Thumotic Linkage

by Frost on April 12, 2013

Are you reading Thumotic: A Community For Men With The Fighting Spirit? You should be.

Here’s a taste of what we’re up to over there:

The Entry-Level Nootropic Stack

“Over the past month, I’ve used a variety of natural and easily obtainable supplements to significantly improve my focus, memory, mood, and cognition. I have turned my brain into a more effective machine.”

Eight Reasons Men With Options Don’t Date Feminists

“Masculine men don’t date feminists.

Occasionally, horniness and a lack of better options forces us to bang them. But even then, we are merely going through the motions with the urgency and desperation of a starving man scraping rotten cheese off a discarded pizza box.”

How Speed Dating Works

“I went speed dating last night and had a lovely time. For those of you who live under rocks, speed dating is where you pay a few bucks to go on a dozen three-minute dates with a bunch of girls who’ve signed up to do the same. As a keen student of human sexual dynamics, and a narcissist who loves to talk about myself, it was right up my alley.”

Comments at Thumotic are heavily moderated – only informative, positive additions to the information in the post are allowed through.

But, long-time readers of Freedom Twenty-Five, I would like to ask you: What do you want to see more of at Thumotic? What topics are you interested in? What problems do you have in your life that could be solved with the help of a handsome blogger with a bit of time to research lifestyle design on your behalf? Laissez-moi savoir.

And since Google is being a bunch of cunts and shutting down Reader, Follow me on Twitter to stay abreast of new posts.

{ 0 comments }

Ask Me Anything

by Frost on February 19, 2013

Reddit is a site where dorks waste time looking at pictures of kittehs and saggy boobs. But it’s also a key battleground in la revolucion for the hearts and minds of the best and brightest young minds in America. So it is with great pleasure that I introduce you to The Red Pill subreddit.

In a category that admittedly includes no better than the lickspittle manginas of r/seduction and whiny incel Bizarro Universe feminists of r/mensrights, The Red Pill is the best subreddit on the site by a wide margin.

But perhaps I’m biased, because the good men running it have done me the kindness of hosting an AMA (basically a crowd-sourced interview) today at noon. If you head over and create an account, which will take you all of five seconds, you can ask me any question you want. Yes, gentle reader, I will be coming down from my perch of D-List internet fame to mingle with you, the rabble. Never say I don’t have the common touch.

I encourage you to spend some time clicking around r/TheRedPill, upvoting that which is good, dropping the blue arrow hammer of Thor on that which is not. You may even make a habbit of submitting an article or two on your own. And once that’s all done with, drop u/RedPillSchool a line and let him know what a bang up job he’s doing on behalf of the movement. Or just report him to the SPLC. I’m sure he’d take either as a complement.

But don’t do it out of the kindness of your heart, dear reader.

I am hereby making an offer that will be good for the next twenty-four hours: Anyone who PMs my Reddit account in the next 24 hours will receive… drum roll please…. a free advance copy of A Generation Of Men, my first novel. Devotees will recognize it as Trig with new clothes and a haircut. It will retail for twelve bucks on March 1st, but in the coming week I’ll be giving copies away like a pedophile with a pocket full of candy at an elementary school for the blind.

So team, let’s summarize the action items:

1) Go to The Red Pill Subreddit. Create an account. Up or Down vote everything the light touches.

2) Participate in my AMA interview. Upvote it if you appreciate my irascible charm.

3) PM me from your brand spankin’ new Reddit account for a code that will let you download A Generation of Men for free.

{ 4 comments }

Book Reviews: Ferdinand, Jack Donovan, Aurini

by Frost on February 5, 2013

Reading is fun kids. Here are three books that belong on any respectable Red Pill bookshelf.

