Category Archives: Men

How to git gud wit men

Alf I ain’t no gay why should I read advice on dealing with men?

Because you need friends. Listen up.

While I used to be of the opinion that I was a lone ranger, a Wolverine, I have come around to the fact that men are a lot more powerful in groups than they are alone. You stand alone, you stand weak, which is exactly why they want you atomized.

We are social creatures.

So, how do you deal with men, e.g. make friends?

Friendships can either be 1-on-1 or in the context of the group. 1-on-1 is rare, in the sense that both friends need to have something exclusive in common that cannot be found outside that friendship. Group dynamics are very healthy in curing weird male ego things. Think of it as social proof: in a 1-on-1 relation the other person is apt to make himself more important than he actually is in relation to you, while in a group he will often be reminded of his actual place in the hierarchy. Therefore, to have a good intimate friendship without group dynamic, both friends must have healthy ego and share a natural connection.

But here my focus is mainly on men in groups, where the greatest power lies. Groups of men get wonderful stuff done that no one else can, like building a civilization or putting a man on the moon or getting VR porn to work. Being part of a group of men can be a very satisfying feeling, a hard to describe, top-of-the-world feeling. Jim sometimes says that we overestimate the power of the government, and with a group of friends it does at times feel like you are your own powerhouse, that the government has no say over you, that your group decides what is just in the world. Such feelings especially arise after you do manly things with your friends such as to building a street fire on New Year’s Eve and drinking a beer around it. Such events raise the testosterone of all the men involved and increase the love of all wives watching. They are functional mini-societies.

So, how to deal with men in groups?

First and foremost, men in group test each other’s strength. As women love to remark, men in groups are one ‘who has the biggest penis’ contest, where biggest penis is a metaphor for… ‘winner’, I guess. Who is the biggest winner. A fluid hierarchy is built from biggest winner to biggest loser, and that’s about it. So, the easiest trick in getting along with men is to be a winner, to build and display strength. People love the strong horse.

It used to be hip to call a group of friends ‘Männerbunds’, but I think I’d rather call it a group of friends. After all, such a group presupposes that only men are in it, since any group of friends which includes women is no group of friends, just a disaster waiting to happen. Therefore, if you want your group of friends to last, put the women in their place. This requires some tact, not in putting women in their place (if you know how to deal with women this is actually the easy part), but in putting white knights in their place. Any group will have white knights. Pick on the biggest white knight in the group, ridicule him for his stupid behavior with women. Such things work great.

Similarly, must ridicule leftist behavior, e.g. the guys who behave like women themselves. Personally I do not believe in pre-emptively throwing leftists out of the group; I think it is unjust and unpractical. Better to let them throw in their own glasses by doing what leftists always do, namely stupid shit that ruins their reputation. Either their reputation will drop to the point where they leave out of own volition, or they drop a healthy few spots in the hierarchy but remain a net positive for the group.

Now, building a group of friends is different from building a corporate career. Many traits that serve your corporate career (ass-licking, dishonesty, disloyalty) will undermine the building of a group of friends, which is more free-flowing, honest… honor-based. In business you win by screwing over the right guy at the right time, in a group of friends you win by being cool. Sometimes they overlap, often they don’t.

Different people have different talents. Some people are leaders, some people are jokers, some people have ideas, some people are connectors, etc etc. Since the rules of power always apply, it tends to be useless to peg people in different categories. Instead, what tends to work is to amass power for yourself and use that to the best of your abilities. Enlightened egotism always works better than any kind of masterplan, since any kind of masterplan is apt to map poorly on reality.

Cooperation is key. People tend to be poor at cooperation, because they are poor at putting themselves in the shoes of other people. I find that what works well is not that I get along amazingly with person B, C and D, but that I can cooperate with all of them. For instance, perhaps person B gets along with person C much better than me, but person B can not get along with person D at all. Then, even if person C likes person B better than me, he sees that I can cooperate with person D, while person B can not, and consequently my status rises. Such situations happen more often than you’d think.

