Courtesy of commenter “max from australia”, a juicy quote from a former Pope which accords with Chateau Heartiste analysis of the deleterious blowback from the availability of widespread, cheap contraceptives (of the sort never before experienced by humanity until relatively recently):
Predictions from a wise Celibate bloke in a dress, Pope Paul VI, 1968 Humanae Vitae (Latin, “Human Life”)
“Not much experience is needed in order to know human weakness, and to understand that men—especially the young, ….. growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion” (HV 17).
Pope Paul VI was close to the mark, but he forgot to mention the distaff side the equation; specifically, that as cheap contraceptives silently and subtly move men toward devaluing women, so too does the technology move women toward devaluing beta males, those bitter losers in the sexual market (note: I did not say marriage market or child market) for whom contraceptives, coupled with female economic self-sufficiency, have rendered them practically superfluous as primetime sexual partners.
The mass-produced condom and the Pill have freed men from feeling obligation for women as much as they have freed women to regularly and blithely pursue what was historically risky sex with caddish alpha males on the make.
The contraceptive is, in practice, a female hypergamy facilitator.
It’s funny for me to write this, because contraceptives have, in fact, been very very good to me. I did a back of the envelope calculation and figured that my aggregate sex life would have been truncated by 90% if contraceptives were prohibitively expensive, unreliable and hard to get. A world in which women had to grapple with real, palpable fears of STDs, pregnancy and subsequent abandonment is, not to put too fine a point on it, a really shitty world for womanizers and serial monogamists and uncomplicated lovers of the art of seduction itself. I imagine I’d have to *gasp* start promising marriage or some such claptrap to any woman I wanted to bang, just to loosen her up enough to unhook her bra.
I am on record as predicting that the Six Sirens of the Sexual Apocalypse will be the cultural and technological juggernaut that hastens, if it is not the sole cause of, the death of Western civilization.
Is this revelation, this knowledge, supposed to turn me from my wicked ways? Here I am, standing at the edge of the abyss, pointing into its bowels like a histrionic jester, leading the ignorant and the deluded to peer into the void and imploring them — no, more precisely taunting them — to heed my warning of their desolate future…
and still I cavort insouciantly along its lip, secretly relieved that no one will seriously weigh my prophecies.
Pope Paul VI, apparently, was as far-seeing as I. Yet his vision of the good world, the civilized world — a vision with which I find no quarrel — would, if it were fully realized, necessarily mean a lot less fun for me. And that’s a reality I can’t abide; my own private delusion.
What would your ideal society look like given the realities of easily available contraception and free access to information, with the attendant liberal attitudes which accompany the latter?
If you were the supreme monarch of Western Civilization, what institutional reforms would you enact to stop civilized humanity from degenerating?
Techne sets the parameters of the challenge. Episteme guides us through the challenge.
Take six of the most obvious technological mileposts: the crossbow, the telegraph, the airplane, the automobile, the contraceptive pill, the internet. They each precipitated world-altering events, they each brought anomie, chaos, and new institutions. They all seemed to promise the obsolescence of old ways and the dawning of a new age from which we could never return. On the margins, they heralded the idea that human nature itself is malleable, subject to techne, open to manipulation.
This is the maelstrom into which we were born. We inherited the Heraclitian idea that “all is flux,” that nothing is permanent, that everything can be bent toward our human will. This site’s fixation with the “biomechanics is god” philosophy is an echo of the postmodern predicament. Insofar as credulous, semi-educated, and desperate searchers rely on such pseudowisdom for answers, they build their house upon sand. (On the other hand, they are a step closer than their spiritual brethren on the left to acknowledging the unalterable permanence of human nature, if arriving at their “science” in a blind-groping and ignorant way.)
We Christians, however, build upon rock. And while this declaration will bring the usual village atheist-idiots out of their hovels, put aside the fideism and think empirically. Only one institution has survived intact up to our present age from ancient history, no matter what the struggle, no matter what the social trends. Indeed, the “gates of hell will not prevail against” us. Exaggerations of our demise have been proclaimed ever since the apostles fled the passion and cross.
The “institutions” come and go, save one. They will crumble and be rebuilt around the techne shaped by those whose progeny remain to promote righteous episteme. Tree-obsessives miss the forest. By definition, the church is charged to look past any single lifetime and toward the long view. That’s why Paul VI’s observation was — and most papal encyclicals are — a no-brainer: sub specie aeternitatis goes with the job description. We are the keepers of the generations. The rest of you, along with your pet concerns, are “but a moment’s sunshine / Fading on the grass.”
Memento mori.
Matt
Call you Montresor:
“Once more let me IMPLORE you to return. No? Then I must positively leave you. But I must first render you all the little attentions in my power.”
The catacombs await them.
Or cats, anyway.
“Respected and beloved companion.”
Well, that certainly dates him.
If liberals could get embarrassed, they would find it embarrassing that a celibate (we think) old religious guy predicted sexual behavior better than the enlightened progressives of the day. I note that the Pope did not predict how the females would behave. That means he was certainly a beta or a white-knighter. Or just wouldn’t bring up the subject, since women hold a place of high esteem in Christianity. All delusions.
But, I agree with our blog host. Don’t try to swim upstream.
There’s actually a seventh Siren: access to cheap abortion.
Its part of the birth control siren, seeing that abortion is de facto birth control.
By the way, feminists and other Pill pushers predicted that legalizing contraception and making it widely available would improve society in numerous ways. It would reduce divorce, because couples could have more sex without worrying about pregnancy. It would reduce child abuse, because people wouldn’t have children they didn’t want. It would reduce teenage pregnancy, because obviously teens would just use contraception. It would reduce poverty, because people wouldn’t have more children than they could afford. Basically, life would be rainbows and unicorns once we had the Pill.
The cranky old pope, Paul VI, predicted just the opposite: more divorce, more marital strife, more illegitimacy, more abuse. People scoffed and said he was out of touch; what would an old, white, celibate priest know about marriage and sex?
Who was right?
+1
Whenever some snarkbait recommends dismissing the words of some “out of touch (or dead), old white man”, that’s when the wise perk up their ears.
“Many a truth has been spoken through false teeth.” – Brother Theodore
There isn’t much difference between deceitful racists like you and most leftists – both have misleading ideologies they want to bring to the mainstream, using propaganda to do it. You want to switch Jews for liberals, and they want to switch racists or white-supremacists for conservatives. Two sides of the same coin.
Their demagogy appeals to the emotions and prejudices of the angry losers, which is how racist killers like your role model are born. Thankfully, people with insight and mental awareness know what men like you are all about. You’re not fooling anyone, just the idiots.
Quit stalking me, you silly woman… you’re not my type.
You’re such a hysterical cunt, you remind me of those femcunts protesting Warren Farrel.
Uhm…WHAT??????
You’re such a hysterical cunt, you remind me of those femcunts protesting Warren Farrel.
Hey, for all we know, that might very well have been her in the video.
The pope has the guidance of the Holy Spirit…feminists have the guidance of the Father of Lies. In a sense they agreed with each other.
Excellent observation.
lzozozozoz
HEY HEATRIRTZEZ!! this rmeindz me of a joke i told at thaknigivingz!!!!
The joke goeas like this:
The Pope, Heartistes, and da GBFM walk into a Bar on K street zlzzoozoz. There are lotsass hotties on the pill in the bar, who because of the pill, have transofomered tehir once-fertile gina holes into infertile butthoelozzlzoozozoz
The pope says, “Not much experience is needed in order to know human weakness, and to understand that men—especially the young, ….. growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion.”
Da GBFM turns to da hearteistes and says, “u can have first pick but get next two zlozzllzozlzlzo”
Yup. And, as previously discussed, welfare supercharges the process for the least well off.
I spent some time in Singapore, some years ago. Maybe OT, maybe not.
They have arrived at a point that appears – and probably is – stable, for them. The deal in Singapore is it is sortof socially accepted for young people to have sex – and using contraception. However, having illegitimate children is NOT accepted at all. Strong families with two parents married to each other, and divorce is rare.
Now, how does this compute? Well, here is the deal. If an unmarried woman gets pregnant, there is enormous social pressure (by the whole culture, not necessarily individually – nobody else might even know she is pregnatn) for her to do either
1) Marry the father (this is a golden oldie in most societies, including the West.
2) Have an abortion – consider no biggie
3) Adopt out the baby (I think this is rare, but I don’t have the stats)
Marriage is also boosted by some legal inducements. Among which, everybody who works in Singapore has to contribute to a pension plan, but it is an individual pension plan, not like US Social Security but more like a compulsory IRA/401K/whatever).
And generally, you CANNOT borrow from this fund, except if you are married and you and your spouse are buying a house/apartment/condo/whatever..
And thus social bliss is boosted.
Thor
This is why men need males spaces (places they can keep women out of).
Mens greatest thoughts and ideas are forged in male spaces; even when that space is only the one between his ears.
Think about it?
There are people who live in fear of what might be going on between your ears when there is no woman to prevent you from thinking thoughts that don’t benefit them.
This is why the feminists and manginas are tampering with the language.
We think in words.
By forcing you to use certain words, both the feminists and the state can control your thoughts in a manner that channels your behavior to only support them.
This is why black people had to fuck with the language; its been the key to our oppression.
All you stupid niggers who were afraid to give your child an African name because you were afraid it would be hard for them to get a job?
Have you looked in the fucking white house lately?
That nigga got a jungle Islam name.
Im laughin.
at what?
at all you stupid wannabe, uncle tom, mammy, soft taco, house niggers.
I’m naming my next son Mahatma Kote.
Look man, Im gonna tell you to fuck off as soon as I stop laughing.
BTW, one of the effects of the co-ed workplace is it allows some women to be around and interact with guys that would ignore them in any other venue.
Only partly right. We don’t think in words; this has long been debunked. Words can be used to obfuscate and misdirect, however, and that’s why the manginas and feminists’ first recourse is language manipulation. They’re slippery fucks because reality isn’t.
flap, when you look at something and you don’t have a word to describe it, what are you left with?
All righty there, Nom Chompsky.
I’ll stop doing it when you stop laughing
who is Mahatma Kote???
Eh, that’s a joke, I say, a joke, son. (My hat, My coat)
But, didn’t Obama get where he is precisely because he is an uncle tom and a kosher one at that?
yes
Lets kill these words and watch our IQ rise:racist sexist.
… and watch internet vocabularies attenuate by 30%.
I am pretty sure thwack is white. Octaroon at worst. Methinks muhnigga doth protest too much. He begins with an excellent point, and all I can do — seriously — is scan down to get to the word “nigger,” because I know one is lurking in the woodpile.
On the upside, we are witnessing a Dreams from My Father identity struggle going on in real time. Not much of an upside, but it is fun to watch the psychological gears grinding.
Matt
Thats interesting. I think its more that you HOPE Im a white person.
Wow. Your most introspective post ever?
” A world in which women had to grapple with real, palpable fears of STDs, pregnancy and subsequent abandonment is, not to put too fine a point on it, a really shitty world for womanizers and serial monogamists and uncomplicated lovers of the art of seduction itself.”
Profound. For the first time in history, it has become possible to become a serial womanizer without being a sultan or super famous like Erroll Flynn.
Except Flynn didnt ned fame to bang those young lovelies…
Being a young, dashing Aussie rogue goes a long way.
But fame helps, too.
Like most mainstream socons, Pope Paul didn’t really get it. He was one of the most egregious perpetrators of the myth that the sexual revolution was about what those bad, bad men were doing to those poor innocent wimmins. Oh please, get me a barf bag.
Ah, no. Whatever one may think about Catholicism, it has taught from the start that people are no damn good at all, i.e. Original Sin. The only woman who was ever without sin was the Blessed Virgin Mary. I think that pope or any pope would be the last man on earth to deny the reality of female hypergamy. Hell, even good old St. Paul knew the score (wimmins obey your husbands and keep your heads covered in church.)