Three Years Of Hate, by Ferdinand Bardamu

Three_Years_of_Hate-_Cover_for_Kindle

3YoH is a collection of Bardamu’s best articles over his three years as lead author of In Mala Fide. I could write an original and brilliant paean to the Bardamu ouevre, but oh wait, I already have. Work smart, not hard, that’s the ticket:

“In Mala Fide is not a safe space. Ferdinand’s worldview is a blended mess of nihilistic anarchism, traditional conservatism, libertarianism, and youthful rebellion for the sake of itself. And still, it is one of the clearest approximations of reality that you’ll find today. In Mala Fide has become one of the most popular and comprehensive blogs (and web magazines) in the alt-right blogosphere, primarily on the back of Ferdinand’s ability to articulate a cogent and original perspective in a literary space dominated by cant.

In addition to his contributions to the alternative blogosphere as a writer, this throwback profile would be incomplete without a mention of Ferdinand’s role in coalescing the diverse world into a single community. Weekly link-love posts, and a willingness to regularly host guest submissions from both established and new authors, have turned In Mala Fide into a one-stop hub for all your non-mainstream opinion and analysis needs.

The result of these two approaches – bold, reckless, and insightful literary forays into the murky swamps of the 21st-century western mind, combined with an open-door policy for dissenting opinions – is that In Mala Fide is currently the closest thing the alternative blogosphere has to a center.”

Also see my short eulogy for IMF. One wonders what the old boy is up to now. He didn’t strike me as the sort whose pen could lay idle for long. But until he rises, Han Solo-like, from wherever he is, buy the dirt cheap and well worth it Three Years Of Hate.

* * *

Next up is Jack Donovan’s The Way Of Men.

I already reviewed it here, but in retrospect, I did a terrible job of communicating what a great book it is. My only excuse is that I was trying to make a point that was tangential to the review (the scope of the task of narrating a renaissance of traditional masculinity), but it came off wrong. Or, maybe my mind was just poisoned with negativity after a month of backpacking around the proud, noble, street-corner-shitting people of India. Either way, here is the cold truth: The Way Of Men is an excellent book. It was a very interesting read, it led me to a ton of great primary sources, I’ve thought about it frequently since putting it down, and it’s inspired one of my favourite new habits that I’ve built into my life since reading it. Buy it right now if you haven’t already.

* * *

Last but not least is Aurini’s As I Walk These Broken Roads.

“As I Walk These Broken Roads” by D.M.J. Aurini

I will preface this review by saying that I was very, very excited to read this book. I was also genuinely afraid to read it. I was afraid because Aurini is one of my favourite bloggers. He is, as far as the word can apply to someone I’ve never met and who wouldn’t know my face in a crowd, a friend. Most importantly of all, I know that he’s a damn good writer and had worked his ass off on this book. If he couldn’t throw together a decent book, a worthy opening salvo in the looming culture war between The Cathedral and its soon-to-be-exponentially-growing Red Pill challenger, what chance do the rest of us have?

So it is with great relief that I write this sentence: As I Walk These Broken Roads is a great book. It is gripping, entertaining, immersive, and manages to walk the incredibly fine line of being very thoughtful and deep, while staying true to its core as a character-driven suspense thriller.

It’s not perfect. In fact, there are some fairly obvious flaws, and its a testament to the quality of As I Walk These Broken Roads that I recommend it so highly despite them. Some of the dialogue is strained. The first few chapters are extraordinary. There’s a romance that feels like it was added by a Hollywood producer who demanded that Aurini fit a love story somewhere, anywhere, in a book that is essentially a story of men.

I also had some trouble believing the early stages of the relationship between the two main characters. Without giving too much away, I think that there friendship comes too easily, especially in a post-apocalyptic world in which I would expect people to be much more guarded and hesitant to trust. But, other reviewers have praised the relationship as the best aspect of the book, so maybe I’m just not seeing it. I do agree that the relationship in question, certainly one of the most important aspects of the book, is extremely well written and believable. But the beginning felt like each was very much wearing a green light at a ‘looking for a new BFFE’ party.

