Kevin Williamson at National Review writes in Advice for Incels:
In the 1960s and 1970s, there were some social disruptions touching marriage and family life. It was, they told us, a “sexual revolution.” The thing about revolutions is: Somebody loses. The so-called incels are some of the losers in that revolution, though not the only ones or, socially speaking, the most significant ones. (Those would be the abandoned single mothers.) But their situation is worth considering.
The fiction that what we are witnessing is men abandoning their families, and not women ejecting the fathers from the homes, is the very foundation of conservative support for the destruction of traditional marriage. Lost in all of this are the millions of innocent children who grow up without their fathers because mom wanted freedom to bang other men, and cowardly men like Kevin Williamson couldn’t bear to speak, or even think the truth of the matter.
Note: I originally wrote this as a comment at Instapundit.
Related:
Lets see:
Incels: Don’t get free sex.
Single mothers: All manner of free stuff from the government and several other entities.
Yeah, single mothers are definitely worse off…. (imagine, if you will, me rolling my eyes).
What they must have forgot in the sexual revolution is that pregnancy can still occur after sex. Hence the dilemma of single mothers. Rather than trying to point this out…we’ve just kept on the contraception-abortion-government welfare train to keep the sexual revolution going.
I get that most of the time it’s the woman kicking the guy out but for the sake of argument let’s say the guy abandoned her…while I think a man abandoning his kid isn’t a great display of character…he’s not married to her, he can leave if he wishes. That’s probably why it was a good thing for women to keep sex in marriage. Your chances of the husband and father abandoning you would go down with the vows he publicly declared to you.
Video of mens rights statistics read off unwittingly by some beta and careergrrrls. Watch their facial expressions.
Pingback: The coward’s way out. | @the_arv
Let’s see some numbers!
Lyman Stone writes about these matters as a Research Fellow at the Institute for Family Studies, He is tells us he is a Lutheran.
This tweet shows over time the number of men and women who are unmarried, 25 – 36, and have had no sex in the past year. See the number of men in this group rise.
His explanation: “I should add here that @Noahpinion suggests porn drives these trends. I am inclined to agree somewhat! Porn may enable men to be more comfortable not having a sexual partner. Lacking a partner means they don’t benefit from the civilizing effect of woman.”
His work is well worth following for those interested in the changing state of marriage. Such as this fact-rich post: “No Ring, No Baby: How Marriage Trends Impact Fertility.”
https://ifstudies.org/blog/no-ring-no-baby
It’s fun to read his articles and see how adroitly he dances around the role of feminism. His favorite tactic is to discuss women, but when covering negative behavior flip to “men and women” (because anything bad must be both, or just men).
The name “Kevin Williamson” should by now be a derision trigger for everyone hereabouts. The cuckservative to surpass all other cuckservatives.
I notice that it is always a DIFFERENT cuckservative from NRO peddling his misandric stupidity.
Brad Wilcucks, Jim Gay-ratty, and Rich Lowry have been quiet for quite some time. So now they are trotting out Kevin Williamson as the crash test dummy.
The previous faggots got beaten up (for reasons they still can’t figure out) so are averse to launching another foray, but hence send another rookie out to draw fire.
Always notice that NRO keeps trotting out different cuckservatives to push the misandry message.
Kevin Williamson at National Review
Right there I stopped reading. Wiallliamson is a bigot, a real live hate filled bigot who wants small towns inhabited by people of a certain skin color to die, just die.
National Review is just another version of the same main stream narrative. Recently a writer for Not Relevant came out in favor of transvesites. I won’t link, it is easy to find via any search.
LIke the Washington Generals vs. the Harlem Globetrotters, the function of conservatives like Williamson and the rest of the Not Relevant crew is to lose. They can lose gracefully, or not but they must lose and consume resources from flyover country in the process. Because their job is to lose.
National Review: standing on the train tracks of leftism politiely saying “Please don’t run over me too fast”. While wearing a dress..
Larry Editor quotes someone from something called the Family Research Institute (where have we seen that name before?)
Sigh. More idiocy from some traditional conservative who lives in a bubble filled with air from 1965.
Two quick facts: Men tend to use porn as a substitute. Women do not civilize men – the can’t even civilize themselves. Just for a start.
@Lovecraft: nice find.
Yeah the women civilize men narrative needs to die in a tire fire.
Do women civilize men?
What are the least civilized places in the US? Inner city ghettos.
Is there a shortage of women in America’s inner city ghettos? Obviously not.
Of what is there a shortage in America’s inner city ghettos? Married fathers.
Who civilizes boys and makes them men? Married fathers.
Who civilizes girls on the way to becoming women? Married fathers.
Anon Reader,
I agree with your comment about the Stone’s tweets (as I said in my comment).
But the data is useful, even essential. This is the problem we face in a wide range of fields: academia has been colonized by the Left, so their analysis is often bogus or even risible. So we have to extract the data and provide our own analysis.
Unfortunate, but such is life. We work with the tools we have, not those we want.
As a rule, with some exception, feminism has resulted in women becoming severe liabilities and threats to men. That’s exponentially true with respect to marriage. I just say no to things that are bad for me.
Lacking a partner means they don’t benefit from the civilizing effect of woman.
Oh what a laugh I got! Last I remember we lost our perfect paradise, and were turned out into a cursed world, as a result of listening to a woman instead of God. Biblically women usually led men into sin, far more than leading them to righteousness.
I didn’t hardly curse, before I got married! In this adulterous generation, few women are likely to be a good influence on an already decent man.
The biggest blind spot most cuckservatives think is that a woman is just a beacon of virtue no matter what she espouses, believes, or acts.
I don’t doubt a civil woman could help a man become civil and really that could only happen in marriage (1 Peter 3:1-2)…but a feminist man hating slut would certainly bring out the caveman in men.
“civilizing effect of woman”
Who builds civilization?
“civilizing effect of woman”
In reality, civilization happened in spite of women, not because of it. The proof is obvious.
1) Women send love letters to serial killers, but have no respect for honest work that keeps society running (and women do almost none of this work).
2) The more a particular subject has to do with uplifting the human condition or advancing the future, the less women are interested in it.
WHICH GENDER IS QUITTING ITS “CHRISTIAN” MARRIAGES?
DALROCK wrote, “The fiction that what we are witnessing is men abandoning their families, and not women ejecting the fathers from the homes, is the very foundation of conservative support for the destruction of traditional marriage.”
DALROCK knocks it out of the park with this analysis! It is wives, both secular and “Christian” who are ending their marriages! Sadly, pastors love to pass along the myth that deadbeat husbands are the root of marital decay!
It would be ideal if this “false assumption” could be emailed to every evangelical pastor and every evangelical leader so the church would quit assisting these unhappy “Christian” wives who are abandoning their husbands!
I have been abandoned by three (3) “Christian” wives (a 21 year marriage, a 3 year marriage and another 3 year marriage). All 3 had abandoned their previous husbands too, but in each case our pastor sympathized with my departing wife’s claims which I have no knowledge of, and he NEVER SPOKE TO ME (The “head”)!
This is because conditioned pastors, conditioned church members, conditioned family members and conditioned neighbors who BELIEVE EVERYTHING THE DEPARTING “CHRISTIAN” WIFE SAYS ABOUT HER GOOD-FOR-NOTHING HUSBAND!
Who did all this “conditioning?” Forty years of radical feminism that has infiltrated every facet of society has conditioned almost everyone! Even deceived pastors and church leaders pass along this “conditioning” not even realizing it is satan’s effort to prove God is a fool for choosing males as leaders and heads.
I propose we call this “what it is”…. “DEPARTING WIFE PRIVILEGE!” I warn husbands all the time at AMBEC (please join the AMBEC on fb) that whatever she says (makes up) about them will be BELIEVED!….and Christian husbands get crushed by the loss of their church, their small groups, their friends..and even some of their own blood relatives after they hear her fabricated story! (I never saw my two kids again, and I was abandoned 16 years ago with the assistance of my pastor and my church!) Doesn’t this make the pastor and the church members who helped her abandon me and our home “accomplices” in the breaking of God’s marriage covenant? Can you hear me now?
WARNING TO HUSBANDS: A discontented, departing wife without ANY BIBLICAL REASON for quitting her marriage obviously shows LITTLE OR NO FEAR OF GOD, and therefore she will have no problem telling HUGE LIES ABOUT HER HUSBAND to insure that her escape plan will not be challenged, but instead, be supported by everybody!
Mike J. Baron, Licensed Baptist Minister
Please join the AMBEC facebook page!
https://www.facebook.com/groups/reportAMBEC/
Leftardism, rather than traditional conservative Christian families. What could go wrong: http://worldstarhiphop.com/videos/video.php?v=wshhjUJBy7db8SQZ312v
Pingback: The coward’s way out. | Reaction Times
Another hit piece against incels from National Review? I’m still tired from fisking David French. Maybe just this one paragraph. It’s special:
All you have to do to clear that first hurdle is show up. You’re a man, you go to church, ergo you are a churchgoing man.
An unbeliever who goes to church is legitimate headcount? I know these guys believe in Magic Dirt but this is the first time I’ve seen it in the context of Holy Ground.
Maybe you go for self-interested reasons. Most churches are good with that: Lots of people come to church not because they fell off their ass on the road to Damascus but because they are lonely or because they are unhappy with some aspect of their lives. That’s okay. In Jesus’s time, a lot of people came mostly for the show and the bread and the fishes. Just park your ass on a pew and we’ll see about your immortal soul.
WTF does he think Christianity is? A suicide prevention charity? If you think the Bible is a book of lies then that’s okay, you can fake it and marry my daughter as well? She’s desperate to find a lonely, unhappy hypocrite like you!
Hold up, hold up, he thought Jesus’ popularity came from people wanting to be entertained? “Yo, Hay-Soos, show us that bottomless barrel of food trick again!” Williamson obviously never read that story. What church has misinformed him so badly? *Googles* Hmm, he doesn’t claim Christianity on his biographies or Facebook page at all. That’s good, non-Christians are allowed to be ignorant about Scripture, but why then does he advise going to church?
