This really is the hard truth that few care to admit, and I must give you credit for daring to present it in such a cohesive and clear manner. However, I would disagree with your assertion that the concepts you advance have no bearing on your proverbial Kansan. The homeschooled Midwesterner is unfortunately going to encounter the seamier side of modern culture whether he likes it or not, especially if he has a high I.Q. and a wandering mind. He does not handle its women well, as I can relate from the experiences of far too many friends and acquaintances. Therefore, these erstwhile homeschoolers are perhaps the most likely to benefit from essays that spell out the rules of the modern dating environment in explicit terms. However, I do not yet know how many of them will find your social commentary, or if they did, would be able to square it with their own values. Too many of them would take one look at the title and mentally fast-forward on to something more palatable. I sometimes think I should try to translate these concepts into something that would not get me excommunicated.
I must admit, the Mr. Darcy analogy is a good one for your brief description of the Trad environment. A pleasant aspect of the women there is that they are in fact avid Austen novel readers, and emulating the hero's behavior therein does work.
This one interestingly feels more esoteric and less linear in its presentation than the Barstool manifesto, almost as if attempting to insulate itself from chud hermeneutics…
"The vast majority of women (and by extension weaker men, who’ll forever conform to womanly sensibilities like gospel) perennially rewrite their whole ontology around the Winner being good and virtuous and sensible and the Loser being gross and evil and clearly the province of dissolute shit-eating worms and by the way I’ve always known the Winner was a beneficent splendid lovely deep down!"
This must explain why women loved Harvey Weinstein for his predations and he never got cancelled!
Seriously this entire essay suffers from a bad case of "narrative as truth". Then again I think that might just be your entire blog.
Excellently done! I agree with most of this, as usual. Nobody knows how to work in that weird intuitive vibespace like you do.
The only thing I'd say is that while gender-based grievances may be seen as too low-status to be pursued *now*, young men should start forming networks for the day that may not be the case, and to bring it closer.
Recall also that a lot of the same statements about competition for the opposite sex making gender-based activism impossible for men were previously applied to women before the rise of second-wave feminism.
If society 'believes women', well, *you* don't have to. Even if you have to pay lip service to the 'victim' for the moment, you can always have your own doubts, and act on them at a more opportune time in the future. If all women must be believed, no woman should be trusted. If women need to support other women, well...men should put bros before hoes as well.
If you can't crowdsource reputations via something like Tea, there are always group chats, discords, and so on. Even if one can be compromised, if there are more heads of the hydra than feminists can break up, decentralized action may still be possible.
Above all, nip chivalry in the bud. The social contract has been abrogated; no reason to keep your end of the bargain.
Also, forget all that macho stuff about standing for your principles--a subaltern group must fight in the shadows. Once you've read the Art of War, follow it up with the 36 stratagems; watch the fires across the river, decorate the tree with false blossoms, replace the beams with rotten timbers.
A big advantage women always had was offering sex to break down men's resistance, but with all the gooning and AI, that may be less powerful--turn a weakness into a strength!
If you call me reddit but the right young man reads this, I've done my job.
I hate to agree with your assessment, but I do. Sometimes, when a situation is broken, but only slowly decaying, the best move is to accelerate the collapse. How do we do that? Stop playing by any sense of the old rules. Fuck chivalry. Fuck providing and protecting. Fuck honesty and loyalty. When none of those cooperative actions are reciprocated, you're a simp if you keep playing with the hope and idealism they might be.
Yes, male collective action won't happen. Not at any scale. So assume nothing will change. But, for Heaven's sake, please stop being a simp. Have some self respect. Be a fuckboy, if you have sufficient charms, care enough to put in the effort and bear the burden of playing that game. Otherwise, force yourself to embrace the harsh reality and find your own path.
I agree...but I wouldn't it say it *won't* happen. I don't think the odds are great right now, but I can definitely see the signs that it could someday, probably during the next rightward political cycle. Talk to other men who share the same views. After all, there was a patriarchy as recently as the 1950s.
Exactly. My guess is that Walt Bismarck's target audience already have enough life experience and social instinct to understand the ideas advanced in this essay without learning them consciously. The men who actually benefit from written reports of this sort of information are socially inept but intelligent ex-homeschoolers who no longer live in Kansas.
When liberal men get prostate cancer, they learn that their feminist pals made sure that three times more taxpayer funds are spent on breast cancer than prostate cancer
Im inspired by this table image. Ive been wanting to make an image that imagines the ‘hostess with the mostess’ of ‘all inclusive’ beurocracy. Everyone is invited. But the image will be harshly split horizontally, table-waist, she the head of the table, determining what can and can’t pass through the table top threshold of the accepted. Instead of the Overton window, the Overton dinner party. Table top etiquette. Beneath the table all that is omitted, abjected. A bit like the cat in Dominico ghirlandaoi’s last supper.
This really is the hard truth that few care to admit, and I must give you credit for daring to present it in such a cohesive and clear manner. However, I would disagree with your assertion that the concepts you advance have no bearing on your proverbial Kansan. The homeschooled Midwesterner is unfortunately going to encounter the seamier side of modern culture whether he likes it or not, especially if he has a high I.Q. and a wandering mind. He does not handle its women well, as I can relate from the experiences of far too many friends and acquaintances. Therefore, these erstwhile homeschoolers are perhaps the most likely to benefit from essays that spell out the rules of the modern dating environment in explicit terms. However, I do not yet know how many of them will find your social commentary, or if they did, would be able to square it with their own values. Too many of them would take one look at the title and mentally fast-forward on to something more palatable. I sometimes think I should try to translate these concepts into something that would not get me excommunicated.