It is possible to acknowledge that women are sinful in general without acknowledging that they are sinful specifically in the area of sexuality.
Ey,Pope or no Pope,dude was STILL Italian,capice??
He was one of the most egregious perpetrators of the myth that the sexual revolution was about what those bad, bad men were doing to those poor innocent wimmins.
Citation or it didn’t happen.
I love how soi-disant iconoclasts make grand claims about “perpetrators” and “myths” … even as they perpetrate the hoariest myths there are. The pope: nothing but an American “socon,” fits snugly into that cubbyhole. Like some ultra-Pat Robertson in gold vestments. Next!
Know-it-all faggots like you invented the word “churchian.”
But what would internet conversation be without an unlimited straw heap with which certain ignoramuses construct their “enemies”? Worst of all, such enemies attain that status in the hater’s superficial, paranoid mind out of little more than his once having caught a fleeting, bad odor. It’s a superficiality that smacks of … wait for it … feminine judgment.
The church has never been naïve about female nature. We never have pedestalized it, nor have we degraded it in reaction to passing fads. We are quite clear about hypergamy, which is why our scripture begins with the ur-explanation of female wanderlust. We are the last hold-out against feminist infiltration. While the lukewarm Christians are outfitting priestesses in lavender cassocks, not a single Petrine prelate has blinked. Indeed, they find our fixations and feminist capitulations curious. Even the United States infantry is wavering.
So shut your retarded face-sphincter.
Matt
I would invite you all to read again the above quote where the pope goes on and on about how worried he is that men will disrespect women.
And not a single peep about how this will cause women do bad things. Telling.
Sadly, women want to be treated like pieces of meat.
Beef or, porked chop?
Sort of. What a woman wants is to know that she’s sexually desirable. Unfortunately, in the sexual free-for-all of today, that means acting like a slut, ie, letting herself be treated like a piece of meat.
Do you find that red-pill women do too, in general?
On this Sunday morning, I too have had a vision. It went something like this:
http://vimeo.com/10798467
I take your phrophesy seriously as I see the effects of the Men’s Liberation Movement and I wonder if there is any instance where you *would* advise a man to marry. Isn’t that the one last vestige to save him from the abyss as well?
I wonder if there is any instance where you *would* advise a man to marry. Isn’t that the one last vestige to save him from the abyss as well?
The cure that often kills.
If only Jovan Belcher had come here.
Pope dismissed as a just jealous, bitter, small-dicked, can’t get women, omega old white man keyboard jockey in 3… 2… 1…
Paul VI brought the collapse of civilization into the Catholic Church with his Vatican II and his gutting of the rites, which basically turned it into a larger version of the Church of England. Plus, there was evidence he was gay, at least as strong as for 0bama.
This may be one explanation for his weaksauce beta white-knighting in Humanae Vitae. Even if he was a revolutionary, he had to at least keep up appearances to keep Catholics from getting suspicious.
Paul VI’s legacy is mixed, for sure. Lots of problem with Vatican II. But, I think Paul VI still deserves to be called a great pope because of Humanae Vitae – the most important and greatest encyclical of the 20th century.
At the height of the cultural revolution that was occurring [1969], Paul VI had the courage in Humanae Vitae to say that sexual license is wrong and it has serious consequences.
Many at the time dismissed Paul VI for being out of touch with the times, but what have been the fruits of the sexual revolution forty years after Humanae Vitae?
– increased rates of single motherhood [check]
– increased rates of STDs [check]
– increased numbers of men dropping out of society/economy because of limited access to pussy [check]
– declining fertility rates in the western world, leading to economic collapse because of declining taxbase [check]
– declining rates of female happiness [check]
– rise of no-fault divorce and destruction of families [check]
These are just a few of the bitter fruits of the sexual revolution.
http://cdn.memegenerator.net/instances/400x/31228665.jpg
… weaksauce beta white-knighting …
You’re gonna have to do much better than this. To which part specifically are you referring?
Also, next time you think about spreading rumors of crypto-queenism, consider what it means to call another man’s father a faggot. I realize you have a point to make — unlike the other ad hominem trolls who express their broken-home resentment by pissing on the church — but you are stomping around in territory where you should be treading carefully. The church is my family; if you have criticism, present it with respect.
Matt
Whether Paul VI was gay or not is relatively unimportant. It would be telling, especially given the gay scourge in the seminaries that started during his reign, but it’s not the main point I was trying to make. Humanae Vitae was a stale bone thrown to conservatives. If you and Alexander IX wish to consider Paul VI a “great pope” because of this encyclical, despite his basically destroying all the sacramental rites (except baptism and matrimony, which don’t require priests), and bringing the Protestant Reformation to the hitherto untouched half of Western Christendom, than that’s fine. But I never will. As far as I’m concerned, he’s the worst pope the Church has been afflicted with for centuries, at least… assuming, of course, he was actually a pope and not a heretic, which I am not convinced of.
I reserve respect for real Catholicism. Liberal modernism, on the other hand, deserves only one thing: to get mocked, laughed, and dumped on.
Bet you the masses don’t know the pope have hidden women/children on the side or US presidents are actually married to the first ladies. The sheeple love the FANTASY that the worlds most important figurehead is actually MARRIED to a REGULAR looking woman or even an ugly one, because he like her for what’s on the inside.
And I’m sure you know this because you are the pope’s wife.
His beard.
Curious post. Courtesy, I suppose, of the Catholic inhabitant of the chateau.
I’m in the same boat. Sort of.
I’m taking (and have taken) full advantage of the sexual availability of modern females, but there lingers at the back of my mind an idea that something better once prevailed…
If it is true the West is dying and circumstances haven’t yet progressed to the point where modern White men can finally experience life as it is meant to be experienced, then there are worse places to be than poolside with a cocktail in one hand and a hottie beside you.
@ Kate
Men should marry when they meet an *AWESOME* woman. Obviously.
Too bad that’s easier said than done.
Until then, why not screw a bunch of sluts? It makes the rest of us look even better!
Because sluts are made, not born. Marriage protects women from becoming them and men from making them.
[Heartiste: Well, if the science coming down the pike is correct, it’s more accurate to say sluts are both made and born, (like many human personality traits). Sociosexuality varies by individual and by group, and sluts likely score higher in native levels of this trait. Otoh, culture obviously wields immense power over how much women’s natural inborn sluttiness is expressed. A strongly patriarchal culture with a deep marriage tradition will tamp down on both total number of sluts and the degree of practiced sluttiness. As always, societies have to find that balance between individual freedom and civilizational cohesion.]
It’s why during the Regency period fathers protected daughters from cads turning them into sluts, and parents worked hard to find worthy mates for their daughters as marriage affords respect for women. Woman left to their own devises back then would turn into something like Can Can dancers/courtesans.
In the absence of such societal protections, it’s up to women to protected themselves and their virtue. It’s not easy to keep your legs closed when everyone around you and all your friends are “living it up” as sluts. But it’s the only way if you don’t want to become a toilet seat for men. So yes, marriage is the best solution for women and it’s why women do have such a strong spiritual need to get married.
That Pope was naive about stuff like female hypergamy but how was he supposed to have known better? The crucial Experiment had not been carried out in his time. Indeed, it could not have ever been carried out before the arrival of the 6 horses of the sex-apocalypse..
I think everybody was naive about female hypergamy until it was unleashed. Up until that point men ruled things and for the most part it went well.
The Ancients knew about Hypergamy; that’s how society’s rules came to be established. Unfortunately, this knowledge was lost through the millennia and now must be relearned.
Press on!
Ezekiel 23:19-20 :
“Yet she multiplied her whoredoms, in calling to remembrance the days of her youth, wherein she had played the harlot in the land of Egypt. For she doted upon their paramours, whose flesh is as the flesh of asses, and whose issue is like the issue of horses.”
A modern translation is “There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses”.
@ Tex, right on.
This isn’t just applicable to hypergamy and marriage, by the way. For example, the Kosher laws were health-based, but have been passed down in a cloak of dogma and mysticism because the Jews didn’t have the science theory to explain why things happened–like why you got sick after eating pork that had been rolling around in shit and eating trash before it was butchered. Gay sex was called an abomination no doubt because of all the unfortunate health effects it would have had at that time, not to mention any social repercussions. Unfortunately, many people now dismiss religious teachings as irreconcilable to our current enlightened state without first seeking the deeper purpose and teachings behind them.
Daniel Amneus knew about it………
How long before NiteLily posts the first of several dozen insipid comments? Sigh…there’s always a Neecy, in one incarnation or another.
As thwack so wisely put it, credit where due
:
This is why men need males spaces (places they can keep women out of).
Mens greatest thoughts and ideas are forged in male spaces; even when that space is only the one between his ears.
The way the chateau has been lately, I’m about ready to limit my comments to one-liners, just to hone a nightclub act.
And let’s be fair to Neecy. lllozozozozlllozozozlllllzzzlll
Yes, but nature has a away of writing the wrongs wrought by man. And what’s happening is that fundamentalist women not using the pill are outbreeding ones that do. Those women are from a religion that wishes to have world domination and will soon achieve it, thanks simply to the numbers.
When they asked the native Americans why the new settlers beat them in battle on their own turf, their answer was “They was just more and more of them and we couldn’t win. They just kept coming.” Americans will soon be singing this same song. Might doesn’t make right; numbers do. We gave up the numbers and the might when we made contraception accessible and affordable.
Was it Joseph Stalin who said:
“quantity has a quality all its own”
Marshall Zhukov.
Quoting Uncle Joe…and you black?
Yes Im a black person Darious.
Now, who the hell is that in your picture? Is that you?
Do you have any stats to back this up? I wish it were true, but fertility is cratering in places you wouldn’t expect at all. In Saudi Arabia, e.g. it has gone from 6.3 to 2.26 in the last 12 years! In Mexico it has gone from 2.67 to 2.27 in the last 12 years. In Iran it has dipped under 2 in the last few years. In Pakistan, a former heavy hitter it has gone from 4.56 to 3.07 in the last 12 years.
I’ve found stats for US religions from 2003, but the rapid plunge probably makes those numbers obsolete.
In any case – Iran? Saudi? Pakistan? The most fundie Muslim places are cratering. How does that fit in with the 6 sirens theory?
There’s something more at work here – I suspect that better wealth and health has a major impact on fertility globally.
Indeed, the Israelis and Kurds have fertility rates beating the average in the middle-east by a large margin. “Spengler” regularly addresses this stuff over at Asia Times. (he also writes a lot of drivel) — at any rate, “the future belongs to those who show up.”
I have to conclude that, given the likelyhood of a continued global fertility implosion, the future belongs to robots. This is looking more and more like The Singularity Is Near, but mass unemployment won’t be a problem because of lower population. You’re going to have automation serving the graying population, which will push mean longevity into the triple digits.
Assuming that said oldsters are able to continually work exercise into their life. But it’s a reasonable supposition, I agree.
Yes – and we can’t forget that medical science is not standing still. We still haven’t picked all the fruit from the human genome project. At some point you’re going to have human beings with tailor-made health programs from birth.
At which point we will gradually become another species. I’m okay with that.
I also have to conclude that 21st century will be relative more peaceful on the whole. Populations with smaller families have more to lose, and are unlikely to be as belicose as in the past.
Female hypergamy was kept in check, as stories like this were all too real:
The wake of the alpha, pre-sirens; when god was unforgiving:
[Fantine is left alone, unemployed and destitute]
[FANTINE]
There was a time when men were kind
When their voices were soft
And their words inviting
There was a time when love was blind
And the world was a song
And the song was exciting
There was a time
Then it all went wrong
I dreamed a dream in time gone by
When hope was high
And life worth living
I dreamed that love would never die
I dreamed that God would be forgiving
Then I was young and unafraid
And dreams were made and used and wasted
There was no ransom to be paid
No song unsung, no wine untasted
But the tigers come at night
With their voices soft as thunder
As they tear your hope apart
As they turn your dream to shame
He slept a summer by my side
He filled my days with endless wonder
He took my childhood in his stride
But he was gone when autumn came
And still I dream he’ll come to me
That we will live the years together
But there are dreams that cannot be
And there are storms we cannot weather
I had a dream my life would be
So different from this hell I’m living
So different now from what it seemed
Now life has killed the dream I dreamed.
yes indeed, this is why I keep talkin bout trees
Is this the song that fat broad sang?
