closely you’ll find vapid people in suits in respectable jobs in the past, versus vapid people in football jerseys now.

      Like


  116. on October 29, 2011 at 3:54 pm Sorer Beveito

    Now naturally, few conservatives will take up this call to arms. Have you heard any of them discussing the possibility of rearranging contractual marriage, the workplace, and religion to make it easier for men to ascend to a gloried position in society?

    Patriarchal religions still exist and flourish today – even in the US and Europe.

    Like


  117. I see my comment did not make the cut.

    Like


  118. FWIW Aleister Crowley considered Christianity a religion for the weak.

    Like


    • Like the Crusaders, Charlemagne, Napoleon, Nelson, Churchill, DeGaulle, Michael Collins, Robert E. Lee, and Francis Drake? I would not call them weak. The current lickspittle who don’t even believe, yes those guys are weak. Historically most Christians were hardly weak. They sure killed enough people by the truckload.

      I would not cite a gay drug addict spiritualist as a source of authority on weakness.

      Like


    • Pagans in general always have because Christianity teaches that meakness is a virtue. It was necessary to toughen up Christ in order to convert people like the Saxons and Vikings.

      Like


  119. My unposted comment agrees with anon October 29, 2011 at 11:01 am.

    I wonder why it didn’t make the cut?

    Like


  120. Aye, if anything, religion is… growing. Yes, in North America and Australia it is currently decreasing (but not in total number, only percentage), but in Europe religion (both Islam and Christianity) is growing, as well as in the former Soviet Union and China. The reason why even the decline will stop? Population growth among the religious is far, far higher than that of those who are not religious. Also, those who are religious (and go to Church- important distinction there) are more likely to have stable marriages; stable marriages breed successful children.

    Like


  121. it all starts at home like this:
    [YOUTUBE]girpkHnfGHw[/YOUTUBE]

    Like


  122. didnt embed for some reason, heres the video

    Like


    • Hear that chuckle at 2:00?

      Bitch enjoyed every second of it.

      A normal human would have …. ah fuck it. These aren’t normal humans.

      Like


  123. […] of Femasculation The Chateau posted a great essay worthy of “anthem status.” Entitled Another Conservative Traditionalist Gets It Wrong About Men And Women, he pounces on the diatribes of Conservativatard, Bill Bennett, for his recent spiel of […]

    Like


  124. You know, I’m curious, what, if any, country is there that still very much practices the patriarchy without being Muslim?

    Like


  125. Hmm. As an inside evangelical (of 50 years), I note that the pedestalization is not as widespread as the author might think.

    Having said that: where it appears, it’s really bizarre to see — sometimes downright pathological.

    An excellent read. Thank you.

    Like


  126. on October 29, 2011 at 9:33 pm rocket science

    Speaking of men not manning up. I have a young colleague who makes good money and doesn’t have a girlfriend. My advice to him is to not even consider marriage until at least 10 years after you begin full time work after your education is over.

    The women at work can’t really verbalize it, but they just know this is wrong. He should be supporting a woman.

    A woman could be spending his money much better than he is. He likely is saving his money, buying stuff he likes, paying off his loans from school, paying down his mortgage, thinking about how to further his career. Imagine how much better his money could be spent. Supporting a wife in a big house, expensive clothes, expensive furnishings to keep up with their peers, a second car, private school for the kids. And, forget about planning his future. She’ll do that. And his present. He won’t need to keep track of his social calendar. She’ll take care of that, too.

    So, just one more guy who is not doing all he can to support the matriarchy. He is as much a zero to the matriarchy as all these low achievers who play computer games. Only, the low achievers haven’t spent years in school and built up a big debt.

    And, as I have commented before, I don’t know any educated young men with professional careers marrying women without decent careers. They just aren’t going for the usual bait. I guess delaying marriage does that.

    Say. What did happen to all the good men?

    Oh, and it is really worth mentioning. Men may die younger, but women age faster. Get yourself a younger wife if marry you must.

