Here's my theory how it exactly where the softening of men in Western society started to slowly change:
Generation X: AKA "The Middle Children Of History" Or I would call "The Founding Fathers of the online Manosphere" The 90's generation that saw the peak of Western Civilization, the collapse of the Berlin Wall, the dissolution of Soviet Union, women's rights stronger than ever, racial harmony and equality, homosexuality being accepted by society at large, technology getting better and better, ruled by pop culture and Hollywood, social security, comfy consumerist capitalism/materialism, a stable economy, back when nobody knew what the hell Muslims were, along with Christianity fading away, and with the rationalization of Western society....
But how did men change?
No hard challenges or struggles. No great wars or economic depressions. The easy living of the comfy consumerist/capitalist life style.
While many of the feminists and Post-Modernists were busy purging and taking over academia. Most men never thought much of it or hardly noticed back then, A lot evolved into corporate excutives or shallow weak cubicle computer office McFreindzones drones towards the secretary compared to the generation of the older hardened factory workers due to the fact that technology improving more and more, while most others joined army or went to trade school or retail, and most men were just carried on with life back then whether it be watching sports, parties or bar fights, drugs, Metal bands, gangsta rap, college Fraternities and skinheads back when only nerds and losers use to played video games.
Unfortunately instead of Honor, Strength, Pride, Resilience, and Willingness male Masculinity in the West devolved into the shadow of itself slowly being shunned by society as it strictly devolved into: Sports, beer, gurlz, fast cars, in a shallow sense.
Yes I know you guys love your NBA, NFL and the Premiere League but unfortunately for some reason SPORTS & BEER has become one of the fundamental basics for becoming masculine man these last 20 - 40 years for some reason.
The old saying goes: "Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men and weak men create hard times"
Skip right through to today and here we are now and the worst thing that these feminists and Post-Modern academia freaks have ever did was challenge us Western men at dominance hierarchy, because that's all we men needed a fucking CHALLENGE.
Trump was only a warning shot there's going to worse if they keep going where they're going.
To be continued if you want more....
Caspero444 5y ago
I don't really believe it's feminism, or good times/ bad times. Technology and dating demographic shifts have made a significant percentage of males obsolete
ebaymasochist 5y ago
I think the powers that be figured out about a century ago that women are better consumers than men... They are more willing to spend money for things they want and need. Corporations used psychology to create needs for all kinds of things that men will just not bother to care about, let alone spend money. 9 billion dollars for makeup every year. Billions for cleaning supplies, billions for clothes, billions for purses, billions for baby clothing and accessories. Men wear their clothing until it falls apart. We don't buy more than one shampoo or bar of soap or really anything like that. I think it was very profitable to give more money, or access to money, to women. And that's why it happened. Follow the money.
VictxrSenpai 5y ago
One day, I feel as if a wave of violence shall wash over the world and bring us back to our primitive ways
Freedomeofchoice 5y ago
You know what they say:
hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men and weak men create hard times? Take a guess which is next...
farendsofcontrast 5y ago
These times are terrible no doubt. It Sucks because our generation is experiencing the worst the world has had to offer for men in all of history. But I gather hope through the fact that the realisation is happening. People are slowly seeing this shit for what it is. The first step to change is realisation. As a guy in my 20s I know I will live to see the change bring back the natural order.
I also believe society has gone to shit in the last decade. Mostly in the last eight years, all of it in Obama’s rule. I don’t doubt for even one second that he was part of the group of people who had an agenda to emancipate the ideal of masculinity and upset the very moral fabric of society.
raggot_the_legendary 5y ago
It's not a very well written post but your message is true. I actually think feminism's expansion is not just a cause but also an effect of the loss of traditional men's virtues.
yummyluckycharms 5y ago
the problem with this theory is that since the opec oil crisis, it hasn't been easy times for most people in the west.
Consider that wages have been stagnant, labour participation is low, inflation is high (they hide this via not including basic things in the basket), and housing costs are even higher. Most people wont have a pension when they retire, and are heavily in debt. The government doesnt even have the ability to keep track of the homeless numbers. Plus, reported suicide is at an all time high, which wouldnt happen during "good times". All of which suggests that the current period isnt one of a prosperous time
If anything, what we are seeing is stage 4 of a civilization's life cycle (as in the stagnation/slow decline phase).
The good times were 1946-1972 - at least for north america, and in britain it was 1880 to 1914.
Sylvester_Sterone 5y ago
Ah man, was just at the local library. Enter a male toddler running around in a black shirt saying "FEMINIST." His mother was there and she fit the description of a beyond-the-wall sourpuss.
[deleted]
stoicstephen 5y ago
Good times create weak men.
Weak men create bad times.
Bad times create strong men.
Strong men create good times.
scissor_me_timbers00 5y ago
Yep. Feminism is as much a symptom as an accelerant. When the men go soft, the women can reasonably start entertaining these ideas of equality.
red_reality_ 5y ago
This is where I say: Don't blame women for all of this, they were only every doing their best to cope with the softening men around them.
Today there is only us men to pick up the pieces. Take it upon yourself, personally, to do your best and be your best so that others around you can follow suit and aspire to be something more than a consumer, socially media addict or raging sjw.