I think everybody was naive about female hypergamy until it was unleashed.
I recently had some drinks with a few friends, including a 70-something father of one of my friends. Discussions veered socio-political. He (the older man) is an old-school deeply religious Catholic and a consevative. However, he doesn’t get it on hypergamy because it wasn’t part if his reality growing up. It was an interesting conversation. He really thought that women were noble angels, and his other son’s continued singleness despite his being a nice guy with a job didn’t help him connect two and two.
My parents will be seventy soon and I see the disconnect you do. In fact, anyone who is “off the market” has little appreciation for the challenges single people face these days. I had a debate with my mother over Thanksgiving as she tried to explain to me why the 50s weren’t so great. You couldn’t even buy a house on your own, she exclaimed! To which I replied: why would you want to buy a house on your own? I have my own house. Big frickin’ deal. I live in it ALONE. (Actually I’m very grateful for my house, but you get my drift. I’d rather have a fuller family in it.)
There has been a power shift and both men and women know it. Whereas before women kept their bodies locked up and might tease men with a hint of cleavage, men keep their providership locked up and taunt women with the knowledge that they could take care of them, if they wanted to, but they don’t.
When there wasn’t the pill, or the morning after pill, or easy abortions, everyone had to think about the condsequences of their actions. Now its assumed that there aren’t consequences when there actually are; instead of being physical, they’re psychological.
My biology still tells me to act in certain ways no matter what my head says. There is no known cure for the mental upheaval of pms that I know of. And there is no check to a man’s impulse to withdraw after intimacy even if there isn’t a biological advantage. Modern men and women both have been able to get what they *thought* they wanted, yet no one seems very happy.
Good post Kate.
Thank you.
Look poolside;sipping the mai-tai,so insouciantly….He’s happy.
I realize men and women have different ideas of happiness, but, in theory, can true happiness be achieved at the cost of others’?
Happiness is overrated.
F “happiness.” The term has morphed into the idea of supersaturated selfishness, which is why spoiled princesses in the west, whose lives are better in every measurable and non-measurable way than 99% of all people who ever lived, still manage to convince themselves, “I’m just not haaapppyyyy.”
Happily, our language affords connotational nuance. I prefer the Christian idea of “joy,” which is a part of human worth, but not the central focus, as it is in the childish complaint-think of the modern woman.
“Always be prepared to make a defense to any one who calls you to account for the hope that is in you.” — 1 Paul 3:15
Matt
Re: Older guys – My dad’s kind of an odd duck, talking to him about women, relationships, dating, sex, or anything even remotely connected to the subject is like talking to an Eskimo about a jungle on an alien planet. My uncle views women as odd, irrational, silly children who must be protected, primarily from themselves. They are in their 80′s and experienced the last gasp of an age that probably started after the Napoleonic wars and started to die in the aftermath of WW II. The age in which women were seen as noble, innocent li’l angels, nurturing, good, virtuous and caring.
When I tell them that shaved-headed, goateed, tattooed jail bird drug dealers get all the girls, while the clean-cut Nice Guys(TM) with decent jobs and good character can (quite literally) go fuck themselves, they draw a complete blank or just think I’m having them on.
…My uncle views women as odd, irrational, silly children who must be protected, primarily from themselves.
I am 53 years old and I agree with your uncle, most women are like that , not all but most.
How i despise brainless dumb fuck whimpering beta cocksuckers and white knights who will blabber on about their “respect” for women and their opposition to “sexism” ad nauseaum…
and whom would that be?
Not you, dude.
LOL! Do your father and uncle wonder why you don’t settle down?
Before anyone slams too hard on Pope Pius VI, remember the era he lived in, how old he was when he made these statements which seemed more anti-male and less anti-female, and that he was born raised and lived most of his life in a more traditional Western culture, namely 20th century Italy, than we do now. Italy wasn’t that different from the USA in the late 1980s and I’m sure it is less different now. Most of the 20th century, Italy was more traditionally Western and less modernly Western than the USA. Women’s hypergamy was more restrained in the USA in the 1960s than now when he uttered these statements and Italian women’s hypergamy was even more restrained than American women’s hypergamy in the 1960s. Now both Italian and American women socially are less restrained in their hypergamy, although it seems Italian marriage and divorce laws are more equitable between men and women than American marriage and divorce laws that favor women over men which explains why Italy has a 11% divorce rate and the USA has a 50% divorce rate. I was born in 1968, and I like almost all American men my age believed much as Pope Pius VI did when were eighteen years of age in 1986. We were taught and brainwashed to believe in the pretty lies and were eating the “BLUE PILL”.. By 1990, when I was 22 I accepted the harsh truths about women’s nature and had swallowed the “RED PILL”. When I had first come to this site and others like it 3 years ago, most of what I read here and other sites, I already knew from harsh experience. I did learn many things here though, and for that I am grateful. I try to tell these things to other men and show them these sites. Still even with more innformation out there because of women’s less restrained hypergamy and the internet providing more information about the truth, most men prefer the pretty lies to the harsh truth. How could Pius VI know more than what he did? He couldn’t. He knew more than almost everyone when he was alive though. I wonder if Heartiste was raised Catholicas I was or had a Catholic parent(s) like I did even if he wasn’t raised Catholic? Sometimes it reads like it.
True, I also have a feeling CH used to have some connection with the church. You can smell it every so often in his posts. Now,he is a backslider, haha!
The truth is always universal, aka catholic. Sometimes it takes an alpha hedonist to remind us of it.
I always thought Heartiste, Ferdinand Bardamu, and Vox Day were crypto-Catholics. No pun intended.
Whether you like or dislike the Church, one of Catholicism’s virtues is that it works to reconcile intellectual progress with spiritual truths within a logically consistent framework.
Older conservatives like Larry Auster also have a blind spot on hypergamy. While Auster spares women no quarter, he can’t bring himself to examine principles of Game as a logical and effective response to female hypergamy. When first introduced to this subject several years ago, he freaked out and called Chateau founders awful names like “whoremonger.”
“Whoremonger” is an awful name; “payah” is a far more dignified way to describe guys like me
Off-topic, but I thought this was funny- left-leaning British newspaper the Guardian has been doing a lot of articles on internet dating recently. One in particular was a conversational back-n-forth style piece featuring Jill Filopovic, some sort of relatively prominent voice of the femosphere.
In particular, she says this:
“And there’s that complaint from men – she shows up and she’s completely different from what they expected from her photos, and they act as if they have been radically deceived”
(suggesting men are bad or shallow for feeling “radically deceived” when a woman puts up a misleading profile pic). Is it any wonder her dates feel deceived?? – Look at here here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/30/online-dating-ups-downs-conversation
And compare to the more flattering photo she uses on her articles:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/jill-filipovic
Barely looks like the same person!
Wow – it looks like Jill gained 15 kilos during the time between the pics!
“She holds a JD and BA from New York University” – that’s a warning sign to not stay for the night.
I have met at least two dozen different women trough dating sites and women looking different from their profile photos is the most common problem.
they usually look older, fatter and definitely not as good.
and yes they ALL are offended that we are not interested once we see that the 8 we saw on one photo is in reality a 5.5.
they played a trick on us, they deceived us yet they are the ones who act all offended as if we the men had done anything wrong
they are guilty of false advertising yet they are angry at us…
the very few women who looked better than their photo I ended up dating , like the one I am dating now, she was ok on her photos but turned to be a little hottie ( for a woman her age ) .
Be gentle with the old girl…
Deception is what women do naturally. They wear makeup to disguise their imperfections on a daily basis. They used to wear “falsies” to improve their bosoms, but obviously in today’s climate that would be joke. Imagine criticizing a woman for wearing makeup. She would think you were a misogynist. I suspect they think touching up their photos is in anyway different from their other daily, trivial deceptions.
“Pope Paul VI, apparently, was as far-seeing as I. Yet his vision of the good world, the civilized world — a vision with which I find no quarrel — would, if it were fully realized, necessarily mean a lot less fun for me.”
so you’re having a lot of fun when you have sex with several different girls … but don’t you feel bad when you have to dump them? For me, having to hurt someone would destroy all the fun. Do you never feel any guilt??
And why do you always have relationships/sex with “easy” girls, wouldn’t it feel better to find a perfect woman and marry her? I think you once said that it’s better to have sex with one 10 than with ten 8s … or something like that.
I know a solution for you … you should find a really pretty young girl who’s also smart and feminine and empathetic with your paranoid blog and then you two would fall in love with each other and have babies together! That’s a much better idea than sleeping with different girls and having to hurt them every time when you get bored with them … SO just find someone who is so perfectly beautiful that you will never get bored with her and then fall in love with her <3
Don’t worry, sweetums. Your crush has no true grasp on what that “vision … fully realized” would be.
Men in their forties who are still talking about “fun” have missed an entire dimension of manhood.
There is one way by which you can reconcile evidence of female hyprgamy with a traditional attitude of “bad, bad men were doing to those poor innocent wimmins” — you can do so when you assume no female agency — that women really are passive objects of male agency, and today’s liberalized female is merely doing what (male-created) culture incentivises them to do. In this worldview, the same women would really be innocent angels given a Kinder, Kirche, Kuche social context.
However, this “bad, bad men were doing to those poor innocent wimmins” worldview is incompatible wiht any significant female participation in public life.
A corollary of sorts: a woman is helpless (and therefore hypergamous) around an alpha just like a man would be around a willing 10. Some might remember a 1980s scandal involving US Marines guarding the US Embassy in communist Moscow falling for beautiful Russian female agents who seduced them to obtain sensitive information. It’s just that the reality of most men is such that willing 10s are extremely rare.
Yes, if you have strong external controls plus the threat of pregnancy to keep women in line, you don’t really need to know much about their real nature.
I think feminism got us to intentionally disregard a lot of what used to be commom sense.
We’ve known about hypergamy and female sexuality for a long time. ‘The Taming of the Shrew”, a great vignette about a dude & his fiancee in Don Quixote, Wuthering Heights (Heathcliffe IS the dark triad), Madame Bovary, Anna Karenina, Vantity Fair, etc. The list goes on for ever.
Knowing truth served us so well that we disassociated Truth from its benefits. Pretty Lies are nice, but the Gods of the Copybook Headings don’t give a shit how Pretty the Lies are. They’re lies and they will kill.
Ugly Truths may smell bad, but they serve you well.
…I think feminism got us to intentionally disregard a lot of what used to be commom sense.
so true
it is as if feminists had never heard of history
That’s because they think it’s just his story.
We belong to the generation that has been given a harsh wake up call as to the true nature of women.
another of my comment has vanished in the haze???
in short,
feminism has shown us that we men were right; women need to be guided and protected from their true nature, as their true nature makes them irresponsible whores
it is kind of like why we have speed limits on highways or why we have drinking age limits, being guided and protected from ourselves can be good, we are not talking dictatorship or tyranny here
@PA
“liberalized female is merely doing what (male-created) culture incentivises them to do.”
Except that the “maie-created” no longer applies, I agree.
However the revised line
“people are merely doing what culture incentivises them to do.”
is generally true, for men and women. Among those who go against this rule, you will find the innovators – and the destroyers.
Thor
Silent war Genocide. Hitler’s slogan Arbeit macht frei – WORK BRINGS FREEDOM. Anyone who refuses to feed themselves must either die or become enslaved. Today warfare, cotton-pickin, and gas chambers have been replaced with the CUBICLE, food,chem trails, birth control, education . The conclusion remains the same. No life. No freedom.