    Like


  127. Our modern situation reminds me a lot of the problem faced by the Aristocrats in Britain during their ascendency in the mid-late 19th century. There was so much money around(for them, anyway) that their sons and daughters could have been spoiled and ruined to a fare the well.
    Instead, they sent the sons of the upper classes to hardcore Public Schools followed by a couple of tours in South East Asia/Africa/ whatever fighting the fuzzy wuzzies–Tailban.
    The girls of the upper classes were educated, sort of, but mainly they were to be “presented” at 18,19 at the latest to a Society” which had a vested interest in getting them paired off sooner than later with one of the surviving returning heroes.
    Then, they push out a couple of legitimate sprogs. After that, all parties were largely free to find their private satisfaction – having done their duty. And divorce was not on, and was at any rate unneccesary, given how things really worked.
    That was how it worked for upper class rich folks. Nowadays, even the lowest class folks are effectively very rich in terms of how their breeding choices might or might not be restrained by any sort of economic fear.
    Changes will come when the economy in the West comes to re-resemble Victorian Times.
    I see an abundance of raw material for Neo-Victorianism: A Massive surplus of workers. A very insecure middle class. A self confident super-elite. Bottomless fear encroaching on the imaginations of the working classes.
    Here is a hint: The truly rich continue to marry at good rate. And do not divorce very much, either.

    Like


  128. […] with circumspection upon dudes who don’t seem to want to grow up. Into the fray jumps a blog entry that takes apart some of Bennett’s arguments…and more truth be told….some of the counters are pretty sensible too.  […]

    Like


  129. At one level, you’re trying to provoke the socons to do your work for you. Hey, I’m going to be lazy, and chase sluts, and why don’t you socons do the hard work of actually changing society? Your chosen method is to taunt socons, basically a childish “I doubledog dare ya'”.

    At a slightly deeper level, you’re admitting that you’re not fit to run society, and you need social conservative leaders to do it for you. This is, of course, true. Libertarians can live and function fairly well in a socon society. But run, and DEFEND a society…not so much.

    On the plus side, you’re also trying to educate socons.

    And its certainly true that socons are waaaaay too nice. For years we listened to libertarians, and atheists, and pretended they had more than an occasional valid point for the first, and functioning brains for the second. A certain lack of confidence was at work.

    So I will agree with dropping the white knight, and rebuilding the system of chivalry, which is a system that puts obligations on both sides. I will disagree with your notion of ‘if women are going barbarian, men ought to as well’. I prefer high culture to barbarian culture.

    And if you want to learn more, read George Gilder’s ‘Men and Marriage’, written more than twenty years ago. And then follow it up with his articles on understanding the universe from the top-down.

    Like


  130. This guy grew up in an era when women were still… women! The lucky bastard got to know what feminine, lovely, western women were like! He also happen to get into the labor force when the US economy was booming and prospering.

    I’d say he’s hell of a lot luckier than us young guys.

    William Bennett, if you actually meet the women in our generation, you would be a miserable motherfuckin’ beta like most young American men.

    Shut the f*ck up, Mr. Bennett!

    Like


  131. Your post is avesome. I suggest to make an animation about it (in style of this animation http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EwogDPh-Sow ).
    This could make possible for many to digest this information. This REAL reason why many mens doesnt marry should be known.

    I live in Romania and few months ago was adopted an alimony law (for now it states that alimony only for 20+ years of marriage, but I am pretty sure that this period will be shortened in next years). The same law makes easier for a women to kick out the men from the house even if the house belongs to him (before marriage). So, even here the law gets more and more misandrist. That’s why I decided to not marry. I worked hard to have my own apartment, zero debt, pretty good savings, a high paid job, and happyness and I really don’t want for a women (alpha male leftover) who had fun with a lot of cocks to destroy my acheivements.
    Beta Male

    Like


  132. The only downside is that women become even more self-important because they think they’ve become more intelligent through higher education and their career as being a “professional” foot soldier, before coming home and watching reality TV while reading their horoscope.

    Being feminine is an occupation. Women know that feminity is exactly what attracts men and maintains attraction. The reason women are feminine is so that they can be supported by a man, or in order to fuck a man.

    A women who spends all her time earning income has no reason to be feminine. Her job of support is already accomplished.

    So women working has a downside.

    And this is again why I consider the best arrangement is for your woman not to have any job. Forget about whatever income she can bring in. That is insignificant in comparison for the value of her doting on you, and relying on you.

    Like


  133. I detect moderate amounts of mad in this post. Get some beer and chill, man, they’re just some conservatively beta chumps.

    Like


  134. What you guys need to keep in mind is that ever since the Jewish Neocons displaced the traditional WASP conservatives in the 80s, the definition of a conservative has shifted dramatically away from its traditional meaning. Many of the mainstream “conservatives” today are not culturally conservatives at all.

    The new conservatives only want lower taxes, lots of immigration and endless wars on behalf of Israel. That’s all!

    -John

    Like


    • Idiot. Jewish principals built the West.

      Like


      • on October 30, 2011 at 4:31 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

        Yes,

        But the neocons do not harbor classical, Jewish principles.

