Last year Kathryn Edin wrote in The Shriver Report about low income single fathers, in a piece titled What About the Fathers? She thought she knew all about these men, having spent years speaking to single mothers. But talking to the fathers themselves was a shocking revelation (emphasis mine):
…I had spent years living and talking with black, white, and Hispanic single mothers in some of the nation’s toughest urban neighborhoods in Philadelphia, Chicago, the deep South, and the West Coast—10 cities in all. I thought I had learned everything there was to know about these men from the moms. Besides, didn’t everyone know the guys were irresponsible? That they really didn’t care about the kids they conceived? In 2008, even presidential candidate Barack Obama was calling them out, saying they had better stop acting like boys and have the courage to raise a child not just create one.
Finally, fellow researcher Tim Nelson and I began actually talking to these men—more than 100 low-income noncustodial dads living in poor neighborhoods in the Philadelphia area. As it turns out, “everyone” wasn’t right. We were all dead wrong—me, the country, and even Barack Obama.
Edin explains that the pregnancies she studied very often were due to the decision by the mother to forgo birth control without the knowledge of the father, because motherhood will gain her status:
Pretty soon, the women are skipping doses of the pill or letting the patch or other forms of contraception lapse. Why? In these communities, motherhood often exerts a strong pull on young women’s hearts and minds and weakens their motivation to avoid pregnancy. Being a mom serves as the chief source of meaning and identity in neighborhoods where significant upward mobility is rare.
Then once the baby is born, the mothers have strong incentives to eject the father from the family, replacing him with what ultimately turns into a parade of men:
When a single mom in the inner city feels her kid’s father has failed to provide, there is an enormous temptation to “swap daddies,” pushing the child’s dad aside while allowing a new man—perhaps one with a little more going for him economically—to claim the title of father. These moms are often desperate to find a man who can help with the bills so they can keep a roof over their kid’s head. The problem is that these new relationships may be no more stable than the old ones.
When a mom moves from one relationship to another—playing gatekeeper with the biological father while putting her new boyfriend into the dad’s role—she puts her kids on a “father-go-round.”
Edin is describing the very double think I’ve been discussing here and here. It is overall a surprisingly good article, especially coming from a feminist organization. Edin recognizes that it is the mothers who are the ones who decide the structure of the family and if the father is to be involved beyond just a paycheck.
If they want to stop the father-go-round, moms will have to do what they can to keep the biological dad involved with his child and not push him aside. It’s up to them, because currently, mothers have most of the power de facto, if not de jure.
While the mothers eject the fathers to invite in a parade of new men, the rejected fathers end up repeatedly trying to create new families with other women, hoping they eventually will be permitted to stay:
Meanwhile, the biological fathers themselves end up on a family-go-round, having kids by other women in a quest to try to get what they long for—the whole father experience. Each new child with a different mom offers another chance—a clean slate. With eagerness, they once again invest every resource they can muster in service of that new fragile family.
However, Edin fails to realize the need for true commitment if we are going to stop the immense suffering of so many poor (not to mention middle class) children. Our elites have created a new family structure which is a disaster for all but the top quarter of the socioeconomic scale, but the UMC refuses to recognize the immense pain this selfish change is wreaking. Her suggestion to poor men is to make sure they have a high income and their relationship with the mother is “on a solid footing” before having children, in order to reduce the likelihood that she will become unhappy and expel him from the family:
Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
See Also:
Pingback: What about the fathers? | Manosphere.com
Pingback: What about the fathers? | Neoreactive
What freakin’ planet is that woman from? Absolutely worthless advice. Yep, she’s a feminist….okay….here’s the deal, I work around this a lot, and was married into some of this nonsense….these young feral women KNOW exactly what they’re doing. They know the best way to make a buck in the system. The young dudes are just interested in sex…..Plain and simple. You don’t try to have children with a hoodrat. The dominant female is the queen bee. She controls basically everything that happens in her sphere of influence. This is Black culture here, btw. But, really, poor white trailer trash does the same thing.
These feral females are children farmers, plain and simple. Queen bee gets her cut of whatever the rat takes in. That way the rat has a reliable drug connection. Seriously, Dalrock….white folks have literally no idea how all this works. I’m a white guy who married a Black RN. Eye opening ain’t the word for all I’ve seen.
Queen bee will tell a rat who to go be with…..and she does it. Straight up tribal behavior, no doubt about it. A big boned rat can start having kids at 13-14 years of age. I’ve seen that personally. Try 5 kids by the time she’s 20 or so. It’s big business, no doubt about it. Visiting nurses pay their cut to be able to take care of “sick” kids…..please.
Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
Exactly — basically she is saying this: “Act like the white upper middle class, and everything will be okay.” It’s dumb because the UMC’s success is precisely based on those folks having a ton of advantages in their bag of tricks — education, ambition, drive, discipline, future-orientation and, of course, money. These guys do not have most of that, if any of it. The same path is disastrous for them — it isn’t plug and play. It just doesn’t work unless the men fit that UMC profile I just outlined, such that it is quite painful for the mother to just ditch them (even though it still happens, of course — but much more rarely, as we know from the stats). The UMC in the US is myopic and out to lunch on this issue — thinking they can just clone themselves and their ways in the rest of the demographic that doesn’t have anything like their own profile, even leaving aside the money. It’s just a plain dumb way to look at the world and inherently solipsistic.
Sadly, I don’t think the attitude will change much until the ravages of this system start to eat at the UMC itself. That’s coming, mostly because there won’t be enough UMC men, not nearly enough of them, in the next couple of decades for the rising cohorts of UMC women. At that point, TSWHTF. Men will be blamed at first, of course — that’s to be expected. But the shock that the dysfunction has spread upward may, eventually at least, lead to some eyes being opened.
I forgot to mention this important fact…..the rat can’t have a husband. Nope…..no welfare, otherwise…..EVERYONE knows that. That’s what makes that whole article a big steaming pile. Dalrock,m I’ve read your comments for quite a while now, and have learned a lot. But this welfare fraud, and that’s what it is, is beyond decent people’s understanding. Once a rat is pregnant, well, she’s on her way.
You can see them sitting on the porches when I go to work on a house. They’ll use a juvenile b rat in training to watch the kids……while they do whatever they’re into. Crack is generally too expensive for a rat, so they drink a lot.
hypergamy doesn’t care what sort of solid footing you think you have
Something I’ve noticed is that women who take the most pride in being Feminist in thought are actually the least feminist in behavior.
I know a lot of feminists who actually act rather submissively towards their (male) partners, take a lot of pride in their appearance, and are generally more traditional.
I suspect that people tend to go towards the middle of accepted behavior. If they feel secure in their feminist credentials, they are more free to act traditionally in their actual actions.
Lower class women have more trouble gaining their feminist credentials through employment, high pay, or participation in feminist organizations, so they gain them through divorce, partner count, etc.
I’m going to get downvoted to hell for this, but its been bouncing around my brain for a while.
Yeah, those rats are into the government. They get everything you can imagine…..and, then, it’s time to plant another kid. You see, a lower class male can’t compete. Simply can’t. Most of the young Black guys around here end up in the Texas Department of Correction. No real way to make any money without hustling drugs, mainly.
“The problem is that these new relationships may be no more stable than the old ones.”
“MAY BE”??? Seriously, you moronic wench… What man wants to take care of another’s bastard spawn? What man can help but wonder “Isn’t she going to ‘NEXT’ me too?”
This is kind of redundant when these women are committing birth-fraud by “lapsing’ on their birth control. I’m sure 90+% of these fathers thought exactly the same thing, but had no choice in the matter when they believed the woman was actually on birth control.
Another revelation should be that not nearly as many who think they are middle class actually are. The working class is the ignored in America; especially by those in it.
What I’ve seen is low level prostitution, basically. It’s tribal in nature, plain fact. They’ll carry on until they’re showing. It’s a truly violent culture. Anyways, this has to be the stupidest thing I’ve read k ately. And, really, the rat is looking to get pregnant, no matter what the guy is thinking. You see, he’s probably going to prison in a short while.
First the feminist bleats out truth, probably by total accident:
Pretty soon, the women are skipping doses of the pill or letting the patch or other forms of contraception lapse. Why? In these communities, motherhood often exerts a strong pull on young women’s hearts and minds and weakens their motivation to avoid pregnancy. Being a mom serves as the chief source of meaning and identity in neighborhoods where significant upward mobility is rare.
But she gathers half of her wits by the end of the article to blame men:
Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
First she noted that the reproductive choices are completely in the hands of women.
Then she demands, of course, that men be responsible for women’s choices, thus directly contradicting the previous position.
It’s not unusual for a feminist or other ideologue of the left to self-contradict. It’s a bit less common to do so in the same article. Of course, no one outside of the androsphere will even notice this. Certainly “pro-family” SoCons and Tradcons won’t.
Gents, there’s a whole lot of money being made on the backs of these little children. My ex would tell me a rat was deliberately making her kids sick, for the visiting nurses. Another scam run by Nigerians……who would kick back for the government money. The Queen bee will set all this up. Generally, they’re very intelligent. You see a lot, when you work around these folks.
I have thought about this a lot.. how there’s a vicious cycle here with low income single motherhood. They end up alone in large part because they have no relationship skills –> alone, their lives are difficult and unstable –> their daughters are raised to be tough and gritty to be able to face this hard world –> inevitably they too will push away their men and the cycle will go on and on.
In so many ways true Christian social justice in the inner city would be to teach and mentor women in the skill of being gentle and submissive to husbands or even just to honor and esteem masculinity. Generations of single motherhood have left such deep wounds on both inner city femininity and masculinity that it’s hard to imagine how restoration will even begin.
Male birth control is going to put a serious dent in this business model. A man that can get a single injection good for 10 YEARS of infertility is going to be dead silent on his fertility status amoung these women. And when they cant get pregnant by “forgetting” anymore, and they cant milk the government child support system anymore, well, there will be rioting in the ghetto….
wait….
It’s too late for the hood. Just ask Black social critic, Tommy Sotomayor. He repeatedly posts social warnings about single motherhood’s consequences in the black community.
If you have not read it, Edward Banfield’s The Moral Basis of a Backward Society is a must-read classic. It’s a case study of life in a backwards Southern Italian village.While intact families were norm (this was the 1950s), Banfield observes that their equivalent of the “man up” message – namely to behave like people in successful communities do – is impossible. Because his village was such a low trust society, to behave “properly” would immediately expose one to ruin. Doing the “right”, socially responsible things is only rational in a place where the norms support such an action. It’s similar with our society in that the incentive structures are so perverse, it’s very difficult to pursue the stable family approach if you are outside the UMC.
Goto Min: 4:55 btw, where Tommy sums up the difference in a Mom who has kids, but no money, vs a Father in the same situation. Tommy is a legit (secular) Fathers’ Rights warrior.
@John VI The male pill (or injection…) cannot get here soon enough.
Feminists will come up with some law, that White Knights will write in their own blood, that says something like, “whoever….shall…for the purpose of evading an accidentally pregnancy…have been found to have utilized any discrete form of sperm suppression…without giving written notice that he would not be available to hold hostage…”
Picture a Tradcon signing it (like a Santorum type), with Pelosi looking on approvingly in the background. Or, just picture a boot stamping on a human face…forever.
* “accidental pregnancy”
Sotomayor is the real deal. There’s no way they’ll ever get contraception in the hood….not going to happen.
Feminists will come up with some law, that White Knights will write in their own blood, that says something like, “whoever….shall…for the purpose of evading an accidentally pregnancy…have been found to have utilized any discrete form of sperm suppression…without giving written notice that he would not be available to hold hostage…”
What is more heartbreaking is that the typical western man will take it in the behind, and silently whine about it. This can only happen in the west by the way, because there is no other part of the planet where the men have completely given up their balls, and allowed their women to stomp on them.
Feminists are bullies, and as long as you don’t stand up to bullies, they will keep on bullying you. I hope that some time, in not too distant a future, the mass of western men will put a stop to the nonsense of feminism. The whole of the feminist movement is a giant sh!t test, which the western man has woefully failed at.
@Enrique
The Clayton County Commissioner of Health and Human Services has been tried for his crimes against welfare moms. He is scheduled to begin rehabilitation next Monday.
“Our elites have created a new family structure which is a disaster for all but the top quarter of the socioeconomic scale, but the UMC refuses to recognize the immense pain this selfish change is wreaking.”
I’m not exaggerating when I say they just don’t care, whether the current situation affects their own relatives or family friends – as long as they aren’t from the same social/economic class. The UMCs will make up excuses, such as claiming that there’s nothing wrong with the system and anyone harmed by it just didn’t do what they were supposed to (like they think did). Deep down, however, I believe they know that things are bad, but it’s not their problem. I believe another part of it might possibly be that they like the sense of superiority from the situation. They enjoy the fact that their lot in life is better than all but a select few in society. Wouldn’t want others to have the same and make them appear “common.”
It’s an epidemic elitist mentality; they got theirs, (because they’re so special, of course) and as long as they keep it they couldn’t care less about those who didn’t.
Neguy, sounds like one of Stephen Molyneaux’s recent youtube vids about the R-population strategy vs. K strategy. With the interesting exception of a conversation I had today, with an older white women (which contradicts what I’ve been observing), I CONTINUE to wonder how long it will take single white women, who are working 40-50 hours a week, to figure out THEY (are also) supporting the welfare state. It’s not some remote “other” any longer, it’s EVERYWHERE, particularly in the cities. They are literally funding all these other women to have children. Not to mention all the other entitlements: free lunch, apartment assistance, transportation…they literally have a type of welfare for just about everything.
Cane:
Look, “Somebody gotta pay for these kids ! “
If a man had all that going on why in the hell would he be screwing some ratchet bitch.
The mind-shattering arrogance of this broad is seismic.
“Here is my message to young disadvantaged men…”
Bwahahahahaha! This entitled white woman is going to give these Black men advice after having such a disconnected view of the situation until she deigned to speak to these men?!?!?! Should they be thankful she decided to spend some of her time even inquiring about their existence much less their experience? LOL!!! I imagine they all ran to the local library and packed into an internet cubical like sardines just to read what brilliant revelation she skillfully crafted just for them!!!! ROFLMAO!!!
I am in the UMC from a very poor background. We have a mobile society separated mostly by social capital as Novaseeker said, not by fundamental classes except for the very top upper classes. This author is simply describing the underclass attributes that perpetuate failure even in our mobile society. Many other modern nations do not pay for children out of wedlock. We are insane.
@greyghost & JaRG
It seems to me that the author recognizes that, but she’s caught in an ideological trap because she simply cannot call inner city women ratchet bitches, and she must never say that sometimes women behave badly on purpose.
And she doesn’t have the language to describe what “solid-footing with the mother” is because male-led marriage isn’t part of her Feminist world, either.
@ John VI:
Excellent point. I’m looking forward to this becoming a reality.
“We were all dead wrong—me, the country, and even Barack Obama.“
Hahahahahahaha! No! Say it ain’t so! “Even Barack Obama”? LOL! Not dear leader! He was wrong?! That’s not the Barack Obama I know. How dare you even say such a thing?! ROFLMAO!
Like most feminist writing, it’s a treasure trove of unintentional comedy.
@Kevin
This is much less true than it used to be. Even in the days when there was more social mobility, the signposts for MC and UMC were dramatically moved. Well-paid factory workers, IT staff, and low-level managers are considered MC now, and consider themselves to be such, but they’re not. Successful business owners, doctors, lawyers, accountants…those are the MC.
In fact we talk about an UMC only because we have lied and told WC people they are MC to make them feel better about…nothing, really; to give them an Oprah Moment of Empowerment. It’s exactly like how women’s dress sizes keep getting bigger in measurement but not number, and so they invent “smaller” dress sizes. In the future models will wear 000 dresses on the runway.
That said, I am surprised that despite being the Internet age and more countries less vulnerable to arm-twisting by America, why there is not an ‘underground railroad’ for to go to a country that will not extradite for CS, such as China or Indonesia.
Some men have escaped to those countries, but there are no websites or message boards about that. The US authorities may shut down such sites, but can’t shut all of them. Plus China and Indonesia gain from this influx of expertise who have a higher skill level than most locals..
@ enrique
“Neguy, sounds like one of Stephen Molyneaux’s recent youtube vids about the R-population strategy vs. K strategy.”
I was thinking the same thing. The r/K theory has holes in it because as humans we don’t always fit neatly into catergories however, it explains alot.
Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
This actually exposes this Medusa as the worst type of fraud…
She gives this advice ONLY because she sees that the pile of coal for the furnace is running out, and that she desperately wants the coal to be replenished (and yes, ‘coal’ is an intended pun).
She has zero problems with the laws on the books, and how they are enforced.
>>>Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
Is she serious? What does the father having financial ability have to do with the woman’s SOLE RIGHT TO HAVE OR NOT HAVE A CHILD. The man has no say in that decision and in most cases the woman offered free pussy and lied to him about being on birth control. She acknowledges that in the article and then tells young, virile males to be celibate good little Betas and go to work so they are ready when they hop of the CC.
The buck rats figured out the rat race a long time ago and I am seeing more and more every day they are right. Bitches aint nothing but tricks and ho’s and this ‘white man’s society’ aint worth a shit.
good find and an interesting read …my experiences working in some of the finer parts of town clash with some of her observations but no matter…it was still worthwhile
Pretty soon, the women are skipping doses of the pill or letting the patch or other forms of contraception lapse.
And then later…
If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond.
So what she’s basically saying is “Even if a young woman throws herself at you, wait until you’re in your late ’20s to have sex.
Houston, we have a problem.
I’m assuming most of the folks reading this are white. If not, my bad. Black men have a lot to deal with vis a vis Black women. Black women will fight you like a man. Seriously. If you’re a wimp, well, you’re gonna get beaten, or worse. When they get stupid, well, generally they’re severely beaten. Are you noticing a theme here? Black tribal behavior. Exactly where does white morality fit in there? My ex was a violent woman…..didn’t know that at first. That’s how she was raised. Her mother would act out, and her father would beat her down. How I got out of that was I asked her if I was going to be able to avoid shooting her repeatedly. And she was a churchy woman. I grew up rough, and always had something at hand.
This is a common problem. Men go to the joint over such violence. I never laid a hand on her, because I knew she wanted to fight. Violent foreplay. Anyways, I was able to get out of the marriage…..eventually. That’s why young black men beat those hoodrats….it’s foreplay.
Pingback: What about the fathers? | Reaction Times
This is much less true than it used to be. Even in the days when there was more social mobility, the signposts for MC and UMC were dramatically moved. Well-paid factory workers, IT staff, and low-level managers are considered MC now, and consider themselves to be such, but they’re not. Successful business owners, doctors, lawyers, accountants…those are the MC.
