Category Archives: Personal

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.

Musings on Romance

Donal has some musings:

The basic strategy which many (most?) women employ right now, which is regularly known as AF/BB (see Rollo’s post for more), is one that requires two distinct elements to pull off: deceit and desperation. Many, if not most, men would not be content to marry a woman whom they realize is choosing to marry them solely as a meal ticket, and effectively a sperm donor as well. It should surprise no one that men don’t like to be used in that way, and will balk at it if they realize that is what is happening. Hence the importance of hiding what is going on from them.

Maybe I’m odd, but I honestly wouldn’t mind taking a wife who was wanting to make rational deal upfront. I’d be quite willing to go along with a young woman who proposed an honest, straightforward marriage deal: ‘you provide for me, protect me, and father my children, and I’ll bear you many children, keep your house, and provide regular sexual access.’

If she met my list and I had some positive feelings for her, I’d jump at the chance for such a rational young girl.

That’s not to say I’m willing to be the beta bux for a woman who’s already had her alpha fux, but that’s something quite different a family-oriented girl with a low time preference rationally planning her future. In fact, that kind of future-time orientation would be rather attractive in its own right.

My problem with being the beta bux is not that a woman would want “a meal-ticket” but rather that she is not offering a worthwhile value in trade by trying to sell damaged and/or decaying goods for full price through deceit.

If a young woman wanted to make a fair and honest trade on the marriage market for a meal-ticket, I’d be game.

But then again, I’ve always been rather emotionally-detached and bloodlessly rational, so I’m probably the odd one out here.

****

Which leads me to further musings on romance.

The slow, agonizing death of modern marriage did not start with gay marriage nor did it start with no-fault divorce. It didn’t even start with the creation of ‘marital rape‘ or mass contraception.

It started well before that: it started with the acceptance of romantic love as the basis of marriage and the conflation of romantic love and Christian love.

Romantic love is a feeling and feelings change, for this reason romance and romantic love are a horrible basis for marriage.

Christian love is not a feeling, it is a series of purposeful attitudes and actions adopted.

‘Love’ is not love.

If you accept that romantic ‘love’ should be the basis of marriage, you are the problem.

Disconnection

I read my Tweets. It seems the Oscars are tonight. Who knew? Thanks Anti-Dem blog, I guess. A lesbian who had a sitcom a couple decades ago took a picture; 2 million RTs. A lot of people it seems. Society is dying.

I read a newspaper article a friend sent me. It’s from the CBC.  It seems tribalism is evil; ethnic nationalism moreso. I almost forgot. Thankfully, this one was at least written by an adult with a functioning brain and a basic grasp on reality. I read another article, this one was not. The mind revolts; I remember why I don’t read newspapers anymore.

I’m visiting family. The TV is on while we talk. Commercials come on. I haven’t seen one in months; it feels like a mental assault. The stupidity almost hurts. Do I really feel the brain cells dying or is that psychosomatic? Has anyone, ever, been even half that excited over an egg sandwich before in their life? Even more, I am insulted someone, someone with a degree and a six-figure job, thought I would actually believe somebody could get that excited. The actor’s every expression screams backpfeifengesicht, yet I would be the one to go to jail. There is no justice. Wait, if they’re making this commercial somebody must actually be convinced to buy an egg sandwich because of it; the mind reels away from the horror. Finally the pause in conversation ends; I can ignore the terror.

I am riding the bus. An ad displays an idiot who is amazed, mouth agape, the government will subsidize his renovations. Does a thousand dollar subsidy from a nameless bureaucrat really elicit such an emotional outpouring? I wouldn’t even be that amazed if my office pool won the lottery. His face looks retarded. The urge to punch something, anything, stirs, so I look elsewhere.

Another ad. It’s a mentally handicapped man, looking slightly less retarded than the renovations guy. “I’m an athlete.” Despite being better at his sport than 90% of people will ever be at anything, “I’m an athlete.” is how you advertise him? I’m an emotionally-detached asshole, yet I’ve never been that condescending to anybody in my life. Why do the Special Olympics hate disabled people?

