Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for the ‘Self-aggrandizement’ Category

I’ve since lost the link to the original Voxday post, but this comment by Cail Coreshev is a valid criticism of dual-income marriages that one doesn’t often read from more mainstream sociological pundits:

Good comment, but it’s too bad he threw in that sop to getting an “education” before marriage. The “she needs it for a financial backup just in case” attitude is a big part of the feminist narrative. It leads to women entering marriage with one foot out the door, trying it out for a while before deciding whether to go with the backup. By the time she gets that college degree “just in case,” she’s already burned through several of her most attractive, fertile years; and unless she’s unusually virtuous, has been on the carousel learning bad habits.

It makes logical sense to reduce your risks as much as possible, but taking risks together is one thing that bonds a couple. When people like my parents and grandparents started a life together, owning very little and highly dependent on each other to make ends meet, it bonded them in such a way that they couldn’t imagine having done anything else. If a man died and widowed a young mother with no skills outside the home, that sucked, but it was very rare, and that’s what family and community are for. But when a married couple are both financially stable and don’t particularly need each other, you don’t get that interdependence. Instead you get a lot of people wondering if they could be doing better elsewhere.

I’ve made similar points that working wives are 1) tempted to infidelity (physical or emotional) by close proximity to high status male bosses not their husbands in corporate environments, 2) men are less inclined to emotionally invest in, and therefore materially provide for, careerist women who are financially self-sufficient, and 3) marital egalitarianism kills sex lives dead.

There are many good reasons why the feminist idea of a successful marriage is a warped one. Humans are not (yet) an androgynous blob of asexually-reproducing drones. Women love men who come closest to the masculine ideal, and men love women who come closest to the feminine ideal. This means, in real life, women love powerful confident men who serve as the oak tree under which they can find shelter against the storms, and men love to shelter pretty, vulnerable, feminine women whose first instinct is to nurture rather than swim with the corporate sharks.

Cail’s theory that shared risk — and shared vulnerability —  helps bond couples is also worth pondering. It’s not hyperbole to say that women who depend on “having a backup in the event of a broken marriage” unwittingly encourage the breaking up of their marriages. Not a sermon, just a shiv.

Read Full Post »

Cirque du Solei is the most recent entertainment act to boycott North Carolina over a law passed in the state barring mentally ill men in dresses from peeing in front of your daughter in women’s restrooms.

CdS morally preens ans status whores about opposing “discrimination in any form”, (really? discrimination against necrophiliacs too?), but as Breitbart points out, Cirque du Sogay has no plans to cancel its shows in the United Arab Emirates where open homosexuals are put to death.

Cirque du Sashay is one of many examples of shitlib virtue signaling, in which the conspicuous assertion and indulgence of virtuous feeling is more important than virtuous deed. Boycotting a state for an eminently reasonable law to prohibit cross-dressing men from women’s restrooms while continuing to do business in a country that would throw cross-dressing men off buildings to cheering crowds below is as little virtuous as it is greatly hypocritical. Donning a mantle of virtue to impress friends and win plaudits from similarly signaling virtuomos is not the same thing as actual virtue.

There are three psychological motivations compelling shitlib virtue signaling about tranny “””rights””” (this bullet list can be applied to nearly every shitlib cause du jour).

1. Shitlibs don ‘t really believe Arabs (or blacks/mestizos/gypsies/etc) are as evolved, culturally or genetically, as Western Whites, and therefore can’t be expected to adhere to Western morals. Shitlibs are in truth extremely racist and expect more from Whites and less from nonWhites, which is why they punish (as they see it) minor transgressions by BadWhites more severely than major transgressions by NuminousNonwhites.

2. Shitlibs don’t really give a shit about tranny rights, they just want to act self-righteous and gain social status points with their amygdala-stunted SWPL peers. Their virtue, such as it is, is wholly self-aggrandizing in the pursuit of social benefits that will redound to their (awkwardly androgynous) reproductive fitness.

3. Shitlibs are one group of Whites that hate another group of Whites, and their moral causes are merely weaponized rhetoric to lower the social standing of the enemy Whites best situated to be the group that ousts shitlibs from power. Virtue signaling thus accomplishes two fitness-maximizing tasks for the shitlib: raising their own social status and lowering the social status of their most immediate and capable competitors: nonshitlib Whites and shitlib Whites who may grow a pair and stray off the reservation (taking many others with them to foment revolution against the reigning shitlib order). In this motivation, virtue signaling can as reasonably be called ‘virtue warning’.

As the scope of the battles in which shitlibs can morally posture shrinks, the ridiculousness of their causes approaches lunacy. We are reaching the logical end-game of shitlibbery, and it’s nothing less than wholesale normalization of mental illness. One can only guess what’s next on the shitlib plate, but advocacy for “benign” forms of pedophilia and bestiality are certainly a possibility.

Read Full Post »

The Iron Grail – losing fat, gaining muscle, doing it quickly – is here. It’s not a gimmick, it’s not easy, but it will work for everyone. (Via)

The program:

Cut calories by 40%.

Eat more protein.

Lift weights and do High Intensity Training like wind sprints.

There ya go. At the end of four weeks, subjects following this protocol gained an average two pounds of muscle and lost an average ten pounds of fat.

The hardest part for most people will be the drastic cut in total calories (most of which will come from carbs and a little less so from fat). Calorie restriction is notoriously hard to adhere to over the long term. But fortunately there’s a way to achieve the benefits of calorie restriction without cutting calories. Intermittent fasting – eating the same amount of daily calories during a shorter window of time – can readily substitute for the 40% calorie reduction in the study program above. Mangan explains it well.

