Anonymous Reader suggested in the discussion of the last post that welfare law changes in the 1960s might have also played a role in encouraging illegitimacy:
Dalrock, it seems to me the most likely direct influence on illegitimate children would be the Great Society. I have been told by people who were around as adults in the mid 1960′s that before the LBJ political landslide, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) was available only to women who had been married. Widowed or abandoned or divorced, made no difference, but the claim made is that it was not available to women who had bastard children until after LBJ I cannot confirm this, so far am unable to determine the requirements for such aide prior to 1964-65.
…
So the question that ought to be investigated is this: did the rules for AFDC, public housing, and other mother-and-child protective aid change in the mid 1960′s?
With just a bit of google searching I found The Legal History of Aid to Dependent Children Program which corroborates what he had been told.
A provision in the law that authorized ADC assistance only to “suitable homes” functioned, in the program’s first three decades, to reduce the number of eligible children (in 1960 when 79 of every 1000 children were in need, only 30 received assistance) and, particularly, to inhibit coverage of “illegitimate” children and children of color. Local ADC policy frequently discontinued coverage during seasons when low-wage labor was short in fields or homes, thus forcing poor mothers into such labor.
For its first three decades, AFDC operated much like a private charity, with its case workers given discretion in investigating clients, cutting off benefits to those determined to be unsuitable, and reducing benefits to those found in violation of any of AFDC’s myriad regulations.
Radical agitators fought to establish welfare as a right:
The overarching objective entailed establishing a federal constitutional right to a minimum adequate income.
According to the paper, they were largely successful in this through a series of court rulings.
See also: The blurry line between the welfare state and child support
Millions of unemployed male workers would like to know why this constitutional right is not being applied to them.
Welfare arrangements are obviously an important part of the problem, but they are not the whole story.
In the UK, the relevant part of the Welfare State was the National Assistance Act of 1948; but despite “National Assistance” (later called “Supplementary Benefit”, then “Income Support”), most unmarried mothers gave up their babies for adoption, until the mid-1960s. It took nearly 20 years for people to realize that they were no longer compelled to follow the old rules. Attitudes changed – some time between the Chatterley trial and the Beatles’ first LP.
On one of the HBD sites there was a graph of US marriage rates broken down by race (which unfortunately I cannot find right now). The African-American marriage rate tracked the Caucasian rate for the first half of the 20th century, but started to diverge in the mid-1950s. This happened a decade before LBJ’s Great Society.
In the previous post, the changes in the early 1990s do not have an immediate explanation.
These things really ought to be studied by professionals in the fields of Sociology and Gender Studies. In fact they are studied by such people, but (a) their publications are usually behind pay barriers, (b) these publications are deliberately couched in jargon, in order to remain consistent with the politically correct ethos of those professions, and so that members of the public will find it hard to extract the political dynamite that is contained within.
See also federal family planning: (much is readable in the preview)
http://books.google.com/books?id=tEJ9_0LcBPoC&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_atb#v=onepage&q&f=false
nice dalrock.
interesting book just out:
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/da17512c-9e0e-11e2-bea1-00144feabdc0.html#axzz2PjgBWR00
David Stockman, budget director for Ronald Reagan from 1981 to 1985, is the man who will be short of dinner party invitations after becoming the most mainstream figure to argue that all America’s economic problems stem from the welfare state and the end of the gold standard.
GBFM translation: “David Stockman, budget director for Ronald Reagan from 1981 to 1985, is the man who will be short of dinner party invitations after becoming the most mainstream figure to argue that all America’s economic problems stem from the welfare state wherien good men must fund da gian tingelelz and butt thingellzozol of slutty slutzz and the end of the gold standard ala da beenrkeifificxaataion bernakifiaction buttcocking of da moneyz zlzlzlzlzozlzzlzozlz and da cocmon mnannzzmzmzozllz zlzlzlozozlz zopoenegs ikz zkzkizkzoz.”
Isn’t the high percentage of out of wedlock mostly because married women are having fewer children? I’d read that the actual numbers of children born out of wedlock is about the same as it has always been but that the numbers of children born in wedlock is way down.
Hey IAW,
Your thorough use of statistics and academic citation of multiple sources really puts Dalrock to shame. Hopefully Dalrock can learn from this, and instead of providing extensive links, charts, graphs, analysis, and sources, Dalrock can just say, “I’d read that blah blah blah is blah blah blah so it’s blah blah true”
zlzozozoozozoz
“I’d read that the actual numbers of children born out of wedlock is about the same as it has always been but that the numbers of children born in wedlock is way down.”
RU Kididngzlzlzozozozozo?
As I’ve noted before, I think another driving force for the illegitimacy explosion is the seemingly paradoxical effect of Roe v. Wade. At some point in time (probably mid 1980s, and increasing in the 1990s), the churches abandoned condemnation of premarital sex in favor of encouraging pregnant women not to abort. In theory, I suppose you could both condemn the sex and discourage the abortion, but in practice I think it’s impossible, especially with young women. From the churches’ perspective, the avoidance of even one abortion was worth just about any cost. So these young unmarried pregnant women were lauded for their courage, and they threw lots of parties for them, and pronounced this a glorious gift from God, all to set an example and encourage other unmarried pregnant girls and women not to abort. But they didn’t seem to understand that when you celebrate and reward something like that, you get a lot more of it. And not just more women carrying to term – but more pregnancies in the first place. It’s pretty tough to argue convincingly to a girl or young woman that she is a sinning harlot and going to hell for the sin of fornication when just last week she saw you throw a big party and praise the Godliness of the unwed pregnant mother about to give birth. So premarital sex among the religious undoubtedly went up a lot, as did pregnancies (which were then carried to term for the reasons I’ve stated and for the other reasons articulated by other posters). And once the religious folks start doing that, who is left to argue against this and try to shame it?
Of course, they needed to try to shame someone for this, so now they simply shame the young men, since the men don’t have the decision making authority on the abortion. But that’s totally ineffective, since most young men aren’t going to turn down sex no matter how much they are shamed and, even if they do, some other guy will just knock the women up. Men also don’t have the same access to birth control (neither men nor women generally like condoms), so they’re not in the position to avoid this that women are. But the shaming of men in the churches will continue, because they’ve already let the genie out of the bottle and can’t go back to shaming the women.
This is from the perspective of an agnostic who watched a lot of this go down due to religious parents and a religious first wife in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
James : “.. most unmarried mothers gave up their babies for adoption, until the mid-1960s. It took nearly 20 years for people to realize that they were no longer compelled to follow the old rules. Attitudes changed – some time between the Chatterley trial and the Beatles’ first LP.”
It was pretty much the done thing up in my backwater into the ’70s. Up the duff and unwed=Unmarried Mothers’ Home+adoption, unless the girl’s family really made a fuss, or did the traditional thing of a ‘miraculous’ late baby for her mother.
I think the key was getting council housing. Cathy Come Home had a much bigger impact than people give it credit for now (I remember the fuss: everybody was a bit shocked and the media went into meltdown. It made an impact on my quasi-beatnik parents such that even I realised there was stuff other than Dr Who on the box).
I’ve no idea what they did for money though. Can’t imagine them rocking up at the Labour Exchange and showing them the babby through the little barred wicket, and any road they’d have no stamps. National Assistance, I guess.
@Crank:
If the purpose of religion (from a naturalistic worldview based on patriarchy theory) is to protect the beta male and ensure constructive conduct between the genders, then this is the point that Churchianity became the anti-religion it now is.
Many of these men getting lectured to were halpless betas who weren’t getting sex anyway. When their church stabbed them in the back, they pitifully sat in the pews and began to doubt if marriage was “their vocation”.
Since the churches betrayed their beta males, there weren’t enough children brought up within the faith by a father figure who would have passed on the religion to the next generation.
This is part of the reason why so many churches are attended almost exclusively by withering-away old people. Age is catching up and parishes are closing down.
The church chose to subsidize the reproduction of bastards among the heathens while sabotaging the reproduction of its faithful beta sons.
The churches abandoned their first love, and true Christians stayed away from them. The rest is history until some church somewhere rediscovers the first love.
@Dalrock
Can you please expand on the definitions a little in this post, for the benefit of foreign readers? I had to Google LBJ to find out that it refers to a president, and I’m not familiar with the “political landslide.” 🙂
almost true: “The church chose to subsidize the reproduction of bastards among the heathens while sabotaging the reproduction of its faithful beta sons.”
but for the simple fact that the betas were really the alphas, as they were following the teachings of christ. so please don’t piss on them by calling them “betas” as that is pissing on christ and his teachings.
if ever anyone wants christianity to be taken seriously again, you are going to have to stop calling those who live by a humble moral code of honor “betas,” while labeling the buttcockerz and secereuive tapers of butthhext “alphas.”
lzozozoozzozoz
I think you have it wrong GBFM. Christian men in the West used to be far more Alpha than they are now. It was the cult of “Nice” and Churchianity which browbeat Alpha behaviors out of men. Confidence, assertiveness, a willingness to confront others and not back down… those are Alpha traits, and not only compatible with Christian teachings, but absolutely necessary to living a Christian life. There are plenty of Beta traits in Christianity, true, but no barrier against Alpha traits. The best way to think of Alpha and Beta is not as types of men (“Alpha men” and “Beta men”), but as measurements of certain types of behavior.
For somewhat fuller explanation, see here:
https://donalgraeme.wordpress.com/2013/03/14/alpha-versus-beta-part-1/
(P.S. GMFM, the “ideal man” section translates into the ideal position for a Christian man to be)
As for Slarg’s take, I think that his use of “Beta men” interferes with his message. What he is actually talking about is lower tier men, ie. the men who are not part of the 20% or so that women tend to find attractive. He is correct in surmising that Hard (lifetime) Monogamy was for their benefit (Marriage 1.0), and that the Church’s role in destroying that regime constituted a betrayal.
you write “Confidence, assertiveness, a willingness to confront others and not back down…”
well yes of course, as long as it is based on a code of honor.
but what would you say about the sectriev taoe taperof butthext who bangs a lot cgcick chcikxkxk who conveys “Confidence, assertiveness, a willingness to confront others and not back down…”?
Pontius Pilate probably got laid a lot as an alpha king, while Jeseus was sent to the cross.
It is quite remarkable how many churchians worship Pontius Pilate while spitting on Jesus and the meek, going “lzizizzilzozzlzo no butthext for u as you are not assetrive confiedent and willing to concroront otehrzz to get yoru beuetethetx lzzozozlzo”
lozzloz
you write:
“donalgraeme says:
April 6, 2013 at 12:18 am
I think you have it wrong GBFM. Christian men in the West used to be far more Alpha than they are now. It was the cult of “Nice” and Churchianity which browbeat Alpha behaviors out of men.”
Sooooooo would you consider Jesus nice or mean?
You have it exactly backwards. It is the cult of churchianity which spits on nice guys and Jesus.
It is quite hilarious that all you churchians think that one has to be a buttcocking Asshole to be a true Christian, kzizizkzkizlzozozz
It was the cult of feminism and churchianity which browbeat Nice Guy behaviors out of the church, which is why churchians are largely materialitsic, buttcickong assholzlzlzozlzoz
lzozozlzolzlzlzz
christians will never win
by telling their men to become asshole buttockerz
so as to make the congregation’s women’s butts and ginas tinegzlzlozozoz
but rather
instead of serving butt and gina tingellzozo
christians are better off
serving
christ
and that means
that they will have to
man up
and pass god’s judgment
on the asshole bullying buttockerz
rather than trying to
become one
to serve the
churchian’s
sordid and debased
butt
and
gina tingaallzlzoozlz
Subsidise it, get more of it.
@ GBFM
“Sooooooo would you consider Jesus nice or mean?”
Neither. Jesus was a righteous jerk. He certainly wasn’t “nice”, because he spoke Truth to power, even when the power didn’t want to hear it (I’m looking at you Pharisees…). As for mean, that depends on the definition. He was mean if you define it as vexatious, or causing trouble or bother. But not if you define mean as petty selfishness or lacking of dignity or honor (definitions drawn from Merriam-Webster).
“It is quite hilarious that all you churchians think that one has to be a buttcocking Asshole to be a true Christian, kzizizkzkizlzozozz”
You seem to be using the definition of Alpha that Roissy uses, in the pure sexual attraction kind of way. I find that simplistic. Alpha traits are sexually attractive traits, yes, but that is because they are masculine traits, and women find masculinity attractive just as men find femininity attractive.
Take the time to read through the Gospels again, and you will realize just how masculine Jesus really was. Acting in an Alpha way doesn’t require you to be a nihilistic hedonist like Roissy. Jesus is proof of that.
If you still have trouble with it, then think of it like this: Alpha traits are tools. And like all tools, they aren’t inherently good or evil. It is all about how they are used. Jesus used Alpha traits to bring the Word to the Jewish people. Someone like Roissy uses Alpha traits to have sex with women.
Subsidise it, get more of it.
This. Furthermore, (dis)incentives matter not only for economic reasons, but because they also show de-facto (dis)approval. If you admonish against pre-marital sex but also hand out condoms “just in case,” well, guess what people are going to believe Likewise, saying that children should be born in wedlock and raised by a father and mother doesn’t matter if you also advocate financial and other support for single mothers. Actions speak louder than words.
donal; “You seem to be using the definition of Alpha that Roissy uses, in the pure sexual attraction kind of way. I find that simplistic. Alpha traits are sexually attractive traits, yes, but that is because they are masculine traits, and women find masculinity attractive just as men find femininity attractive.”
Kind of circular reasoning to me. Don’t get it. The frat-style letter categories I thought were only of utility strictly in relation to the more or less subconscious effect they had on women.
For instance I could call myself an “Alpha” ditch-digger, nobody fucks with me when I’m swinging a shovel or a pick, and guys follow my lead. But women would wrinkle their noses and find themselves unaccountably repelled, and float off to simper at the nearest idling stringy ponce in a motorcyle jacket.
Long story short. If the woman (rather women, it’s a herd thing) isn’t mysteriously dragged towards you by her vaginal tractor beam, often against her forebrain’s judgement, then it’s not “alpha”.
What those PU cads are about is showing everyday guys the ropes, and where the levers are hidden, so they can “fake” it enough to engage the extreme hypergamous instincts of “liberated” women. Like roping mustangs, without getting your neck broke. Nothing to do with worthiness.
Whether you then gallop off to join their Hole-in-the-Butte Gang or hitch up the plow is entirely subsidiary, and is your moral choice.
So if we’re using “alpha”, it’s the “sexually attractive” bit that defines the “masculinity” for women, and not the other way round. Otherwise it has no value as a term, as it only functions in that context. So your last phrase to me reads ” .. women find masculinity sexually attractive just as men find femininity sexually attractive.” See what I’m driving at?
As for Slarg’s take, I think that his use of “Beta men” interferes with his message. What he is actually talking about is lower tier men, ie. the men who are not part of the 20% or so that women tend to find attractive. He is correct in surmising that Hard (lifetime) Monogamy was for their benefit (Marriage 1.0), and that the Church’s role in destroying that regime constituted a betrayal.
That’s true, but 80% isn’t really the lower tier — it’s the vast majority.
SlargTarg: “Since the churches betrayed their beta males, there weren’t enough children brought up within the faith by a father figure who would have passed on the religion to the next generation.
This is part of the reason why so many churches are attended almost exclusively by withering-away old people. Age is catching up and parishes are closing down.”
Already happened here on Airstrip One (right side of map, near Yoorp).
The myriad ancient wigwams of the proto-, sub-, and para-Christian sectaries that infest the country are routinely turned into prestige “character” mansions, temporary public-sector outstations and, most tellingly, pubs and nightclubs.
The big change was after WWI. People just walked away and never went back.
Which chimes exactly with your “betrayal of the betas” hypothesis. My dad said the odd kids out at school were the ones with a dad. Or uncles. Or grandpas.
Among women, Spiritualism (the oiuja-board/ectoplasm BS) became huge, as did feminism/socialism (previously it was the working men, mostly miners, textile and steelworkers who were basically communists, women tended to take fright at it and attended church in droves).
As a (I imagine) typical forinstance, when my great-grandma died in the ’70s, (in her fireside chair, in her daughter’s and great-grand-daughters’ house) there was no Bible or Book of Common Prayer around. Just her handbag by the chair, and under the packs of Woodbines and chocloate creams, her husband’s last letter,written two days before he went over the top. We never knew anything about it till then.
And you should have heard the old bird’s opinions on “parsons”, when she was alive and a bit more compos. Us kids didn’t know old ladies knew such words. Made us secretly giggle in delight. I think a lot of people blamed the dog-collared cadres, who were the last people to see their boys, sternly lecturing them on their “duty”. Because they then came back, mostly.
Poverty will always be a concern for societies and comforting the impoverished will always be a goal for the church. However, the goal of completely eliminating poverty through unconditional charity can easily and has easily corrupted the recipients of that charity. Being poor does not mean being immune to the vices of greed and laziness. There is a difference between sustaining a person over the long term and merely offering an easing of heavy burdens in the short term.
Roe vs. Wade , the welfare state, laws of misandry where put in place for one thing the comfort of women. Any check or consequence or any limitation at all on any choice a woman makes must be eleminated or reduced to a minimum. You can see it in the comments Each little niche in society has this subroutine running to that goal.
@SlargTarg:
@@Crank:
From the churches’ perspective, the avoidance of even one abortion was worth just about any cost.
If the purpose of religion (from a naturalistic worldview based on patriarchy theory) is to protect the beta male and ensure constructive conduct between the genders, then this is the point that Churchianity became the anti-religion it now is.
Pastors probably do not believe this is the purpose of religion, rather they believe that their primary business is saving souls, and saving the lives of the unborn. Their secondary business is to keep people coming to their church. If any other purposes are served, then this is a happy accident, and one that has been disrupted by the way the church has reacted to the social changes of the last 100 years.
I agree however that blaming all men for the illegitimate children of a minority of men and women is enough to turn good men away from both marriage and the church.
The discussion above about Jesus reminds me of something I have never properly understood.
What does Jesus mean by “meek”?
Clearly meekness is not aggression or arrogance, it is humility, but surely it is not supplication or weakness. But if you want to learn more about meekness, you cannot find much help. There are lots of places that offer “assertiveness training”, but you will struggle to find “meekness training”, even in a church.
donalgraeme says: April 6, 2013 at 3:09 am
Actually, it’s the other way around – anyone who could call on legions of angels has considerably more power than any army that’s ever been fielded.
Anyone who created those legions of angels….is beyond human comprehension.
My guess is meek are people not seen as worldly strong but are strong in faith. They will inherit the earth do their strong faith as in they are not aggressive in worldly desire but will kill your ass if that is what it takes to remain strong in faith. (That kind of strength usually causes surrender and people joining you) First church that drops churhianity will will be attacked from all sides including churchian churches (and big ones too), they hold to the faith the word will get out. The neat thing is the church may fail in a worldly sense but the word and faith will when with pockets of strong marriages and families with all of the other measures of society being bettr also.