Cane —
This is very true in substance. The nomenclature has not caught up.
“Our elites have created a new family structure which is a disaster for all but the top quarter of the socioeconomic scale, but the UMC refuses to recognize the immense pain this selfish change is wreaking.”
If a net worth in the low 7 figures qualifies as UMC then I’m in and I too came up from very near the bottom. I can say for damn sure that this UMC brother feels “immense pain” every fiscal quarter when the accountant gives me the tax bill. I’m am absolutely nauseated by the parasitic behavior of not just the poor on public assistance but the parasites in washington. Yes I also am nauseated by the pain that the children suffer but besides throw money at the problem (which has made it worse) what else should we do? In biblical times the problem of slutty unwed women was solved by throwing heavy rocks. Many people are only looking to do what ever they can get away with, see the southern border. A boot on their necks is the only thing these people can understand, nothing else will stop them. They have minimal understanding and zero self discipline so until outside intervention forcibly stops them this will continue. Who knows, the tipping point may be just over the horizon.
Interesting article. I’m not sure the “Elites” have planned anything though, but they do sanction, if not enable the widespread destruction of the family. The real culprits have been five distinct social and medical revolutions which have unleashed the hypergamy inherent in every woman.
We’ve seen the Suffrage Movement give women the vote which allows women to vote for Socialist government policies thus reducing women’s risks of impoverishment(eg WIC and other welfare. The Penicillin Revolution reduced the risk of STD’s for women(and men as well). The Contraceptive Revolution(the Pill & Legalized babykilling) reduced the risk of unwanted pregnancy. The Sexual Revolution reduced the risk of women being socially shammed as a slut. The Divorce Revolution reduced the risk of unwanted husbands via No-Fault Divorce, Alimony, Default Custody, etc.
What we are witnessing in America & the West is feral hypergamy inherent in women who have chosen to destroy society and the family in their lust for power. In essence, a second self-induced expulsion from the great advances Western Civilization has made to create the modern world we live in. This is what Edin (& almost all women) can’t bring herself to admit, but at least she moves towards that direction somewhat. Any veneer of civilization has been ripped away from women by these revolutions with help from the Elites and we now see women behave as nothing less than barbarians. This is what one expects from the tribalistic, barbaric people’s of Africa. Now, women in the West act like barbarians. Unfortunately, women have forgotten that men can devolve into barbarians too. God have mercy upon us all if that happens.
Great post. I can’t remember where, but I’ve read other sociology work highlighting the role of motherhood status as a motivator for a great number of out-of-wedlock births in places with little economic mobility, and it seems plausible.
I have a sincere question I’ve been wondering about for a while – as a man, why not double down on birth control with coitus interruptus? I get that it’s not 100% effective as a sole means of birth control, but it’s just about as effective as condoms.
I think the men in question just go with the flow maybe because the pattern it’s so normalized?
Doublethink is an amazingly powerful thing. She admits that it’s the women who deliberately get pregnant by lying to the men, and then expel the men because the state is a better provider, yet she thinks men can remedy the situation by waiting a decade or two before becoming fathers? Amazing.
Pingback: The Daddy-go-round | Neoreactive
She might have just read the 1965 Moynihan report. We’ve known for 50 years that matriarchal families are deeply dysfunctional. Academia tried to explain away or transform Moynihan’s findings into something more respectable (e.g. “single parent families are perfectly adequate, so long as they have enough money”), but their narrative is collapsing now that the Moynihan thesis is playing out in white families. Even liberal-ish academics (see Isabel Sawhill, “Generation Unbound”) are starting to understand that family structure matters, and it is quite amusing to watch them try to fit this sqare peg into the round hole that is feminism.
This is straight up bullshit. These mothers are being taken care of by the state. The run through of various men is purely for gina tingle. Done in the same vain as the sex in the city role model for the UC sluts. In fact there is no “mothering” taking place at all. The dynamic that is going on in this class and culture will blow the minds of people here.
This is what it looks like in practice. Believe me this is every day normal.
May I mention one other undesirable effect of women throwing out their husband and replacing him with a different man; namely that there is no Incest Taboo for the new man in relation to the existing children. That being so, it is hardly surprising that – I don’t know the percentage – some of these men will start sleeping with their teenage step-daughters – that according to Judith Herman M.D.s book is the usual age this happens. I suspect that the rise in so-called Paedophilia (a lot of these females can hardly be meaningfully described as children) is related to men marrying women who have children by another man, for I cannot think how – outside of teaching – any man could gain intimate access to young people. Although few, perhaps, consciously set out to marry a single mother for that purpose, the risk is such – and the risk of accusation likewise – that men should be mightily discouraged – and doubtless for other reasons too – from even considering a woman with children as a viable sexual/romantic.
Opus
What happens is half bothers and sisters meet as strangers and become boyfriend and girl friends. I personally right before my eyes have seen that couple. They where together for a few months and he took her to meet his father well it was also her father. This is more common than one would think in the hood. Tommy Sotomayor has a video from I believe Memphis on the subject. No link (too much of that kind of reality will trash out Dalrock’s blog)
Hence the joke, “More confusing than Father’s Day in Harlem.”
Easttexasfatboy: I hear ya. Dalrock is kind enough to let me post: I’m a (White) Hispanic non-Christian (Sufi path: Islam Lite). My experience has been the “White” middle class experience, although I speak Spanish and move within both cultures…but living here in the same area as NovaSeeker for 20 years, I’ve seen everything you are talking about, and believe me, white and black men that work together where white and black women are present typically have more in common than people would think, re: CS, Hypergamy, etc.
If I was building a personalMBA reading list for Red Pill, Dalrock, Rollo (RationalMale), Tommy Sotomayor and the articles on ReturnofKings would be required reading (the latter comments section bringing in men of all races around the world). Tommy (legend!) for example, is saying stuff that white men experience too, particularly in the area of child support. White men have a stereotypical burden of performance that the Court knows, which keeps such men teetering on the brink of financial collapse and suicide. Family Court of COURSE runs through black and latinos, in other ways…but let me tell you, having had 15 years experience with it–they absolutely LICK THEIR CHOPS when they see an upper middle class white guy with some cash–they’re like termites going through your finances to eat every last cent.
These white women see the CS system for blacks as the people living in the steerage compartment…they know they are there, but their main focus is keeping White Men fully cucked and knighted to keep the cash flowing.
Btw, Everything else Tommy says is true too, re: your post.
greyghost: No, they want BOTH to pay for them…the state as the foundation and a “new man” to provide the financial tingles on the sides (“I really like that purse Jamal!”): Tommy’s already covered it:
Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
And here is the great impossibility. It is women who are encouraged to jump into the workforce, taking up jobs that could potentially provide the income a man would need. And all the while women lust after men to make them mothers, adding mommy status to their career status.
But hey, men are the ones failing here.
@Cane
Your definition of MC is maybe too narrow but they are all imprecise. The data continues to suggest we are a highly mobile society. Doctors and lawyers have always been middle class, and factory workers would be low middle class. All the same group. Factory workers are still middle class there are just fewer of them. When I worked in MI the factory workers made more working at 18 than I made until I completed 10+ years of school. Tradesman are still middle class. They can easily make the median income in America. An IT worker owns a house and a car. They go on vacations and own boats. Materially they are wealthier than the UMC of just 1-2 generations prior. An IT worker probably makes 40-120K which is a middle class income. The UMC lives are the same but with just more but its not dramatically different like between low classes and upper classes. But these definitions are imprecise so it may not be worth the point. I made below the median income throughout my life until I started my career – in grad school I got paid $15K and with my wife working a little bit we had a house (in a horrible neighborhood) and cars and life was pretty decent.
Part of the effort to define the MC up into the UC or UMC is trying to make the LMC and LC feel better about taxing them – basic class warfare. The number of UMC working professionals far outnumbers the UC so politicians want to tax them at higher rates. But if you tell people lets tax at 50% an IT manager and his wife who is a nurse people think that sounds crazy. But by defining the MC up and talking about people who make 250K people feel better about taxing them as if they were “rich” even though most people in that group live paycheck to paycheck and have no savings.
Really it is the attributes that matter as Murray wrote about. The UMC espouses traits for the LC and LMC that they themselves abhor. They preach lots of sexual exploration and go girl single moms but the rate of out of wedlock birth and divorce in the UMC is very low.
Feminism is about optimizing women’s sexual and reproductive expression while strictly controlling men’s. In this light, the authors ‘sage’ advice to men should hardly be surprising.
Women won’t be controlled. Period. The legal/social system has been constructed to support and encourage this feral behavior. In order to be truly free, women NEED to be able to: have sex with whoever whenever they want; use birth control or not; kill their unborn babies with impunity; abandon their children with impunity; get married or not while having the father forced to support children he may or may not get to see; trade up whenever possible; divorce while having her ex forced to continue to support her single life; etc etc; have men who may object to their behavior grown out if their houses or arrested for “abuse” which includes controlling finances and calling her mean names ….
Further, many women will not control themselves.
You don’t have to be smart to know that this feminist created world is unsustainable. Other people’s money is finite. It will end. We just don’t know how or when. I suspect it won’t be pretty when it comes. Still…
Dear Father, if it be your will, let the end come quickly.
@Katharine_Di_Cerbo
It is a fair question. Edin describes the pattern of men being totally oblivious to the desires of young women to become mothers, but surely there has to be some cultural knowledge here. Either way, this might be true for the first out of wedlock child, but Edin describes the men as wanting to be fathers and repeating the process with other women. One factor is the nature of the birth control choices available to men vs women. But I think it is clear any way you look at it that these men aren’t doing it right. They are after all having sex (and children) out of wedlock. The real problem is that we have done so much to destroy or block the path of doing it right, and then are baffled as to why broken homes are rampant.
– trigger for clinical language –
Have to chime in: coitus interruptus is more like 100% INEFFECTIVE. Pre-ejaculation there is a drop or two of seminal fluid that discharges and is loaded with sperm, more than enough to do the job. This is in the standard medical literature.
Condoms do work, and do help prevent STD’s, IF used as prescribed, just as birth control works, IF used as prescribed. Anyone saying “the birth control failed” means they stopped using it properly or couldn’t be bothered to keep up the regimen. Despite what should be common knowledge, the coitus interruptus myth persists, and it’s as much men’s fault as anyone’s. Too many PUA sites tout that going “bareback” feels best. Maybe it does, but that’s why it’s risky: it’s intended to synthesize sproglets. Ask the PUA’s paying child support (there are several). They, literally, asked for it.
I understand totally that parents, for moral reasons, preach abstinence and decry birth control and/or condoms. I do not criticize or speak to that parental right. But I do have a problem with circulating known bad information, like “vaccines cause autism” as some lefties do. Sorry, I am not down with “lying for Jesus,” just as I am not down with any false PUA/MRA meme that only bareback sex is proper “manly” sex.
@ Dalrock
No honest discussion will be allowed as to how to reverse divorce trends nor broken homes.
If anything, I expect the few marriages that do take place going forward to have an even HIGHER failure rate. I.E. 60% or higher.
My son is a junior in high school in an UMC community. Too few people (for feminists) are attending women’s studies courses in post-secondary……….so they have brought that claptrap into his school.
It does not help that the administration has turned over to entirely female in the office. Not ONE guy on carpet in the office. Principal, Vice Principal, all support staff……….women only.
Every class is a gender studies class. History, English, Gym, and even Math classes have all taken the opportunity to point out the grave injustices done to women by men over the past millennia.
They brought some abuse awareness team from the local WS department of the local university to corral the entire school into being shown (made aware) of the different types of abuse (including the most fluff type offences such as texting too often, etc.)
What was plain to see was the agenda; as all examples painted the men in these hypotheticals as the transgressor. Even in the fluff examples where women are usually the transgressor.
Once the types of abuses were laid out, the boys were dismissed and the rest of the presentation was for the girls only.
I’d bet my bottom dollar that the rest of the presentation was about how to REPORT abuse. Of course, that’s just for the ladies.
My point being that these impressionable young girls who have not even reached 17 years of age are being poisoned in their view of boys/men.
That will reap a whirlwind in the future marriage/divorce statistics.
Fewer marriages, higher divorce percentages of the few that do take place.
As I argued in this link, we need to end the child support regime along with welfare. Make the only way a woman can reliably receive financial support from a man to be marrying him, otherwise, it’s all dependent on his whim and her ability to persuade him to help. Furthermore, end no fault divorce, alimony, and female-initiated divorce (other than in incredibly rare and extreme cases) not come with a concomitant duty of child support, nor a presumption of female custoidal householdship. The incentives are the problem, and the incentives coupled with immaturity/hypergamy have led to this disaster.
https://mansizedtarget.wordpress.com/2014/07/12/why-the-left-is-obsessed-with-contraception/
An excerpt: If not lifelong marriage, at least let’s restore a system that does not punish men who most reward society. And that means doing something that would be unpleasant and arguably unfair. In short, we should eliminate the entire apparatus that fosters the bad choices that lead to legions of single moms, fatherless children, and what used to be called more accurately “broken homes.” We should get rid of child support for female-initiated “no fault” divorces, we should get rid of all child support for out-of-wedlock births, we should eliminate food stamps and Section 8 and family leave and all the other things by which single moms and their choices are encouraged. We should ban abortion and eliminate birth control for the unmarried, not merely because it is wrong in the eyes of Catholics and others, but because it is anti-civilization and anti-family.
Conservatives love to point out that illegitimacy is bad for society, producing crime and disorder and economic impacts on the entire society. But the single moms and the choices they make and the incentives they face are largely absent from this account. The focus is all on the bad, irresponsible father, as if women have no moral agency and are immune to shaming. In fact, as evidenced by the anti-slut-shaming hysteria, women respond to little else. Ancient societies knew that ostracizing “bastards” and their mothers was not entirely fair, of course, but they also knew that some women may not do something in their own interest, particularly when caught up in romantic and hormonal hysteria, but that these same woman often would do such a thing for the benefit of their offspring. Indeed, they knew that shaming these women and their children was the best and most surefire way to keep a lid on things, even though, as with every form of social pressure and ostracism, it may not be entirely fair in a cosmic sense. As Edmund Burke observed of the once stern English race, “We know that we have made no discoveries, and we think that no discoveries are to be made, in morality.”
So long as women have few financial incentives to favor men who are pro-social, pro-commitment, and able to be a provider to any children they may have, the proliferation of behaviors that reduce marriage to a province only of the upper class will continue. This trend will, if unarrested, quite simply destroy civilization. And the tripartite feminist achievements of birth control (of which abortion is just a subpart), dragooning men to finance this operation in the family law courts, and disproportionately taxing the higher earning of two parents families to finance the welfare state are the chief culprits behind this state of affairs.
In short, to restore the family, conservatives must declare war against all of these arrangements and incentives that are, in practice, anti-family and anti-civilization.
Shorter Kate: “Attention, Useless Eaters! Do not breed! Or Else!!! (I will have to pay more tax
:^[ )”
Oh, all these poor, they spoil it for the rich.
ETFB is uncannily accurate in describing the modus of the (outrageously pasty-white) underclass in the UK, BTW. It all started with the prioritizing of unwed mothers (and mothers-to-be over the age of consent) in the sclerotic and corrupt Council Housing lists, following the nationwide shitstorm detonated by the agitprop TV play “Cathy Come Home”. A portal to a lifetime of Free Stuff, No Questions Asked, and sackloads more than they could have ever attained by their own efforts. Very much not what its devisers had intended, but that kind of paint could never be unmixed, short of Soviet invasion or something.
Before that, I would see headlines in the local paper at the station, when returning for Christmas etc., like “Girl, 14, Gives Birth in Hedge”. Which is some going, given that my country basically resembles the less attractive parts of British Columbia, but stormier.
The general idea was that these foundlings would be absorbed in some way by the maternal parents, or in many cases donated to the local Cyril Smith Childrens’ Home (patron: St James de Saville).
It’s hard to find an actual solution for this when any kind of reform on the political spectrum is responded to with accusations of racism. I can’t foresee this improving any time soon.
But she just said: the decision is being made by the mothers, not the fathers.
Why does a particular type of woman seem to become this “single mother” stereotype? And then why do beta bucks men pick them up, and marrying them without wondering or questioning how she treated the child’s father????
And then the man actually expects her to treat him better than she treated her own offspring’s father? It’s psycho behavior from the beta men who marry these single moms and expect to make them into better women, and then complain that their wife treats them horribly and makes the household miserable.
Cathy come home, Up the Junction. Free council house with every satellite dish.
I understand Tam the Bam. I know what he is talking about. It was and perhaps still is a terrible thing: As soon as a girl gets pregnant she is gifted a house, usually she has a husband but he is quickly disposed of. Shortly thereafter she takes advantage of the government’s free handout (in addition to the income – named support – she already has) and at a knockdown price buys the house with the aid of a mortgage provided by the government. A few years later she sells the house at its true market value and at a massive profit. The prizes are even bigger if she is an immigrant for they already have a large number of children and thus need a larger and thus more expensive house to begin with, which a few years down the line can (I’ve seen it) net the indigent mother over £1,000,000.
Males, of course, are excluded like a black person on a bus in 1955 Alabama from such largesse.
Gents, ya’ll are acting like the young Black men are going to hang around. Well, what happens after they put a child on a rat? She doesn’t care……he’s going to the joint, generally. Most of the Black guys I work around are older, and they tell about what happens. The rat has to have the kid for the welfare. She can turn some tricks to get some other things. Her life , generally, is better with a Queen Bee.
Some have said that Black culture is the Canary in the mine. What I’ve seen is that men don’t have a lot of say in a Matriarchal society. Fact is, I wouldn’t be surprised if a Queen Bee didn’t use the Police to get rid of a dumb old boy that falls in love. Some of those hoodrats are extremely pretty. Plain fact…..but they’re feral. Kinda surprising, I’m talking to a Bee about fixing something in her house, and I hear and see quite a bit. Most folks know who I am. Thing is, white folks wouldn’t believe it, anyways.
The only True Black men I know are some flavor of Missionary Baptist. But,there aren’t that many of them. When they’re gone, well, it’s sad. You see, rampant Hypergamy is different between the races. Black women, by and large, require violent foreplay. We would call it thuggish behavior, but that’s the way it is. Tommy Sotomayor has a huge number of videos about all of this. He points out daily examples of violent Black females who are feral. Folks, white culture is sure to follow in the same footsteps.
I think women, generally, exercise their hypergamous interests within the framework, culture and race they are in, naturally. So these young special snowflakes at Yale and other places, are basically paralleling (or will later in their lives) the same processes black women in the hood are. The model is just slightly different. For MC and UMC, it involves (sometimes), marriage, abuse allegations, divorce rape, post divorce “strong independent woman” status (collecting CS, alimony in some cases, and other benefits such as the sale of the home, pensions, etc).
