SirTimothy
Chubby Chaser
 
Posts: 590
Joined: Jan 2015
Reputation: 7
|
RE: Must-not read books
No More Christian Nice Guy - by Paul Coughlin
I read this book back when I was just barely starting to scratch the surface of the red pill. I had read "No More Mr. Nice Guy", thought it was fairly good, and being a Christian I wanted to see how a "Christian" version would compare.
I was pretty disappointed. It starts off being vaguely pro-masculine, but after admitting that feminism "overreacted", it goes on to imply that it was the evil horny misogynist men's fault that feminism had to happen in the first place. The fact that feminism was responsible for Roe v. Wade and a subsequent 50 million abortions was not even mentioned, which is kind of weird for a Christian author.
The rest of the book goes on talking about how Christian men should not be nice-guy wimps, but instead be bold, truthful, tough, fearless, etc. But it gives almost no idea of what this looks like in the real world, even in the "practical help" chapter. The writing overall felt weirdly female. And the way it makes excuses for feminism is pretty ironic for a book that says to boldly tell the unvarnished, masculine truth.
2/10 Would Not Read Again. If you want good, masculine, Christian reading, try Dalrock's blog.
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2016 07:13 PM by SirTimothy.)
|
|
| 02-12-2016 07:08 PM |
|
The following 3 users Like SirTimothy's post:3 users Like SirTimothy's post
debeguiled, Durbo, RoastBeefCurtains4Me
|
emuelle1
Chubby Chaser
 
Posts: 350
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 1
|
RE: Must-not read books
As a Christian, I highly recommend avoiding many of the popular Christian books. I wish Moses had left an 11th commandment that pastors are not allowed to write books. Most Christian authors (pastors especially) have about 5 minutes of material that have to be stretched across 300+ pages, especially in mainstream publishing. They do this the same way they get through an hour long sermon: lots of stories, anecdotes, and repetition.
I also believe the majority of Christian books are written for the baby, not the mature Christian. So you pick up a book that you think you'll learn something from, and the book is little more than the basic Gospel. I'm already a believer; why are you preaching the Gospel at me if I've already accepted it? Oh, right, just in case that one person in 300 million who has never heard it before accidentally picks the book up so he can be saved.
Likewise, stay away from the majority of Christian marriage and relationship books. I'm not saying there aren't good ones out there; but most of them are regurgitated feminist new age crap. Or just a pastor rambling a page of material into 300.
On to better things... I concur on "The Celestrine Prophesy". The guy wrote a follow up book which is even worse.
Kiyosaki wrote a book in 2009 called "Conspiracy of the Rich". Most of the material concurs with things you'll read in "The Creature From Jekyll Island". One story in there I thought was utter bullshit. He claims while he was in Vietnam, he flew his helicopter into Cambodia to buy gold. The guy admits to taking a Marine Corps helicopter into enemy territory to buy gold? I thought it was Hollywood bullshit and unlikely. And I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations on things like misappropriation of government property, unauthorized missions, and conduct unbecoming an officer.
(02-12-2016 07:08 PM)SirTimothy Wrote: No More Christian Nice Guy - by Paul Coughlin
I read this book back when I was just barely starting to scratch the surface of the red pill. I had read "No More Mr. Nice Guy", thought it was fairly good, and being a Christian I wanted to see how a "Christian" version would compare.
I was pretty disappointed. It starts off being vaguely pro-masculine, but after admitting that feminism "overreacted", it goes on to imply that it was the evil horny misogynist men's fault that feminism had to happen in the first place. The fact that feminism was responsible for Roe v. Wade and a subsequent 50 million abortions was not even mentioned, which is kind of weird for a Christian author.
The rest of the book goes on talking about how Christian men should not be nice-guy wimps, but instead be bold, truthful, tough, fearless, etc. But it gives almost no idea of what this looks like in the real world, even in the "practical help" chapter. The writing overall felt weirdly female. And the way it makes excuses for feminism is pretty ironic for a book that says to boldly tell the unvarnished, masculine truth.
2/10 Would Not Read Again. If you want good, masculine, Christian reading, try Dalrock's blog.
|
|
| 02-12-2016 07:27 PM |
|
The following 6 users Like emuelle1's post:6 users Like emuelle1's post
Paracelsus, debeguiled, Truth Teller, samifon, Durbo, the1element
|
Paracelsus
Innovative Casanova
      