Just my view on the word meek. BTW I used to think it was people so passive and non threatening that that the world was given to them for being such “good” people. (wrong)
Efforts to protect women and children from violence and poverty have only guaranteed more of it in the future.
lzozozolzoz
“Jesus was a righteous jerk.” So preach the churchians.
Jesus was a moral, exalted prophet and poet loyal the Code of Honor laid down by his Father and the prophets of yore.
Men will find far greater victories in exalting that Code of Honor, rather than trying to make the churchian woman’s butt and gina tingelzozzlz so he can slip his little wee-wee into the infertile bungolohloe or infertile gina hole made infertile by da pill and abortion.
You say the church used to be more Alpha.
Yes, back when they were Alpha enough to teach women to serve God and good, honorable men above gina tingles and butt tingles, instead of encouraging men to become slaves to butt and gina tinglesz to “keep their women in line.”
Back when true Christian Alphas ruled, they exalted in the Law of Moses, bringing on down Zeus’s Lightning and Moses’ Thunder upon the fornicators, buttcockers, adulterers, liars, cheaters, and thieves. Today’s “Alphas” in the never-ending pursuit to serve butt and gina tingelozozoozz are the fornicators, buttcockers, adulterers, liars, cheaters, and thieves, as tucker max rhymes withgoldman sachs buttcokc womenz and tapes it in secret while lying about his hiegt and succeteteh and is adored, funded, promoted, and financed by women. True Christian Alphas did not try to game and neg and buttcock comeone else’s future wife, nor did they have to to game and neg just to get their wives to behave like women. Instead, they were so Alpha that they infused the arts, courts, univeristies, legal system, publishing world, culture, movies, films, and monetary system with God’s grace and divine justice.
What troubles me about all the churchians is that they can’t even see the greater value of the greater battle lies not in negging a girl (someone’s future wife?) to get her butt to tingleolzozoz, but in reclaiming the higher culture, reinfusing the arts, courts, univeristies, legal system, publishing world, culture, movies, films, and monetary system with God’s grace and divine justice.
Sometimes fighting for such things does not get one laid,as the higher, exalted, abstract ideals of God’s Kingdom do not even show up on the feminine radar–in fact, it sometimes gets one crucified.
So it is, that if you really want to reclaim and exalt the term Alpha, you need to disassociate it from the fanboyish pursuit of butt and gina tingelzllzlzoz, which casts men as slave to butt and gina tinglzozozozoz, and reassociate it with the manly Classical, Judeo-Christian Heritage.
Moses, Jesus, Homer, and Socrates are all pretty clear on this.
I find it sad that it is such a source of consternation for many men these days, but such is the price of coming of age as Telemachus and Hamlet, with our true Fathers absent and murdered in our homes, churches, and universities–in our courts, arts, and culture–in too many young men’s hearts and souls.
But such is the Glory
of the Story
That it does bring
The Return of the King.
GBFM
that was good
if ever anyone wants christianity to be taken seriously again, you are going to have to stop calling those who live by a humble moral code of honor “betas,” while labeling the buttcockerz and secereuive tapers of butthhext “alphas.”
Outstanding, and a tiny epiphany. Something (this) had been nagging me for a long time. I thought it was some detail or minutia. But this is huge, conceptual, definitional, and falls under the same damn ode to conventional wisdom that so (mis)informs the masses.
Kman
@Dalrock
Can you please expand on the definitions a little in this post, for the benefit of foreign readers? I had to Google LBJ to find out that it refers to a president, and I’m not familiar with the “political landslide.” 🙂
I’m not Dalrock but since I brought up some of those terms I’ll write a bit. LBJ was Lyndon Baines Johnson, a politician in Texas during the 1930’s, 40’s and 50’s who became Vice President in 1960 with John Kennedy who was elected President. When Kennedy was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald part way through the 4 year term, Johnson then became President. The election of 1964 pitted Johnson, a Democrat, against Arizona Senator Barry Goldwater. Goldwater lost by a very large margin of votes – a “landslide victory” for Johnson. The Democrats also gained control of the Congress (House of Representatives and Senate) and therefore were able to pass pretty much any legislation they chose. Various social legislation was enacted, including some of the changes discussed in this and the previous posting; social welfare as a right being prominent. Johnson also heavily escalated US military involvement in the war in Viet Nam, a fact that led to his not running for re-election in 1968 but otherwise not relevant to this discussion.
At the same time frame, reliable hormonal contraception was undergoing testing, and became a prescription drug around 1968 or so. Originally it was supposed to only go to married women but that limit didn’t last very long. In 1969, the first “no fault” divorce law was signed in California. Prior to this, divorce had to be “for cause”, i.e. a limited list of infractions starting with adultery and typically including abandonment for some number of years, serious physical assault, and a few other things. “No fault” meant just that – no one was at fault, the couple was just tired of being married. The “no fault” divorce law swept the US in very few years, by the mid 1970’s most states had some variation of it.
Does this help?
Jesus was not a prophet or a “righteous jerk.” The sun that you see in the sky every day? He’s the one that put it there.
This tendency to bring down Christ to our level by not acknowledging his true divinity and comparing him to fallen men like Homer is offensive. If you’re not a Christian then I’d understand not recognizing Christ as part of the Godhead, but I think those who are not Christians (but are friendly with them) need to keep in mind they are not being respectful even when they say Jesus was a smart/good man or one of the wisest men in history. You don’t refer to the Creator of the universe as a mere mortal and expect those of us who believe him to be God in the flesh not to be offended by that.
if ever anyone wants christianity to be taken seriously again, you are going to have to stop calling those who live by a humble moral code of honor “betas,” while labeling the buttcockerz and secereuive tapers of butthhext “alphas.”
Outstanding, and a tiny epiphany. Something (this) had been nagging me for a long time. I thought it was some detail or minutia. But this is huge, conceptual, definitional, and falls under the same damn ode to conventional wisdom that so (mis)informs the masses.
It all depends on what one is discussing.
The whole alpha/beta/gamma/delta/omega typology was always intended to be specific to the sexual attraction context — at least that is how it has been used by people like Roissy, Vox Day and many other bloggers in this general part of the internet. It was never intended to refer to anything other than one’s ability to attract women, in a relative sense as compared with other men. It wasn’t meant to apply to any other hierarchy.
This has led to rampant confusion. For example “Well, the alpha males I know are not like that!”, and when you ask to whom they are referring, it’s the guys in the corner offices who are at the head of the professional or corporate hierarchy, or the guys driving BMWs, or the guys with the big houses and so on. All of those men have scaled the economic hierarchy, for sure, and some even a corporate or professional hierarchy, but that doesn’t mean they are “alphas” in the sense of being able to easily attract women.
The same holds true in Christian terms. In Christian terms, the point of life is not to attract women but to lead a holy life (godly for Protestants seems the preferred term). So the ones who are truly godliest/holiest would be the ones who deserve the most honor, respect and alienation in that context. But we all know that just like the corporate or economic hierarchy, this hierarchy is also a different one from the one that is relevant for attracting women.
So, in other words, one can speak of a “sexual alpha”, a “corporate alpha”, a “spiritual alpha” and so on, because these are different hierarchies. In the manosphere the terms have generally been used to refer to sexual attractiveness in terms of the relative place of the man on the socio-sexual hierarchy in which all men have a slot, however high or low. That doesn’t make the term problematic, it simply identifies properly what it is. The degree of “value” one places on that particular hierarchy is of course an individual decision, and people can disagree about that (and do, quite a lot, which is a source of at least some of the confusion).
Thanks greyghost! I very much enjoy your commentary here too!
Yes! Thank you empathologism! This is the crux of the matter!
“empathologism says:
April 6, 2013 at 10:51 am
if ever anyone wants christianity to be taken seriously again, you are going to have to stop calling those who live by a humble moral code of honor “betas,” while labeling the buttcockerz and secereuive tapers of butthhext “alphas.”
Outstanding, and a tiny epiphany. Something (this) had been nagging me for a long time. I thought it was some detail or minutia. But this is huge, conceptual, definitional, and falls under the same damn ode to conventional wisdom that so (mis)informs the masses.”
You see, our true Fathers are the Great Books For Men, with Jesus on high. And I would put Homer, Socrates, Virgil, Plato, and Aristotle far, far ahead of all today’s buttcockng Churchians who use and abuse Jesus to sanctify their buttehxting, falsely claiming that he forgives them simply because they go to some corrupt church headed by a covetous, materialistic preacher bastardizing the gospel, while making cashing in on the bastard children and their slutty mom’s who are demanding entitlement cash from the true Alphas–the loyal, hardworking, nice, good men living humbly by Jesus’s exalted code of honor–the men the churchians persecute, attack, and spit upon, as they did to Jesus.
Yes, Red Pill Game is fine and good, as it is based on Truth–the Truth of Butt and Gina Tinglzozlzozozzoozz. But the higher way is to be found not by enlaving one to materialsitic butt and gina itnelelosozozo tnegellaozlzl tingzzozl, but to aspire on up towards the very pinnacle of Manhood–the Great Books and Classics, with Jesus the King of Kings on High.
When Jesus preached “One cannot serve two masters, he did not mean that one had to choose between serving either butt or gina tinglzozlzozoz, but rather, he was stipulating that one had to choose between serving butt and gina tingelllzozozo or the Higher Code of Honor.
hen Jesus preached “Man does not live by bread alone,” he did not mean that man needed both bread and buttehxt/gianasnsetxh, but that the true man gained nourishment from the Word of God, by rendering it real via noble action.
So all of ye who are dedicated to serving the buttct and gina tingelzolzozo of the buttcocked womenz in your churchian churches–you are missing out on a far higher calling. Rather than succumbing to being ruled by and dictted to by butt and gina tingellsoszolzoz which enslave you to lying, dishonorable, manipulative, dead-end game to spill your seed in infertile butt and gina holes, pick up the cross, and take the road less traveled that makes all the difference.
There is nothing more masculine than this–than following in the footseps of your Nobler Fathers–the Alphas of all Alphas. There is no greater “shit test” to pass than ignoring the butt and gina tingelzozozozolz as Jesus did before he began his long, hard, tragic, yet ultimately triumphant journey:
The Temptation of Jesus
Mk. 1.12, 13 · Lk. 4.1-13
1 Then was Jesus led up of the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted of the devil. Heb. 2.18 ; 4.15
2 And when he had fasted forty days and forty nights, he was afterward a hungered.
3 And when the tempter came to him, he said, If thou be the Son of God, command that these stones be made bread.
4 But he answered and said, It is written,
Man shall not live by bread alone,
but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Deut. 8.3
5 Then the devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple,
6 and saith unto him, If thou be the Son of God, cast thyself down: for it is written,
He shall give his angels charge concerning thee: Ps. 91.11
and in their hands they shall bear thee up,
lest at any time thou dash thy foot against a stone. Ps. 91.12
7 Jesus said unto him, It is written again, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God. Deut. 6.16
8 Again, the devil taketh him up into an exceeding high mountain, and showeth him all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them;
9 and saith unto him, All these things will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and worship me.
10 Then saith Jesus unto him, Get thee hence, Satan: for it is written,
Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God,
and him only shalt thou serve. Deut. 6.13
11 Then the devil leaveth him, and, behold, angels came and ministered unto him.
Yes, in order to join the Alpha of all Alphas, one must not serve worldly, debased butt and gina tingzlzozozlzoz, but the exalted spirit. I can show you the path, but you will have to walk it, Neo. And when ye too have turned away, then, and only then, shall the angels minister unto you, instead of your covetous, debased, prideful, lecherous, churchian preacher, standing on a pulpit, seeking only to make the butts and ginas tinglezlzoozoz in his harem congregtion which spits upon good men alongside the noble words, exalted spirit, and courageous deeds of Jesus Christ.
Hey Dalrock. It gets even weirder. It’s still linked to Supreme Court decisions that allowed illegitimate kids to get the same rights to inheritance and child support by manipulation of the 14th amendment. Since child support, inheritance and the like were only allowed for legitimate children, the liberal legal community took up the challenge + fought for bastards. This then was applied to public programs because if the courts deemed the bastards capable of receiving private settlements, the government would have to treat them the same.
http://28sherman.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-right-can-learn-from-liberal-abuse.html
Novaseeker writes,
“So, in other words, one can speak of a “sexual alpha”, a “corporate alpha”, a “spiritual alpha” and so on, because these are different hierarchies. In the manosphere the terms have generally been used to refer to sexual attractiveness in terms of the relative place of the man on the socio-sexual hierarchy in which all men have a slot, however high or low. That doesn’t make the term problematic, it simply identifies properly what it is. The degree of “value” one places on that particular hierarchy is of course an individual decision, and people can disagree about that (and do, quite a lot, which is a source of at least some of the confusion).”
Well, as this is a “Christian” blog, is it OK to assume that the proper interpretation of “Alpha” is dictated by Jesus and Moses et al.?
You write, “In the manosphere the terms have generally been used to refer to sexual attractiveness in terms of the relative place of the man on the socio-sexual hierarchy in which all men have a slot, however high or low.”
And that is what I find so hilarious about the manosphere. Men worrying about their “sexual attractiveness” have already lost the greater GAME, acting like women.
You write, “the relative place of the man on the socio-sexual hierarchy in which all men have a slot, however high or low.”
Who maintains the “socio-sexual hierarchy” you speak of? Jesus or BEn BErnankekekzozlzlzozlzzoozzo BErnnake ? lzozozlzozozz
Also, was that a term you learned in your pop-sci bernakification class, or did you see it in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John?
BTW, I’ve looked up the lexicon regarding the word “meek” and the central definition is “mildness of disposition” and “gentleness of spirit.”
GBFM sez:
And that is what I find so hilarious about the manosphere. Men worrying about their “sexual attractiveness” have already lost the greater GAME, acting like women.
I definitely agree with this, but it goes deeper. Preselecting men based upon whether they can score with hot chicks is meaningless, when hot chicks can be scored with a few cheap tricks. Coming to your (correct, in my view) conclusion, though, requires large numbers of men to see through the GAME nonsense. Perhaps we could call it lesser game, which is just conning women to sleeping with oneself, whereas greater game would be the overcoming and becoming of the quality man game allowed them to pretend to be.
In short, the way to get men to realize just how worthless game is, is to teach them game, and have them realize that all the principles of it collapse, in a Hegel/Marx sense, due to their internal contradictions. Then they have to accept the fact that becoming a great man takes more work than just learning how to flirt and bed hoes.
Regards, Boxer
Don’t forget that ‘no fault’ is unilateral divorce.
They could have written the law such that two people could decide to get divorced for no cause. Instead, it only takes one.
Who maintains the “socio-sexual hierarchy” you speak of? Jesus or BEn BErnankekekzozlzlzozlzzoozzo BErnnake ? lzozozlzozozz
Also, was that a term you learned in your pop-sci bernakification class, or did you see it in Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John?
You’re in the hierarchy whether you like it or not, just as you are in the economic hierarchy whether you like it or not. The degree of emphasis you place on your slot in the various hierarchies is a question of personal values.
Look, I understand your point that the sexual hierarchy isn’t important.
The issue exists, however, for Christian men who wish to marry and are not attracting women by looking after their slot in the spiritual hierarchy, so to speak. There are many men in that position. I understand that your view is “they shouldn’t care about that”, but that’s not going to be an acceptable answer for most of them.
EXACTLY 8oxer!!
“I definitely agree with this, but it goes deeper. Preselecting men based upon whether they can score with hot chicks is meaningless, when hot chicks can be scored with a few cheap tricks.”
Yes, it is so easy easy easy easy to score with a whore.
So hard to exalt the currency, culture, art, literature, and church with Honor.
Never before in the history of Christianity were men taught to serve womenz butt and gina tingelzlzloozoz, pimping and preening and peacocking like women, worrying about their “sexual attractiveness” over God, Jesus, Homer, and Honor, which is what GAME teaches them to do, thusly ensuring that they miss out on their higher calling as a MAN.
One of the things I try to do when defining alpha is to seperate the definition into context. In the manosphere it is just a man womne find sexually and emotionally arrousing and nothing more. In my eye the best compliment a man can get is to be a beta male. But the term alpha has way too many positive connotations to be seen as a negative. It maybe a good thing for it will be an easy way to see a red piller or a blue piller. Only someone with a dedication to civilization can truely see the positive of a beta and will be in a better position to make laws and cultural norms that will make sexual attraction to a beta female herd positive. Sounds like catering to women but I see it as pedistalizing the productive and brnging the women along not for changing their ways but because of their nature it is the most tingling for them. How’s that for biblical leadership?
I wouldn’t spend to much time trying to trick women into productive men by calling them alpha a more effective way would be to have a monthly news magazine titled Childless Spinster and have articles about lonelinees, the holidays without family, Vacations without kids,or vacations with you pets, Friend networking with single retirees. dieing alone and leaving what for heirs that aren’t there, taxes with no deductions, living in hospice with no visitors, etc. etc. women respond better to that kind of thing. Much better than trying to redifine Alpha Just change things within yourself to respect the beta male.
Dear Novaseeker,
You write,
“You’re in the hierarchy whether you like it or not, just as you are in the economic hierarchy whether you like it or not. The degree of emphasis you place on your slot in the various hierarchies is a question of personal values.”
Was Jesus in the sexual hierarchy whether he liked it or not? Where would you put him? Did he make buttsz and gina tingelzlozoz when he healed the blind or overturned the tables of the money changers in the temple? Was that what he was up to, in your view?
You write, “The degree of emphasis you place on your slot in the various hierarchies is a question of personal values.” So it all depends on the “personal values” of the Christian? So if a Christian personally values buttcocking his borthers future wife and taping it in secret, that is a fine thing for a Chirstian to do, as it is all about “personal values,” but not about the teahcings of Moses and Jesus?
You write,
“Look, I understand your point that the sexual hierarchy isn’t important.”
Do you?
You write,
“The issue exists, however, for Christian men who wish to marry and are not attracting women by looking after their slot in the spiritual hierarchy, so to speak. There are many men in that position. I understand that your view is “they shouldn’t care about that”, but that’s not going to be an acceptable answer for most of them.””
Yes, and that is why the crucified Christ, and replaced Him with Churchian ministers preaching and teaching game to make woememnz infertile butts and ginas go zllzlzzlozozozo tinglzozzozlzoozoz.
Dear greyghost,
Yes, it is all semantics.
But at the end of the day,
I feel that good, honorable, rugged, kind, polite, humble men
own
the word
Alpha
over the manipulatiing buttckcokerz who define leadership
as erving a owmanz butt and gina tingzlzlzozz
while the good, honorable, rugged, kind, polite, humble men
define leadership
as living by
the Code of Honor.
Yes, worrying about attractiveness has led to This:
http://www.youtube.com/user/gillette/featured?v=Moi9Mq1_sIU
and the stupid follow on ad I cannot find quickly with all the women around the pool explaining exactly how men can coif their body hair…..