Cooperation also means the ability to make decisions. The ability to make decisions necessitates the ability to follow. This is always a hang-up, because every guy thinks he knows better than every other guy. But again, after initial storming men always settle on a hierarchy and the hierarchy is what allows the group decision-making, is what allows them cooperation. This means that no decision is ever made from weakness; very rarely does the virgin who raises his hand and tepidly says ‘hey guys perhaps we should do this?’ get his idea through. instead the Chad who loudly says ‘hey guys lets do this!’ gets his idea through, and 9 times out of 10 Chad indeed had the better idea.

Advertisements

Passiveness

If there is one thing the children of modernity are blamed for, it is passiveness. We drown ourselves in video games, mindless entertainment, porn. We do not know how to maintain a car, how to build a shed, how to raise children. ‘Nietzsche’, the accusation goes, ‘turns in his grave.’

Well, OK. Sure, we’re not striving to become übermenschen. I’ll grant that. Then again, I have to meet the first generation who did strive to become übermenschen.

In fact, I believe passiveness is an entirely rational and human response. Passiveness saves energy, prevents doing unnecessary shit, prevents doing stupid shit.

‘But alf, raising kids is neither unnecessary nor stupid!’

Who decided that? Fuck you.

… I’m sorry for saying fuck you. I got emotional for a second.

See, peer pressure only works when incentives are lined up correctly: you pressure me into having kids because it will raise your status and it will raise my status, and we’ll all be happier. But that’s not how it works in modern times. Not only will nobody care for me having kids, I am in fact pressured into renting my house, leasing a car and handing over any hypothetical kids to the state apparatus. Not only that; my woman is encouraged to chastise me for every sliver of weakness I show and leave me for her personal trainer, taking with her the kids and half of what little I own the moment she is unhaaaaappy.

But wait, there’s more!

I actually did put in the work. I finished school, I have the diplomas, I worked my ass off for a nice career. And guess what — nobody cared. I was not awarded any status. In fact I was told that I was evil for being white and male and heterosexual, and the only thing I was given was a big sack of debt and some silly diploma which I ripped into tips to roll joints with. I trusted the system and because of it I was abused like Jimmy Savile abused young boys. I was, in short, punished for being active.

So hence my fuck you for accusing me of being passive.

At least in video games I am rewarded for putting in work.
At least in mindless entertainment I enjoy myself.
At least in porn I get to see pretty naked women without being #metoo’d.

….

… But of course, escaping from reality does not make one happy either.

So, we need to correct our reactive passiveness, find a new balance.

We need little to correct our useful passiveness, meant for relaxation, thinking and enjoyment of life. Personally, I like music, meditating, watching online videos and the occasional video game. If you like video games, there’s no reason not to play them — people who claim otherwise are self-appointed martyrs who hate fun.

We do however need to correct for useless passiveness, for the passiveness of the prisoner. What do?

A pretty good answer is to treat life as a video game. Beware, for the game is rigged against you! Do not play by the rules that the authorities tell you, for that is what got you to be passive in the first place: deep down you already knew the game was rigged against you, which is why you stopped participating. So, need to figure out a way to play the game that is not rigged against you, or rigged against you as little as possible.

How you play the game differently is up to you. I have my ideas, but they are hard to put correctly into words, apt to come out garbled. But I will try anyway. I feel like there’s two things that need to happen.

First is disconnecting from bad coping behaviors, for behind many of these coping behaviors hide people that hate you, that want to see you weak. The alcohol salesmen has nothing to gain from a sober customer. Too much TV melts your brain, makes you believe being cucked is the only way to live. As for porn, I like the story that when the Jews conquered parts of Palestine, first thing they did was broadcast porn to all their new subjects. Get ’em docile and obedient.

But in honesty, to break with bad behaviors is not remotely as important as the second thing that needs to happen: to live in line with your purpose. I apologize for not being able to express that sentiment in a less gay manner, but that’s what it is. You need to find your purpose. This is personal, but it can in large parts be generalized among men. I will not repeat in what manner I think it can be generalized, for I have repeated this too often already.

That’s my thoughts on the rational choice of passiveness, and the way to overcome it should you so choose.