Does HE go to churches as an unbeliever looking to scam them for selfish benefit? That would explain his recommending the practice to others.
That’s good, non-Christians are allowed to be ignorant about Scripture…
It’s a real coin toss these days as to who is more ignorant of Scripture, churchians or professing non-believers.
“… and not women ejecting the fathers from the homes…”
No. Again, that’s where *MEN* *DRAW THE LINE*.
Women can’t “eject men” from being fathers in their homes to their children. That’s a pure *BETA EXCUSE*!
I don’t have “women control me” as a *MAN*! They can only “use other men” to try to “control me” lol.
Women may “physical attack” and/or try to “run away” from the father of her children if she doesn’t want him in his life; but she has *NO RIGHT* here.
Any *GOOD MAN* who is a *FATHER* will *ALWAYS MAKE A WAY TO BE A FATHER*.
Just because the mother of their children decides “she doesn’t want him in her life” doesn’t change the fact that a *CARING FATHER* always is a *FATHER TO HIS CHILDREN*!
So my advice to men out there who may be fathers of children by “troublesome women” is that they must always make an *ACTIVE STANCE* to physically be there in their kids lives whether the shameful “single mom-wannabe” wants him in her life or not; she has *NO RIGHT* here.
A patriarchal tribe of men wouldn’t let this kind of thing occur and support and leverage the father of the rebellious mother of their children against her to *KEEP HER IN CHECK* in society so she couldn’t get away with this.
Because of the “wicked State” of government these days; the Devil uses the police as “enforcers” of the wicked Feminist State against God’s Model of Husband/Father-led households and families.
As a Christian man of God’s Word I stand by and support husbands and fathers and a man’s natural *GOD-GIVEN AUTHORITY* over females in society: if I see men who are fathers of children by “single moms” who try to “run away” from the fathers of their kids; I do my best “personally” to side by and support the father of the children and not “side with the woman trying to run away from him”. I do everything I can “personally” either directly or indirectly to make it easier for the man to have better leverage and control of the situation and make it as hard as I can “socially” and/or “economically” to where the single mothers can’t “run away” as easier or as long as possible. I’m on the guy’s side.
And I do my best to “wake up” and “shame” the silly blue pill “white knight” hordes of men worshipping the “false goddess” of their pathetic existences: they need to be *SUPPORTING THE MEN AND NOT THE WOMEN*!
When the “State” of men wickedly interfere in a man’s God-Given natural rights of marriage and fatherhood I am to oppose and speak against the wicked State.
So even though the “police” and “brainwashed blue pill society” will give men a hard time, I always stand by the *MAN’S SIDE* when the mother of his kids go the State to put “restraining orders” on him and make it “legally difficult” for a man to be the husband and/or father to the family he is.
What men here on Dalrock and elsewhere on the “manosphere” and anywhere online and most importantly *IN REAL LIFE* need to *BAND TOGETHER IN BROTHERHOOD* and “look out for their fellow men” and when possible “have each other’s backs” against the wicked State when they cross the line of “God-Ordained natural law of marriage and fatherhood”!
For all the “negatives” we men can “preach against women” there is *ONE THING* I have to admit womankind are *BETTER AT*! Get this: the *SISTERHOOD IS DEFINITELY COOPERATIVE TO EACH OTHER NO MATTER WHAT!* lol.
If *MEN* had each other’s backs just as good as women do in the “Sisterhood” we’d *ALL BE BETTER OFF IN THIS NATION*! Smh… REMEMBER THAT.
But no, we too “competitive”, uncooperative and in a constant “stick-measuring contest” to be “humble enough” to accept hierarchy within our ranks…
If men can’t be a legit “Brotherhood” like the “Sisterhood” amongst womankind in real life; we should be able to at least get along “online”.
Let’s quit “fighting against fellow men” who all universally want the same thing here: Western society to have proper *HEALTHY* natural human relations in the world. Amen!
~ Bro. Jed
Williamson writes:
What legal arrangement is he dangling here?
It’s hard to believe there was a time I thought it was a good idea to give NR money.
It’s hard to believe there was a time I thought it was a good idea to give NR money.
In the 1990s, I actually donated $100 to National Review, in addition to my subscription fee.
As I’ve written earlier; churches are called to uphold the institute of marriage:
Heb 13:4 “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.”
How are churches honoring marriage if they allow for no-fault divorces? How are churches honoring marriage if they allow sexual immorality? How are churches honoring marriages if they allow adulterous marriages (“whoever marries a divorced woman commits adultery”) ?
Do they not fear God’s judgement?
They fear wimminz judgement more than God’s. It’s how screwed up they are.
Isn’t “abandoned single mothers” an oxymoron? If they are single mothers they cant perforce be abandoned and if they are abandoned they can’t be single mothers.
Mike J. Baron,
“All 3 had abandoned their previous husbands too, ….”
I am truly sorry for what you have gone through. You make a lot of great points in your post.
Why did you twice marry women who had left a previous marriage? They had already shown they would abandon a husband.
“Just park your ass on a pew and we’ll see about your immortal soul.”
versus
“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.”
You read that? OBEY! As in:
“So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
NO ONE!
I’m willing to bet a lot of wimminz just causually forgot to hear that part of the wedding…along with the ’till death do us part’.
My wife said she specifically wanted the “obey” part in her vows to me.
That’s when I REALLY knew I had a winner!
Kevin says “incels go to church.”
Because someone:
1. Has to mow the lawn
2.Change the oil
3.Sex these fat tatted cows that have 3 kids by 3 thugs
4.Clean house
5.Prepare food
6.Be an entertainment center
7.Scapegoat
8.Bitching post
9.Point of blame
10. Lose retirement account
11.Lose all outside interests,he just want to die now thank you very much
12.DROP MONEY IN ANTI-FATHER COLLECTION PLATES
13.Uphold the anti-christian tenates of the Churchian faith in Greater Society.
Jed mask says the cops are agents of the Devil. I agree
trick question of the day: Who can make war with The Beast?
Hint: He comes with Vengeance no longer the sacrifice.
I entered high school in 1977. That year was when sex education was taught for 40 minutes per week on a trial basis. the “sex revolution” had already produced a slew of single mothers, and the education department was to respond by educating high-school age children so that unwanted pregnancies would become a “thing of the past”
Today, my son’s school curriculum had “Personal Development” as a full subject, taking several periods per week.He came home traumatized by all of the ethic-free perversions he encountered there (I’m being cynical).
And those ten pregnancies? They became a lifestyle choice!
Kevin has no idea what it is really like out there for some men, no idea. So everything becomes just an esoteric term for him based on what he believes given his own lifestyle. That is a very dangerous place for an opinion writer to find himself. Instead of Kevin or David French writing about incels, it should be an incel. Why has not one person asked an incel?
“freebird says:
May 12, 2018 at 9:33 am
Kevin says “incels go to church.”
Because someone:
1. Has to mow the lawn
2.Change the oil
3.Sex these fat tatted cows that have 3 kids by 3 thugs
4.Clean house
5.Prepare food
6.Be an entertainment center
7.Scapegoat
8.Bitching post
9.Point of blame
10. Lose retirement account
11.Lose all outside interests,he just want to die now thank you very much
12.DROP MONEY IN ANTI-FATHER COLLECTION PLATES
13.Uphold the anti-christian tenates of the Churchian faith in Greater Society.
A VERY good list! But you also need to add:
— “whipping boy” (either by itself or as an addition to #7 {which itself is virtually the same as #9}), and
— “house, car, and at least 60% of income for at least the next 15 years in ‘child support’ for those thuglets that those fat tatted cows gave birth” to #10.
Nevertheless, I understand your points — which is why I myself am a MGHOW (and the funny thing about that is that I principally have the girls/young women whom I grew up with, to thank for making me a MGHOW).
For all the Catholics, Prots, or those wondering just why and how feminism wormed its way into the churches. I’d suggest reading this book…
Now it specifically talks about feminism got into the Catholic church and Catholic universities in the late 70s and 80s…but the opposition to masculinity is on full display there and might be how it got into the Prot churches as well. Reading things like supporting abortion, woman priests, homosexuality, taking the Father part out of God and the Son part out of Jesus and turning the Holy Spirit into a ‘she’ in the creed.
The biggest bunch of nonsense I read was the theory that Christ actually wanted a non-sexist androgyous church but the disciples screwed it up.
At the very least it’ll make you think ‘a ha’ or fill you with anger this stuff got this far in the church. It’s done both for me.
Also of note I’m not sure if the Orthodox are that far down the feminist rabbit hole in their churches…but it would be a good read for them to in order to spot it before it happens or see it if it is happening.
Mainstream writers aren’t going to talk to incels or anyone outside their little circle. That’s why they were so surprised when Trump won. The US has the laziest worst journalists (if they can be called journalists) anywhere and they wonder why they aren’t trusted.
Women don’t civilize men, but instead gives a man a reason to be civil…those who are inclined to it.
The violence in boomtowns from gold rushes and oil finds shows that unattached men with no support structure are more prone to violence. San Fran had 1,000 unsolved murders during the first few years of the gold rush and martial law was once declared on a Texas oil boomtown as the violence was so bad.
Having a family give a man a reason not to be violent, lest he endanger them; the women themselves are a means to that end.
So in a way women DO civilize men, but not because the women act as a conscience to the men (though that may occur from time to time).
I’d agree the unattached man with no support structure is prone to that.
Hence why God should be number 1…the ultimate support structure.
Then your family composed of your father and mother and other siblings. An institution created by God.
Then should the man get married…he has a family of his own as a support structure.
From all of this comes communities and a nation.
Try and undermine any of those things and the structure starts to crumble.
@earl: “Now it specifically talks about feminism got into the Catholic church and Catholic universities in the late 70s and 80s”
Well, feminism even developed its own theology: feminist theology developed in the 60s within RCC theology. Thus feminism quickly found its way into academia forming future theologians.