Game indeed
one picture says it all:
manly men:
gaming men:
it is quite remarkable that the churchians are teaching their men to look and act like the latter, just to keep the butt and gina tingelzozooz of their slutty women with bastard children buzzingllolzo tingzlzzoz so that the female feminist flock keeps on tithing, even though it means exiling the Spirit of Christ and Moses form their congreagtion. lzozozoozlzozozoz
@Tam the Bam
Yes, “Cathy Come Home” changed everything. By the early 1970s, the rules for Council Housing were changed to give priority to those in greatest “need”. This is obviously what the film-makers wanted, and it all went brilliantly for about a decade. In the early 1980s there was an explosion in single motherhood, and the end of full employment. Since then, council estates have changed from being places where most tenants were two-parent families employed in traditional working-class jobs, to “sink estates” where many, if not most, of the white British tenants are underclass single mothers. When well-meaning people reacted to “Cathy Come Home”, they had no idea that they were creating the world of “Shameless”.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
8oxer
Dead on right. Once men understand game and the nature of women (get them off the fuckin pedistal ) The value of being an alpha is while good for pussy it does something else to beta gamers. It will make beta gamers more powerfully beta with out the pussy worship.(Good time for christ to fill the pussy worship void). Men will look for and see better character in women rather than pass a shit test they become her shit test. her failure is finding a better man on the carousl his failure is thinking he should please her into wanting to be with him. An experience man with game knows better.
Yes, GBFM.
Because comparing Mystery wearing his funny hat (which considering the asskicking he could have gotten was rather brave) and Neil Strauss (who is, by all accounts, an average looking guy at best) to Hollywood movie stars (selected as much for their looks as anything) who ‘play hero’ on the big screen and represent one of your mythical figures is a fair comparison.
while the good, honorable, rugged, kind, polite, humble men
define leadership
as living by
the Code of Honor.
Maybe the word Alpha is used because at one time such a man was is the most desirable. That same man in todays society is an emasculated loser but has all of the labels of alpha, example these guys.http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_uRIMUBnvw
You guys here get the best out me and are some extremely thoughtful people.
GBFM
The manly men used to be the men that were loved and adored by society in general. With hatred for all men normal the PUA and player is the “man” due to women wanting to fuck them. So we have a society founded on the gina tingle and not real solid values. Manly men emasculate themselves to pussy worshippers in and effort to be seen as “manly” men These are good beta males that wish to be pleasing to society. Even one trying to be pleasing to god is sitting in a churchian church being lied to.
@ GBFM
Since as far as I can recall you never frequented SSM’s old site, I will leave it at this:
I am not a player, or PUA, or Roissyite. I am a Christian man whose N count is 0, because I love God more than I love the world. I don’t use Game to sin, although I certainly could if wanted to. If you want to insult me, feel free. But do not imagine it will have an impact on me in any way.
Clearance Clarence,
Roger Roger
Why is it so “brave” to wear a furry hat? Who’s the last person who got their ass beat for wearing a furry hat? Every year millions of babies are aborted, and they are not wearing furry hats. Why aren’t you sticking up for the courageous little babies ready to come forth into a world of light, only to be eebebenkrified before every realizing their Nature Right to Life? Remember how Jesus said we must treat children?
Just as the slutty fat beenekrified Girls on HBO’s Girls have replaced honorable women, Neil Strauss and Mystery have replaced the traditional movie stars who embodied Chivalric Codes of Honor. Sure they were selected for their looks (as are all the pictures of Jesus that make him look like Axl Rose without the bandanna or John Lennon without the specs), but the Characters they played were men of Character and Honor–not peacocking, buttcocking, gaming fools pulling and pushing little levers to get pre-butcocked women’s buttholes and ginas to tingle, so they could perform a mere biologcal function, not so different from peeing, in the sterile butthole or gina hole of some random bernankifed girl lzozlzozozozoz, whereupon they would proclaim to the world I. AM. BECOME. ALPHA! as they deposit biologial matter in an act of adulterous fornication, void of the Spirit, in some random hole they made tingzlzlozo by negging it.
What a MAN! lzozlzozozllozzozo
Yes!
“greyghost says:
April 6, 2013 at 1:06 pm
GBFM
The manly men used to be the men that were loved and adored by society in general. With hatred for all men normal the PUA and player is the “man” due to women wanting to fuck them. So we have a society founded on the gina tingle and not real solid values. Manly men emasculate themselves to pussy worshippers in and effort to be seen as “manly” men These are good beta males that wish to be pleasing to society. Even one trying to be pleasing to god is sitting in a churchian church being lied to.”
The great irony of game is that it is ruled not by men and their classical, exalted Codes of Honor–their higher heritage bought and paid for via the blood, sweat, and tears of their Fathers–but by mere gina and butt tingzleolzzozoozlzozozozozo.
Yes, Jesus warned us of false prophets, and he himself called out the institutionalized religion of his own day. Look closely and you will see the unrepentant money changers, fornicators, and adulterers filling the “Fort gods” massive churchian structures, while Jesus walked the earth, sans any Temple. Yes, when those massive buildings fall, following their debased spirit on down, He will rebuild them in three days. One thing I have always wondered is how anyone can even hear the preacher over all teh butts and ginas going tinglozlzozlzozzlzozlozzlozlzzlzozolzozozozozoozzo anymore.
lzozozozlzooz
Unfortunately, GBFM has taken over this comment section with his nonsense. He is promoting his form of christianity and his “Chrivalric codes of Honor”(whatever the hell that is) to attack the excellent advice that comes from Game and its proponents. If you are a young European-American christian man, you should learn Game. And ignore weirdos like GBFM.
Phil says:
April 6, 2013 at 1:44 pm
Unfortunately, Christ has taken over this comment section with his nonsense. He is promoting his form of christianity and his “Christian codes of Honor”(whatever the hell that is) to attack the excellent advice that comes from Game and its proponents. If you are a young European-American christian man, you should learn Game. And ignore weirdos like Christ.
The Knights Code of Chivalry and the vows of Knighthood
The Knights Code of Chivalry described in the Song of Roland and an excellent representation of the Knights Codes of Chivalry are as follows:
To fear God and maintain His Church
To serve the liege lord in valour and faith
To protect the weak and defenceless
To give succour to widows and orphans
To refrain from the wanton giving of offence
To live by honour and for glory
To despise pecuniary reward
To fight for the welfare of all
To obey those placed in authority
To guard the honour of fellow knights
To eschew unfairness, meanness and deceit
To keep faith
At all times to speak the truth
To persevere to the end in any enterprise begun
To respect the honour of women
Never to refuse a challenge from an equal
Never to turn the back upon a foe.
YEs, all ye chruchian buttcokerz, please ignore the weirdos and go back to buttcocking and gaming to make buttsz and ginas go tingzzlzzozozozozozozoz because that is “Normal” while Chriist and Honor and GBFM are weird
zlzozlzolozozz
GBFM-“Who maintains the socio-sexual hierarchy you speak of? Jesus or Ben Bernanke?”
Neither. Sexual attraction between humans is a natural part of humanity. It has always existed and will continue to exist in the future. It isn’t maintained by any one person or by one’s religious God.
Yes Phil,
“Jealousy and the will to murder between humans is a natural part of humanity. It has always existed and will continue to exist in the future. It isn’t maintained by any one person or by one’s religious God.”
“Sexual attraction between humans is a natural part of humanity. It has always existed and will continue to exist in the future. It isn’t maintained by any one person or by one’s religious God.”
The question that a man must ask, is, should people act on their baser instincts and buttehxt at will if da gina and buttholzo goe tingzlzlozlzlozzoozzo? Or should they try live by a Moral Code of Honor which Phil calls weird, but which seemed OK for Moses, Homer, Christ, et al. , as well as for countless generations of those engaged in this weird thing we call civilization?
zlzozoz
Here is a posting from the previous thread, before I noted this new thread. It may fit better here.
This is a duplicate posting, but not in the same comment stack.
Dalrock
There was a strong and successful activist movement to make welfare a “right” which bore fruit in the 1960s and 1970s.
So all the parts to build this machine were in place by the 1970′s – government support of children no matter what, unilateral contract abrogation aka “no fault divorce”, and last but not least reliable hormonal-based contraception that gave women pretty much total control of reproduction. Homosexual marriage as a cultural object may accelerate the decline of marriage as a social institution or it may not (Stan Kurtz thinks it does and has some evidence), but the toboggan ride down hill was already in progress 40 years ago.
Unfortunately, it is very difficult to criticize the notion of welfare as a right without being accused of racism, and “racist!” is an epithet that tends to shut down any debate (it is, IMO, all too often used specifically with that end in mind). One way to avoid this may be to focus on the deleterious effects that single motherhood has on the children. It is ironic that even socially liberal academics appear to have finally arrived at this conclusion – the social sciences are converging on this rather rapidly in the last few years. Of course, the “science” is simply rediscovering what was already known 50 years ago. But never mind that.The point is, now that social science agrees with common sense once again, supporters of marriage can use that as a lever, or a club, against other liberals.
Supporters of marriage can point to the extensive documentation of bad effects, bad outcomes for children from single-mother families and use such terms as “science” and “scientific consensus” to argue this topic – illegitimacy – while avoiding the usual claim of “racism”. We should do this. Because the disaster clearly is approaching. As I have said in other places, an industrial society needs a certain percentage of the population to be normal, functional, thinking people in order to keep the water coming out of the faucet, the electricity in the wires, doctors & staff in the hospital, gasoline in the pipelines, and so forth. It is not enough to keep on turning out investment bankers, stock brokers and upper managers – sorry, UMC and UC, you are not indispensible. A society where the incompetent takers outnumber the competent makers is not stable. It will likely break down.
Oh GBFM you really are a cute lil dumpling.
Imagine me being such a meanie and pointing out that using movie stars who playacted courage and calling them real men and comparing them to real men who don’t have movie star looks, and don’t get to pretend to be war heros or a prophet of God is not really very fair or enlightening. I should have been nicer and not pointed that out so you would not have been so butthurt.
And to answer your questions about the furry hat and most of the other crap Eric was wearing in those days if you really feel that wearing earrings, a furry hat, nose piercings and such doesn’t put a big fat target on your butt in many places where men and males congregate than I could only conclude you spend far more time typing “tingzlzlozlzlozzoozzo” and other such literary gems on your keyboard than you do out in the real world.
Oh wait. I forgot you are a Christian saint, probably live in a monastery, (despite your gutter language) and think that it is unmanly for someone to chase women more than he chases Christ.
Well, carry on then.
GBFM-“assume that the proper interpretation of ‘Alpha’ is dictated by Jesus and Moses?”
The Christian God Jesus Christ never addressed the sexual and social issues of male-female attraction. Europeans had already been thinking about these issues long before Jesus Christ walked the earth. And so had other ethnic groups all over the earth.
Moses is a character from jewish writings. A person from a middle eastern desert tribe. If Moses did have something to say about that male-female relationships, it would have been shaped by his own ethno-racial-religous experiences in his time. European peoples would already have created their own ideas about male-female relations.
Christianity and Talmudic Judaism are two very, very different religions.
Lzoozlzzzzozlzl
There u churchians go again lzozozozlzzo
Jesus was born, lived, and died a jew.
Jesus stated that he came to fulfill the Law of Moses not Abolish it.
Have fun with your bastardization of the Bible as you churchians celebrate your congregations filled with bastards whose moms are seeking beta dollarzlzolzozoozozoozozoozoz as its all just part of the GAME. Lzzozoozlz
@ James and Tam the Bam,
I have a question (also for anyone else who could give a reasoned answer):
But first, thanks for citing the film ‘Cathy come home’. I just watched it on Youtube.
Very enlightening film!
Regrettably, despite being a Brit I never even heard of this film before.
Here is my question: How could the demise of that family have been avoided?
As I see it, Cathy did everything right – she married before having children. She never complained even as things went from bad to worse. She remained upbeat even as her husband began to drift from her. Right to the very end when she lost her children to Social Services.
How could the bad things in this film have been avoided?
Reg, to all appearances was a good candidate for marriage. I thought he was a great husband and father, a good leader as he tried very hard to fix what he could to make life better for his family, until the very end when everything fell apart.
Why was it not possible to keep this family together (by The State)?
Was this a ‘divide and conquer’ tactic, which was an effective strategy to lure Cathy away from her true husband towards a fake husband The State, which ultimately was brutal to her in a way her true husband never could have been?
(Importantly, Cathy herself protested on more than one occasion the fact that her husband was being separated from her at the homeless shelters – she understood (without the aid of studies that are coming out 50 years later, lol) the importance of Father in the lives of children)…
Was this film just an exercise in sensationalism or was this a real attempt to ‘educate’ women away from the ‘Average’ man (aka Mr. Normal guy without millions) in the guise of ‘See what happens if you don’t marry a man with assured provision capabilities – your children will end up being taken from your arms’.
So perhaps it may not be surprising that the choices for subsequent generations of women have been:
1. Marry the richest man you can find (hypergamy). This option is not new, but only re-inforced.
2. Rely on The State and not an individual man.
3. Go it alone.
If The State is only to be relied upon for when people are really at the end of their tether, as this family was, then is The State the ultimate ‘bad guy’ of this film, or is it Reg himself, who accuses himself of ‘failing’ Cathy and his children?
I personally have a lot of sympathy for Reg because I got the sense he was really trying, but as he himself said, there was always a force pulling from the opposite direction. Was that ‘force’ the beginnings of the laws designed to obliterate/annihilate ‘The Average Man’ like Reg???
The other point I would like to make is that right at the end of this film, Cathy is told, ‘No-one (i.e. The State) cares about you now – it’s the children’s welfare we are interested in. Again I note she was a MARRIED woman circa 1962.
Ironic that in 2013, a never-married woman with children will never hear those words because the children’s interests are inseparable from the mother’s interests
Interesting.
Perhaps I can say something about Cathy Come Home. Firstly, if I recall, it was filmed twice, originally for Television as a Play (which is what the B.B.C. euphemistically called T.V. Movies) and then for the Cinema, with actress Carol White. A similar film is Up the Junction and perhaps Alfie is also not entirely dissimilar. Alfie is significant because Alfie is a would be PUA, although frankly a bit of an amateur by today’s standards (married women old enough to be his mother, and vaguely unattractive birds, and all of this in the back of his Ford Cortina – and in the cold – housing shortage you see and nothing to rent except from the council, which unless you were married…). At the time, Cathy Come Home was seen by the left as an indictment of modern Britain, though in fact the working classes always seemed a damn sight happier than their betters. The self-loathing liberals of course knew what was best for the working-class and doubtless well-meaning vicars piled in too. Doesn’t every Cliff Richard movie have an obligatory man-of-the-cloth to keep Cliff and his pals from shagging the likes of Susan Hampshire – not, of course, that there was in retrospect any likelihood of that. It was the successor to the kitchen sink of the abusive (to his tenants – cut off the electricy supply and knowing there was a six-week old baby in the appartment) John Osborne’s Look Back in Anger. He may have started life on a Lewisham sink-estate but ended it in a country house and spent his afternoons getting sozzled (as I recall observing). I have never seen either version of Cathy Come Home and frankly can never bear Alfie to the end. Never wanted to. I preferred things like Smashing Time or Blow-Up – now those I could identify with (those well-spoken young Redgrave girls – in both actually).
Slightly further upmarket, however the situation was somewhat different: I knew of one young lady whose fiancee bailed before the wedding – the girl lived with her parents and led a very sheltered life – and thus the parents took her on a world cruise to forget the Beta who bailed. On a latter occasion a friend of mine was phoned (I did not have a landline) by the desparate mother of a young woman (after I had come to the conclusion that her knickers were indeed constructed of Iron) to inform him that her daughter had turned down no less than Nineteen proposals of marriage, and that I (Opus) was apparently the one. I thought very much otherwise and she certainly did not get a proposal out of me, hence her dismay. Marriage mattered to the middle classes, especially to the unattractive females therein (and their mothers).
As a PS, may I recommend Fredeick Raphael’s Darling (which perhaps as it has a few Oscars is familiar) for the text-book hypergamy of Julie Christie’s character.
Dear Phil,
Phil says:
April 6, 2013 at 2:28 pm
GBFM-”assume that the proper interpretation of ‘Alpha’ is dictated by Jesus and Moses?”
The Christian God Jesus Christ never addressed the sexual and social issues of male-female attraction. Europeans had already been thinking about these issues long before Jesus Christ walked the earth. And so had other ethnic groups all over the earth.”
lolzozozozo one can see that Phil, like most churchians, has never read the Bible:
Jesus’ Teaching about Divorce
(Matthew 19:1-12)
1And he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he was wont, he taught them again.
2And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife? tempting him. 3And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you? 4And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put her away. 5And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept. 6But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female. 7For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife; 8And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh. 9What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same matter. 11And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her. 12And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.
lzozozozozo Phil writes, “The Christian God Jesus Christ never addressed the sexual and social issues of male-female attraction.” as Phil knows more than Mark about what Jesus said and did. lzozozzoz
Phil continues his foolishness:
“Moses is a character from jewish writings. A person from a middle eastern desert tribe. If Moses did have something to say about that male-female relationships, it would have been shaped by his own ethno-racial-religous experiences in his time. European peoples would already have created their own ideas about male-female relations.”
Ummm you do realize that Jesus was a Jew living in the Middle East? Or do you think he was living in the Vatican?
Yes I am a huge fan of Homer too. Odysseus and Penelope present a great love story of faith and commitment, while Helen & Paris’s adultery leads to the Trojan war. Homer was trying to convey an exalted moral message, which is why he is no longer taught in school.
You do realize, Phil, that Jesus was born, lived, and died a Jew, who stated that he had come not to abolish, but to fulfill the law of Moses and the Old Testament prophets? Or are you one of those false churchians who teaches the opposite–that Jesus came to abolish the law of Moses, and usher in a new era of buttcocking, fornication, and adultery?
Phil writes, “Christianity and Talmudic Judaism are two very, very different religions.”
Was Moses a Talmudic Jew?
The PUA definition of alpha allows women to dictate to men. Never a good thing
With critters, the alpha male is the most physically dominant critter. The alpha lion is not banging all lady lions because they dig his vibe, he’s banging all the lady lions because he’s beaten the snot out of all the other male lions.
I’ve seen some of the PUA on the youtube and what not. They couldn’t dominate my 14 year old nephew.
Alpha/ beta is value neutral, however you define it. Good and bad is in what a man does and not his position on the food chain. Woman will continue to dictate everything until men put developing and exercising their strength and power as the cornerstone of their life. Not implying strength/ power in a strictly physical sense either.
And if you want to bring back an honor code, it has to be enforceable by legally sanctioned social violence.
> Christianity and Talmudic Judaism are two very, very different religions.
Of course. Talmudic Judaism and Biblical Judaism are also two very, very different religions. They had to make up for the loss of the ability to make the required sacrifices and reject the Septuagint since the Christians were using that to show that Jesus really was the Jewish Messiah.
What is your point?
I would disagree with a point made way above that it is not a Christian man’s job to attract a women. Our society is doomed if he does not do that, as no new families would be formed and even Christianity would not continue. It will though, as some men will eventually get the message.
Read the book Why Men Hate Going to Church and you will see this is a problem that has been going on for some time (men and church), as in centuries. Someone here referred it and I finally finished reading it. Interesting book.