23 comments and we already have the first hitler citation
And whiskey still hasn’t appeared
I don’t think it was Hitler who coined that phrase, and a more apt translation would be “labor will set you free”. Other than that, the crazy is strong in this one. I’d rather sit in a cubicle than be worked to death in a concentration camp.
Chem trails. Riiight.
So we don’t have to pretend that we’re all busy banging 9s and 10s during the week-end anymore?
Who said anything about 9′s?
Touche’
The Greeks had a nightclub act about women. Listen in.
SOCRATES
As to a marriage or celibacy, let a man take which he will, for he is sure to repent.
My advice to you is get married: if you find a good wife, you’ll be happy; if not, you’ll become a philosopher.
EURIPIDES
Man’s best possession is a sympathetic wife.
ARISTOTLE
This is the reason mothers are more dedicated to children than fathers: it is that they suffer more in giving them birth and are more certain that they are their own.
AESCHYLUS
Wiles and deceits are female qualities.
AESCHYLUS
Unions in wedlock are perverted by the victory of shameless passion that masters the female among men and beasts. Woman is the salvation or destruction of the family. She carries its destiny in the folds of her mantle.
EURIPIDES
Neither earth nor ocean produce a creature as savage and monstrous as woman.
SOCRATES
Once made equal to man, woman becomes his superior.
SOPHOCLES in his old age
Most gladly have I escaped from a mad and furious master.
Artur Schopenhauer :
“For the innate rule that governs women’s conduct, though it is secret and unformulated, nay, unconscious in its working, is this: We are justified in deceiving those who think they have acquired rights over the species by paying little attention to the individual, that is, to us.
The constitution and, therefore, the welfare of the species have been placed in our hands and committed to our care, through the control we obtain over the next generation, which proceeds from us; let us discharge our duties conscientiously. But women have no abstract knowledge of this leading principle; they are conscious of it only as a concrete fact; and they have no other method of giving expression to it than the way in which they act when the opportunity arrives.
And then their conscience does not trouble them so much as we fancy; for in the darkest recesses of their heart, they are aware that in committing a breach of their duty towards the individual, they have all the better fulfilled their duty towards the species, which is infinitely greater”
Kipling’s poem “The Female of the Species” is more modern, but also sums it up.
I always liked Gunga Din.
lzozozlzoz arthur shcopenhauer schopenhauer exalts the species and collective over the indivdiual
Homer, Moses, Mises, Socrates nd Jesusu exalt the indidviaual over the colelctievez zlzlzozlzolzoz
dids is why we will read Homer Moses Mises Scorates and Jesus lzozlzzo thousandz of years from now, while tucker max the buttcocker who rhyemes iwth golamn sax da dsecteiev taper of buttcockeringz whoe serves ada womenez butt titngelsz will be forgeoeetenznz zlzlzlzzozl
word
Sounds tragic.
Where’s Bernanke in all this?
He’s out secretly taping butthexings with Goldman Sachs.
General rule: Never underestimate the ability for encyclicals to contain meanings.
With regard to the beta angle, it reminds me of the passage in the bible about parents not nagging lest their children lose heart. I submit that the missing aspect identified by CH is only missing on the surface, but that the passage can be read to contain the beta bitterness angle. Have not beta’s lost respect for women? Have they not been taking the red pill –maybe not in droves, but maybe these things go parabolic? Note the passage doesn’t restrict itself to beta’s using contraception with women, but contraceptive use as a whole. Women don’t get knocked up by their alpha cock carousel. So they stay on it longer, with different effects….
Your hamster is calling you.
Never underestimate the ability for encyclicals to contain meanings.
Or for people to read into them what they want to.
He (the Pope) was right but for the wrong reasons. The consequential arguments against contraception were pretty poor. It was a pretty bad document.
“Everything he predicted has been proven true, so naturally, his argument must be poor…”
The Christian religion, and the Catholic Church especially, deals mostly with the higher aspirations and motivations of mankind. However, this doesn’t leave much room for accounting for the everyday, base, animal nature of humanity. The arguments against contraception are an appeal to the higher nature. Lower nature (in this case, hypergamy in women and the need for sexual variety in men) aren’t accounted for much by Christianity. When that sense of a higher nature, man’s connection to a sense of holiness in life, is lost by the larger culture (which is what seventy years of nihilism, feminism, atheism and deconstructivism has done to us) no appeal to it is going to sound logical. Which is a shame, but hardly means the Pope is wrong. He was addressing the problem from a different position, albeit one that might not be particular valid for most people these days.
Thought is good but action is better, and that’s something I learnt from Mencius Moldbug. So what would the Chateau recommendations for action on this issue be? Electoral attempts to restrict contraception are bound to fail, and will boomerang on any conservative stupid enough to use them. War on Women War on Women War on women. So there must be a better, slyer way of getting things done to avoid the apocalypse. Assuming, of course, that you are interested in preventing the apocalypse.
Throughout history, change has only occurred because great men stood up against all odds and fought for what they valued. Spain would be muslamic central today had it not been for the Reconquista- those guys could have pointed and laughed like a jester as well, but they decided they had to do something about it.
You cannot flow against the tide of history. There is, in fact, very little that _can_ be done at this point. If our current social arrangements really are unsustainable, then they will not last. But our individual actions are unlikely to turn the tide. All that can be done at this point is to watch Rome crumble and set up small scale communities that resist dominant trends.
I have said this before. There are only two decent options for any self respecting man in our current society:
1. The Heartiste option. Make hay while the sun shines. Hang out poolside and bang as many bitches as you can.
2. The Benedict option. Marry a virgin and wall yourself off as much as possible with your wife and kids in a small religious community.
Throughout history, change has only occurred because great men stood up against all odds and fought for what they valued. Spain would be muslamic central today had it not been for the Reconquista- those guys could have pointed and laughed like a jester as well, but they decided they had to do something about it.
I like the cut of your jib, bro. When the fray comes, I got your back.
in the meantime, work on your song and dance man act:
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zpNIomYAkE&w=420&h=315%5D
Hey, man… do I come down to McDonalds and heckle YOU at your job?
hey pal..hey pal..can u tone it down a bit pal..jees..i dont know where these bloggers from..
Let me just add here that I think Heartiste is already doing a great job, if the 21st century Reconquista ever does happen, he will be remembered as one of the sparks that lit the fire. I’m just wondering how to convert all this wisdom into practical technology that serves purposes other than profiting from the collapse of civilization.
You ever known an American to accept half measures on anything? The only way to correct the problem is to reverse it; ban birth control in all its forms. Short of that, you’re never putting women back in what most of my generation would term “the patriarchy’s cage”
A word from the Pope on a Sunday. How religious of you.
And remember when the Catholic Church told the truth about women? And celebrated masculinity?
Yeah, me neither. ‘Cause those days have been dead before our births.
Those days were dead from the beginning. The Catholic church never liked men thinking, and it is the second to last just above crazy cultists one should probably point to as a source of truth.
In this case, it’s just the lucky monkey.
The Catholic church never liked men thinking
—Yawn. Me thinks the bitch knows no history.
and it is the second to last just above crazy cultists one should probably point to as a source of truth.
—2000 years of philosophy and science, but it was one step above “crazy cultists” to this ignorant black bitch.
Go play with your voodoo dolls, little piggy.
Whorefinder, thank you. I couldn’t have said it any better. Dispelling ignorance can amusing.
Seconded.
There’s just one problem. None of you arguing with me knows the roots of your own faith, much less anything about African belief systems.
The ones who do know are not arguing with me about it.
Celibacy is not pro masculinity guys.
Your original comments don’t merit argument, nor extended replies… which is why people are not arguing.
But if it makes you feel better to think of silence as consent, keep you warm.
Ah, so rather than admit your jumping the gun in your overexcitement at the claim of my ignorance, you feign indifference after the fact.
You are beginning to seem very much like a puppet who jumps on every “let’s hate on Nicole” bandwagon, without actually considering the validity or historical truth of the content of my posts.
Dare I say that this is typical of brainwashed cultists who, upon hearing any criticism of their faith, clap their hands over their ears and begin chanting rather than analyzing the argument and replying in a rational manner?
Celibacy is not pro masculinity guys.
It may not be pro-sexuality, but for an order of men who are supposed to be devoted to God and the preaching of His Word, often itinerantly, well…
The Bible makes several points about the distractions that women cause, up to and including turning men to false gods… a heinous distraction, indeed.
The only point being, however, is the celibacy is for the priesthood, not every man.
Also note that one of the initial changes when Protestantism came along, and a less-itinerant mode of Christian preaching came to be the norm, pastors now took wives and become more like the flocks they shepherded.
I’ll let wiser heads than mine debate the merits thereof… and dumber heads rail against the easy targets of obvious indiscretions and outright perversions of some members of the priesthood who were more men of whole cloth rather than proper candidates for priesthood.
You are beginning to seem very much like a puppet who jumps on every “let’s hate on Nicole” bandwagon, without actually considering the validity or historical truth of the content of my posts.
Don’t make yourself even bigger than you already are… when you spew your bullshit and get called on it (to wit: dismissing the 2000 year history of the Catholic Church as “one step above crazy cultists”), then yes, I will second that.
And when you go into the usual Nicole-babble mode of oddities, like trying to make it that voodoo dolls, as people know them today, are actually European instead of African, well… that’s a weirdness that begs mockery.
Why the hell do you think they’re called “voodoo” dolls… even if there’s a technicality somewhere that you can attempt your Afrocentrist distraction or obfuscation over?
Your continued folderol is the prime example of swallowing camels and choking on gnats.
So, Greg, a religion being (more or less) 2000 years old and having many followers is what makes it above reproach?
That many people believe something, and have believed it for a long time is what makes it truth?
Is this a masculine way of determining truth or validity or a feminine way of determining truth or validity?
I’ll leave the further stalwart defense of the Catholic Church, or apologetics in re its historical warps and woofs, to wiser heads than mine who are Catholic themselves… of which King A seems a worthy champion.
I myself am simply Christian… with a Protestant upbringing.
Is this a masculine way of determining truth or validity or a feminine way of determining truth or validity?
There’s Truth and then there’s relativism (usually of the moral variety) and attempting to make all things cause of debate and doubt, in the disingenuous name of intellectuality.
Pilate, he of the conveniently clean hands, once said “What is Truth?” Much to Satan’s delight.
Whorefinder Vs Warpig is why I come here.
Whorefinder VS Warpig would be a catchy name for a video game
I thought I saw a commercial for a movie-of-the-week by that title featured on SYFY network.
Or maybe it was Warpig versus Sharktopus… or Whorefinder versus Licktalottapus.
Sharktopus ?Licktalottapus?
I had to google those
it is a lot of work trying to understand your comments, but it is educational.
I am not complaining
The SYFY channel specializes in weird B-movie genetic monsters… I know they recently advertised a movie with a Sharktopus in the title, and the Licktalottapus is from a joke about lesbian dinosaurs that went extinct.
“Voodoo” dolls are what people who don’t know history call poppets, the use of which in sympathetic magic originated in Canaan and was popularized in Europe, not Africa.
This little piggy, by the way, is old enough to be your mama, but were you my son, you’d have a better attitude towards women because I’ve never been a whore.
When you fire a shot, you give your position. I’m very firmly cool with my place, so I respect men who behave like men. I have no respect for pissants who brag about beating up people who they know are weaker than themselves and can’t do them any real physical harm. Those kinds of vermin, I don’t believe deserve any mercy or respect.
So keep the ignorant attempts at insults flying. It only proves what a pathetic imbecile you are.
“Voodoo” dolls are what people who don’t know history call poppets, the use of which in sympathetic magic originated in Canaan and was popularized in Europe, not Africa.
All of your babble doesn’t alter the fact that the both denotation and connotation of voodoo is firmly ensconced amongst negroes… in the Caribbean, circa Africa.