For the snowflakes that can’t wait that long, it involves “trigger warnings” “microaggressions”, and dubious if not completely false date rape allegations. It may or may not come with a mattress burden, a Rolling Stone article or Gloria Allred at your side at a press conference. ALL OF THIS, from “Queen Mother Nubia” to “Special Snowflake Justice Warrior” is based upon solipsism and narcissism to the highest degree–it is essentially a never ending “selfie”.
One way to help with many of our issues is to build strong family connections. I am a traditional Christian man with a daughter graduating high school this year. We are looking for a white, Christian, traditional man for a husband, preferably in his early to mid twenties. I am dead serious, our society is in disarray and we must begin building traditional large families again. E-mail me at robert_engr@yahoo.com.
@Novaseeker:
“This is much less true than it used to be. Even in the days when there was more social mobility, the signposts for MC and UMC were dramatically moved. Well-paid factory workers, IT staff, and low-level managers are considered MC now, and consider themselves to be such, but they’re not. Successful business owners, doctors, lawyers, accountants…those are the MC.”
Cane —
This is very true in substance. The nomenclature has not caught up.
How are the two of you defining MC/UMC/UC?
It always seemed to me to be some weird mix of income, wealth, and sensibilities.
So, a powerball winner from the trailer park hasn’t suddenly become a true member of the UMC/UC just with the gaining of money. Are the Clintons members of the UC, or are they still despite political success and wealth gained still MC?
I spent time as a kids living in a 14’x70′ single-wide trailer. Now, I made an income in the top 5%, but divorce has consumed most of it. Am I MC/WC/UMC? It depends.
I noticed recently when I had some people doing construction work on my house, I can easily drop into the patois of the LC/WC and blend in somewhat, or I can put on a suit and discuss politics and art with old money. I’d guess that I blend in less well there because I don’t care about the same things they care about.
Only one solution – Coitus interruptus
@Fred Flange –
Sperm in pre-ejaculate fluid may be a myth. Some studies that claim they found it was from the subject’s prior ejaculation.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12762415?dopt=Abstract
@Damn Crackers: Thanks for that info. Your citation is correct but there is also this from 2011 also on the NIH website:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21155689
where motile sperm were found. The more recent studies found there should be no sperm in the pre-ejaculate, which is intended to de-acidify and lubricate so the sperm pass more readily with a higher chance of success. So I guess discretion being the better part of male valor etc. I would not counsel coitus interruptus as a policy, if you want to call it that.
@Dragonfly,
Men want to have an intimate relationship with a woman. Women refuse to allow this unless we are the very very top men. Single mothers are damaged and they know it so they actually lower their standards to a slightly more reasonable level.
And a lot of men are desperate pussy beggars that have every woman up high on a pedestal.
So maybe ask how are boys being trained to pedestalize even these extremely immoral women?
And do you really think that these men even think about how the woman treated her ex? They are blinded by the pussy and, frankly, men do not give the slightest shit about how other men are treated. Men are out for themselves and are actually quite happy to see the child abusing single mother treat the children’s father like shit. It makes these men feel like they’ve won.
Really I think the only solution is war. Hopefully a lot of Muslims invade and destroy this wicked and worthless society, where even our church’s have abandoned God.
I can’t wait.
@snowdensjacket
Be careful of what you wish for……….a muslim force isn’t going to make a distinction between the readers on this blog and the white knights that are causing our problems.
mpwellen,
Some valid points in your reply, but it is not just esoteric thoughts. Many people, male and female, have very short time preferences and don’t consider the long term. That has nothing to do with feeling solid in anything. It is allowing oneself to be driven by feelings.
Casey,
Why is your son in that school? Homeschool or die is a very accurate saying.
Easttexasfatboy,
You need to write a book. Or at least a blog.
@ASDGamer: Father’s Day in Harlem.
The greater travesty is Mother’s Day where the fathers appear demanding a portion of the child’s welfare check cuz dat be ma baby too byatch. It is said that nice cars line the streets of the projects on the day the welfare checks come- aka “Mother’s Day” when the “Alpha” drug dealers line up to collect their cut from the baby mommas.
Easttexasfatboy is on the money here. I’ve seen the same thing in California: children are bred specifically as a means to bigger welfare checks. It’s an abomination.
Although here at least, too many of those baby daddies are thugbait for me to feel sympathy. Maybe they’re the only men still willing to risk humping a California Girl.
…
Dragonfly @ 10:29 am:
“Why does a particular type of woman seem to become this “single mother” stereotype?”
I’ll guess that women who hate or aren’t comfortable around men really like the idea of marrying Uncle Sam.
“And then why do beta bucks men pick them up, and marrying them without wondering or questioning how she treated the child’s father?”
Men want respect. Logically, a faithful mother who was cruelly abandoned by a heartless scumbag will have a lot of respect for the man who sacrificially uplifts her from the gutter. What the white knight doesn’t realize is all the assumptions that sentence contains. Assume she’s completely innocent. Assume his picking such a woman is not interpreted as “I’m a loser who cannot do better than this”. Assume she will love him first before her kids. And so on.
Throw in some ignorance about hypergamy, sexual bonding and the realities of stepfatherhood, not to mention a few pep talks from Pastor Churchian, and it’s a disturbingly easy sell. Men are the romantic sex.
…
@Roger,
Good to see you working the problem we all face! I’m not in the market but you might mention which state/region you live in.
“Men want respect. ”
Right… until they find out they’ve become less than respectful to the woman who takes advantage of them. Doesn’t the manosphere call men who marry single moms, and raise children who aren’t their own a Beta Cuckold?
@Snowden’s
“Men are out for themselves and are actually quite happy to see the child abusing single mother treat the children’s father like shit. It makes these men feel like they’ve won.”
As bad as that sounds, it does seem like it’s a pride thing, White knights feel that false pride in being the Beta Cuckold.
Completely off topic, but here’s the perfect slogan for an MGTOW T-Shirt:
[suitable cartoon art]
Gentlemen, I now declare this idea to be fully in the public domain. Run with it.
Pax Christi Vobiscum. (ツ)
@Roman Dmowski
Excellent summary of the enabling problems. I would add tax-payer funded schools or daycares. These should be the responsibility of the fathers. No father? Then you will have a tough life.
Compensate as needed by making one spouses’ income tax-free.
Every subsidy that helps a woman to raise a child without the father will encourage women to do exactly that.
@Robert
Good luck. Getting her married young will help start the correct path.
I would encourage you to allow up to 30 however. I think guys should marry younger; I myself wanted to marry at 21 or so.
But since so many marriage-level guys are around, you could choose a guy who already has his career going. This might help her to have respect for him.
@yac-yac
>Bad Fish!! No Bicycle!!
Hah! I see it with a couple frames from the chef in The Little Mermaid, who is slapping the fish and chopping off its head.
Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.
And here is my response: why should I work hard, study, save, and make myself a success just to have it all taken away by a woman who will use me to get a child then take him or her from me while making me a slave for the next 21 years? I should work hard for this?!?
Well, it aunt going to last. I’ll paraphrase a certain smart black Chick who has left the USA to annoy Hollenhund: if you have a husband you still have the state as backup but… the husband cares and the state does not.
So this is what;s going to happen. Because where I live, it has.
If you get child welfare, when the second kid turns three, you lose your benefit. You have to be in education (different funding) or looking for work. If you have more kids, you don’t get back on the benefit.
No, I am not joking. The last minister of social welfare was a solo mother, minority, made her way out of it, and has made it her mission to break the entitlement culture. Our unemployment rate is aroudn 7% (structural unemployment is aroudn 5% here) and the domestic purposes beenfit is closing down. The recidivist families have dedicated teams assigned to them. There is a bill of rights but parliament can and does trump it.
No, I don’t live in the USA. I live somewhere poorer. But we will continue to have a social welfare safety net. I would not bet on one being in the USA at the end of this decade.
And at that point the prophet will be correct: women will beg to men to marry them. promising to support themselves, so that the shame is taken from their name and their children.
@Casey,
I know exactly what I’m wishing for. Muslim hordes to bring God’s justice to the wicked that surround me. You really think it bothers me that they’ll attack me as well? Hell Sharia law sounds a million times better than what we have now.
What do we have now?
Let’s see the society around me protected another man, you all protected him, an adulterer, from me. You protected an adulterous home wrecking man and society instead punished me. You took away my ability to own any weapons, in the short term, removed me from my house, my wife, my child, and all my belongings to protect this other man so he could better fuck my wife.
You all then turned me into a slave to support this woman and another man, not her husband, not the father of her child, but you didn’t want my wife to experience any discomfort as she went through a parade of men and mentally and emotionally fucked up my child. My child that all of you refuse to allow me to protect.
I live under constant threat from a worthless pathetic degenerate society of pussy worshippers. If I try to even consider protecting and fathering my own son I quickly realize how I’m surrounded by evil men and evil women who protect adulterers, who protect all that is evil, and who will use violence against me if I do anything, anything at all, to be a father to my own son.
So yeah Muslims please invade. Please destroy the people around me. Perhaps one day the men who will inherit this country will not enslave husbands and fathers so that adulterous women can get fucked by men that aren’t their husbands.
Give me Sharia law. Give me chaos and death. I’ll help you burn it all down.
More refugees!
Really what would I prefer?
A society that stones adulterers to death in the streets or one that rewards adulterers with cash and prizes, offers them police protection, and provides them with a slave who must produce resources for them?
Hmm…?
What about a society that hangs gay degenerates or one that puts them info positions of leadership over ten year old boys and places them in a tent with those boys, at night, alone?
Hmm…?
A society that supports marriage and having children or one that attacks marriage endlessly, even at my church, that spits on husbands and fathers, and doesn’t even have kids?
Hmm…?
A society that has no God, that worships the vagina and consumerism, or one that worships Allah? Cause there sure as shit aren’t any actual Christians left. Only weak men who worship the vagina and have twisted and corrupted a once proud religion.
Yes I pray at night for more refugees and I pray that they will violently attack the system around me. I will go pray for this again right now.
I used to just pray for God to send a plague. Now I see, God is answering my prayers 🙂 🙂
A society that has murdered fifty million of God’s children or one that will take steps to prevent feral girls from fucking the hawt guy who isn’t a husband and won’t be a father? By not allowing women to go out without a male relative?
Hmm yeah so which one of you is going with the fifty million murdered babies society? Really how can any of you be against our Islamic invaders? They are trying to do God’s work. Work you all have abandoned.
How old are you Snowden? Your blog looks like you’re in middle or high school.
Snowden: Try praying for grace and forgiveness rather than vengeance which is for the Lord, not us. The anger will destroy you and eat you up from the inside. However, that is a Hell of a righteous rant. Men will see this and I think some will understand better.
Snowden has a point, sort of. Your goals are not different from those of ISIS. You are just too squeamish to do what you constantly advocate here and elsewhere.
Making my way through Submission, by Michel Houellebecq, in all it’s Red Pill glory, including precise insertions within the text about why Islam (Patriarchy) works, as far as the family. The author, I assume historically left-leaning, has enough remnants of the original Bohemians that he respects healthy patriarchy (and sexism), including that women should not work, but instead be at home. I’m not sure if objections to this novel are more due to the perceived ‘Islamophobia’ (although the opposite is implied in the text it appears), or the drops of Red Pill Wisdom, including this (Fair Use) gem:
In speaking of a Post-Wall, bitter woman named Aurelie, a past flame he happens to share drinks with and accept her last moment to go to her flat for a nightcap:
“I didn’t even want to see her naked, I’d rather have avoided it, and yet it came to pass, and only confirmed what I’d already imagined. Her emotions may have been through the wringer, but her body had been damaged beyond repair. Her buttocks and breasts were no more than sacks of emaciated flesh, shrunken, flabby and pendulous. She could no longer—she could never again—be considered an object of desire.”
Wow. And people get upset when I talk about polygyny as a solution.
So… Given that there ARE NO POLITICAL SOLUTIONS, does anyone have suggestions for individual solutions?
Dragonfly I don’t have a blog. Is insults the best you can offer? Typical woman. Yes please insult me some more! That’s going to fix everything! Cause oIIjust haven’t been insulted enough. Clearly.
Artisanal Toad: Individual solutions include Baptism in the name of the Trinity, taking the Shahada, studying the Torah and preparing for conversion, or any variety of spiritual paths (including Wicca, etc).
Each individual, regardless, are responsible for their own actions on the day of Judgment. Period. So choose wisely, love all whom you can, give to charity, do good works, have faith in our Creator, forgive and routinely pray and periodically fast. From Eastern Orthodoxy, to Sufism to Spiritualists, this seems to be the anecdote to a world gone mad around you.
Bad Fish!! No Bicycle!!
yac-yac wins teh Internetz in this thread. That’s like something on Spearhead a few years back.
Dear readers…..those what are students of the Bible know what’s coming. One of the reasons there’s so much societal disfunction is the abundance of food. Remember Jesus said something about that, in the last days.
Here’s my point…….cold blooded as it may be. The first thing to go offline in civil insurrection is food distribution. Think of all the folks on welfare, not just the Blacks. How many of them can produce their own food? What happens if the farmers can’t get diesel, or if they won’t be paid for their crops? It would take a while to sort it out, wouldn’t it? Honestly, when I watch those Black students protesting at the University of Missouri, I know that their long term prospects are very bleak. You see, no one will feed them, and the ones who try to steal food will get shot. This is a common thread in human history.
The Bible describes food being used as a weapon, along with drought. Farmers in this country have really worked a miracle. And, yes, the giant corporations certainly feed the world. Stable food production requires a stable society. Civil insurrection or worse is headed this way, and most older folks know it. Everyone should read Jeremiah and Lamentations. It’s very instructive. But few will…..and then they don’t understand why all this calamity has come to visit.
The subject of this thread is LC males and what’s happening to them. I made some comments about what I’ve seen. I know most of the kids I’m acquainted with will perish if things go to heck. There’s nothing I can do about it.
This society is feminised and perverted. That’s just the way it is. What do historically illiterate people know about famine and starvation? Soldiers always get fed, women and children always starve.
Snowden, it’s not an insult, I was actually wondering your age since your blog talks about being in middle or high school, shows pictures of your friends in school uniforms, analyzes your emotions, etc. I don’t think you quite understand how evil ISIS is, and how much a righteous, godly person would NOT wish that on society. I don’t think (right now) you’re capable of understanding that from a Singapore teens’ point of view.
Dragonfly…..Masculinity will have its revenge. Do you believe feminists can spout such hatred without consequences? ISIS is very attractive to many young men. They promise revenge. They promise the chance to humiliate and kill the feminists who hate and drug them. I’m a 59 year old man who is a student of history. Feminism can’t suppress testosterone. As for violent Barbarians who behead men, women and children…….Effeminate perversions draw them out. The USA still has a warrior class, but it’s being destroyed as we speak.
Feminists have been killed out before in different cultures. Are you a student of the Bible? Think of what happened to the daughters of Jerusalem. During the siege, they had to choose between the slow death of starvation and pestilence……or going out to meet the maltreating sword. Do you understand viscerally what that means? There are many examples in history, if you wish to learn. However, a woman trying to talk a young man out of revenge in this misandric world is misguided, to say the least.
Sharia is very attractive. It basically means a huge societal reset. Abortion has filled our hands with blood. I cannot help but long for a day of stable families again.
EastTexasfatboy, I do get it… I’ve seen that kind of unproductive anger in my own brother. He didn’t get better until learning he had more control over his life than he realized before. That kind of wishing harm on people you don’t know, wishing brutality and claiming you will greatly enjoy the suffering, hurts and slowly kills you, and makes you no better morally than the women having those abortions. Even God says in the Bible that He doesn’t enjoy dealing out His wrath on people.
Satan enjoys it though, every bit of it.
Yo, ETFB
You’re wrong. It is very rare that a student of the Bible actually cops a clue and figures out what the Bible says. There’s an entire church industry out there to keep people from even reading their Bible, much less understanding what it says. When they do read and *study* the Bible, all the churchians gather together and start throwing rocks.
God is a God of righteousness. Period. By definition, that means He’s a God of justice. Churchians are all “my brother Jesus” and don’t want to deal with the real world. Justice is a hard millstone that grinds very fine. It may take time, but sooner or later justice happens. I’ve seen it.
I’ve never been in a firefight that lasted more than 15 minutes but I’ve got buddies that have been in the kill-zone for hours, praying for somebody to come over the hill with more ammo. It would be stupid of me to assume that based on my experience, firefights start fast, you burn through 10-12 mags and all of a sudden, it’s over. Biblical justice takes you down, beats you up and keeps you there for a long time.
Dragonfly @ November 13, 2015 at 8:26 pm:
“Men want respect.
Right… until they find out they’ve become less than respectful to the woman who takes advantage of them.”
And then it’s too late. He’s signed the marriage license, he’s the official daddy and he is probably unwilling to duck his responsibilities by taking prison vacations. Perhaps he continues in ignorance, trying to prove himself worthy of respect to a woman who has already decided he isn’t, or perhaps he realizes what a deep hole he’s fallen in to and gets slammed by threatpoints.
Hello, MRA movement.
…
Artisanal Toad @ 9:53 am:
“So… Given that there ARE NO POLITICAL SOLUTIONS, does anyone have suggestions for individual solutions?”
Enrique has the gist of it. Stop worrying about foreign tyrants in faraway places and look to your own neighborhood. Keep Frame.
Ultimately, this entire reality will be destroyed. All the nations, all the histories, all the land, sea and sky. Only humans are immortal. If you improve the life of one immortal soul you know, you’ve done as much for Christ as a king with all his armies could. It isn’t as sexy as being the next Charlemagne but that’s only the human perspective.
God is allowing the tyrants, jihadists, feminists and banksters their day… but their day is a mortal one. Everything they ever achieve will burn. They have already failed. Meanwhile, our suffering unites us eternally with Christ who also suffered at the hands of hopelessly corrupt tyrants and their Morlock mobs.
You guys have a really rosy view of Islam, which isn’t really justified. It’s a lot like how people on this board view Mormonism.
Jews and Protestants were the first to be pozzed in the USA. Those religions (excluding some very tiny outliers that keep to old traditions) are toast. Catholics and Orthodox and Mormons and Muslims are in the middle of being pozzed now.
Talk to any red pill Muslim bro, or simply visit your local Islamic center, and get the idea. You’ll find that women will be wearing hijab while showing tons of cleavage, and you’ll see the preacher standing up talking about the responsibilities and duties of the Muslim man, while telling Muslim women about their privileges and entitlements. Muslim girls (even the daughters of immigrants) can be found heading up feminist societies on university campuses, and talking about how they “don’t need no man”.