[deleted] 5y ago
I want the 80% to keep chugging their coors light & watching sports on the tv while getting fat so their wives can keep giving me fuck me eyes.
RedPilledRoaster 5y ago
You have no need to worry my friend. It will always be that way.
Frenetic_Zetetic 5y ago
Not just that dude, but they also consume a lot. Sell them shit at a high price AND hook their wives!
kareemgoat69giggity 5y ago
Even if every man was a real man there will always be a top 20%, u cant get rid of it
TheH1dd3nFear 5y ago
Too many dads have bitch tits these days, at least you can get your flirt game up with the orbiting mothers at the kids soccer games.
kdf39 5y ago
Not around here. Sadly every parent at my kids soccer, baseball, hockey events look like trolls. Both men and woman at these events seem to be in a race to gain more weight. It’s rare to see an attractive person of any of the 72 genders.
TheRealJesusChristus 5y ago
Go somewhere else. There are people out there that care about their body, even women who identify as female.
magx01 5y ago
Those fuck me eyes are gonna take us right into the apocalypse though.
[deleted] 5y ago
I'm sure they got cookies there.....
[deleted]
thegreatcornholio42 5y ago
They already serve beer in hell
[deleted]
Zanford 5y ago
Also BPA and xenoestrogets sapping T levels. Has even been observed in other species. Ironically, the one 'pollution scare' that's nearly been blacked out by legacy media. Weird, isn't it
Cantloginhere 5y ago
This. Plastic containers (bottled water), food wrappers. Hormones in meat and dairy. Animal waste used as fertilizer entering water supply. As a result men are full of estrogen. It's not a mystery, it's proven.
bonusfruit 5y ago
The question becomes how do we maintain male virtues in good times. No one wants war or natural disaster just because it toughens men up
midnightreider 5y ago
Fatherhood is your answer. Education and tradition come best from fathers especially when it comes to boys. Your father teaches you how to live properly, or you so strongly desire to live properly that you struggle to find the path without the guidance of your father or some type of father figure. With this current era of cheap and instant gratification, I guarantee that if you were able to quantify the amount of boys with the drive to achieve a truly fulfilling life on their own you would be appalled at the decline. These boys, without the rearing of a strong father figure are left behind by society. The best thing you can do in life is to be a phenomenal father who will instill values and traditions that will be passed on for prosperous generations to come. Observe the problems in the world, the large and small, the chaotic and the evil, and you will be very surprised at how many would never be around had strong father figures been almost unanimously present throughout humanity.
My Father is the oldest of four boys. Their father taught them absolutely nothing, but their grandfather was extremely active in instilling values into the oldest two before he passed. The difference between my father and his brother who were partially raised by their grandfather is astonishing compared to the other two who weren’t. The younger two have dysfunctional families, failure children who do absolutely nothing in life, unhappy marriages and financial trouble. The older two live with better families with higher values and achievements, and live completely the opposite of the younger two. The cycle will continue for many generations, all because one man decided to put his time into his descendants, and the other man did not.
donkey_democrat 5y ago
Easy times are just part of it. We live in a world with a huge xenoestrogen presence all around us. Food, water, hygiene products, and birth control are all very common sources of exposure.
Testosterone levels were 2-3x higher in men at the turn of the 20th century. I think such a change is not due to merely decadence of culture, but due to the addition of xenoestrogens in everyone's life.
Work to eliminate these sources of exposure, and then take supplements to boost testosterone presence for a quick change.
johnbranflake 5y ago
Eat red meat and egg yolks. Cut soy out of your diet (hint soybean oil is loaded into everything you didn’t make yourself even things like salad dressing ).
Since I did this and stopped watching porn I’m so horny if im not careful I will get a boner talking to any woman that’s not a landwhale and it’s way easier to chase women when you actually have the hunger and confidence of your natural hormone levels.
SheepWaker 5y ago
Red meat and egg yolk diet. Sounds interesting. Thanks bro
johnbranflake 5y ago
Lol I’m not saying make it a diet, but a lot of people avoid those because they think cholesterol is bad
SheepWaker 5y ago
I’m adding* this to my diet next month.
donkey_democrat 5y ago
Phytoestrogens don't play a big of role as xenoestrogens. Worry about those first. Phytoestrogens can be easily cleared by the body, xenoestrogens are a lot harder, therefore feminizing one more.
Get all organic products for things like food and especially skin contact products, as the xenoestrogens will just absorb right through the skin like with lotion and body wash.
Take vitamin D, Zinc, and Magnesium. Best supplements for increasing T besides injecting T itself.
Gozsayin1 5y ago
This is very accurate in fact in the accient world this was a well known factor that many empires should as Rome and China had to serious problems with. Back when wars were fought with swords and muscles a population that was too soft, could prove problematic against harderen barbarians. Alot of wars were fought just keep the men tuff.
saltyafrican 5y ago
I like that quote. Constantly reminds us there is a vicious cycle and we need to get out of our comfort zones to truly succeed.
Definitely interested in the continuation of this post.
Neo_Trunks 5y ago
Don't get the Trump reference...
Are you praising or bashing the dude? Everything else is spot on, good times do breed weak men (myself included sadly).