Another ad, but of a soldier advertising the military, something noble, something worthy. Looking past the uniforms, its a woman; still sacrifice is sacrifice. ‘I love that I’m a role model.’ Shudder. I look to the quote under the other women soldier beside her, ‘People take me seriously.’ Defeat overwhelms me. Where are the calls to flag, country, patriotism, duty, honour, sacrifice, freedom, hell, even democracy, something, anything, transcendent? The army is purposefully recruiting narcissists. My biggest regret for almost over a half decade was not joining the army after high school; that regret is almost gone. Why can’t I fall asleep?

I am at work. I overhear my coworkers discussing a show I’ve never seen. I stay in my cubicle. They move to discussing football; I don’t recognize the names. I stay seated.

I scan Slate semi-regularly just to keep some connection to the mainstream news and opinions. I rage at the stupidity and asininity, but at least it’s not Salon or the NYT or HuffPo.

The headlines are increasingly infected with the Gawker voice. You know the voice; the one that sounds like Cracked headlines had a retarded step-child.

“I opted my kids out of standardized tests. I thought it was no big deal. Boy, Was I Wrong.” Here’s how someone who hadn’t drank paint as a child would write this: “Opting my kids out of standardized tests was a greater hassle than I thought.” See: 14 words in 1 flowing sentence as compared to 19 in 3 choppy sentences; much more readable and it sounds like something not written by a child who skipped his standardized tests. But I guess you must appeal to the other paint-drinkers. Can people no longer read ‘complex’ thoughts?

Also, up yours Slate. I don’t need your permission to lick a cookie-dough spoon. What kind of pathetic incompetent does? Come to think of it, what kind of worthless person even thinks about this more than, “Hey, my cookies are baking, let’s eat the leftover batter”?

Fictional TV character doesn’t understand economics! This from the same site that publishes Matthew Yglesias. The irony almost burns. Speaking of, does Matt ever write something not retarded?

Seems Pharrell’s, who sounds vaguely familiar, Happy, which does not, is the new Hey Ya, whatever that means. No one ever writes on heavy metal; c’mon Iced Earth’s new CD just dropped.

I read something in XX. It’s dripping with venom; hate seethes from every word. I check the byline, but I already guess the author. Is there any person in the world more hateful than Amanda Marcotte?

Get to Dear Prudence. Ahhh… Normal human pettiness is an amusing relief. Hmmm… It seems teaching children anal sex against the parents’ wishes is only ok if the public school does it. Good to know.

I write for my blog. Trying to find article on Gawker voice I vaguely remember reading a long time ago. Find this instead. There is actually someone who believes Gawker writes good headlines. America deserves destruction. Reason #5: “They’re written like real people talk.” Really? Reading a Gawker headline makes my bloodlust rise. If the people I spent my time with talked like that I’d be in prison. Remind me to never talk to anyone either named or friends with Andrew Hanelly; 20-to-life does not interest me.

Finish Mass Effect 3. It and the first two have been my major interactions with popular culture over the last three months. 40 hours a game, a game a month, an average of an hour a day (but more realistically one or two evenings a week). I also watched LilyHammer and House of Cards.

The more time passes the more disconnected I feel from society and culture. My knowledge of societal and cultural events around me all comes from a small internet subculture. No radio, no TV but Netflix, no newspapers, no sports but the occasional party for the ‘big game’ or ticket to the ‘local team’.

What little of culture seeps through my filters repulses me.

I’m not sure how healthy this is.  I’m not sure if the alternative is any healthier.

Am I insane? Or is everything else?

Labels and Libertarianism

Michael Anissimov has put out the 5 premises of neoreaction with which a someone must totally agree to be a neoreactionary. He argues that “anyone who disagrees with any one of them is almost certainly not a reactionary.”

I agree fully with all the points except possibly #4, which got me thinking about the rather petty problem of self-labelling. Particularly the fact that my self-descriptive label on my about page has been “reactionary libertarian” since I last updated it months ago.

I hold to a form of libertarianism, anarcho-monarchism, as the optimal form of government for English people, something which I just commented on that a couple weeks back. If asked I’d describe myself as a reactionary anarcho-monarchist.

But then again, I don’t “make personal freedom axiomatic“; rather I hold to the principal of subsidiarity. I do not “refuse to consider the negative externalities of that freedom to traditional structures” but rather I believe these structures are best preserved by distributing power primarily to the individual, family, and the community to best “foster community, family, and social cohesion”.