Nonbelievers think that the scriptures are full of superstition. They don’t advise attending church because they believe in scripture. They see it as a social/cultural thing. Why do Unitarians go to “church” when they are defacto atheists? Heck, even some bona fide atheists form “churches” where they sing to the void and wave their arms like evangelicals do. It’s just a club, with rubrics to make it feel substantial. He might as well tell people to join the Kiwanis or the Rotary Club,
Paul says: As I’ve written earlier; churches are called to uphold the institute of marriage:
Heb 13:4 “Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.”
Do they not fear God’s judgement?
earl says: They fear wimminz judgement more than God’s.
Paul says: [Matthew 19:6] “So they are no longer two, but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let no one separate.”
NO ONE!
The true church, wherever the remnant is hiding, does uphold Biblical marriage. And the false church is a “Great Whore” defiling marriage while disregarding God without fear.
Psalm 10:3 For the wicked boasts of the desires of his soul,
and the one greedy for gain curses and renounces the Lord.
4 In the pride of his face the wicked does not seek him;
all his thoughts are, “There is no God.”
Psalm 14:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds; there is none who does good.
Psalm 36:1 Transgression speaks to the wicked deep in his heart; there is no fear of God before his eyes.
Psalm 53:1 The fool says in his heart, “There is no God.” They are corrupt, doing abominable iniquity; there is none who does good.
Apparently David, a Man after God’s own heart, also felt compelled to begin a number of his psalms explaining that the fools don’t actually believe there is a God. It is not what they say, but how they live that shows out their belief. Those who really believe that there is a fearful God, live like it!
I once thought that just the Roman Catholic Church was the Great Whore, but now I realize, there are lots and lots of other whoring churches, and very few, usually persecuted ones, that are pure in their faith. And like the churches in Revelation, even the good ones have faults. There is no good bride that does not need to be frequently cleansed of worldly ways and doctrines with the washing of the word of God.
I guess the Christian Patriarchy movement needs to start by cleansing hearts and minds with the word of God, and exhibiting and exhorting the fear of God, and demonstrating and preaching Biblical love in opposition to romantic notions,chivalric notions, or permissive notions. It has to start with cleansing the temple like Christ did. It has to start with uprighting the church one mind at a time. We have to support and respect our red pilled brothers and sharpen each other for the task.
You could make the case the Feminist Theology is the great whore.
Pingback: Church Ladies | Spawny's Space
Women don’t civilize men,
Remember what Eve did,
Women who are civilized by men
Are capable of civilizing men
Within the strict confines of the Patriarchy
Where women are not allowed
to follow the Serpent’s temptations.
“The fiction that what we are witnessing is men abandoning their families, and not women ejecting the fathers from the homes…” I’ll take it a step further than that. A lot of these men were never in the homes to begin with! I can’t count the number of times I’ve met a single mother, only to find out later that it was her, not the guy, who wanted to raise the kid alone. This usually comes up when the child is about ten and starts asking about his/her father. Then these moms are suddenly surprised that’s an issue. And, to take it even one step further, some of those mothers don’t even allow eventual stepdads any authority over the kids. It’s as if the kid is the woman’s property and hers alone.
The US has the laziest worst journalists (if they can be called journalists) anywhere and they wonder why they aren’t trusted.
That’s true, but Williamson is an even lower form of life than a journalist: he’s a professional opinionmonger. This means that all he has to do is spew forth his ignorant thoughts and hope that enough people will pay to read them to make the spewing worth his while. It’s like a toddler rubbing shit from his diaper all over the wall of his bedroom and being praised for creating a work of art rather than getting a spanking/time out. It just encourages him to produce more of it.
Is this the same Williamson who didn’t care if White people died?
Williamson is a hateful anti-white, anti-male bigot.
This means that all he has to do is spew forth his ignorant thoughts and hope that enough people will pay to read them to make the spewing worth his while
Actually, they don’t even hope people will pay to read them. He just has to make it juicy enough that people will click on it!!!! Advertising revenue will do the rest. Don’t need to charge anyone a dime directly.
Also of note I’m not sure if the Orthodox are that far down the feminist rabbit hole in their churches…but it would be a good read for them to in order to spot it before it happens or see it if it is happening.
My year long honeymoon phase is pretty much over, and it is definitely present. We have just as much work to do as anyone. The thing that we have going for us is a canonical tradition that has not changed in about 13 centuries, so appealing to it is usually pretty helpful.
And since Orthodoxy is a VERY aesthetic oriented tradition, the insidiousness of the feminism and egalitarianism within our ranks is very subtle. It has to hide behind a veneer of traditionalism. For example, a good portion of women in Orthodox churches wear head coverings to liturgy. But they explain it away has having nothing whatsoever to do with obedience. There are entire articles about all the reasons it is required, and they go out of their way to explain how NOT oppressive it is.
In that way, I fear Orthodoxy may be inundated in the coming years with “cucked” men and their families fleeing the overt leftism of the mainline protestant and RC churches. It will provide a brief rewind of the type Dalrock discusses here so they can pretend they are “conserving” something. This will be the crowd who loves the aesthetic of “gender roles” but not the underlying rationale for them.
If you are lucky, you may find a priest who simply leaves you alone to practice marriage in the home the way we do, but does not discuss it in the larger group. Too uncomfortable.
Birth control is rampant within the church. “If mamma ain’t happy, nobody’s happy” is a common theme. There is a strong social justice contingent as well. Its going to be a fight.
Yup it’s in there. Give it time and all the traditions will soon start being changed or demand being changed. All they need is weak leadership and motivated feminists.
@Spike
They promote out of wedlock sex which would be often with deadbeat thugs and then suggest contraceptives or install IUDs to escape the consequences. And demand “safe abortions” for the pregnancies that do occur. Disgusting.
The chief flaw of compulsory education is their access to our children in order to corrupt them.
Its an attack on the healthy family.
I have a strong sense that the current crop of converts to Orthodoxy are drawn to it mostly because they are turned off by jumbotron, big box churches with rock bands–which is as good a reason as any, I guess.
They think the high church liturgical style is cool and authentic. They are called “smells and bells” orthodox.
But our own Sister Vassa, a bona fide canonical nun (who is very popular) has recently penned a piece paving the way for an argument for female clergy.
There are those who think this tradition should be modified to fit the times or be thrown out completely:
https://ljubomirfarms.wordpress.com/2018/03/04/churching-of-the-mother-and-child-after-40-days/
And of course, there are the folks who are “concerned” about “racism” and “bigotry” in the church.
FWIW, nuns made a lot of noise about that during JP II’s days, but I haven’t heard a peep recently
When I think about the migration of Protestants, especially Evangelicals, a few thoughts cross my mind:
1) They’re definitely in a better place than before, even if they’re just there for the “smells and bells”. The challenge is getting them beyond that, of course. I have seen the same with Protestants who join RC parishes. After the honeymoon is over they start talking about the validity of birth control, women priests, divorce and remarriage, that confession isn’t necessary and why it isn’t a sin to skip Mass.
2) They will bring a Protestant mindset with them, as much as they claim to be pure Orthodox. I have some friends who became RC’s over 20 years ago, and they tell me that they still have days when they are tempted to go back to Protestantism, not because they think it’s right, but simply because they feel comfortable there.
3) Being they’re used to church/denomination hopping, often switching simply because they stopped liking their pastor, I believe many will move on after a few years, maybe even going to a Jumbotron church with a rock band where the pastor says what they want to hear.
My wife said she specifically wanted the “obey” part in her vows to me
Mine did too. But she didn’t mean it. Lots of “Christian” psychobabble to explain why she can’t obey:
-She needs boundaries
-If she doesn’t agree she can’t go along b/c she needs to maintain her “honor” and integrity
Please join the AMBEC facebook page!
Your page requires log in to facebook. I’m not part of Facebook, nor will I ever be. Perhaps you could generate a web site, or use a different social medium. I honestly don’t know what AMBEC stands for.
Women can’t “eject men” from being fathers in their homes to their children. That’s a pure *BETA EXCUSE*!
AMOG. We should be honored. Dipshit
All she has to do is call the boys in blue, tell them you make her feel unsafe and you are gone. In divorce court she will get full custody, the house and at least half your paycheck.
A bunch of people got triggered by the phrase civilizing effect of women. This is a data driven statement that most people say without reflection because sociology studies have shown a marriage benefit and change in male behavior with marriage. That association is very robust. It is possible to make of criticisms about this association – what it means, what is the causality, etc. it’s possible it is self selection. It is possible the data no longer applies. It’s possible it’s not marriage but fatherhood, maturation, etc. But in sociology the framework is marriage is the civilizing aspect and women that does it and that’s why we see it repeated so often.
If we repeated the analysis today we might conclude women get some big benefits like not sleeping with strangers, having kids in wedlock, etc.
Kevin, if causality is in question, then the phrase is legitimately in question, and it is inappropriate to say it’s data driven.
You might equally say that “moving cars give birth to people” b/c every time one parks, a human emerges. The data will support me on that.
I’ve noticed that an awful lot of female celebrities are giving the middle finger when posing for photographs. Not just in the raunchier music industry, but respected film actresses as well. Not just young women, but middle aged actresses too.
These actresses aren’t just giving the middle finger in anger, to paparazzi. They’re happily giving the middle finger while on the red carpet. Or posting selfies on Instagram and Twitter accounts.
Also, many actresses are giving the devil’s horns, or sticking out their tongues, or distorting their faces — extreme pouty lips, or gaping mouth, or one eye tightly shut (not a wink), etc.
I get the sense they’re signaling that they’re rebellious, that they refuse to conform to convention, or good manners, or any control whatsoever.
Of course, adolescent girls idolize these actresses. As do fat single moms. And rebellious wives.
When I was a kid in the 1970s — it wasn’t the Golden Age of Hollywood, but still — actresses still strove to exude some dignity and glamour.
Devon35, you might visit my blog.
http://gunnerq.com/2018/05/13/circling-the-convergence-drain/
@Kevin: “a marriage benefit and change in male behavior with marriage.”
