Monthly Archives: July 2014

Sex Ed Hypocrisy

I found this both amusing and angering:

EDMONTON – An Edmonton teenager and her mother have successfully filed a complaint with the Alberta Human Rights Commission, alleging the Edmonton Public School District’s use of a Christian fundamentalist abstinence education program infringed upon their rights as non-Christians.

Dawson’s mother Kathy, an agnostic who supports sex education, signed the permission slip for Emily to attend CALM’s sexual education classes. She was shocked when Emily texted her to say the “sex ed” class was being taught by an anti-abortion activist, from the American-based Pregnancy Care Centre.

The leftist theocrats spent decades ramming “sexual education” into the public education system against the vocal opposition of Christians, the right, and anybody with any sanity because indoctrinating elementary-school children in the joys of sodomy and pedophilia is essential for the leftist goal of destroying the family.

One pro-life Christian group manages to infiltrate their sexual indoctrination sessions and make it vaguely pro-family and suddenly it becomes a human rights issue that must be dealt with in court.

It’s funny how suddenly teaching children about sex is wrong when it comes from a point of view of Christian morality rather than nihilistic hedonism.

Remember, its all about forcing their views and destroying traditional values, nothing more.

To add even more joy, this is how the article ends:

It’s absurd. CALM isn’t religion class. That’s not what parents sign up for. Sex education in our local public schools should be delivered in a scientific, non-judgmental way, by qualified professionals, not outsourced to an American-based pro-life lobby group.

Emily and Kathy Dawson have inspired an important public debate about the nature of our public schools. They deserve our thanks for their courage in speaking out.

This left-wing moralizing BS is a part of the news story. It’s not an editorial, it’s in the national news section. The priests of progressivism aren’t even trying to hide that the news is simply propaganda any more.

The gloves are coming off, they’re coming into the open, and they won’t stop until they’ve devoured your children’s souls and destroyed whatever is left of the family.

Men and Women’s Dating Markets

Here’s an article (H/T: RPR) of a woman whining about she hates dating because she wants an ‘organic’ relationship. The article is worthless, but there is something that I want to highlight:

I’d long been criticized for never having “officially dated.” In an attempt to put this argument to rest, I decided to say “yes” to any agreeable man who asked me out. I had 98 dates in nine months.

I’ve talked about this before but this is a good reason to reiterate. Over an extended period, this women had 11 “agreeable” men ask her out each month (I wonder how many ‘non-agreeable’ men she rejected).

And I doubt her 11 dates a month is abnormally high. From her photo, she’s rather attractive for her age, but when she’s 20-odd years past her prime, any average 20-25 year old gal who takes basic care of herself would be her match there, and, at least from her article, it doesn’t sound like she has all that dazzling a personality.

Despite this, she got almost 100 dates in less than year by simply not saying no to ‘agreeable’ men.

Compare this to Krauser, one of the masters of bedding women, who has spent years perfecting and writing about game and has bed more women than 99% men ever have or will. He opened 1000 women and got a grand total of 60 dates in a year.

Again, an average woman got 98 dates in 9 months for doing nothing, while a grand-master of game got 60 dates in a year after busting his hump.

That is how easy the dating market is for women. The vast majority of men will never get anywhere near as many opportunities for romance in their whole life no matter how much effort they put in as this average-looking woman got in 9 months of not saying no.

This is the difference between men and women in the dating market.

****

This is also why advice of ‘just be yourself‘ and ‘you’ll find someone when you stop looking‘ is so common, yet so useless. For women it’s true: all a woman has to do is show up, not cripple herself and say yes and she has her pick of 100 guys a year. She doesn’t need to search and she can just be herself.

In fact, for a woman, ‘looking’ is probably counter-productive. Given the massive opportunities for romance that just come to her, she obviously does not mean looking in the sense most males do, ie. trying to find and ask out suitable members of the opposite sex. She means something totally different; when she’s looking she’s actively vetting men, ie. ruling men out, so when she stops looking she’s no longer ruling men out beforehand, giving one of those hundred guys a foot in the door.

Men though simply can’t do this. George Clooney maybe, but very few others. If you ‘just be yourself’ you’re one of the hundred faceless men boring her with your dog and pony show. If you stop looking, you’re not even one of those 100 men, you’re no one.

This is also why women are often devoid of sympathy/empathy for male dating problems. It’s not that they’re heartless, it’s that they simply can’t understand (unless they are unattractive): the concept of not having plenty of options is as alien to them as having a date fall into your lap every 3 days with no effort is to men.

****

This came up briefly in my personal life; I was with my folks and we were talking about my sister. She went through a break-up and my mother was surprised that she hadn’t jumped back into a relationship within a month and she was proud that she didn’t just jump back into it. I dryly said, “A whole month”. Then she talked about how woman can usually have plenty of options after a break-up.