I suspect that a lot of the problems are rooted in the fact that Christianity has to make some fit to the culture. It should not compromise the core principles, but it must fit the culture. The apostle Paul did that, so must we. That is a big danger area though, so it must be done with great wisdom. Though how is that any different than any other part of the Christian life?
Someone wrote that confidence, assertiveness, and a willingness to not back down were alphas traits. I can attest through personal experience that i’ve had all three in abundance. I’ve been confrontational towards evil, I’ve been assertive with the word of God. I am confident in who i am and what i can do. And feminists hate me for it. And 99% of all women are feminists.
If confidence is sooooo “Alpha”, then Dalrock should out himself. Wouldn’t that be alpha?
If confidence is sooooo “Alpha”, then Dalrock should out himself. Wouldn’t that be alpha?
Hey, asshole, Dalrock has a wife and a little girl. He doesn’t want them hassled on the street by kooks like you, who seem obsessively interested in him.
Alpha is protecting your family, saying what you want, and not giving a shit about your critics, all at the same time.
Hope this helps, Boxer
Opus wrote
I have never seen either version of Cathy Come Home and frankly can never bear Alfie to the end. Never wanted to. I preferred things like Smashing Time or Blow-Up –
Probably further off topic, my two favorite British films from the late 1960’s or thereabouts are “The Ipcress File” and “Bedazzled”, with “From Russia With Love” and “Zulu” trailing behind (wait, does Hitchcock’s “Frenzy” count as Brit?). I am not sure what this set of choices says about me psychologically…
Clarence says:
April 6, 2013 at 11:32 am
Go back to HUS where you slagged Dalrock. Don’t waste our time reading your twit comments.
Liberty, Family, and Masculinity says:April 6, 2013 at 7:19 pm
If confidence is sooooo “Alpha”, then Dalrock should out himself. Wouldn’t that be alpha?
Alpha means not falling prey to shaming language like this.
And this ‘soooo Alpha’ is typical of you “having all three in abundance”, then that would go a long way to explain why you’re not doing too well with the women. Use of shaming language is a rather “female” trait, so if you don’t have a uterus, then what value do you bring to the table?
Now, now Legion.
Keep those multiple personalities (or Demons) in your head under control.
GBFM, good posts.
Spacetraveller , I’ve never actually seen it! All I remember was it being “the talk of the steamie” for weeks among the grown-ups (the Play for Today that is).
It seems now to have been a very carefully crafted piece of agitprop, unsurprising now, given Ken Loach’s subsequent portfolio . Basically, Oxbridge Communists pouring their enlightened pity on their mulishly obstinate and ungrateful inferiors, much like the modern “Labour” Party. Not unlike Orwell/Blair himself (the Wigan Pier one, not The Liar).
At the time I was oblivious to almost everything, wondering how long I could get away without a haircut, practising smoking, fantasising (and worse ..) about Emma Peel , desperately hankering after some jeans that actually fitted, and almost permanently clamped to the radio.
OMG how’d they do that? “God Only Knows”. “Good Vibrations”.
And the Kinks, lazing on a sunny afternoon and the Stones painting it black. And Revolver. Hey that folksinger my parents like so much, he’s fucken great actually, he’s gone electric. And then at Christmas. “Hey Joe”. I mean WTF? What ? What !! You can’t do that! That’s … outrageous .. impossible! Ohhh…this is the greatest thing in all the world … ever …
But there’s no doubt that for people with kids, and no family to back them up in hard times, even for a bit, it was pretty tough. But you never thought anything about it. That’s just the way it was, and it was miles more benevolent than my father’s day, a kid in an industrial area back in the Depression. Unbelievably so. Barnardo’s or the Industrial Schools, even unaccompanied to Australia, effectively as a 3 y.o.-plus chattel-slave, if the family lost a parent (i.e if the mother died and no replacement could be found) or broke up somehow, and no relatives willing or able to share the kids around.
Oh that reminds me, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning that’s a slightly less miserabilist work to give flavour of the social mores of the time.
Especially as our poor American friends seem to believe that Downton Abbey is a live-streaming reality show, that Mary Poppins was a documentary, and back that up by researching the life of the provinces via Mel Gibson movies. Gorblimey bless yer guv’nor dint see yer creepin’ abaht there, beg Yer ‘Onner’s pardon, don’t ban me from the site for h’insultin’ the Land of the Free I’ll bugger orf if yer gives us sixpence. Or a cigar.
O done me tags again stupid man the blue should stop after “Morning”.
The post about how men should listen to God and his Church, rather than gina tingles is a good one.
Another good film from that period is “Far from the Madding Crowd”, again with Julie Christie, as a 19th-century woman courted by three men of very different character, and smitten by the most caddish of the three.
Meh game already addresses the need for dominance & masculinity, it’s called inner game
As I said before GBFM is a below average low iq, as are most anti-gamers
If you guys bothered studying game, dominance & masculinity is emphasized to build up & repair the damage done by a feminist dominated society
Dominance & masculinity has always been the foundation of tight game
Right from the very beginning of game
It also proves you guys have no idea what game has always been about
The whole point of game is to become naturally dominant & masculine
The routines & techniques like MM are a crutch, until they no longer need the routines & structure
The whole point of game is to become a naturally dominant confident man, once you”ve internalised the dominance & confidence required to be socially confident
Game is about SOCIAL INTELLIGENCE
Social intelligence requires extreme levels of confidence & dominance in order to be successful
Gaming chicks in clubs & bars requires extreme levels of dominance & confidenc, it’s insanely ridiculous to point out it doesn’t
ok mack pua,
how high is your iq? how many girls have you gamed and buttcocked?
what does jesus and moses think about buttcocking and gaming?
what do jesus and moses think about sex outside of marriage?
is it ok? please use your high iq to answer, in addition to using it to get pre-buttocked, sterile womensz’ butts to go tigngnglgllllzlzlzlzlzlozolzlozloozzo
@Alecsti
The problem is most men listen to gods word
Most women listen to their gina tingle
The beta’s aren’t the problem, as all beta’s are herd following morons like most women, which is why they’re beta in the first place
The problem is there’s no one leading the charge against these evil male hating churches
Without an antithesis to the extremism in these churches there is no real masculinity or dominance to force these feminists out of the churches
Without any real activism against these destructive feminists, as Christians have always worshipped the culture of Christianity, not biblical Christian, like Muslims do
Churches will have to wait until the MRA & game becomes mainstream
Which is why it’s pointless not to be for MRA & game, as men’s rights & the masculine truths men always bring when we fight
Men who ruthlessly stand up & dominate spread masculinity far & wide, as our society biologically respects dominant ruthless men
There is no empathy for men who victimized & by social orders they do not understand
Which is why men have to turn to MRA & Game
Society is a death sentence for men who don’t know game or their rights as real MRA’s
Dear Mack:
I don’t think GBFM is “anti-game”. You can read above where he agreed with me. I first met him years ago on the old roissy site, where he was a regular and valued contributor, in his own unique way. I am pretty sure he’s of average to bright-normal intelligence, and way to the right of the “well-read” bell curve to boot.
We all know it works. Hell, it is Saturday night where I am. I could take you to any of the local spots, and we’d see dudes in dirty jeans, dudes with pants hanging down over their ass, low quality guys getting numbers and leaving with chicks. I once saw a guy with no front teeth score numbers from several women, one after the next. That’s game.
I’m sure you can pull HB 8-9 chicks when you need to. So what? Any loser who can flirt with women can do this. It’s once the playa comes to this realization that the real work begins, and he can adjust his priorities with reality, becoming greater than he was, not for some dumb broad to roll around with him, but for the underlying masculine principle of self-improvement.
I think if you really read GBFM, that’s been his point. Letting women decide who is “alpha” based upon who they find attractive is “beta” in the extreme. Women and their silly attraction triggers are of no consequence. It’d be as illogical from the opposing perspective, to presume a hot chick with a nice ass would make a good and faithful wife. Sure, maybe, but not just because she’s attractive.
Regards, Boxer
I’m with Mack PUA on the idea that all men should learn game. Especially christian men. A beta male that triggers gina tingle is the ideal man for civilization.
After reading most of the post here i have come to some conclusions. for today, ill only state one. Women no longer marry men, women get married to the state and men pay the state.
@Anonymous Reader
Thanks for expanding on the political situation of the day.
@Anonymous Reader
You ask me about Frenzy, and whether it counts as British. British cast, British setting, British composer, British director: I should say so. If Dalrock will allow me, I would suggest (for those who want to know) that British films from the 1960s are either Domestic Comedies (largely Carry on this or that) or Horror (from Hammer or Amicus and invariably with Peter Cushing, who for my money is far more watchable than the rather mannered Alec Guiness). There are a few, more intelligent films, and with larger budgets (thankyou Americans for your Dollars), such as Doctor Zhivago and Lawrence of Arabia. Even the least impressive of British films (from Butchers) are of a reasonable standard – there is no British equivalent of Edward D. Wood Jr. Overall one would describe British films of the time as sober, and realistic and a fairly true version of how things actually were.
I too love Emma Peel, partly because I had a girlfriend who was convinced she looked just like Diana Rigg (as she did) and acted accordingly.
The Great Deal and WWII saw US Goverment spending go from 7% in 1902 to 30% of GDP in 1960 to 40% today, of which some 65% is attributable as payments to individuals (wealth transfer, predominantly women).
America’s Real Fiscal Problem: Federal Gov’t Has Become a Gigantic Wealth-Transfer Machine:
http://mjperry.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/americas-real-fiscal-problem-federal.html
Welfare has simply removed the responsibilities of recipients towards payers and shifted the consequences of actions on to others.
Parkinson’s Law is sufficient to explain how the state bureaucracy will respond.
GBFM is trying to change what we call alpha. He intent is good. I feel his method and ideas on how to move the culture is wrong for the very reason that there are those here that just plain want him gone. The guy is one of those types I have run across as a Marine NCO as a guy with a big personality that dominates the area. Regardless of knowledge or skill or how impressive the individual talents of the man appear he is bad for the team. Once you stand up to those types and work with the other beta types that were smothered by his personality you will acheive team greatest that is bigger than the sum of the individual men by a huge margine. That my friend is leadership/ small group crack and it feeds on itself. People years later will use social media and or last known addresses to find you and say hello with pictures of their families. It will bring tears to your eyes to see a picture of a guy that the last time you saw them they were 22 years old and he is in his late forties posing with his family.
Find the truth and stand by it check the truth for “truthfulness” by results.
One more Important thing. No man today will live a biblical marriage will a woman that has agency. There is no check legal or social on any woman’s behavior. To even tell a woman she is wrong much less stop wrong action is a crime( http://www.sbnation.com/2009/9/6/1644611/san-diego-chargers-shawne-merriman) Your rule in this world is to know you will have no wife ever. You are here to ensure 4-5 year old boys and unborn men have a chance to marry. The best place to start is the laws of misandry, the feminine imperative, and the damn church. Every man possible needs to be a PUA gamer including virgins. (no needs for the faithless sissies to lose it here just need to know why and how women behave the way they do.) The idea of the blissful and pure man needs to be shot in the head and dismembered with the pieces run through a wood chipper. She needs it to function but men don’t and can’t, not in todays world or maybe ever.
lzozozozozooz
hey dalrockzz!!! last night while watching girls on HBO with my grirlfirendz i got to reflecting on my low IQ and what it means for da futrue of future of Churchianity!
“mackPUA says:
April 6, 2013 at 10:52 pm
Meh game already addresses the need for dominance & masculinity, it’s called inner game
As I said before GBFM is a below average low iq, as are most anti-gamers.”
what i foresee is a great schsms schism schism in da chucrch!! as big as when martin luther king jr. nailed his points precepts to the door in germany and started da civil rights protestent reformation movementz lzzozozozzoz!!!!
there will be two churches in da future
one with all da low iq dummy people like me
and one with all the high iq geniusss people like mackPUA, tucke rmax da buttcocker rhymes iwth goldman sax, mystery, and neil strauus.
in my churchchc dummy church we will be reading jesus on high alongside moses homer virgil dante shakespearez, and there will be jsut men only just men there speaking and talking about the higher ideals of western civilizatin like dummmies
in da mackPUA church the pews will be filled iwth genius bernakikifikied bernankiifed womenz and their bastard childrenz born by those who had learned how to make their buttz and gina tingelozozo by wearing furry hattsz and negging them and the pews will be filled with men exchanging tips on the best lubes for buttockcing bernakiified pre-buttcocked owmnez with, and da best tips to get their ginas and butts to go tinglzozozozzlzozozoz. and as eveyrone knowsz dat mattherw, mark, luke, and john, and all that is holy and exalted does not make owmenz butts and gina tingelzlzool, there will be no need to read nor study such stoopid stoppid stoooopid low-iq bookzz, but only anal lube brandndz lzlzlzozo
in my churchchc dummy church we will dress plainly and humbly t-shirts and jeansz mayebe a tie on sunday, as tehre iwll be no womenz to impress. there will be no need for all us dummy low-iq menz to worry about our sex appeal in our cruchr fo rthstoopid, but only on improving our souls and spsiitrrtts and exalting in the Truth that sets us–the dummies-free.
in da mackPUA genius high-iq church the sermonz will consist on how men can shave all thir body hair as that dat is what owmenz womenz want, and we will have lecturesz and sermones on sermonz on how to make owmenz womenz orgagsgmasmz lzlzlzlzzlzolzozzlzoz. the geniustehes will liberate themleslez from teh stooopid texttssz which emprisoned sex in marriage, and replace teh bible with fity shades of grey.
Allegheny College’s Ford Memorial Chapel,
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2013/02/21/pennsylvania-college-chapel-reportedly-hosts-masturbation-tutorial/
“A pair of sex educators who travel the college circuit teaching students how to masturbate picked a curious venue for their presentation at Allegheny College — the campus chapel.
The Pennsylvania liberal arts college’s Ford Memorial Chapel was transformed into a “boudoir of sorts” on Wednesday as sex educators Marshall Miller and Kate Weinberg advised students how to best touch themselves and others to reach orgasm, The College Fix reports.”
in my GBFM dummy church we will talk about how to infuse da inhumane, immoral economicsz law business abortion landscape with exalted morality christsian moralitiesz so that men are no longer made to pay for bastard children that are not theirz, and so that cvilization can heal and recover with just morality moral justice of zeus, moses, jesus. in the GBFM dummy low-iq church, we wil talk about a literatry spritrtual cultural renaissance centreded around Honor and Homer and a rteurn to the gold and god standardsz, like the retsrdsz dat we are lzoloozozzzlzozlzozozozz
in da mackPUA genius high-iq church the tingzlzoozzlzozoozozozzozz of ginas and butheolzlzozo will be so loud that they will be liberated form having to sit and listen through boring boring sermons from teh gospelz from da Bible. da mackPUA genius high-iq church will teach the genius churchian worldview that jesus came not to fulfill the law, but to abolish it and repalce t with GAME, so as to set men free from God’s Moral Truth, and free them to serve butt and gina tingelzozoozo above all else and fund teh welfare/warfare state and pay for bastard chrdrenz, buttcockig and deosuling/bernakifiying their brotehrz’ future wives in sectrely taped buttcocking sessionsz, hoping for a ben bernake baillout while their bortherz are placed in epic, immoral unrpedcedenet debt
Jesus was trying to change what we call alpha. For Jesus stated alpha is not being King of the world, but being the King of the World of Ideals. His intent was good. I feel his method and ideas on how to move the culture is wrong for the very reason that there are those here that just plain want him gone. The guy is one of those types I have run across as a Marine NCO as a guy with a big personality that dominates the area. Regardless of knowledge or skill or how impressive the individual talents of the man appear he is bad for the team. Once you crucify Him and work with the other beta types that were smothered by the Biblical Ideals of His Father, you will acheive team greatest that is bigger than the sum of the individual men by a huge margin. And instead of Jesus the loner, we will have churches filled with unquestioning team-players–hairless, chestless bernankifiers, buttcockerz, gamerz, and all da owmenz ginas and butts going tinggzlozzlzolzozozozzolzolzozzlzzo as they sit next to tehr bastard chidlrens in teh church, not quite sure of which one of the furry-hat gamerz is the father, and so all the men will be required to pay for the bastardz chircldrenz. lzozozozlzzozl
Yes, yes, yes,
In the high-iq Churchian Church of Game they will re-crucify Jesusth for all the low-iq, silly stooppid wordsz he uttered, and repalce his stoopid low-iq teahcing for dummies with game and how to neg and make bernkeified womenz buttssz and ginas tinglez.
For these low-iq teachings are simply not acompatible with agme game, and rather than getting rid of Game (which is for the high-iq, smart folks who can make bernkeified womenz butts and ginas go tingzzlozozlzozzoozzo), we will get rid of Jesustsh Jesus and his stooopid code of honor and silly stoppid moral precepts and idtitoic teahcingz, as Jesus was NOT A TEAM PLAYER. i mean would you want this stoopid dummy guy as your wingman? lzozzlzozlzloz:
Jesus’ Attitude toward Adultery
27 ¶ Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery: Ex. 20.14 · Deut. 5.18
28 but I say unto you, That whosoever looketh on a woman to lust after her hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.
29 And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Mt. 18.9 · Mk. 9.47
30 And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee: for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell. Mt. 18.8 · Mk. 9.43
Treasure in Heaven
Lk. 12.32-34
19 ¶ Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon earth, where moth and rust doth corrupt, Jas. 5.2, 3 and where thieves break through and steal:
20 but lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where neither moth nor rust doth corrupt, and where thieves do not break through nor steal:
21 for where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
God and Mammon
Lk. 16.13
24 ¶ No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve God and mammon.
I Never Knew You
Lk. 13.25-27
21 ¶ Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.
22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?
23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Ps. 6.8
The Two Foundations
Lk. 6.46-49
24 ¶ Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:
25 and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.
26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
27 and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
28 ¶ And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
29 for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes. Mk. 1.22 · Lk. 4.32
lozozlzlz ok lets now all man up, put on our futrry furry hatz , egt those bunghoelsz and gian holes going tinglzozlzozlzozozoozoz! lzozzlozzzozzloz
AWE,,,, GBFM you are not being crucified that would make you the center of the conversation. The other fellas need to realise their potential. Now you know you are putting assumptions into things with the churches filled with unquestioning team players line. You are behaving right know as the perfect example of what I was describing you have belittle men that are actually thinking on their own. You are wasting your talent and ability. I have no delusions of you rolling over from your frame but man you are in the way now. You have brought a lot of men out of the dark. Those men are growing up. They don’t have the big personality or social gift of gab but they are very thoughtful and thinking men.
You are not the enemy here GBFM. This is war and you have helped get the manosphere on the beach and now they are pressing on inland. A male child as yet to be born will a marry on when 19 an 18 teen year old virgin on easter sunday. when she finishes high school they will stay married until 51 years later he dies falling off a ladder getting a cat out of a tree. No worries because she is surronded by family that they made together. The marriage was seen at the time as good and normal and not as some creep taking advantage of a young girl. Be there at that wedding. The point is we are here to change history. We are the only ones even talking about this in a rational way with real thoughts that even consider the truth. And you GBFM are a part of it to.