But enough nit-picking As I said, none of these flaws interfered much with my enjoyment of the book.

As a suspense novel, it is a great read. As a bromantic comedy, it is quite funny and moving in a very understated, masculine way. As a meditation on the nature of society in general, and our own in particular, it is the sort of book that often pops into my mind after putting it down, and one I look forward to re-reading. Most importantly, Aurini has created an extremely interesting post-apocalyptic world, a fascinatingly ambiguous protagonist, and a story with enough deliberate loose ends to leave me eagerly awaiting the sequels.

Buy As I Walk These Broken Roads

{ 3 comments }

The Crackle Of Pigskin

by Frost on February 3, 2013

It’s been a dramatic week in the Red Pill blogosphere.

Ricky Raw has written two posts at Nexxtlevelup, taking on Human Biological Diversity and accusing the community that acknowledges it, more or less, of being losers. Chuck Ross, who writes about HBD among a great many other topics, took up arms against the Nexxt Level Up commentariat. This prompted Danger and Play to write that Chuck should stop wasting his time writing about depressing political topics, and use his talents to start making money online by writing about personal finance. Chuck responds that his blog is not all about the Benjamins.

Tempers flared. Comment-thread skirmishes and Twitter battles raged on all week. Men chose sides. Feelings were hurt. Such is war.

It’s for the best though. The Red Pill blogosphere, the nascent counter-Cathedral, is an odd mixture of personalities and views. Not all of them are mutually compatible. We might as well blow off some steam, talk about our feels, and – if necessary – go our separate ways. In a way I’m proud. No movement can be properly considered grown-up until it goes through a good old-fashioned purge of its Trotsykite wreckers.

My ideal outcome would be for the two halves of the Red Pill blogosphere – Reactionary and Self-Improvement – to stay BFF’s. The two subjects are a match made in heaven. But human nature is what it is: Tribal.

So, Human Biological Diversity. I won’t even bother making the case for it. It’s 2013. Every intelligent and curious American with the ability to operate the internet can review the facts on their own time. Should these facts scare us? No. We each are who we are, and we each do what we can to make the best of what we have. The relevance of HBD to our personal lives – especially if, like most, the people you live and work amongst are from your own social class – is negligible. It’s not just decent to treat a man with no regard for the colour of his skin – it’s rational.

But while its possible to disregard group averages in our treatment of individuals, we cannot do the same for our treatment of groups. We cannot disregard the realities of human biological diversity when we make grand, collective, nationwide decisions affecting our policies on immigration, education, criminal justice, civil rights, and a hundred other areas. An individual who remains ignorant of the realities of human biological diversity and embraces the Blank Slate hypothesis can still live a happy and productive life. A society that ignores it…

- Will accept arguments like these for massive increases in Mestizo/Aztec immigration.

- Will continue pouring money into programs like Head Start, until we succeed in closing The Gap.

- Will continue to attribute any observed racial patterns in crime to racism. Such patterns will be denied, covered up, and mentioning them in any polite context – let alone during a formal discussion of public policy – will be extremely taboo.

- Will continue to view any difference in outcomes to be the product of racism, will waste billions if not trillions of dollars encumbering every aspect of its productive economy and education system with a complex, destructive, and completely ridiculous system of affirmative action, disparate impact lawsuits, quotas, and other assorted shenanigans, all to avoid ever having to question the null hypothesis that perhaps not all humans are created perfectly equal in every conceivable trait.

America is actually quite odd, on a global and historical scale, in its absolute insistence on shutting its eyes and plugging its ears to the realities of average differences between human sub-populations. Outside of liberal enclaves of America from 1964-2013, the vast majority of people simply accept the reality of group differences.

Why does our society insist, so vigorously, at such a cost, and against all available evidence, on abiding by the theology of the Blank Slate? This is a big question, but the surface answer is that a lot of money, a lot of careers, a lot of political power, and a lot of ego depends on it.

