Post: #51

Comte De St. Germain, why do you think there are so many incels nowadays? And why there are so many men who don't want to leave their houses? So many men who don't have any charisma?

Post: #52

The last page or so of this thread:

Post: #53

(05-11-2017 07:34 PM)Dan Woolf Wrote:  Comte De St. Germain, why do you think there are so many incels nowadays? And why there are so many men who don't want to leave their houses? So many men who don't have any charisma?

Let's answer some of these.

Why are there so many incels nowadays? Why are there so many men who don't want to leave their houses?

First, the priesthood isn't popular anymore. Sexual incapacity or frustration was often channelled into religious fervour in the past. Going right back to the medieval period, the first son who showed some physical aptitude was often trained to be a knight, and the second son who didn't was given to God, i.e. sent to a monastery.

Second, society's structure incentivises it. Society is structured such that it is possible for a man to sit on his ass doing nothing but receiving continual small doses of dopamine and not starve to death in the process. And I am not referring to drugs, either: I am referring to computer games and most of the mindless shit that passes for geek culture these days, which amount to the same thing. Seriously, human beings have it so fucking good in the West that we can afford to lose entire days, weeks, months chasing little dots around computer screens and there isn't any real societal condemnation of this impulse. Very few times in history has such a large proportion of a human population been able to go into the digital cave and not die a couple of weeks later. The Last Psychiatrist argues not entirely facetiously that there's no need to argue about whether or not there should be a living wage in the United States, because in large degree it's already present.

Indeed that structuring of society may well be "accidentally on purpose". In Rome the only way they kept the bored (because it was largely unemployed) populace from rioting was by bread and circuses. In modern society we've at least diversified our approach to cover the different sexes: for women, the bread and circuses are likes and the Kardashians. For men, it's massive quantities of overly cheap food and sports/computer games (depending on whether you're an extrovert or an introvert). This doesn't even require any (((tribal))) or Illuminati influence, it is just how the dust settled after industrialisation set in and made human input into large-scale production more or less optional.

Added to this is the fact that, overall, society has the sad phenomenon of both running largely on trust and not being results-oriented. Government is essentially process-oriented, and large government now essentially rules the West. But that's a bigger and tangential issue, one I won't get into here.

The main point being: incels would not exist if our society had not evolved to the point where said incels could survive in their preferred environments for protracted periods of time. Incels are not a recent thing, they only exist in numbers proportionate to society's tolerance of them.

Thirdly, the mixture of incentive to disincentive in the West favours the generation of involuntary celibacy to at least some extent. Divorce is no-fault, and the fact twentysomething women are just as immature as men (since adulthood has been postponed in the West until the age of 40, a major war, or an economic collapse, take your pick) means that marriage doesn't provide quite the foundation or underwriting of stable circumstances for a man that it once did. Incels are very stable, as the "documentary" points out: so are the dead, but hey, that's another story. Either way, they are rationally (which is to say, instinctively) assessing the economic circumstances and asking "what's in it for me?"

Fourthly: the tide of narcissism. I know I keep coming back to it again and again, but you cannot discount it here either. A narcissist doesn't quite see other people as real. He is unable to connect with others. Incel culture feeds that narcissism; and if you're not able to connect with another person, you're unlikely to see any benefit in trying to connect, and therefore the merits of a relationship are debatable at least. The user "Advanced" in the documentary is a narcissist. He freely gives it away when he says he needs to appear intelligent on camera. That is a guy whose sense of self depends on people seeing the identity he has constructed for himself.

It also doesn't help that the Western media doesn't actually provide any model of a functional relationship. At all. Movies and TV (that is, the only culture to which incels or anyone else in the West has been meaningfully exposed) only sympathetically portray a relationship at two stages: the beginning or the end. Established relationships are literally jokes, see Everybody Loves Raymond except his shrew of a wife. (And for the record, if you related to the Judd Apatow film This is 40 you are part of the fucking problem, that film is showing a bunch of immature kidult narcissists finally discovering that the world around them actually exists).

Worse still is a common theme most exemplified in Raymond, but present everywhere else in pop culture: men are not worthy of their women. Incels take that message to heart.

Why are there so many men who don't have any charisma?
First, you are your father in new skin. Was your father charismatic?