I’m astonished that anyone didn’t know who LBJ was. No offence meant, I took the time to look around Kman’s blog and he’s obviously no fool. I just didn’t realize that there are people who speak English and don’t know about Johnson and Goldwater. FWIW I’m 30ish, not an American, and have only been to the USA once when I was a child to see Disneyland.
hey greyghost
do you even lift?
zlozzozozlozloolzozozozozozz
Dalrock, if you are looking for more data, The Cato institute has some testimony given to congress on the relationship between welfare and crime. In the testimony, several studies are cited that show the relationship between the welfare state and increased single motherhood. As most of your readers and you are certainly aware, fatherlessness is a primary contributor to delinquency in youth.
Here is the testimony: http://www.cato.org/publications/congressional-testimony/relationship-between-welfare-state-crime-0
mac pua sez gamers want marriage?
-laugh break-
Well you be the Provider,buy the ticket,take the ride!
James and Tam the Bam,
Thanks for your replies.
But I still haven’t got a direct answer to my question 🙂
Opus,
My mother and one of her sisters went to school with Diana Rigg! My aunt is still in touch with her…
@Spacetraveller
I deduce you come from Yorkshire.
My Russian friend knows her (but does not quite get on with her) so it is sometimes a small world. For myself I have to confess to having bought a ticket to see Stoppard’s Night and Day at The Phoenix Theatre, where she was appearing in opposite the late John Thaw, primarily so that I could see her strip off – and of course witness her fine performance. She was (imho) easily the best Bond girl – but I fear we are digressing.
I am left thinking that the way forward for Christianity is for a church planter to start a church which concentrates on attracting young adult men who previously never took part in any sort of church service and who have not been contaminated by the churchian teaching that pervades the existing denominations. Such a church would (have to) see biblical roles for both husbands and wives, and would have to preach that all have sinned and fall short of the Glory of God. Then again, most revival starts with a desire to get closer to the meaning of Scripture and to enact it starting in the lives of those who are filled with such a desire.
I don;t know about the USA, but in the UK such a church would probably be prosecuted (persecuted?) for stirring up hate.
I always appreciate the argument that says if someone doesn’t agree with something it means they just don’t get it. In the case of game, by its nature each game adherent is able to say this of 95% or more of the other adherents, let alone those who do not subscribe.
The result is that, framed in the view of one individual game adherent, the number of other equal adherents must necessarily approach zero by asymptote. This leaves one point something (1.?) gamers who hold similar enough beliefs to form an azeotrope….and they boil off together, inseparable, off by fractions of degrees.
This is evident to dummies like me too, because I see them always disagreeing, enthusiastically in mutual admiration type disagreeing, when the eddies of definitional fussing start churning.
It would be unlikey to see two uber gamers write a book together and it not be published post mortem for one of them. .
@GB4M,
So if a Christian personally values buttcocking his borthers future wife and taping it in secret, that is a fine thing for a Chirstian to do, as it is all about “personal values,” but not about the teahcings of Moses and Jesus?
And that doesn’t have anything to do with what he said. By all means though, misconstrue. That is _very_ Christian. He said you have place on the hierarchy _regardless_ of whether you want it. Your response is to…nothing he said.
@…don’t remember,
If confidence is sooooo “Alpha”, then Dalrock should out himself. Wouldn’t that be alpha?
Says the guy using a pseudonym. Hard to take you seriously there guy.
@Spacetraveller
“How could the demise of that family have been avoided?”
The world has changed so much since 1966 that it is hard to imagine comparable circumstances today. Nowadays an evicted family with no work and an industrial injury would have home and money provided by the State; if suitable housing is not available they would be put into temporary “bed and breakfast” accommodation, which is a room in a boarding house or hostel. Occasionally there are stories of families being separated at this stage, but I do not know how common this is.
The chief problem that such a family would face nowadays is that there are so many people ahead of them on the Council housing list. Single mothers are above them, and families with several children are above them. The fact that ethnic British families have 1.6 children and ethnic Pakistani have twice that number gives the Government’s priorities a nasty racial bias. The very top of the housing list is for rape victims, who are offered Council housing whether or not their existing accommodation was a factor in the rape. I personally know of only four accusations of rape, and one of those was a false claim designed to secure the award of a Council house. Social Services and rape shelters insist that a woman must not be compelled to speak to the police, “because her attacker might retaliate”, so any rape claim goes unchallenged. In the case I knew of, the woman’s false accusation was against her husband, who nevertheless joined her in her Council house after she had moved in.
Thinking about your question is profoundly depressing. If you are a decent, law-abiding, hard-working, married, two-parent family that falls on hard times, the British system is more benign than it was 50 years ago, but you are still not at the top of the list of priorities. The system looks down on you for being married, together, and having “only” one or two children, the same as it looked down on Cathy and Reg for being broke, sick and out of work.
GBFM
less is more, man.
Spacetraveller
“Thanks for your replies.
But I still haven’t got a direct answer to my question”
Because like I said, I’ve not seen the prog., m8.
I have not the foggiest as to what he could do. Rob the Post Office and emigrate to Oz?
It’s just what happened if you had no kin. People, especially working class people, lived in each others’ pockets, and didn’t often stray from their extended family network for precisely the reasons laid out above.
It was suicidal, if you were solely reliant on wage-labour and had dependants. Hardly anybody at Reg’s level of work had a car, or even a motorbike, unless they were Jack-the-Lad living at home with Mum and like Opus said, needed a Passion-Wagon.
Which seems to have conflicted with Govt. and Encorpera desires, which, as ever, amounted to little more than “On yer bike” Tebbitism and “flexibility”, displacing the risks of an unstable system from capital onto the workers, and as recent events have shown, there is no creature on this planet, no antelope, bird, rodent, or reptile more risk-averse than a globalist “entrepreneur” and financier.
It does seem to have been a careful but unlikely concatenation of worst-case scenarios, in order to make the film-makers’ (hypothetical) case. Televisual rhetoric. Or agitprop, like I said.
Yes, theoretically, the results were monstrous, and no doubt did coincide in that way on occasion.
How to mitigate the costly and inefficient consequences, without incentivising the barmy looking-glass world of Philpottery and Frank Gallagherism, the free-rider problem and the tragedy of the commons that we now endure, another debate entirely.
Involving the relentless intrusion and proliferation of state agencies in every corner of people’s lives, no matter how trivial. Like somebody said upthread, Parkinson’s Law (of bureaucracies and social work), “.. a mathematical equation describing the rate at which bureaucracies expand over time”.
Remove the safety net after the artistes have ascended the trapeze, and then expect them to jump through hoops and “perform” for your company’s benefit? I should cocoa. Jail’s better.
The real, yet mysteriously unsung villain of the piece is, as ever in Blighty, of course the ubiquitous Landlord. He’s just here, like a force of nature.
Strange that, a bunch of posh kids making an arty film, having a blind spot about the biggest fuckoff elephant of all time sitting permanently in the Twiglets bowl of British life. The class from which they depend.
Reg’s family was destroyed by voracious rent-extraction.
Not by the “state”, not by “capitalism”, or “society”, where “we” are all to blame. And it’s still happening. The UK is bleeding to death, openly, from obscene levels of landowner parasitism.
That’s why homelessness is still a huge problem. Every penny the workers (and “non-workers”) receive is sucked out through various circuitous conduits by a staggeringly vast class of bone-idle, unproductive rent-seekers, monopolists and hoarders. Who then have the utter gall to whine about how “uncompetitive” the lazy British workers are, unlike the (wage-and-exchange-rate arbitraging, dependent-free, or else claiming a raft of UK benefits for them (!)) immigrants.
“The rent is too god-damn high!”
Fuckin’ hell you’ve sent me off on one. “I deown’t believe it!” LOL
I just remember the caterwauling about it at the time, and if “LOLWUT” had been invented then, no doubt I’d have thought it. Being all young and carefree and that. Actually I thought the same thing at the time as I do now.
“Must be a right pair of arseholes, doing something as daft as getting married in the first place.”
I could just make something up, if you like 😉
Ohhh. Diana Rigg. Nnnnn. Aaaahhhh. Ghhhhhh! Ooooooooh …
If I’m late tomorrow, it’s officially your fault, right?
typo, para 5 line 2; “here” should be “there”. Not that it makes a whit of difference. I’m just an old fusspot.
Great comment thread. Thanks GBFM for giving me the idea that this blog’s comment section is like a place we go to that would be part lounge/part bar. You would likely be having a beer whereas more reserved people prefer quiet analysis. It is when you come to the lounge and get loud that people start to wonder if there’s somewhere quieter to debate.
But if the church is about unification in a highly fractured world, does the lounge/bar concept work? Is the church ready to reemerge into a new global movement? Depends on whether we are able to keep the lights on. Once that ability disappears, there won’t be anyone to keep things running.
Solomon says:
“April 7, 2013 at 7:31 pm
GBFM
less is more, man.”
hey godo ne good news solomnz! tehy are increaisng or decreasing my doeses of ritaliznnz — i forget which — but now when i want to go
zlzozozozozozzoozozozozozozozoz
it comes out less as
lzozzozozozozozzlzzo
and less is more so
lzozozozozozozozozo really = zlzlzlzzozozlzzlozlozozolzlozolzozlzozoozozzolzolzozozozozo
hey everybodyiyzz they are preapring ext text bookz and cliffss notes on da gbfm for tomrorowss’ generationssz to study!!!!
“Neocon Butthex: symbology and terminology in the works of Great Books for Men”
http://eumaios.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/gbfm-code-the-symbology-and-terminology-of-great-books-for-men/
Q: What’s the difference between inflation and feminism?
A: One has caused out of control government debt, economic and social chaos, stagnation and lack of productivity in business.
The other is what happens when you use a tire pump on an inner tube.
greyghost .. there are those here that just plain want him gone. The guy is one of those types I have run across as a Marine NCO as a guy with a big personality that dominates the area.
Wish I could flip off a noncom with just a wheelmouse.
I can’t see what the problem is. If people don’t like it, well scroll the fuck outta there.
I do, when I’m in a hurry and don’t have my decoder ring handy. Or a smidgen of single malt.
But it does make me grin. And shock! horror!, occasionally think. It’s not like he’s hypnotizing us or anything.
People are a bit intense round here sometimes, don’t ya think?
If Mine Host gets the ‘ump with the acreage, well, I suppose he’ll exercise the barman’s privilege. Collar and seat of pants, both hands, heave-ho.
I don’t know what the fuss is – when GBFM isn’t being lucid, that’s one of the reasons God let man invent the scroll wheel. Problem solved.
Hey Mark,
You write, “Mark Minter says:
April 7, 2013 at 10:20 pm
Q: What’s the difference between inflation and feminism?”
You know, a lot of inflation is hidden in your future wife’s bunghole, via the feminist movement.
Before the central bankers debased women during secretive tapings of butthext, $50,000 could get one a loyal wife, mother to one’s children, devoted soulmate, and lifelong partner.
Today, even $200,000 will only get you a debased, buttcocked, desouled spinster trained in college to transfer assets from her future husband to ben bebenrkekei so as to convert his worthless fiat debt into physical property and wealth.
Via the promotion of feminism and buttehxt, trillions of dollars of inflation were hidden in those bernankified buttholezlzzo churchians sitting next you in the pews. That is why even though there has been massive inflation, milk has only doubled over the past couple years, instead of augment by a factor of 10. That is because 90% of monetary inflation is in her bunglzozhzlzozol, deposited there during sertiece sectrive tapings bof buttehxt by tucker machs rhemeys with gdldman sax zlozzlzzzozolzlzoz
actually dalrock has an EXCELLENT POST on the debasement of marriage:
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2012/10/06/debasing-marriage/
zkzozlzozzozlzzozlzo
DW3bmh
Must be an age thing.
I’m foreign, and ancient.
It’d be like me knowing who Warren G Harding was.
I can even remember the chant. “Hey hey LBJ! How many kids did ya kill to-day?!”
Mind you I can remember Elvis arriving too, on his way back from West Germany. My dad was on shift in the tower at the time. Tiny bit of pandemonium!
And of course I remember where I was when I heard JFK got shot. In some detail.
Elvis sure had a bad case of “sewing machine leg”.
Tres alpha. lolzz
How about we just go back to calling them studs, or lady’s men?
Tam the Bam I can’t believe you want to give me the finger. All I have to say to that is scroll you hard and long.
Gosh, I had no idea a stupid feminist joke would set off GBFM. Let’s see if I can do better.
What the difference between Feminism and a prostrate exam at the doctor?
You want to finish that one, GBFM?
I remember reading a paper about Korean single parents. The most startling point was that not all single parent’s children were doing bad. Children raised by single mothers or fathers were doing just fine, IF the father or mother was single because of death of their spouse. Seems then that the factor damaging the children cannot be just single parenting. There are several other factors to consider:
1) Divorce – the stability of the child’s world is shattered by the divroce. Death of parent is not as catastrophic (mother died, but she was mourned and loved by father) as divorce (something like: suddenly father and mother do not love each other, they fight. Was everything I know a lie?)
2) Biological factors. Maybe single parents have some hereditary traits, which contribute both to their lower success ratio in keeping the good relationship, and which later contributes to lower success of their children? E.g. poor impulse control
3) Finally, the welfare. This may be also contributing factor, since children see that they receive money from the outside just for the fact they exist. Children of widows and widowers do not get alimony, so they are not demoralised by witnessing that you can just sit on your arse and suck to the system.
Tam the Bam and James,
Depressing issue for sure, but thanks for your fine answers! 🙂
Indeed the fact that the couple in question were married seems to have counted AGAINST them, yes.
But that’s no reason NOT to get married, of course…
Opus,
No, I am (was) a Londoner, (now expat) but my mother and aunt went to school up North. (By the way, it wasn’t Yorkshire! but to protect Ms. Rigg, I won’t give away the exact location of her school).
My mother’s only claim to fame is that she used to wash Diana Rigg’s hair. 🙂
Somehow I don’t think Diana Rigg is going around telling all and sundry that she used to wash my mother’s hair, lol.
Sorry for the derailment…I blame you Opus, for mentioning Diana Rigg 😛
Delurking to comment on MackPUA’s absurd assertion that GBFM has a below-average IQ. If you’ve read more than three of his posts and you can’t figure out that his writing style is a gimmick, then your own IQ probably isn’t nearly as high as you think it is.
lzozolzoozz
thank you faust!!!
Regarding you, C.S. Lewis the feminist wrote, “If we compare the chief trumpeter of the new era (Bacon) with Marlowe’s Faustus, the similarity is striking. You will read in some critics that Faustus has a thirst for knowledge. In reality, he hardly mentions it. It is not truth he wants from the devils, but gold and guns and girls.” http://www.columbia.edu/cu/augustine/arch/lewis/abolition3.htm
Anybody who wants gold, guns, and girls if a friend of da GBFM!!!!!
Also I luvs me some Bacon!!! Sir-FRancis-BAcon flavor on all da GBRM sandwhicnes zlzlozozoz
C.S. Lewis had his severe limitations. He writes, and writes, and writes about Christianity, and writes more, and never, never, never quotes da Gospels, as if he thinks he is better than JEsus and better knew what JEsus wanted and menat, like Joel Olsteeeeeeezzzn zlzllzlzlzlzlo.
Solomon@7:31p “less is more, man.”
Yes, but quantity has a quality all it’s own.
Faust, CrappyTVforPoufters isn’t a dummy. He alternates between relatively-well-written posts that are wise and informed, and posts that are predominantly-nonsense huge blots of largely random letters with just enough content in them to keep from getting deleted. There is NO need for him, or anyone, to effectively spam the site with posts that are 80-95% chaff. I wish Dalrock would stop his inexplicably pampering this clown, telling him that the forum is upgrading to standard English only, with all PWI (Posting While Intoxicated)-seeming posts getting deleted on sight.
Luke says:
April 8, 2013 at 10:02 am
Faust, CrappyTVforPoufters isn’t a dummy (lzoozozo that name isn’t funny?). He alternates between relatively-well-written posts that are wise and informed (filled with my zlzooz lzozlz omg lzozlzozoz), and posts that are predominantly-nonsense huge blots of largely random letters with just enough content in them to keep from getting deleted (the posts which quote the bible, as churchians have been raised to believe that jesus came to abolish the law and make way for da massive butctcockciinggzz of ther future wifesz wives zlzoozzl, and thus they see the words of jesus christ as noise, like gkchesterton stated in a different post). There is NO need for him, or anyone, to effectively spam the site with posts that are 80-95% chaff (just because Luke doesnt undestarndz 80-95% of my geenisisusnststshst is no reason to ban me zllzzozozzozlozz. jesus was accused of spamming by the scribes and pharisess of his day who put him to death for his “noise”). I wish Dalrock would stop his inexplicably pampering this clown, telling him that the forum is upgrading to standard English only (thusly banning James Joyce, J.R.R. Tolkien, Shakespeare, and Jesus, who spoke no English), with all PWI (Posting While Intoxicated)-seeming posts getting deleted on sight.
Cato understood Luke’s mindset: “All Ministers … who were Oppressors, or intended to be Oppressors, have been loud in their Complaints against Freedom of Speech, and the License of the Press; and always restrained, or endeavored to restrain, both.
Cato’s ”
“Give me the liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.”
― John Milton, Areopagitica
“I believe there are more instances of the abridgment of the freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments of those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.”
― James Madison
“If freedom of speech is taken away, then dumb and silent we may be led, like sheep to the slaughter.”
― George Washington
“If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”
― George Orwell
“Without Freedom of Thought, there can be no such Thing as Wisdom; and no such Thing as publick Liberty, without Freedom of Speech; which is the Right of every Man, as far as by it, he does not hurt or control the Right of another. And this is the only Check it ought to suffer, and the only bounds it ought to know. This sacred Privilege is to essential to free Governments, that the Security of Property, and the Freedom of Speech always go together; and in those wretched Countries where a Man cannot call his Tongue his own, he can scarce call any Thing else his own. Whoever would overthrow the Liberty of a Nation, must begin by subduing the Fteeness [sic!] of Speech; ” a Thing terrible to Publick Traytors.
Cato’s Letters
greyghost you should have said mate!
I’m afraid I’m no use to anyone now, all tuckered out after a sleepless night er … “reminiscing” *koff koff* about Emma Peel’s leather catsuits.
Oh no. Even the thought. Done it again. Hang on, I’ll just get a bag of peas out of the freezer and shove it down the front of me keks. And pretend to be asleep with a newspaper on my lap.
“CrappyTVforPoufters”. Oh, I cackled loud for that one. Now I have the Monty Python sketch running through my head.
GBFM has been a great help to me with his talk of true Christianity and bernankified buttehxtd dollarzololzzollozozozzzol
Churchians and heathens often confuse meekness with being a doormat. Not so. I defy anyone to read the Gospels and come away with the impression that Christ was a low self-esteem milquetoast. Humility means seeing yourself as you really are: a sinner who relies on God for everything.