Little things like that really hammer home the point that women live in a whole different world.

****

So, things to consider for men:

Every time you’re asking a woman out, you’re competing against the other 99 men who’ve asked her out that year. What makes you better than them? Why would she choose you when she rejected them?

If you want to win, you either need to find a girl who doesn’t get 100 offers a year  or you need to offer what those other 99 guys don’t.

Make it look “organic”. She has dozens of dog-and-pony shows she could could attend, make it seem like it just happened.

Practical things for women:

Be available, don’t say no, start saying yes.

That’s it. If you’re a decent person and moderately attractive, you’ll have a guy in no time.

Lightning Round – 2014/07/09

Victor gives advice on marketing.

How to get out of the friendzone.

PUA’s thinking like women.

One red pill is not enough, if you’ve been deceived by one thing, you can be deceived by others.

We’ve already lost.
Related: The solution to civilizational collapse.
Related: The end of the left-ward ratchet?
Related: Outprogressing the progressives.

The watch must be manned.

The smearing of McCarthy.
Related: The WB makes a pro-Stalin film at FDR’s behest, which is glowingly reviewed by the NYT.

Related: Why people used to have children.

A round-up of the capitalism talks.
Related: Capitalism and entrepreneurial capitalism.

The Flores Hobbit and evolution.
Related: The deep ruin of Detroit.
Related: The wasted century.

Metal is right-wing.

The development of social norms.

Persons fleeing concept: removing the actor from the act.

Scott notices that to the social justice nominalists, words are weapons.

The anger at the Hobby Lobby is because their act of cultural war failed.

The religion of liberalism.

Religion and social trust.

Aristocracy as a tool for decreasing time preference.

Life history theory.
Related: A bunch of science links.

Gender mainstreaming is deliberate social engineering.

How IQ relates to personality.

It seems that Jayman, while right on many things, is wrong on this one: fatherhood does matter, even apart from genes.

The transition of civilization.

White working-class British children marginalized by focus on diversity.

The Africanization of America.
Related: Brazil: The future US.
Related: The Feds side with the illegal invaders.
Related: The “declining” labour force.

Civilization as an iterated prisoners dilemma.

Defensiveness marks civilizational decline.

There were four American revolutions.

The brainwashing of colleges.

Mises vs. Jesus.

You can’t get the cultural aspects of religion without the religious belief.
Related: On religious pluralism.

Christians need better art.
Related: Robbed of beauty by the left.
Related: Why modernists think ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’.

What humility is.

The problem of the Pharisees.

Against relevance in church.

Positivism and meaning.

Ontario “Catholic” schools, aren’t so Catholic.

The culture warriors are almost as progressive as their enemies.

Control and conflict resolution.

Why chivalry is dead.

No truth for men.

The feminist humiliations and suspicion reach everywhere.

Feminism is a spiritual disease which will run its course.

Tracy-Clarke Flory has noticed us.

TRP, looks, and ONS.

Science: Pre-selection exists.

A hamster on abandoning her children to work.
Related: Modern womanhood in all its glory.

The Veeck effect.

Physicist: Humans will not be the dominant species by 2045.

Why liberals should stop trying to help blacks.

A thorough post on guns and violence.

US military bans Bibles, but enforces Ramadan rules.

On writing with an axe to grind.

The lies of the anti-Amazon SFWA.

The decline in SF is due to pink SF/F.

On raising virtuous children.

Tips for making your kid a billionaire.

Pretend the dead lion is a baby so you won’t be as upset.

Universities raise tuition while paying hundreds of thousands for Clinton to speak.

Black lesbian privilege.

Religious people are as discriminated against in employment as blacks.

How medicine works.

http://www.sunnewsnetwork.ca/video/fighting-for-freedom-in-nanaimo/3658064081001

H/T: Pollack, VD, Land, RPR, SDA

Assertiveness, Leadership, and Bitchiness

Dalrock posted avideo. I had seen it earlier and was going to comment on it, but never got around to it, so I’ll comment on it now. Watch it:

Cane also had a good post on it, but I’m going to take this a bit of a different direction.

You’ve all heard feminists whine about how women are called bitchy where a man would be called assertive or women are called bossy, while men are called leaders. It’s one of those memes that seem to continually float around. (Any young women who may read my blog should take note of this post).

The reason women are called bitchy or bossy is because in general feminists, and many non-feminist women, do not seem to understand that there is a middle ground of assertiveness between being a pushover and being bitchy. Leadership exists in the space between passiveness and bossiness. This commercial illustrates that ignorance perfectly.

There are five mini-stories in the commercial, where there’s a before, where the woman is sorry and an after where the woman is “confident” (although, bitchy would be a better term in most cases).