I must admit, the Mr. Darcy analogy is a good one for your brief description of the Trad environment. A pleasant aspect of the women there is that they are in fact avid Austen novel readers, and emulating the hero's behavior therein does work.
So did anyone actually read this?
Did you count the punctuation marks?
There were only 7.
This one interestingly feels more esoteric and less linear in its presentation than the Barstool manifesto, almost as if attempting to insulate itself from chud hermeneutics…
Well, I certainly feel remarkably old today, now...
Too long, didn't read.
Assuming this describes what I've previously described as a 'paleo-degenerate.'
In that case, I fully support.
Man, you must have some good coke.
"The vast majority of women (and by extension weaker men, who’ll forever conform to womanly sensibilities like gospel) perennially rewrite their whole ontology around the Winner being good and virtuous and sensible and the Loser being gross and evil and clearly the province of dissolute shit-eating worms and by the way I’ve always known the Winner was a beneficent splendid lovely deep down!"
This must explain why women loved Harvey Weinstein for his predations and he never got cancelled!
Seriously this entire essay suffers from a bad case of "narrative as truth". Then again I think that might just be your entire blog.
He literally was invulnerable for years, until the system needed a sacrifice and then it all came for him at once. Pick a better example.
Sure, here are a couple hundred examples of women turning on "Winners": https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/10/23/us/metoo-replacements.html
Excellently done! I agree with most of this, as usual. Nobody knows how to work in that weird intuitive vibespace like you do.
The only thing I'd say is that while gender-based grievances may be seen as too low-status to be pursued *now*, young men should start forming networks for the day that may not be the case, and to bring it closer.
Recall also that a lot of the same statements about competition for the opposite sex making gender-based activism impossible for men were previously applied to women before the rise of second-wave feminism.
If society 'believes women', well, *you* don't have to. Even if you have to pay lip service to the 'victim' for the moment, you can always have your own doubts, and act on them at a more opportune time in the future. If all women must be believed, no woman should be trusted. If women need to support other women, well...men should put bros before hoes as well.
If you can't crowdsource reputations via something like Tea, there are always group chats, discords, and so on. Even if one can be compromised, if there are more heads of the hydra than feminists can break up, decentralized action may still be possible.
Above all, nip chivalry in the bud. The social contract has been abrogated; no reason to keep your end of the bargain.
Also, forget all that macho stuff about standing for your principles--a subaltern group must fight in the shadows. Once you've read the Art of War, follow it up with the 36 stratagems; watch the fires across the river, decorate the tree with false blossoms, replace the beams with rotten timbers.
A big advantage women always had was offering sex to break down men's resistance, but with all the gooning and AI, that may be less powerful--turn a weakness into a strength!
If you call me reddit but the right young man reads this, I've done my job.
Good luck!
I hate to agree with your assessment, but I do. Sometimes, when a situation is broken, but only slowly decaying, the best move is to accelerate the collapse. How do we do that? Stop playing by any sense of the old rules. Fuck chivalry. Fuck providing and protecting. Fuck honesty and loyalty. When none of those cooperative actions are reciprocated, you're a simp if you keep playing with the hope and idealism they might be.
Yes, male collective action won't happen. Not at any scale. So assume nothing will change. But, for Heaven's sake, please stop being a simp. Have some self respect. Be a fuckboy, if you have sufficient charms, care enough to put in the effort and bear the burden of playing that game. Otherwise, force yourself to embrace the harsh reality and find your own path.
I agree...but I wouldn't it say it *won't* happen. I don't think the odds are great right now, but I can definitely see the signs that it could someday, probably during the next rightward political cycle. Talk to other men who share the same views. After all, there was a patriarchy as recently as the 1950s.
The lesbos are in for an awakening. 41% of lesbian relationships are violent.
They also have lower household incomes than straight peeps, and both lower than gays, on average. At least if you count who is using EBT cards.
Maybe, maybe not. There are two lesbians on the Supreme Court, and they make the big bucks.
It might be very interesting if anyone can read this
Secular white dudes in tech? Do you even know who works in tech? Who the hell is a white man in tech?
Exactly. My guess is that Walt Bismarck's target audience already have enough life experience and social instinct to understand the ideas advanced in this essay without learning them consciously. The men who actually benefit from written reports of this sort of information are socially inept but intelligent ex-homeschoolers who no longer live in Kansas.
Elon. This dating advice is clearly for him.
Brilliant. As much as I, or any of us, would prefer the world not be this way, it is.
When liberal men get prostate cancer, they learn that their feminist pals made sure that three times more taxpayer funds are spent on breast cancer than prostate cancer
I was going to say no one is looking up your asshole tho.
But you did say liberal men so maybe they are.
Just keep that three times funding gap in mind at your next annual physical.
It’s a Fuckboy Magnum Opus.
Ye is a dumb nigger who should be hung stabbed and shot
Im inspired by this table image. Ive been wanting to make an image that imagines the ‘hostess with the mostess’ of ‘all inclusive’ beurocracy. Everyone is invited. But the image will be harshly split horizontally, table-waist, she the head of the table, determining what can and can’t pass through the table top threshold of the accepted. Instead of the Overton window, the Overton dinner party. Table top etiquette. Beneath the table all that is omitted, abjected. A bit like the cat in Dominico ghirlandaoi’s last supper.