Tags
abundance, divorce, family, feminism, happiness, marriage, modern life, modern marriage, modern parenting, parenting, patriarchy, red pill
When you hear the word patriarchy, what images and thoughts come up?
For many raised in a post-feminist world, images or thoughts of oppression, violence, anger, intolerance, abuse, toxic masculinity, and victimization may come to mind.
Yesterday I saw an example of patriarchy that defied all those images and labels. An example that perhaps more truly reflects the true concept of patriarchy.
I noticed the children first, at a small local family fun park where the girls and I had gone to spend a beautiful summer afternoon.
The kids ranged in age from about 17 down. There were lots of them, and they beamed with happiness and joy, good naturedly joking with each other, playing tag, and clearly enjoying themselves. There was a distinct innocence to them, a carefreeness and sense of absolute security.
They were all tastefully dressed, not overtly any distinct religious faith but also not in the latest fashions. Timeless but not at all out of fashion either. The girls wore girl cut T-shirt’s and skirts with Capri leggings underneath, and their faces were glowing and fresh but make-up free. The boys wore T-shirt’s and shorts.
I could tell they were likely related because of their similar appearance and obvious close ties, I figured perhaps they were cousins.
A man not much older than myself followed the youngest girl, a cute and spunky little blond. She scrambled up to the top of a tall slide and fearlessly barreled down, calling to and waving to the man the whole way.
He laughed and beamed with pride. “Hard to believe she only weighed three pounds when she was born,” he said to me out of the blue. “She was 9 weeks early.”
“I was just thinking what a daredevil she is,” I replied. He beamed even more.
”She’s the youngest of 12,” he said, gesturing to the other kids who bounded around happily, playifully. “She’s three.”
“That’s fantastic!” I replied. “How old is the oldest?”
”Twenty-six,” he replied. “Ages 26 to 3!”
”Any grandkids yet?” I asked?
”The first is on the way this January,” he said.
”Congratulations!” I replied. He smiled a lovingly proud smile.
The little girl then dashed off to the next activity and he followed at a close but not hovering distance.
Later in the evening I saw him and his wife. He tenderly held her arm as they steered through the crowd of people gathered on the grassy hill to enjoy a performance., heading back to their brood. They looked very content and happy.
I reflected on this couple and their children and thought how this patriarchy wasn’t as so often described — looked nothing like that, actually. It was remarkably refreshing, this family’s dynamic, I found myself wishing more families (of any and all sizes) today looked like that. Happy. Joyful. Secure.
Perhaps the patriarchy isn’t as it’s been portrayed? Perhaps there’s a much more positive side that is rarely celebrated or acknowledged today?
What do you think? Please share in the comments.
Notes From a Red Pill Girl 
This was my childhood. It is all it’s cracked up to be.
I imagine most women who think the patriarchy is evil…either had no father or had a mother drip drip drip into their brain how evil their father is.
It sure did work out for the kids.
https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2018/06/30/children/
My first thought upon finishing the article was that the folks on the other side would argue that there is no real proof that this is an example of patriarchy. They would probably argue that mom has run the show the whole time, since your blurb provides no evidence of who has been in charge over time. They would also probably argue that he was the one in the park with the kids so that proves he is not in charge.
Growing up, I was part of many such experiences, where mom and dad had figured out how to be properly married to each other, and support each other in the raising of their large family. The faces and temperments of the kids showed it. When dad behaves as the Bible calls him to behave (and mom does as well), it shows in the kids.
When dad behaves as the Bible calls him to behave (and mom does as well), it shows in the kids.
Yes, agreed. The Bible tells how the husband and wife are supposed to act with respect to other, and how they are suppose to think
The dad was “all guy” as in he was not at all wish washy or weak. He was clearly in charge and respected, but not out of fear but out of love. Real true respect. He had the air of someone who had it all so under control, nobody else even worried about anything. He clearly held the frame, even when hanging w the kids or walking w his wife.
If indeed “mom ran the show” and dad was just following along, the dynamic between the kids and him and her and him would have been very different. I know couples w that dynamic and dad gets no respect from kids or spouse in that case, certainly not the respect I saw.
Rule #1 of the Red Pill … you’ve been lied too. And, yes, this includes the lies about the Patriarchy. Women were happier under the Patriarchy. Children were MUCH happier and grew up healthier under the Patriarchy. And were much more successful in life. Men were happier too. Society functioned better, immensely better.
Compared to what we have today … with single mom’s in charge, women in charge, where women have rights AND MEN DON”T and a legal system which is designed to turn men into slaves and anyone male who won’t be a slave … ends up in prison. Compared to that … Patriarchy knocks it out of the park.
Did it always work, for everyone ? No, of course not. But much better on average for all concerned. So … are we going back there ? Nope, not unless we revoke the right of women to vote … say, … you ever wonder why 95% of all Felons are men ? And can’t vote now, by law. Ever wonder why the US has the highest incarceration rate the world has ever known ? Ever wonder how evil works ?
Here is how evil works, give women the right to vote … then revoke the rights of men to vote by convicting them of Felony jay-walking. Or Felony looking at someone the wrong way. Felony looking at a picture on the computer. Or Felony man-spreading. Or Felony not addressing a trannie by a pronoun you don’t know because he/she/it made it up last week. Or Felony … #metoo … we had sex 40 years ago and now that I’m rich and successful and you’re an old hag … FELONY UPON FELONY. And if we can’t get you for a FELONY we will ruin you anyway. Got a job ? NOT ANYMORE … 10,000 SJW’S WILL MAKE SURE OF THAT !!!