Yes, these people still have functional families, but that’s largely inertia, and they’re being worked on, same as you guys were 30 years ago. The rot has already set in, and there’s no escape. If it helps you to convert to Islam, then I have no problem with it, but you’d better be ready to fight your enemies, because they’re coming for you, regardless of what you call yourself.
Boxer
@AT: “does anyone have suggestions for individual solutions?”
Red Pill/Marriage Strike/Asian Brides are individual solutions. However at the societal level, the empowerment of women in marriage at the expense of men is not going to change without war and dictatorship. Traditional marriage will not be restored in this democracy.
Check…Mate.
Doesn’t mean you can’t have a grand time individually during the decline and fall of the Pax Americana.
@Dragonfly,
I’m going to repeat this. I don’t have a blog. I have no idea what blog you are looking at but I do not have one. I’m thirty-five. I do not have any blog. I have no idea what you are talking about.
Also you think I care about how evil Isis is? Lol! Look around you. Look at the evil everywhere around you. I’m drowning in evil right now. I can not escape the evil I was born in to and I see no one who actually gives a damn. Not my (old) church, who told me I was “secretly abusive” and was “in denial” of my abuse. Why? Why would they say such lies to my face? Because they have to excuse any female behavior.
What are they going to do? Acknowledge the truth? Acknowledge my suffering at the hands of the evil people I’m surrounded by? You think the people at church give the slightest fuck about the truth?
How is that going to get more women in church? Lol.
Bring on the plague. Bring on anything, anything that might change how things are now. I don’t care. You think somehow I’m going to care? About the worthless white filth I’m surrounded by? You think I give the slightest fuck about the evil people I’m surrounded by?
More “refugees” please.
Let’s get some Sharia law up in here. Maybe under Sharia law the worthless “men” that surround me won’t fight me to stop me from protecting my own son. My own mentally and emotionally scarred son.
Is Isis threatening me with violence to stop me from protecting my family? Did Isis turn me into a slave to pay so my wife can fuck other men in comfort? Did Isis steal my house, ALL of my stuff, reduce me to homelessness while my wife fucked her boss in our bed while my son suffered in his room? And then make me pay for it.
What options do you think I have? Really?
Her married boss at that.
Yeah Isis sure is evil aren’t they? Lol.
When I mention a societal reset….well, I’m speaking from a historic perspective. Massacres are generally involved, and the survivors decide to act differently. Abortion is such a fundamental evil that God will not ignore. Yes, most will regard this as religious ranting, but history says differently. Essentially, there’s nothing that can be done with this perverted culture. Open infanticide is actually the death knell. Feminist screeching is meaningless. Those whom God will destroy…..well…..the Bible points out that He frustrates their counsel…..meaning that they’ll believe any sort of idiocy will work. That’s what is happening now. Do you really believe that God will not call to account the massive blood guilt?
So, the stage is being set, and a true descent into madness is upon us. Islam may very well be a scourge sent from God, as some have mentioned in the past. What I know is this……..the Bible states that God controls the weather, for good or bad. Interestingly, God said that He would give the rebellious Jews the “curse of clean teeth”. Famine = clean teeth. Mock me as you wish.
Snowden, I think you’re overdosing on Bad News. I’ve been there myself. It takes discipline to not worry these days.
It’s Saturday. Unplug the Internet. Go outside, breathe some fresh air, hit the beach, have dinner with friends.
You too, Easttexasfatboy. If God did not exist then yes, we’d be totally screwed, but He does exist and therefore we aren’t. We do not live under the Old Covenant of “Do good and be rewarded, do bad and be punished” so your talk of bloodguilt and divine punishment is meaningless. Hardships are a part of the mortal Christian life. There is no possible future in which God would allow us unbroken peace and prosperity.
Therefore, relax and enjoy the moment.
ETFB,
I agree whole heartily. However I think the trojan horse is coming in 200,000+ a year now. I am not talking about mexicans. I am not for illegals, I am talking about refugees. Small killings we have seen for the last 10 years by muslims. We will see them get help to shut the grid down and there will be a massive reset. That will separate the men from the “mennn”. Women will be offering themselves for food and protection. I only pray there will be more good men than bad.
Christ is my savior, but i am preparing for this with the 3Bs and after seeing Paris and looking back to 2000 when the grid shut down along theasr coast? I have enough .22 for teade, silver/gold and food for a few families but they will be vetted. My team includes ex seal, contractor, engineer (if he doesnt die on me). As a doctor myself we are covered until a local government can be salvaged from the dead ones. Start by getting to know your neighbors. Those thinking a farm in middle of no where? Think again. Look at the boa wars. The gangs will be hitting those and your closest neighbor will not hear your wife and daughters sceams.
Look up Argentina, ukraine, and rohdesia. Learn from them. Red dawn scenario is not going to happen. It will be from within. Whether false flag or islam i dont care, it will happen.
Snowden, when people click on your name, it takes them to a suggestion for a blog – so somehow you’re linked (through wordpress?) to someone else’s blog domain name, but my mistake for assuming.
I know there’s no way for me to completely understand, but since I do have a brother, I try to sympathize/empathize
I’m sorry for what you’ve been through.
ISIS is not your answer. They would take your son and chain him to a bed and rape him, or sell him to different War Lords for the same treatment. Your son, you, and everyone else in society is not better off with ISIS in charge.
EastTexasFatBoy “Massacres are generally involved, and the survivors decide to act differently. Abortion is such a fundamental evil that God will not ignore. Yes, most will regard this as religious ranting, but history says differently. Essentially, there’s nothing that can be done with this perverted culture. Open infanticide is actually the death knell. Feminist screeching is meaningless. Those whom God will destroy…..well…..the Bible points out that He frustrates their counsel…..meaning that they’ll believe any sort of idiocy will work. That’s what is happening now. Do you really believe that God will not call to account the massive blood guilt?”
We actually agree with you, my husband and I, that the massive infanticide in our country won’t go unpunished. That we’ve more than likely reached a point of no return concerning immorality. But understanding and believing in that, and actually wishing that to come to pass so you can enjoy watching the misery and cruelty that will fall upon BOTH the unrighteous and righteous, are two different things. I can believe that will happen, maybe even anticipate the speed of Christ’s return, but going down the other road is where Satan and the demons are – anxiously waiting for the destruction and enjoyment of it.
Righteous families will also suffer… there will be blood shed like an ocean.
That’s not really true. Anyway, that’s not what he was saying. He was just pointing out that ISIS isn’t an existential threat like the United States government is, to fathers who want to do right by their families. I agree with him. Its not ISIS that runs the divorce court or the child support industry. That’s the government of the USA.
Someone (I think it was TFH) once pointed out how stupid ISIS was, to start beheading people. They should have used their slick propaganda machine to send messages about healthy families and promises that fathers would be respected, for anyone who joined them, converted to Islam and enlisted to fight. They could have easily garnered tons of good will from disaffected North Americans that way, and probably thousands of willing volunteers too.
Most men want to be in a healthy relationship with a woman who respects them, and they want the opportunity to raise normal, healthy kids in a sane society. USA and Canada and UK don’t offer this opportunity any longer. ISIS should have marketed itself this way. They’d have gone a lot further.
Boxer
Dragonfly,
I didnt see where etfb was looking forward to it, just that he sees that it will. I think the tribulation is coming. Those he think they are going some where before it happens will fall away because of their own diappointment at not being “taken”. You are right, the righteous and unrighteous will be here that is why we are told to persevere. Why would we have to persevere not being in great troubled time? We are not to enjoy or enemies death, but we certainly can praise God for his righteous judgement and know our brothers and sisters will remain in Him forever.
I’ve had to argue this point before people insisting the only bad single motherhood is low income single motherhood. Single motherhood, in A L L economic classes, is the literal breeding ground of the forces that destroy modern civilization.
It is moral outrage to treat people who create broken homes willfully or out of negligence with the same respect you would with those who provide a stable, heterosexual, 2 parent home for their children.
Also, you cannot rationalize with the products of broken homes. You can only starve them of resources and ostracize them until they demonstrate the desire to reject their defective ways.
Boxer
That is how a new American civil war will play out. Given a place to go and values to fight for how many straight white men will loyally fight to keep in power people that cuckold them, call them racist, homophobes, and abusers and sexist daily in church, popular media, movies, TV shows, magazines and law family and criminal. Killing and being killed by men fighting for the freedom to live by the values of a respected family man.
When men speak of the collapse it will be really nasty. As I stated before any society that treats its most productive and civil family men as this one does deserve to suffer horribly and it surely will. The end will look like the end of the 2nd world war with war crimes trials and executions.
Folks, I’ll tell you something…..I take no pleasure in the coming storm. No sane person would. Civil insurrection will be the least of it. I’m a Christian, of the old school. Not churchy in any way. Thing is, feminism is very old…….like straight from the garden of Eden. That puts it right there with Lucifer or Satan if you prefer. So, looking at this problem from that standpoint, there’s no way humans can take on Demons without God’s help.
It’s always seemed strange to me…..folks who say they believe in the Bible, but scoff at the presence of Satan and the Demons. Oh well…..God has pronounced a curse upon those who call good, bad…..and those who call bad, good. As for the subject of this thread……the destruction of the intact family unit is a real big deal. From a Demonic viewpoint, I’d reckon it has to be a major event. Anyways…..anything you might want to know about feminism…..Is explained in the argument put forth by the serpent.
In the Old Testament, a lot is said about infanticide. Molech and such. The people who practiced that were put to the sword at Divine command. You see, God doesn’t change……we get a good look at His viewpoint in the Old Testament.
So, America isn’t the good guy anymore. Sickening, but a plain fact. Another thing that God has done in the past…….He’s spread a sense of defeat that rendered armies impotent. Feminism is a mental and moral disease……that’s extremely contagious and virulent. I mean that literally.
So, here comes Islam…….drawn in by effeminacy and perversion. You know, the Mullahs are right…..so, Barbarians from the 7th century are coming forth. I reckon this is part of the four horsemen, right?
My neighbour is a Muslim; and – will you believe – so far as I can tell, Divorced; he has two or three nice little children who visit him and he cares for his aged mother and attends the Mosque every Friday. I am trusting that he won’t go Allah Akbar on me. We are both fluent though sadly in different languages.
My parents used to take me, my brother and sister, every Summer on Holiday to the French west coast. Later I used to chill-out in Lille. Then I spent three holidays on the Med – Nice, Cannes and St Tropez, respectively.
Never been to Paris, never got the hang of French food. Je t’aime Sylvie Vartan mais elle n’est en vraiment Francais, being the daughter of Bulgarians.
Pardon mon Franglais. That should have read: Je t’adore Sylvie mais n’est pas vraiment Francais.
“Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.”
Didn’t she just admit that these men are forced into fatherhood i.e. they aren’t fathers by choice?
“ I thought I had learned everything there was to know about these men from the moms. Besides, didn’t everyone know the guys were irresponsible? That they really didn’t care about the kids they conceived? In 2008, even presidential candidate Barack Obama was calling them out, saying they had better stop acting like boys and have the courage to raise a child not just create one.”
“As it turns out, “everyone” wasn’t right. We were all dead wrong—me, the country, and even Barack Obama.”
“Pretty soon, the women are skipping doses of the pill or letting the patch or other forms of contraception lapse.”
“Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing first.”
If I’m correct premarital sex would be required here wouldn’t it (“solid footing” meaning strong social, emotional, sexual and financial compatibility)?
If all this is the case how in the hell does this advice make any sense to her?
America has never been the good guy Easttexasboy. The United States was founded with legalized slavery and tolerated genocide on indigenous people. The US became great and powerful like every empire which is by being selfish, ruthless, and exploiting weaker peoples.
You are right that willpower and weakness is the problem. Feminism is simply an ailment along with low fertility, declining male productivity, economic malaise, and poor planning. Out leaders are either deluded or simply don’t care about what is going on. Islam is going to pass Christianity to become the world’s largest religion in several decades. The endless flow of migrants chanting “Allah’s Snackbar”is going to continue unless Europe decided to do something about it.
>ISIS should have marketed itself this way. They’d have gone a lot further.
They’re a front for the Israeli government; the Iraqi government has actually captured Israeli spies as POWs from amongst their soldiers. Of course they didn’t; that would run counter to their *real* goals: the destabilization of the Muslim world. It’s no coincidence that before the Russians showed up, there was no effective air defense between Israel and Iran.
Also, Dalrock: could you take a look at the story of Gideon? I think you could probably turn it into a decent blog post. My church had a sermon on it today, and I think it’s really relevant to today’s society, and to the Alt-Right (your blog included) in particular. You’re doing good work; keep beating your pot with a stick.
I would never wish for the wicked to prosper anywhere, no matter how much it is deserved. It sometimes comes, but we should never rejoice in it.
Easttexasfatboy,
We have no Biblical standing to claim any exact future. We may be near the end, we may not. We likely will face quite hard times, but those are no more Biblical that they were in the days of Genghis Khan. Consequences come, but we have not promise of the specific timing of anything, including the end times.
Dragonfly,
The suggested blog name is not promised to be his blog or to have any connection to any poster. I can’t see what it shows for mine, but I do not think I have a blog in my profile, so any mentioned just happen to be spelled close to my name.
Snowden likely claimed that as a blog name when setting up his WordPress account, but it does not mean it ever was a blog. He has a load of bitterness and I recall a different version of who he was in his posts, but I don’t know of any blog unless he deleted the one connected here, though it is possible he changed the link in his profile.
Dragonfly asked:
“Why does a particular type of woman seem to become this “single mother” stereotype? And then why do beta bucks men pick them up, and marrying them without wondering or questioning how she treated the child’s father????”
As a woman you might offer us some insight on why single mothers do what they do. Personally I think its the nature of women in general when social/economic pressures are removed. Observe female feral cats in an alley, same thing.
As for why the Captain-sav-a-ho, mr beta bucks, picks them up? It’s complex but primarily its desire for sex, companionship and admiration all of which are faked by the single mom. Mostly though its plain ignorance about the nature of women. I know some of the idiot men who put themselves through hell trying to have relationships and even marriages with slutty single moms. Some of these fools absolutely cannot be talked out of it, some of them even see the folly and yet continue. I know a multi-millionaire who throws hundreds of thousands of dollars at an illegal alien whore who is the mother of 3. he knows she’s sleeping with another man, he sobs over her. He’s in his 60’s, she’s 30 something. She manipulates him like a marionette and people tell him right to his face. Sometimes he snaps out of it, says he’s ending it then goes right back.
Part of the problem is that too many men see sex as a need not a want and prioritize it beyond all rational reason not realizing that marrying a slutty but attractive single mom wont yield much sex anyway. The problem for average men is that there is a severe supply shortage of decent, attractive women for wives. Most single women in the US are sluts, many are also fat. An average beta bucks chump with a good income can marry a moderately attractive single mom or a fat girl, sorry arrangement either way. Regardless of which he chooses he’ll likely end up with a sexless wife who is also fat so there really isn’t any point at all.
It’s not happening fast enough to make me happy but younger men are finally starting to catch on, marriage to most women is a pointless waste of a man’s life.
@Gunner Q
>We do not live under the Old Covenant of “Do good and be rewarded, do bad and be punished” so your talk of bloodguilt and divine punishment is meaningless.
true and false.
Jesus did not abolish the law; he fulfilled it. (Matt 5:17-20, John 16:16-17.) Until both of the following are true, the law will remain:
a) heaven and earth disappear
b) “everything” has been accomplished
Even if I think “b” refers to Jesus’ crucifixion, that would not satisfy “a”.
For those who accept his Lordship and payment for their sins, yes, we will not be punished by having to receive eternal death. Even those however should still expect to be punished; both eternally in the form of loss of rewards (1 Cor 3) and physically on this earth (Rom 13:1-7, Heb 12:11 and Rev 3:19-AT’s favourite verse).
For those who do not repent however, no payment for their guilt is available. I expect those to be judged and punished for eternity for their deeds, and God was rather fulsome on his expectations in the OT and the NT. I personally think the US and Canada are going down, not least because of their choice to not stand by the jews (Gen 12:2-3).
@Jeff
>Why would we have to persevere not being in great troubled time?
Where Revelation records the saints being told to preserve just a little longer, this is said during the tribulation. That is, to the saints living in that time.
This could mean believers from prior times are still there.
Or it could mean people who became believers after the taking away described by Jesus in Matt 24.
The fact saints are there, in the tribulation, to be spoken to does not prove anything one way or the other.
@Nick
>They’re a front for the Israeli government
Are you insane? Most of the Arabs want to wipe Israel off the map. Even “moderate” arabs think Israel should be forced to return all land gains they made in the various wars that the ARABS started. I have spoken a few times to a muslim, who has a calm, peaceful presence. Even he thinks the jews are big meanies (not his words) for being there.
I can’t imagine the Israeli government being stupid enough to help a bunch of arab, muslim men to get arms, wealth in the form of oil fields and battle training. Such people WILL want to use these against God’s chosen people.
@embracingreality
>Part of the problem is that too many men see sex as a need not a want and prioritize it beyond all rational reason
I have never understood this. I think my desires are pretty high; I desire sex almost every morning.
Yet, I somehow manage to survive, have a great job, have friends and job, all without any sex or any romantic relationship.
Yes, I understand the desires, having them myself, but the way many guys degrade and debase themselves, just to get sex a few dozen times, is really strange.
We as men are not worthless, and should refuse to treat ourselves as if we were.
>The problem for average men is that there is a severe supply shortage of decent, attractive women for wives.
Absolutely. Go foreign! 🙂 Yeah, a small number of western women could be salvaged with the appropriate training, if you catch them while they are still young.
Something I noticed is that whenever one of those huge chasms spontaneously opens up in the Earth? . . . well another issue of The Shriver Report gets published. It’s probably just a coincidence though.
“What about the fathers?” is my question also, but all I see is that The Shriver Report has become more subtle at selfishness and rebellion.
At the end of the Old Testament, those alive in the times just before Christ’s return are told to ‘turn the hearts of the fathers to the children’ — to work at restoring fatherhood. (Malachi 4.) God ties this restoration directly to the severity of correction the planet and people receive. He will be looking to have mercy, but if we disobey and do nothing — or worse, actively prevent and oppose fatherhood — then there’s a big problem. Jesus takes fatherhood and sonship pretty seriously.
There are many ways of ‘turning the hearts of the fathers’ and most of them are surprisingly prosaic. Often, it’s the little things we do. But contrary to Queen Maria’s dissembling, mothers and fathers can’t share authority over the family. One or the other is in charge, always. In America and the West, that is the mother. Only presumptive father-custody can alter this. Anything less, any seeming legal or political compromise, will always revert authority to the FI.