1. A religion practiced chiefly in Caribbean countries, especially Haiti, syncretized from Roman Catholic ritual elements and the animism and magic of slaves from West Africa, in which a supreme God rules a large pantheon of local and tutelary deities, deified ancestors, and saints, who communicate with believers in dreams, trances, and ritual possessions. Also called vodoun.
[from Louisiana French voudou, ultimately of West African origin; compare Ewe vodu guardian spirit]
Stop tripping over your own tongue and calling it victory.
What you posted, Mr. Clap-n-chant, does not say that “voodoo dolls” originated in Vodun.
Everyone knew what his original reference to voodoo dolls meant… your snark about Christianity and your semantic hair-splitting mean nothing.
Okay, Greg, you’ll have to explain this to me. What did his reference to “voodoo dolls” mean that was not an ignorant implication that science and philosophy are only 2000 years old?
And what of the science and philosophy that was suppressed by the church for the better part of that? Was it a “shit test” to see who would insist that the Earth was round and rotated around the Sun despite the death and/or torture penalty for heresy?
We’re all supposed to forget now, the people the church had executed for adhering to different philosophies, and for practicing science and medicine without their endorsement?
Forget the priests thing which may or may not be anti male hype. We’re supposed to be cool with the known, real, and well witnessed cases of nuns bruising little boys’ hands for minor misbehavior?
Sorry, but this church does not seem pro male to me. It seems to me that in this church, men are but tools and useful idiots. You’re the enforcement arm and ATMs on incubators of a massive herd.
You should consider, at the very least, being less attached to it as a mental teat rather than a convenient community, or joining a church that is actually more pro masculinity.
Let me guess… you were reading the Da Vince Code again, in all of its goddess-worshipping idiocy?
Funny you should mention that… awhile back, a friends wife started in with me about the Bible and the supposed contents therein, to my utter amazement, since I had been a long-time student of Scripture and couldn’t recall any of what she claimed.
Turns out, she was talking about what she read from the Da Vinci Code, and quoting that tripe as if it were historical fact, if not outright gospel.
At the time, I hadn’t heard of the Da Vinci Code, so when I did my research and found it was, in fact, a novel, I damn near split a gut laughing.
Greg,
it is astounding how many people know what they know ( which means they know almost nothing ) because they have seen it in a Hollywood movie ( or read it in a novel)
I can not tell you how many times I have had debates with people who were talking about things that are not so, are not true, are not facts, and they would eventually tell me in a condescending tone ” Haven’t you seen the movie???”
the damage Hollywood has done is immense , it is as bad or worse than medieval superstitions.
True for the most part… a constant source of amusement, though, is a friend’s brother, who is probably one of the least-educated men I have ever know, yet never fails to amaze with pulling some arcane reference or cerebral quote from literature or history out of thin air.
I’d ask, near incredulously: “How did you know about that?”
Invariably, he mention an episode of The Simpsons or Family Guy… or the occasional movie.
Nope, just looking at the facts. Religions with a history of thought policing at the end of a sword don’t seem all that pro masculinity to me, unless by masculinity you mean being able to smile while you give your hard earned or won gold to the Pope. I suppose that would take a good deal of strength.
Where you and other feminist programmed people see patriarchy and glory or whatever, I see smug, upper class ladies hitting knaves on the side, and fields of dead men who thought they were serving a higher purpose.
M…i…c…r…o…w…a…v…e…d…
M…a…r…x…i…s…m…
Zzzzz.
I appreciate you doing all the work of exposing yourself. What’s more, your rendition of ecclesiastical history in crayon only highlights the jejune quality of your comprehensive unthought.
And here I was about ready to respect your utterances. Maybe I’m mixing you up with cynthia? I can’t keep you broads straight. You’re the black one, right?
Matt
Women who do not worship a goddess are more likely to devalue their femininity and create social movements to force sameness with men.
Nicole
“The Catholic church never liked men thinking, and it is the second to last just above crazy cultists”
Didn’t Sampson use your jawbone to slay a thousand Philistines? (Fred Sandford FTW)
Heh, heh… I’ve often used that one on forums, along the lines of “Never since the days of Samson has the jawbone of an ass done such damage.”
I think I stole it from some TV evangelist… the one with the fat face that everybody used to love to hate.
In these conversations, I come to understand the moral of a story about another biblical ass.
Did you know the whole idea of a guilty man being allowed to appeal his verdict to a higher court came from the Church? I think we take for granted what the Church gave us. Not that I am a gbig fan of my faith,as they seem these days to be four-square pro Amensty. Sick!!
That idea came from there being a higher court to appeal to. The Sumerians had appeals long before Jesus was a twinkle in a social engineer’s imagination.
The original appeal:
Genesis 18:23-33
So you believe the Earth is only 6000 years old?
Dude, not even naked dudes with spears in the jungle believe that.
Where did you get that I believe that from? If some fundamentalist Christians want to make that statement, that’s their business. Try not to put their words into my mouth. I’ve stated before that I believe evolution shows a remarkable aspect of God’s unique genius.
The Bible itself speaks of 6 days of Creation, but the actual time is symbolic. There are other verses that say a day unto God is as 1000 years to Man, but even that can be taken symbolically.
Man himself uses the numeral 1000 to speak metaphorically, e.g., tusen takk from the Norwegians, or “1000 pardons” by the Arabs… indeed, 1001 is not unlike us saying “forever and a day”.
And, of course, there’s the thousand year Judgment Day in which Christ and the elect will bring mankind back to Adamic perfection, the Devil being bound, but let loose one last time to cull what he can from humankind one last time before he is destroyed, and with him Death, forever.
I’ve explained this before, to both believers and the snark of unbelievers… I won’t do it for you again months from now on yet another thread where the same ol’ same bushwa keeps arising.
Who said anything about celibacy?
Most of the popes, cardinals, bishops, etc. had about as many hookers come over as any noble/rich guy, and monasteries were places to keep all the gay guys together and conveniently out of everybody else’s way.
Bitches for me and none for you, and even your wife shouldn’t give you any except for purposes of reproduction? Still not seeing the pro masculinity in that.
Another factor is the feminist-driven imperative for women to have orgasms. These are *far more likely* to arise during sex with an alpha or caddish male who doesn’t give a shit, than with a caring beta male, fresh from studying The Joy of Sex.
The history of the techno-ideology around female orgasms needs to be studied. Was it Lawrence or Hemingway that first introduced them to popular literature in English?
In France les freres Goncourt were more on the mark, writing about how they hated it when the whores they were banging came, since it made them look momentarily sublime.
I have to blame the Christian churches for encouraging orgasms of both men and women… indeed, every holiday season we are exhorted in no uncertain terms to sing shamelessly aloud in our churches
Oh Come All, Ye Faithful
OT…another study proving CH maxims correct:
http://main.aol.com/2012/11/30/psychopaths-dark-personality-hot-more-attractive-study_n_2218568.html
Paul told women to cover their heads, sit down and shut up in church and obey their husbands. Later on the church started worshiping Mary instead of Jesus. That’s when the Catholic distorted view of women developed.
“Later on the church started worshiping Mary instead of Jesus”. –
Wrong. The Catholic Church doesn’t worship her. That would be heresy to Catholics. They venerate her. There is a difference, ignoramus.
..and guess what. This veneration of Mary (never above the veneration of Christ) was practiced centuries before Paul VI. Yeah, those guys with swords and stuff who kicked Muslim ass during the Crusades venerated Mary and, uh, they weren’t exactly beta.
Dan, I would even go as far as saying that those dudes with swords are setting up a female role model as to why they venerated her.
” Later on the church started worshiping Mary instead of Jesus.”
Obviously not a Catholic.
The church recognizes the importance of Mary. The one woman who did the will of God over her own.
It’s sad that the Protestant downgrades her importance…it’s very devil-like of them.
Aw, man… what can I say?
To us, it got a little too close to idolatry.
The Bible says to pray to Jesus, the Mediator between God and Man.
I like Mary better when think of her as a regular woman. One of my favorite Christmas cards was of a very pregnant Mary, sitting on a camel outside the inn, saying to Joseph, “I’m not hysterical, I just want to know what he means by no more vacancies.”
Our tainted nature’s solitary boast.
I think you might be thinking about the whole goddess worship thing that got started up by the feminists with The Chalice and the Blade.
The only people who worship Mary are some indigenous groups in places like Central and South America, or in Caribbean voodoo practices. It tends to be a blending, though, of older native Indian and/or African religions. Not pure Christianity. Roman Catholicism doesn’t engage in anything like this.
No, the whole “goddess worship thing” started when man first began speculating on where it all came from. Your Ancestors worshiped at least a few goddesses before they got either fooled or forcibly converted into Christianity. For Hindus and many Africans, it never ceased. Europeans began reclaiming it in significant numbers in modern times. One of its most influential proponents, Aleister Crowley, was no feminist and was very pro masculinity. He was called a sexist on many occasions, and fluffy new agers despise him to this day.
There is Paganism aside of college age experimental Lesbians playing at Dianan Wicca.
It doesn’t surprise me that you would invoke do-what-thou-wilt-shall-be-the-whole-of-the-law Aleister Crowley. Who’s next, Old Scratch?
[…] Courtesy of commenter “max from australia”, a juicy quote from a former Pope which accords with Chateau Heartiste analysis of the deleterious blowback from the availability of widespread, cheap contraceptives (of the sort never before experienced by humanity until relatively recently): Predictions from a wise Celibate bloke in a dress, Pope Paul VI, 1968 Humanae Vitae (Latin, “Human Life”) “Not much experience is needed in order to know human weakness, and to understand that men—especially the young, ….. growing used to the employment of anti-conceptive practices, may finally lose respect for the woman and, no longer caring for her physical and psychological equilibrium, may come to the point of considering her as a mere instrument of selfish enjoyment, and no longer as his respected and beloved companion” (HV 17). Pope Paul VI was close to the mark, but he forgot to mention the distaff side the equation; specifically, that as cheap contraceptives silently and subtly move men toward devaluing women, so too does the technology move women toward devaluing beta males, those bitter losers in the sexual market (note: I did not say marriage market or child market) for whom contraceptives, coupled with female economic self-sufficiency, have rendered them practically superfluous as primetime Source: Chateau Heartiste […]
About damn time you quoted Humanae Vitae… I’m sure that this post is not the first time you read it. Your whole blog has long been a synopsis of many of its points. For better or worse. I find myself staring into that same abyss from time to time. I find myself equally torn… I know it’s bad for me yet I do it anyway… why do I do the things I don’t want to do?
HV long ago prophesied the crushing blow to civilization as you have due to contraception. Yet… we barrel toward it like lemmings to the cliff.
I hope the fall is at least a fun one…
Speaking of ugly truths:
Psychopaths, ‘Dark’ Personalities Better At Making Themselves Look Attractive, Study Suggests
http://main.aol.com/2012/11/30/psychopaths-dark-personality-hot-more-attractive-study_n_2218568.html
Great stimulating and unique ideas and interconnections about the SMP, I now only fear a return to the early-junior-high ideas-I-got-from-my-redneck-dad level political “discussion”, with its wincingly moronic breakdown of culture into two–count ‘em, two– variables.
This place really has something of the idiot-savante flavor, like Neil Young having one of the most sustained songwriting careers, but embarrassingly babbling on and on on Charlie Rose about a car that will never have to be refueled.Something he is fascinated with, but is simply beond his knowledge and expertise.
CH instigates it, but the hangers-on are ruthlessly stupid and vicious well past the point of tolerability.
Everybody ready for those special, blinding insights? All together now? “Leftie – kill, libtard-kill, ….”
Funny how it’s more than a given cliche, a universal truism, that kids rebel against their parents and pretty much don’t listen to them at all in matters cultural and political.
Yet when it comes to those who haven’t swallowed the PC bait… hook, line, and sinker… those ‘redneck’ and ‘fascist’ views were somehow “learned at home”, according to our wise liberal friends.