Yeah. You get the point. Patriarchy wasn’t perfect, but FAR FAR better than what we have today.
So learn the lesson and lesson #1 is, you’ve been lied to. About the Patriarchy. It wasn’t evil. It wasn’t bad. What we have today is far worse. TAKE THE RED PILL … YES, IT TASTES YUCKY … but knowing the truth is worth it !
Another thing about this guy, while he did not seem menancing at all there was also a very protective air about him. I have no doubt if anyone threatened his happy clan, he’d take them out w/o blinking. Bam! He wasn’t a guy most would tangle with. Again it was his body language or frame or something but he was clearly owning his frame.
I truly think when patriarchy looks like this, everyone falls into natural order and it flows. Easily.
“Another thing about this guy, while he did not seem menancing at all there was also a very protective air about him. I have no doubt if anyone threatened his happy clan, he’d take them out w/o blinking.
”
Jesus, Bloom get your head out of your ass. You have no idea what its like to be a man in today’s society because you were born with the golden vagina.
Here is how it works … if that man were EVER to make any attempt to stand up for his woman, his children, his family, his home … HE WOULD BE DESTROYED. The media would make him out to be Charles Manson part deux. The gov would plant kiddie porn on his computer. And any female within 8,000 miles who has a grudge against men would be given an open platform to roast this dude in the media. He’d be arrested, of course. Beaten, and tasered. But only beaten after he’d been tasered and handcuffed … helpless. Then, raped repeatedly once in jail and word was spread to other prisoners that he was abusing children under the age of 4. Since the jail inmates are too stupid to realize its all lies … the other prisoners want to slit this guy’s throat. And so they lock him in solitary confinement, is denied bail, is denied lawyers. Until he is 1/2 insane and pleads guilty to something he didn’t even do, because he’s in jail, and will stay in jail … FOREVER … unless he pleads guilty, to something, anything, even though he didn’t do it, whatever it was … and he’s not even sure what it was that he supposedly did. But at least he has an outcome. Knows his fate. Better than being killed. Better than being raped every day. Better than being driven insane, even though it mostly already is.
So … he gets 20 yrs to life for something YOU DIDN”T EVEN DO … and you think anyone cares ??? Yeah, his mother showed up at his sentencing … and quickly ended up in jail too. ANYONE CARE ABOUT THAT ? Couple of other people tried to speak up too … and ended up fired, ruined, beaten, raped, dead, or in jail. Seth Rich, like. Did the left wing media report on that ? The MSM media. ANY MEDIA. Anyone tell the truth on any of it ????? Anybody know ? Anybody care ? Dude had a penis … so must have been a monster … anyone want to say that’s not true ? (we got a jail cell for you)
That’s how it works these days, Bloom. If you’re a man. Yeah. You have no idea, do you ? You ever been arrested ? Ever had to deal with the legal system … WITHOUT A VAGINA ??? No, didn’t think so. So you have no clue. Have no idea. You think the rules work the same for men, as they work for you … you … with the magic golden vagina … with all of society and all of the gov and all of the media behind you. Ever think what its like for the other side ?
And like all humans with a vagina … you just don’t fucking care what happens to 1/2 of all humanity … those with a penis. JUST DON”T FUCKING CARE. You expect them to stand up for you … and when they do … YOU JUST DON”T FUCKING CARE WHEN THEIR LIFE GETS DESTROYED.
Do you … kinda see the problem here ?
But back to your original comment. The dinosaur you witnessed is a dying breed. Frankly, there aren’t many left like him. And if I or YOU or ANYONE here, were in his shoes … you’d probably not be as stupid as him. Stand up for your wife ? Stand up for your kids ? Your family ? Your home ? Your job. Your business. Your lifestyle ? In today’s environment … only the hopelessly naive and insane do that. Basically if you have a penis and do that … you will get destroyed.
The magic vagina changes all of that, and since you got one … don’t think you can ever walk in man’s shoes. So please quit trying. And please quit trying to tell men what to do … that they should take on being the suicidal mission of standing up for something.
Here’s a suggestion, if you want to accomplish real good … here is what you do. Start confronting the evil we are dealing with. And the list is large. Feminism. Feminists. Women who hate men, resent men. Divorce. Child custody laws. The media. The government. The courts. Cops. Judges. Lawyers. TV personalities. Internet personalities. Facebook. Twitter. Cell phones. Technology. The list goes on. Its all bad. Stop blaming men. Stop expecting men to do the right thing … when 100% of society is going to make sure we are destroyed for trying to do so.
Confront the evil … and it ain’t men. Stop the evil. Expose the evil. Then and only then will men stand up and want to be men again. Until that happens, dudes like the guy you spoke about, are naive dinosaurs just waiting to be exterminated.
Sad, but true.
