I recognize that I am opening up a can of worms with this post.
The sex/gender related posts tend to generate more controversy and responses than any other topic. But this is an important subject. It is worthy of further exploration.
In the past, I have been cynical about women, not because I am a misogynist per se, but because the Sexual Revolution of the 1970s has drastically narrowed the pool of attractive mates.
American women tend to ruin themselves these days. There are fewer incentives than ever before for a man to settle down with one woman. Marriages don’t last. Divorces can cripple a man financially. It is harder than ever before to raise children in this degenerate culture.
Here’s reality as it exists: what American man wants to settle down with an American woman who has slept with 15+ other guys, who is going to divorce him in four or five years, who is going to take all his money, who has an insolent, self-centered attitude, who doesn’t have the personality required for marriage and childrearing?
Before I go any further, I want to emphasize that I am not talking about women in general, but a socially and historically situated problem that afflicts contemporary American men. The peculiar conditions that modern men are facing are unique to our own times:
– Previous generations enforced strong taboos against frivolous sex. “Loose women” were shunned. “Cads” were frowned upon. Both were stigmatized with bad reputations in their communities. Neither men or women had as many sexual partners as they do today.
– The man used to be recognized as the head of the household. He was a provider. Men didn’t have to compete against the federal government. Women were never represented in the workforce to the extent they are today. They were not idle housewives, but they were not the primary “breadwinners” either.
– Abortion used to be illegal. Previous generations never had access to the methods of modern birth control.
– Previous generations of American women were not brainwashed 24/7 by film and television. Trashy celebrities were not role models. Feminism wasn’t glorified in our culture.
In so many words, the sexual landscape in America has changed dramatically since the 1970s, and this has implications for White Nationalism. The typical White Nationalist clings to the traditional sexual ideal which has become antiquated in contemporary social conditions.
The disconnect between this ideal and reality has been a source of frustration for countless White Nationalist men. There is no consensus among White Nationalists as to what to do about it.
The available options are as follows: forced celibacy, holding out for the right woman, adapting to the sexual marketplace. The latter two options are the most popular.
I’m only vaguely familiar with Roissysphere terminology. I have learned of these concepts second hand through friends who follow Roissy and the Men’s Rights community.
Alphas are men who sleep with lots of women, who are naturally attractive to women, and who can have any woman they desire; Betas are men who are less attractive to women, who pick one woman and have children, and who are the stable household providers; Gammas/Omegas are frustrated men who are not attractive to women and who don’t have any sexual partners.
Traditional American culture used to privilege the Betas. Alpha behavior was punished by an elaborate sexual code of courtship. There were enough women to go around for all but the biggest losers. The typical man ended up with the typical woman.
That’s no longer the case.
The majority of my male friends are married and divorced. Only a minority of them remain happily married. Most say they would never remarry after going through the crushing experience.
As for the women I know, the majority of them always deliberately choose the wrong man and end up pregnant and divorced within a few years. When they are young, they run through men like a deck of cards. Later, they age and become less attractive, and finally grow bitter when they find men are no longer interested in them.
The people I know who are happily married with children are the exception to the rule. In such an environment, it makes sense to be cynical White Nationalist male, and that attitude can persist until the unexpected happens.
So why bring all this up?
What happens when a White Nationalist beta male finally does meet an ordinary, traditional woman who is worthy of more than just passing sexual interest?
9 times out of 10 this doesn’t happen: most American women are some combination of slutty, crazy, dumb, boring, frivolous, self-centered, etc. Sound familiar?
You know what to expect. You know what you are dealing with. You know how far a relationship can go (i.e., don’t get married, don’t get her pregnant, don’t get attached) when you are dating one of these types.
Even a broken clock is right twice a day. For every ten women you date, one or two might be worth entertaining thoughts you wouldn’t normally consider.
The danger here is obvious: the Beta instinct is to pedestal and romanticize the woman, fall in love, lose control of his emotions, come on strong, needless to say, the consequences of which can be disastrous.
In such a situation, it would be wise to get a second opinion, maybe even a third opinion. So you introduce your friends to the woman in question. They agree that she is smart, pretty, respectable, and wholesome, not cut from the same cloth as other girls, everything you are looking for in a serious relationship.