Posts: 6,125
Joined: Sep 2014
Reputation: 147
|
RE: Must-not read books
(02-12-2016 07:27 PM)emuelle1 Wrote: Kiyosaki wrote a book in 2009 called "Conspiracy of the Rich". Most of the material concurs with things you'll read in "The Creature From Jekyll Island". One story in there I thought was utter bullshit. He claims while he was in Vietnam, he flew his helicopter into Cambodia to buy gold. The guy admits to taking a Marine Corps helicopter into enemy territory to buy gold? I thought it was Hollywood bullshit and unlikely. And I'm pretty sure there is no statute of limitations on things like misappropriation of government property, unauthorized missions, and conduct unbecoming an officer.
At the risk of labouring the point, Kiyosaki's stories in respect of his Vietnam experiences change regularly. In his earlier books he'd imply that he deserted from the military because he was conflicted about shooting a Vietnamese boy who was playing in a helicopter. The real story essentially came out that he just missed a boat to come back to the States and thus was listed for a while as AWOL.
Even his "I'm a tough Marine Corps guy" story is somewhat bullshit. Though the USMC is depressingly willing to affirm him as a proud product of theirs, in reality his military service isn't quite so hardcore. In his earliest books, he said he was accepted into the US Merchant Marine Academy. John Reed goes on in his breakdown of Kiyosaki's bullshit:
Quote:Did Kiyosaki go through Marine Platoon Leader School? Nope.
So how did he get to be a Marine?
He was a Navy officer in helicopter school. The Vietnam war was winding down, so the Navy decided they had too many pilots and decided to stop training Kiyosaki and his fight-school classmates to save money. The Marines, on the other hand, still wanted more helicopter pilots. By letting Kiyosaki and his helicopter classmates make a lateral transfer to the Marine Corps, the Marines could save the amount of money the Navy had already spent training them. In other words, to the Marine Corps, Kiyosaki was a pilot trainee who was “on sale” for half price or “overstock.”
In World War II, officers who graduated from Officer Candidate School were called “90-day wonders.” By that standard, Kiyosaki is a “zero-day wonder” in terms of Marine training—an instant Marine. He passed no “crucible” or its predecessor tests. He just filled out some paperwork and made a wardrobe change.
Did he serve in the Marine Corps? Yes.
I have no problem with his claiming he served in the Marine Corps. But in his interview on the Marine Corps Web site and elsewhere, he has laid on the “Marine Corps made me what I am today” stuff pretty thick for a guy who came through the Marine Corps’ “back door,” skipping the notoriously difficult training that virtually all other Marines had to complete successfully before they could “claim the title of United States Marines.”
Remissas, discite, vivet.
God save us from people who mean well. -storm
(This post was last modified: 02-12-2016 10:19 PM by Paracelsus.)
|
|
| 02-12-2016 10:18 PM |
|
The following 1 user Likes Paracelsus's post:1 user Likes Paracelsus's post
SlickyBoy
|
Aurini
True Player
    