@ Mega,I get what you are saying but I am not sure you are getting what I am saying. I agree this guy is an exception, a dinosaur of sorts. Clearly this model works only w/I a society that admires such men, sees they are actually the bedrock it all sits on. I am trying with this post to show the value of patriarchy, the positives, the upside. In a small way I am doing what I can to counter the overwhelming message that men are BAD and EVIL bc they are not. I am not saying any guy can just have faith and do what this man has done. Hardly. For one most women in the culture at large could not begin to understand the value of such a man or situation to herself and her children bc women have been so brainwashed to see it as some sinister thing. Perhaps kinda like Noah and his clan before the flood. Mocked. Scorned. Rejected. By society. But who just kept on, knowing their path was right and wholesome and true even if the rest of the world disagreed (how did that work out for them vs. Noah’s clan, btw?) it’s a much bigger battle than the battle of the sexes, it’s the battle between all that is holy and good against the base and evil. Of course destroying Godly men is top of the list for those favoring the dark, it’s way bigger than feminism, that’s simply one (and yes big) part of the whole destructive plan. But as the Book clearly says, we all know who wins in the end.
Personally I feel a shift underway. Trump is also a patriarch, and while there are many wailing and gnashing teeth, there are many more who welcome the return of sanity, safety, security, and order. Is he at risk? Absolutely, under attack on all sides. What does he do? Brush it off, make fun of the efforts, call it out, and keeps on doing what needs done for the good of the family (in this case the American people are the family.) if he (and many men like him who stand in support) had not stood up, what then? Where would we be? The patriarch does not do it because it’s safe or bc people approve. He does it simply bc it needs done, for everyone’s good. If he must be the baddie, so be it. I for one am so thankful for such men. They don’t owe me anything
Also I do not mean to say men who choose a different path for the many good reasons Mega listed are wrong or lesser or “not stepping up.” Walking away from a stacked deck is a very smart move, too. Each man chooses his own path, I would not begin to suggest this guy’s path is the best one for all men in this day and age. For many it would mean being a lamb to slaughter. I get that. And yes men did not ask for that or want it, they are responding to the tactical reality on the ground. Also true the world this guy married in 27+ years ago was a very different one a man of that age faces today. It was risky then, way more so today.
Hmmm, well I am almost 70 but never saw much patriarchy. Sure, most fathers were rightly respected but so were most mothers. If anything there was a gentle matriarchy where older aunts and grandmothers quietly curtailed excess female behavior.
The foundation of feminism is hatred of the Father. Hatred of earthly fathers and hatred of our heavenly Father.
Mega,
I get your frustrations. But consider this, men ALLOWED all this shit to happen. Either by actively fucking up the system or sitting back and doing nothing, we let these females run wild and berserk as we see happening today.
Who gave these females all the privileges, protections and benefits they exploit now? Just a wild guess on my part…men.
This is just my own opinion, ok? This country and western society in general is dying. It is no longer a matter of “changing” anything for the better, it is way past the point of no return. Eventually the west will simply be another has-been empire whose time has come to die off.
Carve out your own space, play by your own rules, govern your family as you see fit and don’t give a single fuck about the rest of this wasted culture. Get a comfy chair, a cold six pack and enjoy the demise, dude.
I enjoy an advantage most men here do not have, I have seen what a non-western feminized society looks like from the inside, patriarchy is alive, well and in total control. The women folk know their place and are happy to be wives and mothers. Men work and support their families without coercion from any government or court. Children actually respect and obey their parents. Society works.
To me it is simply amazing how the western males let these females get away with some of the bullshit they pull, seriously. The men seem to have let themselves be pussyfied, and did not have the balls to say NO when pushed. So, we have feral females on the loose tearing up the fabric of this country, big fucking surprise.
So given the two examples, which do you think will survive in the long run? America and the west? LOL! I think not…
Correction: “I have seen what a non-western AND NON-feminized society looks like from the inside..” Sorry about that
I think it has become crystal clear that ‘the powers that be’ have had a longitudinal strategy to undermine the nuclear family. These are the days when we see the bitter fruit of those schemes.
Wayne,
“I think it has become crystal clear that ‘the powers that be’ have had a longitudinal strategy to undermine the nuclear family.”
Just who do you think these mysterious “powers that be” might be? I think you are giving way too much credit to the faceless “theys” for a cultural situation that spineless men let happen over a couple of generations. But be aware that this culture-rot is NOT the norm for the vast majority of countries on this planet.
Got a fun question for you, bud. If a man in America wants to marry only a virgin girl, what are the chances he could actually find an unspoiled bride? My guess, probably less than one-tenth of one percent. Other cultures that I know of, that same man would have a 99.99% probability of marrying a virgin. Which would more than likely lead to a solid marriage?
I think the power of ‘they’ comes from the demonic.
Mega: “Here is how it works … if that man were EVER to make any attempt to stand up for his woman, his children, his family, his home … HE WOULD BE DESTROYED.”
Even without our modern society that’s often how it has been throughout the history of the world. The man takes that risk. Whether it’s going off to hunt or facing down the harpies from HR. Looking clearly into infinity, protecting your family at the risk of your life, is what makes you a man. If you do it hoping to win a medal you are both kidding yourself and it probably isn’t that dire a situation to begin with. If you die or are destroyed … well, it wouldn’t be risk with out that possibility.
That said, a man is an idiot to stand up for a family that doesn’t deserve him. I suspect that cultures that created “patriarchy” in it’s original intent also had mechanisms to help insure (there is no guarantee) that the family deserved the risks a man took and that he, in turn, was appropriately responsible to them. This is why one does not allow Grandad, who fought in Normandy or the Solomons, to die alone in the VA hospital. A woman gives life. A man stands between death and life. Children protect, in those same ways and with their youth and strength, their seniors. The seniors provide wisdom and perspective.