 

Strength

iu-3

Today I will tell you why my blog is named AlfaNL.

It is named alfa because at the time of creating this blog, 5 years ago, I was still sort of working out how to get laid, and getting laid is all about being alpha, so I just named it what was on my mind most, NL referring to my country of origin. Finally, the reason it is spelled alfa, not alpha, is because I first wrote this blog in Dutch.

I feel that now, years later, I have finally solved the puzzle of being alfa in a way that I can explain. I could’ve titled this ‘THE SECRET TO BEING ALFA’ but I think this title is better. After all, the secret to being alfa is strength.

I’ve already touched on this in a kingdom for the introvert.

The most important lesson I learned as an introvert is this: don’t show weakness. Extroverts, hell, people in general, come down on weakness like a ton of bricks. They sniff out weakness, and introverts in public society all too often display body language revealing that they are uncomfortable, that they want to disappear, that they want to be ignored. They signal weakness. Displays of weakness arouse disgust. I’ll repeat that once again because it is such a crucial point for introverts: displays of weakness arouse disgust. It’s like seeing a cockroach.

So, I stopped showing weakness. In fact I do the exact opposite: I signal that I am a threat, that if you disturb me I will come at you, like those poisonous animals in the jungle with bright colors. Works like a charm.

Korreldragende-gifkikker-3
A successful introvert, yesterday

The more I go looking for a fight, the less fights I get in.

Very true, very wise, and the more I live to this principle, the better it works for me.

Different things work for different people. But, the fundamentals of strength are universal, and I will attempt to explain them now.

There’s different kinds of strength, but most obvious is bodily strength: size, muscles, and the body language that flows from that. For an easy example, check:

That is basic cookiecutter alfa walk: straight up posture, swagger (walking with rhythm), chin tilted up, easy-going. Notice how his back muscles push away his shoulders from his torso, increasing the distance between his arms and torso, making him even bigger.

All of this goes back to the jungle; who is the biggest monkey? The guy who acts like the biggest monkey is the biggest monkey.

My sole objection is that his suit, especially his pants, are a size too big.

Anyway. Displaying strength like that, if only slightly less exaggerated, is what gets you respect, not just from chicks, from dudes as well. Strength is the most powerful tool of persuasion.

So, go to the gym and lift iron. Put on some weight, or if you have too much of it, lose some, although being slightly overweight is preferable to slightly underweight. Don’t worry if you’re small, skinny, or disadvantaged in some other way; work the advantages you have, that is enough. Remember, Connor McGregor fights in the featherweight division.

Very important part of strength is health. Displaying strength is displaying health. So, in order to show strength, you must be sure you are healthy. How be healthy?

This is a hard question to answer, first because people are different, second because we are surrounded by an incredible amount of lies concerning our health. As a rule of thumb, I don’t believe nutrition experts, physiotherapists. Doctors I take with a major grain of salt. Their advice is vague, contradictory and subject to silly fashions. For instance, when I experienced muscle pains, every paid expert advised stretching exercises which I was supposed to do for the rest of my life. Did them for a while. Didn’t really work. Then I went to the gym, did heavy compound exercises with barbells, and whaddya know: pain disappeared.  I have yet to meet the first health expert who advised me to do heavy squats.

Similarly I experienced pain in my hands, especially my thumbs, which makes sense because I like gaming. Overpaid health experts gave me a bunch of stretching exercises. Did not really work. I reasoned that if heavy lifting worked for the rest of my body, perhaps it would work for my hands. So I made up some lifting exercises for my hands. Whaddya know: pain disappeared.

I knew this guy who was a regular at the gym. He and I must’ve attended about as often, even though I’m sure he did extra sporting activities like cycling and running. He was the kind of guy who’d tell you about his marathon activities while sipping from a green cucumber/carrot concoction. Of course, instead bench pressing and pull-ups, he would do cardio exercises and light lifting. And, surprise surprise: he looked unhealthy. Skinny and worn-out. Which made sense, because he was wearing out his body in order to score holiness fit points.

