Men rejecting masculinity

Alt title: men rejecting their gender role (then blaming women).
https://www.mercatornet.com/above/view/apatheism-is-more-damaging-to-christianity-than-atheism-and-antitheism/21642

“More nuanced and incisive rebuttals, such as Edward Feser’s The Last Superstition and David Bentley Hart’s Atheist Delusions, somehow never quite achieved the same recognition.”

cabal

“The questions and debates engaged in by the new atheists were often reductive, emotionalized and glib, but one does have to grant that they at least tackled the great questions of faith in their way.”

All redditfags do is strawman and pretend to be House on social questions while their own lives are miserable bachelorhoods full of porn and video games. It’s like church ladies self-congratulating.

Yeah, in spite of mathematical certainty, they’re all 130+ and can’t spell or compose a sentence for shit. O.K.

The only way they feel good about themselves is crusaderism, finding a “sinner” and making them feel bad or stressed e.g. Christians.

“Its supporters soon tired of tedious and repetitive debates,

with their navel

and they began to argue with each other about social justice and political correctness.”

And failed, clue.

Nothing they say is original. They’re multicultural monstrosities.

“The answer lies in the grey zone between believers and atheists.

no?

If you want to find the real wolf steering sheep away from the flock, look not to fedora-bedecked atheists, but to your average apatheist.”

No, hedonist. They pay lip service to virtue to continue a life of vice, massive cognitive dissonance.
You are not special, broflakes. This is not a special thing worthy of a snowflake term.
e.g. they will say all men should be married, and refuse to get married. Idiots.
They will say all men do better in the military and call the draft “sexist” (like evolution didn’t happen).
Women are weak but should magically overpower any male attacker with kung fu grip (but hitting a man is sexist).
They will know about atheist sub-fertility and refuse to be religious because they think it’s beneath them, a status signal, and again, they’re avoiding patriarchal standards i.e. no manwhoring, no carousing, no drugs, no lechery, actual standards of historical masculine virtue.
They don’t want to grow up or can’t (emotionally regressed). Peter Pan spent all his time “having fun” and dodging responsibility.
The idea of being a gentleman or “respectable” is something they dismiss out of hand with another mis-label, cuck.
No, a cuck is someone who rejects tradition and history in their own life while verbally going on (and on and on…) about its importance, they’re cuckservatives hoping to freeload off the backs of real men’s hard work. For thee but not for me. They’re worthless humans, if they won’t contribute they should emigrate. They’d actually take a class on Penis Studies (Man Studies) because they’re so mind-numbingly boring (predictable, all on the same diet, same clothes, same haircut, same reading material across borders, like a cult of dull) and lacking in individuality.

They’ll say men should be providers – and refuse to provide even for themselves (a mantrum) and worse, defend deadbeats!
Cowardly r-types.

“It’s okay when we do it” hypocrites. They’re socialists who self-loathe in different ways. An abortion clinic on every corner and whore pills in every 13yo girl’s hands would be alright by them! Moral relativists. “Social liberal, economic conservative” cucks. All the gibs, as long as someone else pays.

You can only strike from your gender role if you were competent enough to have ever achieved it.

They reject their gender role, like male SJWs, in favour of materalism, atheistic hedonism (acting like an animal). It’s the exact same thing.
In their own ideal society, they’d be rejects!
Nihilism in the pomo sense of the word is the belief system of losers, it’s their cover for postmodernism while pretending to be oh-so different (special) from the SJWs (narcissism of small differences).
Even this article’s like “this is a new and special thing”.
No? It’s just that we notice because dueling is illegal (otherwise their lip would get them shot by a real man) and they can’t be cannon fodder without an overt war. This is what happens in the dysgenic situation when you let the Low IQ males with delusions of superiority (a self-proclaimed penis pass, if you will, on all sin) run their whining mouth about how, in the most spoiled society ever, they’re still abject failures! Oh, poor baby in your air conditioned palace on welfare! It must be so hard!
Their failure isn’t society’s fault, it’s a character fault and on the contrary, the ones bitching online are exclusively reared in the middle-class (they had advantages).

They have no excuse.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2017/09/19/middle-class-white-male-memes/

If a meme about a spoiled suburbanite Prince stereotype offends you…. it should.

Shame is GOOD.

Their slide down the social mobility scale is a sign the system works. You aren’t entitled to a better life than your parents unless you work at least as hard (complaining isn’t work).

I’d know.

9/10 they’re actually nagging. But they do nothing themselves. Only nag. We have male shrews! They expect the rest of us will step in like their helicopter parents. You’re an adult, we owe you nothing.