The costs are huge. The Diversity Industry wastes tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars; Affirmative Action throws hurdles in front of high-achieving Whites and Asians throughout their careers; Perhaps most importantly, our society now enforces a strict code of thought. All right-thinking people must pretend that a simple, straightforward, observable fact of human nature does not exist, or they will be fired, drummed out of polite society, and depending on their jurisdiction, thrown into prison.

This is unhealthy. This is tyranny. This is the hysterical enforcement of feigning allegiance blatant lies, and it is the mark of a power structure about to collapse.

Not to mention that stuff like this is just unfair. I have no idea why Asian Americans are not more pissed off about this. At least the race hustlers pretend to have a reason - the 150-year-old legacy of slavery – why imposing legal penalties on men with white skin is OK. Why is it OK to put these artificial hurdles in front of Chinese immigrants, whose great grandfathers were brought to the continent in chains? I guess no one ever bothered to tell the Chinese – or the Vietnemese, Irish, Italians, Poles, Armenians, etc – that the true path to success in America lies the way of victimhood posturing.

Note, Ricky Raw does not deny that proponents of Human Biological Diversity are right. To his credit, he acknowledges this in the comments here:

“Again, NO ONE IS DENYING THERE ARE GENETIC DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE RACES AND THAT THE GENETIC DISPARITY IN IQ HAS A GENETIC COMPONENT TO IT.”

But while he agrees with the fact that HBD is true, and I presume he would agree that this fact is suppressed in all public forums, Ricky Raw’s claim is that this entire subject is unimportant, and thus only attracts the attention of psychologically damaged weirdos. He has written an entire series, not in an attempt to take down any particular claims, but to tar anyone who crosses the politically correct limes into wrongthink as insecure, shame-based, and whatever else he read in Psychology Today this month. He has constructed a hilariously bad sequence of arguments, under the pretense of detached observation, in support of his own ego-salvaging belief that anyone who dares to write about race in America, is a big meanie.

Raw believes that anyone interested in this extremely interesting, relevant, and systematically suppressed field of inquiry, must be doing so out of secret racism and white man shame. Then, he accuses Chuck Ross of writing an ego-driven blog.

At this point, the reader may be drawn to the simplest and most obvious conclusion: Ricky Raw is an idiot.

But this is not the case. I’ve been reading The Rawness for years. The author is usually a smart and insightful guy. He’s usually an honest and clear thinker. Something about the present topic though, cuts his critical thinking abilities off at the knees. No points for guessing what that is.

I agree with Ricky Raw on one point: Strongly identifying with your race is the mark of an insecure man. A confident man stands on his own two feet. If he wishes to brag, he invokes his own accomplishments, not those of his ancestors, nor the status afforded him by his station in life. A white man who derives a great deal of his self-worth from his whiteness, is probably a loser.

But then, what can we say about a black American who is personally offended by discussions of HBD? Ricky Raw and VK are smart guys. They will continue to be smart guys, no matter what Steve Sailer writes about disparate impact.

My own primary ethnicity is in the lower bound of European populations in IQ. Yet, I can solve differential equations like a Chinaman and – as the astute reader will note – craft sentences with the deftness of a wily Jew. Group genetics are not individual destiny. If Raw and VK were  comfortable in their own skin, so to speak, they would join HBD-bloggers-of-colour like Jayman and Nelson in acknowledging this core truth of human nature, and accept that the HBD is one of the most interesting topics in the human sciences today. Raw doesn’t have to write about it himself – plenty of smart, talented people, including one of the best damn journalists of our generation, have already got it covered – but he should stop embarrassing himself by pretending that it’s not a legitimate area of inquiry.

{ 8 comments }

Winter Is Coming

by Frost on January 25, 2013

Check out the latest post over at Thumotic: Winter Is Coming. And now, a word from our sponsors:

Have you subscribed to Thumotic yet?

Do you follow me on Twitter?