Our culture has always rewarded risk, in business, in the sexiness of risk accepting men (personally I’d leave out risk-SEEKING, but that’s not up to me), and the authority given to those who have accepted risk, survived it, and thus gained the wisdom to guide their family and culture. I’m guessing that is, or should be, the definition of Patriarchy.
@Alan, yes I would bet money this man would say his wife and kids are worth it. Not bc he’s got a death wish or doesnt understand the risk, but because as he loves them, and they love him. I suspect he lives and breathes for them, and as a result I see him years from now surrounded by many grandchildren and children. His wife, as well. Perhaps we have lost this idea of carrying and then passing the baton? The entire “West” may indeed collapse but my bet is that families like his will be the coal that does not go out, revives, and once again catches fire to rebuild once more. He and his ARE Western culture, Western culture at large today is not. One is based on tried and true principles that persist come what may, the other subverts those same principles.
@Bloom asked: When you hear the word patriarchy, what images and thoughts come up?
Not all men, now or in the past, are patriarchs. But the men who are or have been patriarchs tend to attract a community around themselves. The paragraphs presented below are extracted from a much longer discussion I created for my daughter – to create a foundational perspective for her as she increasingly becomes exposed to the political chatter that young folks are being exposed to today. I’m talking to my daughter in the narrative below, not the audience here. Most of this is just basic Sociology 101 This may be overkill, in terms of what Bloom asked for. But I think it demonstrates why patriarchy was a natural occurance before oil was discovered, and will be again when the use of oil is no longer cost effective. I think many young women who have grown up under the influence of advertising (since the late 1950s) are not aware of the reality discussed below. On the odd chance that some of them are reading behind the scenes:
Some foundational truths:
* If we don’t eat, we will die;
* We don’t get to keep what we can’t defend;
* Politics, at its most basic, is about us procuring and defending our ability to eat.
* Only when we have secured our ability to eat will politics beyond eating matter to us.
1. Men who have the energy and the smarts to create a good harvest attract to themselves those who don’t have the same energy and smarts level. This reality creates family groups. Folks cluster around the guy who can create bounty and is willing to share it. The one who can less easily create a harvest from the ground gives his loyalty to the one who can more easily create a harvest.
2. Men who are strong and who can dominate, will. Men who are strong enough to steal the harvest of a weaker person, will. Such men also attract other men to themselves. Rather than extract the harvest from the ground, they take the harvest from the one who created it.
The truth of Points 1 and 2 lead to tribes – groups of families gathered together to protect what they have created. This form of social organization increases the ability of folks to create a defense against those who would take what they have created. It increases the likelihood that folks will eat, and thus, live – an idea encapsulated in this cliche: When the builders of the boats are the uncles of those who sail them, the boats will be seaworthy.
The ground does not yield its harvest easily. Life is hard. Humans will not survive unless a great deal of energy is expended – a level of energy that men as a group possess and women as a group do not. Life is hard. We cannot eat, and therefore cannot survive, on just the energy that women as a group possess. If we are to eat, and therefore survive, we need the energy that men as a group possess. Because this is true, because we cannot survive without the energy that men as a group possess, men as a group will always rule over women as a group. The labor-saving devices created in the last 150 years have obscured this truth.
Note: “At Spawny’s, “M” gives a personal account of male strength that adds something to this discussion.
Families led by men can and will enforce the no work, no eat ethic. Families led by men can more easily encourage compliance with this everybody helps out ethic than can the state, simply by shunning the non-compliant folks. Hunger is a marvelous motivator. Especially when the village will provide a better guard than the state against the shunned one burning down the village out of anger at being denied the ability to eat for free.
It is a historical reality that some folks are willing to steal the harvest created by others. In his diary, Captain John Smith at historic Jamestown writes that he had to advise his men that, if they didn’t work, they wouldn’t be allowed to eat. He took this admonition from what Paul said to the Thessalonians in 2 Thessalonias 3:10: For even when we were with you, we gave you this rule: “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.”
The fact that both Paul and Captain Smith had to say this to their folks indicates that there are people throughout history who are only too willing to steal the harvest created by others. This truth requires that a defense be built against it, for survival’s sake. And that defense can be better created and maintained by families led by men than by the government. Over time, such families tend to coalesce into tribes. This historical truth will remain – so long as folks need to eat and the ground does not yield its harvest easily.
The current period is an anomaly, historically. We are and have been in a period of less difficulty – brought about by the labor-saving devices that the energy derived from oil has allowed us to produce (covers the last 150 years or so). For the most part, those labor-saving devices can’t be maintained once available oil drops below a certain level. When that happens, life will slip back into the historical norm where life will be much harder than it is today. Overcoming that hardness will require the physical strength that men have and women don’t. And so, all of the old social structures that evolve from that truth will again emerge.
Pay attention to the voices you listen to for information and learning. If you pay attention over time, you will find that their conversations fall into one or the other of two general themes: 1.) how to take resources away from Group A and give them to Group B, or 2.) how to guard against those who would take resources away from Group A and give them to Group B. These two themes correlate generally to the men who have the strength to create a good harvest and those who have the strength to steal the harvest that others create. Those you listen to are, at its most basic, talking about supporting one of those groups of men.