        For instance, a fiat currency stalesstetelz from tda common man, and thus the neocons reject “Thou shalt not steal.” which is a clssic Jewish principels form Moses lzozlzlz and Mises zlzozl

        Butthex is not a classical Jewish principle, nor are the secretly taped butthexing sessions used by noeoncs to sell books a Jewish principle.

        Also, sodomizing someon’s future wife is not good, accroding to the classical Jew Moses, who says, “thou shalt not commit adultery,” and “thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife,” which probably means that you should not butthex your neughbor’s future wife in a secrtive taping of buttheixng sessions funded by da neoocnsths and celebratesd in their warmongering publications.

        Furtehrmore, the Bible places the man at the head of the household, while Jonah Goberg and the noeocns are ardent feminists.
        lzozozozozoz

        Like


      • Really? Please elaborate sensei.

        Like


      • “Idiot. Jewish principals built the West.”

        Are you serious? If that was the case, why have Jews been living among Christian nations for the past 2000 years? How come Jewish principals never created a successful Jewish society? Even today, why doesn’t Bernanke, Greenspan, and Goldman Sachs just move to Israel? Could it because living among Jews sucks even for Jews? Oy vey!

        Like


      • When you water it down and repackage it for the masses, and when the masses take it up, it’s an amazingly good system for societal harmony and utility maximisation.

        Any system will fail though when you are a shit tiny country going up against the largest, most highly skilled and most technologically advanced army in the world: The Romans. I stress the word *principals* too.

        Like


      • “Jewish principals built the West.”

        You mean unbuilt. For, you ought to know, Europeans built the West. And Europeans existed before “Jewish principles” were grafted onto their own native principles. Which existed.

        Care to explain your anti-white bias, “Ben”? could it have to do with your people being kicked around Europe when the nations each grew sick of their presumption and bad behavior?

        Could it now. I seem to remember something in Exodus about that. Pharaoh subjecting you to the yoke or some shit. Could those be more of your “Jewish principles” at work irritating the host people?

        Man, I’m glad we have Christians and Jews on the scene to interpret the past for us. It’s like white men aren’t really white, like they have no biological being at all — just a bunch of spooky disembodied “principles” talking in Hebraic code, “building Western Civilization”, this stodgy universalist empire of cotton-picking and piss freak porno. Butthexlllaujajiaa!!!

        It’s like two-thousand years are wiped out, wails King A! He means like Christianity wiped out the preceding two thousand years of Roman, Greek, Persian, pagan lifeways — and continues to deny anything at all prior to those “dark ages”!

        Except when it comes time to assert that God “did” the Big Bang! yes, yes! God is responsible for science. God god god god god god. God god god!!! Jews, chosen Jews, Jews Jews Jews! Jews = God!!! Salvation of the Jews! BUTTHEHHEHHSHSHSSHSHSHSAEXXXX

        Nietzsche wrote, “Judaism is the primordial butthexing — the revolt of a slave race against the master race, and the reinterpretation of reality as heralding only themselves.”

        Christianity adopts this narrative to satisfy the craving for dominion among goyim. Does this really still need saying?

        Before “the Bible placed the man at the head of the household”, Romans, Greeks, Persians, and in fact all Aryans, had men as head of the household, because the household, as we understand it, is an Aryan innovation. I guess it’s time to expand that shelf of “Great Books”, buddy.

        Oh shit! Christers didn’t come first. Human beings did. What now??

        Am I really doing battle alone here? will no one else speak up in the name of humankind against these officious cross-lickers?

        Like


      • uh fabricated: “Nietzsche wrote, ‘Judaism is the primordial butthexing — the revolt of a slave race against the master race, and the reinterpretation of reality as heralding only themselves.'”

        Nietzsche or Pseudonietzsche? Source, please?

        You talk about the purity of your race, but you can’t even keep your foundational ideas clean of miscegenation.

        I love these serious attempts to intellectually dignify the fever dreams of some assistant secretary to the vice grand-wizard. If only we could rid ourselves of the last two thousand years of irrelevant history! we could get back to those rock solid principles of enduring paganism! (… which were eradicated without a trace planetwide by some queer Jew-carpenter upstart babbling about his own divinity and executed on a tree.)

        I’d take your meandering thoughts more seriously, if we hadn’t just had twenty centuries proving their impotence. You’re too feeble to even be a decent hater.

        Like


      • KA, im starting to think uh is a feminist agent provocateur troll, sent to discredit this blog by gathering tyrone and whiskey types into a frenzy to red herring the shit out of the many quality postings that are immortalized on this blog.

        if true, it would be a brilliant gambit. anti-semitism is reviled for good reason and unlike those who shamelessly and futilely throw it at critics of israel, i am happy to see that the only real genuine anti-semites are froth-at-the-mouth maniacs like this one, provocateur troll or not.