I grant that the behaviour of GBFM, like that of men, must be watched. GBFM is not absolutely a dead thing; he has a potency of life in him to be as active as that soul was whose progeny he is. But then he is more than living; GBFM is the precious life-blood of a master-spirit, embalmed and treasured up on purpose to a life beyond life. The destruction of GBFM ends not in the slaying of an elemental life, but strikes at that ethereal and fifth essence, the breath of reason itself,—slays an immortality rather than a life.
I mean come on, guys. This blog already has a very effective moderator. The Proprietor.
If I had a choice, between some occasionally rambling and opaque, but invariably amusing and frequently acute wall-o-texts, and a bunch of people telling me what to do in my own house and who I can and can not have round for drinks, well … for the latter, I’d get married.
GBFM is not a low IQ type. But he does have the natural ability to drive someone crazy if you let him. The best weapon against a well spoken churchian bully. Gotta like it. Mack PUA just let his game slip. All men fighting feminism are friends. even the different ones. Ha ha ha
Yes Beefy Levinson!
When Benjamin Franklin wrote his precepts for an honorable life, the thirteenth and most important was “Humility: Imitate Socrates and Jesus.”
Now Benjamin Franklin stood up to a King for freedom, knowing that he and his fellow Founding Fathers “must all hang together or we will surely hang apart.”
What Franklin meant by Humility was not kneeling before Churcians and feminist wilderbieasts and buttcockers and secrtieviet tapers of butthext, but Humility before God and God’s Law.
“Rebellion to tyrants is obedience to God.” –Benjamin Franklin
And both Socrates and Jesus were put to death, not for being servile before the Scribes and Pharisees, but for manning up and calling them out in the Spirit of God.
Now the thing that perplexes me is how much time churchians invest in not attacking those who publish, promote, fund, and finance sectrieve tapings of buttehxt (of their very own future wives or the wives of their brothers), but how much rage they invest in attacking Dalrock and da GBFM.
Or perhaps it should not surprise me, for when given a choice, the mob freed the buttcocking murder murdereder Barbarous Bababraous Babrrbodourous and sent Jesus to death via crucifixion.
The more things change, the more they stay the same, but now and then we get the idea that civilization can advance. 🙂
@mackPUA
Since you have chosen to question the IQ of the Oracle of Lzozozozozlzo, please allow me to raise your IQ by a few points:
MRA = one MRA
MRA’s = belonging to one MRA
MRAs = more than one MRA
MRAs’ = belonging to more than one MRA
To the rest of you, it takes great intelligence and skill to write in the manner of GBFM and still make the message coherent and understandable.
To the rest of you, it takes great intelligence and skill to write in the manner of GBFM and still make the message coherent and understandable.
Lets not get out of hand with dick sucking here.
Thanks Eon,
Historically speaking my style evolved a bit from when the neocon woman Charlotte Allen, who dutifully repeated Tucker Max’s (Rhymes with Goldman Sax) lies about his height and success in the Neocon Weekly Standard, said something about my grammar not being up to par.
I realized that she was representing something far larger than herself, exalting mere grammar and semblance over the soul.
I mean here you have her promoting the lies of someone who buttehxtes and tapes it in secrtee without the grirlths conthent, who lies about their height and succetehhttzh, but to her the greater sin was bad grammar lzozlzozlzozzlzozlzozozozoz.
I mean the West is falling all around the good lady–future wives are bing buttcocked and taped sectrely and desouled–and all she can see is some speleingz spellingzz mistakeez lzozlzozozozoz.
This led to a roissy cartoone, wherein the girl is saying “Help! Help! I am being buttehxted andit is being sectrely taped without my contehent!” And the good neocon lady responding, “That is not how you spell buttehxt!” zozozozooz
And as my journey progressed, I noticed the same thing about many churchians, which I found to be amusing, as do many, many others, who see the zlozozozozozozozs as calling out their butetehxtual hipocracy.
Jesus–the Wisest of them All–also noted the same thing about the humanity of the Churchian:
“”23Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone. 24Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat, and swallow a camel.
25Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye make clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess. 26Thou blind Pharisee, cleanse first that which is within the cup and platter, that the outside of them may be clean also.
27Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men’s bones, and of all uncleanness. 28Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.”
Then, a couple passages later, we read:
“The Plot to Kill Jesus
(Mark 14:1-2; Luke 22:1-6; John 11:45-57)
1And it came to pass, when Jesus had finished all these sayings, he said unto his disciples, 2Ye know that after two days is the feast of the passover, and the Son of man is betrayed to be crucified.
3Then assembled together the chief priests, and the scribes, and the elders of the people, unto the palace of the high priest, who was called Caiaphas, 4And consulted that they might take Jesus by subtilty, and kill him. 5But they said, Not on the feast day, lest there be an uproar among the people.”
Yes, the churchians would do it again in a second, for they value game and buttocckingz and mere grammar and material welath over virtue and wisdom and the Soul.
“”greyghost says:
April 8, 2013 at 11:41 am
To the rest of you, it takes great intelligence and skill to write in the manner of GBFM and still make the message coherent and understandable.
Lets not get out of hand with dick sucking here.”
yes let’s not start that, nor da buttcockingz!
zlzoozoozozoooozoz
each and every day
dalrock’s brilliant blog
chronicles the destruction
of the nuclear family
of the demise of property rights
for men
to
as the bible and Homer state
become the head of their household
to expect devoted, non-buttcoked wives
and children
which cannot be taken away
at the distant bureaucrat’s whim
but rather than fighting the forces
of massive destruction
of unprecedented debasement and debauchery
the churchians
persecute da GBFM
for bad
grammar
lzozozoozozozoozozozoozzoz
Not related to this post, but I would like to see it in another. What advice would you give to this guy?
http://www.reddit.com/r/Christianity/comments/1bx09t/wife_is_leaving_me_for_another_man_advice/
Being a foreign man and English being a foreign language to me, I would like GBFM to write more clearly. I have to skip his posts which is a shame but I don’t understand them.
Skipping GBFM’s posts “is a shame”?
I disagree. It’s no shame to skip those posts. It’s a sign of manhood.
Micha Elyi – ”It’s no shame to skip those posts. It’s a sign of manhood.”
Could you elaborate as to why you believe doing so to be a “sign of manhood”?
Many things are said to be such signs of manhood, some would seem to be more obvious to understand than others. Certainly your suggested indicators is rather obscure as to how it would even relate to manhood at all.
So, please, do explain.
[or, was it just your attempt at female-style shaming of something you dislike?]
Yes Micha Elyi,
What do you mean by “It’s no shame to skip those posts. It’s a sign of manhood.”?
Do you also consider it “manly” to skip reading Homer and Virgil?
Have you read Homer, Virgil, and the Bible? Or was it manly to skip them too?
See what the churchians have done is invert the Proper Order:
Alpha Manly = skip reading the Bible, Homer, Virgil, Milton, Dante, Cicero (Jesus is “noise”)
Alpha Manly = buttcoking, gaming, negging, engaging in female-style shaming, serving but and gina tiingzlzoo over god
The decline of the family, liberty, and freedom is your doing.
O Jerusalem Jerusalem!
…..
GBFM
@ Eon:
on a similar note, I was hoping you could clarify whether I should call them Men’s Rights
or Mens’ Rights. Both get rejected by spellcheck. Thanks.
The two Pillars of the West are Athens and Jerusalem.
Today’s Athens = Heartiste
Today’s Jerusalem = Dalrock
And GBFM, like Hamlet, is caught in-between zlzlzlzozzlzzo
lzolzzlzzzozlzooz
“I am but mad north-north-west. When the wind is southerly, I know a hawk from a handsaw.” HAMLET
Lovekraft,
It should be Men’s Rights, because “men” is already the plural form of “man”.
I only occasionally read GBFM’s ramblings. I’m sure they are quite good for some, but yeah, I skip a lot of them. And yeah, I skipped reading Homer and Virgil too. Could not care less about them.
“And yeah, I skipped reading Homer and Virgil too. Could not care less about them.”
Homer (who wrote the Iliad and the Odyssey), and others like him, served two purposes: 1) to show men how to become a Creator-of-Worlds Alpha, and 2) to explain the true nature of women, using contemporaneous examples.
Dalrock and Heartiste explain the true nature of women using examples that are directly relevant to our time.
But I have yet to find a substitute that accomplishes the first purpose.
I’m not much fond of yankees but that’s a good Ben Franklin quote.
And thanks to GBFM, I am back on to reading the classics. Can’t fathom half his posts but he’s balls on accurate with that.
I take it back; maybe I did read Homer, or at least part. Still don’t care much about what he had to say. I guess I’ve never been overly impressed with a bunch of ancient Greeks men who enjoyed sodomizing each other. Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense.
tbc says: “I skipped reading Homer and Virgil too. ”
hey tbc, do you value the Soul of Western Freedom? or do you think it’s all baoyut sbutctchsosststshjzlzozoozozzloz?
what tbc represents, alongside so many churchians, is the massive decline:
I should as soon think of closing all my window shutters to enable me to see as of banishing the Classicks to improve Republican ideas. –President John Adams
As we advance in life, they all fall off, one by one, until we are left with Virgil and Homer, and perhaps Homer alone. –Thomas Jefferson
Over all, Ferguson calls for a return to traditional education, since “at its core, a civilization is the texts that are taught in its schools, learned by its students and recollected in times of tribulation” — by which he means Great Books, and especially Shakespeare. The greatest dangers facing us are probably not “the rise of China, Islam or CO2 emissions,” he writes, but “our own loss of faith in the civilization we inherited from our ancestors.” –The New York Times review of Niall Ferguson’s CIVILIZATION: The West and the Rest
“And yeah, I skipped reading Homer and Virgil too. Could not care less about them. … Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense.”
Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil) was a Roman.
Dear TBC,
There is far, far more sodomy in the Bible than there is in the exalted Homer.
You write,
“tbc says:
April 8, 2013 at 3:20 pm
I take it back; maybe I did read Homer, or at least part. Still don’t care much about what he had to say. I guess I’ve never been overly impressed with a bunch of ancient Greeks men who enjoyed sodomizing each other. Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense.”
Why don’t you man up, for a change, and provide us a single example of sodomy in Homer.
Or is this just another churchian fanboyism going “lzozozoz becuz i says sozozo!!! zlozzolozzozoz”
“eon says:
April 8, 2013 at 3:32 pm
“And yeah, I skipped reading Homer and Virgil too. Could not care less about them. … Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense.”
Publius Vergilius Maro (Virgil) was a Roman.”
Yes Eon and Homer was poet. 🙂
I challenge our fanboy to cite some of the “degraded nonsense” which he found so degrading in Greek philosophy, even as he uses Western Science, which has its origins Greek Philosophy, to type his ignorance on the internet, thusly buttehxting Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle in one fell swoop.
zlzozozozzozloz
No I’m not going to provide you with anything thing other than a polite ‘F U’. I’m thoroughly uninterested in intellectual pissing contests.
To the point of the original post, certainly the welfare changes encouraged the explosion in illegitimacy, but perhaps more on the order of fanning flames that were already burning. or adding fuel to the existing fire. It would have been largely unthinkable to enact such legislation is the culture shifts had not already taken place to support it.
lzozozozo
tbc’s post represents EXACTLY why men are losing.
see tbc correctly states that such legislation became thinkable because of the cultural shifts–because of the deconstruction of the moral code of the GREAT BOOKS AND CLASSICS.
and then witness how earlier TBC tated that “those GREAT BOOKS AND CLASSICS are irrelevant and stooopid stsoopid because dey are filled iwth buttccokingz” even though Homer isn’t.
then, when challenged on this point, tbc became the typical churchian fanboy zlozozozoz going “No I’m not going to provide you with anything thing other than a polite ‘F U’. I’m thoroughly uninterested in intellectual pissing contests.”
there you have it folks.
men say “FU” to Homer and the Bible (buttFUing them, and then
they wonder
where their culture, heritage and Natural Rights have gone.
lzozlzozozozoozozlzozoz
@ The Twat TBC
Because you have so cleverly changed the subject, no one will ever suspect that you are unable to support any of your bullshit.
I think that the phrase “sit down and STFU” was created with you in mind.
eon – thank you, I’m already seated, but I’ll take a pass on the STFU.
GBFM – I kindly request that you not conflate my ‘FU’ to you with any insult to scripture. To level an insult at me is one thing. To imply my disrespect or disregard for scripture is quite another.
As I said, I’m not interested in an intellectual pissing contest and I’m not. Nor are most people. I am also not cowed nor awed by GBFM. Some of what he says is interesting. Much of it useful. A lot of it tedious. And I’m not particularly interested in Homer and Virgil, though certainly I am interested in the Bible. Perhaps I will gain some interest in them one day when it feels necessary to my life. At present, it is not.
lozozoz
hey dalrockz!!!
this is what happens when the tbc’s all say FU to Homer and da Bible lzozozoz:
they lose their chidren to the state!!
but dat is ok they dey can go bakckck to gaming and ebenrkefieying one-another future’s wiveszz who will take tehir kids to teh state too lzlzozozozzoz
@ tbc
You stated that Homer and Greek philosophy were worse than worthless, for specific reasons, and when GBFM asked your to support your claims, you refused, in an insulting way.
Now you are disrespecting the readers of this blog by assuming that they are too stupid to see that you are changing the subject while allowing your unsupported and unretracted bullshit to stand.
What I said was that Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense. I also said I wasn’t particularly interested in Homer and Virgil.
I’m not disrespecting anyone, save those who have disrespected me. And I assume that the readers of this blog are neither stupid nor illiterate. They can read for themselves the exchange and make their own judgments.
I choose not to respond to GBFM’s demand that I give him any example of sodomy in Homer (although I never said there was sodomy in Homer). I don’t owe him any response. I mean really, who is he but some guy on the internet just like me? In response, he called me a churchian fanboy, said that needed to ‘man up’, suggested that I am ignorant and implied that I disrespected scripture.
What I haven’t done is insult him or you in anyway, and yet both of you have insulted me.
“tbc says:
April 8, 2013 at 5:06 pm
What I said was that Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense. I also said I wasn’t particularly interested in Homer and Virgil.”
so are you going to man up and argue with logic, reason, and examples like dalrock does in all his posts?
or are you just going to keep on trying to collectively buttehxt this entire blog with your “waaaa waaaa waaaaa but-butt-butt becausez i sayz so waaa waaa wwaaaa”?
lzozozzzlozzlozzlozlozloz
What I said was that Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense
Really? Trigonometry is degraded nonsense? Quantum Field Theory is degraded nonsense? Music, poetry, literature?
Degraded from what?
GBFM:
Werd, my christian brutha, werd. lzolozlolozlzlzlz
zlzoozzlzl nice videeo 8oxer i remember the meme from like ten yearz ago zllzozzlzo
I’m simply not interested in that discussion. Don’t care to engage it. Have no desire to discuss it. Could not care less about it. Maybe another day I will desire to do so, but today is not that day. You may continue to screech and claw demanding that I substantiate my opinion of the Greeks if you’d like – that’s your choice. Have at it.
As an aside your fascination with buttehextt lozolzozzloolzozlzozlzz seems to fit well with your fascination with the Greeks.
@ tbc
“You may continue to screech and claw demanding that I substantiate my opinion of the Greeks if you’d like – that’s your choice.”
The issue is not your opinion about anything. Neither you nor your opinions interest me very much.
The issue is that you are trying to use lies to divert people from something of great value.
But I think that what you are is obvious to everyone by now.
eon – is that so? What am I? I’ve been commenting here for some time and have never had to opportunity to have a long distance diagnosis of ‘what’ I am, so it should be interesting to have an assessment.
Folks,
If anyone is looking for an example of what it means to grow up in a ocuntry where Fatherhood has been debauched and deconstructed, all one need to is listen to the whimpering, whiney, milquetoast ramblings of today’s young “men,” tbc says: “I’m simply not interested in that discussion. Don’t care to engage it. Have no desire to discuss it. Could not care less about it. Maybe another day I will desire to do so, but today is not that day. You may continue to screech and claw demanding that I substantiate my opinion of the Greeks if you’d like – that’s your choice. Have at it. As an aside your fascination with buttehextt lozolzozzloolzozlzozlzz seems to fit well with your fascination with the Greeks.”
And TBC, there is far more buttehxt in the Bible than there is in Homer, Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle combined. Perhaps that is why you don’t like the Greeks and their exalted art, mathematics, logic, reason, philosophy, poetry, music, science, and literature?
zlzozozolzo
Am I a young man? Thank you for that compliment. It is nice to be thought of as young at my age. Would be better perhaps to be an old fool, but in either case I’m grateful to God for my life.
Have I rambled? Maybe but far less than you. I aim for concise speech though I don’t always succeed.
Ah the noble and wonderful Greeks. How can we not exalt them with all their incest, sodomy, bestiality and idolatry. What noble pagans they were, whose temples were filled with prostitution and vice and who elevated pedophilia to an art. Yes, we should all celebrate and emulate them.
Recently I visited my local public library and keen to discover more about Socrates, enquired of the female librarian whether they stocked his books. ‘Are you sure you don’t mean Sophocles’ she enquired, ‘for we do not seem to have any books by the author you seek’. ‘No’ I replied ‘Socrates is definitely the author of the degraded nonsense that I am after’. I left the library rather disappointed and confused for it is clear from what GBFM writes at 6.00 pm above that he is familiar with the great man’s works.
Opus – that’s sad
hey opus, tbc and tons of churchians are rejoicing, alongside the feminists, that the Great Books for Men have been disappeared. And then they wake up and say, “Where did my rights go? Where are my children? Why did my wife leave? Where is my country? Why are we enslaved to massive, buttocking debtszz? lzozozozlzz lzozozlzozzlzo”
@boxer
@northern
Are emotional outbursts also alpha? How about assigning malicous intent in order to win an argument? Is that alpha? How about repeating an assertion too win an argument?
Why so defensive? I never claimed that being annonamous is shameful. But based on both of your reactions to my comment, its clear that you do.
My claim was that being confident does not automatically get you respect and admiration. And I used a very well respected person for my example, because it adds weight to my argument.
So stop with the childish backbiting. Were all on the same side.
hey Liberty, Family, and Masculinity,
here’s a good read:
“The tradition of anonymous speech is older than the United States. Founders Alexander Hamilton James Madison and John Jay wrote the Federalist Papers under the pseudonym “Publius ” and “the Federal Farmer” spoke up in rebuttal. The US Supreme Court has repeatedly recognized rights to speak anonymously derived from the First Amendment.”
https://www.eff.org/issues/anonymity
and remember that odysseus chose to remain anonymous even in his own home, when he was outnumbered by the false suitors.
enjoy the decline.
GBFM-
i quote the psychedelic furs, “you can never win or lose if you don’t play the game.” i retire in one year, heading back to texas and living on my 10 acres with my lovely little micro farm. no need to get married when i can easily land a nice 24yo for a mini-relationship. eventually she leaves. rinse repeat. lol.