FlamingAmmosexual 5y ago
I have to disagree.
I think 9/11 deeply changed society and it'll take decades, if ever, to get back to where we were before. It has literally made people embrace a police state in exchange for a false promise of their protection.
It has made young men and boys grow up in a world where self reliance, taking care of yourself and loved ones, and any ideas outside of the mainstream are bad and should be looked at with a watchful eye. The state is now suppose to do all of that for you.
We now have feminists publishing articles in mainstream media that would look like something out of a KKK pamphlet if you changed just a few words. Feminism is mainstream and if you're into Red Pill Theory, Men's Rights, MGTOW, or anything of that nature they'll try to label you as a suspected terrorist. Why do you think they're pushing so hard this "woman hating" movement by bringing up incels that have gone on rampages and trying to connect them to the manosphere.
I mean I don't think it'd take me long to find some posts on Reddit comparing this sub to an ISIS recruitment center.
[deleted] 5y ago
I don’t think 9/11 changed society at all in the long run. It was certainly a massive event and seared in the public consciousness, but 99% of people’s lives did not change at all.
FlamingAmmosexual 5y ago
Patriot Act
TSA
Department Homeland Security
War in Afghanistan
War in Iraq
Indefinite detention
That's just off the top of my head.
That doesn't include all the laws and regulations that have been passed since then in the name of anti-terrorism. A good friend's mother works in the banking industry and she told me one day everything that was passed after 9/11 behind the scenes that most people don't know about. The government is tracking your money and you and you don't even know it. Again, all done in the name of fighting terrorism.
If you lived before and after that event it's very clear that society is different.
[deleted] 5y ago
None of those things have ever effected 99% of peoples’ daily lives, and frankly you’re drifting into paranoid delusion territory. It’s a red herring. We can debate whether some of the things you listed are oppressive or not, but their actual effect is negligible compared to the real oppressions that we live under.
Your government tells you who you must hire if you start a business. It decides what your children will be taught in school. It regulates how you interact with people at work. It’s trying to regulate how you interact with women. It takes 25% of your money and redistributes the majority of it to other citizens as opposed to spending it on services that benefit you. It has upended the social contract through divorce rape. It forces businesses to show preference for certain races and genders to the detriment of others. I can go on forever here but you get the point.
These are massive massive oppressions that touch every single American life every single day. The patriot act or a faraway war in a distant land simply aren’t even in the same universe as this.
FlamingAmmosexual 5y ago
Read that back to yourself and then reread your post very slowly.
TheH1dd3nFear 5y ago
Yes but I'm talking about about the pre 9/11.
FlamingAmmosexual 5y ago
I'd say Vietnam was a bad deal for the country and so that'd leave the late 70s, 80s, and 90s for this change you talk about to take place. That's 25 years and we're almost 20 years removed from 9/11.
I'll agree with you somewhat. I think the 80s was a good time for America/the west and that lead us to falling asleep at the wheel in the 90s. When 9/11 and the 2000s hit things got turned upside down and we're still scrambling from it.
SKRedPill 5y ago
It's sad that a country badass enough to fight the Nazis and the Japs in a world war is now so chicken that they're frightened of anyone with a beard. I'll be inhuman for a second and ask - do you think 9/11 was comparable to WW2?
And when WW2 happened and Pearl Harbour hit, the response was to become more badass. Now-a-days, the state needs to play mommy.
[deleted] 5y ago
9/11 was way worse than Pearl Harbor. Pearl Harbor was an attack against a legitimate military target. 9/11 was an attack against a civilian target with no military value whose sole purpose was terror. We would have been justified in virtually any response after 9/11.
Gadnuk_ 5y ago
Not really a fair comparison though. Back in WW2 we had a clearly defined enemy, who wore uniforms and were the agents of enemy states. With recognizable targets all you have to do is gather the means to engage them and do so. Manly men would take up arms, go to the fight and kill the enemy.
These days the enemies of the west tend to be non-state actors who blend with civilian populations and don't need geographic control to spread their influence. The end goal is not so simple as these days we are fighting against the influences of ideology, which means our greatest enemy is intangible and can rear its ugly head anywhere at any time. The 9/11 attackers were trained to fly in a US civilian flight school, because our enemy is not confined to one location nor do they identify themselves with uniforms. They blend in with civilians and naturally the implication is that the enemy can now live among us undetected, anywhere they choose.
Fighting Japs and Nazis required sheer force of power and essentially manning up to crush the clearly defined enemy in predetermined locations, whereas fighting radical islam is far more complicated. Force has to be directed, and with a clandestine enemy that has no borders or geographic limitations it is very difficult to determine exactly where that force should be directed.
Put simply, "become more badass" is a solution to a problem that we don't have. We've been the most badass for 75 years and still wear the crown
[deleted] 5y ago
Guerilla and terror tactics are just that- tactics. They only work if the opposition is not willing to take the necessary countermeasures.
What do you think would have happened if an insurgency broke out in Germany or Japan after ww2? Would we have sent our boys out in squad size patrols to “provide security for the populace” and try win them over with smiles for ten years? Hahaha. No.
We would have done anything necessary to quash it. That means mass reprisals against civilians. That means relocation of hostile populations to camps or other areas. That means known geurilla sympathizers disappearing in the night.