Second, Gerry Spence calls charisma just being unafraid to reveal who you are openly. Narcissists cannot afford to do that because what is revealed may not be approved of by the people who set their identities for them. This goes for incels as much as it does for women.

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #54

(05-11-2017 07:34 PM)Dan Woolf Wrote:  Comte De St. Germain, why do you think there are so many incels nowadays? And why there are so many men who don't want to leave their houses? So many men who don't have any charisma?

2-4 generations now have been raised believing:

-That all people are "equal".
-That men and women have the exact same strengths, weaknesses, vices, and imperatives. Even biologically.
-That sex is a spectrum.
-That mere participation is the same thing as winning. A life of being second place has made me painfully aware of that unlike most people who never even had a taste.
-That equality and freedom can both concurrently exist. You can have freedom or you can try to make all people equal you can't have both.
-That the state is your friend.
-That your culture is evil and oppressive.
-That we don't need the state butting into our lives, but that they'll handle everything we can't handle anyways.
-That we can have all the stuff we want.
-That there's no dignity in working hard and making do. That there's no dignity to being lower class. Concurrently being lead to believe that the most vulgar habits of the lower class are worth emulating.
-That everyone's opinion matters. Everyone deserves a voice but the vast majority of people don't deserve any say in the matters of politics until intolerable excesses prevent you from achieving your freedom/maintaining your way of life.
-That non-violent protest will solve things and that you have no right to fight by spilling the blood of the unjust against oppression should you come under it.
-That corporations are people.
-That men are Disney Princes and our magical, beautiful princess will fall in love with us at first sight.
-That women are Disney Princesses that will continue to wait for their prince charming that will defeat the hamster guarding her tower.
-That the college degree is the only thing you need to survive.
-That we shouldn't shame others.
-That your life and your path matter to others in the grand scheme of things. That magically people will give a damn. They won't. Only you and those that value you for what you've done in life will.
-That throwing money at a problem will solve it.
-That money will bring happiness.
-That you can throw your parents into a retirement home with a clean conscience.

That's the tip of the iceberg. Anything else I can add would warrant a thread of its own, but I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

Post: #55

(05-11-2017 09:45 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  but I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

Says the guy with over 4,000 posts

Post: #56

(05-11-2017 09:45 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

So, you're saying I'm an incel only because I dared to ask some questions and to point out that maybe, just maybe, your deep-rooted hatred for incels and your equally deep-rooted love for sexual liberation might be wrong in the grand scheme of things? And then you list everything you have to show that you are better than others - hilarious coming for a guy who called others narcissists.

Comte De St. Germain Wrote:A narcissist doesn't quite see other people as real. He is unable to connect with others... if you're not able to connect with another person, you're unlikely to see any benefit in trying to connect, and therefore the merits of a relationship are debatable at least. The user "Advanced" in the documentary is a narcissist. He freely gives it away when he says he needs to appear intelligent on camera. That is a guy whose sense of self depends on people seeing the identity he has constructed for himself.

Funny how aptly that fits you.

No need to reply to this post as I'm sure you are busy.

Post: #57

(05-11-2017 10:40 PM)TigerMandingo Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 09:45 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  but I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

Says the guy with over 4,000 posts

2000 of those discussing the merits of a pretty face and some C cups thank you very much friend .

Post: #58

(05-11-2017 10:48 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:   I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

I was just saying to another forum member that I thought this was an interesting discussion but didn't want to participate because it would mean dealing with unpleasant incels, so I get where you're coming from.

I will say that Paraclesus raises a number of interesting possibilities, but I think he's missing the big one: lack of socialization. Social skills aren't genetic, they're learned, and lots of kids don't get a chance to learn them. Their parents are at work all the time. They're dumped in day cares where nobody's really watching them. It's easy to grow up without any friends. They may not have any siblings, and if they do they're probably both doing their own thing (TV, cell phone games, etc.) and not communicating with each other.

Someone 150 years ago would've had a large family and a local community that he'd belong to almost by default. He'd be helping out at the church. He would always be sitting around the dinner table and talking with his family. He'd be playing with the other local kids, simply because there was nothing else to do.

In an environment like that it's much, much easier to learn to talk to others.