A lot of injury-sensitive sports are unhealthy in the same way: scoring holiness fitness points is often more important than actually being healthy. Marathon running is not good for your health. Rugby, while manly, is not good for your health. Listen to your body. If you experience repeated injury because of an activity that is supposedly healthy for you, your body trying to tell you something important. Listen to what it is saying!

I believe that the natural state of the body is to be healthy. Exceptions aside, if you are ill on a regular basis (e.g. in that you have to call in sick, lie on bed all day), it is very likely that your body is trying to tell you something is wrong. Listen to your body! Interestingly, the bodily pain you experience might very well not be the result of bad diet or health habits. Often it is psychological; that your body transcribes your psychological state into a physiological state. Thus, if you’re not happy, this often expresses itself in body pain. An often occurring and dreaded visit for doctors is the spinster lady with unexplainable stomach pains.  The doctor knows what causes the stomach pains, you and I know what causes the stomach pains, but no one is bold enough to tell the spinster ladies and it is too late for them anyway.

Since you are probably not an old spinster: find what makes you unhappy, correct for it. If this means quitting your job, quit your job. If this means breaking contact with people close to you, be it your lover or your family, do it.

So here we see how strength in mental health is related to strength in physical health, and how it is of little use to focus on building physical health when your mental health is lacking. Lots of people pretend to be happier than they are, but the truth always shines through in their body language.

We are wired to know our standing in the socio-sexual hierarchy. If you want to climb up, repair in your life what makes you unhappy, instead of pretending you don’t give a fuck. You give a fuck; everybody at some level gives a fuck. you know it, I know, everybody knows it, and pretending you don’t just isn’t a good long-term strategy. Quit what makes you unhappy, don’t worry if it lowers your status; I know happy garbage men who get much more and higher quality pussy than depressed suit-and-tie businessmen.

Now, diet. I find diet is highly personal. I eat lots of meat, lots of fat (I drown my cooking pan in butter), lots of carbohydrates, a decent amount of vegetables and a little bit of fruit. I also take creatine, weightgain and potato chips because I want to be as not-skinny as possible. Diet is personal; experiment with what works for you. Simple guidelines: don’t be cucumber/carrot guy, meat is good, the more processed a food is, the less good it is, many carbohydrates gain weight, fewer carbohydrates lose weight.

As for sleep: it’s important. Sleeping rests the body, but also rests the mind. Dreaming is our way to process all the stuff that happens throughout the day. Dreams are also our subconscious’ way of communicating with us; listen to them! It’s been over a year since I stopped sleeping with a pillow, instead resting my head on the mattress just like the rest of my body. I believe it sends more blood into my head, makes my dreams livelier. But again, might just be personal.

I’ve come to love afternoon naps. Right after lunch, no longer than half an hour. Since those naps I have energy to do my thing all day, and not crash on the couch in the afternoon / evening. It’s the closest thing I have to an effective lifehack.

Drugs, if cautioned for addictive properties, are good for your consciousness. Nicotine stimulates neurons, makes you think faster. Marihuana makes me creative. Alcohol makes me social. XTC makes me love life.

Moving on to social strength. Social strength, in a nutshell, means don’t blink in a game of chicken. Games of chicken occur when people test you, and you test people, which happens all the time. In traffic it happens when a guy cuts you off, in the gym it happens when tattooed big muscly guy bumps into you, in flirting with women it happens when she says you’re too old for her. Rule of thumb: don’t blink, push back. Be prepared to cut off the guy in traffic, be prepared to bump big muscly guy back, be prepared to laugh off shit-test and tell the woman that you’re old enough to be her daddy.

If you accept that it’s OK for your car to have scratches you’ll be miles ahead of everyone else, because most people go to great lengths to avoid scratches.

The greatest benefit of not blinking and pushing is that it gains you respect. Most people prefer to be liked, but I prefer to be respected: it is less whimsical, more robust. When people respect you, they are automatically more inclined to like you.