I definitely do hold to the “socialism” of “family and friends helping each other of their own free will.” (I wouldn’t call it socialism though).

Rather than not caring “if a libertarian society would leave many out in the cold” I have thought of the problem of natural slaves, although, simply having strong community values and mores from birth would probably take care of the problem.

I don’t think any who have read my blog are overly concerned about me being “excessively materialistic” in my outlook.

It would seem his criticisms of libertarianism do not apply to me or my thinking.

So, maybe I fall into the category of “theoretically compatible with libertarianism, but is not compatible with the mood and spirit of libertarianism”?

Or am I simply an unwitting entryist?

Could it be possible I’m “lonely and want friends to debate politics with, or [am] intrigued by the personalities of reactionaries, though they are not one”?

Or maybe by rejecting the axiom of a natural right to freedom, I am simply not a libertarian, whatever the similarities?

Maybe it’s time to retire the libertarian label.

I’ve worn it for many a year, but maybe I’m in the ideological territory of post-libertarianism and the label no longer fits.

Study Resources

I recently started running a young adults small group at my church (as part of my quest to become more of a leader). Right now it’s just four guys, but it’s open to both sexes. The last month we’ve been doing casual topical bible studies, but we want something more structured.

I’m brainstorming what to go through. Can any of my Christian readers recommend some good study resources or books I could use?

Nothing overtly Catholic or Orthodox; the materials need to be approved by an elder and one of the guys is very anti-Catholic.

Thanks.

“The List” and My List

Donal makes a list of what he requires in and offers to his future spouse, and suggested others do the same. I will, but first I’ll talk a bit on lists.

Unlike many in the ‘sphere, I do not have a negative reaction to a list; in fact, I support “the list”. I think it is a positive if a woman rationally plans ahead and has a strong list of non-negotiables she would require of a spouse before marriage and even a list of negotiable preferences. I think every single person, both men and women, should have a list.

A woman should have high standards; in fact, I think women should demand more from men than what they currently do. Women should not settle and should refuse to settle. Many of our modern difficulties come not from women with “lists” or high demands, but rather from women lacking either.

Men should have high standards and a list as well. In fact, I encourage any man reading this who is considering marriage to go and make a list of non-negotiables once they’ve finished reading this post.

****

The purpose of the list is something that should be kept in mind when making the list. The list exists, or should exist, for two main reasons:

1) To clarify what you are looking for in a relationship so you can focus your romantic efforts where they would be most valuable and avoid wasting time on people who are not what you need in a relationship.

2) To create a hard standard to prevent you from making a bad choice while being swept away in lust and emotion.

A list exists to protect you and your time from those who would use and waste both.

Leap stated:

The underlying subtext of this is all wrong. It’s a beta list for Beta’s and women who feel guilty about not dating them. She actively admits dating men that contradict these values.

He understands the proper subtext but misses the point of the list; the list, for women, is and should be to keep her from dating the alphas who would ruin her. It exists to protect her from her emotions so she doesn’t go through “alpha now -> beta later“.

A man’s list should exist to keep him from marrying the blonde bombshell with BPD. It serves as a firm anchor point when the tidal wave of lust overwhelms his good sense.

Every list should have this, not just as the subtext, but as the main point. Remember one of the main points of Proverbs, protect yourself from the adulteress.

Keep your heart with all vigilance, for from it flow the springs of life. Proverbs 4:23 (ESV)

****

The problem is not the concept of the list itself, the problem is with some women’s poor and irrational attempts at creating a list. They go about it the wrong, resulting in the incorrect use of the list. Here are some of the errors people make:

1) Creating a list that is unmeetable, but still expecting to get married. Too many women make a large list that no man can possibly live up to, than wonder why no man lives up to it. You must accept the reality that the higher your standards and the longer your list, the less likely anybody will meet it and the less likely marriage will be. If your standards are too high, you might remain single for the rest of your life.

My list of standards is fairly high (at least for our modern world) and I’d be surprised if even 10% of the single female population met them. In fact, my original list had more points (13) than the list Donal criticizes (12) and my new list below has the same number. But I recognize that my standards are high and accept the reality that I might remain single for the rest of my life. I simply know that I would prefer singleness to marriage to a woman that did not meet these basic standards.