Have you bought the Freedom Twenty-Five Lifestyle Guide and The 2012 End Of The World Tour?

{ 6 comments }

I am not a Christian. But, I take Christianity far more seriously than most.

Taking Christianity seriously marks me as an oddity in the modern era, wherein everyone who’s anyone knows that only low-class, backwards, half-retarded rubes ever consider the possibility that the story of biblical Jesus Christ is anything more than a fairy tale. A little while ago, I told someone close to me that I was reading the Bible and a stack of Christian writers in an effort to better understand the origins of western history and philosophy. Their off-hand response was: “I suppose that might be interesting. But honestly, as soon as I find out a person is a Christian, I lose all intellectual respect for anything they say after that.”

Well. That’s certainly one way to look at it. But imagine making the same statement about Muslims, Buddhists, Koreans, teachers, pipefitters, tall people, feminists, conservatives… or really, any sort of differentiable group of people. With any other target, such a statement would be beyond crass. When Christianity is our subject of ridicule though, full speed ahead.

The stronger the modern leftist taboo around a given set of beliefs – i.e., feminism, global warming, human biological uniformity – the more likely it is to be true. Such is the trend I’ve noticed.

Our universe appears, beyond a shadow of a doubt, to be the product of either design or evolution. This is absolutely beyond dispute. Paley’s watchmaker, now armed with our 21st-century knowledge of cosmological constants, exists. I repeat, this is an observable fact about our universe that is beyond dispute: Our existential plane gives every appearance of having been designed with the intent of hosting intelligent life. Richard Dawkins, the closest thing atheism has to a pope, devotes the second half of The God Delusion, not to refuting this observation, but rather to offering alternatives explanations.

And yes, there are alternatives. Our universe could be one of an infinite number. This is the Multiverse Hypothesis. Combined with the Anthropic Principle, it provides a perfectly reasonable and God-free explanation for the otherwise implausible existence of our fine-tuned universe.

Does God exist? Or are we the fortunate inhabitants of one of a few habitable worlds among multitudes of lifeless parallel universes? Both explanations are, to a first approximation, pretty far out. Hence, my agnosticism.

But when I look around the world, I see many agnostics (and many Christians) who are agnostic (or Christian) in name only, while their actions betray their true atheism.

Consider: If you are uncertain of whether a proposition is true, and the truth or falsity of that proposition is extremely relevant to your life, the rational thing to do is expend as much time and energy as possible evaluating that proposition. Say, you are legitimately unsure of whether there is a suitcase filled with hundred dollar bills hidden somewhere in your basement. Or, that your house is on fire.

In either situation, if there is any doubt in your mind, if you are any less than ~100% sure that there is no suitcase and no fire – you would be a fool not to immediately set about finding the truth. Right now, as I type this, I am ~100% sure that my house is not on fire. If the fire alarm were to go off right now, I would adjust this probability to 95%. (If that seems high, keep in mind my roommates and I are not good cooks.) Still, that five percent possibility is enough that I would immediately stop what I’m doing and figure out if the house is on fire or not.

The truth or falsity of the God Hypothesis is vastly more relevant to our lives than a mere fire. The logical and evidential case for the possibility of the existence of God is quite strong, if not conclusive. So why are most men completely unconcerned with the question of whether God exists?

Further to all this, Pascal’s Wager is an irrefutable case for why any hedonist who is not completely convinced of the non-existence of God, should immediately start living a pious life and do his utmost to ‘trick’ himself into believing through prayer, readings of the bible, and immersion in a social milieu conducive to Christian brainwashing.

But, while the case for literal, certain atheism is extraordinarily and obviously weak (not even Richard Dawkins can bring himself to endorse it in The God Delusion), many atheists are completely convinced of the non-existence of God.

Much of this flows from the success of a clever rhetorical trick on the part of atheist thinkers: The re-definition of God.