        Like


      • Anti-racism: the beta default of PUAs.

        Good work, hens, clucking thoughtcrimes out of court!

        shalom!!!!!

        Like


      • The most fascinating part is uh’s love-hate relationship with CH, whom he refers to as a Jew above. But don’t worry! The Hebrew Love Hammer of Le Shtelteau is okay in uh’s book, because Heartistein is one of the self-hating, collaborator-in-his-own-genocide kind who will not kick up much of a fuss on his way to the ovens. Tell me those aren’t some mental gymnastics that beg to be studied.

        I’d complain about his incessant diversions into race theory like many whiners in the comboxes do. What’s with all the tangents! Let’s talk about pick up! They have a point, but conspirazoids go with the landscape.

        In any forum bold enough to allow dark truths like game spoken without penalty or censorship, you will attract all manner of crackpots itching for a channel (at last!) to get the ideas out of their head. Wake up white man! etc. Hence the Bernanke connection — seriously, game and fiat money — and lonely girls like Maya pining for love stories and pregnancy from her fantasy incubus, and even CH’s own forays into immigration and cultural issues. It’s a motley gathering.

        I acknowledge myself among them with my own religious/political diversions, but in my defense I’ll say this: I am not here to proselytize (much). I’m happy to go along and get along, so long as there isn’t gratuitous defamation of principles I’d die for from spoiled twerps who watched the web sensation “Zeitgeist” ten times back-to-back.

        And besides, there is a silent majority. One wants to correct the misimpression that libertarianism and libertinism (or neonazism or autistic Ron Paulism) is somehow a necessary or even interesting component of game. Those who dismiss these cranks as preposterous just laugh and click on to “the good stuff.” Those others in the severe minority, who have finally discovered intellectual kismet, join the fray and dominate through volume.

        In other words: “Am I really doing battle alone here? will no one else speak up in the name of [INSERT CAUSE HERE]?”

        Like uh, I’m just planting my flag, hoisting it up the pole to see who salutes. I have my suspicions that there are more strong, silent Christian men than there are Anders-Breivikian crypto-skinhead-cum-pseudo-intellectuals — but hey, who really knows? Most men like me are inclined not to mix it up with the rabid insensate. We are more inclined to keep our heads down while the zombies exhaust themselves against the bulwark.

        We Christians of this Century of the Woman have selectively overindulged the command, “Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves; so be wise as serpents and innocent as doves,” being too much the sheep-dove and not enough the wolf and serpent. After all, it is a real danger: “He who fights with monsters should look to it that he himself does not become a monster.” But the Tenth Crusade resides dormant in the breast of every baptized man, waiting for his trump, biding his time while the dissidents shout and the harpies reign.

        Like


      • Can’t we all just get along,
        Get the pussy drunk on some dom perignon.
        And it’s on…

        These racial talks sound so stupid. When y’all will realize in your core that we are the descendants of a bunch of chimps, maybe the corollary to that realization will sink in: civilization is merely a dream, and races are marginal genetic variations that don’t mean shit.

        Grab your dick and knock some black/brown/white/yellow pussy out. If you want a meaning to your life, there it is. You’re welcome.

        Like


      • civilization is merely a dream, and races are marginal genetic variations that don’t mean shit.

        http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2055813/Marion-Hedges-left-fighting-life-kids-throw-shopping-cart-her.html

        Tell it to this woman, who was hit by a flying shopping cart thrown by the very savages she so whitely set out to entertain.

        She would agree with you most vehemently, but she can’t speak at the moment.

        Like


      • Yes, but an ideological frame of racism doesn’t make sense under the light of evolution.

        I’m mad at blacks for their criminality and their other stupid shit. I’m mad at arabs for terrorism and their retarded beliefs. I’m mad at jews because they are smarter and more dark triad than me. I’m mad at nazis because they want to kill everyone that they deem problematic…

        I’m mad for all that shit, but i’m not justifying my anger with nebulous ideological fallacies, that don’t make any sense under the ultimate truth; Natural selection.

        Like


  135. I don’t know the particular “conservative traditionalist” but I can’t agree with the reaction that styles men as victims. It removes all that masculinity is, and ignores some obvious solutions.

    Like


  136. Nathan: “Men these days are pathetic”

    You are one to judge?

    If you struggled through the same issues these other men you mention had, then continue to call them pathetic, then you are judgmental and, frankly, a douche.

    However, if you had doors opened for you, or lived in a matriarchal household thus indoctrinated with feminist standards, then you are an even bigger douche.