You get the all clear.
How do you shift gears though? How do you go from adapting to the sexual marketplace to finding a worthy mate and getting into a serious relationship? It is like the difference between flying and landing.
There are ordinary, traditional women still out there. They are fewer in number, but still exist. What do you do when you meet one?
Well first of all, I reject the Roissy terminology and you should too.
From a moral standpoint, elevating degenerate behavior by calling it “Alpha” implies it is the standard of which we should aspire to. Furthermore, calling men who engage in traditional relationships “betas” makes them seem lowly and meek. That isn’t the sort of standard we should be setting with these discussions.
I would also question the notion that these so-called “alpha” men are “naturally attractive” to women. They are merely attractive to a subset of women who like to be played a certain way. There are certainly many women who reject that behavior and reject the advances of such men, so it’s not a question of nature as much as it is culture and fashion. Many of these so-called alpha men, as described by their traits, are often ugly, smelly, and brutish. Furthermore, I suspect that if you try merely for quantity, you can get it more easily than most would admit.
The so-called “alpha” male, perhaps best typified by the American negro, is known by his low-investment reproductive strategy. He invests essentially zero into his partner: he’s here today and gone tomorrow. He isn’t there to see his offspring grow up and do his best to make sure things go right for them. If it wasn’t for the cushy modern welfare state, the offspring could very well likely starve. In Africa, such strategies might make sense: produce a litter of offspring, hope that some small percentage of them survive the disease, famine, and cannibalism.
Among Europeans, we didn’t do things that way. Our culture, along with our instincts, changed to fit the harsh northern climate. We invested heavily into our offspring and our relationships. The true alpha male is the one who fights for his woman and his kids, not the one who clocks out as soon as a whiff of responsibility beckons him to duty.
The cool thing about being a White Male is that you and you alone have free will. Liberals and Nazis alike agree on this, because it’s true. Everything in history is ultimately caused by White males, with every other group passively reacting to what they do. Behind everything anybody who is not a White Male does, there’s an elaborate Kevin Bacon game of effects caused by history’s prime mover: you.
The only way that our American girls can be expected to improve is for us to expect and demand more of them. As the Roissyites repeat, women are intuitively drawn to dominance and leadership. Give them what they’re asking for – in a loving and patriarchal way, of course. And more importantly, AFTER you score, raise your daughters and raise them right.
I think all reasonable people can agree there are different types of men and women. The alpha/beta terminology is used to describe other primate species. A similar division exists within the human species.
1.) There is a subset of men who get a disproportionate number of women.
2.) There is another subset of men who have the provider mindset and tend toward monogamy.
3.) There is another subset of men who can’t seem to get laid no matter what they do.
Personally, I fall into the “beta” category. I would prefer to get married and have children. I would prefer to get deeply involved with one girl than to sleep around with several.
The tripartite division exists among women as well.
1.) There are some women who turn heads everywhere they go and have men falling all over themselves in pursuit.
2.) There are some women who are pretty average in the attention they get.
3.) There are some women who are frankly not attractive to men.
I’m attracted to the average woman; the one who isn’t necessarily the dominant one in the crowd, but who isn’t the closet case either.
Agreed on rejecting that particular terminology: it’s basically a hobby subculture, for those who have ‘chasing loose women’ as a hobby. As far as society as a whole goes, it’s way too diverse in characteristics and desires to break it down into 3 categories. Which one would Michelangelo fall into? George W Bush?
As far as the OP goes, there’s the additional option of seeking out women from countries which are not overrun by modern western feminism. As WNs, we’re restricted to the white ones, but there’s Russia and other eastern European countries.
Also, there’s the whole evangelical/traditional Christian scene. It’s not for me, but there are still many people who have traditional marriages in this community.
Note that the man in the photo shown above is wearing a fedora. It has that effect on the ladies.
As usual, the problem is not the solution. Organized Jewry invented feminism precisely in order to create and co-opt another group entitlement, destroy the nuclear family, de-stabilize “bourgeois” civilization, and most important: cut down on white reproduction. The great thing about the coming Age of Chaos: men are going to start acting like Men again, and women are going to start acting like Women, like it or not. Those who don’t, will not survive. I’ve actually discussed this with a number of unhappy, aging feministas: they agree.