The modern idea that insurgents are impossible to defeat or “you can’t kill your way out” is laughable, and would have been difficult for pre-modern people to understand. The insurgents can only win if the other side is unwilling to escalate.
“They [Romans] make a desert and call it peace.”
SKRedPill 5y ago
There's always an enemy in some form or the other. First it was nature and the predators, and now this.
FlamingAmmosexual 5y ago
I'm not sure as I wasn't around on December 8th of 1941.
I would say it's comparable because in 1958 the war was over and we weren't worried about the Japanese or Germans. We were worried about the Soviets, nuclear weapons, and another world war which was still very fresh to everybody. Here we are in 2018 still scared about the same type of enemies from 2001.
The difference is there was a clear enemy. There was a nation state to fight. Today it's an ideology. The world is also a lot smaller due to globalisation and the internet. The news media covers everything.
It has been stated we could not have a Normandy beach D-Day style invasion today because the news media would plaster it all over the TVs so much the American people would be screaming to end the war.
SKRedPill 5y ago
And the leftist media as usual would support whoever they think is losing, unless that's your side, in which case they'll jump ship... no wonder the media is the ideal female space.
fblackstone 5y ago
Our great war is a spiritual war. Our great depression is our lives.
Tyler Durden
redpill_scientist92 5y ago
I never thought of that. If the baseline for being masculine is that you watch sports and drink beer, we got fuckin problems.
[deleted] 5y ago
tbh I always thought of that as the baseline for being a hick
Troll_Name 5y ago
This is a television stereotype. Anyone using TV as a role model either got robbed out of life by absent parents or is simply opting out of life on their own free will. TV seems like a scary force when you think about it at first, until you think deeper and envision all these goblins out walking the streets instead.
GorgeousGamer99 5y ago
I do neither of those. Must be a woman.
Iron_Disciple 5y ago
Gamer chicks don’t exist, gotta be a man.
/s
exit_sandman 5y ago
However, it's also a problem is if you shame guys for drinking beer and watching sports because, of course, it's immature and stupid and Grown Men^TM don't do these things.
[deleted]
exit_sandman 5y ago
Oh, I don't disagree and am not into binge-drinking and watching sports myself. BUT I consider it a valid way to relax and see the female complaints about these pastimes as another attempt to squeeze men into neat little female-compatible boxes.
It's this "men do something women don't approve of, and we can't have that, and therefore we brand it as juvenile and boorish" what grates me when this topic comes up.
redpill_scientist92 5y ago
I'm not shaming, I do these things, but i dont let it consume my life and I certainly did it before I "became a man"
Edit, but in the words of Bill Burr, youre a fucking man, quit worrying about what youre getting shamed about, laugh in their face.
exit_sandman 5y ago
I am not refering to you, I am refering to nagging women.
SKRedPill 5y ago
Good point. Now this is something we can't blame women or society for - this IS totally our god damned fault. Men are rather easily capable of falling for pleasures, women and sex being only one of them. We're literally bombarded with a 50,000 calorie equivalent diet of pleasure these days. And guess what pleasure does - it leaves you depressed, unproductive, reduces your attention span to mere seconds, incapable of deep work and in soul searing pain as you realize your life's slipping by and you're not evolving or even experiencing life itself as you sit confined to the screens and the tabs, playing on your xbox and wondering why you still feel empty as shit at 3 am in the night. And as you do that, you're being bombarded with social media, youtube and news BS, while eating junk and frozen shit.
True happiness lies in the gym way. Suffering is actually good when it creates growth. The mind, especially the mind, needs a gym of it's own even more than the body does.
Here's a solution. Go and do something that requires about 12 hours of solid focus before it's done. An ultra marathon is for the extreme folks amongst us (and it might be too much strain down the road), but do try something equivalent just once.
Buddhist monks practice meditating on the flame of a lamp for hours to train their concentration. Karma's part of evolution - and there's a whole stack of it that must be suffered for you to evolve. Deny this and that karma will come out in a much more destructive way.
microtry 5y ago
Logged in just to comment.
Your comment really resonated with me.
Was in a slump lately, and this just lifted me right the fuck out of it.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
farendsofcontrast 5y ago
I agree with your view completely except for the fact that you fail to recognise feminism has played an active part in disabling a man from expressing masculine behaviour by demonising it through main stream media and the like...
Maybe things are not so bad in your part of the world but here feminists and other sjws make it their job to ostracise any male who does not conform to their ideal of what a male and masculine behaviour should be. They have dictated the rules and through the support of the judicial system imposed drastic consequences to anyone acting to the contrary.
Like the original poster said Donald Trump is really the first sign of retaliation and it’s going to get stronger from now on.
Troll_Name 5y ago
But there are also world class competitors who consume porn and video games.
You can use games or fishing or athletics or meditation or reading to flush tens of thousands of hours down the toilet. Evil is not an object in the hand.
mestermagyar 5y ago
Az a vicces amikor egyes Nyugattól beszívott megmondóemberek (Puzsér) vagy politikusok (Széll Bernadett) úgy állnak a feminizmushoz mintha bármi valóéletbeli vagy politikai ütőerőt képviselne magyarföldön.