    Like


  137. on October 30, 2011 at 10:09 am rocket science

    Just can’t leave off this “manning up” stuff.

    The battlefields of Europe are littered with the bones of millions of young men who answered the call to “man up” in the first 1/2 of the 20th century.

    Where did that get them? Anytime you hear someone telling you to “man up”, that person is not your friend. They just want you to be a more useful tool.

    Like


  138. We men need to make a secret pack to promote other men, to hire only men for management positions. This is the only way to curve the damage caused to our society. Women will thank us once thier vaginas begin to tingle again for the increase in higher status males.

    Like


    • Yes. Absolutely.

      Or, they just need to make a pact to only employ / promote those who they think legitimately merit it. Without the coercion of PC, things will go back to normal eventually.

      Like


  139. on October 30, 2011 at 2:46 pm ready, steady-

    Bill Bennet is out of touch with reality. Things are not what they used to be. Pay the least tax possible and get a really good lawyer is what I say.

    Like


  140. The problem with American women is that femininity is no longer embraced by them, it is now associated with weakness. We have feminism to thank for that! Instead, American women would rather be entirely too obnoxious/aggressive while simultaneously thinking this behavior is attractive and empowering. I suppose that on an individual basis, it’s not their fault. They are merely the result of their social environment that not only enables, but rewards this otherwise unacceptable behavior.

    I don’t know if any of you perhaps have ever heard about or watched the show called “Bridezillas,” but it’s really an interesting social experiment. The “women,” and I use this term loosely, are some of the most classless and wholly unattractive parodies of human beings I’ve ever had the displeasure of watching. All the while, their beta, no omega, husbands to be put up with all of their verbal, mental, and sometimes physical abuse. I’ve only seen a few episodes, but not surprisingly, the vast majority of the “women” featured are no more than a 5 on a 1-10 scale. Ultimately, I sincerely believe this is a fairly accurate representation of your average American woman.

    Anyway, this is aside from the topic, but I want to pose a couple questions to the men on this site:

    1. What would be the best way for a woman to go about diffusing a situation which involves a male friend attempting to break out of the friend zone? I reckon the wise decision would be to end the friendship right then and there, but even wiser would be to see it for what it is from the beginning and prevent it from even getting to the friend’s state, but what do you think?

    2. How hot does a woman generally have to be for you to go down on her? Random, yes.

    Like


  141. “An appalling lack of understanding, of even a tangential blow with the truth about female nature, suggests that traditionalists and their offspring — Promise Keepers, Iron Johns, (some) MRAs, evangelists, etc. — have an allergic reaction to plumbing the depths of the human sexual soul, a revulsion likely concocted in a cauldron of sheltered life experiences and morbid fear of their own temptations.”

    These…traditionalists…are more likely to be reactionaries and opposed to men’s and women’s rights:

    “removing women from the workplace, where female career growth acts indirectly to undermine male provider and leadership status, and directly through the feminization of the workplace.”

    It’s not gonna happen in a modern society where middle class women don’t *need* men to be providers or leaders. How very old fashioned.

    Like


    • Empowerment of one group typically comes at a cost to another group. Ironically, empowerment of women has come at a cost to … women.

      Like


  142. Man up? Nah bro.

    Like


  143. I thought feminism was one giant shit test. And if this is the case, Bennett failed the test.

    Like


    • on October 31, 2011 at 11:53 am So, Do the Zonk

      He is 68 years old. Born 1943. Barely pre-Boomer. He was a young guy in the 1960s. He is not stupid. He saw what was happening. He is a professional pundit with the time and resources to study and understand. He has no excuse for not understanding what has been happening. He probably has an audience that skews even older, and he is telling them what they want to hear. No guts.

      Like


  144. Rum,

    “Here is a hint: The truly rich continue to marry at good rate. And do not divorce very much, either.”

    Nailed it.

    Socon for me but not for thee.

    Tit-for-tat might have finally been bested (practice tit-for-tat, while advocating that everyone else abandon it).

    Here’s another hint: calling the fake progressives/liberals running the corporate state on their bullshit doesn’t make you a conservative.

    Like


  145. Very well put.

    >former Secretary of Education and Drug Czar<

    Guilty right there. No matter how conservative the man pretends to be, nothing screams socialist more than those two institutions.

    He is partially correct in stating that men need to man up, but he participates in the cause which is that men have betrayed themselves and their bros by giving their influence over to women in matters that only men can (and should) control. He is a willing participant in the decline of the very culture he dishonestly claims to defend.