Post: #59

The self pity bullshit has to stop. Whitewolf, don't compare yourself to Chris Chan. Stop identifying with the losers.

Honest question, is being on this forum helping you? Or is it hurting? Judging by your posts, I'd have to say it's hurting. But that's just my opinion. Decide for yourself.

From what I see you are obsessed with being autistic, and how you can't overcome any of life's hurtles because of that. And you are using this forum to reinforce your negative opinions about yourself. You frame the majority of your posts in that way. That's not what this place is about. We are here to help. So stop getting in your own god damned way.

Again, I think getting off the internet is what the Dr. ordered in your case.

For someone in your situation, the last fucking thing they need is to spend time reading about

-autism
-the state of western women
-the fall of western civilization
-feminism
-politics
-sterilization of autists (really..come the fuck on)
-eugenics

The list could go on and on, but I think you get the idea. It's plain to see this shit isn't helping. Go out into the world and do something, and for fucks sake DO NOT come back here making excuses for why you didn't. Because we don't wanna hear it.

I want you to break free of this self imposed prison.

Only you can do that. I think once you start actually putting one foot in front of the other you will start to realize that its not as impossible of a task as you think.

One step at a time.

You think you're the only guy with issues? Challenges? Mental problems?

You're not.

Stop thinking in terms of the hand you were dealt. Because there is nothing you can do about that. You have positive attributes; learn to highlight them, and downplay your weaknesses. We all have had to look in the mirror and do exactly that to get anywhere in life, or with women.

Stop comparing yourself to others.

There are guys on this board that make far more money than me, have way better lifestyles than me, have more freedom than I do, that get more tail than I get. Do I care? Not really. Does it get me down? No way. They are on their journey, I'm on mine. And I am 100 percent ok with that. I wouldn't trade places with anyone else despite my life being FAR from perfect (and believe me it's FAAAAAAAAAR).

We are all on our own path here.

We can only take the road that's in front of us.

So don't expect us to point you in the right direction or that "the answer" is one click away on a god damned message board. IT ISN'T. It's out there. It's the journey that counts, not the destination. So get moving.

Sometimes I feel bad for you younger guys who've grown up with google, been conditioned to think "the answer to everything i could ever ask is in this search engine lol"

No it fucking isn't.

And to answer your question, NO. Nobody is entitled to shit. You're not entitled to food, shelter, happiness, NOTHING. You want something in this life? You take it.

Post: #60

(05-11-2017 10:47 PM)Dan Woolf Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 09:45 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

So, you're saying I'm an incel only because I dared to ask some questions and to point out that maybe, just maybe, your deep-rooted hatred for incels and your equally deep-rooted love for sexual liberation might be wrong in the grand scheme of things? And then you list everything you have to show that you are better than others - hilarious coming for a guy who called others narcissists.

Comte De St. Germain Wrote:A narcissist doesn't quite see other people as real. He is unable to connect with others... if you're not able to connect with another person, you're unlikely to see any benefit in trying to connect, and therefore the merits of a relationship are debatable at least. The user "Advanced" in the documentary is a narcissist. He freely gives it away when he says he needs to appear intelligent on camera. That is a guy whose sense of self depends on people seeing the identity he has constructed for himself.

Funny how aptly that fits you.

No need to reply to this post as I'm sure you are busy.

I'm not sure whether to be tongue-in-cheek about the fact that it was me who diagnoses narcissism in the incel population rather than the Count, or the supreme irony of someone thinking a comment regarding narcissism is all about them

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #61

(05-11-2017 11:29 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:48 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:   I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

I was just saying to another forum member that I thought this was an interesting discussion but didn't want to participate because it would mean dealing with unpleasant incels, so I get where you're coming from.

I will say that Paraclesus raises a number of interesting possibilities, but I think he's missing the big one: lack of socialization. Social skills aren't genetic, they're learned, and lots of kids don't get a chance to learn them. Their parents are at work all the time. They're dumped in day cares where nobody's really watching them. It's easy to grow up without any friends. They may not have any siblings, and if they do they're probably both doing their own thing (TV, cell phone games, etc.) and not communicating with each other.

Someone 150 years ago would've had a large family and a local community that he'd belong to almost by default. He'd be helping out at the church. He would always be sitting around the dinner table and talking with his family. He'd be playing with the other local kids, simply because there was nothing else to do.