The Boomers are right about the entitled ones. It just happens to be the hippy kids.

https://disenchantedscholar.wordpress.com/2016/01/24/the-anti-spanking-initiative-is-r-selected/

Nagging only works if you’re bound i.e. parents, marriage. Nagging society doesn’t wash and given the advantages men have on many levels (that they deny “male privilege is a myth” when they seek to evade responsibility or champion with hyperbole “men are superior biologically” to signal, both when it’s convenient, like we don’t notice), they don’t have an excuse that blames women e.g. when boys lose out on math tests and other schoolwork, it’s because they study less around the time they discover porn. Asians can’t watch that stuff all day, look at their grades, it isn’t “all men”, it’s all degenerate men who make poor lifestyle choices. So they want a meritocratic system – but only when it leads to positive outcomes for themselves (liars).

If someone works harder than you, they deserve to beat you! Add up hours studied and you’ll find female (and male) conscientiousness isn’t bias, they activate with their IQ the traits which help them. The guy or girl “winging it” the night before deserves to fail*. Low IQ don’t have the IQ to know what they’re NOT doing! That isn’t everyone else’s fault! If there are systemic forces against men in some fields, the same must be true of women in other fields because that is how systems work, ya dummies!

Otherwise it’s like saying there’s north without south or taste without those tacky cheese squares at the other end of the spectrum. Logic is consistent! Smart men address the topic of stupid men – until they’re shouted down as “sexist” (???), like smart women.

It just so happens by nature that there are more lazy men! So yeah, they fail! Confound!

You cannot ignore the left half of the bell curve, men overpopulate it!

They’ve simply never survived in these numbers before because responsibility is the new leprosy in a decadent West. It makes a lot of sense actually. No prior society (that didn’t collapse) ever had to tolerate this much stupid and it shows.

If we live in clown world, send in the clowns…

War is like sexual selection, it’s a good thing that keeps the bad genes down. The modern world is like adding shit to the pool so it doesn’t feel excluded.
It turns out you don’t need to sterilize irresponsible people, just give them a free sex doll on condition they never have children (or they’d be aborted). We could solve this in two generations if we stopped listening to their “feelings” (they don’t have feelings, relativists, they only ramble and screech).

Seriously, hand them sexbots on condition of no kids to inflict on the future world (and no sex crimes, because apparently their hand wasn’t as big as their ego). They’re genetic suicides anyway, that or move them (could be cheaper) to a literal Pleasure Island with no internet (no corrupting the outside world) and they can never leave (I figured Westworld was about this, a brothel prison with no victims, would’ve been cooler). They’d OD in about a week without the nanny state. Actually, a literal death camp could work very simply: press lever 1 for food or 2 for heroin. Technically, it’s suicide. Dummies are predictably hedonic.

*They’ve been told it’s important for literally over a decade. You can lead a horse to water. Education is wasted on the lazy and stupid, and they’re the same people. That’s Dunning-Kruger. They’re blind to what they’re missing because they’re missing it!

They cannot see past their ego to anything, including Pascal’s Wager. Again, deny and dismiss, typical cuck.
The destructive person (antisocial to society) telling you you deserve to be destroyed (like an SJW) because society sucks unless it’s sucking them off (but it isn’t their job to fix it?)… boys who weren’t raised with real discipline have no shame (sociopath trait). They’ve been allowed to get away with ruining themselves and remaining psychologically as teenagers.

It’s just the dysgenic men too proud to become blatant SJWs. 

Actually worse than SJWs, wow. They’d sell their grandma for a porn star.

You can’t sympathize with people who hate you and your people.
There’s the obvious traitor and the sneaky little shits who under-mine attempts to make things better for everyone because the gap to their own life would become greater. Fifth Column is worse.

Divorce risk factors

http://emorywheel.com/professors-study-marriage-economics/

Diamonds aren’t the problem, it’s the premium pricing that’s the problem.
People are living longer than ever, we need harder rocks.

It’s easy to find cheap, good quality diamonds and arrange a setting for the stone.

Husband/wife is a status.

Status-obsessed materialists (who want to get married but not be married) tend to divorce more because of the narcissism, and overt narcs tend to pair up with covert ones.

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/understanding-narcissism/201712/how-the-3-types-narcissists-act-first-date

Once the money is gone, the spark fizzles out.

The study also found a correlation between marriage age and duration, which Francis wrote are positively related, meaning the older the person was when he or she got married, the longer the marriage was likely to last.

Maturity, waiting for the hormones to settle and personality to crystallize, few societies in history married off someone younger than 21-25, outside times of war (Regency, American Independence) but then only for re-population purposes, knowing it was less than ideal.

Another notable finding was that the larger differences in age and education between husbands and wives were associated with a higher risk of divorce,

Assortative mating wins again.