Everybody ready for those special, blinding insights? All together now: “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!”
“Everybody ready for those special, blinding insights? All together now: “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!”
What can I say, if the shoe fits wear it, ya fucking Nazi.
And constantly complaining about “insipid” comments or getting upset when you can’t refute FACTS, makes you as beta as they come. Strong men don’t complain about problems, they work around them, or they shut the fuck up. Therefore, you and your racist helpers complaining all the time, come across as castrated little eunuch.
I was reading a few older threads recently and all I know is that before you showed up, the racist and bigoted comments weren’t the norm here. Yes, there was the occasional fly-away racist or anti-Semitic comment, but it wasn’t so prevalent like after you showed up. All of a sudden the threads got laden with niger, niga, monkey, yiddler, schlomo, Shabbos- goy bullshit, not to mention your constant fights and nasty one-liner comments that don’t have anything substantial to add to the conversation. Talk about insipid. Projecting much?
Bottom line, you’re nothing but a fucking racist neo-Nazi evil man using the Chateau to spread your racist hateful cheer around. Then anyone who disagrees with your hate or your brand of “Biblical interpretation,” you complain about like the little useless delusional Jealous Nazi you are, waiting for the GREAT “fray.” Guess what? The first person to go in your famous fray will be you, Nazi. Remember Hitler? His fate = your fate.
The Girl With The Dragon Mouth chimes in
Yet again to yiddle the chateau with her spin,
But it’s better she diss ya,
Rather than kiss ya,
‘Cause who knows where her mouth has been.
I’ve been reading the Chateau for a couple years now and the comments section was MUCH better before you started menstruating all over it. You have nothing to offer but shaming language and hysterics. Nobody likes you.
My, My, don’t we sound like women. LMAO!
Lanconshit, women wanting to fit in might be all heartbroken some Nazi loser tells her, “nobody likes you.” Me, it doesn’t affect one bit. If anything, all your crying and pouting only livens it up for me. You’re only proving my point, ONCE AGAIN. Now STFU, NAZI.
“If anything, all your crying and pouting only livens it up for me.”
In other words, it makes you even more hysterical?
“I was reading a few older threads recently and all I know is that before you showed up, the racist and bigoted comments weren’t the norm here.”
This. A few months back this comment section was worth reading. I’ve considered not posting anymore in general because I just don’t care to keep sifting thru the same garbage even in articles that have nothing to do with race.
When every article about race/politics/religion ends up with 200 comments arguing about “Niggers ‘n Jews”, and every article about Game ends up with 200 comments arguing about “Niggers ‘n Jews”, it’s hard to really call this a Game blog anymore, and helping men learn Game was the only reason I started posting.
That’s a damn shame but I share your angst. Realize though that you do have a solid group of dudes that appreciate your comments and are actively trying to improve. It seems like it’s guys in their mid-20s and that can take the game-centered knowledge to use it to it’s maximum advantage.
If you think that we’d benefit from reading elsewhere just let us know the location. I’ve got the MM Collabo, Mystery Method, Paul Janka’s pdf, The Tyler Digest, Roosh’s Bang, etc so I think I’m set for life with the text based stuff.
While my office was flooded out and I had off work for a few days, I did make a composition PDF of ALL your comments here & @ at Rational Male which I feel like you are owed a copy considering all your contributions to us trying to move up. If you want that let me know and I’ll post the link.
PDF sounds awesome lol, feel free to post the link. I tried starting a wordpress account a while back because I was hoping there was a way to easily/automatically get it to post the threads/comments I participate in to the blog so people who want to read my shit could just easily find it all in one spot but couldn’t find a way to do that and I do a lot of my posts from my phone while I’m taking a dump etc. so cutting and pasting threads manually is just too much of a time sink for me.
Wish there was a solution to this, some kind of “duplicate this thread to my blog” option when a wordpress account is posting on a wordpress blog.
I like posting here and at Rational because I don’t really care about coming up with ideas for articles, I just like delving into concepts CH/Rollo bring up. But when you can’t have a single Game article not get derailed with a dozen race-bait flame wars it’s like are there even any gamers reading the site anymore?
I don’t post for the guys arguing about jews and lib-tards because I know those guys are never going to do anything significant with their lives, that’s why I don’t participate in those waste of time exchanges. I post my shit for the guys lurking here looking to better their lives through learning Game and understanding sexual/social dynamics because there’s still hope for them to turn their life around the way I did and do something good either for themselves or for others once their life no longer feels depressing, frustrating, and hopeless.
I don’t post for the guys arguing about jews and lib-tards because I know those guys are never going to do anything significant with their lives,
You know, kid… it’s okay you don’t want to get into the politics and religion frays… they’re not for the weak of mind, when they get beyond the usual suspect useful idiot fem hysterics.
But this ego-balm of yours in the imagined “I’m doing something/they’ve done nothing” folderol is weak-sister shit.
Men with long-term marriages, multiple children, entire families educated at the graduate level, lifelong careers at demanding professions, amidst other varied interests and deeds, the surface of which having not even been scratched yet here at the chateau, far trumps your ability to bang a few alleged hotties of indeterminate virtue… even when they allow you to use them as your personal toilet.
Nor does your “help” to others who couldn’t get laid in high school with what amounts to mere common sense in dealing with the MTV generation of women constitute any achievement worthy of the tiresome self-congratulatory bloviating in which you over-indulge, like some fat kid given free reign in a Maggie Moos.
So keep doing your thing, if that’s all you aspire to… but can the stupid snark about how nobody else who doesn’t see Babylon through your shit-coloured glasses has done anything with their lives.
It has been broughten.
“I was reading a few older threads recently and all I know is that before you showed up, the racist and bigoted comments weren’t the norm here.”
I seem to be getting a lot of credit, and from more than one reliable source (loozozozoozlllllooozozozlll), for the un-PC boldness of the chateau.
If my initial courage to speak out has inspired others to voice their heretofore hidden feelings, then I pat myself on the back.
But credit where due… we all know that Generalissmo H deserves the lion’s share of lion-heartedness.
True, a few here are a bit brutish with the epithets, and I’ve often voiced my own reservations about such… only indulging in them myself as, for example, a humorous response to those who start in said epithets themselves.
But there have been many, many more who have chimed in with reasoned responses and necessary fire to the heretofore unchallenged PC, shabbos goyism and antiwhite bullshit that pollutes the internet in general, and which finds it way all-too-often to this very chateau… the usual haven for men who admire harsh truth over pretty lies.
And this is what truly puts the panties of the opposition in a twist… if it were merely a few “Nigger!” or “Kike!” rantings, the cognitive dissonance and female hysteria we see arise wouldn’t bother to show their ruffled feathers.
Cool story bro. So basically you think you’re better than someone because you were born a different color.
Glad to hear you haven’t done anything worth while in life that would substantiate your false sense of superiority.
Do you never tire of spewing forth the same inanities?
Show me where I ever stated I was better than someone else, merely because of skin color… I’ll buy you a cookie, junior.
@ immoralgables
He often backpedals unchallenged. Don’t let him twist the argument, or misrepresent the truth in one of his misleading fallacies. You had him pegged.
In every hateful comment he either says outright, or he implies, that he’s better than someone because he was born a different race, or he’s not Jewish, or he’s white. Often he minimizes their achievements and contributions, or he refuses to give credit where credit is due, or he uses scriptures to justify hate with bullshit non-argument fallacies, or he blames them and their ilk (only) while he overlooks his precious Aryan race doing the same thing, or he calls them names like niggs and yiddlers and shabos goys nonsense. Every one of his political, religious, or social commentary posts are laden with racism and hate, and the ones that aren’t, sound like the mumblings of a teenager looking to fit in with his friends. Hence, you’ll find the one-liner stupidities, or the usual “+100” at the bottom of many a comment at the Chateau. That’s a deep thinker for you, whom you have something to learn from??? What a joke!
“If my initial courage to speak out has inspired others to voice their heretofore hidden feelings, then I pat myself on the back.”
Speaking out? You call your brand of hate speaking out? It’s more like the inciting of the masses, much like your beloved Fuehrer used to do.
Criticizing Jews or Blacks for their liberal leanings is one thing, but spreading sheer hate, lies, and retarded conspiracy theories devised by demented white-supremacists like yourself, is completely another thing and doesn’t belong here. If you are so “traumatized” by the Jews, why don’t you move to a place like Coeur d’Alene, ID, where I hear many Neo-Nazis live? I’m sure you’d find many kindred spirits there, and you can fly your Nazi flag and hang your Hitler portraits unhindered and unimpeded. Maybe you’ll get all that hate out of your system once you can act out in the open.
Better yet, maybe move to Germany and help the “master race”? Oh, I forgot, over there you can’t even fly the swastika flag and hang piccees of the beloved Fuehrer. How perplexing, as well as ironic? Only in America can a Nazi creep like you indulge in Nazi speak and paraphernalia, eh? The very place you and your ilk want to turn into a hate inferno.
“True, a few here are a bit brutish with the epithets, and I’ve often voiced my own reservations about such… only indulging in them myself as, for example, a humorous response to those who start in said epithets themselves.”
NO GO. You’re complicit and culpable, and now all of a sudden you start misrepresenting again. Some of your comments border on serious Nazi propaganda rivaling that of Joseph Goebbels, and if it weren’t for me putting you on notice a few months ago you’d be spreading it like white on rice and feeding it to the easily incitable. You toned it down a lot, and yet it’s still disgusting and brings down the quality of the conversation.
“But there have been many, many more who have chimed in with reasoned responses and necessary fire to the heretofore unchallenged PC, shabbos goyism and antiwhite bullshit that pollutes the internet in general, and which finds it way all-too-often to this very chateau…”
What? I don’t see anyone here talking against the white race in a serious manner as you do against other races and religions. There is the usual liberal posters bashing conservative ideas, but all you do is accuse them of being Jewish, which in turn means all you care about is substituting Jews for Liberals because your hate has no basis in reality, and stems from irrational demented beliefs.
Don’t you remember? Our fights started because I commented in a manner which someone didn’t like (as I am a conservative, not a white-Supremacist) and you rushed to their aid spewing Nazi nonsense about protecting the white race from yiddlers and shabos goys or whatever racist Nazi nonsense you were spewing at the time. You are hardly an innocent bystander who gets swept into fights as you portrayed yourself above. You instigate em’. So stop misleading.
LOL! And you using “cognitive dissonance” in every comment is laughable. I don’t think you truly understand the meaning of that term, or you can’t see it in yourself, because you’re full of ironies and hypocrisies. People are often blind to their own shortcomings, but like to point the finger and project it on others.
I repeat:
But there have been many, many more who have chimed in with reasoned responses and necessary fire to the heretofore unchallenged PC, shabbos goyism and antiwhite bullshit that pollutes the internet in general, and which finds it way all-too-often to this very chateau… the usual haven for men who admire harsh truth over pretty lies.
And this is what truly puts the panties of the opposition in a twist… if it were merely a few “Nigger!” or “Kike!” rantings, the cognitive dissonance and female hysteria we see arise wouldn’t bother to show their ruffled feathers.
People are often blind to their own shortcomings, but like to point the finger and project it on others.
And once again, folks, it’s time to play:
CAN… YOU… SPOT… THE… IRONY!!!
Nitelilycunt
“or the usual “+100” at the bottom of many a comment at the Chateau.”
I don’t particularly care for your ongoing drama with Greg. Although it amuses me and I think you’re a cunt.
But don’t you dare criticize the way men communicate between them. The +1s and +1000s are vital expressions between men. Your cunt criticism is how political correctness starts to turn public debate into shit.
Tell you what, ho, one of my favorite memes on any male forum are +1s and +100s.
Now fuck off!
Anon,
LOL! Why are you internalizing what I said about Greg’s habits to mean you? That’s a female habit. I didn’t think it plagued men too?