In an environment like that it's much, much easier to learn to talk to others.

This man makes too much fucking sense, I'm putting him on my ignore list from here on in

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #62

(05-12-2017 12:31 AM)Paracelsus Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 11:29 PM)SamuelBRoberts Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:48 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:   I don't have the hours in my life to debate with incels with infinite amounts of time behind their computer screens. I have friends, lovers, comrades, family, mentors, and wonderful strangers I would prefer to dedicate that time too.

Godspeed and good luck. You'll need it.

I was just saying to another forum member that I thought this was an interesting discussion but didn't want to participate because it would mean dealing with unpleasant incels, so I get where you're coming from.

I will say that Paraclesus raises a number of interesting possibilities, but I think he's missing the big one: lack of socialization. Social skills aren't genetic, they're learned, and lots of kids don't get a chance to learn them. Their parents are at work all the time. They're dumped in day cares where nobody's really watching them. It's easy to grow up without any friends. They may not have any siblings, and if they do they're probably both doing their own thing (TV, cell phone games, etc.) and not communicating with each other.

Someone 150 years ago would've had a large family and a local community that he'd belong to almost by default. He'd be helping out at the church. He would always be sitting around the dinner table and talking with his family. He'd be playing with the other local kids, simply because there was nothing else to do.

In an environment like that it's much, much easier to learn to talk to others.

This man makes too much fucking sense, I'm putting him on my ignore list from here on in

Shit!!!!

You're an incel. Guess I don't have time to respond to this post .

Fool me once Para...or should I say delete me???

Who knows?

Post: #63

I think after a closer examination of this thread, particularly Rhyme or Reason's excellent post above, that I may have been missing the subtext here. I use this forum as a way to talk about ideas that I don't have an easy way to talk about in real life, just because most of the people I know don't have the kind of background people here have. So I'll often throw out ideas I have just to see what other people think of them, since I don't have any other easy place to share what I think about matters I consider important.

It looks like, though, that there are two conversations going on here. One of them is a intellectual conversation about involuntarily celibacy in the US and Canada. The other is a conversation where certain members are trying to justify the fact that they can't get laid, and seeking affirmation that "it's just too hard for certain people", so they should be "provided" a wife. They seem to be saying that the fact that they're not having sex is a reflection of society, not their own failures.

The former conversation interests me a great deal: I've had enough of western society to the point that I'm seriously thinking of bailing out entirely and heading to Asia. The latter conversation interests me not at all.

If you're on this board, and you're not getting laid, and you're not taking steps toward getting laid, it's your own damn fault and I have no patience for your own excuses. Don't take my post as an excuse to not to put in the work.


I think it's critical to draw a distinction between the macro level and the micro level. On the macro level western society is fucked up unbelievably. It's on the verge of total collapse, if you ask me.

On the micro level, you can still get your shit together. I forget who it was, it might've been PapayaTapper, or maybe it was R&R or Comte, who said that on any given night in your town, there are people fatter than you, stupider than you, smellier than you, who make less money than you do, and they're all having sex. So there's no reason you can't too. Go figure it out.

In your case, get off the damn internet and go do something that involves interacting with other people in person. Join a book club. Go learn to knit. Hell, join the circus and get your bearded lady flag. I don't care. Do something.

Something like 95% of people who diet gain back the weight. But that's not because the fat fairy visits them in the night and waves the BMI wand until they're morbidly obese. They make the choices to lose the weight, and they made the choices that caused them to gain it back. You can be in the 5%, just by not making the choices you know are bad.

It's the same with this. Maybe you were dealt a bad hand. Maybe you've got a fucked up face, or a mild bit of autism. I don't know. But people have overcome worse problems than that. You know what you need to do, so make the choice to go do it.

What steps are you taking RIGHT NOW to fix your involuntary celibacy, as opposed to whining about unfairness on an anonymous internet board?

Post: #64

Haha, it's been said many times:

If you're not getting laid, your standards are too high.

On the micro level, this is just a problem of not wanting it enough. Not every hand dealt is aces, but you can still find good spots to bluff with 7-2. Even if you don't win the tourney, you might still place in the money. If you aren't willing to take shots and get your ass kicked, you have no right to complain.