A marriage benefit is NOT the smoking gun to show that women have a civilizing effect on men.
As a matter of fact, I think marriage triggers inherent male behavior to protect and provide.
It’s telling how this get turned into a story that women have a civilizing effect. As if women are more civilized than men.
As a matter of fact, I think marriage triggers inherent male behavior to protect and provide.
It’s telling how this get turned into a story that women have a civilizing effect. As if women are more civilized than men.
Yes, I agree. I think that’s an accurate description of what it does to men, and maybe you can interpret that as a “civilizing effect.”
But you’re right, that’s very different than saying women civilize men, or even more extreme, that women are civilized and they civilize men.
In fact, an injured brother or a pet can invoke that same response in a man. It’s not an accident that Tarzan was depicted as having a pet.
You guys know Kevin Williamson was fired right? He left NRO and went to the Atlantic. He was there for a week and they fired him because Kevin once tweeted (way back when) that women who have abortions should be put to death. One of the writers at the Atlantic dug around for some dirt on Kevin, found that, gave it to the editor, and they walked him out. As far as I know, Williamson is freelance, currently unemployed.
@Earl Also of note I’m not sure if the Orthodox are that far down the feminist rabbit hole in their churches…but it would be a good read for them to in order to spot it before it happens or see it if it is happening.
As Scott pointed out, the tradition keeps the more overt manifestations out, but each version of Orthodoxy, and the individual archdiocese, and the individual parish priests bring their own flavor to the community. I often wonder how Orthodoxy manifests in California and if it’s different than in Chicago.
I don’t notice that in our parish, or in our archdiocese that there is any particular push for a feminist agenda, and today despite it being Mother’s Day, the only notice was mothers added to the list of those for whom a blessing is asked during the great entrance, and that is pretty standard.
In our parish, perhaps five percent, or perhaps ten percent of the women wear head scarves, and those women aren’t always the most devout. There are a couple of women I know that I would consider more devout than most who don’t wear any head covering. Of course, since the priests’ wives don’t wear head covering, why would any other women?
Kevin
But in sociology the framework is marriage is the civilizing aspect and women that does it and that’s why we see it repeated so often.
Sociology is “science” about as much as astrology. “Sociologists say” is as relevant as “The moon is in Virgo with retrograde Uranus”.
Furthermore, argumentum ad populum is a logical fallacy. If every person on Earth decides PI = 3.000000, it is still not true. The majority can believe all sorts of false things: “women civilize” is one of them. “Women civilize” is a myth from the Victorian era promulgated by feminists and their pedestalizing, traditional conservative, sock puppets. The fact that we’ve had it served up to us in the Anglosphere for over a century doesn’t make it true, it just makes it part of our mental framework along with other aspects of feminism.
Just about 100 years ago in the US one argument for giving women the right to vote was based on women’s superior moral sense: because women were “more moral” than men, IOW they were the “civilizers”, their voting patterns would be different and better than men. Women were given the vote in part because they would clean up politics in the US due to their civilizing influence…
Well, golly! How did that work out for us, anyway? Is a century long enough to test that idea?
Despite the standard story, the narrative, that we have all been brainwashed with to some degree:
Women do not civilize. They socialize.
But women do civilize! That’s why they’ve been importing barbarians of late!
@ info…
That’s probably why it’s not a good idea to incentivize divorce. We see which sex takes advantage of that incentive quite often.
From what I read in the book that’s where the feminist rebellion started with the Catholic church too…the nuns. Then it spread into the Catholic academia.
It is interesting… that porn is always somehow a cause rather than a symptom. As if, all things being equal, men would prefer the imagination of a thing to the actual thing. Now if the choice is between a simulacrum or nothing? Then it’s obvious what gets chosen. But if these mass market preachers admitted that, they might, the horror, have to admit that women in general could be better wives, that they could be more loving wives, than they currently are. Imagine going to church, and being told you needed the Lord’s forgiveness!
anonymous_ng @ 4:46 pm:
“I often wonder how Orthodoxy manifests in California…”
In Los Angeles, Orthodoxy manifests as colonization. The Armenian Orthodox in particular builds its temples in traditional Eastern architecture and refuses to have services or signs in English; no concessions to being in USA. Of course, the large Armenian/Iranian community there means they can easily get away with such ethnic hostility.
Farther north, Orthodoxy is still incredibly insular but not as confrontational. The Russian Orthodox people don’t seem to have nearly as much contempt for white Americans as Armenian Orthodox… less insistent upon foreign architecture and language.
The WORST aspects of Kevin Williamson’s article are not even in the part Dalrock quoted.
He says :
‘Join a Church’, and
‘Marry a Single Mother’
Jesus H. Christ.
colonelpopcorn,
Every one of those barbarians had a mother! And many have sisters and wives. Apparently not all women civilize men. I’m afraid I’ve got to agree with da GBFM’s comment above.
As a personal anecdote, my wife has used her influence on me in a destructive fashion.
I’m not sure if defrauding and extorting men into passivity and conformity is really “civilizing”.
If it is, I prefer to remain as God’s redeemed yet unreasonable man, and not become useless to God and society, preoccupied as my wife’s handmaiden.
The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.
~George Bernard Shaw
@Jed Mask
‘Women can’t “eject men” from being fathers in their homes to their children. That’s a pure *BETA EXCUSE*!’
You funny Jed Mask – who bitch is this?
It’s called $money$ and you know nothing of it.
Brother Jed is Black. I suspect he gets away with a lot more than us White boys, because of the dindu effect – even if he isn’t a savage scumbag himself.
Roman’s 12:2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God.
I don’t think conformity to this world’s standards and having beat out of you that exceptional part of your character which God gave you to share with the body of Christ, is “civilizing” so much as it is a satanic diminution of your gifting. My wife has always begged me to bury my talents, give up my dreams, and settle for being sub-par. In fact she has often rallied opposition to my dreams and goals, so that her dreams and goals might be partially arrived at instead. Sometimes she will not know what to do, so she asks me what I want, just so she can figure out in which direction full rebellion lies, and then she runs to it. Women are not responders! They’re rebels. Parts of “Game” are much like using reverse psychology on the rebels to get what you wanted by posturing otherwise.
Matthew 10:34 “Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person’s enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it.
I’ve been living that.
“Mama says girls are the devil.” ~Bobby Boucher Jr.(The Waterboy)
Proverbs 17:15 He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous
are both alike an abomination to the Lord.
I’ve been condemned as a husband, mainly because my ‘Intimacy Anorexic’ wife is unhaaaaappy, and my wife’s sins against me have been excused solely because she has a vagina, and sheds crocodile tears.
Abominable Feminist hirelings! “The Waterboy” seemingly has more sense than today’s preaching fools, leading their flocks to destruction, and destroying whole families as they go.
Lord God, be my vengeance, add my wife’s sins which they excused to their account!
For they persecute him whom thou hast smitten; and they talk to the grief of those whom thou hast wounded. Add iniquity unto their iniquity: and let them not come into thy righteousness. Let them be blotted out of the book of the living, and not be written with the righteous.
Cast down the wicked from their high places. Expose their wickedness and lay it naked before mankind. Purify your church Lord. Or turn them to repentance of their wickedness against you and against your servant, who fears you. Your will be done Holy Father, I ask this is Jesus name, and for his glory and according to His Word.
They Call Me Tom says: It is interesting… that porn is always somehow a cause rather than a symptom. As if, all things being equal, men would prefer the imagination of a thing to the actual thing.
It is their Feminist religion at work again blinding them to the obvious. (1 Corinthians 7:2-5) Otherwise you’d have to believe that they give them all something in seminary to make them mentally retarded, and tore sections out of their Bibles. A second glance is as bad as raping a woman, don’t cha know! They spin an upside down religion with a counterfeit Christ.
Kevin Williamson hasn’t the slightest CLUE how it is for so many men having so many difficulties with feminism. He is not even a little bit aware. I was starting to believe that Kevin (formerly of NRO, now unemployed since the Atlantic fired him) was starting to “get it” when he wrote this:
https://www.nationalreview.com/2017/05/underclass-character-eviction-court-native-born-americans-entrepreneurial-immigrants/
That was a superb piece of intelligent writing, writing about people who have it much harder in life than he EVER will. I was starting to believe that maybe he would begin to understand feminism. But no, he’s just a chivalrous trad-con, the AMOG. And as such, he really disappointed me.
info says:
May 13, 2018 at 8:28 am
@Spike
They promote out of wedlock sex which would be often with deadbeat thugs and then suggest contraceptives or install IUDs to escape the consequences. And demand “safe abortions” for the pregnancies that do occur. Disgusting.
The chief flaw of compulsory education is their access to our children in order to corrupt them.
Its an attack on the healthy family.
Info:
”Promote” is the exact right word. As is ”disgusting”, especially when abortion is used to get rid of the unwanted ”tissue”. I have used the term ”diabolical” whenever any woman talks that way about aborting and therefore killing a child.
My son is now of marriageable age. I have told him about the current state of marriage from a legal perspective.He understands the risk but understands that if he wants children, he must take that risk and has sought to mitigate it by very careful screening. He has an eastern European girl with deeply traditional RCC roots in mind.
So far, so good, but he will still need to fight what you have just described – the corrupting influence of ”education” for his children
That’s probably why it’s not a good idea to incentivize divorce. We see which sex takes advantage of that incentive quite often.
Women are immature. They don’t want husbands, they want soulmates. They expect marriage to be a nonstop romance novel or romcom movie. And the moment their marriage comes to a boring part, they want to switch channels.
The so-called incels are some of the losers in that revolution, though not the only ones or, socially speaking, the most significant ones. (Those would be the abandoned single mothers.)
That’s a very popular trope among women in any Western or Westernized country. It has particularly been popular among credentialed middle-class women. It’s no surprise that a sheltered mangina like this journo would parrot it.
To what extent has this actually happened, I have no idea. But I’m pretty sure it’s widely exaggerated.