I have left out of this presentation here the discussion that people poor in finances, health, mental abilities, etc. are expensive. They tend to burn down the palace when they get hungry. If we are not going to just shoot the poor people and get rid of them, then we must face an uncomfortable truth: folks who create the harvest must be required to give up part of that harvest to the poor folks. Otherwise, the poor folks will burn the palace down or otherwise behave in ways that will prevent the folks who create the harvest from operating efficiently. But, again this caring for folks who legitimately can’t take care of themselves is best handled at the level of the village – where the folks providing the sustenance actually know the folks who need that charity.
The patriarch creates the harvest, with the help of the men he attracts to himself. The womenfolk distribute that harvest to other members of the family / tribe / social group.
If you click on the “male strength” link in the previous post, you may need to scroll down to “M.s” comment.
@ Richard P yes, the lives of many depend on the few that have the ability and knowledge to direct those who cannot direct themselves. The 80/20 rule in a different way… to undermine/vilify those who can only jeopardizes all. But envy is a powerful force of ill intent…
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/careers/business-education/article-after-starting-a-new-job-and-an-emba-along-comes-baby/
So 40, starting new executive job, starting an Executive MBA at Rothman tuition about 60+k and pregnant. Yup have it all.!!
Talk to me in three years when you are studying for your finals with a terrible twos. And that new high powered job is gonna love you going on maternity leave less than a year in. Or are you just gonna hand little over to the nanny to raise while you buck for promotion to pay for that tuition.
And talk to me in fifteen years when your career has peaked, you have massive burnout and a 15 year old about to start the party years (like you did) when all you want to do is go to bed.
Because You Are 55 with a 15 year old and an MBA!
You go girl!!!
Ahahahahahahahahaha.
By contrast I am 55 with both kids grown and finished university, happily early retired, debt free and six figures in the bank.
(Oh where did I go wrong?? Oh yeah I am a practical Guy!)
Sorry stand corrected. 113,775 in tuition. So it needs to get you a raise of at least 10k a year for ten years just to pay for itself!! Yeah math!!
http://www.rotman.utoronto.ca/Degrees/MastersPrograms/MBAPrograms/ExecutiveMBA.aspx#body_1_maincontent_5_pane5
Oh and buried in the article so I missed it first read
You guessed it!!
Single Mother.
Daycare in Toronto (Rotman is part of U of T so assume GTA somewhere) for a toddler is 3000+ a month or 36,000 a year
So 150,000 for the five years til kindergarden.
Plus the 113,000 for the MBA
So 260k before living expenses! On her own!!
Wow!! What a woman!! What a job!!
P.s. No financial pressure! You can handle it! Cause you dont need no bicycle!!
“But envy is a powerful force of ill intent…”
Yes, just writing a post on this.
As per the OP, that is my husband’s dream, to build our family up around us – adult kids someday, grandchildren & hopefully great-grandchildren. It takes a lot of work but it looks sooooo worth it in the end.
Ok interesting one.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/canada/article-grey-area-the-fragile-frontier-of-dementia-intimacy-and-sexual/
Two alzheimers patients in a ltc can’t remember their non live in spouses. They form a relationship with daily contact. Moral and consent issues?
Going to happen as boomers age.
Vice versa stories every week of long term married couples seperated to different homes because there is no requirement to prioritize keeping couples together.
‘So 40, starting new executive job, starting an Executive MBA at Rothman tuition about 60+k and pregnant. Yup have it all.!!’
I’m sure when she’s drowning in debt, working 14 hour days, and raising a kid on her own…she can just blame the Patriarchy for the mess she’s in. Where have all the good men gone?
The MBA plus baby thing does not seem like a good plan… but I had my youngest st 40 so I probably am not one to talk! Instead of getting an MBA I started my biz. But it’s tough to be a working mom for sure, even if I work from home!
Just ’cause (live open mics, no synths.)
Just checking in. GF is sleeping in the next room, need to crash soon. We went to the ball game tonight. Took her car shopping this afternoon. We sure do get along well.
Guess I just want to say that what most people say about the Patriarchy is wrong. It wasn’t bad or evil and actually worked well for thousands of years. If you were mentally ill and were born a man and thought you were a woman and cut your own dick off with a hacksaw … well, no … it probably didn’t work very well for you because you ended up in a mental institution.
So what percentage of society cut their own dicks off with a hacksaw ? And include homosexuals. Include obese pigs. Include the mentally ill. But for most others … 80% of society … the Patriarchy actually worked pretty well. Till Feminism.
The real problem is how we ended up letting a extremely tiny minority to call the shots. Who put them in charge. Who LET THEM BE IN CHARGE. If you cut your own dick off with a hacksaw … you deserve to be in a mental institution. There is no question about that. The real question is … who put a mentally ill, retard … who cut his own dick off with a hacksaw … WHO PUT THIS PERSON IN CHARGE OF SOCIETY !!!!
That’s all you got to ask. Who decided that the mentally ill should be allowed to dictate morals to the rest of us ? Who did that ? Cause I certainly didn’t !!!
Psychologists for some reason in the 70s started to think things that were mental illnesses suddenly weren’t anymore.
Homosexuality was the big one. I don’t know if feminism was ever considered a mental illness…but the proof is in the ethos that it makes women go nuts.
Well, my upbringing (both in my immediate family and among other male relatives) was under a patriarchal family structure, and I am glad of it. My father was upfront about what his standards and expectations for me were, and was pretty objective about whether or not I was meeting them. He was equally upfront about what the consequences would be for failing to meet them.