It doesn’t matter that our current works towards Father are small or even unrecognized. We must do them in whatever way we are called and equipped. Under present single-mother/matriarchal circumstances, boys in our nations often need help, sometimes desperately, for physical safety. The media, government, schools, and churches won’t tell us about this. Although establishment of biblical fatherhood is the goal, there’s plenty we can do immediately in supporting and protecting the sons of our nations, even when we’re not biological fathers. Even when women resist and rebel. The Kingdom is spiritual, not magical, and is built by effort.
I don’t think it is either right or fair to suggest that America was founded on Slavery; one might as well say it was founded on Homophobia – times change and in any case the Slaves were probably far better taken care of in the South than they ever would have been in their native Land. As I recall it, America was founded when her late Majesty (your first Head of State) Elizabeth granted Letters Patent in 1584 to Walter Ralegh to found a colony on terms that one fifth of all Gold and Silver discovered would revert to The Crown: that is what America was founded on! So, if you would now like to pay – albeit rather late – that one fifth, I am, by good chance, the duly authorised representative to whom to send the bullion; you may rely upon me to ensure that it reaches the present Elizabeth.
Dale,
The veil keeping me out of the Holy of Holes was torn in two the same time Jesus said it was finished. Why was that noted if it was only His crucifiction that was finished?
I’m sure someone else has made this point, but it bears repeating:
“Here is my message to young disadvantaged men: If you really want to be a good dad, wait until you are financially ready to have a child, preferably your mid-to-late 20s, if not beyond. Make sure your relationship with the child’s mother is on a solid footing firs.”
Then, PRAY AND PRAY AND PRAY that she doesn’t get bored or angry or lustful for fresh meat and decide for no good reason to kick your ass to the curb and take half of everything you have while denying you access to the children you love.
Yeah. Well get right on that, sweetheart. Sounds like a great investment strategy.
Opus,
Fine, we’ll deduct it from the massive Great War debts which Britain defaulted on in 1930s. Consider me authorized representative to receive that payment still outstanding.
@oldfashionedfellow
I am entirely unaware as to whom you might represent nevertheless I can inform you that about five or so years ago we repaid the final million including interest – to the last penny – that we owed The United States of America in respect of loans to fight WW2 – the period to repay the debt had been by agreement extended. Britain always repays her debts.
p.s. America – you also owe us duty on some tea now rotting at the bottom of Boston Harbour.
As I recall it, America was founded when her late Majesty (your first Head of State) Elizabeth granted Letters Patent in 1584 to Walter Ralegh to found a colony on terms that one fifth of all Gold and Silver discovered would revert to The Crown: … I am, by good chance, the duly authorised representative to whom to send the bullion; you may rely upon me to ensure that it reaches the present Elizabeth.
Better you than the feminazi’s in charge of things now. I agree about the tea, but alas the feminazi’s in my own country have rendered things so that I can not afford to pay those duties at this time.
Also agree that this country WAS NOT founded on slavery.
Oh, Dalrock:
http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/11/unexpected-freedom-of-being-single-at-41.html
@ Opus
you also owe us duty on some tea now rotting at the bottom of Boston Harbour.
Technically, the duty isn’t owed because the tea was never actually delivered. To be delivered, the tea had to be moved from the ships to the docks. The tea never made it to the docks. 🙂
I realise this is staying way off topic but perhaps the following will be of interest.
The reason (or one of them ) that it took Britain so long to repay the WW2 loan was because in the 1970s when we were in some financial difficulties and asked for a new repayment schedule which as I said was agreed by America, the interests rates were as you may recall well into double figures but the rate of interest on the loan was something like only One and Three quarter per cent simple interest. It thus made no sense for Britain to be in any rush to repay. As Inflation reduced and likewise interest rates repayment became more pragmatic.
Whatever the position with regard to the duty on the tea – I guess we agreed to waive it after the Battle of Yorktown in1781: we prefer not to mention that as we hate losing to the French more than anyone else – Ben Franklin and so as to prevent a rift with Britain offered to repay the entire cost of the tea. I worked out that in today’s money the value of the tea would have amounted to some Twenty Million Pounds Sterling. He was not taken up on his offer.
Speaking of Franklin none of the house that he lived in have survived save for one and that one is situate in Craven Street, London which is just to the west of Charing Cross Railway station on the north bank of The Thames. It is now a museum to his memory and is unaltered since he lodged there. I have visited and when next in Britain you may do so too.
Dale: I personally think the US and Canada are going down, not least because of their choice to not stand by the jews (Gen 12:2-3).
Sounds like Dispensationalism. Which, from my Catholic perspective, is a heresy.
Christianity is the religion of Abraham, Issac, Jacob, and Moses. None of them called themselves “Jews,” a term which refers only to the tribe of Judah. None of them called their faith Judaism or Christianity. These are mere labels.
Labels change and don’t matter much. Christianity is what Jesus preached. Christianity IS the Judaism of Jesus, even if he didn’t use that label.
The Jews that followed Christ are the remnant. They are the ones that stuck to the faith of Abraham, Issac, Jacob, and Moses. To reject Jesus is to reject the faith of Abraham, Issac, Jacob and Moses, even if you’re not aware of it.
The modern state of Israel is just another country. Modern Jews are no different that are Muslims or atheists. All are children of God, but all must accept Christ. Having “Jewish blood” or heritage has no theological relevance, for good or ill.
Opus,
I wasn’t talking about WW2 debt. I was talking about of WWI debt. See below. (sorry for the digression Dalrock)
“A British government spokesman is quoted in this article as saying : ‘The UK Government’s position is this: “Neither the debt owed to the United States by the UK nor the larger debts owed by other countries to the UK have been serviced since 1934, nor have they been written off.”’
http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2014/08/britains-vast-unpaid-debt-to-the-usa.html
@Easttexasfatboy
The idea that the jihadis are more masculine than western men is a widely held misconception. Their preferred method of fighting is to beg for the big strong men of the west to support them and protect them, and then stab us in the back when the time is right. They are punishing us with their presence. This doesn’t change the fact that the west is antifamily, not to mention stupid for bringing them in when they beg for our protection, but the idea that jihadis are masculine is farcical.
From an Eastern point of view, if the West is stupid enough to feed them…..all the better. Poor people fight differently than rich. My point is this….. a culture that practices infanticide is so whack as to be beyond salvation. The West has a warrior class, but is trying to destroy it as fast as possible. I’m not a fan of Islam, but any port in the storm to protect the young men and boys who are being drugged and worse by this feminist society.
If you consider my comments upstream, I explain what I reckon to be coming. Feminism, by its very nature, has to destroy masculinity. That’s the reason why Islam will be able to recruit a fifth column here in the US. Where else are young men going to go…..and be masculine? You see, there might be a difference in how the West views masculinity and how the East does.
The Islamic way of fighting is very different than the west. Beheading in the East is a very shameful thing. From their viewpoint, if you allow yourself to be captured, you deserve your fate. American soldiers realize that, and act accordingly.
As for actual levels of testosterone present in a Jihad male versus a western mangina, well, all I have is an opinion. I will say this….Islam is the closest thing to a Barbaric horde that I’ve ever encountered. Mentally, I keep comparing the situation today with Ancient Rome as it collapsed. If anything, the cultural perversion is worse today.
I believe that ISIS will be successful in recruiting alienated young men. Suicide bombers? Perhaps, but public attacks where guns are forbidden, no doubt about it. Feminist policies will create more recruits. Think of those alienated LC men who realize they’re never going to have any part of a family.
RPL,
The RCC has a lot of heresy to those of us who hold the Scriptures higher than RCC tradition. Though lets not dive into that or dispensationalism.
Keep in mind thought that the RCC position was formed when it found itself in charge of the Roman Empire and had to account for why it was not the really bad thing that needed to be overthrown. Seeming necessity often drives doctrine, unfortunately at times.
I could pick many other things, but that is not productive here. I am sure you could find many sites if you want to play in that battle.
Easttexasfatboy: Where else are young men going to go…..and be masculine?
Boys from our underclass will continue to join gangs. Having been raised without fathers, gangstas are their masculine role models.
The main question is, where will American boys from our upper and middle classes go to be masculine? I guess some options will include: video wargames, extreme sports, PUAs, and MGTOW.
Mattel is now marketing Barbie dolls to boys: http://nypost.com/2015/11/16/a-boy-appears-in-a-barbie-ad-for-the-first-time/
Look at the boy in this ad. How young is he? And is that a gay or transgender haircut on him?
More: http://nymag.com/thecut/2015/11/kipnis-friedman-women-and-jerks.html
Red Pill Latecomer @ 11:05 am:
“Dale: I personally think the US and Canada are going down, not least because of their choice to not stand by the jews (Gen 12:2-3).
Sounds like Dispensationalism. Which, from my Catholic perspective, is a heresy.”
Doesn’t look good from my Protestant perspective, either. No nation has treated modern Israel as kindly as the U.S. yet we’re still going down. That was my point, that God doesn’t treat nations the way He does people. Whether the U.S. continues with its borders and people intact has no correlation to whether its gov’t does good or evil.
RPL….as this feminist mess gets worse, young males and boys will systematically hounded and destroyed. Drugged and indoctrinated. You see, the reason why I feel Islam will attract young men is simple……at some point, a normal young man will have no other place to go. ISIS recruiters won’t have a shortage of young men. Masculinity will have its revenge.
History shows that Barbarians use a blooding process to indoctrinate their troops. We’ve all seen it in the videos. Slow, torturous beheading is an example of that. There will be young men from this society that are attracted to brutal rites of passage. Feminists will be a real target. Go pro video in HD. Western rules of civilised behavior are considered weakness. Plus, really, there’s that whole drone situation.
The sad spectacle in Paris is a logical progression of events. I reckon the real reason we haven’t had such things happen here have to do with electronic surveillance. I do not believe feminism will win. Perversion can’t fight a long drawn out war.
I forgot to mention that most terrorists seem to come from well to do circumstances. Seems like they’re looking for a reason to act out.
How are the two of you defining MC/UMC/UC?
I think it’s easy to tell the difference.
If you depend on crime, or welfare and other forms of financial assistance from the state for your survival, because whatever salary you may have doesn’t cover that, you’re underlass.
If your only income is your salary, you’re working class.
If you also have income besides your salary, or an income from something other than a salary, but your lifestyle depends on good governance and low taxes, you’re middle class. To give one example: the middle class can only thrive in safe, peaceful neighborhoods, because it cannot afford to live in gated communities protected by armed guards, and middle class men generally aren’t hardened enough to always stand their guard as protectors with guns. People who belong here include small business owners, shareholders, people who rent out houses or apartments, contractors, people who have inheritance to invest etc.
If your wealth makes your lifestyle independent from policy decisions and economic trends, you’re upper class.
If you have the ability to directly influence policy decisions in your community (the city, county, the state etc.), and you have more in common with oligarchs abroad than with any of your countrymen, you’re ruling class.
I’ll paraphrase a certain smart black Chick who has left the USA to annoy Hollenhund
LOL. Are you talking about Alte, by any chance? She used to make good points, but in the end she went full retard. Thankfully she doesn’t comment anywhere anymore in English, as far as I know.
@Dale: “Jesus did not abolish the law; he fulfilled it. (Matt 5:17-20, John 16:16-17.) Until both of the following are true, the law will remain:”
You may be correct that the law will remain, but it will remain only for those to whom it was given. The law was given only to the Children of Israel. It was not given to the gentiles. As Paul states: “Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law.” (Romans 2:14)
Acts 15 discusses this truth in some detail. There is a good discussion of Acts 15 at this link: http://www.gci.org/bible/torah/exodus2a
You might notice that the four requirements imposed on new Christians in Acts 15 reflect the sentiment in the Noahide Laws that the Children of Israel believed were given to the Gentiles by God. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Seven_Laws_of_Noah
The “Law” given to the Children of Israel is valuable to the Gentile world for instruction and reproof. But, as the readings I’ve referenced above make clear, the Gentile world has never been bound by that “Law”. Only the Children of Israel were/are bound by it.
Here is a list of all Islamic terrorist attacks :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks
All the dumb Facebook libs (mostly women) who didn’t know what France’s flag looked like until Friday, but now put it on their FB photo, don’t even know that Russia had a bomb on a plane that killed 224 people, just two weeks ago.
The list is quite long.
All the dumb Facebook libs (mostly women) who didn’t know what France’s flag looked like until Friday, but now put it on their FB photo, don’t even know that Russia had a bomb on a plane that killed 224 people, just two weeks ago.
Arguably the only good thing that can be said about Facebook is that it exposes the true depths of narcissistic stupidity to which large segments of our society have descended. At some point in the very near future it will become self-parody.
Arguably the only good thing that can be said about Facebook is that it exposes the true depths of narcissistic stupidity to which large segments of our society have descended.
The Paris attacks were not even the biggest attacks of the 15-days before it. 224 Russians were killed in a bomb on October 31.
95 in Turkey on October 10.
42 in Beirut the day before Paris.
Over 40 attacks in 2015 alone, several of which are pretty big (100+ deaths)…
So all this is just the last 5 weeks… I am almost surprised that there has not been any other attack in the last 3 days. Odds are there won’t be a 7-day streak with no additions to the list in the link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks
Gunner Q,
I tend to be in the camp that thinks we should treat really well due to the promise to Abraham a long time back, but I am not sure I ever thought that meant we had to fight their wars for them, give them lots of foreign aid, etc.
We still got a lot of blessings and it very well could have been due to our treatment of Israel. Some of that may have prevented more of a slide, though too many people try to foolishly simplify things to the extreme and I would say then err.
Who knows for sure though? God will protect what God wants to protect. Even wicked Babylon was used by Him.
@Red Pill Latecomer
>Modern Jews are no different … all must accept Christ.
Absolutely correct. Rom 10:9-13 addresses this, as do other passages.
>Having “Jewish blood” or heritage has no theological relevance, for good or ill.
Depending on how you mean it, this can be false. It was prophesied that Israel would become a nation again… and they were, right on schedule in 1948. This was not a bunch of Gentiles… it was jews.
Revelation mentions the Israelites, specifically those in Israel, in Jerusalem.
Revelation also mentions 144,000 jewish witnesses for God.
So God is not done with the jewish people yet. They are very much a special people, as in, special promises. No, that does not mean they have a different route to heaven; per above your point on that is correct.
@RichardP
Re law:
>Acts 15 discusses this…
As the first verse in Acts 15 shows, the context is whether one can be saved by fulfilling the law, or, whether one must fulfill the law to be saved. My comment above, to which you responded, was meant to be about those who are not saved; pagans if you will 🙂 Sorry if that was not clear.
Although, I also that that God may bless me, as a believer, specifically due to my attempts to bless Abraham’s seed. For me, I do this primarily through giving to Chosen People Ministries. This charity specifically seeks to give the gospel to jewish people. I can’t say they are the only/best group around to do so, but I think they do valuable work. “you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” Acts 1:8 Bring in the Jews! 🙂
Your Romans 2:14 passage is very appropriate however. I’m not sure it means what I perceive you to think it means. It appears to me to indicate that God gives us all a conscience, and thus even the Gentiles have a law from God for themselves, regardless of whether they received the written law. Thus not murdering or whoring is still necessary 🙂
I had not heard of the tradition of the seven laws of Noah. Interesting idea. Thanks for the link.
Thanks for the input.
@Anon
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks
Wow! For a religion that is supposedly a religion of peace, that is a massive list of terrorist attacks. Some are against soldiers or police, who could conceivably be seen as oppressors or armed enemies. (Not that I agree with such acts.)
Many however are targeted to people going about their daily life, not in any way attacking the Muslims.
I left a comment at Heartiste which (unless it disappeared into Cyberspace) he chose not to publish on his blog. The gist of the comment was to have some perspective for I pointed out that during the 1970s and 1980s and into the 1990s England suffered from a series of bombings by Irishmen – specifically of the Roman Catholic persuasion. Perhaps my adding that the perpetrators had American funding did not help. It may all seem a long time ago now now that the Irish are once again a likable bunch of leprechauns and River-Dancers but it is hard for me to forget that I used to study in a library in a certain town-centre where (I went home that weekend) the terrorists over that weekend blew-up the pub opposite and the one to the side . Deaths of course in both locations. Not that I was seeking to make Sectarian or anti-Xtian or even anti-American points but merely to observe that ones memories tend to be short and that the effectiveness of terrorism seems to be in inverse proportion to its frequency. I might also have made the point that Tolstoy made, that in terms of firepower the Terrorist is, compared to the State, the equivalent of a man with a bow and arrow.
Having said that it seems to me that the West has for reasons of its own created situations where the likelihood of terrorism is increased from nothing to most likely. All the security services that the west can muster are by comparison of little effectiveness. Nothing will change: the elite will double-down; the French citizens return to their altruism: Marie le Pen will not be the next French President.
p.s. There has only been one murder in the road in which I live since I moved her: a white Xtian lad at the hands of his girlfriend’s Muslim father: Muslim fathers do not take kindly to casual sex with their daughters especially from someone of a different race or religion. Growing up I was never advised of these problems either by parents or teachers because in those days those problems did not exist. One learns quickly and what one learns bears no similarity with the ideology put out by the State of rainbow-coloured equalism.
Dale: Revelation also mentions 144,000 jewish witnesses for God.
My Catholic study guides to Revelation offer a different interpretation. The number 144,000 is a symbolic number meaning “many Jews and many gentiles.”
There were 12 Israeli tribes. Therefore, 12 symbolizes the Jewish people.
There were 12 apostles. Therefore, 12 symbolizes the gentile people.
12 x 12 = 144. So 144 symbolizes Jews and gentiles.
The phrase “a thousand” was used back then to mean “many,” and is not to be taken literally. It’s like when you say, “If I’ve told you a million times…” You don’t literally mean a million.
So 144,000 means that “many Jews and many gentiles” will be saved.
Dale: It was prophesied that Israel would become a nation again… and they were, right on schedule in 1948. … Revelation mentions the Israelites, specifically those in Israel, in Jerusalem.
I can’t find in the Bible where it says that the nation of Israel will be established in 1948 “right on schedule.” Or ever in the temporal sense. The Catholic Church teaches that the Church is the New Israel. All those references in Revelation to Israel and the New Jerusalem are references to the Church, either on Earth or in Heaven.
I think Orthodox Christians hold the same view. As even do some mainline Protestants.
“The Catholic Church teaches that the Church is the New Israel.”
Another in a long reasons of why it’s an apostate church.
Chris, seems you have a quarrel with the Apostle Paul (writing at the Spirit’s behest), not the Catholic Church. See Galatians 6:16, where the writes that that the Galatian Christians who first received this letter are the “Israel of God.”