Older men civilize young men, and older women civilize young women, under the supervision of older men (patriarchs). I’m pretty sure that’s how it has normally been done throughout the ages.
I understand what these people mean when they say that women civilize men………….but it’s only narrowly true. Women don’t actively MAKE them more civilized. However, when a man cares for a woman, he will civilize himself more.
Example. Will men act like fools to attract a woman? We all know the answer is yes. Men will do all sorts of crazy and foolish things to “show off” and atttact a woman. Now, is the woman “making” him do those things?
Of course, once she knows he is trying to impress her, she can then manipulate him into obeying her commands, and now she is making him do things……..
See, it’s subtil. In the first, she caused him to act like a fool, but not deliberately. It was his natural reaction to her. In the second, she has taken control of that willingness and used it for self.
The modern fiction that women civilize men does indeed come from the 19th century, when the idea of separate men’s and women’s spheres first came into view. The woman’s place was in the home, and it was her job to make the home a pleasant place for her husband, who was out in the workplace, and for her children. Since her husband brought the outside world into that sacred space, she worked to reform his language and manners, curb his drinking, get him to come home nights, and smooth off any other rough edges (which meant home was a pleasant place by her definition, not necessarily his).
This is source of the persistent idea of women’s inherent virtue that infects us in the modern church through the efforts of such as George Gilder and Doug Wilson.
Of course, ultimately women didn’t confine themselves to the home, but decided the world needed their efforts as well. And from this arose the temperance movement, women’s suffrage, birth control, and all the other virtue movements of the 20th century.
@Spike
Homeschool. And look into classical education. We can no longer just let kids go to school anymore.
In Los Angeles, Orthodoxy manifests as colonization. The Armenian Orthodox in particular builds its temples in traditional Eastern architecture and refuses to have services or signs in English; no concessions to being in USA. Of course, the large Armenian/Iranian community there means they can easily get away with such ethnic hostility.
Armenians aren’t Orthodox. They’re a very old confession, but theologically they’re closer to Protestants than to RCC or Orthodox.
Kevin says:
May 13, 2018 at 12:14 pm
A bunch of people got triggered by the phrase civilizing effect of women. This is a data driven statement that most people say without reflection because sociology studies have shown a marriage benefit and change in male behavior with marriage. That association is very robust. It is possible to make of criticisms about this association – what it means, what is the causality, etc. it’s possible it is self selection. It is possible the data no longer applies. It’s possible it’s not marriage but fatherhood, maturation, etc. But in sociology the framework is marriage is the civilizing aspect and women that does it and that’s why we see it repeated so often.
If we repeated the analysis today we might conclude women get some big benefits like not sleeping with strangers, having kids in wedlock, etc.
We have to consider the methodology here – the difference between married and unmarried men puts divorced men in the ‘unmarried’ category. ‘Unmarried’ does not simply mean ‘never-married’ as many people presume
Thus, financial and ‘happiness’ survey figures are skewed (usually) negatively in the direction of ‘unmarried’. The differences between ‘married’ and ‘never married’ might be a more accurate reflection
In Los Angeles, Orthodoxy manifests as colonization. The Armenian Orthodox in particular builds its temples in traditional Eastern architecture and refuses to have services or signs in English; no concessions to being in USA. Of course, the large Armenian/Iranian community there means they can easily get away with such ethnic hostility.
Farther north, Orthodoxy is still incredibly insular but not as confrontational. The Russian Orthodox people don’t seem to have nearly as much contempt for white Americans as Armenian Orthodox… less insistent upon foreign architecture and language.
Interesting. Armenians aren’t Eastern Orthodox, of course, having been split from the rest of the Church after the council of Chalcedon in 451, together with the Copts. This has left them particularly isolated, and their more recent history of persecution at the hands of the Turks in the early 20th Century has created a kind of consciousness, especially in the Armenian diaspora, of ethnic self-preservation at all costs. There is a similar attitude among some Greek Orthodox as well, for similar reasons in terms of the history, but it’s less intense than it is among the Armenians. Certainly Los Angeles has a large number of Armenians, so that also facilitates that kind of approach, as compared to DC, which has a very small number of them (a couple of churches in the whole metro, I believe).
Russian Americans tend to be more integrated culturally than Armenians, for the reasons I note above — although at least in DC the church architecture for their main churches is still rather Russian. There are sound liturgical reasons for this given the way that space inside churches is used in the Orthodox divine liturgy, but in smaller and poorer parishes of course the tendency is to use Western style church buildings to the extent they are available for rent or purchase at reasonable prices that the parish can afford. Almost all parishes that can afford it try to build a more Orthodox style church building, though, at least here in DC.
Nova-
Serbs share a common historical bond with Armenians regarding the ottoman occupation and commensurate atrocities.
Then the Orthodox Church was basically underground for the failed and bizarre communist experiment known as “Yugoslavia.”
Then it was Serbs against NATO and the whole world for their (now exhonerated from) supposed “ethnic cleansing” (AKA “preserving your tiny little piece of the world from being totally overrun by Islam”).
The four Cs of the Serbian cross stand for “only unity saves the Serbs” for a reason.
They won’t be apologizing to Angelenos any time soon for how they come across.
Responsibility civilizes men.
For most men, that is marriage and children, but I can think of several other responsibilities that fit the bill.
They won’t be apologizing to Angelenos any time soon for how they come across.
Or anybody else. Here the Bishop of Serbia (if the translation is accurate) makes things clear how much theological ground he is willing to cede. I hope to get him as a guest speaker for the next Gospel Coalition, or CBMW leadership conference.
There’s no reason for men to be civilized when the entire society is working against that end,and their place in it.
It’s time to join the ranks of the uncivilized.
No man is safe rebuilding a foundation whilst the edifice is dropping large boulders from great heights.
This whole shit-show has to come to level scorched ground.
Same as the feminist ideology: Tell men they are demons: act surprised when they become as such.
Sow the wind REAP THE WHIRLWIND, bitches. (including “Pastoressess”
I don’t understand their interpretation of the celibacy graph posted above. Are they saying that internet porn didn’t exist prior to 2008? That idea is absurd. The economic downturn or women on smartphones are better explanations.
I live in the Aremenian capital of the USA. Fresno. After the genocide, a huge swath settled here. American writer William Sayoran spent most of his life in Fresno. On the 100th anniversary of the genocide, there was a huge reflective service in front of city hall. Fresno State University even unveiled a memorial. We even have a joke that every property owner here in town is connected to Aremenians (ownership, financing, slum-lording, money laundering)
The uneducated say “they are Orthodox Christians” but that isn’t true. Their churches here in Fresno (and there are many) do not reflect the architectual styles. The Armenian church so to speak has been the traditional caretaker of their heritage, language, and culture
In many cases exactly like the Catholic Church did for the Polish people through most of their tragic history.
@ Hose_B says:
May 14, 2018 at 5:50 am
“I understand what these people mean when they say that women civilize men………….but it’s only narrowly true. Women don’t actively MAKE them more civilized. However, when a man cares for a woman, he will civilize himself more.
Example. Will men act like fools to attract a woman? We all know the answer is yes. Men will do all sorts of crazy and foolish things to ‘show off’ and atttact a woman. Now, is the woman ‘making’ him do those things?
Of course, once she knows he is trying to impress her, she can then manipulate him into obeying her commands, and now she is making him do things……..
See, it’s subtil. In the first, she caused him to act like a fool, but not deliberately. It was his natural reaction to her. In the second, she has taken control of that willingness and used it for self.”
It’s still false.
Yes, men use ambition and achievement to attract women. And yes, that motivates men to do the things that create and build a civilization. But, what kind of woman is most likely to be attracted to the kind of man who does the things that create and build a civilization?
The answer is that a woman who was raised by, and has a healthy relationship with, a hard working, loving father is most likely to be attracted to that kind of man. In other words, the kind of woman who is attracted to a civilized man is only attracted to a civilized man because she was herself civilized by her father.
Women do not civilize men. Married fathers civilize their sons AND their daughters.
That’s why our culture is becoming less civilized. Up until the 1950s, the percentage of children in the US growing up without a father was in the single digits. Today it’s closer to 45%. And it’s not evenly distributed among races. Around 75% of black children are growing up without their father. Among Asians it’s still in the single digits.
Who, in general, is more civilized in the US, blacks or Asians? Is there a shortage of black women? Of course not! In fact, there’s a shortage of black men, when compared to black women, because black men are more likely to end up in prison, or get killed precisely because of their uncivilized behavior.
Black crime, and the black incarceration rate were far lower back in the ’50s when the fatherlessness rate among blacks was under 20%, as opposed to 75% today. In other words, black behaved in a much more civilized manner back when the vast majority of black children grew up with their fathers, and they behave in a much more uncivilized manner today that the vast majority of black children grow up without a father.
Women do not civilize men. Married fathers civilize their sons AND their daughters.
Last time I checked, they subscribe to neither Sola Fide nor Sola Scriptura
Seems more like a case of project to me than anything.
I don’t understand their interpretation of the celibacy graph posted above. Are they saying that internet porn didn’t exist prior to 2008? That idea is absurd. The economic downturn or women on smartphones are better explanations.
Yes saying “porn” is lazy. Smartphones did increase porn viewing, however, significantly because more convenient and always at hand rather that sitting in front of a PC to do so — but it wasn’t because internet porn was new, but the smartphone was what was new and that impacted porn viewing. Also the smartphone didn’t create internet dating, either, but it did create the smartphone-oriented aspects of that, such as Tinder and the like, and that of course exacerbated the haves and the have nots in terms of sex, for obvious reasons.
Likely the economy played as much of a role as anything else in the timeframe after 2008 as well.
So likely a complex array of factors. Porn has its role to play, but it’s also in the context of other things that were not exactly new but which became exacerbated with smartphones in a way that really didn’t benefit average guys very much at all.
The four Cs of the Serbian cross stand for “only unity saves the Serbs” for a reason.