    Personally I see the beggar and pass on. I can shape my world without any help from the higher powers and clearly Americans have little desire or ability to live outside of their suicidal bubbles and police state sanctions.

    Like


  146. The battlefields of Europe are littered with the bones of millions of young men who answered the call to “man up” in the first 1/2 of the 20th century.

    Don’t fight liberal wars and you should be OK.

    Like


  147. Bill Bennett is just another social conservative broken record. He puts out the bullshit he writes because that’s all he knows and what’s more, it gets him paid. He’s got his money and that’s all there is to it.

    Does anyone actually believe he gives a single fuck about any of the young men in this country? This is a man who would shoot his own grandson in the back of the head in exchange for an early tee time at the local country club.

    Like


    • He is a coward who hides behind the mask of godliness, which in fact is leftist commie feminism/national fascism that is rife with liberal anti-male rancor.

      Like


  148. I like Bill Bennet, listen to his radio program etc. I’m a rock ribbed conservative too.
    Here is the difference between a conservative rant (opinion) and a liberal one…the conservative rant is just pontification, there is no legislative action that is even hinted at. Liberals want to force their lunacy on others through the law…eg anti-smoking laws, seat belts, mandatory insurance, bike helmets, gun control, title 9, blah blah blah the list goes on and on.
    I have no problem with sanctimonious blowhards spouting their tripe…it’s free speech and all good, they can even attempt to change public attitudes and ry shamming…hey, go for it…just don’t propose a law to force me to bend to your opinion.

    As for men, manning up, your last paragraph says it all…Other than for reasons of religion, the worst financial/legal decision a guy can make it to get married. I’m married 18 years and would never recommend it to any male relative/friend I care about. Mind you, I have a pretty good marriage, but I know that tomorrow morning she could get a wild hair up her ass and pow, I’m getting ass-raped in divorce court.

    Like


  149. All hysteria and all chatter aside, one should concentrate on what’s most important.

    There is nothing happening anywhere which is more important than what is described in the following article. Members of the Just So Chateau should read it closely:

    http://tinyurl.com/This-is-what-you-attend-to

    There will be a scramble to control these resources. That scrum leads to great-power alliances and presently to war.

    That war, for both winners and eventually losers, brings an intensification of technological progress to the lives of human beings.

    This struggle is more basic than any ideological struggle.

    Like


    • Forget Kerogen… once we figure out how to deal with methane clathrates, we’ve got fuel for at least the next 500 years.

      Like


  150. What creates wealth in society now?

    Automobiles and transport
    Food growing
    Energy production
    Construction
    Technology and computer science
    Advanced science
    Manufacturing
    Teaching any of the above

    Are women doing any of this in North America? No. Most of them have parasitic government or “liberal arts” jobs.

    Transfering wealth of productive men to them is societal suicide. Any conservative who doesn’t want to shrink government massively and end political correctness is exactly the same as a Democrat.

    Like


    • on October 31, 2011 at 12:52 pm Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      See, the federal reserve can only create debt.

      And thus they need legions of deosuled, haggard, assocked women to transfer physical welath and labor from men to ben bernake and jonah godlbegr lzozozozloz so jonah can stuff his fat cherubic face with more pizzaass inside teh beltway while fro scremaing for more warsz and sending women forth to tame menz llzozoz

      Like


  151. Why should I hand over half of my net worth and part of my pay to a women for a few years of repetitive sex – even after the sex has been taken away? Marriage hasn’t been a permanent arrangement for over 40 years, it’s just a way to transfer money from men to women so they can raise children they have taken away from him..
    Dropped out? Damn right I have. I’ve also realised if I don’t have a woman hanging off me I don’t need to earn as much so I am able to drop out of the workforce too. One more highly qualified worker kicking back and relaxing instead of contributing to a society that has turned him into a sperm bank with a wallet.
    Really doing anything but dropping out would be mindlessly clinging to a fantasy from a bygone age that is actually robbing me blind. I AM manning up – I’m not allowing emotions to rule my reasoning, that’s what being a man is all about, not submitting to the demands of a money grubbing manipulative woman. I am free and loving it.
    A man needs a woman like a bank needs a robbery.