Itt nem feministák vannak, csak az egyik leginkább instagram függő női társadalom ami létezik, hogy a posztod többi részét kiegészítsem.
The_Chiselnator 5y ago
Nasty women exist where the men are weak. Nasty hags are a lagging indicator of male weakness.
Troll_Name 5y ago
Men are weak when strength is prohibited. This phases in and out of history like a silent pendulum.
I do not remember these "good times" people speak of. I remember cascading economic crashes then adjustment to the new norm mislabeled as recovery. I remember entire payroll accounts being confiscated by the California divorce courts and dozens of people being splash damaged to ruination all in unison by individual splitups.
Individual strength gets unleashed again after all the king's horses and all the king's men cannot quadruple bypass the nannystate back together again. That's one of the most enjoyable things about the decline - the nannystate does not exist to uplift the weak individual but to drag down those trying to climb the slow ladder upward. Banning individual strength is the basic history of conflict between regular gentry and upper aristocrats.
[deleted] 5y ago
The nanny state will eventually collapse, of this I am sure. The problem is that there is no knowable timeline on this. It could take decades or centuries even. Western governments, especially the US, are nowhere close to the maximum levels of resources that they could theoretically extract from productive citizens. They also have a nearly endless well of credit, and of course control the printing presses.
I actually don’t buy into the nutty central banking conspiracies. Right now, central banks are acting in the public interest and doing the best they can with the situation in front of them. Despite the prognostications of gold bugs, inflation remains low and stable. As things begin to deteriorate though, the central banks will start to do what they are being accused of now - printing massive amounts of paper to prop up their governments.
AnyDoughnut 5y ago
Men are weak because the feminist courts and judges have bludgeoned them into submission. Men are weak because they don't have good male role models in their lives, as they are raised by single mothers.
NormalAndy 5y ago
The heavy drinker has always been lauded in western society- certainly since Berne wrote Games people play in the really sixties. He cites it as one of the foundations for the ‘alcoholic’ game.
We have been ‘educated’ to play some pretty degrading games. Check out ‘schleimel’- it’s the blueprint for bluepill. Again- documented in the sixties so anything dubious most likely implanted before then.
kdf39 5y ago
Also would explain why testosterone levels have been falling decade by decade
[deleted] 5y ago
Do you have any study sources on that? I tried telling someone that the other day and didn't have a good answer for them when they refused to believe it.
kdf39 5y ago
http://www.ourstolenfuture.com/newscience/reproduction/2006/2006-1210travisonetal.html
https://www.forbes.com/sites/neilhowe/2017/10/02/youre-not-the-man-your-father-was/
Quote from the first study : "None of the health and lifestyle factors examined were associated with either age-matched declines in either TT or BT: The age-matched declines remained essentially the same after controlling for chronic illness, general health, medications, smoking, body mass index, employment, marital status, and other indicators."
Work_In_Progress92 5y ago
I think there are a variety of reasons that T levels have been dropping for the past few decades; especially with the foods and drinks we consume, what chemicals they put inside of them along with other products we use daily like soap and shampoo that could lower T levels; medication, etc.
I wonder how many men that they diagnose at "depressed" and put them on anti-depressants which make them even more depressed, would feel if they were put on TRT instead.
Sylvester_Sterone 5y ago
I refused anti-depressants and asked the 91 year old psychiatrist for testosterone instead. He got extremely offended and said "how dare you try to get me to prescribe performance enhancement!"
Brought me out and asked the nurse if my t count was low for my age. She said yes. He told me that he will consider me getting more blood work then take it from there.
Next day I received a phone call from the office saying that he cant help me.
magx01 5y ago
Only women can manipulate their own hormones. Misandry at its finest.
Sylvester_Sterone 5y ago
...and soon we will have this: https://genderneutralpronoun.wordpress.com/tag/ze-and-zir/
Fyrjefe 5y ago
So, did you end up getting a T supplement from somewhere? What kind of impact did it have?
Sylvester_Sterone 5y ago
Absolutely. About a year ago I contacted an online t clinic. Told them what happened that led up to antidepressants being administered (Symptoms: anxiety, not looking at people, trouble sleeping, low libido) Heck I was on FMLA leave. This was at the age of 29.
During that time period I did have my testosterone level taken, which came out to be 400. The psychiatrist was explaining to me that 400 is normal for me (he was probably at my level too).
I've been a year on it and I feel well. Sleeping better, talking to people, joining community organizations, good libido, approaching multiple women and moving on if rejected while handling it.
vicious_armbar 5y ago
Any side effects? Hair loss?
Sylvester_Sterone 5y ago
Blood work keeps me in the 900- 1100 range, with all the the values looking good.
I do respond strong to the AI where they recommended taking .5 once a week. This knocked my estrogen a little too low which resulted in me feeling crappy on some days. I take .25 now every 2 weeks.
No serious emotional side effects. Although I've been in some situations where I was able to hold back. I was in a situation where I verbally confronted a staff member for a Special Olympics team (at the hotel not at the venue)... he did not let them shower after three basketball games before going to a dance. Nothing too bad but the guy quit the following week.