All this leads me to believe that most men put a high value on level-headedness, objectivity, and the concept that the punishment should fit the crime. As opposed to the female tendency to bring emotions and knee-jerk reactions into things too much (although maybe this is just a modern thing? Were women more rational under patriarchal culture?).
It really needs to be done with someone you get along well with.
Since we’re living what I would call a modern day Patriarchy (well as close as maybe you can get in the West), i think women do have to be more rational rather than emotion-driven to do it.
Just recently, my husband decided to do something I really really didn’t want him to do… I told him my concerns and hesitations, but it was very clear he was going to do this, as he thought it’d be best for us. And maybe it will be! The men he asked about this decision before he made it, pretty much all said it was a good decision for him due to them thinking it’d be best for me and the kids.
Do y’all get that though? He took advice from his male mentors and friends, over mine (granted mine was more emotion driven and fear based).
I told him if it works out well, I’ll send his male friends a thank you card.
LOL
Stephanie, congrats to your hubby for having enough sense to listen to his gut, and listen to other men. Over you. That’s how a patriarchy works. Men make the best decisions they can and women get to go along with it, that’s how it works.
So those are the odds. And since you didn’t say what the hell your hubby was deciding, I have no info. Again, typical woman. Deceit and misleading and plausible deniability. Deny it all. Unless he gets it wrong and then you’ll be telling everyone all about it.
So, all I got to go on is one single thing. When it comes to making decisions, big decisions, important decisions … men get it right far more often than women. And if a man makes a decision and gets it wrong, its wrong. If a woman makes a decision and gets it wrong … its usually 100% the complete polar opposite of what should have been decided on.
Which is why men should be making decisions. And women should just shut the hell up and trust their men.
Yes, I probably sound like a cave man. Feminism is cancer.
“And since you didn’t say what the hell your hubby was deciding, I have no info.”
It’s complicated and I want to protect him so I can’t say too much, Mega. But we’ve been married long enough to where we’ve both made decisions together that ended up not working out the way we wanted sometimes, and it was never the end of the world. We just survived the mistakes together and didn’t blame each other.
Maybe my comment sounded trite, but that wasn’t the intent. The intent was to show that Patriarchy was probably like that.
The strange thing is that I’m glad he feels like he can make decisions like this. I don’t want him to be ruled by my emotions or fears and let them make his decisions for him.
And he does hear me out and listens to my concerns (not trying to make him sound unloving)!
His wild and crazy friend/coworker who poured Tequila into my soda at the retirement party a couple of weeks back, said something about me being my husband’s “hot wife” and I jokingly told him that he was just saying that so my husband wouldn’t want to leave me. He then looked at me dead serious and said, “He never will.” It was really romantic to see how much his friends know he loves me. So it’s not like he doesn’t actually have our best interests in mind. But when push comes to shove, he’s his own man and the leader of our family.
@Stephanie said: when push comes to shove, he’s his own man and the leader of our family.
I’ve read enough of what you’ve written to think that you already understand what I’m about to say. But for others who might not understand this yet – your comment is a good example of the role a wife plays in determining whether a man can effectively lead his family. A woman who takes the kids and goes home to mom when husband overrules her on something important, or gets a restraining order because she fears for her safety, or otherwise whines and denies sex and is a generally all-around pain-in-the-ass because “I live here too, why aren’t you doing what I want?” – it won’t be long before the husband of such a woman stops choosing in the way he and his male cohorts think is best. He defaults to whatever she wants. Or he just walks away. The wife’s attitude plays a large role in the success of her husband learning to trust his own judgement and leadership skills.
You guys seem to have it figured out. Good for you. I think the example you’ve provided above can only be carried out by a woman who is comfortable in her own skin.
total Dad win!
RichardP I know we disagree on a lot of biblical things, but I’m glad you see us that way.
I think Patriarchy was and is hard for women, but it is A LOT easier when you get along well and have a sense of humor.
Stephanie
We were unevenly yoked; she believed, I was always a doubting Thomas. She saw my Bible in the beginnings of my library, noticed that it was well worn, and promptly pinched it ;-D She had come West with a tiny New Testament. I doubt that she would have dated with me except for that Bible, a reward for memorizing as a child.
She restored her marriage vows to include obey, an alteration from the 20’s in the United Church in Canada. So I became her captain, while she became my first officer. We always discussed major decisions, usually found acceptable compromises, and lived with my decisions otherwise. Because in the end, it was me that was always going to be held responsible.
@Stephanie said: RichardP I know we disagree on a lot of biblical things ….
I think we actually disagree on very little, if anything.
I know you have misinterpreted some things I’ve said, which is natural for this type of communication. I’m not ignoring your responses to me. I’ve just been particularly busy lately. But I am slowly pulling together responses to some of the things you’ve said in your posts – responses that will hopefully clarify some things. I will respond privately as I don’t wish to clutter up anybody’s blog.
@Stephanie said: I think Patriarchy was and is hard for women …
I grew up in a church where missionaries would come from Africa and India and show slides. I can remember back as young as six or seven, seeing slides of burning pyres where the husband has died (of old age or accident) and the custom was to burn the body. The missionaries never showed pictures of this next scene, but said it was customary for the man’s widow to throw herself on her husband’s burning pyre and perish. At that young age, I thought that was quite a sign of devotion. When I got older and learned what I said in my post above about how difficult life is just to get a harvest out of the ground and warmth or cooling for the home without the power that oil gives – I understood that the widow had other motivations. If there were no other family members available to give her what she needed to survive, she would likely die of hunger or exposure to the elements, or by way of an animal attack. Throwing herself on her husband’s pyre and perishing was a logical response to the unsolvable problem of her not being able to keep herself alive.
