We talk about male and female sexual strategy, but there is in fact a thing called social sexual strategy that puts a limiter on both of them to ensure its own stability and a stable family life for children to grow up in.
single mothers have been burdens for time immemorial on families and governments and their brood are far more been likely to be troublemakers than society reformers.
Boys do better with male role models, and girls do better with male role models, too.
Boys see a man restrain his impulses, because a man learns not to fight or lash out at every emotional response.
And a girl learns from her father what a man should be - and learns that jumping into bed with a guy isn't going to automatically win her the love she's yearning for.
Society needs fathers for stability and self-confidence/self-belief.
Boys see a man restrain his impulses, because a man learns not to fight or lash out at every emotional response.
Exactly. Bullies are not admired any more than a man who lets his vices and passions overwhelm him. Moderation and restraint is what makes a man and we have many many stories reinforcing this of men being brought down because they lacked restraint.
On the opposite side we rarely have stories of women brought down low by their weaknesses because it's already assumed but it creates a false idea that women are more perfect than men ignoring how women were often a part the downfall of those men in the stories. In women's stories giving into excess and passion is often encouraged - max out your credit cards if you're blue is a common mantra. This is why in real life far more women are in debt than men. Give into forbidden desire of going with the dark-eyed scoundrel hence why there are so many single mothers. Feminism has failed them because it doesn't set up an ideal to aspire to but teaches them to blame men for everything including their own poor lifestyle choices.
I think the point is if you control females with threat of something really bad, them knowing its not an empty threat, then they in turn control the alpha males by saying "NO, I will not cheat on my husband, because I fear that really bad thing."
Attempting to control the males, goes nowhere. Controlling the females, in reality, controls both.
I think they both need equal amounts of control...
​
Problem is women know that they can fuck as many Tyrones as they can, and they will still have a docile loser to take their leftovers at the end of they day.
​
If you control both sexuality you actually ensure monogamy, which is quite frankly the best social formula to guarantee a thriving civilization so far.
Agreed. In lieu of there being a new false rape allegation made against a man every week, I've come to see that patriarchy was essentially the answer. By nature, women are irrational, childish and whimsical- and if you don't place a control on those impulses and set boundaries (as has happened)- they will walk all over you and spin things into endless chaos. Schopenhauer was very accurate in his writings on the subject.
Men's mastery over his own primitive/sexual impulses, I believe, is just part of the self-improving aspect of the red pill once you get past the anger and finally swallow. We cultivate our masculinity, but exercise the stoicism necessary to keep order over ourselves. That is the mark of the true man. Outside of the control over ourselves, men do not need any social controls on our behaviour, per se- but that is what's been going on, and that is what is so necessary to reverse so we can gain that balance back again.
Men's mastery over his own primitive/sexual impulses, I believe, is just part of the self-improving aspect of the red pill once you get past the anger and finally swallow.
Well said! I would say across the board men who allow their vices and lusts to dominate them are generally looked down upon whether they are kings or gangsters as it makes them weak.
Women on the other hand don't have this concept generally amongst themselves. They don't see giving into their wants as a problem which leads to a number of them even when they have millions of dollars still winding up in debt. Lisa Marie Presley inherited 100 million and less than 20 years later filing for bankruptcy. Now there are male celebs who have spent themselves into bankruptcy but men don't have the philosophy of max out their credit cards on a shopping spree if they feel blue.
Yes indeed sir. It is a recurring task for me to get a rein over ego and id myself. Also fairly timely- we’re reading Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics in a Moral Philosophy class at my college right now, and it is a fine guide on how and why man should carefully walk that line.
At the same time, there is a Rhetoric Of Delivery course I am in where the the prof is rambling BP autism about women and gays not being allowed to speak in the oratory in Greece because Male Fragility™. Anybody on here with a cursory grasp of the nature of the genders would understand why they really relegated those positions to strong masculine men, and why it was necessary in Ancient Greece especially- according to this woman though, it’s because of performative theory a la Judith Butler instead.