With projecting strength comes a certain loneliness. It is the knowledge that you are responsible for your life, your territory, your family. No one else is going to do it for you; not the government, not your family, not your friends. Your life hinges on you. Thus, if things go good, pat yourself on the back. You’ve earned it. I call this the satisfying loneliness of being a rightist male. It is contrary to the unnerving social life of a leftist male; the leftist male has, as an advantage, that he is plugged into a bigger hivemind. But the hivemind has big influence on his state of mind, and he is constantly re-assessing his standing, is constantly being re-assessed by the hivemind. Quite stressful. I prefer my way.

Social strength is more than just walking around like a silverback. African men intuitively act like silverback monkeys, and this works, but they are outclassed by white men, because white men know how to behave like 18th century gentlemen, which is a more complex form of strength. It demonstrates situational awareness: what is my appropriate role in this situation? With women one needs softness, with children one needs playfulness, with men one needs to observe, sometimes strike. Finesse is needed in every situation, sometimes more finesse than I have. But, in every scenario, when in doubt, it is always better to err on the side of showing too much strength than to err on the side of too little strength.

Important to note is that while projecting social strength at times seems like magic, it can rarely be used to change fundamental frame. E.g. if you act like the boss around your boss, you won’t get away with that. People are aware of their roles, and even if they have insecurities you can play into, their insecurities will often only strengthen their roleplaying.

If you know how to project social strength, it is remarkable what becomes possible. Once you hit that sweet spot you will notice that men imitate you and women want to be with you. Life becomes a joy.

To illustrate: I am the most right-wing guy I know. I am also, if I am to believe my friends, a very not nuanced guy (to which I reply: ‘nonsense, I am the most nuanced guy around!’). Yet, I rarely get in trouble, I even have some leftist friends. Why? Because I project strength. Everybody likes a strong horse. I know for a fact that if I were to show weakness, if my health failed, my big mouth stopped running, my muscles shrunk, I would lose standing and get in trouble. I know this because I have experienced it in the past. But I have learned and know that as long as I show strength, I will be fine.

Male chain of command

I figured out how to deal with women before I figured out how to deal with men. For me, women have always had a special glow, something enticing. Turns out women, for me at least, are easier to deal with — it is instinctive for a woman to want to belong to a male’s in-group, if the fundamental requirement of the male demanding the need for the woman to belong to his in-group is met. This goes for all women, whether you have sex with them or not.

(so, theoretically, if a woman ever accuses you of raping her, the correct response would be to treat her with the fury of a thousand suns, while a single tear rolls down your cheek.)

With men it is different. It looks similar, but it’s totally different. Both shit-test, but if a woman shit-tests you, it is to figure out if you are strong enough for her to want to belong to your in-group. If a man shit-tests you, it is to figure out if you are weak enough for him to take your status. One tacitly invites conquerors, the other tacitly seeks to conquer.

Women belong to any in-group that conquers them, men form their own in-group.

Leftism is turning on the in-group by breaking down borders between in-group and out-group. Hence leftist fathers sacrificing their sons to the out-group; the ultimate in-group betrayal.

The Dark Enlightenment has broken free from the enlightenment by re-establishing in-group and out-group borders: you say you are with me? Prove it. And then prove it again. And again. Only in the act of cooperating with me do I know you are on my side.

The consequent question has been: how wide do we re-establish our in-group? Human eyes have big whites around their irises for communication, so it is obvious that we are at our strongest in a group. But which group?

The lie of white nationalism is that all the white men in all the nations share a special unspoken bond. This is nonsense, as observed in the leftist white father sacrificing his sons to the out-group. Similarly, I have heard enough war stories from my granddad to know that even close friends may betray one another when life or death is on the line. White men have a long history of stabbing each other in the back.

So we aim for a better means of cooperation. We consider religion — after all, religious movements are required for large scale cooperation, as nazism descended from lutheranism and as progressivism descended from puritanism, although neither of these are the religions we are looking for. Christianity did pull it off for a long time, so perhaps Christianity is the religion we’re looking for, but obviously, has its issues.

The thing about religion is that personnel is policy. You may have the most beautiful scripture in the world telling you how to do good, but if the preacher interprets it to do evil, it don’t mean squat. So it is not a matter of writing the scripture and calling it a day, it is a matter of tinkering and adjusting and tinkering, depending on your personnel.