    Like


    • on October 31, 2011 at 11:53 am Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM)

      lozozlzzlzl

      women are assockced and deosuled in college in ceroemeies secrtaive tapings of butthexing scerememonies funded by teh fefed and sosodom reawwarded by sododdnm and scheiester as women are transformed into welath-transgferring vehicles by the federal reseers cenetral banking cartel which needs physical porpety and welath as all they cn create is debt and thus in college the assock women and train woemnzzz to assock men in divorce ocurt and bring men’s assettss to be n bernanke and his sbill benenete egambling fattassss fuckfae lzlzlzlzolz

      the reaosssnn reaosns neoocncs hate prostitutiution is that they don’t wnat to compete with a more fair system that does not make a man pay for past use of a pussy lzlzzoozzllzoz like the modern “christaan” church fronts in marriage cermeiooneis lzozlozlz

      Like


  152. “The lunacy of thinking the culture is ultimately well-intentioned and all it needs is a proper scolding is the mindset of the fool, or a pity whore”

    If I could pound one single statement into the heads of our so-called social conservatives, it would be this.

    Like


  153. Here’s another conservative take on the sexual “revolution” from National Review Online.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/281490/blame-sexual-revolution-br-not-men-mona-charen

    It picks up SOME points most of us will agree with but has some of the same lack of reality that Bill Bennett’s piece suffers from.

    Like


  154. >This means removing women from the workplace, where female career growth acts indirectly to undermine male provider and leadership status, and directly through the feminization of the workplace.

    This is the only part that will discredit you as some anti-woman nutcase.

    [Heartiste: You read what you want to read. No one said anything about *forcibly* removing women from the workplace. Incentives can do the job just as well, and with everyone’s consent.]

    Like


  155. […] Most Men Are Feminists 1 […]

    Like


  156. on October 31, 2011 at 7:16 pm Abelard Lindsey

    Hitler said if you tell a lie enough times, people will believe it is the truth. This is called the “Great Lie” principle. One of the lies that social conservatives will tell you is that married people are healthier than singles even when adjusting for factors such as healthy habits. This is a bald face lie. Anyone who works out regularly (weight lifting, swimming) and has a rational life extension regimen (ALA chelation, resveratrol, PQQ, etc.) is going to live a longer, healthier life regardless of marital status. This is a fact that social conservatives will not tell you.

    Marriage can actually threaten your chances of an definitely long healthy life:

    http://www.overcomingbias.com/2010/07/modern-male-sati.html

    http://www.depressedmetabolism.com/is-that-what-love-is-the-hostile-wife-phenomenon-in-cryonics/

    Like


  157. I think talking about what individuals can do against sweeping social forces arises from a misdiagnosis. The problem is not in ourselves, so to speak, but in our stars. Namely, overscaled post-industrial technological societies. These create mass men, feminized and passive, and women masculinize in turn to cope with perceived resource threats and escalating competition. So changing something like divorce laws (which you’ll never get support for anyway) cannot possibly have an effect. In reality there’s probably nothing we can do, even if we precisely diagnose the problem, because these things that cause the collapse of societies are simply too big, the inevitable result of crashing forces.

    Like


  158. In answer to the “frivolous” question above,

    2. How hot does a woman generally have to be for you to go down on her? Random, yes.

    uh says:

    First, she can’t be a woman at all; she’d better be a girl of no more than 17.
    Second, had better be a virgin, or have taken no more than four trips round the carousel.
    Third, must be under 115 pounds.
    Fourth, must not be of some uncomfortably hirsute race such as South Asian, Greek, or Ukrainian.

    That said, I have made exceptions, but they all gave the appearance of conforming to rules one, three, and four. Sometimes you find that magical pussy that seems to call out to you for a tonguing, being attached to some special creature you just want to devour in every way.

    Like


  159. Everything you write in this post is correct except for the indirect defense of playing video games. I’m sorry, but video games are for fucking losers, period. If you want to remain a bachelor playing the field, more power to you; but read some good books, write, take up some sport with alpha male vigor, etc. But sitting around playing video games is simply pathetic. On that ONE issue, I do think the social critics are correct; the males in their late twenties and thirties playing video games are an embarrassment. Living a virtual life is no life.

    Like


    • Spoken like a true ignorant. Sure, overindulging in videogaming has a detrimental effect on your physical health, but making such a blanket statement over a hobby that can be very engaging for mind and help acquire useful skills (of course, provided you don’t play the mindless button-mashers) is simply foolish.

      Overindulgence in a pasttime like videogaming (or any for that matter) is a symptom, not the cause.

      Like


  160. “They know the revolution must come from disenfranchised White males. Yet they pander to women and their “traditional family” and “peaceful solutions” dogma, because they are feminist flogged spaniels.

    No disrespect too our few good women. It was, Because the beauty of the White Aryan Woman must not perish from the earth,” that I entered this struggle. But, as a rule, women will put individuals and their families ahead of the survival of the whole race. A warrior, risking his life and freedom does not make a good provider in this day and age.