They won’t be apologizing to Angelenos any time soon for how they come across.
Yep. We have a couple of Serb churches here in the DC region as well — one is in the OCa and the other is a patriarchal parish. I think the experience of the Orthodox who were at one stage under the Ottomans is broadly similar, but more traumatic at different times than others, and of course the more recent history is also very relevant.
The largest Orthodox communities here in the DC region are the Greeks (by far) in the GOA followed by the Russians and Carpatho-Rusyns, sort of spread between the OCA and the ROCOR. There are a few AA parishes and a few ACROD parishes as well, but not many.
It always reminds me of the loaves and the fishes: whenever there is genocide there always seem to be more survivors than there were originally people of the unfortunate ethnicity. For me: if your ancestors weren’t American in 1776 are you really American? Happily every American I have ever met claims to be able to trace their roots back to 1776 and usually even 1606 (and won’t let you go until they have shown you the proofs). It is thus my view that if reparations are in any way required for any of your citizens the payments should fall entirely on the shoulders of the present inhabitants of Canterbury by way of punishment for their predecessors organizing the original one-way package-trip.
…Kevin once tweeted (way back when) that women who have abortions should be put to death.
Even a stopped clock is right twice each day.
You funny Jed Mask – who bitch is this?
It’s called $money$ and you know nothing of it.
Clueless Jed is clearly off his meds again (he’s the male version of IB22). Why is anyone paying attention to him?
And here it finally comes, a Cuckolding movie: http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/13/cuck-movie/
The units are counted in gorillions.
It is slightly comical when the AMOG enters the room. Pin the blue ribbon on his chest for not letting women control him.
I’ve maintained it’s the state men should fear more. She has that behemoth at her disposal.
What’s funny and sad about the Williamson piece is that the advice given to incels is the same advice thrown around all over the place.
–join a church.
–marry a single mother.
–women are sexually attracted to men who go to church.
Williamson related a story that ended: “I’d love to do something tomorrow,” he says, “but I have an event at my church. The word that stood out in that sentence, with an electric charge, was: church. the idea of dating an old-fashioned churchgoing man was to her very appealing.”
Suuure. Riiight. That happened.
Williamson: “there are girls who want to date — and marry — a guy they met in church. You know where you find those girls? Church.”
Suuure. Maybe in about, oh, 1972.
“But it’s a safe bet that some of them are there, at least in part, for the same reason you are: They are alone, and they do not want to be. And they don’t want to say “We hooked up after knocking down six Mango Madness Margaritas apiece at happy hour at Bennigan’s” when their parents and friends ask where they met. “We met at church” is a better opening chapter.”
Mr. Williamson, let me explain a few things to you.
The vast majority of them ARE hooking up with men after getting drunk at bars. Because they WANT to hook up with those men. Because those men are sexually attractive. They have no intention of marrying those men.
And many of those women who are in church are alone, after spending a good number of years hooking up with men after getting drunk at restaurants and bars. And many of those women are alone because they don’t want to date the men in their churches. They don’t want to date the men in their churches because they are not sexually attractive.
Those women (most of them current or ex-sluts) are being told that they are Daughters of the King. They are special. They deserve only the very, very best. They are being promised men with the bodies of Brad Pitt, the faces of George Clooney, the money of Warren Buffett, the status of Prince William, the charisma of Bill Clinton, the kindness of Jesus Christ, and the spirituality of Billy Graham. They are being told that any day now, an Adonis millionaire who can preach a sermon off the cuff and who is nice to her and only her, will show up, sweep her off her feet, and take her to his mansion in the sky. There is no way in hell women will even look twice at any of the hopeless incels you demand go to church and step into that maw.
The men in their churches are not sexually attractive because no one has ever told them what is and is not sexually attractive in men. Those men are not sexually attractive because people like you commit educational and spiritual malpractice by telling them and teaching them that loving God and going to church 5 times a week is sexually attractive. IT IS NOT. How about telling them to get exercise, lose weight, lift weights, get therapy, get good at something, make money, carve out a corner of the world for themselves, get some self-discipline, and forget about most women? How about telling them what really is sexually attractive in men? Instead, charlatans and bigots like you, Williamson, tell them that all they have to do to get girls is to sit in a church pew and listen to sermons. This is sheer insanity.
Williamson, stop talking to these men. Just stop. They’re better off listening to the nonreligious Jordan Peterson than they are to you and your cohorts like David French.
Mr. WIlliamson: These men don’t need to go to church. These men don’t need to be around clueless feminist pastors who are terrified of their female congregants and who have no idea what is going on in the real world. These men don’t need to be around clucking middle aged harridans and their hen pecked husbands. These men don’t need to be around spoiled sluts with overinflated egos who will nuke reject these men as much as look at them. They don’t need to waste time on lectures or fire and brimstone or singles groups or coed coffees.
What these men need is someone to HELP THEM. What these men need is someone who will tell them what they’re doing wrong and how to fix it. They need someone to tell them what is and is not sexually attractive. They need real encouragement. They need to know their wants, needs, hopes, dreams and desires are important. They need to know what work they need to do and how to do it and they need men who have done that work themselves to help them. And churches aren’t helping them. AT ALL. And they never will.
@ A bunch of people
I don’t think I was clear since a bunch of you are trying to convince me that there is no marriage benefit, as if I did the 50 years of sociology research supporting this claim. As I said there are lots of criticisms and alternative explanations, like the ones offered by W Benning (although there are lots of reports that examine men by single never married vs married vs single divorced).
The point is that this is a “fact” someone who studies the social sciences would learn. This is a taught framework. It is taught in part because the data are very good and conceivably support this narrative and attempts to prove alternatives have not gained acceptence. Its also not even a crazy idea. Many of us have friends that were part animals that got married and suddenly were out with their wives matching paint colors to their designer sofas. Women have an impact on men. I think children and co-linear maturation are more likely, but I don’t publish in this area.
A parallel to this would be IQ data, of which there could be many interpretations but seems to suggest there are differences between people and in part explained genetically/by race. You can make educated criticisms, but “I don’t like that conclusion” is not one of them. Many people are just saying they don’t like the conclusion about men and marriage but without understanding its source and why others can confidently and reflexively repeat it. If you don’t like it you need to deal with the data – this is an instance where I think the data drive the conclusions in large part and not any pro-female bias (although I think you could make a criticism about the framework as well since some assumptions it makes are open to debate).
I think….but don’t remember…that our host actually did make a substantive criticism of this conclusion and some of the data at one point.
@Kevin
As I read it most people don’t contest the benefit of marriage data but the attribution of a civilizing effect caused by women
I have never read anything by Williamson until this post and the guy gets a lot more right than I expected. I was searching for his piece where he wants whites to die (still have not found that – it may be print edition only). The guy grew up in a divorced home with a drunk mom and abusive dad (several “dads”). I read only three pieces. The one quoted, one about US changing economy and populism (usual Never Trumper stuff), one was about how family structure is destroying America
( https://www.nationalreview.com/magazine/2016/03/28/father-f-hrer/ )
and could have been written by someone in the manosphere down to his making a point of saying that women initiate the divorces in America and have left men in terrible situations. He lost his job because he picked up the gauntlet Dalrock threw down about women who have abortions deserving the death penalty for murder.
Given Williamson’s previous acknowledgement of women being the divorce initiators in the US, I have a harder time parsing his statement. His piece overall is silly advice, but I think he is someone who is moving in the direction of understanding how bad things are in the current legal and social structure for men. Of course, he does hate Trump like every other NRO tradcon and much of his advice is typical tradcon stuff. But I have hope for him because he is already willing to put some things on paper that the traditional journalists refuse to acknowledge – like women starting most the divorces in the US.
Kevin
I don’t think I was clear since a bunch of you are trying to convince me that there is no marriage benefit,
Moving your goalposts isn’t convincing, especially on a blog that is explicitly pro-marriage.
as if I did the 50 years of sociology research supporting this claim.
The claim is “women civilize men”. You’ve chosen to take that Victorian myth and tag your own particular rabbit trail onto it, but it is not relevant. Especially on this explicitly pro-marriage site, you don’t need to wag your finger in an attempt to be the Only Moral Man In The Room Who Supports Marriage.
Kevin, show how women civilize men now, in 2018. Don’t wave your hands at cool stories about gold camps in the 19th century, don’t babble about what social “scientists” believe, just show the way it works now in the current year. We are all waiting.
Stereotypical traits of the incel vs Chad the vag destroyer.
Incel first:
1.Introvert
2.Polite
3.Shy
4.courteous
5.Actually was taught and believes Christian doctrine
6.Intelligent
7.Stable personality
8.Gets friend zoned
9″Nice guy”
10.Never gets laid,rarely approaches,takes rejection seriously because he considers relationships a serious issue.
Chad the vag destroyer.
1.Rude
2.arrogant
3.Violent-dark Triad, ect
4.Disrespectful
5.Thinks churches are for funerals and weddings
6.Approaches by sheer volume of numbers,no respect for the individual woman or relationship
7.Gets laid often by many partners,top %20 of men sexing %80= more STD’s for women.
(fun facts with the stats)
8.Dumb as well as a walking disease factory. (no concern for personal health)
9.Is attractive to most women (they love the bad boy)
10. IS REWARDED BY WOMEN FOR BEING UNCIVILIZED
Law of economics You get more of what you reward.
Thus-women have made this current situation so many manginas are fretting about fixing without addressing the fundamental driving forces.
Trick question of the day:
Was Christ Possessed by the demon of violence when he drove out the money changers?
Note to unnamed critic running the attempted ad-hominem
It’s spelled “projection” not “project”
Perhaps learn the English language before attempting amateur psychology.(you moron)
freebird,
I think earl may have been trying to say that women are projecting their demonic behavior onto men, not that you are projecting yours.
That is how I read it.
Sharkly is correct.
And you can use my name, freebird if you have a problem or lack of clarification with what I am posting. It would help stop the passive aggressiveness.
Kevin said: “I was searching for his piece where he wants whites to die (still have not found that – it may be print edition only).”