College IQ men marrying high-school IQ women is dysgenic.

 as was reporting that looks were important in marriage.

Vain men, bad husbands. As soon as she gets a little wrinkle, his “love” dies.

Evil people confuse lust with love. When the lust is spent, they claim to fall “out” of love. There is no falling “out” of true love, you can only be betrayed and detach. The love doesn’t go anywhere.

Marriage will get less expensive when it becomes more common.
As it is, only rich people can afford to marry.

That’s right, classism again.

Social media would make it a little gimmicky.

Abolishing no-fault divorce and making it hard (or impossible) to re-marry after a set N times would make people respect the institution again, nothing less will work.

Really, our era has the term “starter marriage” – nothing else will work.

If society didn’t get rid of rites of passage for both sexes, the social value of over-spending on a wedding would plummet. For women, debutante balls were important. Now the expense is carried over into bridal models.

The IKEA people

https://jacobitemag.com/2017/09/13/the-ikea-humans-the-social-base-of-contemporary-liberalism/

Who care so much about people they want cheaper iPhones at the expense of slavery and the environment that IKEA isn’t forced to disclose its logging sources but a less than fully organic egg is a crisis.

You could come up with a list of these.

Food labelling for vegans but not religions?

Regulation for these, but not for me.
No prior generation was so weak as to identify with companies, that’s some impressive advertising. Companies are people, they stand for more values. And they’re tricking the consumer into doing their own manual labour. Brilliant. No other generation in history was that thick. Imagine being sold poor-quality vegetables and being told to make your own soup, but they’re charging you for soup and you claim to receive Souppe. It’s hilarious.

They’re over-charging people to pay for their own DIY with shoddy materials.

On another note, can you think of anything more white supremacist than IKEA? It’s not just white, it’s 101% Nordic. Let’s see if the meme works. Technically, you can custom anything you self-build and there’s nothing they can do about it.

It looks so wrong but feels so right. LMAO. Perhaps in a similar shade range.

I’ll admit, I didn’t expect that to fit as well as it did. Confirmed, IKEA is Nazi.

Nazi chic isn’t a joke but this post is.

Elegance or decadence?

5 min. Male designer speaks.

There’s a line, isn’t there? Think how much we spend on clothing today. Think how little is any good. If anything, it ought to be better. In menswear you see a lot of circulation, for instance, the gilet is a doublet.
A related discussion in vintage or re-enactment circles is the glamour/beauty debate.
Beauty is natural but human beauty never has been. Primitive tribes had shell necklaces and the torc or crown were made alongside spears. This is something we are so immersed in we cannot see it, there is a hierarchy of style and the modernist love of minimalism (it’s been almost a century now! come on!) came from an American urge to distance themselves from Europe and carve out what is ironically a more rugged, romantic* standard.

Boomers were defined by the hippy look, androgyny that mimicked the political shift.

People wore wigs in most centuries for decency reasons, like hats, they wore heels and girdles, eyeliner was medicinal. Male watches, wristwatches, were originally ladies’ bracelets. To this day, the face is too large for the male wrist, they go overboard to make it look manly with a chunky appearance. If humans put effort in, and since wearing clothing is legally required, they naturally want to express who they are and where they come from and that art form shouldn’t be dismissed. The utility belt began as female, with its height in the chatelaine. Men would only have things strapped to a military uniform from the shoulders, where their muscles could take the weight. Heavy belts help women, whose strongest muscles are our thighs.
The 1950s makeup aesthetic was heavily painted, more than some looks now. There was a full face of foundation and a lot of powder. These days, with HD cameras, it would look cheap as Hell.
Men forgoing makeup is modernist, inspired by the Romantic* philosophers because it was au naturelle.

To this day, many of you don’t know where this sudden squee over the working class came from.
https://www.artofmanliness.com/2010/09/19/3-archetypes-of-american-manliness-part-iii-the-self-made-man/

Yes, it was totally your idea… like the American eagle that isn’t Napoleonic that isn’t Roman…. calling it, Empire = eagles. Sciencey.

The Romantic poets had a fetish about the countryside and farmers, this continued on into Vincent’s art but began around the 17th century with still life and paintings of farmers and cooks. The simple life to contrast the urban “Enlightenment”. Industrialization got the Romantics down, they thought machines were replacing men and making them more effete, dependent. Actually, how many men can stitch a button?

There’s a physical component to gendered presentation, the scale of masculine to feminine.
Modern looks are androgynous, even for men. Denim is andro, cotton, andro, jeans, andro, boots, andro, ties, andro, scarves, andro, t-shirts, andro, it’s all andro-andro-andro-andro!

For real.