Funny you should bring up the subject! I personally am that lucky guy that has found the quality girl and have been happily married for over seven years now. I did have to morph her into a WN though, but that process is another story. John Young of European Americans United has made an excellent 3 part series called “How to have more White Babies” that speaks directly to this issue . Every White man (and woman) should listen!
Part 1
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=6148
Part 2
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=6369
Part 3
http://www.wvwnews.net/story.php?id=6670
Love the website!
How important is churchgoing in predicting a woman’s traditional qualities?
I’m on the verge of joining a church for the sole purpose of meeting a traditional woman. It helps that I’m already a Deist, and see less harm in the intellectual dishonesty of accepting Jesus Christ for show than I do in the intellectual dishonesty purveyed to women by my generation of men (think lying about STDs, cheating, etc.)
Oops, that last “intellectual dishonesty” should be plain “dishonesty”.
http://www.counter-currents.com/2010/07/ludovici-on-chivalry/
discusses the problems that traditional chivalry was having even before oral contraceptives.
@Morphy:’I’m on the verge of joining a church for the sole purpose of meeting a traditional woman.’
Bear in mind that a lot of dishonest women will go to church just to find potential meal tickets.
If you want to find a traditional woman, don’t start by looking for the woman.
Start by talking to a bunch of 40-year-old or 50-year-old guys who have extremely patriarchal values. Gain their respect. Then find out if they have daughters.
Marriage research should not be done by potential brides. It should be done by fathers of potential brides.
Well said, Hunter. But, American men have changed, too. And, mostly, not for the better.
I miss courtesy, manners, chivalry, and respect. American men tend to blame all American women for feminism when a lot of us are victims of it, too!
I don’t find men attractive when they coif their hair like girls (perms, highlights), get chest waxes and groin waxes (geez guys, come on, a man should be hairy in some places), wear earrings (which I find very feminine regardless of which ear it’s in), etc. I laugh to myself when I see the lone guy sitting among all those women getting pedicures. Now, that’s not to say I don’t like a well-groomed man. I do! Just not groomed like a girl!!! There is not too much to admire these days.
And, yes, American girls/women are real filthy sluts today. But, a self-respecting man is very particular about where he puts his most prized possession.
I always find it funny when someone who is like “20” glorifies life before the 60’s.
Hunter, “Animal House” is older than you are and Animal House is probably closer to life in the late 50’s early 60’s than this “Leave it to Beaver” dream world that never existed.
People through out time were always sleeping around, even before the pill, they used condoms or took chances.
Marriages were breaking up, but people didn’t get divorced and make it legal, therefore we don’t have the accurate statistics.
The mother would tell her kids that daddy went away, and that would be that.
At least now there are visiting days and child support to help these women along.
You don’t want a woman who has experience? So you would prefer some clueless virgin who reacts like a wet towel? Give me a gal with the know how;-)
And most important! The last thing you want to go back in time to is the scary foods of days of old. Dishes like this:
http://www.candyboots.com/wwcards/rosyperfection.html
All I am saying is that the grass is always greener in another era, and never trust a 1950’s sit com to present any form of reality.
Remember back in the old days there was no:
Internet
South Park
Good Rock Music
Cell Phones
Fast Food
7-11’s
24 Hour Supermarkets
Good Porn
Aqua Team Hunger Force
Fresh fruits in the winter
So, think real hard before you dream about wishing for the more dismal time of frigid women who made dinner in a jello mold, TV was the Lawrence Welk Show, and you and your wife are sleeping in separate twin beds, you really think you’d do be doing better than you are now?
H.Rock- Michelangelo was gay….
@John Walters
Within reason it’s acceptable for a woman to evaluate a man’s worthiness with respect to his ability to provide for future offspring (even if a woman doesn’t rationalize it that way). That said, if she’s liable to run off with another man because he’s wealthier above and beyond the ability to provide for children then yes… it would be best to see her for what she is and avoid her. I guess my question is, to what extent are churchgoing women more likely to be traditional mates? And in that regard, are some churches preferable to others? I’ve always been impressed by Mormon women’s traditional aspects, but there is the obvious issue of LDS strictures (alcohol, coffee, certain politics, etc.) I’ve also been impressed by my experience with Baptists.