Your search-fu is weak, Kevin. It took me, oh, about 45 seconds on Google to find three pages of links. It was so easy, in fact, that I think you didn’t bother to try:
If you spend time in hardscrabble, white upstate New York, or eastern Kentucky, or my own native West Texas, and you take an honest look at the welfare dependency, the drug and alcohol addiction, the family anarchy — which is to say, the whelping of human children with all the respect and wisdom of a stray dog — you will come to an awful realization. It wasn’t Beijing. It wasn’t even Washington, as bad as Washington can be. It wasn’t immigrants from Mexico, excessive and problematic as our current immigration levels are. It wasn’t any of that.
Nothing happened to them. There wasn’t some awful disaster. There wasn’t a war or a famine or a plague or a foreign occupation. Even the economic changes of the past few decades do very little to explain the dysfunction and negligence — and the incomprehensible malice — of poor white America. So the gypsum business in Garbutt ain’t what it used to be. There is more to life in the 21st century than wallboard and cheap sentimentality about how the Man closed the factories down.
The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die. Economically, they are negative assets. Morally, they are indefensible. Forget all your cheap theatrical Bruce Springsteen crap. Forget your sanctimony about struggling Rust Belt factory towns and your conspiracy theories about the wily Orientals stealing our jobs. Forget your goddamned gypsum, and, if he has a problem with that, forget Ed Burke, too. The white American underclass is in thrall to a vicious, selfish culture whose main products are misery and used heroin needles. Donald Trump’s speeches make them feel good. So does OxyContin. What they need isn’t analgesics, literal or political. They need real opportunity, which means that they need real change, which means that they need U-Haul.
If you want to live, get out of Garbutt.
I confirm PokeSalad. Williamson is a tiny-dicked rabbit of an Elite.
Isn’t print journalism a dying industry too?
Many of us have friends that were part animals that got married and suddenly were out with their wives matching paint colors to their designer sofas.
Which isn’t civilizing but domesticating/feminizing/beta-izing as Mommy puts them under her thumb. No doubt this does happen in marriages, so much is obvious, but classifying this as “civilizing” is where the issue lies.
Also, in terms of the downturn in destructive behaviors among married men, a lot of this is self-selection, and some of it is children. For all of the wild and crazy part animals who suddenly become tone-matching betas by getting married, there are many more guys who are basically steady eddies prior to marrying and not party animals at all who go on to have — what a surprise! — successful marriages. They then get rolled into the stats about the civilizing effect of getting married, when they were mostly acting in similar ways prior to marrying anyway. I do think that quite a few guys do mature a lot when they have children in the context of a marriage, but it’s hard to separate that out from the “Mommy Wife Effect” of the wife basically forcing the husband to comply with her demands and him subjecting himself to the feminizing, domesticating, beta-izing effects of that in the context of a marriage — something that is well known and easily observed really.
On Williamson he wasn’t saying he wants whites to die, he was saying he wants whites in downscale blighted communities to leave them and go to parts of the country where there are more opportunities for them, and a less dysfunctional local culture. This is not necessarily bad advice from a life perspective for people from such places. Of course, it does mean that such places “die off”, but that’s happening now anyway, just with more dysfunction and suffering than if the people who are born there leave for greener pastures. Did he say that in a particularly cutting and incendiary way — well, yes, because that’s his schtick and always has been. Kind of a textual shock jock in some ways.
I grew up in the sticks of Upstate New York. Born in a once small industrial city (Schenectady) and had family there…….I saw it die a very, very painful death when General Electric closed up and moved one fine late 1970’s day.
GE took the folks it needed with them. Everyone else really had no where else to go. This is not lameting the poor choices of the white-working-class…….plenty of stupid people in this population. I know this first hand when I saw all the paper mills and the last of the lumbering leave the Adirondacks when I was in jr high and high school in the 1980’s………and Ticonderoga / Adirondack Graphite pencil close in 1986. Even the last vestiges of the slate industry collapse in Washington County, New York (and Rutland County, Vermont) too.
Seasonal tourism. Summer homes. Summer camps became the new normal for the region. Even the 1980 Winter Games in Lake Placid were a financial ruin for the area……huge ammounts of debt and bonds (that are STILL being paid for) for an event that gave us “miracle on ice” but did little for the long term health of the local economy.
It beautiful. Gorgeous. The region still speaks to my heart, and the the ancient Adirondacks always hold a place deep in my that God can only touch…..my three week hike back there last summer showed this………………..wept in joy many day while hiking. California’s got NOTHING on this unique place.
However…..when I finished college in 1993……what was there for me? Welfare check scams. A then growing meth problem. Empty mills, and rundown towns………poverty that seemed to be getting worse. I had to go where work was………
So I decided to go to grad school instead.
Rural America’s problems are viewed as “their own fault” whilr the multi-colored poverty in larger cities….is somehow institionalized and brought upon by the white working class way up in Speculator, New York…..or the folks in the rundown coal towns of Penn, West VA or the folks in the eastern Kentucky hills……
If these folks have so much power and influence……..I never saw it….and I grew up in this
Novaseeker @ 8:05 am:
“On Williamson he wasn’t saying he wants whites to die, he was saying he wants whites in downscale blighted communities to leave them and go to parts of the country where there are more opportunities for them, and a less dysfunctional local culture. This is not necessarily bad advice from a life perspective for people from such places.”
What parts of the country offering opportunity? Can you name a few? I assure you that Silicon Valley has no place for them. I assure you, in fact, that the entire state of California discourages the employment of white men as official government policy.
First the Elites imported 30 million low-class Dindus in a single generation, then they exported every factory they could to China, now they fault low-class whites for complaining they don’t have jobs anymore while pushing mass-transit projects that will make even fast food joints at exits off the Interstate unprofitable.
Our problem isn’t lazy white trailer trash. It’s top-down white genocide at the hands of our own leaders.
What parts of the country offering opportunity? Can you name a few?
That’s easy. The places in the country where white folks from the upper midwest and industrial northeast, as well as rural areas, have been moving to for the past few decades — mostly growing metros in the southern tier: Atlanta, Dallas, Houston, Austin, Nashville, Charlotte to name a few, never mind coastal metros that have had huge influxes of whites in the same period like the DC. I am sure there are other areas I am not thinking of, but these places aren’t hiding, and it’s no mystery that the boom in population they are seeing is largely due to internal migration from older industrial areas as well as more rural ones. What Williamson is saying is: leave the blighted industrial and rural areas and go to one of the places that is booming with growth and development.
Yes I know California sucks for regular whites who are not rich, but you also know that many regular white people have left California because it sucks for them. Most of them seem to have gone to the cities in Texas, including the ones I mentioned.
@GunnerQ: “First the Elites [..], then they exported every factory they could to China”
Those are different elites: the first is the government, the second is multinational corporations.
Multinational corporations are undemocratic, not tied to nations, and usually so large they hold enormous power, even over governments. The latter is seen by the amount of money flowing into government and controlling them. The banks play a specially nasty role; during the 2008 crisis, banks needed to be rescued by the government with tax-payer money, while at the same time robbing the same tax-payers a second time by loss of investments.
The people do hold power over corporations, but are hardly able to use that power effectively, because the government usually decides not to listen to voters, but to corporate lobbyists. And don’t forget that the same people in goverment usually have a personal interest to keep friends with corporations and banks, who will be their future employers once their government days are over. Look at how much corporations are paying ex-government officials, either as speakers or in advisory roles.
Novaseeker,
How do you know Texas is a great and prosperous land for whites to move to? Because statistics and pundits don’t lie? It’s arrogant for you to tell people they should go live where you don’t just because it’s a ‘better place’. Either Williamson directly helps poor whites to move in literally next door to him or he’s the tiny-dicked rabbit I said he was.
“Just end your entire life as you know it and start over from nothing in a land of promised opportunity!” is hard and DANGEROUS advice to follow, usually offered by people with no concern for your fate. I failed at that advice myself when I left California 20 years ago for promised better pastures in a solidly Red state… moved back into my parents’ home, penniless, a year later, through no fault of mine. It was one of two times I’ve come within a month of being homeless on the streets.
Me: “Your advice was bad! I lost what little I still had!”
Them: *shrug*
…
Paul @ 11:27 am:
“Those are different elites: the first is the government, the second is multinational corporations.”
Wrong. They are one and the same. As you say:
“And don’t forget that the same people in government usually have a personal interest to keep friends with corporations and banks, who will be their future employers once their government days are over. Look at how much corporations are paying ex-government officials, either as speakers or in advisory roles.”
The left hand washes the right hand.
Novaseeker, others–
The issue of marriage “civilizing” men, I think, comes down to something like this. Some of what attracted me to Scott were intangibles like risk taking, immovable goals, being a little unpredictable (in sort of a scary way), this kind of staring-right-through-people eye contact that lets you know he will either get what he needs from the person or just move them out of the way–but all done in this charming, and even weirdly polite way. He is especially driven when it comes to protecting and making sure the people closest to him are taken care of. He’s not mean. He just has zero tolerance for BS. He walks away very quickly from situations that seem stupid to him.
Marriage did not make one bit of that go away. I think it caused him to channel it in ways that were even more productive than before (which is pretty hard to imagine). No color matching. No picking out furniture. If he had become that, I would have immediately been turned off and disappointed.
@GunnerQ
Strictly speaking they are different, one group is under democratic control, at least theoretically.
“Drain the swamp”, does anyone remember that? Or : “Hillary Clinton has to go to jail. She has to go to jail…She’s guilty as hell.” ? And what did Trump tell after being elected?
“I don’t want to hurt the Clintons, I really don’t,” Trump said, “She went through a lot and suffered greatly in many different ways.” “It’s just not something that I feel very strongly about.”
Really?
@Poke
Your reading comprehension-fu is weak. That piece you quoted is the piece I linked to in my post. I had read that article but people kept saying he wants whites to die so that must be why I didn’t understand that was the piece being referenced. So his advice was the same advice we might give a poor kid raised in the ghetto – get out of town. Wow…earth shattering.