Fyrjefe 5y ago
Thanks for sharing. Maybe this is something I need to get me started. I am around the same age and I have been dealing with depression as well and just don't feel like I have energy sometimes. It would help with exercise which would kick in natural T production. Of course, that's why it's high up on TRP recommendations.
Sylvester_Sterone 5y ago
Antidepressants can be nasty to some. At first I was put on one to help me sleep... eventually it lost its magic. I decided to come off when I was denied TRT from the P-Doc and had some withdrawal symptoms. Bad anxiety and eye twitching plus at most 2 hours of sleep. TRT increased my quality of life but it is a lifelong thing which I accept.
Get some bloodwork done to see where you are at. Exercise and TRT would have a good effect. Master the AI dosage.
conflagratorX 5y ago
I don't think decline of masculinity is because of easy times. It has much more to do with raising boys by single mothers. Masculinity is something that has to be learned and if there is no teacher, knowledge passed from generation to generation is lost. You don't need great war to teach your kid how to lift, keep frame and work hard.
otter6461a 5y ago
Being raised by single mothers is not “easy times”, that’s for sure.
Fyrjefe 5y ago
Amen. I personally recall a lot of instability, especially in decision making under duress.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
otter6461a 5y ago
Being miserable does not look easy to me.
Edit to add: I’m not really a believer in this idea that if only things were terrible men would somehow become happy. Things ARE terrible. Boys and men are failing at a level that they have never failed at in history. All it’s doing is creating a lot of destroyed boys and men.
replicaplater 5y ago
I would argue that this process of weakening started after WWII. Post-WWII America was characterized by prosperity and a booming economy and the effect of that on the Baby boomer generation who were raised then was the first domino to fall. No surprise that this generation was also the one responsible for the hippie liberalism culture that eventually gave rise to feminism and the beginning of drug culture acceptance, and sexual liberation etc on a mass scale. All of these forces were fundamental drivers towards where we are today. Forget Generation X and every generation after them, they were fucked from the beginning and just fell in rank with everyone else on the decline. Where all of this will lead to is anyone's guess, but if past history is an indicator of the future its not going to be a pretty sight.
Vince_McLeod 5y ago
No drug has done more harm to Westerners than alcohol, and we didn't need the boomers for that.
[deleted] 5y ago
Ni????????a I played Wii fit for 45 minutes a day. I'm alpha. (No offense to my Joycon boyz who lift)
[deleted]
Mr-Ed209 5y ago
The economic changes in the past few decades have contributed a large part to what is happening nowadays. Theres a great Jordan Peterson bit that summarised is something along the lines of;
A minority of women existed in the workforce. Men worked and were able to support house hold on a single income.
Then some high flying women entered the workforce. For a time some households had two incomes. Social mobility in these homes rocketed. Around the time of the 80s right through to the millenials born in the early 90s.
More and more women entered the workforce to the point where the value of labour is reduced such that two parents are required to earn and support a home. (Present times)
If you look at points 3 and 4, it says a lot about what's happening to men nowadays. Men are getting jobs and realising that they can barely afford to live, can't afford to 'launch' from mum and dads place despite working full time. They get resentful, they lose motivation and sit home and play video games to stave off bordem. They become weak because there is no motivation to be otherwise. Theres no longer any reward.
[deleted] 5y ago
I cannot stand when people say women are outperforming men in school. Really? Are they outperforming them in math, engineering, science, accounting? Or are they outperforming them in memorizing and regurgitating what the English teacher wants you to write about “of mice and men.” Women will never outperform men in anything of value (other than childcare) unless men stop trying.
naIamgood 5y ago
Well for me this is a motivation to start my own business or alteast be financially independent so that I don't have to deal with diversity promoting corporations.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
vicious_armbar 5y ago
This can't be overstated! Only 69% of children live in a two parent household. That means almost all of the remaining 31% of fathers are under the boot of the Child Support system. Which greatly disincentivizes hard work and earning.
Why work long hours at a job you dislike when 70% of each additional dollar earned goes to the federal government and a woman who hates you, tries to make your life hell, and has no responsibility to account for the money you send her? That's without even taking into consideration state, local, or sales taxes!
Then if lose your job a family court judge will just 'impute' your income keeping your obligations high; and you'll end up being carted off to jail or worse. Wondering why American men are slacking off regarding their careers is like wondering why a factory worker in communist Russia only pretends to work. The reasons are obvious.
[deleted] 5y ago
[deleted]
Random_throwaway_000 5y ago
We only defeated the Economic Marxists with the fall of the USSR. Now we are fighting the Cultural Marxists. And we are losing hard.
Troll_Name 5y ago
Smart Russians are terrified that the only other mass nuclear weapons hoarder in the world is doing this. Probably also smart people in the rest of the world for that matter.
There's just no way to understand what divorces are like without being near one - not to be wished on enemies. You don't even have to be part of the family; if a self-employed man is suddenly worth 15% less money then his wife sets off a nuke and makes him worth 99% less money. Then the court assigns him a monthly bill to pay based on his income before the economy even dove.
The husband gets effectively lobotomized - anyone who recovers from this is probably undead. Employees get bounced paychecks, and can only complain at the one with zero money and zero further potential for money. Any clientele being served are SOL, and depending on the context this can also mean financial ruin for them as well. Needless to say the kids no longer have access to their father; All because an individual woman was unsatisfied. This happens in waves and asking around for a new job will only find that the entire rental office building is going under.