Posts: 1,775
Joined: Apr 2013
Reputation: 89
|
RE: Must-not read books
Seconds:
Dianetics: I read about half of it. Endless repetitions about how our thetans are messed up, because all of our mothers tried to abort us with coat-hangers but failed. Seriously. We all got coat-hanger raped in the womb, according to him, it comes up at least once a chapter.
Catcher in the Rye: The story of a mentally ill, selfish little twerp, who refuses to grow up. Peter pan with meandering nothing and an obsession with sex. If he'd been the villain of the piece - a damaged little monster who drags his family down - it could have been a good exploration of mental illness. Instead, we're supposed to accept him as a protagonist and sympathize with him, when all he does is walk around calling people phony.
I think this is where the outrage stemmed from; people said it was the sex and prostitution (note: he doesn't even fuck the prostitute, so her pimp almost beats him up), but I think the real anger came from glorifying such a shit heel.
Original:
On the Road: poorly written garbage about Kerouac and his loser friends mooching off of the good will of others, exploiting and degrading the high trust society of the fifties, with no catharsis, no lessons learned, just patheity at the end of the trip. If any of us had lived back then, it would have been so easy to rebuild from scratch; go to a small town, and somebody would help you out with a job and a place to stay. Guys like Kerouac destroyed that for the rest of us.
|
|
| 02-13-2016 02:09 PM |
|
The following 5 users Like Aurini's post:5 users Like Aurini's post
Sonneillon, Paracelsus, DamienCasanova, HermeticAlly, SlickyBoy
|
oilbreh
Chubby Chaser
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Jan 2014
Reputation: 9
|
RE: Must-not read books
(02-13-2016 02:09 PM)Aurini Wrote: Seconds:
Catcher in the Rye: The story of a mentally ill, selfish little twerp, who refuses to grow up. Peter pan with meandering nothing and an obsession with sex. If he'd been the villain of the piece - a damaged little monster who drags his family down - it could have been a good exploration of mental illness. Instead, we're supposed to accept him as a protagonist and sympathize with him, when all he does is walk around calling people phony.
I think this is where the outrage stemmed from; people said it was the sex and prostitution (note: he doesn't even fuck the prostitute, so her pimp almost beats him up), but I think the real anger came from glorifying such a shit heel.
Original:
On the Road: poorly written garbage about Kerouac and his loser friends mooching off of the good will of others, exploiting and degrading the high trust society of the fifties, with no catharsis, no lessons learned, just patheity at the end of the trip. If any of us had lived back then, it would have been so easy to rebuild from scratch; go to a small town, and somebody would help you out with a job and a place to stay. Guys like Kerouac destroyed that for the rest of us.
Beg to differ about Catcher in the Rye, there is a lot more going on. He's a teenager, you really expect a book written in the mind of a teen kid not having anything to do with sex in 24 hours? There are hints of abuse and loss of innocence. Its more of a commentary about how society abuses the innocent to fit them into the structure of society. Its also a short read and easy read. Regarding his family, he does feel sympathy for his family. He just falls apart and has a yolo moment.
I only watched the movie adaptation of The Road, but based on what I saw I think I agree with you.
*Cold Shower Crew*
*No Fap Crew*
*150+ IQ Crew*
(This post was last modified: 02-13-2016 04:55 PM by oilbreh.)
|
|
| 02-13-2016 04:50 PM |
|
The following 1 user Likes oilbreh's post:1 user Likes oilbreh's post
DamienCasanova
|
fokker
Wingman
  
Posts: 940
Joined: May 2014
Reputation: 7
|
RE: Must-not read books
(02-13-2016 02:09 PM)Aurini Wrote: Seconds:
Dianetics: I read about half of it. Endless repetitions about how our thetans are messed up, because all of our mothers tried to abort us with coat-hangers but failed. Seriously. We all got coat-hanger raped in the womb, according to him, it comes up at least once a chapter.
Catcher in the Rye: The story of a mentally ill, selfish little twerp, who refuses to grow up. Peter pan with meandering nothing and an obsession with sex. If he'd been the villain of the piece - a damaged little monster who drags his family down - it could have been a good exploration of mental illness. Instead, we're supposed to accept him as a protagonist and sympathize with him, when all he does is walk around calling people phony.
I think this is where the outrage stemmed from; people said it was the sex and prostitution (note: he doesn't even fuck the prostitute, so her pimp almost beats him up), but I think the real anger came from glorifying such a shit heel.
Original:
On the Road: poorly written garbage about Kerouac and his loser friends mooching off of the good will of others, exploiting and degrading the high trust society of the fifties, with no catharsis, no lessons learned, just patheity at the end of the trip. If any of us had lived back then, it would have been so easy to rebuild from scratch; go to a small town, and somebody would help you out with a job and a place to stay. Guys like Kerouac destroyed that for the rest of us.
I actually liked On the Road and Catcher in the Rye. Can't judge Dianetics - I've never read it.
,,Я видел, куда падает солнце!
Оно уходит сквозь постель,
В глубокую щель!"
-Андрей Середа, ,,Улица чужих лиц", 1989 г.
|
|
| 03-02-2016 06:04 AM |
|
The following 1 user Likes fokker's post:1 user Likes fokker's post
TooFineAPoint
|