Look around and see for yourself.

Women aren’t dressed like men, men are dressing more like women. Do you need a loose fit of maternity wear? Think back to 1980s suits to now, picture the silhouette. Modern men cover up way too much skin, historically. Why? Well, they don’t fight, there’s no body heat being lost. Sports replaced wars. The wealthy areas tend to be cold or polluted, so we cover up. Powerful men are in vogue, fewer dandies and more fat old men, who tend to cover up.

Long coats are Byronic, like long sleeves. Cravat and tie are basically the same thing in French. Grooming became more important, they didn’t just drop a standard so telling women to forgo makeup would be like telling men exactly which hairstyle to wear regardless of face shape and job and climate and whether or not they were allowed a beard, absurd in any time period. Makeup, like hair style is also cultural. You can see comparisons on Youtube of say, French and American makeup. Men couldn’t have beards in the upper classes until soap and good hygiene became the norm. There were reasons for the aristocratic fashions and all grooming is good grooming, with the exception of anal bleaching.

That would be masochism.

Suits, for instance, change how a man walks. Other men don’t notice, we do.
If a man can’t buy a good pair of shoes, do we trust him?
The effect on manners and a sense of personal dignity cannot be under-estimated.
As one man I know put it, he recently got into vintage and said “I know now that I felt like shit because I looked like it.” People responded to that insecurity signal. Depression is linked with unemployment but also sloppy dressers.
Why is there an envy of the stylish? They look happy. We imagine them contented.
It’s different to pin what caused what and I’m not a man so your feels aren’t my beeswax.
When we picture a utopia, what do we spotlight? What they wear. Instinctively, you care. Cosplay is all about the style and the feel of an era, what it represents. Living history, I’ve heard it called, like recipes and music.

They build up on skills and those traditions are rooted in history, in a country and time.

20m. German lady.

A critical aspect of femininity is presentation and expression.
It isn’t limited to women, however, men gain a collective identity more.

It affects how you carry and identify yourself. Think military uniforms.
This concept was floated in NRx years ago but I figured I’d bring it up again.

6m. French designer.

There’s a distinct pride element, whether it’s class, sex, nation, occasion (we still dress up for weddings..) and think how many aspects of appearance are banned or frowned upon (up to the English flag, because it might offend).
SJWs themselves cannot resist the siren song of a uniform but the blending is childish, Monroe catseye glasses with a Betty fringe and Audrey shirts, they signal an ignorance of feminine style. It’s pure fashion and poorly crafted as a look. There is no style.
How many people dress like hoodrats and chavs that wouldn’t dream of it ten years ago? Thanks to Anonymous making it middle class rebellion.
How did wearing Mom Jeans become Tech Guru status? Apple smartphones.
Why don’t men wear hats and spats and carry canes?
Where did all the petticoats go?

These sound superficial but the fabrics follow the philosophies. Designers respond to demand.
We dress cheaply because clothing is made cheaply. That makes us cheap people. History will view us as such. Trends set in LA temperatures look ridiculous in Europe. I said it.
Please can men discuss this because obviously I don’t want to tell you what to wear but women notice. We note the expression and effort, why else do you think the gay best friend thing came about?

This isn’t superficial, aesthetics is critical. It’s the ultimate emotional appeal (looking good) and, no offense, but the signal of sophistication and elegance is one few people could ever make. Natural beauty is genetic but style is a level playing field. The dress-up montages in film and anime are a token marker of stepping into a social role (think Iron Man suiting up) and mature responsibilities.

I’ve noticed one particular thing I want to point out before I set this festive post on a timer: PC culture has risen as appearance has gotten more sloppy. With weak signals from look, the verbal mannerly side has gone into overdrive.

Video: The psychological idea of God

Convert an atheist to hierarchical norms today!

See: Why mockery?

Signalling is Freudian signifiers.
>Checkmate, atheists.

People who claim Freud was wrong about sexuality still get the most ripe interpretations of inkblots despite sleeping around. Stop flirting with Wicca and commit to Christ.

egocentrism is fine, a weak superego is terrible

A lot of supposed nihilists are just Freudians with no clue how to interpret.

Speaking of impossible memes (because you find nihilism to have meaning) – cognitively.

How is a meme qualitatively different from an idea?

Meme is such a pretentious way to discredit any faith by coaching it in pseudo-Darwinian paradigms. Thoughts do not guide behaviour, it is values and those arise from cultural principles. Religion shows the shifts in paradigm of cultural dominance over time.

Today my pill is so red it shifts into the UV spectra.

Iconography is not the territory.
Virtue signalling is the modern Pietism. These basic bitch Pharisees.
Remember to self-flagellate with your Father’s disappointment today!