Marriage!
JamesSkepp 5y ago
"Women entering workforce as the main driver of lower wages" is at odds with basic logic. Let's assume the society is compromised of 100 people, split even. We start with 50 men holding 50 jobs, 50 women being unemployed. Let's change that ratio one by one. 49/51, 48/52 and so on. If women would be the main reason for lower wages (double the competition, halve the wage), there should be 50% unemployment (perhaps split even between genders). The rate of unemployment in Western countries is around 5% - which means that there is enough work for 95% of people regardless of gender.
Therefore it's reasonable to assume that there simply was NEED for more workers, thus women entering workforce simply satisfied the need for NEW job openings not the old ones.
My explanation deliberately omits new technologies like machines replacing men (women will follow too) which has been happening since the beginning of first industrial revolution and now slowly moves into intellectual domains.
Men will not be willing to work b/c men are not motivated to work in today's cubicle/corpo culture with it's absurd and comical motivation incentives and "company loyalty". It's been a problem for decades, now it's going to get even worse b/c new technologies will replace more men than women, at lest at the beginning.
Mr-Ed209 5y ago
I feel that's wilfully reductionist and misconstruing the point. This isn't about unemployment, it's about underpayment for the jobs which do now exist. Jobs which previously paid enough - relative to living costs etc to support a home.
Women entered the workforce because (now this is the contentious opinion) for the first time in history they could. Well paying jobs moved away from largely being hard manual labour (mining, construction) to corporate office, finance and service. These were also booming industries decades ago, requiring intakes of young educated people on mass to join their ranks. Birth control also meant women were capable of controlling reproduction later into their 20s allowing them to pursue a career and graduate university at 21 without getting knocked up. I'm from the UK so associate this time frame and optimism reaching it's height with 90s Tony Blair and 'new labour'.
Things were great on the face of it. You'd have to be a pretty cynical hard lined chauvinist to deny the benefits of women going to work. However, it's knock on effects are now becoming pretty real in the light of a flat lining economy.
Now I agree automation is cutting jobs, but also that now the culture of women working professionally is established many are outcompeting men at an early level. They also are willing to work for less pay because of being agreeable and I feel more so, an underlying belief that they will not have to fully rely on their career to sustain their life once they are married and have children.
If women weren't competing in the workplace in the way they are today, then men would have the money. So what? isn't that just shifting the problem from one gender to another? Well no, we know that women marry hypergamously and chase providers so in many cases this will result in the wealth being shared in a family unit. Well that's the theory..
JamesSkepp 5y ago
No, it's not directly about unemployment, but the rates unemployment are in direct contradiction of the theory that "women take jobs/wages from men". If that was the case, we should have MUCH higher unemployment rate as to "take a job" would mean the number of jobs is constant and/or finite.
Furthermore, the theory in question can be discredited by doing a simple thought experiment: if we fire ALL the working women, would men start to earn twice as much doing the exact same job? No, they would not, b/c someone would had to to the work the women did. IOW there appears to be enough work for both genders.
Largely agreed.
Original_Dankster 5y ago
The ratio isn't the issue, it's the absolute numbers. Double the size of the adult labour force and wages go down.
There wouldn't be 50% unemployment if wages go down. If wages were artificially pinned, you'd see unemployment dramatically increase. But if wages float, you'll see less of an impact on unemployment... Because low wages encourage inefficiency for companies. There's less incentive to automate or otherwise increase productivity per employee when you can hire people cheaply
(edit: combined two posts into one for clarity)
JamesSkepp 5y ago
From another reply:
So, there was not enough men to fill the jobs, thus women had to fill them. Which means the appearance of the new jobs which men couldn't fill was the first reason why women got employed in the first place.
To blame women for fulfilling the need of the market, especially considering there wasn't enough men to fill the need in the first place, is absurd.
That the wages got lowered later, when more workers appeared on the market, was a consequence of new job openings appearing.
rreot 5y ago
You got it wrong.
It's not about balance of employers/unemployed but about supply/demand dynamics - when you don't have enough workers, who's battling for good employees? Good wages.
JamesSkepp 5y ago
So, there was not enough men to fill the jobs, thus women had to fill them. Which means the appearance of the new jobs was the first reason why women got employed in the first place.
To blame women for fulfilling the need of the market, especially considering there wasn't enough men to fill the need in the first place, is absurd.
That the wages got lowered later, when more workers appeared on the market, which was a consequence of new job openings appearing.
IOW, I got it pretty much right.
Timthetiny 5y ago
You're mostly incorrect. Basic economic tgeory would help you immensely.
[deleted]
JamesSkepp 5y ago
Honour is a BP concept.
This was not an abrupt process. It took pace in last 300-400 years when scientific knowledge increased the standard of living and decreased the need for hard labour, step by step. It can be even stretched out on the last 10-15 000 years, from the moment we first "invented" sedentary civilizations, b/c the moment we invent something we already think how to make it better.