Too long to read this whole thread, so it may have been addressed, but as to the posts arguing about the definition of middle class; keep in mind that in feminism, the man is %100 responsible for the material needs of the woman and however many children she decides to have. (if you don’t think that sounds feminist, grow up. of course it’s feminist, that’s why they call it patriarchy when more than half of all pregnancies are aborted solely for reasons of the mother’s convenience or are born with no legally recognized father) So when they demand that men become financially stable, they mean without any state help. It’s easy for them to say this because none of them have ever paid any taxes or done any real work.
To review, a feminist approved father:
1 earns more money than %75 of men and more than %95 of women
2 has no debts except for mortgage and car payments
3 fully funds all tax saving retirement and health plans
4 has been married long enough to guarantee his wife the maximum allowable consideration for equitable division of his property and maintenance payments in his state should she decide she doesn’t like him anymore
5 lives in a good neighborhood, takes expensive annual vacations and goes on frequent semi-expensive outings
6 has enough money to do all of the above without the tax advantages of the wife and her children (that’s her money)
While a feminist approved mother:
1 is old enough to make a baby
Dale,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Islamist_terrorist_attacks
Wow! For a religion that is supposedly a religion of peace, that is a massive list of terrorist attacks.
Not just that, but the idjits at the NYT actually ask ‘Can Paris happen here?’.
Nevermind that we had our own attack that killed 3000 (in fact, it killed *just* 3000 of the 50,000 they intended to kill).
Nevermind that at least during the Bush years, over 15 attacks were foiled, including the shoe bomber, the dirty bomber, and the plot to mix liquid bombs on planes and blow up planes over the middle of the ocean.
It appears we have gone 4 days without an addition to that list. But there was the stadium evacuation in Germany today.
Off Topic:
Sad day! All the paid kooks at Jezebel are in danger and layoffs are already happening!
http://observer.com/2015/11/gawker-lays-off-staff-as-site-pivots-to-politics/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter
Whoever will we laugh at now?
Red Pill Latecomer @ 9:59 am:
“My Catholic study guides to Revelation offer a different interpretation. The number 144,000 is a symbolic number meaning “many Jews and many gentiles.” … There were 12 Israeli tribes. Therefore, 12 symbolizes the Jewish people.”
There are 14 Israeli tribes when you include Manasseh and Ephraim (ref. Genesis 48). Manasseh is listed in the 144,000 roll call but the tribes of Dan and Ephraim are not.
Because not all Jews are represented among the 144,000 and because Gentiles by definition do not belong to any of the enumerated tribes, the interpretation of the group as a euphemism for “many Jews and many gentiles” is unworkable.
“All those references in Revelation to Israel and the New Jerusalem are references to the Church, either on Earth or in Heaven. ”
It’s generally accepted eschatology that the Antichrist will make a seven year-long peace treaty with Israel, then at the halfway point break it and set himself up as God in the Jewish Temple (which hasn’t yet been rebuilt). There are similar references to physical locations such as Jerusalem and Tel Megiddo (aka Armageddon) that make Rome unlikely to be ground zero for the End Times.
I don’t think Israel just happened to return to existence anyway. Nations don’t randomly reappear 1,900 years after their destruction with the same ethnic group, same language, same religion, same location and arguably the same enemies. Muammar Gaddafi wasn’t replaced with Carthage.
There were 12 apostles. Therefore, 12 symbolizes the gentile people.
How do 12 Apostles symbolize gentiles?
It’s generally accepted eschatology that the Antichrist will make a seven year-long peace treaty with Israel,
Generally accepted? Not by the Catholic Church (which are the majority of Christians). Nor, I believe, by Orthodox Christians or mainline Protestants. Only among a minority of Christians (the fundamentalist Evangelicals, mostly) is your interpretation “generally accepted.”
The Catholic Church teaches that the Antichrist has a dual meaning.
1. The Antichrist refers to Nero. Both Roman and Hebrew letters correspond to numbers, and 666 spells out Caesar Nero. So on one level, most of Revelation (apart from the final chapters) is full of metaphors for people and nations in John’s historical time period (e.g., the whore of Babylon is the Roman Empire).
2. WE are all Antichrist. Every time we sin, we are “anti-Christ.” There is an “anti-Christ” in each of us, which Christ has already defeated, and continues to defeat whenever we celebrate the Mass. So on another level, Revelation is a metaphor for our daily struggle against sin and death, which Christ continually defeats. (Babylon is a metaphor for worldly temptations.)
John wrote Revelation partially to inspire the persecuted Christians with the message “We have ALREADY won.” Revelation has already occurred, and continues to occur on a daily basis. The end is always the same. Christ defeats Satan, saving those who believe in Him.
I don’t think Israel just happened to return to existence anyway. Nations don’t randomly reappear 1,900 years after their destruction with the same ethnic group, same language, same religion, same location and arguably the same enemies. Muammar Gaddafi wasn’t replaced with Carthage.
Is it the same ethnic group? I’m not sure about that. I’d read back in the 1990s that Russian Jews had 5% North African DNA, unlike Russian gentiles. So yeah, there’s probably some trace Hebrew DNA in European Jews. But not all that much.
As for Israel’s non-random appearance — it’s called a self-fulfilling prophecy. Believers will often make happen what they expect to happen. And other nations (e.g., Poland, Armenia) also disappear from the map, only to reappear centuries later.
The 12 apostles symbolize gentiles because they were the beginnings of the Church that opened salvation to the gentiles.
I messed up the italics in my previous long comment.
Boxer: Whoever will we laugh at now?
There are plenty of opportunities. Various other feminist blogs, the Guardian, Tumblr, and even CAF will provide plenty of entertainment.
Dear Coleen: He’ll let me have sex with stranger to save marriage
http://www.mirror.co.uk/lifestyle/family/dear-coleen-hell-sex-stranger-6848891 (https://archive.is/kW8uk)
@Red Pill Latecomer
>My Catholic study guides to Revelation offer a different interpretation.
I am not really surprised. I encourage you to read the Bible for yourself, and stop letting others get between you and God. God did not hide from us, making it necessary for religious professionals to interpret for us. I encourage you to read Matt 15, Matt 23 and Romans 10 to see what God’s Word says about religious professionals.
You of course will need to decide for yourself whether you wish to follow God, or follow those who claim to speak for God. That later group would of course include me. Hence the references above, so you can read God’s Word for yourself.
>… So 144 symbolizes Jews and gentiles. …
and
>The Catholic Church teaches that the Church is the New Israel.
For the choice to read in a complicated interpretation of symbolism, instead of just accepting the clear words in the text, I encourage you to consider whether you would accept that kind of interpretation attitude from your subordinate at work when you gave him instructions. Or your child. Or your wife. Or the government year-end tax forms. Or any other relationship or place.
Some text has clear indications of alternate literary forms; examples are parables, hebrew poetic structures, Chiasms, etc. Others do not.
I choose to be careful about deciding to dismiss the clear meaning, without very clear evidence this is the correct choice. The Lord said:
These are the ones I look on with favor:
those who are humble and contrite in spirit,
and who tremble at my word.
Isa 66:2.
Choose for yourself how you will treat Scripture. To quote the Indy Jones movie, “Choose wisely.”
>I can’t find in the Bible where it says that the nation of Israel will be established in 1948 “right on schedule.”
10 seconds on Google found the following link. I am sure there are others. This one includes the chapters from Eze; I encourage you to read them for yourself, without letting someone else tell you what they are supposed to mean.
http://www.1260-1290-days-bible-prophecy.org/bible_prophecy-Israel-nation-1260-years-x2-A-1.htm
I hate women so I won’t become lustful.
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=987779
uncertainty and more uncertainty
http://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=987795
Dale: God did not hide from us, making it necessary for religious professionals to interpret for us.
If this is so, why did the Ethiopian eunuch require Philip’s help to understand scripture? From Acts 8 30-31:
Then Philip ran up to the chariot and heard the man reading Isaiah the prophet. “Do you understand what you are reading?” Philip asked.
“How can I,” he said, “unless someone explains it to me?” So he invited Philip to come up and sit with him.
So many people say they believe in the “plain text meaning” of the Bible. Yet they all disagree, which indicates that the Bible’s “plain text meaning” is not so plain.
A Jehovah’s Witness once began talking to me. I said I wasn’t looking to be converted. He replied, “Oh, we don’t convert anyone. We just show people what the Bible says.”
Jehovah’s Witnesses also think that they merely believe what’s in the Bible. Yet they don’t even believe in the Trinity, unlike most Christians. They don’t see the Trinity in the Bible.
Christ knew that people would come up with all sorts of interpretations. That’s why He established one Catholic Church to provide one interpretation, when he said to Peter, “You are the rock upon which I will build my church.” Peter, the first pope. The head of the Church, as recognized by the other apostles after Christ’s death.
When they heard of the empty tomb, John and Peter ran to it. John arrived first, because he was younger and ran faster. But he waited for Peter to catch up and enter first. John did this in deference to Peter’s authority as head of the apostles.
“The Catholic Church teaches that the Church is the New Israel.”
Another in a long reasons of why it’s an apostate church.
Not that I care about Roman Catholic doctrines, but yes, the Church is the new Israel.
Semantics aside, Israel = called out people. Special to God, etc, not on account of their special genes (Abraham himself was born into an idolatrous family –see below, and God called him out to establish a covenant with him. This was not because of any special quality in Abraham, but purely because of God’s love and mercy.). The CHurch is exactly similar in every respect.
ABRAHAM FROM IDOLATROUS FAMILY
“Joshua said to all the people, “This is what the LORD, the God of Israel, says: ‘Long ago your ancestors, including Terah the father of Abraham and Nahor, lived beyond the Euphrates River and worshiped other gods.” Joshua 24:2
GOD CALLED ISRAEL OUT OF EGYPT (I.E. THE WORLD )
“When Israel was a child, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son.” Hosea 11:1
THE CHURCH A SPECIAL PEOPLE
“But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.” 1 Peter 2:9
GOD CALLED THE CHURCH OUT OFNTHE WORLD
“For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble; but God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong” 1 Corinthians 1:26,27
PAUL CALLED ISRAEL THE ISRAEL OF GOD
“Peace and mercy to all who follow this rule–to the Israel of God.” Galatians 6:16
[Israel in those days were not following the rules but were persecutors of the Apostles, so the passage did not refer to them]
PAUL SAID NATURAL ISRAEL WAS “BROKEN OFF” AND REPLACED BY GENTILES
“If some of the branches have been broken off, and you, though a wild olive shoot, have been grafted in among the others and now share in the nourishing sap from the olive root…” Romans 11:17
A clearer examination proves this thought even further. God will still save those who believe among the “natural Israelites”.
WE are all Antichrist. Every time we sin, we are “anti-Christ.”
Interesting. Does that mean every time we do right we are Christs? Care to specify the appropriate Scripture to back up this wild assertion?
RPL your going to need more evidence than that to establish that Peter was head of the Apostles or that Peter was a pope. If Peter was the head of the Apostles then why did Paul rebuke him to his face for separating himself from the Gentiles when eating with those of the circumcision (see Gal 2:11-21)? Wouldn’t Paul have conceded to Peter’s example rather than oppose him.
If pope’s really are a thing from God then why do they contradict Him while claiming to speak for Him?
From Pope John Paul II: “Having suffered for the Church, Mary deserved to become the Mother of all the disciples of her Son, the Mother of their unity…In fact Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix did not cease with the glorification of her Son.”
From Peter: “11 This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone. 12 And there is salvation in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.””
From Jesus: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”
Jesus and Peter agree with each other, but seemingly not with Pope John Paul II.
Peter knows who his savior (singular, not plural) is.
JDG, Paul challenged Peter — yet came to Jerusalem, to Peter, to do so — thus recognizing Peter’s authority. Paul was appealing to Peter, urging him to reconsider. And Peter did eventually agree with Paul.
We don’t know what Paul would have done had Peter remained adamant. But Catholic doctrine would say that Peter, being the infallible head of the church, guided by the Holy Spirit, was bound to reach the right decision.
Here is what Catholic.com says about the Peter and Paul: http://www.catholic.com/tracts/papal-infallibility
As a biblical example of papal fallibility, Fundamentalists like to point to Peter’s conduct at Antioch, where he refused to eat with Gentile Christians in order not to offend certain Jews from Palestine (Gal. 2:11–16). For this Paul rebuked him. Did this demonstrate papal infallibility was non-existent? Not at all. Peter’s actions had to do with matters of discipline, not with issues of faith or morals.
Furthermore, the problem was Peter’s actions, not his teaching. Paul acknowledged that Peter very well knew the correct teaching (Gal. 2:12–13). The problem was that he wasn’t living up to his own teaching. Thus, in this instance, Peter was not doing any teaching; much less was he solemnly defining a matter of faith or morals.
Romans 11 clarifies and sums up God’s will for Israel the best. Those passages emphatically state that God has “by no means” severed all ties with Israel, and warn us as grafted-in Gentiles to not let His “adoption” of us to go to our collective heads.
“(Babylon is a metaphor for worldly temptations.) ”
The NT metaphor for worldly temptations is consistently “the flesh” or “the body”.
“1. The Antichrist refers to Nero.”
The Gospel had not been preached throughout the known world at that time; only the Roman Empire at best. Only recently did we Christians achieve this. Neither, among other issues, was Nero known for surviving a fatal wound.
“2. WE are all Antichrist. Every time we sin, we are “anti-Christ.”
Bollocks. Even the RCC distinguishes between venial sins and mortal sins. Christ never screamed at Peter the way he screamed at the Pharisees and Sadducees even though Peter was far from perfect.
This is a big part of Churchianity, that there’s no moral difference between a guy who tries hard to please God and inevitably falls short, and a guy who sheds rivers of innocent blood for fun & profit. Sin is sin but repentance makes the difference.
“Is [modern Jews] the same ethnic group? I’m not sure about that.”
The devil seems fairly certain. Why else does he try so hard to kill them?
JDG, you misunderstand: “co-redemptrix” implies neither equality of status with Christ, nor equality of role. Instead it implies one who assists in His plan through obedient cooperation with His will, exactly as men and women can be said to be “co-creators” with God when they reproduce and bear children. God is always the Creator of everything, but for sometimes-inscrutable reasons His will is to enlist our participation in carrying out what He could do perfectly well without us. Mary’s special grace was to assent to God’s plan (“be it unto me according to thy word”), in advance, having been put on notice it would be painful for her. and submit her life to her Son’s mission. That is why the Church has called her “Mother of all Christians” and similar titles: her trusting submission models the role of the Church relative to Christ, by analogy with Ephesians 5.
(One would hope the readers of a Christian blog, while calling out the behavior of modern rebellious sluts and the societal decadence that abhors submission to anything, could spare at least a little appreciation for Mary. Guess she’s not Strong & Independent enough for modern consumption.)
I don’t think the issue is the degree of Mary’s strength, independence, submission, or respectfulness, but the special position that she is accorded in the Roman Catholic, etc.
Knowing that Protestants and non-Protestants have significantly different positions on various concepts, for example, Mary, it would be nice if the Christian readers of this blog would avoid these controversial concepts when possible, as they are seldom of consequence to the usual discussions of marriage, family, dating, etc.
Not surprisingly, most Christian readers feel quite strongly about the validity of their own understanding of Christianity. Consequently, Protestants may find it irksome to be told that the “Church” (for example, the Roman Catholic church) doctrine is truth, and those of Catholic/Orthodox churches might be irritated to be told that others don’t consider the pope’s teaching to be binding on them. I think it would be best if we all would recognize that others have different beliefs, and comment accordingly, remembering that others do not have the same Christian tenets. Be loving, knowing that we likely disagree about many facets of Christianity.
@Red Pill Latecomer
JDG, Paul challenged Peter — yet came to Jerusalem, to Peter, to do so — thus recognizing Peter’s authority. Paul was appealing to Peter, urging him to reconsider. And Peter did eventually agree with Paul.
Sorry, but virtually none of your assertions is supported by scripture, and must therefore be considered a personal opinion (which doesn’t count, actually).
1. Paul had to go to Jerusalem at various times because that was the location of the headquarters of the early church, and many of the Lord’s disciples were there. This is mere common sense. and does not prove superiority of one to the other.
In this particular instance however, Paul’s rebuke took place in Antioch, not Jerusalem. (Galatians 2:11; see below).
2. When he was called by Christ to be an Apostle, Paul pointedly stated that he did not go to Jerusalem to see the older Apostle for advice, and this must include Peter:
“But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood: Neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto Damascus.” Galatians 1: 15-17
It was 3 years later that he met Peter and another apostle James face to face—long after he had begun his ministry. He stayed with Peter then for about 2 weeks. See Galatians 1:18-20
3. The older Apostles, (possibly including Peter) added nothing to Paul’s ministry:
“And the leaders of the church had nothing to add to what I was preaching. (By the way, their reputation as great leaders made no difference to me, for God has no favorites.)” Galatians 2:6
4. Paul claimed the same authority as Peter:
“For he that wrought effectually in Peter to the apostleship of the circumcision, the same was mighty in me toward the Gentiles” Galatians 2:8
5. Peter and the other Apostles readily recognized the authority of Paul:
“And when James, Peter, and John, who seemed to be pillars, perceived the grace that was given unto me, they gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship; that we [should go] unto the heathen, and they unto the circumcision.
6. No, Paul did not ask Peter to “reconsider”; he withstood him to his face, the same way two equals challenge each other:
“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.”
Galatians 2:11
7. Peter never claimed infallibility or superiority above all other Apostles:
He called himself “an apostle”, not “the Apostle” (1 Peter 1:1; 22 Peter 1:1); “a fellow elder” among other elders (1 Peter 5:1).
The Roman Catholic claim that Peter was in any way higher than, or less fallible than, or superior to, any of the Apostles, is a humongous lie with no basis in the word of God.
Talk about missing the wood for the trees.. she says that the mothers have the ultimate choice and always decide when they want children, not the fathers, and then goes right on to blame poor dads who didn’t wait to have children before they were ‘ready’, as if they can ever be ‘ready’ when it is entirely up to the woman..
@ Dave
The Roman Catholic claim that Peter was in any way higher than, or less fallible than, or superior to, any of the Apostles, is a humongous lie with no basis in the word of God
Scripture opines on this question very clearly,
“So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints and members of the household of God, built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus himself being the cornerstone, in whom the whole structure, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord.” (Eph. 2:19-21)
The foundation for the Church is ALL the apostles (and Old Testament prophets and Christ).
When Jesus says that he will build his Church upon Peter, he doesn’t say that he will build his Church upon Peter alone. Never alone.