The conclusion for optimal political cooperation is that we need a king, or an emperor, or a CEO, or a dictator. Whatever you want to call it. Put a white hetero male at the top. Well does not have to white, hetero, or male, it is just extremely likely that the person who by capability rises to the top will be white hetero male. Apex predators tend to do that. Like Trump.

In its simplest form, all our religion needs to say is that it is just for the apex predator to sit upon his throne. Essentially we’re saying: ‘look at this group of gorillas. Look at the alpha silverback. It is good that he is the alpha silverback. It is natural that he is the alpha silverback.’ Our intent with this is not some power-fantasy in which imagine ourselves as the alpha silverback, our intent is that if the chain of authority leads to a formalized leader, the chain of authority works, entirely in line with natural law. By giving the leader the power to say ‘no’ and to follow through on the act of saying ‘no’, we grant respect, honor and cooperation to the leader and his subjects. The system becomes human, as opposed to the mindless bureaucracy that inevitably accompanies a dying democracy.

Every functional group has a leader. That is simply the way things work.

So we are monarchs after all. Of course, we realize the system is imperfect: Trump will surely be a wise king, but what about his son, his grandson, his grand-grandson? There is no guarantee for quality through the generations. That is why it is the Dark Enlightenment: it recognizes that humans are imperfect and thus all attempts to bring in the next world into this are misguided at best, blatant lies at worst.

So we see that while men are not buddies 4 life, they aren’t islands either, and they in fact instinctively respect the chain of command. It is just that the need for the chain of command has to be demanded by its leader, has to meet an actual need.

On a Sky King twitter thread someone broke down how friendships between white males work. He said something in the lines of: white men share an unspoken understanding that they go through life alone, that each bears his own responsibilities. I thought that was very nicely said. I think that adds to the thing I felt missing from Aristotle’s description of friendship but couldn’t quite put my finger on: implicit in any good friendship is the knowledge that, while you share a laugh today, you may never know what tomorrow holds, and hopefully it is more laughs, but it might just as well be something entirely different. That’s just how life works.

Beta male blindness

For a while I wondered why males tend to be so blind to female bad behavior. I think I understand now.

It is not that males are blind to female bad behavior per se, more that in order to cooperate with other men, they acquiesce to those in power, and if those in power tell them that noticing female bad behavior is low-status, lo and behold, men stop noticing female bad behavior. This ability to adapt to value incentives is what enables males to cooperate with other males.

This is why there is no such thing as a pure alpha male. Every man has moments of weakness, even if some hide it very well. Alpha and beta are states of mind you enter and leave, depending on the context of the situation.

I said that males are not blind to female bad behavior per se, but it still seems like they are blind to a lot of female bad behavior, regardless of what anyone tells them. So what is this reason, besides the religion of equalism?

The reason is that the cold truth is quite nasty, namely that women by nature are primarily attracted to horrible, Horrible men. Such men are relatively rare, for horrible men tend to be ostracized by good men working in groups, tend to be ostracized also by other horrible men, but nonetheless women flock to them like moths to a light.

Good men, who are liked by the majority of other good men, liked even by a minority of horrible men, make up much larger part of the male gene pool. Women will fuck Good men, but, and this is the cold truth that is just really counterproductive for Good men to know, women will never escape getting more hots for mister Horrible than for mister Good.

Now, in a world where women get married off young and are prevented from having affairs with horrible men, and good men are stimulated to act as patriarchs, this cold truth does not matter so much, because women are blissfully unaware of their own fatal attractions, and will defer to the family patriarch, which is win-win for Good men.

But in a world where women are free to explore their fatal attractions, mr Good finds his wife spitting on him, divorcing him and cheating on him with mr Horrible. This greatly angers and confuses mr Good, because he genuinely wants to do good, yet finds himself punished for it.

It is a matter of faith and genes: the Good man believes himself better than the Bad man and believes he should be rewarded for his good behavior. Otherwise, why be a Good man? Simultaneously he can’t stop himself from being a good man; that is just who he is.