While I agree with the general gist of the idea, it's hardly an issue in the 20th, let alone 21st century. There will never be "hard times" ever again, for the Western World at least. The amount of infrastructure we have that supports us makes that unlikely, save for full scale WW3 with Russians or Chinese.
What was supposed to be the last "hard times" period? 2008 economic crisis? WW2 fucking up half of the planet comes to mind, yeah that were without a doubt hard times. But besides that, what really can happen that will impact entire countries?
IOW, your quote is a nice soundbite, has a ring of truth in it, but it's outdated more than 70 years now, and highly unlikely to happen (the "hard times") ever again in any meaningful way.
Trump wasn't a warning shot to anyone, it's an alt-right fantasy. He's as involved in Wall Street "swamp" as the rest of them, hell, the guy has obvious ties to what is generally perceived here as the "globalists" (easy to see if you go trough his cabinet biographies on Wikipedia) aka the very swamp he want's to drain.
replicaplater 5y ago
I think its a bit naive to think that the Western World won't have have "hard times" in the future. One thing I can think of is when fossil fuel runs out in the next ~100 years. When it really comes down to it, fossil fuels are at the root of the Western world's development. While we do have the technologies to somewhat replace that energy source, none of them are currently economically viable at the scale needed to maintain the current level of infrastructure.
[deleted] 5y ago
nobody has any idea how much oil there is. And, stop calling it "fossil fuel". Dinosaur bones do not magically turn into oil. For all we know oil could naturally replenish due to geological activity.
The fact that Americans shill the "peak oil" meme so hard makes me instinctively disbelieve it.
JamesSkepp 5y ago
Not on a meaningful scale like WW2.
That's debatable if we run out of natural fossil fuels, the so called peak oil was supposed to happen a few times already. Secondly, in 100 years, fossil fuels as energy source will be an anachronism, we already have break even fusion reactors working (apparently GWs are not out of the question either); there are prototype thorium reactors (fission) that are safe, cheap and efficient (nuclear reactor size of a truck); we will most likely have high efficiency solar farms in orbit etc. Even when it comes to plastics and similar use of oil, we already have enough of the material on the market to simply recycle the existing one to make something new.
Were.
ApexmanRP 5y ago
"Honour is a BP concept."
I think honour in relation to women is BP. Between men (not Beta's) honour is a very real and important cohesive.
That said, if you can find a handful of men in your life that this applies to, you are doing well.
JamesSkepp 5y ago
There's only (mostly) dynamic hierarchy. Honour is a set of rules designed to govern it in a specific manner (not even civilized manner, just a set of rather arbitrary rules). Thus it's BP (as m-f BP is to m-f RP), as it lives on his own life regardless of actual hierarchy.
There's no such thing as having more or less honour, not in a way like you can have more intelligence or more strength and so on.
SKRedPill 5y ago
Does honor mean 'respect' or 'lose-win' altruism? I always thought it meant dignity, while society seems to define it as sacrifice (for their benefit of course).
SheepWaker 5y ago
I would say the second one is above dignity. Sacrifice for the Greater Good blah blah blah. That's the one that blue pilled me hasn't gotten rid of still.
ApexmanRP 5y ago
Are you suggesting that to live as a Red Pilled man, you must live without honour?
SheepWaker 5y ago
Honor is about to get me killed. Always go with self-preservation. Honor will get you killed.
ApexmanRP 5y ago
"Honor is about to get me killed."
Really? Tell me more...
SheepWaker 5y ago
Its a complicated story. You wouldn’t believe it. Fuck , I’ve lived it and I can barely wrap my head around it.
ApexmanRP 5y ago
Sure, it sounds like its more than honour at work there..
I do believe in honour, but that isn't blind honour. It starts with honouring oneself.
SheepWaker 5y ago
Blind honor is all I know. Some people just don’t give a fuck. Don’t be one of those people.
Fyrjefe 5y ago
What he is suggesting is that when you are unplugged, a lot of presuppositions need to be re-evaluated. The game is amoral, so the question of things touted as moral need to be looked at carefully. Honour is one of those things. What was its original purpose? Can it be used against me or others? Does it represent the ideals of justice? Now we are getting philosophical. The questions are not easy and will take time to work though.
ApexmanRP 5y ago
Yes, I get all that. The tools are amoral. How you chose to play the game is up to you.
However, one of the differences we like to espouse is that men are more idealistic than women - this can be a weakness but also a strength. Its why most things of worth have been created by men, and conversely why more men kill themselves after divorce.
I like Jack Donovans take on Honour and the Noble ideal.
Fyrjefe 5y ago
What is his take? I am not familiar. How do you think it applies in this chaotic version of the SMP (and in general)?
ApexmanRP 5y ago
Go to his blog and check it out. There is also a great 21 Convention Presentation he did on this.
From memory the Noble ideal includes things like abundance, setting your own values and life course, and deciding for yourself what is right and wrong morally (obviously acting within the law).
JamesSkepp 5y ago
Are you in a mood for leading questions?
ApexmanRP 5y ago
Yes, I love leading questions.. Do I take it that you don't? ;-)
JamesSkepp 5y ago
It's you private matter whether you take it or not.
ApexmanRP 5y ago
Anyway, you didn't answer my question - is Red Pill necessarily without honour?