Rule of thumb: Something should not be on your list unless you would rather remain single for the rest of your life than compromise on it.

2) Focusing on frivolities, ignoring the important – What matters for a marriage is underlying character, behaviours, and values related to a successful marriage. A list should focus on these. A list should avoid things unrelated this.

Too many times, when people speak of standards, of demanding more, they think of the superficial standards (absurdly high income,  a height requirement,  unrealistic standards of attractiveness). You should demand more and have high standards, but of character, not the superficial.

3) Making a list, then ignoring it – It is my impression many women make a list, sometimes reasonable, sometimes not, then, if they don’t meet a man who meets that list, rather then reconsider some parts of the list or simply go without a relationship, they completely ignore the list out of desperation. Usually when they ignore the list, it is the more important parts (character, values) they ignore in favour of the more superficial parts that shouldn’t be on the list anyways.

The list exists for a reason; if you make a list, stick to it. A non- negotiable list should be just that, non-negotiable; if you can’t meet anybody who meets the list’s requirements, either modify the list to something more reasonable or accept that you may be single for life.

4) Vague emotional standards, rather than concrete rules – I know romantic love can not be reduced to a formula, but a list should primarily be of concrete attributes, not vague emotions. A list which focuses too much on how someone makes you feel is counterproductive. It violates the purpose of a list, which is protecting you from your own emotions and lust. One or two points about emotions and attraction may be fine, but the bulk of the list should be observable traits independent of your emotional state.

****

Donal criticizes a particular list, but I don’t see much trouble with the actual points of the list in themselves. My only real problem with any of the particular point as written is #11 because it is theologically inaccurate, even though I have no problem with women expecting a certain, reasonable level of romance.

The problem is, as Donal mentions, the attitude behind this list and the way certain things on the list, particularly those related to emotions, may be (mis)construed could be problematic, but the list itself, as written, is not really offensive.

Also, the lack of concreteness is a problem: #7,10, and 11 can all be summed up as gives me good feelings. Good feelings should be one point on the list, if that, because good feelings are what the list should be protecting someone from; not a quarter of the list itself.

Irrelevant side note on the comments debate on attractiveness: The lady who wrote this is extremely attractive, both subjectively and objectively; a solid 9 at least (but I’m partial to blondes). On the other hand, I find Angelina Jolie unattractive, while I recognize she’s probably objectively attractive. There’s something I can’t quite identify about the fat lips that I find off-putting and her eyes always seem to look either cold, hard, or dead, none of which is attractive in a woman.

****

I’ve created a list of indicators of a good wife and mother on here before and in rel life I made a list of my minimum requirements for a wife. I’m not sure where I left the RL list, so I’ll try to recreate it here.

1) Christian – I am not too particularly worried about denomination, as long as it is non-heretical and non-liberal (but I repeat myself). I would even be willing to seriously consider converting to Catholicism and Orthodoxy if that was important to her, given that I’ve been leaning more in that direction over time.

2) Virgin, or has a low count but is genuinely repentant – My wife has to have a right view of sex. A virgin would be ideal, but I would not absolutely rule out a low count non-virgin if I knew she was honest about it and genuinely repentant and had enough positive traits to make up for the deficit.

As I’ve said before, I find the problem with marrying a genuinely repentant ex-slut is how accepting the church is of female fornication. When even “Christian” women accept the slut culture, how much can you trust a woman’s repentance?

3) Sufficiently attractive and healthy – Essentially, is she attractive enough to arouse me to the degree sufficient to desire and enact the procreative act and will she be so 20 years down the road? Is she healthy? Healthiness and attractiveness are strongly interrelated, hence why they do together here. It’s not a particularly high bar; most white or Asian women who take care of themselves would probably meet it.

(Note: #3 effectively rules out marrying outside of the white or Asian races, as I am generally not attracted to any but the most unattainably attractive women from non-Asian minorities).

4) Pleasant – Is she a joy to be around or is she a pain?

5) Not stupid – My wife needs to be someone I can genuinely converse with. She doesn’t have to be super-intelligent, I phrased this point as I did on purpose, but I don’t want to spend the rest of my life exasperated with and rolling my eyes at everything she says. Also, included under this would be sufficiently low time preference that she would not take drastic, unthinking actions that could destroy.

6) Not emotionally volatile – I am a calm, non-emotional INTJ. I simply can’t handle emotional outbursts all that well.

7) Prioritizes motherhood, family, and children – My wife who primary earthly goal will be motherhood and the family and she will need to be willing to have many children (I don’t have a non-negotiable number of children, but she’d have to be one amazing prize for it to be fewer than four).

8) Good mother – This is kind of vague, but does she demonstrate traits that indicate she would make a good mother?

9) Believes in traditional Biblical marriage – She needs to accept the model of marriage provided in the Bible. I am willing to date a Christian without this, given the sad reality of modern thought on marriage, but she must convert to this model before we marry. She also must be willing and eager to take my last name, no hyphens.

10) Willingness to homeschool – My children are not going to public school. Out of all of these this is the weakest on the list; it’s on the border between non-negotiables and strong preferences; I considered moving it to the top of my preferences list. I would be willing to accept alternatives such as Catholic private school or possibly Montessori education.

11) Responsible/Reliable/Loyal/Disciplined – Essentially, can she be relied upon. Marriage is essentially a business partnership based around running a household with the added bonus of sex; so, would I be willing to run a business with her? Does she wastefully spend and get into debt? Can she be counted on to keep her word? Can I depend on her to be responsible for those areas under her care? Etc.

12) Under 30 – I’ve written about this before, so I won’t say much more here. Under 30 is required, under 25 is a high priority, but negotiable.

My original list had 13 requirements, so this is not exactly the same, but I can’t think of anything that’s missing. The difference is probably because I mixed a few requirements together in this list that were discrete in the original.

Now, I don’t think I’ve made a list that is unreasonable. In fact, I’d be willing to bet that 100 years ago 90% of the single, white, Christian female population would have met this list. Even 50-60 years ago, I’m sure more women than not would have met this list (excepting some of the religious requirements).

In this fallen age, most women would not meet my list, but I think that says more about the decline of our civilization than any unreasonableness on my part.

****

Lastly, what do I bring to marriage. I’ll start with Donal’s LAMPS:

1) Looks – I’m tall and broad-shouldered, with a decent jawline. I have some muscle mass but I also have a bit of a gut. I’ve been told I’m handsome by a number of older women from church and my family’s social circles; I’ve never really inquired about it from women my own age. I’d guess I’m above average in this regard (but one must always remember the Dunning-Kruger effect).

2) Athleticism – I participate in a few sports, but they are less intense ones, and a martial art. I started lifting recently, but my lifts so far are not all that spectacular. I have a strong handshake and have decent burst capabilities but I’ve always had low endurance; but it’s been improving these last few years. Again, above average.

3) Money – I have a respectable, but not particularly exciting, middle class government job. I’m not yet 30, but I have a salary significantly above my province’s average. My salary is about average, maybe small amount above, for my peer group. I own my own home, have a decent amount of savings, and have a gold-plated government pension. There is a good chance my current career path could lead to six figures by retirement.  Above average here.

4) Power – I am extremely confident, dipping into arrogant at times, but I am not particularly dominant and rarely take the lead due to my introverted nature and my natural apathy to the social hierarchy. I’m working on becoming more dominant though. Probably below average here.

5) Status – I have no idea. I have a respectable but unexciting job. I generally have the respect of my elders; among my peers, I’m thought of as a bit of a right-wing nutball. I’m Probably average to below average here.

Overall, I’m probably average to somewhat above average (hopefully, Dunning-Kruger isn’t rearing its head).

I scored a 4 on Roissy’s Dating Market Value Test, lumping me in the Classic Beta category.

As for the counterpart to my list above:

I am a conservative Christian who believes in traditional marriage Biblical marriage, a virgin (but I do have struggles with pornogrphy), moderately attractive and rather healthy. I am intelligent and emotionally controlled (perhaps too emotionally controlled, according to some). I earn enough to be an excellent provider.I’m also responsible, loyal, disciplined, etc.

I’m probably not very pleasant, but I am fairly easy-going. My major deficits are my social skills are sub-par, I am devoid of charisma, and many women find my views of marriage, society, politics, religion, etc. off-putting.

****

So, am I worthy and capable of achieving the marriage partner I desire?

I’m not sure, but for now I’ll keep trying and improving myself and we’ll see.

Backsliding and Failure

Today, I am here to talk of failure, my own. I’ve been backsliding these last few months.

For a year there I was on the way up, I was approaching women and I thought I was good with it. I was definitely not an approach machine, but I was never trying to be. The occasional approach when a likely prospect comes up and a date every couple months is good enough for me and is all I’m trying to accomplish and I was doing it. Compared to the time prior where I never approached and had a grand total of 0 dates in 3 years, it’s a vast improvement

But these last two months I’ve been backsliding; I’ve been letting good opportunities pass me by. (On the positive, I did go out with a nice feminine girl from my sports team a few weeks back).

One that stands out is from a couple of weeks ago, there was a very cute girl who visited my church with her family. After the service, she dropped a number of shy smiles my way. I knew her father from way back and talked with him some, she was standing right there. I did not so much as say hi to her. I rationalized it to myself that she was too young (most likely she was 18) and her father was right there; but being honest with myself, I just chickened out.

But my slacking in this was hammered home just a couple days ago. In the morning I was on the bus, an attractive blonde sat next to me. I desired to talk to her, but over-thought for far too long. I took of my earphones to start a conversation, but then simply froze in over-thinking. Then kept over-thinking, until she got off a few stops before mine.

In the evening it got even worse. I stopped at McDonald’s and was served by a cute brunette. While waiting for my food, she started chatting me up (I was the only person at the counter). We chatted for a bit, and I held my end up fairly well, but then, I wussed out in getting her number. While walking out I kept telling myself I should get her number, but I just kept walking.

I’m not writing this because any of it is particularly interesting; I’m recognizing my failure here in the hopes it will spur me to try harder in the future, so I can recognize triumphs here instead. I need to put more work into approaching if I want to find a wife.

Omega’s Guide – My Road from Omega

Welcome to part two of the Omega’s Guide to Not Being a Loser, wherein I establish my credentials for taking on such a project.

I want you to know you are not alone, to know I know how you feel, to know that I can help you, to know it is not hopeless, so I am going to tell you where I was at and where I am now, hopefully as an inspirational story, or possibly just so you can laugh.

As a child I was always the one bullied, I got beaten up regularly, and was always one of the most unpopular kids in the class. I had few friends at school, but usually made up for it with friends from church or my neighbourhood. I moved around a lot, so I would always lose my current friends, but I would usually find a friend or two. As a teenager in high school, I moved to a new city. In this new city, I spent a year with no friends; I was unable to make them. I was too afraid to talk to people to make them. I had no social activities outside of church and youth group. I was crushingly lonely during this period.

Eventually, I got myself involved with a small group of friends; there was a group of about five guys I would spend time with. Things were not bad.

Then came college and things became horrible. My group of friends all went different paths, and my friends were all busy. I would see them about once a month. I helped “lead” youth group once a week (by which I mean, I showed up, watched the group while others lead, and talked with the two or three of the more nerdy/introverted youth) and went to church on Sunday. Outside of this, I had no social activities, I had no hobbies. I went to university, went to my part-time job, then came home and played video games, read, and watched TV. I had no friends but that small group I rarely saw; I had other social activities. This was my life for three years.

From about 17 or so, there was a cute blonde girl a few years younger than me who went to my church and youth group. I had the strongest crush on her for four years. I would daydream about her incessently; I thought of her everyday. I wanted nothing more in life than to hold this girl and have her be mine. More accurately, I wanted nothing more than to have the illusionary girl I built her up to be in my head; in those four years, I can count the times I talked with her at all (even a simple hello) on one hand; I had a real conversation with her a grand total of once.  I did not know her well-enough to like her; I was madly “in love” with the idea of what I thought she was.

For four years, I would see this girl in a group once or twice a week, spend most of the time furtively glancing at her, trying not to stare, beat myself up afterwards for my cowardice in not talking to her, then mooning over her the rest of the week. I was pathetic.

To make matters worse, in retrospect, this girl might have have had some interest in me back, and I might have had a chance had I only had the base courage to talk to her. That one real conversation I did have was at a youth event at a corn maze. I followed her and her sister in, walked up beside her, and we started talking for most of the maze. During this time, she dropped a number if hints I was too socially obtuse to understand, hints like “I’m cold” to which I stupidly offered my jacket, which she rejected, and “we should ditch my sister and go off alone together” to which I retardedly answered “that doesn’t seem very nice.” (Yes, really, she honestly said that and I truly answered that).

I was that bad at reading social situations. As another example, there was another girl in my youth group who I was not attracted to. At one event, we talked; she started blathering on about how she broke up with her boyfriend because he wasn’t Christian and she needed to find a good Christian man, while I half-listened and nodded. When she was done, I went inside and did my usual, stand in the group circle and listen without saying anything. She came up beside me and started leaning against me; I thought she must have been tired. We then went for the Bible lesson; she followed me and sat beside me. She then leaned into me and rested her head on my shoulder, I thought it was kind of weird, but she must’ve been really tired, so I tolerated it. After the lesson, she asked if we could talk. I said, sure. She then told me she liked me; I was utterly surprised. She did everything short of kiss me or grab my genitals, and I was no even aware of it until she told me. I asked to think about it (I was wondering if I should just for the social practice) and planned to tell her no a few days later. In my shameful cowardice I just avoided her for two months, until I finally screwed up the courage to reject her. (I regret that, it was a jerk move).

Knowing that, you will probably believe me when I tell you I could literally not start a conversation with a woman. I could literally not talk to strangers, acquaintances, or anyone not among my small groups of friends except in the most transactional or superficial ways (“Hi, How are You, I am good?” and answering direct questions with three words answers was the extent of my social prowess), and even these limited conversations were awkward. I had no friends other than that group of 5 I rarely saw; I rarely called my friends up to do something because I was afraid to phone them and “knew” they had better things to do than hang out with me. I had no social activities outside church, where I stood in a corner by myself. I never had a date. I withdrew from my family, spending most of my time in my room by myself. Etc. I was scrawny and out of shape, at only 150 pounds at 6’2″. My life was pretty much video games, TV, and books.

I was pathetic, I was desperately lonely, I was always bored, I hated myself, and I was suicidal. I thought about suicide every day and I seriously considered it about once a month. Twice, I sat on my bed, with my pocket knife to my throat, crying, while I debated whether to push it in or not. I decided not to both times for two reasons: I didn’t want my mom to find my corpse and I was worried the Catholics might be right and suicide would damn me. Those are literally the only reasons I could come up with not to kill myself.

This went on for three years, until I turned 21. Then I decided to turn myself around. I took the Dale Carnegie course (my grandfather paid for it, as both he and my mother were worried about my social life). I started spending more time with my friends. I attended attending a Christian group on campus, where I made a larger circle of friends. I started going to social events regularly; I spent more Fridays doing things than staying home. Over time, I developed a few hobbies. I started talking to girls, I entered a relationship or two.

Now, I have a circle of close friends and few other circles of friends. I am busy most days with social activities or hobbies. I have no problem talking with strangers. I can readily and easily converse with girls. I can and do approach girls on occasion, and get the occasional date. I no longer hate myself, no longer think suicidally, am rarely bored, and while occasionally I get a little lonely, it is nowhere near the level of desperation I once had. I’m now in decent shape, having gained 30 lbs of mostly muscle (and some fat). I’ve improved my life in every way.

****

As you can see, if you are stuck in a rut of friendlessness, hopelessness, desperation, loneliness, and boredom, there is hope. I was there, I know how hopeless it can seem. I know how frightening social interaction is. I now how comfortable a rut, however miserable and painful, can be and how hard it is to escape. I know how you feel, because I was you, and I want to help. I improved my life, you can to.

The Effects of the Red Pill

I don’t listen to the radio anymore, the only TV I have is Netflix, and I don’t read newspapers anymore except when linked to from some blog, so I’m fairly disconnected from the standard news. This weekend I was on a cart trip with some friends and we were listening to the CBC (the state-run broadcaster) and I realized exactly how deep the red pill has sunk into my thinking. Three particular items stood out.

The first was some news story about the protests in Turkey. The CBC was very much in favour of the protestors. The story was all about how oppressed the environmentalists, gays, and democrats protesting the regime were and how controlling the regime was for oppressing the greens and gays. They never got the side of the government or the majority of Turks who supported the government. Rather than supporting the protestors, I remarked how one-sided and biased the story was to my friends and found myself supporting the regime, simply based on how biased the CBC was on the issue. A few years ago I would hardly have noticed.

A little later a “debate” occurred concerning women’s declining fertility with age and when women should get married. One guest was against women marrying young so they could experience the world and be happy, the other was for women marrying young so they could find somebody and be happy. My friend remarked, ‘see, they cover both sides’. Then, red pill knowledge firmly in place, I told him how it didn’t both were the same liberal side concerned with happiness being the sole goal of marriage. Not a person addressed duty to family, God, or the nation, no one even mentioned are below-replacement reproductive rates, no one mentioned the health of the family or the country, no one mentioned the religious or societal foundations of marriage. Both women had the exact same argument: women should marry to be happy and no one should judge them for that, the only difference was at what age marriage would be the happiest. My friend then told me, they were never going to have that kind of debate on the radio; I told him that was exactly my point about the one-sidedness of it all.

Finally, a story about Nelson Mandela’s failing health came on. I was amazed by the almost painful cognitive dissonance of it. The whole story was about two things: 1) Nelson Mandela has been a foundational symbol of post-apartheid South Africa and his loss will greatly hurt the country, and 2) South Africa is in horrible shape, corruption is out of control, and it has been continually getting worse with people agitating to undo land reforms, etc., which is why the nation needs the symbolism of Mandela to hold itself together. The fact that this continual decline was a result of the regime Mandela helped put into place was enver even remarked on, even thought the entire story screamed this fact between the lines.

A few years ago, I wouldn’t have noticed any of this. The red pill is a strong drug.

A Leap Forward

I’ve been occasionally approaching when conditions are right over time, but today I probably pulled the most alpha approach I ever have, and I felt like sharing with somebody who wasn’t there, so here it is. The experienced alphas may not find it all that impressive, but for a former omega like me, this is amazing.

Anyhow, I was out for coffee with a friend and we were discussing my life mission and my general apathy. We were discussing how I should start to ‘just do it’ to meet girls so I can find my wife. He told me to overcome my apathy. So I hesitated, took a drink, hesitated, took a drink, then I overcome my apathy.

There were a few girls sitting together nearby, one of whom was really cute. Earlier I had overheard them talk about something related to church, so I moved.

I walked over cool as ice and just sat down with them. After sitting, began with absolute self-confidence, “Hi, I’m Free Northerner. What’re your names?”

Firm handshakes and each introduces themselves to me.

“I think you’re cute and wanted to meet you.”

Girl: “Thank you.” [smiles].

Girl’s friend: “She gets that a lot. She’s always telling us how she’s always cute, never hot.

“That’s good. Cute’s better than hot. Take it from me.”

“I overheard you discussing [denomination]? Are you a Christian?”

Friend: “You heard that. I could tell; I keep track of things like that.

“Sound tends to travel in this place.”

Girl: “Yes. I go to [church].”

Friend: “Where do you go?

“[Church]”

Friend: “Where’s that?

“Near [school].”

“Can I get your phone number?” Take out phone; hand it to her.

Sure.” She puts it in phone. “Your phone’s old I got it wrong and put it in twice. I can’t find the back button.”

Take phone. “Yeah, I I don’t really keep up on phone technology. Your number was ####? You name was [girl], right?”

Yeah.” Finish adding number.

“I’m phoning you. Now you have my number.”

She checks phone. [Not a fake #.]

“I’ll phone you in a while and set up coffee. Good to meet y’all.”

Handshakes to all. Girl occasionally giggling and smiling throughout. Walk back to my friend. Get on jacket, leave shop. Friend is amazed at how alpha I was.

There was a bit more to it, and she talked a bit more, but that’s the jist of it.

About 5 minutes from start to finish. All done the half-smirk/half-smile I often wear; full-tilt, absolute confidence. No hesitation, no stumbling, no hemming and hawing; straightforward and to the point. Controlled the conversation, controlled the frame, never veered off. Direct game, no manipulative BS.

I feel alpha.