There exist many sound logical proofs of God’s non-existence. But each takes His literal omniscience, omnibenevolence, and omnipotence as their core premises, rendering them cute but meaningless:

Can God create a rock so heavy he himself cannot move it? Checkmate, Christians!

If God knows everything that will ever happen, how can we have free will? Checkmate, Christians!

If God is perfectly good, why does little Suzie Jenkins have leukemia? CHECK and MATE, Christians!

And so on.

There is some scriptural basis for assigning these qualities to God. But I think we should make the distinction between literal and effective omnipotence. When God describes himself to humanity, we’re on a need-to-know basis.

God is, to us, for our own practical purposes, all-powerful. Much like, if you could communicate with a population of sentient avatars in a game of SimCity 2000, you might similarly describe yourself to them. And it would not be dishonest. From the Sims perspective, you are God. Sometimes you fuck up, sometimes you have to get up and take a piss, and there are some limitations to what you can and cannot will in the context of the game. But…details, you know?

Taking this view of our God, limited somehow – though all-powerful and all-knowing within the context of our own existence – makes Him much, much more plausible. God is God – to us. But perhaps, at some level, he has his own problems. Perhaps he has his own God or Gods to answer to. I don’t think this idea is at all incompatible with Christian scripture.

I also don’t think its nearly as ‘far-out’ and ‘weird’ as it may appear at a first pass. Humanity, right here and right now, seems to be on the verge of creating our own ‘artificial’ intelligences, i.e. sentient life forms who inhabit a digital plane of existence subordinate to our own, to whom we would be, essentially, Gods. Perhaps we’re the product of some earlier iteration of this process, in which intelligent life begats intelligent life on a lower plane of existence than itself.

If humans are mere decades away from becoming, in a sense, creator-Gods, how can we dismiss the possibility that the universe we inhabit is the product of a similar event? Many bright people who would (rationally) admit that it is well within the realm of possibility for human beings to become Gods, irrationally deny that it’s possible we have a God.

*

But What if God is a Dick?

Much is said on the subject of whether God exists or not. But comparatively little energy is spent considering whether God is good or evil. I actually think that this is a much more interesting question than that of his existence. What if God hates us? Or is indifferent to us? What if God’s pretensions to loving us and wanting us to find salvation are a scam? That would be a pretty awkward position for humanity.

But here are my two reasons for believing that God, if he exists, has our best interests at heart.

The truth is hard to come by

The history of Christianity is complex. A smart person can spend a lot of time and energy parsing the philosophical and historical arguments for and against the existence of Christ, and still walk away unsatisfied. I offer this as evidence for, not the existence of God, but the conditional proposition that if God exists, then he is good.

Let’s say you were a God. You are a God who wants to judge your creations on the strength of their character and their faith. But, the subjects of your creation naturally differ in cognitive ability, so you cannot make your existence a mere test of reading comprehension or a logic puzzle – if you did, you would only reward the intelligent and punish the dim.

So you want to create a test that poses an equal, or at least equitable challenge to smart and dumb creations alike.

If that were my goal, as God, I would reveal myself to humanity in such a way that the essential goodness of my message was easily grokked in the primitive hindbrain cockles of the left side of the bell curve, while sending the intelligent and inquisitive in a long and arduous hunt through the philosophical and historiographical arguments for and against my existence. I would reveal myself in such a way that my individual creations, no matter what their given level of intelligence, could not ever arrive at a state of perfect certainty with regard to my existence. I would deprive no one, smart or dumb, of the fundamental choice to believe or not.

*

The minimalist nature of God’s revelation to us suggests his benevolence in another way.

God desires our obedience, allegedly, for our own sake. We can follow God or not – He is, as we say, outcome independent. God would like us to be good, for our own sake. But, an evil God would say that, wouldn’t he?

If we accept that God exists, we must also consider the possibility that our creator wants us to obey for some other reason.