Post: #65

(05-12-2017 03:06 AM)Tactician Wrote:  Haha, it's been said many times:

If you're not getting laid, your standards are too high.

On the micro level, this is just a problem of not wanting it enough. Not every hand dealt is aces, but you can still find good spots to bluff with 7-2. Even if you don't win the tourney, you might still place in the money. If you aren't willing to take shots and get your ass kicked, you have no right to complain.

An unwillingness to roll the dice might be at play?

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #66

Preface to this post: there's a difference between Autism/Asperger's in the real world, and the autism we find on the internet. The former seems to be an overload of the senses, and a poor theory of person; the latter is just malformed social skills, and I'm speaking about the latter.

Does it seem to anyone else that there's a huge amount of loathing in single mothers for their male children? It's like every young boy these days is being turned into a tranny, diagnosed with autism, or doped up because of ADHD. This is beyond the bad sort of parenting you get from a single mom - heck, my parents separated when I was thirteen, so I know first hand that a woman (even a hardworking and loving woman like my mother) just can't properly parent a young man - but what we're seeing with young boys these days is a step beyond. It's not just that women have a lot of trouble understanding what it means to be a man - it's that they're downright hostile to the male principle.

"I just want you to be happy!" says the mother, as she encourages her son to bugchase, she "Munchausen's by proxy"'s her kid into identifying with some crippling anxiety disorder, or just encourages him to be a nice guy to women who treat him like shit.

Post: #67

^
^
What Jordan Peterson calls the devouring Oedipal mother.

Post: #68

I saw the first half and then I stopped.

First of all, to the guy who posted in the shy people forum 'the government didn't get me a girlfriend' or whatever: FUCK YOU.

The guy who the long hair who is clearly too proud to see his psychological faults and just what kind of approaches was he making to get rejected by 1000 women as brutally as he said. Clearly he never learned from his approaches or he is just flat out lying.

I'm not at the skill level that I want to be as of now but I sure as hell refuse to stay the way I am fro the rest of my life. When I lost my virginity all I did was to catch a sideways glance from a cute girl, do some small talk and then took the opportunity when she invited me to her apartment. I was a very shy kid in high school, to the point where I wouldn't even look a woman in the eye and I passed up many opportunities because I carried all this trauma from my past experiences and despite that I decided that bitterness is not the way to go through life so I started reading books to find out what was going on with me. Thank God my curiosity wasn't completely beaten out of me in school.

My father never taught me anything about dating because he was clueless and on top of that I got the same toxic programming from TV, movies etc. in my mind. Yeah it fucking sucks but at the same time I know that just as I was 'programmed' by my environment to be a loser I can undo all of that damage and become the person I want to be and more. I have learned that shyness is not something I am born with and that its just a habit which is what allowed me to start talking to women. If those guys from the video don't realise that I wouldn't be surprised if they kill themselves along with as many people as they can Elliot Roger style. I hope I never cross paths with a guy like that in my life.

Post: #69

(12-04-2016 06:32 PM)Scoundrel Wrote:  Best quote is from the long-haired dude: "I would do anything just for a 300-pound ugly white girl. I would fight in the front lines of the bloodiest battle the world has ever seen, and come back with no limbs, if it meant that that would guarantee me an ugly fat chick for life."

Yet he won't lift weights and get a decent haircut.

Reminds me of chubby girls who say "ughh I would do ANYTHING to be skinny." Anything except eat less, that is.

Post: #70

(05-11-2017 05:05 PM)TheWhiteWolf Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 04:55 PM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 10:02 AM)Dan Woolf Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 09:54 AM)Comte De St. Germain Wrote:  C. You'll just be making sexual communism happen. You want to redistribute the wealth ummm I mean bitches? FUCK YOU!

You're putting words like alpha and beta men into the mouths of our ancestors. By today's standards all of our ancestors were "alpha". Hard work and struggle hardened and molded them creating positive traits that were attractive. Modern unsociable men fuck no.

The only positive trait they have is that they persistently can't adapt making them less of a hassle as genetic dead ends. Betas back then had pride dignity and drive. The only feature that modern ones have is the latter of those three in the hopes of getting something they can't get.