Donald is right. The “Alpha” as described here is a Negro.
Donald is also right that, without the welfare state, Negro-style sexual habits are not sustainable. Without the State to feed your kids, you had better be particular about the company you keep. Those who expect to survive after the Ponzi economy collapses will learn fast.
Regarding slutty women: Every media outlet spews feminism and porn. To expect the average young woman to be immune to the culture she grew up in is as unreasonable as expecting her to be racially aware. A smart girl goes to college and finds herself in a co-ed dorm, with drunken boys right outside her bedroom door every night. She will be harassed mercilessly by the other girls if she doesn’t put out. Her best option, as she sees it, may be serial monogamy. Pick one boy and turn the rest away as long as he sticks around, then try to find another. It’s ugly, but it’s the situation that the college administration put her into.
Hopefully, as she matures, she learns to keep her knees together. There are ex-sluts in their late twenties, hoping to marry a good man. They’re not proud of their past, and they don’t want their daughters to go through what they did. Unless you’re a virgin yourself, don’t be so scornful of these wounded women.
Spock, this little routine of “nothing changes” is silly and distracts from the real issues at hand. You probably think that it is sophisticated in a SWPL sort of way, but it is in fact a very young and ignorant child’s view of the world. The child assumes that his world is “normal,” that other homes are just like his home, that other families operate the way his does, that it’s always been this way.
Once he gets older and develops a little maturity, not to mention brainpower, he begins to realize that this is not the case at all. Some parents are kind and loving, others are distant, still others may be cruel. Some parents give permission to do all sorts of things, others don’t. In other words, the whole world doesn’t resemble his family room.
Society at large has changed, some of this is provable and demonstrable. Other changes are harder to document, but no less real. Many people on this board are old enough that they have personally observed some of these changes. For example, when I was in high school and college you simply didn’t see interracial pairings. Now, you can’t avoid seeing it. I’d say that’s a pretty significant change. It is just one of many.
You laughably try to pretend there was as much divorce in the past as now. This is provably, demonstrably false. We can also establish that there are far more out of wedlock births. Are they faking that too, Spock? That’s quite a charade the issuers of birth certificates have got going. If you could prove your claims, you could turn the social sciences upside down. You could change textbooks all over the land. But let’s face it, that’s not going to happen, is it? You offer no proof, just more SWPL posturing.
If you are not observant enough to notice such changes, then you are not competent to engage in conversation on the matter.
Grow up.
Gentlemen,
Where is it you’re doing your looking for your nice girl? In the clubs??
There’s an old saying: Don’t fish for trout in a herring barrel.
If you want a girl who hasn’t slept with 15 guys, then don’t go where those types hang out.
I know you’re asking, but how CAN you find her? Where do you go to meet good girls, if not the clubs?
I’ll tell you again: Shine up to the middle-aged ladies around. Your landlady. Your aunt’s best friend. The lady at the supermarket checkout. (Not, obviously, the sour-faced “career woman” spinster.)
Because, you see, human nature hasn’t really changed, Jew propaganda notwithstanding. The old ways still work, and middle aged ladies still LOVE to play matchmaker. We live for this stuff.
So, be friendly to us. Do us a favor. Pay us a compliment. Be your delightful “beta” selves at us. Because we’ve lived long enough to know that “alpha” is really “jerk,” and we don’t want that crap played on our beloved young ladies.
And here’s the best part: If WE like you, we’ll introduce you, and before the dinner party, WE’ll do the marketing of you to her FOR you. Which WILL be effective, because women ARE status-obsessed, which is why women CARE what other women think about their potential boyfriends.
So if that lovely young thing hears what a catch you are, she’s halfway in love with you already.
I’ve head ‘Michelangelo was gay’ before, but there isn’t any proof. He didn’t even change clothes when busy with art to the point that his boots became ingrown into his body, and probably wasn’t banging anyone male or female for a good portion of his life, so I was using him as someone not easily classifiable on the ‘roissy scale’.