    Because I speak the truth, there isn’t a woman in the world that doesn’t despise me. We want a “responsible” man they proclaim. Well, what is “responsibility” in an occupied country but treason and slavery. Go off to your factories and warehouses, your counting houses, your fields and slave your life away. Then pay half of your wages in taxes that are used to finance the murder of your race.”

    -Open Letter to a Dead Race

    Like


  161. The Cain fluff-up shows a lack of male solidarity – specifically alpha male lawyers using women to squeeze some money out of other males.

    The trial lawyers have made an industry out of sexual harrassment suits, working with the feminists as their accomplists. Reform of our contigency-fee-based sexual harrassment scheme will only come with the defeat of the Democrats – the trial lawyers are one of the biggest donors to the Democratic Party candidates.

    Like


  162. @Loveiseasy: re: question number 2: I love going down on women and am not picky about her as long as she is clean. Sex without me licking a girl’s or woman’s pussy is less than fulfilling for me. That said, I won’t sleep with women that aren’t attractive. They need to be at least a 6. So I won’t have sex without eating pussy and I won’t have sex with women that don’t excite me either.

    @Uh. I think you are mistaken about Ukrainian women being hairy. My experience is that they have relatively little body hair. I feel sorry for you with that hang up of yours about licking womens’ pussies. I feel sorry for any man with that attitude. It pays me dividends in spades. I get a lot of blow jobs- several a day on average. I’m pretty sure its at least partially because I like to lick pussy and let the women I’m with know I do. My ROI is probably 20 to 1.

    Like


  163. I am a Christian conservative and I read this blog daily. I see no fundamentals in it to disagree with, and that from a Biblical perspective. The Bible commands men to lead, women to subject themselves. You are right, most Christians and conservatives in general have accepted the modern notion that women are our equals, but they are not. We are different and women WANT us to lead.

    This, my friend, is clarity. And every time I share this with Christian males, they seem to be receiving, finally, the explanation they needed to embrace that old, uncomfortable Biblical command. So yes, some conservatives are waking up.

    Like


    • I am one as well and it is good to see these comments; they are getting more frequent.

      I will add something further that is entirely orthodox even though you won’t see it in the Canon: women WANT their men to lead in bed. They want to be dominated; they CRAVE the feeling that their body belongs to YOU.

      More young, Christian men need to be directed to this site, and Bill Bennett and Penny Young Nance need to shut up.

      Like


  164. Any respect I might have had for Bill Bennett evaporated when he became drug czar back in the ’80s. The war on drugs hosed any real conservative revival. It made big government Bigger. It tore up the Bill of Rights (via drug testing, asset forfeiture, paramilitary policing, etc.) and with it, that Jeffersonianism for which Reagan claimed to stand. So much for “…liberty and the pursuit of happiness!”

    Might also consider how the war on drugs affected men in this country. Look at drug testing. The government or your boss requires you to drop your pants and urinate on command. Not very manly to be forced into this.

    Then there is the bigger picture. We need a drug war to — yes — protect womyn ™. You see, there are all these date raype drugs out there, and our chaste females need to be protected from big bad men who want to have their wicked way with them. And least that’s what the government and its feminists claim (but see http://www.overcomingbias.com/2009/12/date-rape-drug-myth.html).

    Really, the war on drugs was a means to further beta-ize American men, or marginalize them. I’ll note I turned down several jobs which required a drug test. I could afford to do it, but I know other men who in so refusing to be drug tested, ended up at the bottom of the economic ladder. And others who did take their test, got a false positive, and found themselves in the Kafka-esque world of “rehab.”

    Maybe the entire drug war is another part of the alpha wannabe complex. Guys like Bennett thump their chests, put down other men, set themselves up as the protectors of womyn. Then they ask why it is that the very men they have been putting down no longer want to play ball with their society.

    What a wasteland.

    Like


  165. @ Uh

    Ukranian damsels and hirsutism are alien concepts. However an exception is realized when a Turkish-induced mongrelized gene permeates a Balkan beauty’s lineage.

    Like


  166. Heartiste

    Someone, anyone, has to pull the wool from their eyes, because their ignorance compounds a problem they rightly see as anathema to civilized prosperity.

    This could be the answer to rampant unemployment – a whole new industry employing millions.
    For pulling the wool from the eyes of 21st century Americans
    IS a full-time job.

    And, seemingly productive
    as a midnight shift
    at SOLYNDRA

    Like


  167. The solution: Non-Americanized Asian chicks.

    Like


  168. […] goal is so to stay positive on this blog, but this is awesome: When she cuckolds you, man up. When she rejects your gentlemanly kindness for an aloof […]

    Like