Indeed the great book for men have disappeared. Taken off the shelves. That GBFM fails to see my joke – though perhaps tbc got it; or perhaps not – shows that despite his purported enthusiasm for the Greeks, that GBFM has never read a word thereof; that he is entirely unfamiliar with Greek Historians, Geographers, Mathematicians or the Philosophers – whether Pre-socratic, Megarian, Epucurean, Pyrhonist, Neo-Platonic, and worst of all Stoics whose writings (and the Neo-Platoinists) influenced and merged into the early Christian writers from the second century A.D. – I despise the academic posturing and use of C.E. – which is why apart from a limited take on The Odyssey – how GBFM can regard ‘the man of cunning’; the man who deliberately spent a year on Calypso’s island for the sole purpose of having sex with her and thus delaying his return to the faithful Penelope, as a moral guide for us, defeats me – all one gets from GBFM is vast amounts of the NT copied out. tbc and GBFM thus have more in common than their spat might have indicated. To regard Plato and Aristotle’s writings as some sort of secular version of the OT and those two men – and Socrates – as proto-Christians as GBFM seems to do prompts me to out GBFM as – lets say – less than knowledgable in his purported area of expertise.
To suggest as GBFM does above that Socrates was put to death for servility and for manning up and honouring the spirit of God certainly comes as a surprise to me for I had always previously understood that – and this was democratically voted – that Socrates was convicted and subsequently sentenced to death for impiety towards the gods and for corrupting the youth of Athens. Perhaps GBFM reads these things on the ever-changable Wikipedia.
Opus, Odysseus’s nonfidelity to Penelope is much less important than the lack of the reverse would have been. It’s female infidelity (and thus likely cuckolding) that would threaten the very basis of marriage. As long as a family is not forced to substantially subsidize them, the creation of any bastards by the husband does not harm it very much as a minimum result. This is explained very eloquently in Daniel Amneus’s “The Garbage Generation” and Roger Devlin’s “Home Economics”, both readable for free online.
I do not understand listing Virgil and not Aristotle as ancient Greeks crucial to Western intellectual foundations. Where would we be without the Law of Identity? Clearly, there are no Objectivists reading this forum, else they’d have similarly commented. The ancient Greeks were pagan because they were not Jews and Christ had not yet come; it was hardly their fault.
lozozozozozozo
Opus writes, “To suggest as GBFM does above that Socrates was put to death for servility and for manning up and honouring the spirit of God certainly comes as a surprise to me for I had always previously understood that – and this was democratically voted – that Socrates was convicted and subsequently sentenced to death for impiety towards the gods and for corrupting the youth of Athens. Perhaps GBFM reads these things on the ever-changable Wikipedia.”
Please read the Apology instead of wikipedia Opus. Socrates states that he must honor God and Virtue, which the Athenian Jury does not like, and so they accuse him of believing in strange gods, while dishonoring their own gods, and sentence him to death for corrupting the youth. In many ways, Jesus was also sentenced to death by a jury of his peers for “corrupting the people” with what was considered, by the Scribes and Pharisees, blasphemies. Jesus was also accused of serving the “wrong gods/god”–the wrong religion. What–do you think they put Jesus to death for conforming to the beliefs of the Scribes and Pharisees?
After glancing at wikipedia, Opus makes fun of the “man of cunning.”
Well Opus, do you also make fun of Jesus for preaching, ““Behold, I send you out as sheep in the midst of wolves. Therefore be wise as serpents and harmless as doves.”
To be “wise as serpents” implies to be cunning.
Opus again roudly shares his utter ignorance. After briefly glancing at wikipedia, Opus again exposes hs that he has never read Homer’s Odyssey, as Opus wrongly states that Odysseus deliberately stayed with the goddess Calypso.
Opus ignorantly writes: “Odysseus deliberately spent a year on Calypso’s island for the sole purpose of having sex with her and thus delaying his return to the faithful Penelope.”
Homer states the exact opposite: “So now all who escaped death in battle or by shipwreck had got safely home except Odysseus, and he, though he was longing to return to his wife and country, was detained by the goddess Calypso, who had got him into a large cave and wanted to marry him.” –http://classics.mit.edu/Homer/odyssey.1.i.html
In typical fanboy/churchian fashion, one need not read the Greats, but only wikipedia, and then fart out some fanboy/churchian opinions as Holy Gospel.
Folks, what more proof do you need that Opus is a phony and fraud, when he can’t even bother to read the second paragraph of Homer’s Odyssey, before lecturing us all on it?
Perhaps there is no greater crime, to one fellow’s man (especially these days), than debauching, defiling,deconstructing, and degrading The Noble Spirit of The Great Books for Men.
If ye wonder why Fathers no longer have the Natural Rights Honored, and why the family is failing, ye need look no further than the likes of the pompous, arrogant, ignorant Opuses.
Opus again displays his vast, arrogant, vengeful ignorance and h8: “all one gets from GBFM is vast amounts of the NT copied out. . . .”
One of the biggest sins, I have learned, on Christian blogs, is actually quoting the words of Jesus. These are often labeled as “noise.”
Opus again: “To regard Plato and Aristotle’s writings as some sort of secular version of the OT and those two men – and Socrates – as proto-Christians as GBFM seems to do prompts me to out GBFM as – lets say – less than knowledgable in his purported area of expertise.”
Hey Opus, where did anyone ever say that Plato and Aristotle are proto-Christians?
In addition to reading the original texts, instead of Wikipedia, Opus, you should also learn to not make things up when assaulting others, as it comes off as masturbatory to the general public, as your triumphant, victorious intellectual orgasms are based solely upon entities that you are imagining. 🙂
@ Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says: April 9, 2013 at 10:01 am
Opus again displays his vast, arrogant, vengeful ignorance and h8: “all one gets from GBFM is vast amounts of the NT copied out. . . .”
One of the biggest sins, I have learned, on Christian blogs, is actually quoting the words of Jesus. These are often labeled as “noise.”
The mere act of posting quotes of Scripture doesn’t mean they’re good, as even Satan quoted scripture – to his own nefarious ends.
Again, as Western Civilization collapses all around us, and as Men are denied their Natural Rights as set forth in Homer and the Bible, note how much time churchians like Opus invest in masturbatory attacks upon those who honor the Great Books for Men, just to get himself off.
Note how Opus never thinks about preserving the Great Books for his sons. Note how he prefers to erect straw men and split hairs, engaging in ad hominem attacks and pretentious, fallacious, pedantry, instead of once actually quoting from the Bible or Homer, while viciously attacking those who do quote the Great Books for Men.
At least the feminists are honest about their intents.
A Northern Observer writes, “The mere act of posting quotes of Scripture doesn’t mean they’re good, as even Satan quoted scripture – to his own nefarious ends.”
What’s your point Northern Observer? That you don’t quote scripture because Satan does?
Fellas, is it any wonder the family is failing and the churchians have destroyed Christianity, as they accuse those who quote scripture of being Satan and persecute them to no end, while giving those who butthext and tape it in secret a free pass?
Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says: April 9, 2013 at 10:42 am
Don’t make this about me GBFM – this is about you and your behavior.
If there’s no point to the quotation other than as a basis to launch an attack on others who call out such pointless behavior, then it is noise. God’s words in the Holy Scriptures words are sacred, and they need to be given the respect they deserve, not used as a firehouse to douse your opponents with.
So now A Northern Observer is accusing me of “using scripture as a firehouse to douse your opponents with.”
Please cite an example.
Oh wait, I forgot, Churchians don’t need to cite examples. They just h8 it when people quote the Bible, showing how Jesus calls them out, labeling it “noise” and scriptue as “a firehose” that is used by Satan.
Fellas, is it any wonder the family is failing and the churchians have destroyed Christianity, as they accuse those who quote scripture of being Satan and persecute them to no end, while giving those who butthext and tape it in secret a free pass?
Again, as Western Civilization collapses all around us, and as Men are denied their Natural Rights as set forth in Homer and the Bible, note how much time churchians like A Northern Observer invest in masturbatory attacks upon those who honor the Great Books for Men by quoting them, accusing them of being Satan.
Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says: April 9, 2013 at 11:50 am
So now A Northern Observer is accusing me of “using scripture as a firehouse to douse your opponents with.” Please cite an example.
Here’s 3:
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/how-we-came-to-embrace-illegitimacy/#comment-77867
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/how-changes-to-welfare-encouraged-the-illegitimacy-explosion/#comment-78024
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/03/29/why-arent-men-responding-to-economic-signals/#comment-77146
lozozo Northern Observer,
All you provided are links of me exalting and celebrating Scripture.
You are utterly failing in supporting your accusations that I am Satan using Scripture as a Firehose.
Do you see it folks? Do you see the extent to which churchians persecute those who celebrate and quote Scripture, accusing them of being Satan, while giving secretive tapers of butthext a free pass?
GBFM – you go ahead and play the victim, straw-men your opponents (I never said you were Satan), and use that Scripture Firehose all you want. I’ve made my point, now I have work to do. Your posts are going back into the “skip” file.
Dear Northern Observer,
Instead of accusing me being Satan and using Scripture as a Firehose, we would all like to see A Northern Observer quote Scripture at some point. And unlike A Northern Observer, we will not accuse him of being Satan, for celebrating the Truth and Beauty of Scripture.
🙂
This is embarrassing for the entire Christian Manosphere.
Witness the never-ending, concerted attacks directed at those who honor the Great Books and Classics and quote Scripture above All Else. They are accused of creating “noise,” being “Satan,” and “using Scripture as a firehose,” by those who quote no Scripture, but only police Christian blogs for those who do quote Scripture, so as to attack and persecute them.
lzozolzlozzo
Witness it my friends–the persecution for quoting Christ on a Christain blog, as the church and civilization decline all about us. Is it any wonder?
A Northern Observer says:
“April 9, 2013 at 12:00 pm
Great Books For Men GreatBooksForMen GBFM (TM) GB4M (TM) GR8BOOKS4MEN (TM) lzozozozozlzo (TM) says: April 9, 2013 at 11:50 am
So now A Northern Observer is accusing me of “using scripture as a firehouse to douse your opponents with.” Please cite an example.
Here’s 3:
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/how-we-came-to-embrace-illegitimacy/#comment-77867
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/04/05/how-changes-to-welfare-encouraged-the-illegitimacy-explosion/#comment-78024
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2013/03/29/why-arent-men-responding-to-economic-signals/#comment-77146
”
The 3 sins of GBFM according to A Northern Observer.
Here’s some random (short!) quotes from Scripture that I think are edifying:
* For a dream comes with much business, and a fool’s voice with many words. Ec 5:3
* And when you pray, do not heap up empty phrases as the Gentiles do, for they think that they will be heard for their many words. Mt 6:7
* If anyone thinks he is religious and does not bridle his tongue but deceives his heart, this person’s religion is worthless. Jas 1:26
* They will put you out of the synagogues. Indeed, the hour is coming when whoever kills you will think he is offering service to God. 3 And they will do these things because they have not known the Father, nor me. Jn 16:2–3
Now, it’s time to honor God with my work….
Thanks for quoting Scripture A Northern Observer.
Please note that I do not think such acts make you Satan, like some do. 🙂
It is unfortunate that so much of the conversation here is sidetracked
“tbc says:
April 9, 2013 at 1:04 pm
It is unfortunate that so much of the conversation here is sidetracked.”
yes tbc,
if only every reference to a Great Book
or the Bible
were removed
and all discussion pertaining to
such exalted entities
deleted
then
we
would be
back on track
like the rest of culture
lzozolzozoozzozozlzozzlozzlzo
Let us therefore list the great books to enhance this conversation about how changes to welfare encourages the illegitimacy explosion.
tbc–are you kidding me?
The Bible teaches “Thou shalt not commit adultery.” If we get rid of out-of-wedlock butttehxt and sex, we get rid of illegitimacy.
Homer also teaches the sanctity of the Family and the sacredness of the Home.
it is because of people like tbc, who see no relationship between the deconstruction of the Great Books and the decline of the family, that the family hath been destroyed.
Really GBFM I expected better. Not even one lolzzzzlozlzlzolzozzl??
I asked for a list of the Great Books — you cite one of the commands of scripture and referenced Homer (I assume you don’t mean Homer SImpson who also has some good things to say about family and home).
Let’s have the full list, so we can have the healthy discussion. Because if we can just get some young barely literate thug to cite Homer, I’m sure we can make a huge dent in the illegitimacy rate.
Dalrock,
tbc, like many churchians, scoffs at “Thou shalt not commit adultery,” alongside the Bible and Homer, and sees no connection between the decline of the family and the failure to honor the Soul of the Great Books and Classics.
lzozoozzlzozlo
I’m not scoffing. I’m asking for the list. We are Christians, most of us, and there is no dispute of the validity and enduring force of the command, “Thou shalt not commit adultery.”
I have not insisted that there is no connection — you have. I’ve said nothing about the Great Books. That is your deal.
I’m asking for the list so that we can enhance the conversation. You have said there is a connection between the decline and the failure to honor the soul of the great books, so I’m asking that we do just that. Let’s discuss them.
The Bible happens to be a Great Book, tbc.
Did you not know that?
“In regards to this great Book [the Bible], I have but to say it is the best gift God has given to man. All the good the Savior gave to the world was communicated through this Book. But for it we could not know right from wrong. All things most desirable for man’s welfare, here and hereafter, are found portrayed in it.”
― Abraham Lincoln
Okay we’re getting somewhere. The Holy Bible. The Greatest of the Great Books. I can agree with that. And it comes with an endorsement of Abe Lincoln, so that is even better. An endorsement I’m certain you would agree with.
Victory!
Hey Dalrock! I have achieved Victory!
The Bible is now accepted reading on your site! O Happy Day!
“tbc says:
April 9, 2013 at 2:48 pm
Okay we’re getting somewhere. The Holy Bible. The Greatest of the Great Books. I can agree with that. And it comes with an endorsement of Abe Lincoln, so that is even better. An endorsement I’m certain you would agree with.”
Da GBFM Wins!!!!!!
Congrats on your win (whatever that means, since no one has disputed the Bible, but whatever)! I suppose now our list is finished no?
Let’s get back to talking about how PUA’s are helping society because they are marriage minded and know how to handle a woman.
I have seen it elsewhere and find it amusing.
Yes, let’s soil the churchian flowers and and pretend we mean well,even if they are unrepentant sluts with illegitimate children by multiple thugs.
(That’s some good luvin’ there!)
Come on,show me how responsible that whole scenario is,I am a-waiting.
yes freebird,
the churchian theory is that if enough betas learn how to serve gina and butt tinzgzlzzlzozooz over god, then there will be so much buttehxt that the sheer energy will create a massive black hole, and all of feminism will be sucked into it, leaving the two-parent family and traditional morality intact.
lzozozozlozllzzloz
Because if we can just get some young barely literate thug to cite Homer, I’m sure we can make a huge dent in the illegitimacy rate.
It actually might help some. I think getting back to the Great Books would give men a sense of manliness, which would not only help the rate of illegitimacy, but would generally help men find their own personal niche, cut down on aimlessness, and raise standards of behaviour in a broad variety of ways.
Of course, I think stuff like this has its place too. NSFW:
Everything in its right place. (I think the brainy peeps call that aesthetics).
lzozozo
GBFM is a brilliant man. It’s a pity some of his critics can’t see that.
http://eumaios.wordpress.com/2013/04/01/intelligible/#comment-1030
Women of the Bible.
Right, so the list is finished? Because if the list is finished we should move towards discussing how the list can help us combat the changes that have occurred.
The William Bennet Tradcons preach “man up and marry the sluts!”
The chruchians preach “man up and buttcock the sluts!”
Da GBFM preaches “man up and read da GBFM!!” lzozozozozozoz
(one of the three above teachings leads to no buttcocking, neither in divorce court nor da bungholzozozli, unlike the other two)
lzozozolzolzozoz
hey i have da solutionz to tame the ILLEGITIMACY!!!!
men must return to living by a classical code of honor! CODE OF HONOR!
everyone needs to stop fighting
lay down their weaponz of snarky snark attacksz
and rejoice
and read
THE GREAT BOOKZ FOR MENZ!!!!!!!
insteaed of spliiting hairz ([redacted] in most cases) read HOMER!!!!!!
Hellyesyysysys!
All da great books BELIVEE
here’s what yu need to read which the neocns dfmeinsist hiresd fmeinist funded fmeinsist to kill detsory these books with utucker max rheyms with goldman sax [redacted]
0. THE BIBLE
1. Homer’s Iliad
2. Homer’s Odyssey
3. Exodus & Ecclesiastes & The Psalms
4. Virgil’s Aeneid
5. Socrates’ Apology
6. The Book of Matthew & Jefferson’s Bible
7. Plato’s Repulic
8. Seneca’s Letters from a Stoic
9. Dante’s Inferno
10. The Declaration of Independence
11. The Constitution
12. John Milton’s Paradise Lost
13. Shakespeare’s Hamlet
14. Newton’s Principia
15. Adam Smith’s Wealth of Nations and Theory of Moral Sentiments
16. Shakespeare’s Hamlet
17. Ludwig von Mises’ A Theory of Money and Credit
18. F.A. Hayek’s The Road to Serfdom
19. Herman Melville’s Moby Dick
20. Einstein’s The Meaning of Relativity
21. Joseph Campbell’s The Hero With a Thousand Faces and The Power of Myth
22. Ron Paul’s Revolution
23. THE BIBLE
not one insatcnce of secrtely taped [redacted] in all the above books, but a lot of god and morality which is hwy the nocnoens h8 the great books and classics lzozzzozl
While I disagree with some of his selections, GBFM’ s reading list will do a man more good then marriage ever will
I’ve read 18 on the list. Not bad for a dumb grunt with a GED
Thanks Ton!
Actually as you have a GED, you probably have *learned* far, far more than those with bachelors, masters, and ph.d.’s!
These are the books one can return to time and again throughout life, visiting different translations!
And many reference one-another, as members of the community of eternal souls, carrying on Man’s greatest conversations.
When men lay down their buttcocking ways and stop pursuing material wealth and buttcockingz and devote themselves to improving their Souls by reading the Greats, then shall the renaissance begin!
For you see, man’s greatest asset is not the ability to make buttcocked asses tingelzlozlzzl and buttcock asses, but it is His Divine Soul.
There is a reason that Zeus is the Father of the Sky, and Hera Earth. Mother comes from mater which means material. And women have ever offered a portal on down to the material, to the base and carnal. Hence the Sirens in Homer’s Odyssey which lure men onto the perilous rocks of buttehxt, and Circe the witch who transforms men into Pigs. Odysseus stands up to her (her shit test), draws his sword, and instead of the turning him into a pig, she invites him into bed. And so too, instead of pursuing women on down and becoming buttehxting pigs, one would be wise to stand tall, reading the Great Books for Men.
Read the Greats–Shakespeare, Homer, the Bible–each and every day. Partake in the Grand Heritage of Your Fathers! Seek to weigh their wisdom for yourself, and improve the soul. And you too, shall see, day by day, that Jesus’s greater glory lies not in the blind worship the churchians teach, but in the realization that while the Great Books are Great, He is the Greatest. I invite ye to pick up the Great Books, and see it for yerself, as every true man must.
And then shall illegitimacy be conquered, when men regain their true thrones.