The chief function of the apostles was that they were witnesses of Christ’s resurrection. “…you shall be my witnesses….”
One point I learned in Catholic classes is that it’s a mistake to say that a Church should be, or even can be, “Bible-based,” because the Church precedes the Bible.
The Church was created on the day of Pentecost. (Christ had already promised Peter that he would be the rock upon which He would build his Church.)
The Church was already preaching before the books of the New Testament were written. And it was the Church which later canonized some books, determining which were inspired by the Holy Spirit, and which were not, in the 4th century: http://www.catholicbible101.com/thebible73or66books.htm
So to say that a church must be “based on” the Bible is to put the cart before the horse.
Of course, Protestants later removed 7 of those books. Which is why Catholics have 73 books in their Bible, and Protestants have 66.
RPL is losing the debate, so he throws in a red herring.
The books in the Protestant Bible have always had apostolic authority–even Catholics recognize this. The seven books were always controversial. Jerome didn’t want to include them in the Bible. They are irrelevant to this discussion.
When I say “apostolic authority”, this includes ALL the apostles. Not just Peter.
The way to consider the Bible and tradition is that tradition came first and was superceded by the Bible because the apostles were dying off.
My point is not that the books in the Protestant Bible don’t have authority — my point is that it was the Catholic Church that canonized the books in the Protestant Bible (and some other books).
Protestants claim that the Catholic Church is not “Bible-based” — ignoring that the Bible is itself one of the fruits of the Catholic Church, which Christ established before the New Testament was even written.
Still a red herring.
The Sunday Times Magazine Provides Frank, Humanizing Look At The Men Going Their Own Way
http://www.breitbart.com/tech/2015/11/18/the-sunday-times-magazine-provides-frank-humanizing-look-at-the-men-going-their-own-way/
—
Plenty of discussions around the web about the article, as well.
asdgamer wrote:
When Jesus says that he will build his Church upon Peter, he doesn’t say that he will build his Church upon Peter alone. Never alone.
asd, at the risk of getting too far into the weeds, the Greek of Matthew 16:18 clearly shows that the church wasn’t built on Peter (petros, a detached stone or boulder), but on his confession (petra, a mass of rock) that Jesus is the son of God.
“what about the fathers?”
http://illimitablemen.com/page/5/
“And how can we expect them to care for something as grand and abstract as civilization when such individuals were never fully subject to the bonds of family? How does one come to love something as grand as nation when they had not even the love of kin?”
When the thin facade of civilization is burnt away, Feminism will vanish in a single day. However, it won’t be a ‘victory’ for anyone. It won’t be 50’s father knows best. It will be…something else. Women could have had something approaching ‘equality’, if they had just had enough introspection and self restraint to know when enough was enough. Alas…no. Protect yourself.
One point I learned in Catholic classes is that it’s a mistake to say that a Church should be, or even can be, “Bible-based,” because the Church precedes the Bible.
Again, not true. The Bible precedes the Church. Unless of course you want to claim that the Church had been established “before forever”, because the Bible has been forever settled in the beginning with God. The book we all carry around are mere paper copies of the Word of God. The Church was established and maintained by the Word.
Even if we were to refer to the paper copies of the word as being the Bible, it still predates and precedes the Church, because Moses began the writing of the Bible, approximately 1500 years before the Church came into existence.
@ mojohn
asd, at the risk of getting too far into the weeds, the Greek of Matthew 16:18 clearly shows that the church wasn’t built on Peter (petros, a detached stone or boulder), but on his confession (petra, a mass of rock) that Jesus is the son of God.
The principles of Bible interp say to go from the clear to the unclear. Eph. 2:19-21 is exceedingly clear–the Church is build upon Peter and the rest of the apostles, the prophets, and Christ. Mt. 16:18 is highly figurative. and somewhat unclear. We’re not sure what the Aramaic was that Christ actually spoke. Peter’s name is masculinized from the feminine petras. Forget the nonsense about small stone and large stone–that’s speculative horsehockey. Mt. 16 is unclear–Eph. 2 is quite clear. We prefer the Eph. passage to settle this question.
None of this interp supports Peter having any elevation among the apostles–support for Peter’s elevation doesn’t arrive until sometime in the 4th century, if I recall correctly.
In terms of historical precedence, the OT was first, then the Church was born, then the NT was written. The Church Councils ratified what was common practice in the local assemblies, which were generally pretty uniform as to what they regarded as scripture.
@Red Pill Latecomer
>why did the Ethiopian eunuch require Philip’s help to understand scripture?
This is a good question. First, similar to the literary structures I mentioned previously, it is necessary to correctly categorize it.
Is it:
a) a command from God to all people
b) a command from God to certain people
c) one example of God’s behaviour
d) one example of a sinful human’s behaviour
If it is a command from God to all people (option a), I certainly would be eager to examine it for theological laws or ideas to apply to my life.
Similarly, even if it was merely an example of God doing something or promising something to someone else (option c), I could still learn something about God and his character from his past behaviour. What was God willing to do?
If it is simply one example of a sinful human doing or saying something, then trying to take theology from this is a bad precedent. For example, I hope we would all agree I would be foolish to follow David’s example of committing adultery and then killing the husband to somewhat cover it up. Or Peter allowing his theology and practices to be corrupted as recorded in Gal 2.
Given that the eunuch was leaving, and had a scroll at that point, and was having trouble understanding, it is certainly possible this eunuch was new to reading the Scriptures. Perhaps this was his first day. I do not expect any brand new student to ANY textbook to understand everything the first week. I think this is common sense. This made-up idea I just gave is an example of why taking theology from an example, that is not a command, is unwise. We have no idea of what lead to the example. Was he having trouble because he was a new believer in the jewish God? Was he having trouble because every person in the world needs the help of an apostle to understand? Examples from human behaviour are not worth much.
In any event, if I allow myself to take the example of the speech of this eunuch as proof I must ask religious professionals for what to believe, why should I also not follow any of the hundreds (thousands?) of evil examples in Scripture.
I encourage you to articulate and write down your rules for interpretation. A person who can’t, likely is either taking whatever interpretation they like, or what they are told. With less concern for what God actually said. I would give this challenge to everyone; it is great for giving us the mental discipline to submit to all of Scripture, without dismissing the parts I do not like.
You will not win any arguments with the JWs as examples. I have seen their greek interlinear “bible”, and the changes are obvious.
As for the statement about the rock, you also changed the text. Perhaps not deliberately, but your statement is not what Jesus said. Matt 16 says:
16 Simon Peter answered, “You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God.”
17 Jesus replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven. 18 And I tell you that you are Peter,[b] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[c] will not overcome it.
Now, there are two obvious possibilities as to what is “this rock”, with respect to the statement “on this rock I will build my church”. The first is Peter’s confession that Jesus is “the Messiah, the Son of the living God”. The second is Peter.
To find out which is correct, I suggest two exercises that you do for yourself. Or you could be lazy and ask some religious guy, there are plenty of those around. Decide whom you will follow.
1) Are the original greek words for “Peter” and “rock” the same? Suppose Peter means loose stone or pebble, while rock means bedrock or large stone? Would it reasonable to think the pebble is a bedrock?
2) How many times is Peter called Rock? And how many times is God / Jesus, the son of God called Rock in the Bible. Hint: the list of references is huge.
Suppose we agreed that the correct interpretation is that Jesus was saying that he would build his church on Peter.
Peter was in the Jerusalem council. He had influence, as did Paul, James and others. Certainly. I could see wisdom in going this far.
But many for far further, with a claim to be able to read between the lines to get so much:
– Peter, or any other apostle / bishop, supposedly had authority to give required beliefs. E.g. prayer intercession of Mary and other canonized saints, birth control (which I agree with in principle, but not as a religious rule), etc. Titus 1 shows Paul giving Titus the authority to appoint elders. Not Peter, Titus. And these elders were leaders, not religious final authorities.
– there is a high-ruler, in effect, in a pope. And all must submit to the pope’s ex cathedra (sp?) statements.
I hope you would refuse my “teaching” if I tried to read in that much.
>But he waited for Peter to catch up and enter first. John did this in deference to Peter’s authority as head of the apostles.
This example has two problems.
a) You are reading in the motivation where none is given. I could say he waited because John had a pebble in his shoe, and John stopped to take it out. Neither can be proven, and neither should even be mentioned in any kind of “teaching”.
b) This is option d from the category list above, and as such, just as valuable for teaching us how to live as is the Biblical example of Amnon raping his sister. Both happened. Both are in the Bible. Should I “go and do likewise”?
I hope my words will encourage you to read the Bible. That is where the truth is. I suppose I should use the term God’s Word, not “Bible”. Some treat the written Bible, God’s Word, as coming from the church. 2 Pet 1:20-21 and 2 Tim 3:16-17 say otherwise.
@JDG
>Mary’s role as Co-redemptrix
Another verse that shows solely God intercedes for our defense is 1 John 2:1:
My dear children, I write this to you so that you will not sin. But if anybody does sin, we have one who speaks to the Father in our defense—Jesus Christ, the Righteous One.
Apparently the RCC teaches that Mary speaks in our defense.
@RPL
>Here is what Catholic.com says
I will assume you have quoted and understood RCC teaching correctly. Again however, choose whom you will serve. The RCC group, or God himself. Of course the RCC group will tell you they speak for God. How many others have done the same?
@Craig
>spare at least a little appreciation for Mary
I do not see anyone showing disrespect for Mary. I think many would disagree with the religious traditions not found in the Bible, which were created by various religion groups. For example, some claim Mary was sinless, despite no Scriptural support for that position. Rom 3:23, Heb 4:14-15 (exception for Jesus only, not Jesus + Mary), 1 John 1:8-2:1.
I think it would be fantastic if every church woman had the same attitudes as the historical/Biblical Mary.
@OKRickety
I agree with the desire for loving relationships. It is loving to show error. Prov 24:11-12.
Although if a person dismisses Scripture, preferring to treat it as lesser than human tradition, it may be best to refuse to give the Scripture to that person. Read Matt 7:7 and Col 2:8, and see what God would have us do. (I say that to myself also. I just do not want to be too quick to assume one is unwilling to hear what God says.)
@Dave
Thanks, that is a great list of Scriptures and points. I had forgotten that Paul said “their reputation as great leaders made no difference to me, for God has no favorites”.
Dale: I hope my words will encourage you to read the Bible.
I’ve been reading the Bible. I’ve been reading the Navarre Study Bible. It’s the Revised Standard Version, Catholic Edition, with commentary prepared by the Theology Dept of the University of Navarre in Spain.
The commentary is drawn from 2,000 years of Church history. From saints, theologians, Church Fathers, popes, councils, etc. From St. Augustine, Origen, John Chrysostom, Irenaeus, and many others.
So much commentary, the New Testament comes in three volumes (over 2,000 pages). The Old Testament in seven volumes.
I’ve read the 3-volume New Testament. Much of my understanding of Revelation comes from reading Revelation, guided by the commentary in the Navarre Bible.
I’ve also read the Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, Samuel, Ruth, Kings, Isaiah, Amos, Job, Jonah, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes. I’m currently reading Jeremiah.
In keeping up with the comments being added to this topic, I’m struck by this: the title is “What About the Fathers?”. Conversation has gone from discussion about fathers from a marriage perspective to Fathers from the early church Fathers persepective. But, still, the focus is on fathers / Fathers. Interesting dialogue going on here.
But…WHAT ABOUT THE WIMMENZ???
Trigger warning: Article that’s chock full of obviousness and foot stamping.
http://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/11/plight-of-the-funny-female/416559/?utm_source=SFFB
“If humankind decides that women’s natural zaniness should be set free, mankind should start to ask funnier women out for drinks. And women could stop dating men who don’t laugh at their jokes.”
With all the Christian love in the world, go f*ck yourself.
Dalrock- just FYI I came across a book called Date-onomics (did not see if you have covered it). Might as well be called, “How Men Are Screwing up Feminism”. Apparently too many awesome, smart, fabulous, professional women exist relative to the men and so men don’t need to commit because there are soo many women around. Lots of data though so might be interesting to you.
This may be of interest: http://www.xojane.com/relationships/open-marriage-and-fell-in-love-someone-else
Money quotes:
I’m now living with James, and I haven’t seen Daniel since I moved out of the place I used to share with him. My (very religious) family is crushed. Daniel’s family is devastated.
I have lost friends over this situation, and will probably lose more. I had had to have some of the absolute hardest conversations of my life with my parents. None of this has been easy, for anyone.
However, I’m happy.
Life with James is peaceful and sweet, and I’m learning things I should have learned years ago.
There will never be a day that I regret marrying Daniel. Our marriage was incredible, and he was a wonderful husband who wanted nothing more than to look after me and spoil me. He took amazing care of me.
But neither of us are the same person that we were then.
I don’t look at the open relationship and think, “This ended my marriage.” If I’m being truthful, I would have probably pursued James even if my marriage hadn’t allowed it.
No, this is not right. Yes, this makes me selfish. This is something I’ve learned about myself throughout this long and thorny chapter.
Every friend, every family member, has their own opinion on what happened. But ultimately, I find myself thinking that they have no idea what the future will bring. None of them know what they would have done in my situation.
Not really.
No, honey, many people do know what they would have done, and not done, in your situation — that’s why you lost friends and why your parents are crushed. You’re a selfish fool who is ruled by your own fleeting emotions. What a poster-girl for the narcissism that is running rampant among today’s younger women (doing some math based on the article, she appears to be 30).
And for the men — just never even toy with the idea of a so-called “open marriage”. Even if you have no personal moral issues with it and think you will be a real slayer of women, 999/1000 it works to the wife’s favor for reasons that become frankly obvious after the fact.
By the way, this open/monogamish stuff is going to be pushed in the decades ahead as the poly community becomes more prominent and gay marriage (including the non-monogamy norms of gay marriage) has a greater influence on straight marriages over the coming years, so it’s going to be more relevant for more people going forward than it is today.
The funny thing is this: in an open marriage, the basic rule is you can screw around but you can never fall in love outside the marriage in a way that threatens the marriage. It’s a rule that almost always is broken, precisely because many women eventually *do* fall in love with the guy they are fucking, especially, as is the case here, if he is more sexy/intelligent/talentred/successful/etc., than current H is. Basically this is not only AF/BB, it’s AF and BB at the same time until she finds an AF that wants to be her AB — which is when she promptly dumps the BB because he is now superfluous (no woman who has an AB needs a BB). This trend is going to lead to an increase in marital instability, amazing as that sounds given how unstable marriages are even today.
Speaking of open marriages, I’m sure you all have heard of the infamous “pass.” http://www.lovebscott.com/news/monique-explains-why-she-gives-her-husband-free-passes-to-cheat-they-may-give-you-something-im-simply-not-willing-to-do
This Date-onomics sounds interesting. Evan Marc Katz’s review does the book justice. http://www.evanmarckatz.com/blog/dating-tips-advice/dateonomics-by-jon-birger-book-review-by-evan-marc-katz/
This Date-onomics sounds interesting. Evan Marc Katz’s review does the book justice.
Evan lacks basic red pill awareness, therefore he cannot explain the mechanics of the current SMP in any meaningful sense. He is merely a blind man groping the allegorical elephant, as are the majority of his commenters.
The single man “shortage” myth has been destroyed numerous times here and elsewhere, and most of it is boils down to apex fallacy. What we have, in fact, is the exact opposite problem: a surplus of men still working to obtain beta provider status pursuing a tiny minority of “marriageable” women, who by traditional standards, would not even have been dateable a mere generation ago. This will eventually correct (by men walking away from marriage 2.0), and that is when the “fun” (i.e. shrieking) really begins.
Keep your ear to the ground on this, it will only get more interesting.
@ jbro1922
What I got from the article is that women don’t want to date (economically) down. Color me surprised.
The more women that get college degrees, the less they want to marry a blue collar guy.
This little turd nugget from the article is worth mentioning too:
“What I do concede, is that it behooves all of us to date extensively through our 20’s, to grow and mature, and figure out what works for us, so that we can realistically settle down between 30-35 instead of 35-45. Life doesn’t always work that way, of course, but it’s hard to argue that prioritizing love is, in any way, “bad” for you.”
White knighting all the way. Long live the carousel, and squeeze a marriage and child into your life just pre-menopause.
If love is not in anyway ‘bad’ for you……….why is it not worth pursuing until your mid-30s?
Please do not indulge in triumphalism by taunting the Separated Bretheren by using the acronym for Real Christian Church to refer to the Catholic Church.
Were it not for Sacred Tradition, you’d only have five books in your Scriptures. Jesus did not leave us the Bible, He left us His Church. The authority of the Christian Scriptures comes from the authority Christ gave to His Church, not the other way around.
I have never heard of any Bishop of Rome being crowned Emperor. Please explain. Provide references to support your claims.
“If love is not in anyway ‘bad’ for you……….why is it not worth pursuing until your mid-30s?”
Because careers are worth pursuing too?
I suppose he means “date extensively through our 20’s, to grow and mature, and figure out what works for us” is prioritizing love. And career. And yoga. And “finding yourself.” And travelling. So you can be this wonderful, fabulous person when you get married. And be married to a wonderful, fabulous person. Who makes more money. And has more education. And a bigger house. And a nice car. And can shower you with affection. And. And. And.
@Casey
The interesting part of that article isn’t the rehashed “where have all the good men gone?” rallying cry, which has become the standard modern refrain in discussions of today’s SMP.
What’s interesting is the utter lack of introspection about “where have all the good women gone?” This is far more important, because:
a) Young women are firmly in control of the SMP, and therefore have a far, far greater influence on how many men ultimately decide to become “good men” than vice versa, and
b) “Good women” have deserted the marriage market in far, far greater numbers than “good men” have (so far), and to miss this basic point amounts to colossal oversight.
Of course there is no way Evan will touch “that” aspect even with a 11-foot pole. Same goes for the author, who clearly is pandering to his audience of single “educated” women over 30.
PuffyJacket @ 4:18 pm:
“What’s interesting is the utter lack of introspection about “where have all the good women gone?””
Yeah, that’s been eating at me lately. Why would a man who marries his high school sweetheart and lives the American Dream turn around and teach his daughter the exact opposite of following Happy Mommy’s example? “My wife married me young, stayed at home and we turned out great. I want my daughter to do things differently.” This describes at least one entire generation of American fathers.
They defied basic human biology and THEIR OWN LIFE EXPERIENCES to push feminist garbage upon even their own children, to their kids’ inevitable ruin. What madness is this?
@anonymous_ng
https://tayiabr.wordpress.com/2014/11/06/why-women-arent-funny-christopher-hitchens/
This verse (Galatians 2:9) is also interesting in considering the importance of Peter.