In the first, the woman interrupts someone, probably her boss, in who’s making a public presentation. In that case, ‘sorry’ is only the minimal politeness. Now, they should have focused on her calling her own question ‘stupid’, that was the real problem with that example, and shows a basic lack of confidence. But in the second, instead of just having her show more confidence in her own ideas, they jump her straight to bitchy. She just flat out interrupts the guy making the presentation in mid-sentence. That’s not assertive, that’s just plain rude. The assertive way to pull this off, would have been ‘Excuse me, why don’t…?” When you are publicly interrupting someone in the middle of a presentation, ‘sorry’ is just plain common courtesy.

In the second one, the women barges into someone else’s office. For this one, there’s nothing particularly wrong in either example, both ‘sorry’ or a polite ‘do you got a minute?’ are basic courtesy when interrupting someone. There’s the small problem that the commercial paints the basic politeness of ‘sorry’ for interrupting someone busy, as being somehow weak when it is not.

The third one, illustrates a girl apologizing when she shouldn’t. The commercial is right here, if someone sits don’t beside you, apologizing is silly. But instead of simply having her simply not apologize and ignoring him, which would be the confident thing to do, she smirks at him like she’s purposely being an ass and winning some sort of non-existent competition. That is being passive-aggressively bitchy; between men, that kind of attitude at the wrong time could result in a fight.

The fourth and the fifth ones are the worst though. In the before skits, one woman passes a child to the husband and says sorry and the other takes part of a blanket her husband is hogging and says sorry. In either case, saying ‘sorry’ is rather silly. Nothing wrong is being done in the former and the husband is in the wrong in the latter; no apologies needed. In the former, just saying ‘take him’ or, in the latter, just taking the blanket without a word is perfectly fine. But again, instead of showing a confident woman doing what needs to be done, they jump straight to bitchy. Going out of your way to say ‘sorry, not sorry’ is not assertive, it is passive-aggressive bitchiness, as is taking the whole blanket on purpose.

This is why “assertive” women are called bossy or bitchy. It is not because of some sort of double-standard, it is because many of them don’t know the basic rules of assertiveness game.

Assertive men do what they need to do, but, as the situation calls for it, they either don’t mention it (such as in 3, 4, or 5) or show basic politeness when they do it (such as in 1 or 2). Only aggressive assholes, the male equivalent of bossy bitches, violate someone else’s space or speaking time or go out of there way to rub their “assertiveness” in someone else’s face.

Among men, that kind of behaviour is what starts fights, but men can’t/don’t generally verbally or physically attack women, so those kinds of women get away with the rather minor penalty of being labelleda bitch.

So, women, if you don’t want to be called bitchy or bossy, learn the rules of decorum game, because the kind of passive-aggressive jackassery shown in this commercial is not “assertive”, it’s just being a jerk.

Traditional Family

In my earlier post, lolz commented:

In my humble opinion, the tradcon exchange between husband and wife that you advocate is not really all that equitable – and certainly not what one sees in ancient societies.

He also posted a link (read it all, it’s pretty good, except the conclusion which is too egalitarian and hedonistic for my taste):

In other words, people we call “tradcons” are frequently hewing to a “tradition” that is mostly a recent invention. Throughout virtually all of history, up to and including much of the world still today, “the family” or even “the nuclear family” meant something very different: what it usually was was father+mother+the kids as part of an extended family, with grandmothers and grandfathers and aunts and uncles and/or cousins frequently living under one roof, or in very close proximity to each other, in a mutually supportive environment. “The family” was all these people, usually dedicated to helping each other, often forming alliances with other families to their mutual benefit. Even in societies where it was the norm for the youngsters to move away, they usually moved in mutually supportive groups together only a day or two away from the rest of the extended family, whom they would often get back together with in times of trouble. Even in societies when young men struck out on their own, they usually did so in mutually supportive groups, not alone against the world.

The ancient idea of “the family” was not “we get together and have dinner at holidays and provide each other some emotional support.” It was much more a matter of, “we work together during the day, we make our meals together, we live in one house or adjacent houses, we fight off enemies together, when one of us is sick we all get together to help. Two of our young’uns are getting hitched? We may need to build them a house because we can’t fit them in here right now so let’s give ‘em a new place over on that hill up yonder.”

First, I’ll answer the ‘equitable’ thing. lolz is right, it’s not equitable. Having to work 40-60 hours a week away from your home and family is definitely the shorter end of the stick to raising your own family, as I’ve written before, women definitely benefited from the ‘traditional’ nuclear family. The problem is, unless you’re willing to abandon your kids as latchkey children to daycare and the public schools or you have family that’s willing to take care of them most of the week, you need someone to take care of the kids, and given biological differences between the sexes, the man staying home will result in marital problems and divorce. It makes sense to have the woman stay home.

Which brings us to the next point: both lolz and Esmay are right.