I think he overuses it and that’s especially noticeable when he instigates racial fights on one hand and uses +1, 100 ,or 1,000,000 in another.
Basically, I mean he has nothing to say other than hateful comments, or his + shit. It’s not meant to disparage anyone else using it.
“I don’t particularly care for your ongoing drama with Greg. Although it amuses me and I think you’re a cunt.”
Be honest you like it, eh? I got to admit it’s funny, especially when Lanconshit comes to the rescue like a good soldier.
Oh, BTW, I forgot to mention that you need to start banging 9s and 10s so that telling Greg off wouldn’t bother you so much. Just sayin’
Here ya go dude!
DISCLAIMER: This is not organized like MM Collaboration. I seriously just sat at my comp for a couple days and did a Ctrl+F search for YaReally on RM & CH.
With that said, it is damn useful and I found a lot of value from it. It’s long as hell but my understanding, knowledge, mentality went from 0-60 just from reading each comment that I pasted into the document. I’ll post the link over on CH’s recent post so more people can grab it.
LINK: http://www.mediafire.com/view/?bka3kkcqb4i52s3
YaReally Composium
Ew.
At your next session, ask your mentor at what point in your manliness training do you reach the lesson on dignity? This is the online equivalent of shaving another man’s balls and pressing the pubes into a scrapbook.
Honor and praise the virtue in your midst. But don’t become Kathy Bates in Misery.
YaReally,
We had our differences, but thank you for not letting it stop you from telling the truth and caring enough for the blog to try to stop the irrelevant racist/bigoted stuff being spewed here. It truly has nothing to do with the subject at hand. But, by the looks of it, someone is not getting the hint.
LOOZOZOZLLLLOZOZOZOOZOZLLLLLL
This particular thread’s craziness began when you went all RAYCISS freaky on my simple comment about not dismissing the wisdom of so-called “out of touch” old (or dead) white men… such as the Pope… which is what this thread is all about, aka “the subject at hand”.
You truly are inspirational… inspiring both mirth and pity.
Talk about “not getting the hint”… that’s lightyears beyond pot and kettle, sugarbritches.
Are there two Nitelily here ???
a few weeks ago my race realist comments were approved by a certain Nitelily
but recently a (different?) Nitelily has been at war with anyone saying anything about race
I’m confused…
Yep, continue twisting the exact implications and meaning of your ramblings. Basically, again you have no argument so you have to resort to mumbo-jumbo fallacious-misrepresentational rants.
This is what you said:
“Everybody ready for those special, blinding insights? All together now: “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!”
No one said anything of the sort, until you took it upon yourself to instigate by implying that anyone “fighting” those that post against the Pope will be dismissed as “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!” People said their peace in favor of the pope or against him to some degree or another, but no one said anything racist, anti-racist, or anti-catholic until you got the ball rolling. Criticizing is not race bating. Your form of comments are purely racial for the hell of starting hateful fights.
See, not so innocent, are you? Yet, you like to act like the innocent victim, eh? Weasel is a weasel is a weasel. And no honor among weasels, you know. STFU already. You have sprinkled the whole thread with your useless comments. Has there been any comment you didn’t reply to? I think it’s time for you to take a much-needed break buddy.
Canadian Friend,
There is a BIG difference between then and now. Criticizing Blacks and Jews for being liberal is fair game. As you know 98% of blacks and 69% of Jews voted for Obama, that’s what we were discussing. But it’s a whole different situation calling Jews the Synagogue of Satan, Christ killers, wielding too much undue influence, or repeating the supposed demented fake Jewish conspiracy theory of Jews controlling the world and the US, or constantly referring to blacks as niggs.
Either we can have an honest discussion about the Left and all its tentacles, or it’s just a fraudulent discussion meant to inspire baseless unrestraint hate and resentment of other people, as well as a feelings of hopelessness, which also breeds rage, all under the guise of being anti-left, when it’s really anti-Jewish. If we constantly substitute Jews for Liberals and Leftists, then we are not going to be effective in this fight. Then all we are doing is getting outraged by the Jews and increasing our resentment of them, instead of looking at the whole liberal movement, which includes many White gentiles, and finding ways to counteract it.
During Hitler’s time, Germany had many problems. But instead of solving the real issues plaguing Germany, he transferred his energies to killing the Jews and starting a World War, which killed tens-of- millions of people in its wake and didn’t solve a thing. We have to be careful of thing like this happening in this country. If it does, we lose. All it takes is one mad man, as you know.
Do you see the difference?
Criticizing is one thing. Pure hateful comments is another. Eliot’s initial comments rival Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda. Despite what Eliot will have you believe, this didn’t start today. This is a very long war between us. Although, he has toned it down a bit.
Lils, you need to stop alienating your allies over minutiae. The fight is bigger than your comparatively minuscule differences, and you get no brownie points for being chief squealer of the PC patrol here.
So what if you have differences in the foxhole? Let’s win the war first, then you can hash it out.
This is why the left always rolls us. They keep their “eyes on the prize” and leave the internecine bloodletting for after they gain power. We squabble constantly (and publicly!) over violations of pristine principle and make the perfect the enemy of the good.
This is also why a woman should not ever be put on watch duty. She’ll kill in his sleep the comrade who made a face at her eleven weeks ago.
Matt
This is what you said:
“Everybody ready for those special, blinding insights? All together now: “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!”
Ahem… sorry, girlie, that was your SECOND outburst of this thread. All with eyes to see can check above and see the truth.
And for the record, that remark of mine you quote was in response to another poster’s snark about “libtards, kill!” and had nothing to do with you nor any of my alleged racist remarks. Merely saying that the opposite side of the “kill libtards” fence busies themselves with shaming language such as the usual litany given above is not, in and of itself, a racist remark.
That this has to be explained just amazes me… and truth be told, I should have my head examined for even bothering to engage your idiocy.
Criticizing is one thing. Pure hateful comments is another. Eliot’s initial comments rival Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda. Despite what Eliot will have you believe, this didn’t start today. This is a very long war between us. Although, he has toned it down a bit.
LLLOLLLZZLZLZOOOOOLLZLZLLZLZL
You call this ‘war’? You posting harpy bizarre slander and female hysteria bullshit upon which you get pwned, and which I countermand for the sake of strangers who may get the wrong impression?
This is not war, Tank Grrrllll… this is a long-suffering man slapping down flies when they buzz too close.
Now give your keyboard… and your jaw… a rest.
Which came first, my comment, or yours? It has the timing on there, go look genius. You said it almost an hour before, and not only that, you already started complaining the day before when the thread came out. So if I were you, I’d shut up.
The fact that I have to argue with a liar prevaricator amazes me.
“LLLOLLLZZLZLZOOOOOLLZLZLLZLZL”
You do realize that these types of responses make you look like a retarded maniac, right? That’s not a winning argument. Oh, but I forgot, you don’t have any, do you? Carry on……
You really are dense, aren’t you? Notice I’m not saying you’re a liar, because I’m just going to prove you wrong, and I’m sure in this weird universe inside your head, you actually believe you’re correct.
1) Your first outburst to me on this thread, going in descending order from the top (1:06pm), was to my remark about not dismissing the wisdom of old (or dead) white men… which was a +1 response to JS’s remark “People scoffed and said he was out of touch; what would an old, white, celibate priest know about marriage and sex?”
Totally weird, so much so that two other posters had to shake their heads at you.
2) Your second outburst to me (1:17pm) was the one where I was responding to siberianjourney’s snark about “libtard, kill”. This is the one you’re trying to say was first.
There…. now don’t you feel stupid? Probably not… you’re the kind of person that people refer to when they say “You can’t insult her”… namely, because of severe dimness and shortness of attention span.
3) As you will have noticed, the honorable GBFM has introduced several memes to the chateau… one of them being LLOOZOZOZZOOZOZLLLLLOOZOOZLLL and variations thereof, which signify the well-worn internet meme lol (which you yourself use). The beauty of GBFM’s variation is that it conveys a much, much, MUCH more ribald sense of maniacal laughter at the given target.
Once again, you’re been pwned dearie… now, please, go find another windmill to tilt at.
Again, I see you need some spoon feeding.
Which came first, my comment, or yours?
The, “Everybody ready for those special, blinding insights? All together now: “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!” was made at 12:12. My comments came an hour later.
Your second comment, the one with +1, which I commented to you first, came at 12:21.
The thread was very short then, about 50 comments or so. It took me about 10 minutes to scheme through the WHOLE thing before commenting in these two places, inspired by your “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!”” comment. I wasn’t even going to post in this thread if it weren’t for your baseless complaints. What’s so hard to understand?
You instigated it again, as you always do and that is the point I was trying to make: “I was reading a few older threads recently and all I know is that before you showed up, the racist and bigoted comments weren’t the norm here….”
But as I said, you already expressed these same sentiments the day before, so reading all of your collective bullshit about misrepresenting how people who disagree with any type of criticism call people like you “NAHZEE! RAYCISS! YOU’RE JUST JEALOUS!” prompted me to reply to your bullshit. It’s simply not true. As I said, legitimate criticism is one thing, but your brand of hateful propaganda is a whole different type of animal. That’s why you are being called a jealous racist. Get it? Let’s hope you do.
Matt,
Sorry, but the nastiness he spews is way beyond the pale for decent people to take. There is a big difference between legitimate criticism of a group of people, and just spewing incitement like they did in Nazi Germany, or like they do in Arab countries driving people to the streets freaking out, high on hate and rage to the point they see some poor helpless woman and take out all their anger on her, ripping her to shreds. That’s the power of the tongue, as you know.
Humans have the power of speech and with it we can build and destroy worlds, with words lone. Look at the Left how successful it has been with its propaganda, simply because it has figured out how to manipulate the language and make evil polices that destroy the country sound innocuous.
The Left love using comments made by people like Greg to seize control of the argument and twist the truth in their favor. They use racists like him as substitute for conservatives, much like he does Jews for liberals. It’s the same shit, different day. Propaganda 101.
Many Jews who aren’t particularly happy with Obama told me they fear the conservatives because they think conservatives are anti-Semitic. That’s the perception they have, despite many Christian-conservative support for Israel and despite having Judeo-Christian values in common with Christian-conservative (if not the same religious theology). I think many whites have the same perception about conservatives. Therefore, there are effective ways to fight the Left without stooping to Nazi-era type propaganda, or middle-ages type of anti-Semitic hate. We need to stick to the issues and the truth, not waste time on shit like this.
Believe me, the truth doesn’t need to be laced with hate speech to be popular with conservative, or with people that truly love the country and searching for solutions. You can’t argue in the face of the truth because it is the truth. It has its own intrinsic power, and somehow it always comes out. I don’t see any point to all the racist comments here. Why not focus on male-female relations, or social commentary on the Left and all its tentacles or deceptive tactics that are very often connected to male-female relations? Let’s keep it on target.
“This is also why a woman should not ever be put on watch duty.”
For a long time I didn’t say anything about his bullshit, but when he started to attack me in his usual thread-patrol self-appointed chief-of-propaganda watchmen, I let him have it. Since no body was saying anything, yes, I said something. Leave it to a 5’4” 106 lbs woman to do the job of men. Some of you should have said something a long time ago, unless you all agree with him and like his Nazi-spewing rants and think they make a winning argument in getting back the country.
Aw, geez… I’m going by your responses based on the order in which you started your inane attacks to my comments on this thread… comments which were neither racist nor off-topic.
Both your first and second attack followed posts where I was responding to another poster altogether, and which had nothing to do with you or racism, nor where they off-topic, as you claimed to YaReally in attempting to rationalize your errant screeds.
The times at which I myself made those posts are immaterial, because as I said when THIS WHOLE STUPID SUBTHREAD STARTED WITH YOUR SHIT, your attacks were what began the craziness.
Gawd… please, now… just stop the insanity.
Sorry, but the nastiness he spews is way beyond the pale for decent people to take.