It’s not easy having totally taken the pill and being surrounded by that much stupid on a regular basis without many others who will truly get the picture if any at all. I graduate in a matter of months though so whatever.
the prof is rambling BP autism about women and gays not being allowed to speak in the oratory in Greece because Male Fragility™
or the fact that it would be just navel-gazing myopic rhetoric focused on them and not society as a whole.
"The Persians are coming!"
"Yes, I'm sure that's important but what does that matter if women have to endure being whistled at in the market place?"
I consider myself progressive on minority rights, equality, and all that but with the idea of getting beyond those divisions and work to the betterment of society as a whole but the problem with a lot of the SJW-minded is they are limited in their socio-political goals thinking only of their own self-identified group with some bones thrown to similar groups for the sake of virtue signaling and allies. Despite calling themselves "progressive" their views often don't progress beyond what their group can get and when they run out of that they make up problems like man-spreading on public transportation.
Another thing, men-run organizations and governments have not and do not sit around thinking "what can we do to make things better just for men?" They're thinking of and debating about policies - economic, foreign, domestic, science, etc... It may break women's heart but when a bunch of men are together professionally or socially we don't talk about women for hours or even minutes because it's either private or just not an interesting topic for lengthy discussion.
Dead on man. It's the conflict between man being able to project outward and create and innovate and woman, in her solipsism, only able to focus on the issues specific to her- frustrated it is not her proclivity to do what man can do and using her own imperative to bend things her way. Often it is so with those who feel and deem themselves to be powerless, the SJW groups you described- where logos and ethos do not prevail, pathos is what has allowed them the institutional leverage they now have.
As far as manspreading goes- whenever I get into one of these classes I always make sure to employ the Alpha-est of tone and body language and with it, an extra-wide spread. Out of sheer coincidence, I'm sure, it doesn't seem to bother any of the female students around.
I got a serious wake up call at the weekend. I fell back into old bad habits and payed the price. I always thought Roissy was harsh but with the reflecting I've been doing I don't think he is anymore. Deep down I know it's true. To be honest I hate it, swallowing the pill the second time is much harder, but there really is no going back.
SKRedPill 5y ago
We talk about male and female sexual strategy, but there is in fact a thing called social sexual strategy that puts a limiter on both of them to ensure its own stability and a stable family life for children to grow up in.
rationalthought314 5y ago
single mothers have been burdens for time immemorial on families and governments and their brood are far more been likely to be troublemakers than society reformers.
[deleted] 5y ago
Boys do better with male role models, and girls do better with male role models, too.
Boys see a man restrain his impulses, because a man learns not to fight or lash out at every emotional response.
And a girl learns from her father what a man should be - and learns that jumping into bed with a guy isn't going to automatically win her the love she's yearning for.
Society needs fathers for stability and self-confidence/self-belief.
rationalthought314 5y ago
Exactly. Bullies are not admired any more than a man who lets his vices and passions overwhelm him. Moderation and restraint is what makes a man and we have many many stories reinforcing this of men being brought down because they lacked restraint.
On the opposite side we rarely have stories of women brought down low by their weaknesses because it's already assumed but it creates a false idea that women are more perfect than men ignoring how women were often a part the downfall of those men in the stories. In women's stories giving into excess and passion is often encouraged - max out your credit cards if you're blue is a common mantra. This is why in real life far more women are in debt than men. Give into forbidden desire of going with the dark-eyed scoundrel hence why there are so many single mothers. Feminism has failed them because it doesn't set up an ideal to aspire to but teaches them to blame men for everything including their own poor lifestyle choices.
[deleted]
dawoodmuslim 5y ago
I think the point is if you control females with threat of something really bad, them knowing its not an empty threat, then they in turn control the alpha males by saying "NO, I will not cheat on my husband, because I fear that really bad thing."
Attempting to control the males, goes nowhere. Controlling the females, in reality, controls both.
FeniZio94 5y ago
I think they both need equal amounts of control...
​
Problem is women know that they can fuck as many Tyrones as they can, and they will still have a docile loser to take their leftovers at the end of they day.
​
If you control both sexuality you actually ensure monogamy, which is quite frankly the best social formula to guarantee a thriving civilization so far.