The nuclear family is not ‘traditional’ or the way things were, it was an adaptation to modern industrial society. What the article above failed to mention, is that ‘work’ as we know it today, is a recent invention. Until the industrial revolution, most people’s ‘work’ was either the family farm or or the family home business (or in tribal societies, men hunted, women gathered). There was no real separation between work and home life, they were the same. Sadly, we do not exist in that society. To not starve, most people have to work outside the home. The nuclear family is the best adaptation to that economic reality we have.

Ideally, we’d be able to get back to that tribal, extended family structure. One of my hopes, if that someday I will be able to be able to create a tribal structure among my family, and maybe with my friends as well. We’ll live on a mostly self-sustaining farm subsidized by some small income from a couple projects I’m working on. That will take a lot of work, and will be a lifelong project, but hopefully I’ll get there.

But for now, the realities of modern society constrain me, constrain us. We can try to build a traditional, tribal structure, but that is not going to happen right away. Before that, I have to get a wife, then keep my children from having their souls devoured by the progressive school system, that means the nuclear, breadwinning family is a necessity for now.

****

As an aside, I would actually not mind being a stay-at home dad. A commenter at Vox’s site has described his adventures as such:

Hey man… we don’t JUST play video games all day. I mean sometimes its almost 8am before they finish with their school work for the day. And sometimes we go down to the lake and shoot turtles with the 10/22s… or fish… or have great glorious nerf wars in the tree forts. and there is a swimming pool out there for the really nice days… about 300 of them a year.

Ok well… its mostly video games…

He’s also described the risk of it:

Look the truth is if I wasn’t such a stupendous badass my wife would’ve lost interest years ago. Happens all the time. The stay at home dad thing is basically betting your family’s future on your ability to maintain your badass man credibility with practically the whole deck stacked against you. The risks are huge. Of course.. if you pull it off you get to spend all day with your kids shooting turtles, fishing, playing Black Ops II, and watching Sportcenter. so I mean… its not entirely irrational.

Honestly, that sounds like a lot of fun, and would be much better life than going to the office every day.

Even the risk of the family being destroyed, while much higher, is not as brutally punishing, as you won’t be the one paying child support and alimony, and you’ll probably have a decent chance of getting custody.

The question is, could you find a girl okay with the arrangement and could you stay badass. I figure, if you ran a little hobby farm in the country, fished, and hunted, your odds wouldn’t be too bad. You’d still get the provider rep if the meat on the table was something you slaughtered or hunted yourself.

It would take a lot of work to set up, but I’d be okay with the arrangement of staying home on the acreage with the kids while the wife worked.

Lightning Round – 2014/07/02

How to settle conflicts like a man.

Some simple advice for young men.

There is no ‘true self’, so become what you want to become.

Remember, avoid women with a ticking biological clock.

The problems of social conservatism and the necessity of PUAs.

Political policy doesn’t matter when the polis is broken.

Evola on capitalism.
Related: Jim responds.
Related: Land responds.
Related: I’ve always found it odd when people point to an example of socialism and label it capitalism. It’s very common; in fact, almost any time I see someone criticize ‘capitalism’ they are criticizing socialism.

Reactionaries need more elitism.

On exit.

An interview by Gary Oldman has been making the rounds.

Zippy responds to me.
Related: Catholicism, Protestantism, and cladistics.
Related: Atheist Religion.

Poe’s law, hoaxes, and gullibility.

Nuke the UK from orbit.

Anti-semitism is everywhere. Check under the bed.

Colonialism is the solution.

HBD truths necessitate Nazism for the liberal.

The savagery of the Jacobins.

Fact Rape: Gavin McGinnes shows how much the media lies.

Italian Vatacinist: “open season on conservatives.”

Is Catholic Answers even Catholic anymore?

Lessons Christian parents need.

The convergence of feminists and conservatives.

For a woman to find a man, she needs to make the investment worth it.

Science: Criminality is adaptive in industrial society.

The two-income trap. (Echoes of what I’ve already written).
Related: Why did women entering the workforce have no effect on GDP?

Feminists trivialize rape: angry that false rape claimant is jailed.

Hehe… The year 2032.

Don’t flatter a woman if you want her to stay pretty.

Physical attractiveness means good health.

Captain Capitalism’s thoughts on post-scarcity.

The purposes of government pension plans.

Why Mark Steyn isn’t keeping a donor’s list.

Tolerance in action in Denmark.

Section 13 of the CHRA  is repealed.

Maybe stocks aren’t such a great investment.

NCAA coaches deserve their pay.

The creation of the British underclass.

Immigrants have taken all new job gains since 2000.
Related: Immigration is the main reason for the increase in sexual exploitation.

Hipster Nazis.

EPA employees told to stop pooping in the hallways.

Female Dem kills driverless car because she can’t resist pushing button.

Manipulated temperature data.

The SFWA is circling the wagons around a pedophile.