Now I like Aqua Teen Hunger Force and all the other things on your list with the exception of cell phones, but it’s ridiculous to say we haven’t had negative changes in society as well. Society may not have been all ‘Leave it to Beaver’ but it probably wasn’t all Animal House either.
What we do know from statistics is that the portions of children born out of wedlock and not living with both biological parents has ballooned in the past decades, and that those characteristics aren’t the best for success later on in life, not to mention a number of other social changes which aren’t exactly positive. Just because we have some technological advances doesn’t mean that the situation today is superior in all aspects to what it was 50 years ago.
Trainspotter- Sorry to burst your fantasy bubble, but, fact is people have not changed that much, only how much they talk about it has.
Yes, TV has changed because the censorship laws have changed, but, do you want to go back to more censorship?
Are there the same amount of babies born out of wedlock today then before?
Well, there were a few choices which were couples were forced into loveless marriages, back ally or illegal office abortions, or the unmarried knocked up girl was sent to an aunt’s or a home and was forced to give the baby up for adoption.
Have the numbers changed? We will never know, but plenty of people were having sex outside of marriage and getting knocked up.
You didn’t see interracial couples back when because it was illegal, but there was plenty of interracial sex going on!
Sex between maids and masters of the home, white women sneaking into Jazz bars, sex that was behind the scenes away from the public.
Strom Thurmond is a perfect example!
Everything is just more visible today.
You want interracial dating and marriage to be illegal again because you want the government to decide who you can and cannot date or can and cannot marry?
“Yes, TV has changed because the censorship laws have changed, but, do you want to go back to more censorship?”
Speaking for myself at least, yes.
“Are there the same amount of babies born out of wedlock today then before?
Well, there were a few choices which were couples were forced into loveless marriages…”
And I suppose marriages aren’t “loveless” today? If anything the White American capacity for love has been degraded greatly, and probably far more of the marriages are loveless.
“back ally or illegal office abortions”
It is clear from the work of John Lott that Roe V. Wade led to an increase in the number of abortions, even if you count illegal abortions.
“or the unmarried knocked up girl was sent to an aunt’s or a home and was forced to give the baby up for adoption.”
I’m pretty sure that was counted as an out of wedlock birth.
“Have the numbers changed? We will never know…”
Yes we do know. If you’re going to deny this, you might as well deny that Blacks commit more crimes, etc.
Spock: When I was a boy…
There was only one family in the neighborhood, or in any of my classes, with no dad around.
I did not know of a single girl who got pregnant in high school.
My mom did not serve Jello. She cooked.
We did not watch Lawrence Welk.
My parents did not sleep in separate beds.
No doubt people screwed and cheated, but not nearly as much as you would like to claim. Why don’t you tell us not to worry about the extraordinary crime rates of Darks, because after all, we had crime in the fifties too? If it’s an error to take old TV shows at face value, it’s much worse to take leftist critics at face value.
Why do you assume that women who did not commit adultery were frigid? Did you learn that from your mother?
What does this list of “improvements” since the fifties say about you? Fast food, 7-11, 24 hour supermarkets, and fruit in winter. Hmm… Internet, South Park, Aqua Team Hunger Force, and good porn. Good rock music and cell phones. I’d say, fat boy, that you ought to put down the spoon and get out of the house. Less food, more exercise, and meet some real people face to face. Stop watching the tube and playing air guitar. Get a life beyond eating and electronic stimulation. Then maybe you won’t need to masturbate so much.
If you encourage and cater to something, you’re going to get more of it. So yes, it makes sense that a society where becoming a single mother is a meal ticket to welfare benefits will produce more single parent households than a society where they tried to discourage this sort of thing.
In general, the seduction community stuff works on all women. Forget the idea that it only works on “sluts”. Look into “day game” and David DeAngelo’s material for stuff that would be particularly applicable to more traditional women.
Spock, I always find it funny when someone is intellectually incoherent and morally repugnant at the same time.
You imply that we cannot make judgements or express opinions about any era prior to one that we have experienced. History is a pretty empty subject in your world, I guess…
You claim that ‘Animal House is probably closer to life in the late 50’s early 60’s than this “Leave it to Beaver” dream world that never existed.’
I claim that “Animal House” is considerably less representative of that era than “Leave it to Beaver”, unless you’re a pot-smoking left-winger who is trying to make a buck at smearing America by making a stupid, stupid movie.