The comedy just keeps writing itself, but now it has turned into a farce.
Woman, if you want to see spewing nastiness, just read your own comments to anyone who dares call you on your female hysteria.
Early Christmas present… from here on out, no more responses from me to your inanities.
Moderator, if I EVER reply to anything NiteLily says again, please ban me… I’m beggin’ ya! :crazyrolleyes.
Is there a point in your post somewhere? Or are you just saying, “You sound like people I don’t like (rednecks), therefore you’re wrong.” ?
I like Greg Eliot and King A.
And we luv you too, darling… whole bunches.
Damn. This post bores right into the heart of it all. Read it three times. Emotionally moved by this one. Appreciation.
Here is the whole thing
http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/paul_vi/encyclicals/documents/hf_p-vi_enc_25071968_humanae-vitae_en.html
Thanks mate and keep up the good work. Here is my favourite quote
Value of Self-Discipline
21. The right and lawful ordering of birth demands, first of all, that spouses fully recognize and value the true blessings of family life and that they acquire complete mastery over themselves and their emotions. For if with the aid of reason and of free will they are to control their natural drives, there can be no doubt at all of the need for self-denial. Only then will the expression of love, essential to married life, conform to right order. This is especially clear in the practice of periodic continence. Self-discipline of this kind is a shining witness to the chastity of husband and wife and, far from being a hindrance to their love of one another, transforms it by giving it a more truly human character.
[…] This is the reason mothers are more dedicated to children than fathers: it is that they suffer more in giving them birth and are more certain that they are their own. – Aristotle [källa] […]
[…] Unions in wedlock are perverted by the victory of shameless passion that masters the female among men and beasts. Woman is the salvation or destruction of the family. She carries its destiny in the folds of her mantle. – Aeschylus [källa] […]
Pope Paul VI, apparently, was as far-seeing as I.
How glib. The man died before you were probably born. He was far-seeing, you however are simply seeing things as they are now. Massive difference.
[Heartiste: Just let me enjoy my moment of self-constructed preen.]
This reality needs repeated; “The contraceptive is, in practice, a female hypergamy facilitator.”
“he forgot to mention the distaff side the equation”
In all fairness to JP2, he probably didn’t have that much experience dealing with women…
Heartiste quoting from a papal encyclical? Will e-wonders never cease? Darkly fitting, really. Sometimes I think that you may be one disheartening romp away from conversion.
Not really. “Game” is a shockingly traditional endeavor, if one takes the long view of cultural history. I would expect many of its adherents to be better-educated, and more classically-educated, than average.
I found this on another message board I read. The original CL ad was taken down but the OP quoted her. File this under Chicks dig Jerks part 8836982750642026:
in Hell with an angel – w4m
Date: 2012-12-01, 2:17AM EST
[email protected]
I dated a callous, cruel jerk. I dated a complete jerk with streaks of evil in his cold blood who cheated on me, lied to me, and ultimately broke my heart. Then I met you and you are an angel in my life because you’ve restored my sense of joy and self-respect after so much abuse and sadness. You found me and I was beaten down and scared like a wounded dog on the run from wolves. You rescued me from a monster.
I’m laying next to you in bed right now in the quiet darkness of this sanctuary you’ve provided me. And I’m thinking of him. I’m thinking of that monster that will forever be under my bed. Our bed.
And I miss him.
Which guy would you rather be: provider beta guy or monster under the bed guy?
“I’ll take ‘neither’ for 100, Pat.”
OK, this is a study that’s been discussed in the popular press, so who knows how badly the reporter distorted its conclusions, but…
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504763_162-20120123-10391704.html
If that’s got any basis in fact, then it would seem that the Pill would be a boon for beta males.
That’s all well and good, but completely moot when you have a diverse, vibrant country such as ours. Since having different laws for different people’s is somewhat frowned upon by our elite liberal overlords, abortion and birth control are the only ways to keep the brown, huddled masses from reproducing like rodents (which they still do).
In a non NAM country, I would fully support limited access to birth control and abortion, as usually those women posses the future time orientation to understand the consequences of spreading their legs for a cad like you
However, in our current environment, you will not find a bigger advocate for BC pills and abortions than me. And I bet these disingenuous white liberals know exactly what’s up when they preach “women’s rights”- it is basically the right to empower Shanequa to pre-empt more inner city crime.
Watching videos like this are the best birth/marriage control:
I lol’ed very much on that one.
[…] this could be a fake, and yet we all know it’s true. […]
“quantity has a quality all its own”
LOL, those Soviets did have a sense of humour.
Marriage is also boosted by some legal inducements. Among which, everybody who works in Singapore has to contribute to a pension plan, but it is an individual pension plan, not like US Social Security but more like a compulsory IRA/401K/whatever).
It seems that Singapore is the best ruled place on Earth. The problem I have with them is their lack of beautiful women. Why the hell we can’t have a tiny country with hot chicks ruled by Singaporean standards?
Uruguay and Latvia would be my choices
Women were cheating on beta husbands…has anyone noted before that husbandry is the professional raising the offspring of 2 other animals…birth control just meant the less crappy women would not have to work so hard to hide it.
It is time to move beyond game as the counterpoint to feminism. While game is the logical endpoint for men in a feminist world paradigm, we can go deeper. Game is nihilism It’s time to go beyond the logical mind and enter the spiritual.
How do you deal with hunger? Logic tells you to eat. Thus one becomes beholden to the hunger desire. The way to control hunger is not to satiate the desire immediately. Thus one masters the hunger desire and it serves the him and not vice versa. In the logical mind this is a paradox, thus it is a spiritual law. The same goes with the libido. The logical conclusion to being horny is to satisfy the sexual urge as quickly as possible. Thus one becomes a servant of the libido instead of a master. Think of the male libido as a hungry 600 pound lion that one is forced to care for on a daily basis. Logic says try to feed the lion real meat as quickly and often as possible (sex with real women). In the case that this is not available logic says find an ersatz replacetment for real meat, say spam. The sexual equivalent for this is porn and hence the explosion of pornography in our liberal feminised world.
The way to mastery is NOT to indulge to libido. Once control is attained that energy can be redirected to use as one sees fit. The ultimate reality of this is that it breaks the illusion of feminine beauty and the hold it has on men. Where game is the endpoint in the logical mind in that it seeks to find the ultimate way to satisfy this always recurring seemingly overwhelming urge, mastering the libido truly releases one from a subservient role. You control the lion. It follows your commands. You do not follow it. You feed it when you see fit. It is often said that women are the sexual gatekeepers. This because we cede it to them because we see our own libido’s as uncontrollable. We can become the sexual gatekeepers.
This is the ultimate reframe. Suddenly female demands for male attention are impervious to you. By controlling your libido you no longer seek to fill “the spank bank”. You visually take in the yoga pants with the jigglying mounds of flesh and bifurcated moose knuckles that women coyly use to pull the male gaze only to give a look of triumphant disgust back but no longer do you linger and cede control. In fact you must actively ignore it. You must teach the mind to constantly redirect it’s thoughts. The triumphant validation women receive from male attention is no longer contributed to by you. When men master their own libido’s and start to ignore the flesh parade of our modern age, then they will have seized control back. Knowing that you can go weeks or months without succumbing to your libido is to know that you are in control. You are the master. This means no fapping. In fact it is crucial because the angst between wanting to satiate the desire and only having an ersatz outlet creates hostility and despair. Pornography exploits men. Millions of women are cashing on men turning over their hard earned resources in the desperate attempt to fend off the wolves at the door. Like the drug addict or the alcoholic, giving in to the craving only creates more future dependence.
This spiritual paradox is applicable in all areas of life. How do you deal with material desires? Logic tells to get more stuff but our insatiable ego means this is never fully met. Thus existential angst, ennui, or the Bhuddist “dhukka”.
The solution is to remove the need. The only way this is possible is to move beyond the stifling limits of the intellectual, logical mind. Feminism is another ideology produced by pure instrumental reasoning. Relying on instrumental reasoning to construct a social paradigm always ends up in a grotesque mockery of the natural order. Just as concentration camps, genocide, and Joseph Mengle’s experiments were the logical extension on Nazism, so the current debauched debacle we currently have is the logical endpoint for the ideology of feminism.
No one wants to become a monk. That is not the point. The idea is to create non reliance (attachements) on the ceaseless, unending, always returning cravings.
As long as legions of beta men are beholden to their libido then rising hordes of angry men in this feminist world is inevitable. Their frustrated sexual desires, as noted, are creating a toxic gender hostility. Seize control. When men work on true spiritual growth and free themselves from material ego enslavement, women will have to follow.
I like this post… to an extreme extent.
Well-done, young man.
Very nice.
oh venerable one, thou hast spoken wisdom. I think CH should be impressed too. ………..”the ultimate reframe.” love it!
This is a semi-higher calling. All men can reach this level, and the everyday Christian is enjoined (by Christ) to follow this calling (as seen in scripture texts such as “Don’t look at a woman lustfully” etc). But there is even a highest calling for the few, that is, men should jettison the sexual desire altogether, and Christ acknowledges that not every body is called to do this.
You have articulated Game 2.0.
Confirm thy soul in self control
And liberty in law.
Yes, this is important. I studied Game so I could actually get “it” if I wanted, rather than be a beta vainly beholden to my libido. And guess what: it has worked. Beautifully. The cravings are there, but I can sneer at them and control them, rather than have them run my life.
Faggot.
Now, now… don’t be such a philistine.
[…] proprietors over at Le Chateau Heartiste in their most recent entry quote from Pope Paul VI’s 1968 encyclical Humanae Vitae, aka The Anti-Birth Control […]
However, he doesn’t get it on hypergamy because it wasn’t part if his reality growing up
This is more typical of Northern Europeans and Anglos in general, even though the guy in question is Catholci
Because Mediterraneans never had any doubt on the nature of Women until the brainwash of the 60s , coupled with American military occupation of Europe
The Romans held women as equivalent of children in the laws…
The Romans are where the idea of monogamy came from…giving women the advantage over men by withholding the vagina.
The Romans? Monogamy is as old as Adam and Eve. Literally.
Mary was a virgin when she gave birth to Jesus, but later she was faithful to her HUSBAND Joseph, and slept with him and gave him children, Jesus’s brothers and sisters including James. The veneration and worship of Mary is idolatry and if she wasn’t consumed with worshiping God right now she would weep knowing that people have sinned against God worshiping her image instead.
That’s what Islam says.
Islam is just Calvinism for dune coons.
Its funny, every attempt to make Mary sinless makes her sin to do it. If Mary never slept with Joseph throughout their marriage, she would be sinning.
I’m confused… who is saying Mary never slept with Joseph throughout the marriage? As someone already pointed out, the Bible itself says Jesus had brothers and sisters.
Second, who’s saying that “sinless” means never having sex? Mary knew no man until after Jesus was born, and then she had normal wifely relations with her husband Joseph.
No, that’s because Aramaic was deficient in vocabulary for distant relatives like cousins. James and John, sons of Zebedee (not Joseph), were called Jesus’ “brothers”. The Greek word phrater in fact eventually came to mean “fellow clan member”. Both Mary and Joseph had dedicated their virginity to God, and therefore didn’t have a consummated marriage.
I’ve never been able to understand the appeal of it myself, this consecrating one’s virginity to God, but it’s been the basis of celibacy for priests, monks, and nuns throughout history.
I know there’s a lot of back-and-forth between Catholic Doctrine and what other Christians say about all the places where Jesus’ brothers and sisters and Mary are mentioned in Scripture… personally, I believe the Scripture is plain about the issue, but I’m not really willing to argue one way or the other… because the point of Mary’s virginity after Jesus is moot, in my book, since I don’t believe one should pray to saints and lean towards the feeling that overmuch adoration of Mary (even if she remained a virgin her entire life) is too close to idolatry.
Again, my opinion, and perhaps that of a few others… but I wouldn’t shun Catholics for this point of faith.