No family back then would let their daughter marry a social failure who couldn't leave their house or wouldn't bring their daughter honor. They were considered losers.

Likewise no man would take a woman who couldn't socialize they'd be considered evolutionary dead ends as they make bad mothers

Show me the guys that wouldn't wouldn't be with a a smokeshow if she was shy or socially awkward.

Dated a girl who was socially awkward and incredibly shy. She was beautiful and had a body out of science fiction, was sweet and feminine and loving. Loved that I would take her places and do all the talking for her. Not a problem whatsoever, actually probably prevented lot of silly drama.

Your other example about guys was loading the question when the other guys are talking about people with advanced degrees. If our ancestor's village/town had master craftsman with amazing skills that would be a great provider for your daughter and grand kids, you made sure your daughter married him and not douchebag with no prospects that liked to talk. The talker would be run out of town with pitch forks if started taking eligible young daughters to bed.

Part of the problem is that simply "being a good man" DID work for thousands of years and lots of guys today haven't made the adjustment yet. Claiming that these things DIDN'T work when they clearly did for thousands of years is a little silly.

Post: #71

(05-12-2017 05:46 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  Show me the guys that wouldn't wouldn't be with a a smokeshow if she was shy or socially awkward.

Dated a girl who was socially awkward and incredibly shy. She was beautiful and had a body out of science fiction, was sweet and feminine and loving. Loved that I would take her places and do all the talking for her. Not a problem whatsoever, actually probably prevented lot of silly drama.

Your other example about guys was loading the question when the other guys are talking about people with advanced degrees. If our ancestor's village/town had master craftsman with amazing skills that would be a great provider for your daughter and grand kids, you made sure your daughter married him and not douchebag with no prospects that liked to talk. The talker would be run out of town with pitch forks if started taking eligible young daughters to bed.

Part of the problem is that simply "being a good man" DID work for thousands of years and lots of guys today haven't made the adjustment yet. Claiming that these things DIDN'T work when they clearly did for thousands of years is a little silly.

Begs the question: what is a "good" man?

The problem is corruption. Corruption is when the stated goals and rules of a system don't match up to the practical goals and rules of a system. Border security is supposed to be about border security; in the old Soviet states, it was about a party member being given a lucrative position where he could demand bribes from wealthy American tourists. The supposed purpose was given lipservice, but it came secondarily, after profit, and a border guard who tried to be honest would get fired when he failed to kick a percentage of the bribes up to his commanding officer.

Corruption is going to be present in any system to some degree - so let's not be whiny purists who point at the hypocrisy within the church/police/society/whatever and so we are "free" to drop out and go our own way - but the present levels of corruption in our culture, particularly sexual/marital culture, is so high that the system is on the verge of collapse.

Our culture says that a "good" man is XYZ. Young man goes out and naively practices XYZ, and his life is miserable. Meanwhile, another man who practices ABC succeeds.

Society is supposed to tell us how they want us to behave, and then reward us when we behave that way. That's what "good" means in a social context. But in practice, doing the opposite of "good" is what gets results.

Corrupt systems suck. Try and zig when others zag, while also living the change you want to see in the system. Watch Bosch on Amazon streaming; he's a perfect example of being an honest man in a dishonest system.

Post: #72

(05-12-2017 02:21 PM)Aurini Wrote:  Preface to this post: there's a difference between Autism/Asperger's in the real world, and the autism we find on the internet. The former seems to be an overload of the senses, and a poor theory of person; the latter is just malformed social skills, and I'm speaking about the latter.

Does it seem to anyone else that there's a huge amount of loathing in single mothers for their male children? It's like every young boy these days is being turned into a tranny, diagnosed with autism, or doped up because of ADHD. This is beyond the bad sort of parenting you get from a single mom - heck, my parents separated when I was thirteen, so I know first hand that a woman (even a hardworking and loving woman like my mother) just can't properly parent a young man - but what we're seeing with young boys these days is a step beyond. It's not just that women have a lot of trouble understanding what it means to be a man - it's that they're downright hostile to the male principle.

"I just want you to be happy!" says the mother, as she encourages her son to bugchase, she "Munchausen's by proxy"'s her kid into identifying with some crippling anxiety disorder, or just encourages him to be a nice guy to women who treat him like shit.