Through those slides and the stories the missionaries told, this point was impressed on me at an early age: in cultures without the power that oil gives, the survival of the women very much depends upon the strength of the husband and sons in her life. Without husband or sons, or other generous family members, her survival was not guaranteed. In those circumstances, I think patriarchy was viewed a bit differently than today. (This is the issue being addressed in 1st Timothy 5, particularly Verse 8.)
So long as we have power from oil, and a women develops skills that she can sell into the marketplace, a woman can survive quite well without husband or sons of her own (but other husbands and sons must do the heavy lifting that creates the food and shelter and transportation that she needs in order to survive). With a job of her own, she can buy the output of the labors of other men. So – in this context – I can see how it would be relevant for a woman to ask – what do we need patriarchy for? God did not say that Eve was created to help every man. Neither did God say that a woman is to help every man. Eve was created to help Adam, and a wife was created to help her husband. But God did not say that every woman must get married. A woman with no husband does not have the Biblical admonitions placed on her that wives have placed on them. A wife points to God’s design for wife > husband as justification for patriarchy. An unmarried woman can say “what patriarchy?” and be correct. So long as she is not saying it within the context of the church or societal governance.
Look at the skyscapers in the cities, and all of the jobs that fill those skyscapers, and all of the women that fill all of those jobs. And the combines in the fields in middle America, cutting down the wheat and the alphalpha and the corn. And realize that all of those things will disappear when we no long have the power that oil provides (however far down the road that is). Society will slowly revert to revolving around those who have the strength and the smarts to create a good harvest and the strength and the smarts to protect it. Patriarchy will revert to its original meaning. And it will be more welcomed then, out of necessity, than it is now.
Roosh is an ass and a degenerate but how do you disagree with these observations?
(Ignore the whole 4 wives bit, focus on what he says about the odds in the dating pool.)
http://www.rooshv.com/all-thats-left-for-normal-men-are-rotten-women
‘Roosh is an ass and a degenerate but how do you disagree with these observations?’
Roosh’s degenerate lifestyle is probably what introduced him to these observations. However you don’t have to swim in the sewer to get how much it stinks.
‘The sad truth is that if you meet an attractive girl today, she was pumped and dumped by numerous sexy men, prefers to nurture her career than children, is addicted to attention via the internet, and has participated in some kind of scheme to exchange social status or cash for her pussy.’
I think any aware man figured that out years ago. It’s not like casual sex, posting insta bikini selfies, women wanting careers over motherhood and prostitution are some new phonomeon.
https://nationalpost.com/health/women/no-one-tells-you-that-life-as-a-40-year-old-single-woman-can-be-this-good
See women are embracing mgtow. If it works for men it can work for women. Wgtow
Agreed Earl, when I first encountered Roosh’s writings, I immediately thought he had a very King Solomon-ish lamentations vibe. This was a few years into his poon slaying lifestyle, and it seemed the excitement had worn off and the realization that what he though was winning proved to be empty. I could feel he wasn’t getting any joy from it anymore. His later work seemed to be less focused on hooking up and more on developing himself as a person, and helping other men develop themselves, too. But you are right, one doesn’t have to sink to debauchery to figure where that will end. Better to skip the ride — and the jaded, broken soul cynicism.
I really don’t think casual sex is good for anyone. Men may be more biologically able to cope, but I think it affects them in a different negative way. Kinda like how police can get jaded, being exposed to the dregs of society day in and day out. If the only women one associates with are those that go to bars to hook up, well… “Enjoy the fall” has it’s drawbacks…
His journey did however back up many red pill theories but how women think, what they respond to, what drives them, etc.
“The art of the chase is gone. It stops at No. But why did you give up? Because I don’t want to go to jail.”
And later the host says
“Even if you say something with the right intention, say it to the wrong person or the wrong way and it is over. You are one tweet away from not being superman any more.”
And these are gorgeous, rich actors thinking this. Imagine the average guy.
Ladies!
My forecast?
The LAST honest, non playa cold approach from the kind of guy you eventually want to marry will happen sometime in 2018.
By next year no guy will ever cold approach a stranger in any setting, at any time, ever again.
“Leave it, it is over.”
Bloom.
Ignore that it is Roosh!
Is his observations about what the real guy faces accurate?
(Its easy to deviate from facing harsh truths by attacking the messenger.)
Horribly Roosh and Carvill are saying the same thing!! That is scary.
“By next year no guy will ever cold approach a stranger in any setting, at any time, ever again.’
Women wanted power and they wanted a man.
Women wanted the law to be based off (their) consent, ‘no means no’, and the like. They also want a man to keep going even if she says no.
If there’s any lesson women should learn is you can’t have it all, you can’t have your cake and eat it too, and you can’t be in a privileged class while claiming to be the perpetual victims.
Men aren’t going to read your minds to see if you really mean no or are playing hard to get in the thrill of the chase…they are going to see what the law of the land does to men and react accordingly.
The only way things change is if women start initiating the approach (fat chance)…or the laws change (highly unlikely at this point).
@Horseman I have never disliked Roosh or found him as horrible as some say. So I don;t have any negative connotations to overcome… I think he was one voice honestly accessing and documenting the current situation.