[deleted] 5y ago
Agreed. In lieu of there being a new false rape allegation made against a man every week, I've come to see that patriarchy was essentially the answer. By nature, women are irrational, childish and whimsical- and if you don't place a control on those impulses and set boundaries (as has happened)- they will walk all over you and spin things into endless chaos. Schopenhauer was very accurate in his writings on the subject.
Men's mastery over his own primitive/sexual impulses, I believe, is just part of the self-improving aspect of the red pill once you get past the anger and finally swallow. We cultivate our masculinity, but exercise the stoicism necessary to keep order over ourselves. That is the mark of the true man. Outside of the control over ourselves, men do not need any social controls on our behaviour, per se- but that is what's been going on, and that is what is so necessary to reverse so we can gain that balance back again.
rationalthought314 5y ago
Well said! I would say across the board men who allow their vices and lusts to dominate them are generally looked down upon whether they are kings or gangsters as it makes them weak.
Women on the other hand don't have this concept generally amongst themselves. They don't see giving into their wants as a problem which leads to a number of them even when they have millions of dollars still winding up in debt. Lisa Marie Presley inherited 100 million and less than 20 years later filing for bankruptcy. Now there are male celebs who have spent themselves into bankruptcy but men don't have the philosophy of max out their credit cards on a shopping spree if they feel blue.
[deleted] 5y ago
Yes indeed sir. It is a recurring task for me to get a rein over ego and id myself. Also fairly timely- we’re reading Aristotle’s Nichomachean Ethics in a Moral Philosophy class at my college right now, and it is a fine guide on how and why man should carefully walk that line.
At the same time, there is a Rhetoric Of Delivery course I am in where the the prof is rambling BP autism about women and gays not being allowed to speak in the oratory in Greece because Male Fragility™. Anybody on here with a cursory grasp of the nature of the genders would understand why they really relegated those positions to strong masculine men, and why it was necessary in Ancient Greece especially- according to this woman though, it’s because of performative theory a la Judith Butler instead.
It’s not easy having totally taken the pill and being surrounded by that much stupid on a regular basis without many others who will truly get the picture if any at all. I graduate in a matter of months though so whatever.
rationalthought314 5y ago
or the fact that it would be just navel-gazing myopic rhetoric focused on them and not society as a whole.
"The Persians are coming!"
"Yes, I'm sure that's important but what does that matter if women have to endure being whistled at in the market place?"
I consider myself progressive on minority rights, equality, and all that but with the idea of getting beyond those divisions and work to the betterment of society as a whole but the problem with a lot of the SJW-minded is they are limited in their socio-political goals thinking only of their own self-identified group with some bones thrown to similar groups for the sake of virtue signaling and allies. Despite calling themselves "progressive" their views often don't progress beyond what their group can get and when they run out of that they make up problems like man-spreading on public transportation.
Another thing, men-run organizations and governments have not and do not sit around thinking "what can we do to make things better just for men?" They're thinking of and debating about policies - economic, foreign, domestic, science, etc... It may break women's heart but when a bunch of men are together professionally or socially we don't talk about women for hours or even minutes because it's either private or just not an interesting topic for lengthy discussion.
[deleted] 5y ago
Dead on man. It's the conflict between man being able to project outward and create and innovate and woman, in her solipsism, only able to focus on the issues specific to her- frustrated it is not her proclivity to do what man can do and using her own imperative to bend things her way. Often it is so with those who feel and deem themselves to be powerless, the SJW groups you described- where logos and ethos do not prevail, pathos is what has allowed them the institutional leverage they now have.
As far as manspreading goes- whenever I get into one of these classes I always make sure to employ the Alpha-est of tone and body language and with it, an extra-wide spread. Out of sheer coincidence, I'm sure, it doesn't seem to bother any of the female students around.
Fulp_Piction 5y ago
I got a serious wake up call at the weekend. I fell back into old bad habits and payed the price. I always thought Roissy was harsh but with the reflecting I've been doing I don't think he is anymore. Deep down I know it's true. To be honest I hate it, swallowing the pill the second time is much harder, but there really is no going back.
[deleted]