@Nova
I agree with everything you wrote. I wish we had the data to prove that is what is going on but its hard to do.
Pingback: She’s too traditional to marry her baby daddy. | Dalrock
Ah, the summer of 1990, those were the days!!!
It’s marriage that civilizes both men and women. Women do not civilize men, they are husbanded by them. To husband an animal is to domesticate them. It’s a simple distinction that has been totally misrepresented by gynocrats.
We talk a lot about game here, as the primary tool in husbanding a wife. Do direct words ever play a role, or is that too much for women too handle? It seems my wife can’t handle it if she detects my tone changing, let alone telling her she is wrong. For example, regardless of likely success, is it okay to tell a wife in a specific situation that her emotions are controlling her and it’s hurting her ability to help me and mother our son? I would like to tell her”you are being selfish and immature. Get over your hurt feelings and over-sensitivity and be a good helper.”
@ Swanny River
You ask a fair question, and in thinking it over all I can come up with are endless variables and no solution other than a man just has to take his shot.
– We know that use of too many words by a man makes him seem more womanly to women, and that actions are preferable to blather; but your proposal uses an economy of words.
– We know that AWALT but by matters of degree, and that each has a slightly different response based on individual level of spiritual, and/or chronological maturity. The same woman may well respond differently to a given situation at different life stages. (If you’re a shooter this is the principle of round-to-round dispersion).
– We know that women tend to give considerable weight to things said by others, particularly if the one saying it is seen by her as an authority figure, but that this figure is seldom to never the husband.
– Conversely, we know anything said by the husband that may be viewed as criticism will be seized upon, never forgotten even if forgiven, and possibly used later at an opportune moment.
This goes on and on. So it seems like it’s down to the husband’s evaluation of who he is dealing with, that he has formed over time trying to work with, or around the same woman.
When they say that women civilize men, they mean that commitment to the woman harnesses the man under her yoke for the purpose of submitting to and serving Satan’s Brave New World Order.
No man should have any thing to do with any woman any where at any time for any reason, for one simple reason: The Duluth Model. Research The Duluth Model and you will see what I am talking about.
Swanny:
regardless of likely success, is it okay to tell a wife in a specific situation that her emotions are controlling her and it’s hurting her ability to help me and mother our son? I would like to tell her”you are being selfish and immature. Get over your hurt feelings and over-sensitivity and be a good helper.””
Yes, that’s pretty much what I would say but with an economy of words. “Feel it later. Right now there’s work to do and I need you to do it.”
The longer version is
“Grow the F up. Put on your big girl panties and get things done that need done. You can feel however you want to feel about it; but right now there are things that need your immediate attention.”
The problem with Mrs. Swanny, as was the problem with Mrs. deti, is her confusing feelings and emotions with truth, or Truth.
feelings are not the truth. Emotions are not the truth. They exist, and we feel them. But they do not solve problems, they do not get things done, and they do not execute responsibility. They do not take care of children or spouses, or complete tasks.
We cannot go to God and say “I didn’t take care of my spouse pr children because feel bad.” We cannot go to our employers and say “I didn’t do my job because of all these bad icky emotions I was feeling.”
Mrs. deti will do things like go off by herself for a while and “feel her feelings”. that’s fine, Mrs. deti, take 15 or 30 minutes, and feel whatever you need to feel. Scream. Cry. Yell. Hit a pillow. Curse me under your breath. And when you’re done feeling your feelings, come on back and take care of these things that are YOUR RESPONSIBILITY and that are right here, still awaiting your considered attention.
GROW. THE. F. UP.
Upstate New York has not recovered from the recession of 1990. We are going back 28 years people, no recovery. And no part of upstate New York has had it worse than Rochester. And what do I mean by that? I’ll use math to describe just how bad it is:
Use 1950 as a baseline. In 1950 (with the booming photography industry) there were X number of jobs in Rochester, and they were good jobs. There was plenty of work for everyone. Today, there are x – 100,000 jobs in Rochester. So over 68 years, Rochester has lost 100,000 jobs.
68 time 365 = 24,820 days. That is how many days it has taken to remove 100,000 jobs from the local economy. That is 4 jobs a day, destroyed. Going over any 68 year period for any part of the country, no one has had it worse, anywhere.
Innocent:
That recession in 1990 / 1991 was the last nail in the proverbial coffin for Upstate New York.
Amsterdam (carpet mills…Mohawk and Bigelow) left mostly in the 1950’s…..all gone by the 1970’s. Gone. Moved to the Carolinas. Gloversville / Johnsown / Utica…..whole Mohawk Valley…the smaller mill towns…..began to shutter up and close in the 1970’s. Schenectday with American Locomotive (closed 1970???) and GE moving out starting in 1979….
The whole Adirondack region….the lumbering, paper mills, garnet, graphite, and slate….all that was reamining left in the 1970’s.
In 1990 / 1991 the construction industry collapsed (which my dad was a part of) and that recession was actually worse than the one that hit Upstate in 1981 / 1982. The only reason my family weathered that well was the fact that the house was paid for, and my mother by that point was a Supervior RN at the VA. She was pulling a decent income at that point, compared to 1982.
Summer 1991 I returned back from college in Vermont for the break and I had been working at a GAP in nearby Plattsburgh since 1986 (high school) as a part time employee, and then full time during the summers….during the summer of 1991 I was given only 12 hours a week. Compared to 40 or more from 1987-1990.
The good jobs in that region of Upstate today are: Government (federal / state / county), including the school and SUNY systems or if you are in the higher grade professions (doctor, lawyer, accountant) or if you are a decent businessman running an established car dealership……..distributor and the like.
Everyone else is forced into retail, tourist related work (Saratoga in the summers, Lake George and the like) or just living on welfare
In 1995, I went to a weekend in Schenectady. Spent the weekend in that God forsaken city. That is when I learned about the “rent game” of Schenectady and Utica. It appears in the mid 1990s (what with all the mills and GE plants and factories completely empty) contractors were going in and “converting” the buildings into rental apartments. Well all that did was drive up the vacancy rate as the existing landlords were chasing renters in a true form of “rent seeking.” So what was the upstate New York “rent game” exactly?
Well, you sign a 4 month lease (pay for 3 months, get one month rent free.) The landlords did that to try and get renters to sign on the dotted line in the hopes that they would just bit the bullet and stay for a year or more. Oh no. You don’t do that. Instead, you sign the lease for 4 months and befriend someone with a pick-up truck. And at the end of 4 months, you just buy your friend with the pick-up truck pizza as he helps you move into another apartment where yet another landlord gives you a rent-3-months get one more free deal. Do this all year, you get 3 months rent free. Yes you are living in squalor but the rent was cheap because it was so plentiful.
That was 23 years ago, I have no idea if they are still doing that. I haven’t been back to Rochester since 1989. I can’t even imagine what happened to that pitiful city since Kodak and Polaroid had to declare bankruptcy since anyone can take digital high-definition pictures with their smartphone.
Regarding Lake George, fiancé number 2, she grew up in Poughkeepsie. So we’d travel back from Boston, get on the I-90 West, and visit her folks at least once a month. One such trip she introduced me to Lake George. We were there for some kind of swap meet or something or other. Everyone was walking up and down the street as the unemployed locals/townies put all their historical attic cr-p on their front lawn in the hopes that someone would take an interest in it and buy it. That appeared to be the whole purpose of the weekend, to be a “picker.” Anyway, that was her dad’s favorite vacation spot, Lake George. I never went to the lake though. We never made it off the street.
Lost Patrol and Deti,
Thank you for the wisdom and patience. Several commenters here have helped me get through bad weekends, as this one was. Funny thing in a bad way, is that I am not sure who makes me madder, my rebellious wife or the conservative church members who enable it with their focused talk about her career. Once in awhile she gets asked to a woman’s bible study, but no one really engages her or calls her to account for mothering or helping me. Oh, they’d be truly sad if we split up, but they won’t be impactful in making sure to do what they can to prevent it.
Swanny River says: I am not sure who makes me madder, my rebellious wife or the conservative church members who enable…
I’m sure. I love my wife, as vowed, as difficult as that has become. However my zeal for God’s word makes me hate the false teachers who twist God’s word through trickery and distortion to serve Satan’s agenda, and I ain’t vowed to those hirelings. So they can’t torture me by way of my religion like my wife does. My wife is just being a completely selfish deluded fool, but those false teachers are paid to preach God’s word, and instead are antiChrists. They know better. My wife may be headed to hell herself, but the false shepherds are employed turning God seekers over to hell. They have seminary degrees in expounding God’s truth and yet chose to lie and deceive instead.
It kind of reminds me of Johnny Ringo the bloodthirsty gangster in the movie Tombstone.
Doc Holliday says, “Evidently, Mr. Ringo’s an educated man. Now I really hate him.” If Johnny had just been some uneducated fool who turned to crime, he wouldn’t have been nearly as odious to Doc as the fact that this educated man apparently gave up other possibilities to seek out a vile life of murder and crimes against the innocent. It is bad when some fool uses the Bible to support a rebelling wife. It is abhorrent when a trusted man with a Bible degree spouts that same balderdash.
Swanny says:
They have seminary degrees in expounding God’s truth and yet chose to lie and deceive instead.
I think it has become obvious that those seminary degrees are what have enabled these guys to so expertly lie and deceive. Seminaries and Bible colleges are the ultimate convergence tools that have corruptedthe established church.
I think that Novaseeker and Kevin are right. I don’t think that Williamson has ever suggested that he wanted white *people* to die.
Pingback: Whose Fault is Feminism? | Secular Patriarchy
Pingback: Father’s day sermons are the symptom, not the disease. | Dalrock
‘Lacking a partner means they don’t benefit from the civilizing effect of woman’
To channel Alex, from ‘A Clockwork Orange’…”Civilized? My syphilised yarbles!”
Pingback: Kickass single moms deserve Father’s Day gifts. | Dalrock