You want to look like an Iron Pill-chugging Shredded Shitlord, esq., whose strength of body advertises his strength of mind? Now you know what to do. No more excuses.

Read Full Post »

Charles Darwin – yes, that guy – once drew up a pro and con list for getting married. His list is reprinted here, in readable format.

darwinmarrynot

The standard Chateau view of marriage is that it is a raw deal for individual American men, as currently constituted, (it wasn’t always thus). However, there are good reasons for monogamous, heterosexual marriage to continue as a cultural norm and societal buttress. Ol’ Charlie hit on a number of the pros. It’s really not a good idea to have children outside of marriage, particularly over the long term (single mommyhood erodes civilizational capital). Over the short term, it’s still a bad idea unless you belong to one of the few human races in the world (think: Swedes) who can handle having children within an unmarried, cohabitational context. (The verdict is out on how sustainable the Swedish method is, considering how quickly their evolved suite of mental characteristics compels them to hand their country over to the kebab crush.)

fr tho, Darwin’s other marriage pros could nearly as easily be gotten with a live-in long-term girlfriend, but to give him credit that was most certainly not the case back in his day. Also,😆 at “Better than a dog, anyhow”.

A lot of Darwin’s marriage cons are inarguable; men must betray their masculine urge to wander and explore once they are hitched to home and wife. Most men aren’t keen about keeping themselves in good graces with relatives; women have much more affinity for nurturing family ties. It is absolutely true that wives, and to a lesser extent husbands, get fat and lazy after marriage. A wife and family are a responsibility that will cut into a man’s free time, (many men are ok with trading in their free time for the comforts of domestication). Less money? Sure. (Don’t be fooled by the lure of a double income. Wives – and long-time cohabitating girlfriends – will just spend twice as fast and twice as much what they spent when they were single.)

Darwin was very concerned about an increase in his “anxiety” from marriage, as he wrote it twice. Potential marital money problems vexed him, too. The provider beta was a real catch in Darwin’s day that isn’t as true today. Women didn’t HATE HATE HATE betas back then with the same bubbling spite. But the ability of a provider beta in the Darwin era to leverage his provisioning skill for prime poon meant that he couldn’t slack off and give his date a bag of Skittles for her birthday, and recline smugly knowing a blowjob was coming his way regardless. Jerkboy Game in Darwin’s time probably had more limited appeal to women than it does today.

Read Full Post »

FB (Former Beta) has a nice personal story about his journey to Game (Learned Charisma),

Having started from an Omega level to now being a former Beta (I won’t call myself Alpha yet, but getting there), I completely agree with this Heartiste post.

(This blog is a great blessing to a lot of us. I started reading in 2008 or so…I posted for the first time this year, after having lost 100 lbs and an ugly wife since 2008).

Alpha: awareness with self forgetfulness. Lack of guilt, ease in all situations, fundamentally: lack of fear.

Both women and men respond positively to the Alpha.

The positive male response yields career success for the Alpha.

The positive female response to the Alpha yields romantic/sexual success with the ladies.

Realistically: you can control your approach to life, one moment at a time, one interaction at a time.

At 48: I am living exceedingly well. A lot of gratitude to Heartiste for opening my eyes to female nature and female needs.

Big props to CH!

Props received and converted into bitcoin.

The take-home point is this:

***

Both women and men respond positively to the Alpha.

The positive male response yields career success for the Alpha.

The positive female response to the Alpha yields romantic/sexual success with the ladies.

***

Tradcon ignoramuses who nurse a prude’s kneejerk resentment of Game and Chateau principles of seduction have never bothered to consider their wider applications. (A few are considering them now, thanks to The Trumpening’s YUGE demolition of cuckservatism, inc. Trump is a walking advertisement for the power of Game over foes and friends alike.)

The fundamental concepts of Game…

  • outcome independence
  • ZFG
  • state control
  • amused mastery
  • qualification/disqualification
  • compliance hoops
  • assuming the sale
  • reframing
  • bustamove
  • and more utilitarian tactics like time constraints, negs, kino escalation, and agree&amplify

…are as useful to climbing the career ladder as they are to cavorting in the dating market.

EVERYTHING TIES TOGETHER. Just as lies travel with ugliness, and truth with beauty, so too is Game a companion to masculinity, providing endless lifelong benefits to men in all avenues of pursuit.

Read Full Post »

The antiWhites are boasting of their battle victories.

The United States is going through a great power shift. Working-class whites don’t think of themselves as an elite group. But, in a sense, they have been, certainly compared with blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans and most immigrants. They were central to America’s economy, its society, indeed its very identity. They are not anymore. Donald Trump has promised that he will change this and make them win again. But he can’t. No one can. And deep down, they know it.

A reader replies,

— Spot the stupid — “They are not anymore.”  White middle class males are not “central to America’s economy”?  If they all blew their brains out tomorrow the entire place would grind to a halt in a week.  The White male Beta, despised and discarded, he is the engine of all progress and civilization.

And deep down, the antiWhite bigots know it.

Here’s a friendly reminder for the Zakarias and Chaits busily sabotaging America:

Chutzpah cometh before the fall.

PS It would be funny if it weren’t tragic how quickly the Left abandoned their role as champions of the American working class. But race trumps all in Post America (Diversity + Proximity = Tribal Identity Amplification) and there were just too many White men in the working class, so they had to go and their problems belittled for the greater multikult cause.

Read Full Post »

“Heads I win, tails you lose.” Rarely are the machinations of subversion so conspicuously visible.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,544 other followers

%d bloggers like this: