Monthly Archives: October 2012

Status Update: Life & Purpose

My blog has been in existence for just over six months now. My first post, was on my reason for blogging, and I was asked about how it’s coming along. So, here’s a post to keep myself on track.

Over this period, I’ve come to accept most of the axioms of the manosphere, although, the praxis of it is still being worked out. In particular, I’m still questioning whether or not to learn game, but am trying to adopt some of the underlying attitudes of it.

I still have not decided what I plan to do with my life, but the two big options I am leaning towards are patriarchy or MGTOW.

Recently, I’ve come to realize that I am okay with going MGTOW; I don’t fear “being alone” like I used to. In some ways, I think I might prefer it, but I do know I’m not going to marry unless it is a very old-fashioned and patriarchal marriage.

High command has let my work unit know that cuts will be occurring, so my job may be in jeopardy over the next year or so, so that might force me to decide. If that happens, I’ll probably slide to a minimalist lifestyle and work on my side businesses rather than bust my ass finding a new one. Going minimalist will likely require, at least temporarily, MGTOW.

On the other hand, I truly would like to get married and fill my quiver. I know the prevalent attitude around these parts is don’t do it, but I think the benefits will outweigh the potential costs if I find the right woman. So, I’m willing to take the risk once and if I perish, I perish. I can than go minimalist MGTOW after that. On this front, there’s a potential, somewhat long-shot wife prospect who’d looks like she might make a good helpmeet, we’ll see how that turns out.

I’ve gotten in much better health. Through eating (mostly) primal, I’ve lost 30 lbs or so, have reduced my gut significantly, and have reduced my belt notches by two. On the other hand, my daily work-out routine disappeared over my vacation and I haven’t restarted it yet. I find I go to bed too late, so I don’t wake up with enough time to do it in the mornings.

I’ve started my affiliate website project, and have created the underlying structure of it. It’s actually up on the net right now and working, but there’s not much for content yet and I still have to market it. The project is ongoing, but I have trouble finding motivation in the evenings after working. I’m setting up a block of time in December to take off work so I can really put myself to work on it.

The affiliation through my blog here, has made me about $20 so far. Not enough to do anything with, but at this rate, I’ll probably get my first check (I need to earn $100 for them to write a check)  by sometime early 2014.

I’ve recently decided I want to eventually homestead. This is a long-term plan (we’re talking over the next decade or two), but  I plan to (eventually) sell my house, buy some affordable property in the country with a large acreage, add a solar power system, get some grazing cows and chickens, start hunting, and become mostly self-sufficient on the food and energy front.  Then use a combination of odd jobs, consulting, and various small business projects for income supplementation. We’ll see how that goes (some day).

So, that there’s the life update. I’ll try to remember to put another one out in about 6 months or so. We’ll see. Cheers.

Feminism and Housing Costs

Today I read this (h/t: BitterBabe) and this one quote really stood out:

Commentators said yesterday that pressures on women to work and pay mortgages mean that many do not have the same choice over having families that their mothers did.

I’ve discussed feminism and choice before, and I’ve discussed how feminists are in opposition to the wants of most women before, but now I’m going to focus on something specific: housing.

I’m going to explain exactly where the “pressures on women to pay mortgages” comes from.

****

Housing is the single largest expense most people have (other than possibly taxes), taking up almost 35% of their income. Unlike most goods, which have gotten cheaper over time due to technology improvements, housing costs as a percentage of income has remained stable over time (with the possible exception of fluctuations due to the housing bubble and crash).

Why is that?

The primary reason is that housing is mostly a positional good.* The price of a house has less to do with the actual materials making the house and more with the desirability of the land the house resides on. This is why a house in New York costs so much more than the cost of a similar house in, say, Detroit.

The other reason is that people are using extra income buying larger homes.

For both these reasons, as people’s incomes grow higher they will generally increase their housing costs to match a proportion of their income. You see this all the time, where people will buy bigger and better houses even if their old houses were perfectly livable and they do not require more space for the kids they are not having.

As people buy more housing the price of housing goes up. So, over time, as people’s incomes go up, they will buy more housing, which will increase the price of housing, increasing the absolute amount spent on housing.

Because of this mechanic, the proportion of income spent on housing remains stable even as incomes go up.

****

So, what does this have to do with feminism and choice?

As more women have entered the workforce, they have contributed their income to their households. Because of this household incomes have increased, but, because of the primarily positional nature of housing, the proportion of income spent on housing by households has stayed the same.

So,to now purchase the same amount of housing you could purchase on a single income prior to women entering the workforce en masse you need the equivalent income of a two-income household.

Because of this, families are now in a position, where two incomes are required for sufficient housing space for a family in many areas.

Households wanting to live in certain areas are now required to have the women work rather than stay home simply to afford housing.

As more women enter the workforce, the viability of women choosing to stay home decreases.

Most women desire to stay home with their children, if they could afford it, and the feminist desire to have women be economically independent is removing that choice from them.

****

Of course, I have completely ignored the impacts of divorce on housing costs for former households and the impacts of increased demand. You should be able to figure them out yourselves (hint: they increase housing prices and costs).

****

Combine this with the unfeasible daycare costs I previously pointed, and you being to wonder if women moving into the working world has provided any benefits to most women.

Most women desire to stay home, but many are forced to work because they can’t afford not to.

But their biggest expense is only that big because women are working and one of their next biggest expenses only exists because they are working.

Is this what most women want? To be forced to work for little real benefit.

Question for women: Do you enjoy spending your days at work rather than with your children knowing that most of what you earn is not actually providing any real benefit to your or your children?

If not, maybe you should think about what you support.

****

Now, for budding patriarchs, this doesn’t mean your (future) wife has to work. What it does mean is that it will require sacrifices and good planning.

You will have to limit your desire for a bigger home (even as you need a bigger home than most, because you’re filling your quiver instead of vacationing in Mexico). You may have to commute longer or find a job away from the urban core. You will likely have to forgo other luxuries.

If you and your wife plan on having her be a homemaker, you will have to discuss this with her. You will have much less house than your peers, and this could lead to envy for you and your wife. You will not be able to afford yearly vacations to distant lands. There are numerous luxuries and status symbols you will have to give up.

You have to make this clear to both yourself and her that this lifestyle is a sacrifice and that both are willing to accept it.

In the long-run, which is more important to you though?

Your child being raised by his mother rather than strangers and the educational system. Or the status symbol of a bigger house and your children being forced to share a room.

*****

* It is only primarily a positional good, not totally. Housing does have a certain intrinsic worth and the materials in housing have a certain intrinsic cost, but, by comparing housing prices in high- and low-demand areas we can easily see that the costs of housing are primarily due to the comparative value of the land on which they are built, than the homes themselves. Of course, it can be argued that the value of the land is not exactly positional, in that being in geographic proximity to certain locations has its own intrinsic value, but this does not effect my point. My point only requires that the value of land is due to competition between potential buyers, for whatever reason, rather than for any immediate practical effect the land has on the utility of the home itself.

Biblical Alpha: Boaz

Returning briefly to my Biblical Alpha series, today we will look at Boaz, who became the forefather of both King David and Jesus. This story is taken entirely from the book of Ruth and all quotes are from the ESV.

The Book of Ruth starts off with Ruth (surprise), the loyal heathen wife of an expatriate Jew. Her father-in-law dies while in her land. Her husband and brother-in-law all die after 10 years of marriage. She converts to Judaism and pledges to takes care of her mother-in-law, Naomi. They move back to Israel. This is where Boaz comes in:

Now Naomi had a relative of her husband’s, a worthy man of the clan of Elimelech, whose name was uBoaz. And Ruth the Moabite said to Naomi, “Let me go to the field and glean among the ears of grain after him win whose sight I shall find favor.” And she said to her, “Go, my daughter.” So she set out and went and gleaned in the field after the reapers, and she happened to come to the part of the field belonging to Boaz, who was of the clan of Elimelech. And behold, Boaz came from Bethlehem. And he said to the reapers, “The Lord be with you!” And they answered, “The Lord bless you.” (2:1-4)

First thing you learn about Boaz is he’s “worthy”. He owns his own land and has numerous men working under him whose respect he commands. This is a man of status and wealth.

He see Ruth and asks: “Whose young woman is this?” (2:5)

He’s told. Then Ruth asks to be allowed to glean his fields, so he responds: “Now, listen, my daughter, do not go to glean in another field or leave this one, but keep close to my young women.” (2:8)

It’s established here that she’s much younger than him, young enough to be his daughter. Being married 10 years, she’s probably in her mid-late 20’s (they married young back then). So he’s probably, at least in his 40’s. Jewish tradition puts Boaz in his 80’s and Ruth in her 40’s.

Either way, remember that she’s a lot younger than him.

He continues:

Let your eyes be on the field that they are reaping, and go after them. Have I not charged the young men not to touch you? And when you are thirsty, go to the vessels and drink what the young men have drawn.

So, he has a number of young men and young women working under him. He is confident enough in the respect the young men have in him that he doesn’t give a second thought that they will obey his orders not to harass her. He definitely has honour in full.

He’s very generous to her, why?

But Boaz answered her, “All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told to me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. (2:11)

Because she’s been loyal to his kin. Good female beta traits in her and good filial loyalty in him.

And at mealtime Boaz said to her, “Come here and eat some bread and dip your morsel in the wine.” So she sat beside the reapers, and he passed to her roasted grain. And she ate until she was satisfied, and she had some left over. When she rose to glean, Boaz instructed his young men, saying, “Let her glean even among the sheaves, and do not reproach her. And also pull out some from the bundles for her and leave it for her to glean, and do not rebuke her.” (2:14-16)

He shares his wealth, but mostly hides it from her. He’s not doing it to buy her affection, but simply out of the goodness of his heart. A bit beta, but not supplication.

Ruth gleans, then goes home and shares with Naomi. They both praise his goodness and Ruth says this: “The man is a close relative of ours, one of our redeemers.” (2:20)

This is important. A kinsman-redeemer refers to a close relative who takes on a number of duties for his kinsman, one of which was marrying the wife of of his kinsmen to continue his family line for him. So right here, Ruth’s being alerted that he’s available for marriage.

Naomi then gives Ruth some advice on how to seduce Boaz, which more or less amounts to ‘make yourself pretty and when he’s drunk sneak up and spoon with him’. So she does:

So she went down to the threshing floor and did just as her mother-in-law had commanded her. And when Boaz had eaten and drunk, and his heart was merry, he went to lie down at the end of the heap of grain. Then she came softly and uncovered his feet and lay down. At midnight the man was startled and turned over, and behold, a woman lay at his feet! He said, “Who are you?” And she answered, “I am Ruth, your servant. Spread your wings over your servant, for you are a redeemer.” And he said, “May you be blessed by the LORD, my daughter. You have made this last kindness greater than the first in that you have not gone after young men, whether poor or rich. And now, my daughter, do not fear. I will do for you all that you ask, for all my fellow townsmen know that you are a worthy woman. And now it is true that I am a redeemer. Yet there is a redeemer nearer than I. Remain tonight, and in the morning, if he will redeem you, good; let him do it. But if he is not willing to redeem you, then, as the LORD lives, I will redeem you. Lie down until the morning.”
…
So she lay at his feet until the morning, but arose before one could recognize another. (3:6-13)

So, here he is 40+, possibly 80, lying down to protect his grain; even in his old age (40 was a lot more back than than it is today) he stills strong enough to do his own dirty work to protect his property. This was a man of Strength.

While sated and protecting his crops, a women comes to him with clear intent. Some interpreters take the “lie at his feet” to mean “got into bed with” and “spread your wings” as “take me now” (more or less), but even without this highly sexual interpretation, he is obviously being seduced by a “worthy” women half his age in the most unsubtle manner possible. That’s alpha.

Now, he lets a little bit of beta frame slip from him here, with his “kindness” and “young man” remark, but he follows it up with a disqualifier, so he’s running some natural, mild push-pull game here.

The next day: “Now Boaz had gone up to the gate and sat down there.”

Again, a high display of honour here. Sitting at the gate was for Jewish elders and being able to do so was a great honour. Boaz had some rep.

The following interaction occurs:

Now Boaz had gone up to the gate and sat down there. And behold, the redeemer, of whom Boaz had spoken, came by. So Boaz said, “Turn aside, friend; sit down here.” And he turned aside and sat down. And he took ten men of the elders of the city and said, “Sit down here.” So they sat down. Then he said to the redeemer, “Naomi, who has come back from the country of Moab, is selling the parcel of land that belonged to our relative Elimelech. So I thought I would tell you of it and say, ‘Buy it in the presence of those sitting here and in the presence of the elders of my people.’ If you will redeem it, redeem it. But if you will not, tell me, that I may know, for there is no one besides you to redeem it, and I come after you.” And he said, “I will redeem it.” Then Boaz said, “The day you buy the field from the hand of Naomi, you also acquire Ruth the Moabite, the widow of the dead, in order to perpetuate the name of the dead in his inheritance.” Then the redeemer said, “I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I impair my own inheritance. Take my right of redemption yourself, for I cannot redeem it.” (4:1-6)

He convinces the man to not only forgo a new wife, but also to forgo taking some new property. He gets both a wife and some land out of the deal. A shrewd businessman; a master at his trade.

He then claims his new property:

Then Boaz said to the elders and all the people, “You are witnesses this day that I have bought from the hand of Naomi all that belonged to Elimelech and all that belonged to Chilion and to Mahlon. Also Ruth the Moabite, the widow of Mahlon, I have bought to be my wife, to perpetuate the name of the dead in his inheritance, that the name of the dead may not be cut off from among his brothers and from the gate of his native place. You are witnesses this day.” (4:9-10)

Both legally and in other ways:

So Boaz took Ruth, and she became his wife. And he went in to her, and the Lord gave her conception, and she bore a son.(4:13)

Rather virile for his age. C’est non?

And the women of the neighborhood gave him a name, saying, “A son has been born to Naomi.” They named him Obed. He was the father of Jesse, the father of David. (4:17)

The Lord rewards him by making him the forefather of the future house of the kings of Israel and of Jesus himself. Not bad.

Once again, a hero of the Bible demonstrates the masculine virtues and alphaness to the glory of God and himself. He lands a worthy gal half his age, fathers a lasting house, and becomes renowned.

Read the rest of the series here.

Lightning Round – 2012/10/10

A salute to conventional wisdom.

Destroying our kids, one drug at a time.
Related: John Dewey is one of the worst Americans ever.

If she’s had sex before marriage, she’s probably had better sex before she married you.
Related: Ruined by 5 minutes of alpha.

Debasing marriage.
Related: Peter Pan Manboys.
Related: Mark Minter on marriage. Nihilism in action.
Related: The importance of marriage. Part 2.

Feminist responds to Aurini. Can’t handle red pill; calls him a monster;.
Aurini responds.

The Bible: the original Red Pill.

Some brides are just disgusting.

Most women aren’t worth chivalry.

No dating relationship should last 9 years.

Game Theory: The Axioms of Game.

The misandry bubble has popped. The anti-feminism bubble is beginning.

Boomers and the War on the Young.

SAT Data: Boys score better, even though girls do better in school.

The manosphere is for men.

The good guys win one.

Female doubts about a marriage lead to divorce (men’s don’t).

Science: Slowly destroying egalitarianism brick by brick.

Better strength than smarts.

Frost contemplates being back home.

As I’ve written before: child care is not economical.

Cool. I hate the phone, but I hate texting even more.

Why liberals are ugly redux. The original.

Society requires old men to be dangerous.

The decline occurs because society is corrupt at every level.

Liberal economics. We trade “leadership” for stuff.

Estonia: Austerity works. Screw you Krugman.
So did Reagenomics. Screw Keynesianism.

Producer tells the truth. Leftists freak out.

Alternatives to tough luck for libertarians.

Socialism in action. Good food banned in schools.

I hate the phrase “correlation doesn’t equal causation“. It is almost always used as an intellectual cop-out by people who don’t understand it.

The miracle of photoshop.

Hehe… Tolerant leftists and dating conservatives.

Striking is for ignoramuses without self-respect.

How it feels to be smart. I’m not quite as smart as the writer, but his observations seem about right.

(H/T: SDA, Maggie’s Farm, Bitter Babe, 3MM, the Captain, Instapundit, Shining Pearls, RWCAG)

Demanding More

There’s been a little bit of debate on the infantalization of men within the alt-right/manosphere, so I decided to weigh in. (I have a companion piece to this post here, read it to give more context to this post).

The Social Pathologist wrote:

The manosphere rightly criticizes women for their diminishing femininity, but what the manosphere does not do so well is criticize the increasing infantisation of men.  When Roosh and his followers point out that quality women are only to be found outside the U.S. he is giving the masculine version of the modern feminist lament that there are no good men at home. What many manosphere commentators fail to recognize is that the nice computer nerd is the male equivalent of the nice fat chick. The manosphere demands thinness  but criticizes women for wanting its feminine equivalent. Mote, beam, eye. It’s all a bit of hypocrisy.

There are two problems with his argument here.

The first problem is the difference between the manosphere and modern feminism. The manosphere is actively trying to improve men; they are encouraging men to become better, more masculine players, or better, more masculine patriarchs. They are actively trying to move away from being the nice computer nerds and become better at being a man. (Whether that’s better or not for women is debatable).

(The other section of the manosphere, the MGTOW, may not advocate self-improvement as much, but they are not hypocritical because they are also no longer calling for women to improve. They’ve simply decided to take their ball and go home and have given the reasons why).

Modern feminism on the other hand is actively trying to make women less feminine. They are actively encouraging women to be fat (fat acceptance), to be “outspoken” (read: bitchy), and to discard their traditional societal roles. They are actively trying to make woman worse. They are encouraging women to become bitchy (not nice) fat chicks.

The second problem with his argument is the underlying social context. The problem the manosphere has is not, so much, about women preferring alpha men to beta men, it is that women and society lie about it.

Men are honest about what they want. Most men (lying manginas and fat fetishists, aside) are honest about their preferences and are quite willing to say “I want a thin, feminine women with a nice chest.” Women are told and know exactly what men want. Some women lie to themselves that fat is beautiful (Rubens like fat women… dur), but even then their complaints are that men do not appreciate their “beauty”, not that men are actually lying to them about it.

On the other hand, women lie (or genuinely don’t know) about their preferences. If you ask women (be they your mother, sisters, female friends, whomever) what women want, the answer will usually be something similar to “a nice, loving man in touch with his emotion who wants to settle down and share the housework equally.” The problem being something any nice young man looking to settle down realizes quite quickly: women’s actual choices in men are something else entirely.

If women just came out and said that they were attracted to aloof, dominant, irresponsible, alpha bad boys, there would be no problem. (There would also be no problem if women found betas attractive like they said). Men would have the honest truth and could live their life accordingly. The problem is that men are sucking up the lies about women’s desire for a loving beta, are having these lies dashed around them, and, when they wonder why, are lied to even more. It is not the preferences that are the problem, it is the lies surrounding the preferences that are the problem.

The difference is that men are honest about what attracts them, but women are dishonest (or mistaken) about what they are attracted to. These are what separate the “why are there no good men?” feminists and the manosphere.

In a later post he wrote:

The manosphere has quite rightly denounced the corruption of women by feminism but what it has been unable see is the failure in modern masculinity. Roosh and Roissy may get lots of lays but they would have hardly been though of examples of masculinity either in Roman, Greek or Victorian times. Hedonism was always the “soft” option of manhood. And the reality today is that many men are soft. Not so much physically as in character. Women are far “harder” today and more self disciplined. Making women “softer” may restore some of their femininity but it no way guarantees the masculinity of men.  Taking away a woman’s rights does not give a man alpha qualities.

Simon Grey responded:

And so, while I agree with the MRA crowd that most women would make for terrible wives, I also agree with Slumlord that most men make for terrible husbands.  Quite simply, most people in this world are self-absorbed cowards, too afraid to live up to their potential, and too weak to suppress their self-destructive tendencies.  No wonder their marriages and relationships turn cancerous.

I agree, most young men today would make terrible husbands, but they both stop there. They do not ask why, and that is the important question.

Why are most young men today living as “Peter Pan” manboys?

(We could ask the same about why most women would make poor wives, but the manosphere has covered that fairly extensively already; the answer boils down to feminism).

Dalrock has already has partially answered the question and has hit a key point:

While we might argue about the speed and magnitude of men’s reaction to such a shift, as well as the specific mechanism we might observe (marriage strike vs weakened signal, etc), I don’t see how one could argue that an overall decline in men’s eagerness to work hard in preparation to lead families is surprising.

We wanted non threatening men, and now we have them.

But I don’t think he spells it out clearly enough, so I’m going to.

The reason there are so many losers, manboys, men without chests, or whatever you wish to call them, comes down to one, solitary word. This word is probably the single most important word when it comes to any social pheonomenum. This word is:

Incentives

This is the centre-piece of economics. This is the single most explanatory concept in all the social sciences. Incentives.

People respond to incentives. If there are positive incentives for a behaviour, there will be more of that behaviour. If there are negative incentives for a behaviour, there will be less of that behaviour.

No matter how much cajoling is done, no matter how much people are shamed, no matter how many laws are written, the incentive structure of society (of which cajoling, shaming, and laws are all a part) will override them all.

****

So, what are the incentives of the young man today?

I was originally going to write a short narrative, but it turned long, too long for this post. You can read it here, it provides more context.

The young man today is put in 13 years of public school and university, where people are judged primarily by their ability tosit still and parrot what their teachers say. Where masculine behaviours, such as risk-taking, dominance, and rough-housing are discouraged, banned, and punished. Sometimes these behaviours even result in a regime of drugging. The entire system is as structured as a tightly run concentration camp.

On the other hand, young males are taught that their natural desires are destructive and to be controlled, but are not taught the discipline necessary to control them. They are taught to get in touch with their emotions, except those school administration think are dangerous. They are taught self-esteem, where no matter what they accomplish (or don’t accomplish) they are special and deserving. They are not taught self-control, they are taught hedonism.

This produces a horrible dichotomy of a lack of freedom and a lack of discipline. The entire school system is geared towards teaching young boys subservience and dependence (beta traits) and to destroy their in-born initiative, risk-taking, and ambition (alpha traits).

Right from the get go, authorities teach young boys that traditional masculine behaviours are punished, while weakness and beta traits (not always the same) are rewarded.

In university, the incentive structure is much the same. Obey and parrot and be rewarded.

Men are taught, while young, that the authorities will reward for being weak and punish for being strong. They are also taught an entitlement mentality.

This is the incentive structure the primary authorities in their life (children spend as much or more time being instructed by the school system than their parents) ingrain in them from a young age.

****

On the other hand, the social system of both school and university naturally coalesces into an opposing dynamic. Children are socialized through other children than through other adults. They pick up natural, feral attitudes towards interpersonal relations rather than a more mature civilized attitude to social relations.

In this social system, the alphas are socially and sexually rewarded, while the more awkward betas are not. Young men learn that sex, social status, and relationships can be obtained without work. In fact, men are taught that the irresponsible “cool” kids are more likely to be socially and sexually rewarded than the more responsible “nerds”.

In other words, they know they can satiate their primary genetic drive without having to contribute to society, as long as they act “like jerks.”

Young men are taught that irresponsibility pays now.

The only threat we have against this the long term: responsibility pays in the long run.

This worked until the last decade or so, until long-term incentives began to collapse.

****

What are the long-term incentives for your young adult male, so he is responsible?

A good-paying, worthwhile job, a house, a loving wife, social status, and a family.

The good-paying job is dying in the current economic corruption. 50% of our young people are either under- or unemployed. Their college degrees are worthless. They are shackled with near unmanageable student debt. Self-employment is a no-go. Government regulations strangle most industries and are especially painful to small businesses. (Not to mention, the initiative and ambition necessary for self-employment were beat out of him by the school system). Those who do get jobs are usually suffering in useless government busywork or brutally impersonal corporate work.

Simply put, there are no longer any guarantees that hard-work and responsibility will lead to a worthwhile job. But even if he eventually gets a job, he is punished by having half his income is taken by the state and given to the irresponsible.

He can still get a home, but not without the job. That, and the young man doesn’t want a home for himself; he wants it so he can raise a family. This incentive is more an ancillary option to the other incentives.

The primary incentive is a wife and family, but that incentive is becoming meaningless.

The average age of marriage for is 28 (in Canada it’s 31). Think about that. Your average man will not find a wife until a full decade after he graduates from high school and about 15 years after he hits puberty.

During this 15 years of either loneliness and sexual frustration for betas or, for the alphas, hedonism and sexual license, what lessons are being learned by men?

Irresponsibility.

Men are learning to get used to irresponsibility. How the hell can you expect most men to be prepared for the responsibility of a wife and family after he has had a full decade of getting acquainted to irresponsibility?

You can’t.

But lets say he’s prepared for marriage. It’s highly unlikely his wife is a virgin: his dating pool probably has more single mothers than virgins. She’s not going to bond to him.

There’s a 50% chance that he will lose his family. When he loses his family, there is a good chance he will be subjected to alimony slavery and have his family kidnapped from him. I’m not going into detail here, because other’s have wrote much more comprehensive articles on the risks of marriage, but marriage is becoming and increasingly bad option.

Social status? Hahaha… Being a responsible person no longer create social status. “Office drones” are looked down upon. The rich and successful are castigated and punished. Everybody is equal now. There is no more of the base respect and social status given to a man who quietly works hard to provide for his family.

So, where are his incentives to be responsible?

When having a family is a decade away and is likely to be punished with divorce, alimony theft, and having his children ripped from him? When hard work and an education no longer means a job, let alone a meaningful one? When he’s grown accustomed to the freedom of singledom? When he is punished for career success? When the lazy and irresponsible are rewarded with his hard-earned income?

****

Overall, the entire incentive structure of society is biased towards men being irresponsible.

If a man is irresponsible, he gets to play video games now. He gets sex now. He gets to hang out with his friends now.

If a man is responsible, there is no immediate gain. When there were long-term incentives, this was fine, but the long term incentives are breaking down.

Why should men act responsibly, when the incentives are towards irresponsibility?

****

Pathologist illustrated his point about weak men with a story about a “responsible” young women with an irresponsible young man for a boyfriend.

Many in the manosphere would view this woman as a demanding bitch. I don’t. She would be a good modern fit for Proverbs 31:10-31. She has independently, on a low income, saved money and bought herself a house, put tenants in it and has a long term plan for the future. She is keeping down a job and has been able to organise her own affairs. She wants a stable future and does not want to live in poverty. By the way, I’d estimate her BMI at about 22. Such a woman is percieved as a threat to Western Civilisation by the manosphere. Facepalm.

She is a threat to Western Civilization, not because she is a “demanding bitch”, but because she is not demanding enough. If she was a Proverbs 31 women she would not be shacking up with an irresponsible man. She would have demanded marriage to a man “known in the gates when he sits among the elders of the land.” ie. She would have married a responsible and respected man. Instead, she is giving herself to an worthless man without any demands of responsibility from him.

She is the one creating perverse incentives.

By herself, her actions don’t matter. But if you multiply her by a few million women, all demanding nothing out of the men they bed, then you have a threat to civilization.

She made her choice to date a loser, to be irresponsible, and to reward irresponsible behaviour. She now has to face the consequences of her choices. Society now has to face the consequences of her actions.

When love is free, most men won’t pay for it.

If men aren’t paying, civilization is threatened.

****

The manosphere is right to demand more from women, but there is also a corollary. Women need to demand more from men.

We need a society that demands more from everybody and rewards those, and only those, who meet those demands. People will only rise to the level that societal incentives reward.

Everything in life comes down to incentives. Right now, the incentive structure for men is built so that irresponsibility is rewarded, while responsibility is punished. When the incentives for men are structured this way you will get irresponsible men.

If women, conservatives, and the Social Pathologist want responsible men, they should help restructure society so that the incentives of society, particularly, in this case, those related to sex and relationships, reward responsible men, and punish irresponsible men.

The Life of a Beta

Your average beta is born. He grow up surrounded by family. They are good times, but he barely remembers them.

Then something changes; he spends 13 years being psychological castrated, mentally oppressed, (sometimes) physically abused, and viciously indoctrinated in what we term the public school system. He has no option but to go and is too inexperienced to realize what is being done to him. But, he is promised that if he does good , he will get a good job, have lots of money, marry a loving wife, and have kids of his own; he looks forward to that. While in this system he is thoroughly feminized; his natural masculine traits are banned, punished, and even drugged out of him.

He sees the young alpha who beats him up and torments him. He sees that the young alpha has many more friends than him. He sees the pretty girls who ignore him smile at the young alpha and even hears rumours they do more than smile.

But he is taught by this system, his church, his parents, and every authority figure he knows that if he obeys, he persists, works hard, and he suppresses his masculinity he will be rewarded with a job, a wife, a house, and a family. God, the market, and the state will smile upon him and bless him.

The young bully will get his. God, the market, and the state will punish him in time. Someday our young beta will be his bully’s boss. He’ll have the nice house and pretty wife, while the bully is working at McDonald’s.

So, he endures. He allows himself to be psychologically castrated. He’s slightly uneasy about it, it doesn’t feel quite right, but he goes with it because everyone is telling him to and he doesn’t fully realize exactly what he allowing to be done to him. In his spare time, he and his friends play video games to keep their minds off their lack of social life and of the shit they have to put up with at school.

The young beta is almost done school looking forward to his reward, but then the powers that be tell him, not yet. You’ll get your reward, but first you have to go through a 3-6 year sentence at this other indoctrination system, labelled a university. Go through this and you will be blessed. Just remember to pay the tens of thousands of dollars of tuition, but don’t worry about it. There are loans, and with the money you’ll make, they’ll be easy to pay off.

The young beta acquiesces; he’s a good person, not a troublemaker. He wants to help society, not fight it. Besides he desires his blessing.

So he goes. He is taught in this university that he is evil because he is a man and men oppress women. He was taught that he is evil because the ancestors of people with his skin colour won some land in wars from the ancestors of people with different skin colour from his centuries ago. He is taught that being rich is evil, because rich people oppress the poor. He is taught his religious beliefs are evil and oppressive. It doesn’t sound right, but these are men of learning; these are the great and the good; these are the wise men of society. So he is persuaded.

He avoids being dominant and manly around women, for he doesn’t want to oppress them. He becomes to question whether the house and job he was promised are his right. Is it only his greed and his “privilege” to expect these things? He’ll work hard so he deserves them, then he’ll help others with some of it. He starts going to a more liberal, less oppressive church; one that isn’t so judgmental.

So, he works hard. He studies, he has a part-time jobs, and he takes out some student loans. He goes to the occasional party, maybe he has one or two short relationships, maybe he doesn’t. But he’s concentrating on school.

He sees some young alphas at school. They are always at every party,including all the ones he’s not invited to. They act dominant around women and treat the women poorly. They are oppressing women, yet they always seem to have a girl in their arms and every week in class they brag about the great sex and fun times they had over the weekend.

But the authorities assure our beta that those are not quality girls. Those girls don’t really like him, he’s just fooling the gullible into bed. The women don’t actually like the those oppressive men. Eventually those alphas will end up alone.

Real women like the sensitive beta man. He’s just has to wait for the right girl to marry him.

So, he waits, he studies. In his spare time he plays video games, because getting drunk and partying will interfere with his job and his schooling. When he graduates he’ll get a job and get married to a quality women.

He’s 21 and nearing graduation. He applies for jobs, but none come. He graduates, and moves back in with family because he can’t afford an apartment, let alone his house.

He works a part-time job; the alpha who used to bully him works at the same job, but is paid $1 more an hour because he’s been there longer. The bully always seems to have a girlfriend who visits him at work, the beta hasn’t had a date for a year.

He keeps applying for jobs, but never seems to get any. The authorities tell him not to worry; there’s a recession, everybody is having trouble. Keep trying, we’ll bounce back anytime and there will be lots of jobs. Then you’ll get your job and your house. When you have those a wife will surely come.

He spends his free time playing video games. He occasionally has fanciful ideas about starting his own business, but he doesn’t know how. He has no idea how to start. No one ever taught him and everybody had always told him to pursue a stable corporate job.

After a year of applying, he finally gets an office job. It doesn’t relate to what he studied and is not very exciting but at least he’s employed. He hasn’t had a date since he graduated. One of the alphas from university works at the same job as him. The alpha is also having a liaison with the cute coworker on a different floor.

He has a job, so he purchases a house. The house is expensive, it eats up a large portion of his paycheck, but he gets by. He’ll be able to raise a family with this house. In his spare time he plays video games with his friends.

He doesn’t really have anywhere to meet a girl other than work and church you can’t shit where you eat and none of the girls at church are interested. He tries online dating but is mostly unsuccessful.

He continues to work. He dislikes it and the office politics suck, but he’s good at it. There’s a promotion. He applies, but the alpha gets it as he’s better at office politics. A few months later the alpha leaves for a higher-paying position elsewhere, so the beta gets promoted.

He’s still lonely; the promised wife is not to be found. On the other hand, he’s getting used to having no responsibilities. He can play video games whenever he wants. He can spend his money on anything he likes. Pornography and masturbation takes the edge of his loneliness. A lack of responsibility and prolifigacy with money become a norm he’s accustomed to.

Finally, at age 29 he meets a women of 28 at church. she rejected him a few years ago, but after a bad break-up she started to treat him differently.  She’s moderately pretty, but he can tell her looks are declining. He dates her. He likes her, although, she’s somewhat bitter about men. He finds out that she used to hook-up with the alpha’s at university and they didn’t treat her well. she’s looking for a real man. The beta’s happy because he is a real man.

They get married. The beta has trouble adjusting. His wife does not allow him the freedom he got used to while single, but he loves her, so he spends less time with his friends and less time playing video games. He spends more time watching romance movies with her. They decide to have a child, but the wife wants a bigger house first. On both incomes, they can easily afford a bigger house, so they move.

She gets pregnant and says she wants to quit to raise the child until he’s old enough for school. He recently got a promotion to Assistant Vice Manager of Internal Corporate Affairs, so they can afford it, barely, if he works overtime and they cut expenses.

They have the child, but the wife continues to spend as they did before. She also doesn’t lose the weight she put on in pregnancy, so he’s less attracted to her. On the other hand, he put on some weight recently and he’s too busy working even more overtime to pay off credit card debt to have sex all that often, so he doesn’t mind. He loves his wife and child and would do anything for them.

This goes on; his wife never does go back to work when his child reaches school age. She has a lot of time at home alone, but even then the chores never seem to be done.  When his daughter is in first grade, his wife surprises him with divorce papers. She tells him that she felt alone and unappreciated; he wasn’t meeting her emotional needs, all he did was work. She also tells him she’s been cheating on him with one of the alpha’s she used to hook up with in university. That explains why she’d been losing weight recently.

He goes to divorce court. His wife gets the family house, the child, and he has to pay alimony. She also gets the mutual friends from church. He has to work even more overtime to support both his family. He tries to rent an apartment on his own, but after about a couple years he can no longer afford it. Besides, it’s too big for him and he rarely sees his child anymore, anyway. She now calls his ex-wife’s new boyfriend daddy.

He goes looking for a roommate. He finds an advertisement in the paper. He meets up with the guy. They talk, the other guy seems decent. They get along well. He recently broke up with his girlfriend of two years who kicked him out of her house and can’t afford an apartment on his own either. They move in together.

They enjoy themselves. One good thing about the divorce is he has more free time, so he plays a lot of video games together with his new roommate. They split the rent; our beta makes more than his roommate who only has a low-skill manual labour job, but because of alimony they’re actual spending money is similar.

He reconnects with old friends, one from his university days and a few recent divorcees from church, and he makes new friends through his roommate. The pain begins to fade and he begins to get used to singledom once again.

A few months later while unpacking, the beta stumbles across his old yearbook. He flips through it, reminiscing about old times and old schoolmates. His roommate enters notices him reading, and hey, his roommate tells him they went to the same school and points himself out in the book. The beta realizes his roommate is the alpha who used bully him. His roommate remembers and he apologizes. The beta forgives him; they’re good friends now and in the same boat.

****

This was originally going to be a small part of another post, but took on a life of its own. I am writing the rest of the original post to put up tomorrow. It will have (hopefully) have more context then.

Lightning Round – 2012/10/03

The science of the rationalization hamster.

Dalrock takes the enemies of marriage in the church to task.

Penis size and science.
The important point: am I bigger than average for my country?
Answer: yes. Boo-yah!

Wow. A good look into the mind of the unhappy modern feminist if you can stomach the entitlement, pointlessness, and poor writing quality. It reads like she just vomited her stream of consciousness on the page.
Wouldn’t she make the best wife?
Aurini administers the truth pills.

A leftist swallows a red pill.
He just needs to swallow some more.

The manosphere is growing. I’ve noticed a lot of new blogs popping up since my relatively new blog started.

Bill is encouraged.
I offer more encouragement.
So do Matt and Aurini.
Bill responds.

Better to have guts than brains.
Related: Sometimes you have to ignore the big picture.

Taking away the rights of women is affirmative action for betas.
A response. The game has been rigged, but most men don’t deserve marriage.
Related: Men today are soft.

Up the Alpha.
Related: The Perfect Man.

She’ll be happier if she does the housework.

The heart is deceitful above all things.

Sheltering your children may leave them as prey.

There is hope for the future.

What love is.

How to end up with a frigid cow of a wife.

Some science: concealed ovulation.

Some freedom pills are dolled out to those who wish to partake.
Related: Remember when dissent was patriotic.
Related: This guy does.

What’s wrong with the Koch brothers?

Maybe libertarians are aspies.

Former Obama Administrator for the NYT: We need death panels.
No kidding. You mean someone has to decide how to ration health care or costs will become unsustainable? Really? Are the people at the NYT retarded? Or am I insulting retards? We all told them this would happen. Idiots.

Calling this guy a jackass is an insult to jackasses.

Hmmm…

Female economists are more likely to support government intervention. Surprising.

What this election is about.

The tribe of liberty needs to stand united.

Why leftists are ugly.

Which colour-coded tribe do you support?
Related: A funny video.

There are probably some lessons to learn here.
There have to be lessons here somewhere. (Irony).

All that spending sure helped those kids. Glad our tax dollars were well spent.
Related: You could buy two houses in Detroit instead.
Related: “the youngest children among U.S. kindergartners (those born in August) were 40% more likely to be diagnosed with ADHD and twice as likely to take ADHD medications as the oldest kindergartners studied (those born in September)”
Related: One guy realizes the damage he did much too late.

Resurrect the Kalmar Union.

(H/T: Instapundit, SDA, the Captain)