Suppose you created a race of artificial intelligences in a supercomputer. Might you consider telling them that you are God, and invent some narrative whereby they will be saved if they toil all their lives coming up with HFT algorithms that make you jillions of dollars? I certainly would. So, maybe our God is pulling a fast one on us.

But, if that were the case, God would hold daily conference calls with anyone who ever doubted his existence. All the better to keep us serving and obeying. As it stands, God seems content with a world in which very few of his creations even attempt to do as he commands. This, ironically, suggests that he has our best interests (or at least, the interests of the best of us) at heart.

{ 42 comments }

How To Find A Wife

by Frost on January 8, 2013

I published an epic, 5000-word post on Thumotic today, titled: How To Find A Wife.

Romantic, yeah? Well don’t get too hopeful. It is, to put it bluntly, pretty fucking dark.

Absolutely required reading for any man who is even considering fatherhood in the 21st century.

Read it here.

{ 14 comments }

The Contrived Hook Point

by Frost on January 4, 2013

Cool kids everywhere are talking about the coolest new blog in this cool little neighbourhood – Thumotic: A Community For Men With The Fighting Spirit.

Today’s post is titled The Contrived Hook Point.

I mentioned one of my favourite smooth moves in this post: I call it The Contrived Hook Point.

What is a hook point? Basically it’s the moment when a girl goes from lukewarm to definitely wanting your dick and starts radiating IOIs like she just went supernova. Recognizing when a girl hits her hook point is important, because once a girl is there, the game is yours to lose. You can chill out, relax, and focus on sealing up your logistics.

But this post isn’t about her hook point. It’s about yours…

Read the rest of this post at Thumotic, my new blog covering Seduction and Lifestyle topics.

{ 0 comments }

Links

by Frost on December 28, 2012

As a gentleman of a certain age, that age being the ripe old twenty-seven, allow me to say: It’s a truly incredible time to be young.

I don’t usually ask much of my readers, but today I am asking a personal favour you: Stop what you are doing, and go read this post of Krauser’s right now. It may well be the most valuable piece of prose a young man can find today.

If you’re a man in your early twenties, you have no idea how valuable it is to have guys like this laying it all out for you. Older men didn’t have that. They didn’t have the Red Pill, in all its myriad forms.

To the extent that I followed much of Krauser’s advice through my twenties (I basically did) I am extraordinarily grateful to past-Frost for his work. To the extent that I didn’t follow it – i.e, spending huge amounts of my undergraduate years drunk and hungover – I regret it. If you’re a young man reading this post, I really can’t emphasize enough how important it is for you to read and meditate on that post.

Read it now

*

Also check out:

- Roosh’s Return of Kings blog is turning into a great site. Here’s a collection of the top fifteen posts from its first two months in operation.

- The panhandling season is upon us. Personally, I would have paid many thousands of dollars for all the value I’ve received from the alternative blogosphere over the years. If you feel the same way, my personal recommendations for your donations are Heartiste and Steve Sailer.

- The Manosphere goes mainstream. Not one but two recent articles in the Sydney Morning Herald quote the crew somewhat approvingly.

- Some presumably handsome and charming devil has been writing a new seduction and lifestyle blog by the name of Thumotic. Check out The 100% Guaranteed Second Date Bang, and Facilitating, Not Attracting

{ 1 comment }

Don’t Worry Sluts, Lydia’s Got Your Back

by Frost on December 27, 2012

The two questions that matter in politics are Who? and Whom?

The wisdom of this old Lenin quote lies in the observation that all politics is tribal. Sexual politics are no exception.

To most in the Manosphere, the battle lines are clear: Men are on one side, women on the other. But this is an inaccurate and unproductive perspective. The true divide is between the traditionalists and their opponents. But, not all who call themselves traditionalists fight for the same side…

For example, here we have Dalrock and commenter Lydia going at it red in tooth and claw, even though both are allegedly Christians fighting for the resurrection of true, biblical marriage and sexual morality in the western world. One would think they would have no trouble putting aside what surface differences they may have to fight their common cause. And yet, Lydia is uninterested in any sort of dialogue.