1. Peter is one of the group of 3 Apostles that are apparently more important than the other Apostles
2. Peter is not mentioned first (usually, the person of greatest perceived importance is listed before those of lesser importance)
3. The phrase “seemed to be pillars” is used. This is not a statement that they are pillars, but relates to their reputation among men.
This statement is only found in Matthew 16:13-19, but not in the equivalent passages of Mark 8:27-29, Luke 9:18-20, and John 6:66-71.
Why would a man who marries his high school sweetheart and lives the American Dream turn around and teach his daughter the exact opposite of following Happy Mommy’s example? “My wife married me young, stayed at home and we turned out great. I want my daughter to do things differently.” This describes at least one entire generation of American fathers.
Actually, there’s a pretty simple answer to this.
That sweet, submissive girl that Dad married in high school and had baby daughter with? After 20-plus years of marriage to beta schlubby hubby, she’s on the cusp of being an empty nester, is bored with hubby, regrets the hell out of having married him so young (ROMO/YOLO); is, now that she’s past 40, ready to live the 20s that she missed by marrying early, and is getting ready to pull the divorce trigger on schlubby hubby.
Schlubby hubby already knows that his erstwhile-sweet-submissive-wife-turning-bitter-harridan (her facade to the contrary in front of friends and family notwithstanding) has been doing “the whispers” in baby daughter’s ear, letting her know in no uncertain terms that THE LAST THING IN THE WORLD that she wants to do is to follow in Mommy’s footsteps, unless she wants to be “miserable and unfulfilled[TM].” Schlubby hubby, ever the supplicating beta, seeks to appease Mommy by enabling her perversion of baby daughter’s view of marriage and family, hoping that Mommy will change her tune. Thus does Schlubby Hubby/BPD castrate himself and stomp his severed manhood to a pulp by endorsing the FI, hoping against all hope that turning his baby daughter into a feminist will save his own marriage to her mother.
They defied basic human biology and THEIR OWN LIFE EXPERIENCES to push feminist garbage upon even their own children, to their kids’ inevitable ruin. What madness is this?
False teaching is insidious and permeates this world. Feminism has always been couched as Progress from the Backwards Way of Things.
And considering the material progress made in the past 100 years, the Progressive way of things seems to make sense …
Now we see its fruits.
Keep in mind thought that the RCC position was formed when it found itself in charge of the Roman Empire
I won’t keep it in mind because it’s historical nonsense.
“Islam is the closest thing to a Barbaric horde that I’ve ever encountered. ”
I’ve got two Muslims in my family and personally know about 30 more. They are all highly educated, professional, cultured, etc.
Essentially, that’s meaningless, when Taqiyya is involved. Islam means submission, and that means killing unbelievers. Plain fact. Islam cannot coexist with the West.
Why would a man who marries his high school sweetheart and lives the American Dream turn around and teach his daughter the exact opposite of following Happy Mommy’s example? “My wife married me young, stayed at home and we turned out great. I want my daughter to do things differently.”
Because this
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-3341988/How-wife-heartless-Simon-maimed-Taliban-bomb-wife-walked-squandered-1million-compensation-took-court-MORE.html
and this
http://www.theguardian.com/law/2015/mar/11/woman-wins-right-seek-money-ex-husband-30-years-after-break-up-dale-vince
Raising girls to get their own means protecting boys from being financially used and abused.
All my kids are taught to work for their keep and have their own bank accounts, like their parents do.
“Essentially, that’s meaningless, when Taqiyya is involved. Islam means submission, and that means killing unbelievers. Plain fact. Islam cannot coexist with the West.”
You don’t any Muslims do you? Most do not take every word of the Quran literally. Like Christians, most are “culturally Muslim” and pick and choose.
That’s a brave struggle against the tide! However, once again, meaningless. Young women today, and as well, young men are raised in a toxic stew of feminism. Indoctrination is very thorough, and young people aren’t allowed to dissent.
Look at what’s happening to young women today. They’re being taught to be feral. All of them. Look at the frivorce and economic rape that’s a growing problem. Who would dare to marry a young American woman? Say what you will, the facts speak for themselves. MGTOW is a growing response to feral feminism. Simply put, men are withdrawing, and, once a young man has made such a hard decision, the chances of recidivism are small. Yes, that means no children, and no future families. Sad, but what do you expect when a woman can steal everything, even your children?
“Culturally Muslim?” There’s only one standard of conduct for Islam. Those who disobey get killed. Honor killings and all that. You see, it all depends on the Imam of their mosque. He’s the one who decides what they do. No, I don’t have any use for Islamic invasion. Does that make me a racist? Don’t really care.
“Does that make me a racist?”
No. Islam is a religion.
“Culturally Muslim?” There’s only one standard of conduct for Islam. Those who disobey get killed.”
My cousin’s wife is married to a non-Muslim man, has been known to drink wine on occasion and had premarital sex, and she’s still alive. She even fasts during Ramadan too.
History shows that as an Islamic presence grows, so do the acts of religious violence. Let her misbehavior draw the attention of the devout, and see what happens. Women have no rights under true Islam. Disobedience results in honor killings and stonings. Believe as you wish. Violent facts are truly hard to stomach. Understanding that not all people are equal upsets most folks. Islam is barbaric, plain fact.
“Understanding that not all people are equal upsets most folks. ”
Trying to upset me? Think you’re being “edgy” do you? Who here claimed all people are equal?
Cultures, religions, people, are not equal. When you travel the world as I have that becomes obvious. Rather than make blanket statements about Muslims, get to know some, right in your own country. You will soon learn that, like you say, all are not equal.
A literalist interpretation of Islam is certainly problematic.
@enrique,
” I hear ya. Dalrock is kind enough to let me post: I’m a (White) Hispanic non-Christian (Sufi path: Islam Lite). ”
OK then school our fatboy above on the many variants of Islam. And I agree the commenters here have no idea about ‘hood life or they wouldn’t be so anti-higher education/career for women and so pro-female sexual objectification.
Fact is, I do business with some Moslems. They’re very conservative, from Pakistan. Very honest in money matters. That’s not the point. As the Islamic presence in a country grows, so also grows the fundamentalist variants of Islam. You know them as the raging mobs. When it gets to that point, there aren’t any moderates left. They either flee, get right with Islam, or get killed. That’s just the way it goes. Here in Texas we have honor killings happen from time to time. The reason is always the same……disobedient women . There’s a mosque a few miles from where I live. I wonder just how long it will be before something happens here.
As someone intimately connected to the projects, the welfare is not enough to cover a good life for her and her children, and that is why the baby mamas seek boyfriends with more means. Welfare gives you the bare minimum and tries to get away with even less than that. That is why, in any ‘hood worth its salt, an underground entrepreneurial “ghetto economy” of bathroom cosmetologists, barbers, babysitters, caterers, DVD piraters, etc, exists. If these people relied on state subsidy alone they’d barely survive.
Don’t raise your daughters to believe her worth lies solely in her ability to attract a man. Cultivate her mind, her intellect and finer aspirations. Instill in her a solid work ethic and make sure she can always stand on her own two feet, no matter what. Husband or no husband.
Although the dictionary definition of Muslim is “believer in Islam”, it seems you want to say “Muslims” are similar to “Jews” in that the name refers to a cultural identity rather than a religious identity.
To me, that sounds like the difference between Christians and “churchians” where the latter also “pick and choose” what parts of the religion they want to follow.
It would seem that your complaint about denigration of Muslims is based on your experience with “Muslims by culture”. I think it’s reasonable to suppose there is a multitude of Islamic believers (millions?) who believe that the entire Quran is literally true. If they are in power (legally or not), then, as EastTexasFatBoy says, “They (the moderate Muslims) either flee, get right with Islam, or get killed.” I have little doubt that many of the Muslims in the USA are moderate Muslims who came here to avoid the rule of extreme Muslims.
How is one to know where an individual Muslim stands? Are they just culturally Muslim and follow the traditions, or are they extremely devout and prone to acts of religious fervor?
It is going to be difficult for a non-Muslim to be certain where a Muslim stands in the Islamic spectrum. For myself, I’d rather be very cautious and initially assume they may be extreme. I can always trust them later, but trusting too soon may have dire results.
One bad apple will spoil the whole bunch eventually, unless it is removed. I don’t see that the bad apples are being removed from Islam.
Some of us have read the Quran, and understand how taqiyya and kitman applies to conversations between Muslims and Christians. Lying is permissible, even praiseworthy, when deceiving the unbeliever. Breaking the rules of Islam is also allowed in order to fool non-Muslims, like drinking alcohol and not fasting on Ramadan.
I would not characterize Sufi as Islam lite, either. It is a more ‘mystical’ approach, but Sufi adherents are called to jihad just as much as the other groups. In Christian terms, it’s the difference between the gospel of Matthew and the gospel of John.
“I would not characterize Sufi as Islam lite, either.”
Neither would I. Aurangzeb alone should put that myth to rest. But I assure you Enrique’s version of Sufism really is Islam lite. Super lite and super rainbows and unicorns, if I’m not mistaken, as most western versions of The Caravan are.
“Although the dictionary definition of Muslim is “believer in Islam”, it seems you want to say “Muslims” are similar to “Jews” in that the name refers to a cultural identity rather than a religious identity.”
Not really. Saying that for most people religion is a social affair. Not many people officially break away from the religion of their parents or recent ancestors. They tend to celebrate the holidays, agree with the good positive teachings, and not look too deeply into the rest.
“It would seem that your complaint about denigration of Muslims is based on your experience with “Muslims by culture”. I think it’s reasonable to suppose there is a multitude of Islamic believers (millions?) who believe that the entire Quran is literally true.”
Believing a “holy” book to be literally true, while certainly a type of mythical thinking, is not necessarily dangerous. I know some Muslims, Jews and Christians who take their holy books as literally true but they say the old barbaric laws like stoning, killing idol worshippers, and the rest were for a previous age under very specific circumstances, totally non-applicable today. While many find their belief in these books as 100% true to be puzzling, at least they have enough sense to divorce the old ways from the here and now, and thus they cannot be called a real threat to myself, yourself or the world at large.
“How is one to know where an individual Muslim stands? ”
Like you do with anyone else. Get to know them.
“It is going to be difficult for a non-Muslim to be certain where a Muslim stands in the Islamic spectrum. For myself, I’d rather be very cautious and initially assume they may be extreme. I can always trust them later, but trusting too soon may have dire results.”
Sounds good. I do this with everyone I meet, regardless of religion affiliation.
Well folks, we’re going to see just exactly how peaceful Islam is. Thing is, I take these serious people at their word. They mean to kill out western perversion. The fundamentalist strain will win out. Think of all the alienated young men here in the US. What happens when they don’t have a chance for a family? Hmmmmm? Radicalization. Islam promises obedient women and a family. Think about that.
” Islam promises obedient women and a family. ”
LOL! Ever dated a Muslim woman?
Recruiters lie, that’s a given. But the thing is, the young men want to believe. All part of the alienated thing. Point is, women in the west are completely nuts. There’s no way to deal with that. Islam certainly controls women. Especially the more fundamentalist types, which are the main attraction.
@Easttexasfatboy
I read this morning an interview with the inland empire jihadi’s father. The father explained that he hadn’t spoken with his son in several years, because his wife (jihadi’s mom) had divorced him and jihadi had sided with his mother.
Yeah, Dalrock, I read that too. I’ve got a problem with the CAIR spokesman who was in the middle of all that. Taqiyya is a real problem dealing with Muslims. Especially in such a high stress situation. His whole family had to know what was up with that trip to Saudi Arabia, and bringing that bride back.
The real problem that Islam presents is this…….there’s no common ground between cultures. They cannot coexist in the same space. They do not share the same moral values.
If it’s true about his mother, then she’s probably lucky she didn’t suffer an honor killing.
It is a mistake, though, to think that Islam is some innocent religion, because it is not, and overwhelming evidence bears this out. Just because you treat a Muslim with respect does not mean he will not kill you in a heartbeat if he gets the opportunity. Even the so-called “Islam-lite” jovial Muslims are all potential killers.
If I were to work in an office where a devoted Muslim also works, I will make sure I pack heat to work everyday. No, I am not kidding. The San Bernadino killers were treated with respect by their co-workers. As a matter of fact, the NYPost has it that the slaughtered co-workers threw them a baby shower just a few months earlier.
But these animals went on a rampage anyhow, in search of their 72 virgins and other mythical and nonsensical rewards which their god has promised them for killing kefirs. When a religion promises its adherents that they would receive a reward for killing nonadherents, would anyone call such a movement an innocent religion? I don’t think so.
And, for those who are not aware, there is no such a thing as radical Islam. There is only one Islam, and it is a very brutal Islam. Obama I think is too deluded or too smart to publicly acknowledge that, knowing he is one of them.
“Obama I think is too deluded or too smart to publicly acknowledge that, knowing he is one of them.”
Please. Obama eats pork, drinks beer, had premarital sex, possibly gay sex. If there’s only one Islam, brutal Islam, and he’s a member, then how come he hasn’t been brutally killed for committing haram or worse yet, shirk, by carrying an idol of Hanuman in his pocket?
“The real problem that Islam presents is this…….there’s no common ground between cultures. They cannot coexist in the same space. They do not share the same moral values. ”
All Abrahamic religions share the same common ground and foundational beginnings. How is it you can coexist with Wiccans, Buddhists, Hindus, etc and not Muslims?
Well, only one of that group is a pack of killers. Call it what it is. However, they’re steadily wearing out their welcome. That’s when the low level pogroms will start.
Neguy, ” it’s very difficult to pursue the stable family approach if you are outside the UMC.
enrique says”
The UMC family structure is comprised of husbands AND wives who are university educated and professionally employed.
Enrique, “It’s similar with our society in that the incentive structures are so perverse, it’s very difficult to pursue the stable family approach if you are outside the UMC.
enrique says:
November 12, 2015 at 7:43 pm
Enrique, “Tommy sums up the difference in a Mom who has kids, but no money, vs a Father in the same situation. Tommy is a legit (secular) Fathers’ Rights warrior.”
Bull. I researched this punk Sotomayor and he’s another “baby daddy”, multiple times over, who’s own son is coming out with how he’s neglected him. He also collected tons of money from suckers to make a documentary “A Fatherless America” and its been years and no doc. He’s another internet hustler. End of.
Article on Islam and lying:
https://pjmedia.com/trending/2015/12/17/how-taqiyya-works-in-the-bedroom-and-in-the-courtroom
Dear 2084GO
Sources, please.
Sources, please.
Regards,
Boxer
@ 2084GO
“All Abrahamic religions share the same common ground and foundational beginnings. How is it you can coexist with Wiccans, Buddhists, Hindus, etc and not Muslims?”
Facts about Islam you can’t dispute if you’re intellectually honest:
1. – Islam has been at war with the world since it’s inception. You can’t say the same of any other religion.
2.- There is no orthodox Quranic support for Islam to be at peace with non-Muslims. You can’t say the same of any other religion and their relative texts. Non-violent, Moderate Islam can only exist via ecclesiastical innovations in tradition, extra-Quranic texts, reverse abrogating violent Quranic verses with peaceful ones or liberalization.
3. – Out of the 1.2 Billion Muslims on the planet, the majority of Muslims (680 million plus) world-wide when polled believe violence is an acceptable means for the establishment of Sharia law. You cannot say that about any other major religion’s followers.
4. – Sharia law is an inseparable aspect of orthodox Islam which is incompatible with the traditions of Western Civilization. You cannot say this about Judeo-Christian foundational laws.
That being said, yes, there are and can be peaceful, non-violent Muslims. Where this PC bullshit you’re touting comes from is a naive and shallow understanding of the kinds social, political and religious gymnastics that have to take place in order to make moderate Islam in the West feasible. I’m not saying Muslims can’t live in peace with the West, I’m saying, is the risk Islam poses to the West really worth getting a case of tennis elbow from all back-patting about what a tolerant culture we are?
That was a stupid troll like question.
JARG….most western leftists can’t wrap their heads around Islam. Islam means submission. Or death. Plain fact. History shows what happens when Islam comes to visit.
@Boxer, its all out in the open on youtube, my friend. The collection scams of Sotomayor and Dr. Umar Johnson, and several other hucksters, are well known throughout black youtube. You can do a youtube search of their names and literally hundreds of vids about it will show up. You can also youtube search “Sotomayor’s son speaks out” and “Sotomayor’s kids”. But Tommy himself mentions his kids often. What, you thought he was childless?! And Dr. Umar collected millions for some “boys school” he said he was gonna start and never did. And got busted for nasty texts between him and his stripper booty call, after years of preaching “morals and purity” and avoiding “ratchet women” to the rest of us. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!! Black youtube is a trip. You should tune in sometime.
“That being said, yes, there are and can be peaceful, non-violent Muslims. Where this PC bullshit you’re touting comes from is a naive and shallow understanding of the kinds social, political and religious gymnastics that have to take place in order to make moderate Islam in the West feasible. ”
I don’t recall spouting anything PC, much less “pc bullshit”, The “kinds social, political and religious gymnastics that have to take place in order to make moderate Islam in the West feasible. ” are the exact same kinds of gymnastics that had to take place to make moderate Judaism feasible. Like I said, the Old Testament laws and Sharia are same. I’m no “naive and shallow” fanboy of either one.
@2084GO
“…are the exact same kinds of gymnastics that had to take place to make moderate Judaism feasible. Like I said, the Old Testament laws and Sharia are same. I’m no “naive and shallow” fanboy of either one.”
I know in post-modern times people are flippant about words and assertions, but sorry, you don’t get to say asinine things like that here and still expect to be treated like a rational adult anymore. I give people benefit of the doubt before they prove themselves idiots.
As far as I’m concerned you’re just a troll wasting everyone’s time.
Have you ever bothered to read the Torah vis a vis the Quran?
Right here on this site we have this comment by BluePillProfessor; “So filing for divorce and dumping your man, literally dropping a nuclear bomb did not destroy your enemy like you thought? He fought back? The Hell you say! Enjoy your cats and eternity in the lake of fire you evil harlot. In an earlier society we would have shown you mercy, buried you up to your neck and then stoned her to death.”
https://dalrock.wordpress.com/2015/12/11/why-didnt-he-think-of-that/#comment-197028
Although I corrected him about stoning over divorce, they did stone for adultery (same as Sharia). Have you never even read the King James Bible?
How many dads have seen themselves in Part 1 of this trilogy:
http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/ad-day-fords-risky-new-short-film-about-divorce-beautiful-and-sad-169836?utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Adweek_Newsletter_2016002415&utm_source=sailthru&utm_term=AWK_AdBrand
Beautiful – No ; Sad; yes, yes it is