A single mother with a male child is going to have about half a dozen psychological issues sloshing around her head.

She's going to love the kid (well, you hope so anyway) but that kid will, every single day, remind her of the father that she will unavoidably hate since he rejected her. Whether it's in his eyes, the way he stands, or even just how he says something, something of the father passes on to the son in every case. That's a massive internal conflict she pretty much will never get to resolve because the wound will always be fresh, always be there every morning.

Some women unconsciously try to rehabilitate the father who isn't there, i.e. why single mothers beat down their male children or crush them into social awkwardness. They are trying to avenge themselves on the absent father, or they're trying to turn that element of the father that's in the son into a "good man."

Think of it also as overcompensation. They bang a bad boy who leaves her with a kid, and, terrified that they wanted a bad boy to start with, they try to crush every masculine impulse out of their son that reminds them of what they were attracted to in the first place. It's akin to the weak, ineffective "protectiveness" that fathers have over teenage daughters because they know what boys were like at the same age. (I say weak and ineffective because in the West a father cannot exert any control over his teenage daughters, even if he desperately wants to. The law more or less prevents him from doing so, let alone the rigged divorce system which incentivises his daughter becoming a slut. If he hasn't instilled control via moral principles by the time the kid hits 13, the battle is already over.)

God save us from people who mean well. -storm

Post: #73

(05-12-2017 07:43 PM)Aurini Wrote:  

(05-12-2017 05:46 PM)DarkTriad Wrote:  Show me the guys that wouldn't wouldn't be with a a smokeshow if she was shy or socially awkward.

Dated a girl who was socially awkward and incredibly shy. She was beautiful and had a body out of science fiction, was sweet and feminine and loving. Loved that I would take her places and do all the talking for her. Not a problem whatsoever, actually probably prevented lot of silly drama.

Your other example about guys was loading the question when the other guys are talking about people with advanced degrees. If our ancestor's village/town had master craftsman with amazing skills that would be a great provider for your daughter and grand kids, you made sure your daughter married him and not douchebag with no prospects that liked to talk. The talker would be run out of town with pitch forks if started taking eligible young daughters to bed.

Part of the problem is that simply "being a good man" DID work for thousands of years and lots of guys today haven't made the adjustment yet. Claiming that these things DIDN'T work when they clearly did for thousands of years is a little silly.

Begs the question: what is a "good" man?

The problem is corruption. Corruption is when the stated goals and rules of a system don't match up to the practical goals and rules of a system. Border security is supposed to be about border security; in the old Soviet states, it was about a party member being given a lucrative position where he could demand bribes from wealthy American tourists. The supposed purpose was given lipservice, but it came secondarily, after profit, and a border guard who tried to be honest would get fired when he failed to kick a percentage of the bribes up to his commanding officer.

Corruption is going to be present in any system to some degree - so let's not be whiny purists who point at the hypocrisy within the church/police/society/whatever and so we are "free" to drop out and go our own way - but the present levels of corruption in our culture, particularly sexual/marital culture, is so high that the system is on the verge of collapse.

Our culture says that a "good" man is XYZ. Young man goes out and naively practices XYZ, and his life is miserable. Meanwhile, another man who practices ABC succeeds.

Society is supposed to tell us how they want us to behave, and then reward us when we behave that way. That's what "good" means in a social context. But in practice, doing the opposite of "good" is what gets results.

Corrupt systems suck. Try and zig when others zag, while also living the change you want to see in the system. Watch Bosch on Amazon streaming; he's a perfect example of being an honest man in a dishonest system.

I'm not even going that deep, doesn't matter whether the job was corrupt or the religion he was teaching was false, I'm just saying that in the era we were talking about, the "dancing clown" games we're forced to play for women nowadays simply weren't important.

A girl would think someone like that was interesting...immediately before he parents married her (at 15 years old) to a guy that could support her and had values that would make him treat her and her kids well for the next 50 years.

You weren't charming a teenager, you were pitching yourself to her mom and her dad as a guy that could take care of her. Completely different game that some of the (advanced degree) incels on that site would have done much better with.

A lot of the "dishonesty" of the current system is people still giving advice that worked...on her parents, a hundred years ago. They just haven't caught up.