I still get cold approached on occasion. I always answer with, “Thank you, I am truly flattered. But I am in a relationship.” That seems to work. I don;t get offended, they don’;t get offended… I don’t get why women make it into some huge “affront.” Someone thinks you are attractive! The correct response is to take it as a compliment (bc it is!) even if the feeling is not mutual or it can’t/won’t move ahead.
Wait till nobody approaches! Ouch!
p.s. Guys respect and accept the answer too!(imagine that! Gasp!)
“Thank you, I am truly flattered. But I am in a relationship.”
I honestly don’t know why that isn’t a go to answer for women if they don’t want the approach to go any further.
‘I don’t get why women make it into some huge “affront.”
They have a game they play…’mirror, mirror who is the biggest victim of them all’.
True Earl, that would work as a reply to any cold approach, unless they knew you enough to know if it were not true. (In my case it is, so that’s what I say.)
Apologies Bloom.
And great response, lets the guys leave with their pride intact.
‘unless they knew you enough to know if it were not true.’
If it’s a cold approach I doubt they would know you that well.
re: “p.s. Guys respect and accept the answer too!(imagine that! Gasp!)”
Jesus, Bloom … not from you too. You a subliminal man-hater ? Every human being with a penis is a born rapist who can’t take no; even if its said nicely. You too ? REALLY ?
Reminds me of a funny story from a few years ago. Back when I was going to church. They had a singles group and one of the women said something along the lines of she didn’t feel safe walking to her car after church … because she might get raped in the parking lot. So one of the dudes googled “what is the incidence of getting raped in ….” our place. Then he googled “what is the incidence of getting hit by lightning in … ” our place.
And, no shit, her odds of her getting hit by lightning where better than her getting raped. Yes, we live in a very safe place. Anyway, the next time the singles group met, he brought it up. And wrapped it up by asking her if she should walk around with a lightening rod on her head … so she could feel safe ???
Yes, she felt like a moron. Because SHE IS A MORON. Nobody with 1/2 a brain thinks that every male on the planet is a rapist who can’t take … No, I’m already dating someone else.
So … please Ms Bloom, don’t start acting like that too.
Always amazes me when women … just when you think they are rational and reasonable … then turn around and act like complete fucked up in the head morons. I’ve mentioned this about the GF several times … 90% of the time … she’s cool and we get along great. And then every once in awhile … its like a kick in the nuts, And its … YUP, SHE”S A GIRL !!!
Kinda like what Ame posted the other day. Thanks Ame, I said it and you posted a vid which captured everything I was trying to say even better. And I thought I said it pretty well too, lol. And, yes, I am wordy.
She posted the NAIL-IN-THE-HEAD vid. Where a guy tries to help a girl with a nail in the head. Her husband or boyfriend. Just trying to help her. And he tries and tries and tries. And all he gets is grief in return. And gets blamed. HE”S THE BAD GUY !!! It would be funny, if it wasn’t true. So … very true. ALWALT.
Thanks to Ame for posting that again. All women should realize the irony of this … when a man offers to help you by removing the nail in your head … DON”T ACCUSE HIM OF TRYING TO RAPE YOU !!! He’s just trying to be nice !!! He’s trying to help !!!
‘she didn’t feel safe walking to her car after church…because she might get raped in the parking lot.’
Because if there’s one place a rapist wants to commit his crime is in an open public place with the possibility of many witnesses all around.
I get the emotional reason why a woman would fear rape…but be a little more realistic here. Besides when I drove to work at my former job I saw plenty of drunk stumbling college aged women walking by themselves at 2 in the morning in the big city through the rough parts of town…if there was a great scenerio for rape, that was it.
In case anyone is wondering about my marriage situation. Hasn’t been discussed in awhile. Serious shit going on though. Took the GF car shopping last weekend. Big deal for her, listening to me, taking my advice, lots of money involved. I recommended a Honda CR-V for her … and she liked it; a lot. And her adult son is moving out in a couple of weeks. Leaves her alone at home. Two dogs and a cat and nobody else. She works during the day and is gone, so nobody to watch the pets.
So instead of her spending time with me at my place, I’ll soon be spending time with her at her place, because of the animals. We’ve known this. And discussed it. And, yes, her animals like me. So, shouldn’t be a big deal. But its a big change, really, but its life. Real life. Kick you in the teeth life. That’s how it works.
Real life decisions. Cars. Money. Kids. Pets. Where to sleep ? Who’s bathroom do I use? That’s life. And, yeah, we still get along pretty great.
i’ll be honest … i’m terrified of the dark … probably b/c a lot of bad things have happened to me in the dark. at night. so it’s rare that i go out alone at night ever, and my husband prefers that i don’t, so with very rare exception, i’m not out and alone at night.
not sure how that fits in anywhere … just sayin. it’s a fear. and it’s real. so it’s a real fear 🙂
or it’s a nail.
whatever.
awalt.
🙂
– – –
which bathroom to use? toilet seat up or down? who cleans the toilet?! 🙂 yep … gettin to the nitty gritty of life 🙂
glad things are going well for you 🙂
@ Mega I was being sarcastic! 😉
There is a new post at Spawny’s
https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2018/07/18/plausible-deniability/
There is a new post at Spawny’s
https://spawnyspace.wordpress.com/2018/07/20/what-is-her-major-malfunction/
Roosh is pure bitter beta, pissed that pretty White girls don’t want him like he wants them
She’s the youngest of 12
……..
Generations of winning right there