I suggest you read the entire post, and links therein, but the gist of it is that Lydia is claiming Dalrock is a bad bad man because he says mean things about women, i.e. calling out those who are sluts, unfeminine, unChristian, and poor marriage material. In response to another Christian blogger linking to Dalrock, Lydia writes:

“If the blogger linked is supposed to be an example of someone who appears to care deeply about marriage and the family, you can keep him. I don’t care if he’s a Christian. I don’t care that he knows feminism is false or that lots of Christians are, unfortunately, feminists. (Whoop-de-doo.) Someone that callous and cynical, who freely thinks and talks in the terms of “Game,” who pretty obviously thinks that all women are prima facie sluts, has had his chivalry and his capacity for wonder permanently damaged if not destroyed.”

To which Dalrock responds:

“Lydia’s complaint is that I am being allowed to think differently than than she would permit, and that Zippy is compounding the problem by exposing his male readers to such subversive ideas.  Her argument isn’t that the facts I’m presenting are untrue, but that I’m committing a thought-crime against the feminine imperative by acknowledging such a painfully obvious pattern.  She is there to make sure no such thought-crimes occur in the minds of Zippy or his readers, lest they too become defective men.”

This is not the sort of thing we’re used to seeing between ideological and spiritual allies. They are not merely haggling over tactics or the details of their visions. There is a vast and unbridgeable gulf between them. We’re left to conclude: One of these two, Lydia or Dalrock, is doing God’s work (take that as literally or figuratively as you like) and one is sowing evil. Lydia and Dalrock surely have strong opinions in the matter. But what are we to make of them? Let’s answer by considering an older, less crude paraphrase of Lenin’s two questions: Cui bono? Who stands to benefit from Dalrock’s perspective gaining traction among the modern Christian community? Who stands to benefit from Lydia’s?

If you are a woman who plans to spend, or has already spent her twenties on the carousel, your loyalties are clear: Lydia’s got your back. She stands firm between you and the Dalrocks of the world who would otherwise be free to call you out on your sin (if that’s a concern of yours) and general poor value as a mate and mother (if it’s not).

If you’re a loyal, monogamous, Christian man who aspires to find a good wife, settle down, and raise a family, Dalrock wants you to know what you’re getting into when you decide to marry a modern “Christian” woman. Lydia wants you to man up and marry those sluts.

But what if you’re – and I will ask my more cynical readers to suspend their disbelief for a second – a true, actual, good woman, seeking to pledge yourself to one man for your life and be a good wife and mother? If this is the case, Lydia is the greatest enemy you will face in this life.

Good women of the world, if you’re out there, take heed: There is a great tidal wave of cynicism, disdain and raw hatred building up in the men of my generation. It is the logical response to what is perhaps he worst generation of women that any culture in any era has ever produced. Over fifty years, women have neglected to fulfill their end of the social contract. Those chickens are coming home to roost. When they arrive, you will see the complete evaporation of the multitude of privileges and advantages that come with living life as a 2012 empowered woman in a world of 1950s chivalrous men. The pendulum has swung out far, and its return will make life very, very difficult for contemporary women.

There is only one way that you will escape the fate of spinsterhood, genetic irrelevance, and poverty: You must differentiate yourself. You must draw a line between yourself and the women who have inspired the men of the world to forsake marriage and decency. You must demonstrate a clear and unambiguous line between the feminists, the sluts, the empowered, the unChristian – and yourself.

Dalrock, and those like him, will give you a chance to do so. The Lydias of the world would deny you that opportunity. By shouting down the men and women who would otherwise call out the behaviour of promiscuous women, they force men to judge your gender as one. In doing so, she makes herself the best friend the slutty women of the world could ever hope to ask for.

Also see: Who Benefits From The Sexual Revolution? Part 1, and Part 2.

{ 9 comments }