Being a Good man, from a male perspective, leads to civilization, prosperity, and peace. However, from a female perspective, she does not really care that he is Good. In fact she finds it slightly boring. It is the power, domination and control she wants. She does not care that her husband is Good, she cares about the deep love she feels for the power that Good men are rewarded with.

If no power, no attraction. The good man in response becomes confused and depressed, but of course, being unable to change who he is, whenever someone points out that women are attracted to horrible men he balks at the mere suggestion: why would you say such horrible things! I know that there is Good in this world and I refuse to be evil! So bad it is for some Good men that the day they come to terms with the Horribleness of the world is the day they take their life.

So, the solution is to not explain the cold hard truth to people who do not want to hear it, while also not denying the cold hard truth to people who want to hear it. The coup-complete solution is for horrible men to take power (in their horribly mysterious ways), for them to reward good men with pussy and make it high status for men to notice female bad behavior.

Manosphere sour grapes

I have read many of Roosh’s books and enjoyed all of them. I still read his blog, with pleasure.

But I am fed up with the sour grapes I see time and time again in Roosh and the associated manosphere.

It seems that whenever a manosphere guy describes the world, all he sees is blue-haired shrieking feminists and bitches with tattoos who, at best, are good for a singular nut. I don’t buy it. Which is to say, I totally buy that there are many, many unattractive self-mutilating women out there, but I know it is even more true that men make their own destiny and that women submit to men making their own destiny.

Personally I have gone through a lot of girls before I found one I love. In my search I encountered many women of the kind manosphere guys complain about, but in the end I needed to find only 1 good girl, and I found her, have been together with her for a couple of years now.

Am I so singularly amazing that I have found the last good girl left in the world, or is the manosphere selling me sour grapes?

It seems to me that for men, unlike for women, complaining does not fix anything. Don’t get me wrong, I empathize with the complaints, but I empathize with action more. Seems to me the right course of action is to find a good girl, start a family and teach your children to laugh at old fat lonely spinsters driving by in mobility scooters.

(Although the laughing part is probably overdoing it, because everyone knows, including childless feminists, that the last laugh inevitably goes to he who lives his life well, which is why unhappy people tend to resent happy people.)

Now, perhaps settling and having kids ain’t your thing, and although it seems to me to be programmed in our genes to settle and have kids, who am I to judge? But then, please sleep in the bed you’ve made for yourself. Stop bitching about women, stop bitching about Western society suiciding. We’re working on it.

Men

So I stumbled upon this MPC thread on Jim’s blog. I was curious to see how the supposedly cool red pill men view Jim. Seems they don’t like him.

I liked the reference to the Dork Enlightenment. I laughed at the accusation that Jim abuses the comma like it’s an underage girl. But overall the thread exudes male insecurity.

The main accusation seems to be that Jim is a sex-craven pervert. Jim’s writings indeed include gems like ‘if it goes up, it goes in‘ and ‘if ten year old girls were not restrained, most of them would be banging thirty and forty year old men‘. So lets talk about that.

A very consistent trait of men is that they do not like to discuss their weaknesses. Displays of weakness lower status. Most of men’s weaknesses are with sex and women: when sexuality is concerned we are but simple beasts, crude and weird in a myriad of ways. Yet sex and women make up a major part of our lives. So what do we do when the topics come up? We bullshit. It is as simple as that.

Men lie about their sexual conquests, lie about their competence with women, lie about the size of their (e-)penis, lie when they put on their white knight armour and rail to the defence of supposedly chaste women.

Jim, quite simply, is honest. You may accuse him of abusing the comma and abusing hyperbole, but that’s about it (I’ve never seen 10 year old girls banging older men, but I do observe teenage girls obsessing over sexy men).

We’ll end by using the below girl as a Schelling point.

2oFgjYg

Supposedly, no one at MPC would give her the time of day. Yet my experience with men of all stripes and sizes tells me they bang girls like her all the freaking time. Are you telling me that the internet forum guys at MPC are so cool that they only bang 9s and higher? And they call us the dorks? I mean, come on.