@GB4M,
C.S. Lewis had his severe limitations. He writes, and writes, and writes about Christianity, and writes more, and never, never, never quotes da Gospels
Which is of course flat out not true from flipping through “Mere Christianity”. If I must chose between Lewis and GB4M I’ll chose Lewis. Worse it begs the question by leaving open the premise that you can only show respect to Christ by direct quotations and that any synopsis of the same is inherently unfaithful. The second is the silliest since it pretty much is self-damning.
And while I greatly appreciate GB4M’s willingness to draw on scripture and correct the ‘sphere’s tendency to praise PUA’s I think there is a strong tendency in his work to confuse Christianity and Classical Liberalism. I can’t blame him for this ; it is a very American way of thinking.
@TBC,
I guess I’ve never been overly impressed with a bunch of ancient Greeks men who enjoyed sodomizing each other. Greek philosophy was largely a bunch of degraded nonsense.
No, it really wasn’t. Which is why St. Paul used it against the Greeks and why the Christians used it to advance their own theology. In fact Greek Philosophy was very friendly to Christianity since it also proposed a “root cause” of the universe. It was one of the few non-Jewish monotheistic games in the West.
I may not like GB4M’s style, but let’s not reject the Western Canon (in which Lewis can be counted) over it.
Ah the noble and wonderful Greeks. How can we not exalt them with all their incest, sodomy, bestiality and idolatry. What noble pagans they were, whose temples were filled with prostitution and vice and who elevated pedophilia to an art. Yes, we should all celebrate and emulate them.
From the Greeks we have some of the first formal arguments against homosexual relations (Plato). The rest is taking a look at the fallen things and not the great things. We are _all_ like what you describe. We _all_ fall short. To reject the beauty that came from an _entire civilization_ that bequeathed us so much is poor form. You shouldn’t ignore what they did wrong, but you should be more careful to condemn what they did well.
GB4M is generally right in that being a well read man is essential. You should understand the underpinnings of our Civilization and the philosophy and arguments that have already been made. Otherwise you look intellectual lazy and can’t project the trust and faith people need to organize around an anti-cultural principle.
Which is why the quoting and the comments about Lewis are silly. Lewis does quote but he draws more on the classic tradition (which includes the Bible) that GB4M claims we should all know about. That is, he doesn’t expect that he’s smarter than God, but that you know all of the historical arguments about the same and can draw on some synthesis.
Both TBC and GB4M seem to be arguing from a Protestant perspective that man’s knowledge of God is somehow fixed. That we can’t continue to build up a greater knowledge through study of both the natural world and scripture. That is, that Theology is not organic and growing.
@Ton,
More than marriage
And this is where Christian androsphere types go over the edge of Faith and Reason. An institution _granted_ by God for the direct good of society and human souls is going to trump any secular reading list ever.
Dear GK,
Please cite specifics supporting your contention that C.S. Lewis quotes the Bible in Mere Christianity: “GKChesteron says:
April 10, 2013 at 2:06 pm
@GB4M,
C.S. Lewis had his severe limitations. He writes, and writes, and writes about Christianity, and writes more, and never, never, never quotes da Gospels
Which is of course flat out not true from flipping through “Mere Christianity”. ”
Or is this just going to be another unmanly “because I said so” churchian argument?
GK Chesteron,
Where did I ever once say thusly, as you accuse me of doing: “Both TBC and GB4M seem to be arguing from a Protestant perspective that man’s knowledge of God is somehow fixed. That we can’t continue to build up a greater knowledge through study of both the natural world and scripture. That is, that Theology is not organic and growing.”
Or is this just going to be another unmanly “because I said so” churchian argument?
You said you “flipped through” Mere Christianity, meaning that you did not read it.
GK Chesteron displays amazingly unclear thought, and fails to provide any evidence to back up his random, false ramblings. Not manly at all.
Marriage as God intended is one thing, as marriage stands today… something totally different and utterly vile when you figure the courts into the system
Yes Ton!
“Ton says:
April 10, 2013 at 2:34 pm
Marriage as God intended is one thing, as marriage stands today… something totally different and utterly vile when you figure the courts into the system”
This is because the courts have done away with Moses’ Biblical Code of Honor, which Jesus came to fulfill.
If ever the churchians stop h8ing on Moses and Jesus so as to sanctify and exalt in buttcockiing, while accusing those who quote Jesus of being Satan, we might have a chance to return to classical, exalted marriage.
Again, it comes down to reinfusing the court system with THE GREAT BOOKS FOR MEN.
The problem with tradcons and socons is they do not understand the things they want to conserve no longer exist. What they end up doing is trying to conserve shells and illusions of once great institutions
@GK Chesterton – honestly I was mostly just writing to get GBFM riled up, but I do reject an overly celebratory approach to the Greeks. There is much that was redemptive in their culture and much that was degraded. Arguably western thought and especially theology, however much it has been enriched by Greek philosophical thought, has also been damaged by its assumptions. Greek thought was not very friendly to Christianity in toto, but only in parts, It was only as Greek Christians wrestled with their pre-Christian heritage that the redemptive elements of Greek philosophy emerged. We see this in Clement of Alexandria’s Protreptikos. In effect it was arguably the gospel that ‘saved’ the gems of Greek philosophy amidst the much more abundant degraded nonesense as the early Greek Christians sought to make sense of their own past.
I’m actually fairly well read. and well versed in ‘western civilisation,’ and I definitely do not believe that theology is somehow ‘fixed’. That is part of the reason why I, in some measure, reject the dominance of Greco-Roman categories of thought because to insist on them as definitive, normative, and norming is to freeze theology in a particular cultural form — which would be a great irony since opposition to such an approach is largely what the New Testament is about. Nevertheless, the contribution of the Greeks to the formation of Western civilisation is indisputable, despite their rank depravity, pagan excess, and sexual immorality. We do well to remind ourselves of this, and I raise the issue intentionally, for it is far to easy to paint a gloss over just how wicked and lost Greek civilisation was, how murderous, how brutal, how dark and terrible.
tbc writes, “@GK Chesterton – honestly I was mostly just writing to get GBFM riled up.”
after complaining and moaning about “off topic” content, and trying to get the GBFM banned, it turns out that tbc was only writing to “get GBFM riled up”–to make by butt tingle, which it never did.
see, the probelm is, that as Rome burns and the culture falls, the churchians spend their time trying to rile up good folk’s bungholes, while at the same time casting aspersion on the great greeks,
tbc writes, “Nevertheless, the contribution of the Greeks to the formation of Western civilisation is indisputable, despite their rank depravity, pagan excess, and sexual immorality. We do well to remind ourselves of this, and I raise the issue intentionally, for it is far to easy to paint a gloss over just how wicked and lost Greek civilisation was, how murderous, how brutal, how dark and terrible.”
tbc, were there ever any wars in the Bible? did the Greeks fight more wars than those who read the Bible instead oh Homer? did the Greeks kill millions via communism or Nazism? was the American civil or revolutionary war a “Greek” thing?
Why all the blind, seething, rage and h8 for the Greeks?’
Or again, are you just trying to “rile up” other mens’ bungholes for the fun of it?
And could you please stop?
thanks!
No I won’t stop. The great Greeks as you call them do not need me to cast aspersion on them. The gospel does that. I am telling the truth about them. They were a vile detestable, depraved, idolatrous civilisation, filled with abominable licentiousness, gross imposture, and sordid paganism. It was not for no cause that Paul’s spirit was stirred when he saw that the whole of Athens was given over to idolatry and that he adjudged their wisdom to be foolishness. It is indeed a miracle of grace that anything of redemptive value could be found in them.
tbc, when you walk in a catholic church and witness them worshipping an idol, is your spirit stirred like paul’s? what about when priests are fondling little boys and covering it up? is that because they are vile Greeks?
also, you state the gospel casts aspersion on the greeks. where does jesus mention the greeks? did jesus read homer and plato, in your opinion?
please cite your examples.
oh wait–i forgot, as you stated earlier, you are just “trying to rile” the bunghole of the gbfm by rewriting, and thus bastardizing, the gospels.
please show some respect to Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, and stop warping and perverting them to further your strange desire to “rile up” other men.
GBFM – Why do you have a problem with Holy Scripture? It is Paul in scripture after all who said that the crucifixion was foolishness to the Greeks and that God himself had made foolish the wisdom of men, in reference to the Greeks. It is the Greeks after all who sought after wisdom.
Do you believe that the Greeks should not have been turned from idols to serve the living and true God? Maybe you believe the silversmiths who lost their business were right to riot in opposition to the proclamation of the gospel by Paul. Perhaps you think that they should have been left alone in their debauched mysteries and depraved idolatries.
Do you believe that the Greeks who came to worship God and desired to see Jesus should rather have stayed back in Greece and read Homer and Plato instead of seeking him who is the source of life itself?
@GB4M,
“Umanly churchian”. Blasting the great minds of the past because they didn’t use quotation marks in a manner that you find fitting I think is a bit more “unmanly and churchian”. We can start with, in “Mere Christianity” book 3, where he quotes, “God is Love”. Since you made a sweeping statement that, “[Lewis] never, never, never quotes da Gospels,” all I require is one counter example. I’m now done. The fact that you have supposedly read this and we’re willing to berate me without checking is more than a little tacky. I also see nothing in Lewis where he seems to think he’s more knowledgeable than God. In fact the _thesis_ of a “A Grief Observed” is that you have to put trust in God to work things out no matter how miserable it makes you personally and that wallowing in that misery is unbefitting a Christian.
And to take it one step further, is the Nicene Creed then also faulty for its lack of quotation marks?
@Ton,
Your comments betray a certain lack of Faith. What God founds can not be destroyed. You state that something is better than marriage with no caveat (until your follow up). That is flat out wrong. That GB4M defends this is more than a little amusing given his philosophical premise. Evidently God is all powerful and should be quoted up until He deals with marriage and then somehow He can be undone by the Moderns.
Marriage exists regardless of how well _we_ keep the institution. Since we are keen on quotes, ” “Therefore a man shall leave his father and mother and hold fast to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh.” This mystery is profound, and I am saying that it refers to Christ and the church. However, let each one of you love his wife as himself, and let the wife see that she respects her husband.”
It is through marriage that we see the Divine relationship with the Church. Our frustrations with wives and modern women are a bit trifling when compared with that. One would hope God won’t give up as flippantly because it would be bad news indeed, even if we _did_ deserve it.
Reading Ephisians I am reminded of how brilliant God is. He saw the “teddy bear Jesus” phenomena and warned us of it by reminding us that we needed to respect “husband/God”. It is easy to love God. Far more difficult to treat him with the seriousness he deserves.
Hey Dalrock,
GKchesterton has solved the illegitimatecy problem! It does not exist!
GK writes, “Marriage exists regardless of how well _we_ keep the institution.”
OK we can shut down the blog now, as GK states it does not matter the actions we take, nor the laws we make.
If ever anyone has their children seized from them, or a wife hits you with divorce and then take half your assets, remember, your marriage stills exists! As GK writes, “Marriage exists regardless of how well _we_ keep the institution.”
🙂
Jesus stated “what god has joined together, let not man put assunder,” but GKChesterton thinks he has improved on Jesus, stating “what god has joined together, man *cannot* put assunder.”
so just stop paying that child support, and you won’t go to prison, and even if you do, at least GK’s words will console you that you are still married to your divorced wife while in prison.
and people wonder why men have stopped going to church.
lzozozlozozlzozzzlz
Quit trolling Dalrock
we have to deal with what’s at hand. The Almighty does not appear interested in saving marriages, or men from from the court system. It’s easy to say I lack faith, but I lived through it, still believe in Him enough to do some dangerous work because my soul is safe, and my life ends on His time. It is more likely folks are misreading some biblical promises or He’s turned His back on a nation of child murders.
If I didn’t have an argument I guess I’d make attacking a man’s faith my default response.
I didn’t see you down range last time I was there. Your faith must be weak. I did not see you in the Sudan when I was there, your faith must be weak. See how that works? Not very well does it
Amen Ton.
We’re supposed to battle for Christ’s Ideals in our courts and laws, even though the faux GK Chesterton and churchians command us not to.
Many things in the blue pill world that was “right” is now wrong. The laws of misandy must be changed to restore order. A brave man it takes to do such a thing. He will look unchristian and eveil and be hated by all. But such a man will be in direct service of the lord. That is where the PUA is doing the lords work comes from. Making marriage christian again is going to take action beyond winning a debate on scripture.
GBFM has taken over another comments section, lecturing everyone from his strange, judaized American Protestant viewpoint. Why do you guys respond to him?
hey phil,
what makes my viewpoint “judaized American Protestant” ?
gbfm 🙂
It is of course unfair to criticise anyone’s choice of books, yet as Schiller wrote in Wallenstein’s Camp ‘show me a man’s library and I’ll tell you how he’ll think and how he’ll act’, yet GBFM’s list is, I cannot help but notice, very americo-centric, and treats the Greeks as a dry-run for the Gospels. Yet consider what is missing (seeing that he is GBFM): Paradise Lost – a book where the (anti) hero is Satan rather than choosing Milton’s anti-feminist Samson Agonistes; the uncertain Hamlet, rather than the Shakespeare’s determined Henry V. Moby Dick is doubtless justly famous, but surely the great MGTOW American book is Thoreau’s Walden. Dante’s Inferno, but not the entire Comedia. The inclusion of the Einstein and Newton’s Principia, suggests that GBFM is a more than competent Scientist. Plenty of Capitalist Dogma in the list, and Smith’s Theory of Moral Sentiments is also there (a great book) but then where is his friend Hume’s Treatise or if he prefers the Two Enquiries.
I am still not convinced however the GBFM has ever read any of these as he refers to Socrates’ Apology. Yes but which one?: Plato’s or Xenophon’s – seeing that Socrates inexplicably failed to write about his own death (or indeed anything else).
Fascinating list none the less, and it was worth observing that on the BBC radio programme Desert Island Discs, – now running for over fifty years – the unfortunate castaway, (besides his individual choice of Music, a book and one luxury item) is always given The Bible (KJV of course) and a complete Shakespeare.
Where are books like Lord of the Flies, Lord of the Rings, and the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy? (sarcasm)
hey opus–WTF? ameriocentric? WTF? Shakespere, Homer, Moses, JEsus, Dante, Virgil are americans?
get your hed out of your bungholzozizizlziizll!!!
the uncertain Hamlet? did you even read Shakespreare’s GReatest Play?
WTF Opus? Are you a friggin idiot?
HAmlet is the most performed, critiqued, written about play dramatic work of all time!
it created the modern western consciousness as athens and jerusalem collide in hamlet’s soul, you idioiotzz!!
capitalist dogma!!???? WTF?
opus–please llist out some of adam smith’s “Capitalist dgmas”
zlzozozoozozozo
and yes Walden and paradise lost belong there too because milton was an emerican too lzozozozozooz it isn’t a FINISHED LIST
zlzoozozoz
I make a point to read posts from certain people (Deti, Imnobody, and Opus). Always thoughtful, insightful, educational and memorable.
There are also certain post from others that are extremely incomprehensible, unintelligible, and annoying.
lzozozozozooz 🙂
Shalom
No Opus is right. The list bespeaks an American. I say that as an American. And again, where did I say that there was no problem with the current state of marriage? Or are you just keen on making stuff up? I noticed you went quiet on your claims on Lewis.
I also love Ton’s argument that is summarized by, “if you haven’t been shot at in a battle then you can’t comment on my argument implicit claims.”
That’s not my argument at all, what I am saying is I can make up silly statements to sling an accusation about the strength of your faith. Then dismiss the idea as doesn’t work very well. I don’t question a man’s faith because only the Almighty know for sure. And apparently you do as well
I was also making the claim you have no real argument so you make it about the strength of another man’s faith.
hey GK Chesteron,
with the family in decline and western civilization falling all about us and good men having their children and assets seized form them, why do you spend so much time attacking your fellow brothers, and trying to rile up their bungholesz?
are you working for satan perhaps?
why GKSatan, do you never criticize the central bankers or communists who hath destoryed the family?
“Hollywood producer, filmmaker, activist and truth seeker Aaron Russo reveals some of the REAL reasons for feminism which was funded and pushed by the Rockefellers and the CIA for very nefarious reasons, which includes being part of their central banking worldwide takeover to help set up the New World Order
How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women
http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html
“How the Rockefellers Re-Engineered Women
February 1, 2007
By Henry Makow Ph.D.
“Feminism is an excellent example of how the Rockefeller mega cartel uses the awesome power of the mass media (i.e. propaganda.) to control society.
In 40 short years, many women have lost touch with their natural loving instincts. Consequently, the family is in disarray, sexual depravity is rampant and birth rates have plummeted.
I will expand on the Rockefeller’s role, but first we need to remember that for a woman, love is an instinctive act of self-sacrifice.
She gives herself to her husband and children and is fulfilled by seeing them thrive and receiving their love, respect and gratitude.”
– See more at: http://www.savethemales.ca/001904.html#sthash.DAaGy0qz.dpuf“ ”
Why do you attack your brothers GK?
I was particularily interested (and I supposed amused too) by tbc’s rubbishing of the Greeks, and his call for not freezing or limiting Theology to that of the Greeks – in his reply to GKC at 03.02 on the 10th inst – as if there were any need to. Consider the writings of Anselm, Aquinas, Scotus and Ockham and doubtless many others for what must be, and to the limits of thought, never easy of comprehension and frequently ending in Paradox, Post-Helenistic Theology. The only way out from that (of which I am aware) is Revelation. I commend Hobbes’ Leviathan.
Hey Opus,
In your supreme rush to get ur tiny churchian cockas in my butthole, you missed #12 where I listed Paradise Lost.
Why the h8 bro?
Why all the condescension? I didn’t bernankify your future wife, so why you gotta go h8 on me?
Opus writes, “Yet consider what is missing (seeing that he is GBFM): Paradise Lost – a book where the (anti) hero is Satan rather than choosing Milton’s anti-feminist Samson Agonistes;”
Hey Opus, if you’re going to try to butthext me like a good preachy chruchian, make sure you at least read what I wrote:
12. John Milton’s Paradise Lost
lzozozozozolzozoz
@GBFM
I see I did not put it particularily well at 03.27 but if you will reread, you will see that I can only mean that (being aware you listed Paradise Lost) I thought that work a strange choice and that a certain other Milton drama, might have been better for men, as it is rather Red Pill, or perhaps – on further reflection – his lament for his dead drownded male-friend in Lycidas would be better still. As Paradise Lost seems to be largely about Satan it is tempting to read it as a defence of the Cromwellian Interegnum and the execution of his Late Majesty Charles the First.
Dalrock, please how can I contact you directly via email?
Pingback: Asking the wrong question. | Dalrock
Pingback: Why isn’t Carl good enough? | Dalrock
Pingback: Father Roulette | Dalrock
Pingback: Turning the hearts of children from their fathers. | Dalrock
Pingback: Percentage of US population over 15 who were married by sex and race, 1950–2017 | Dalrock
Pingback: Should we fine tune our replacement of marriage? | Dalrock