Of course people have been sleeping around since the dawn of time, sex is a powerful force, but a lot of the negative consequences can be avoided with some social restraint. Your attitude seems to be that: “there never were any good old days and even if there was, we can’t get them back and they weren’t any good any ways and so therefore…. bla… bla…”. Liberal b*llshit.
As far as wanting an experienced girl: you take the used up trash, I’ll take the treasure. I’ve had both, married the latter.
Oh, and the fact that a person who’s username is either related to a Star Trek character without feelings or a liberal creep, thinks that “South Park” and good porn are valuable, that’s just to be expected. Thanks for being consistent.
I used to read that David DeAngelo stuff around 5-6 years ago, it didn’t work, and in fact I was even less successful using that ‘advice’ than I was being my normal self. I think the main point of that ‘advice’ industry is to sell books.
‘I guess my question is, to what extent are churchgoing women more likely to be traditional mates? And in that regard, are some churches preferable to others? I’ve always been impressed by Mormon women’s traditional aspects’
The Mormons have earned a great deal of respect from me. However, I refuse to join them.
I tried to use Catholicism to find a mate. I failed.
The fact that I have failed to mate and I am middle-aged should indicate that I am not a perfect source of advice on mating.
Spock
“You don’t want a woman who has experience? So you would prefer some clueless virgin who reacts like a wet towel?”
My answer is YES. Now, when I’ve shed the last vestiges of jew propaganda I see it very clearly. I first and foremost prefer the girl who will be great mother of my LARGE clan of little Aryan wolves (one is here, second is coming) and we contemplate on total 5 or 6.
So I prefer a woman without any fucking experience. Period.
[quote]”Discard says:
July 6, 2010 at 6:17 am
Spock: When I was a boy…
There was only one family in the neighborhood, or in any of my classes, with no dad around.
I did not know of a single girl who got pregnant in high school.
My mom did not serve Jello. She cooked.
We did not watch Lawrence Welk.
My parents did not sleep in separate beds.
No doubt people screwed and cheated, but not nearly as much as you would like to claim. Why don’t you tell us not to worry about the extraordinary crime rates of Darks, because after all, we had crime in the fifties too? If it’s an error to take old TV shows at face value, it’s much worse to take leftist critics at face value.
Why do you assume that women who did not commit adultery were frigid? Did you learn that from your mother?
What does this list of “improvements” since the fifties say about you? Fast food, 7-11, 24 hour supermarkets, and fruit in winter. Hmm… Internet, South Park, Aqua Team Hunger Force, and good porn. Good rock music and cell phones. I’d say, fat boy, that you ought to put down the spoon and get out of the house. Less food, more exercise, and meet some real people face to face. Stop watching the tube and playing air guitar. Get a life beyond eating and electronic stimulation. Then maybe you won’t need to masturbate so much.[quote/]
Thats right to the spot. The brat asked for it
Hunter,
You read too many gamer blogs, I can tell.
Alpha/Beta is something that was originally used to describe pack animals in which the males of the pack sparred and competed with each other until a dominant male rose to the top. The dominant male gets first dibs on food and women. The terminology doesn’t particularly apply to humans – we’re not pack animals (at least among the Europeans); our sociology is way different and far more complex.
There are some men who are good at picking up women, naturally, perhaps due to a combination of looks, assertiveness, conformance to fashion, style, and etc. (though not necessarily all of these – its certainly possible to pick up women if you have average or below average looks – the existence of Roissy’s blog is proof).
There are the Jerry Seinfeld types who eschew long relationships and pick up women every other week simply because that’s what their cultural values dictate. I’d be loathe to call these people “alphas” though (Seinfeld, as a typical hip New York Jew, is hardly someone you’d compare to a primate Alpha male!).
I’m not sure how the behavior of hipsters and negroes all of the sudden became what is falsely believed to be as “evolutionarily desirable” behavior to emulate by the HBD crowd.
Actually I take that back, I think I know exactly why: http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2010/07/adult-virgins.html
Hunter,
You read too many gamer blogs, I can tell.
It seems “game” has captivated the Occidental Dissent inner circle. At least 5 posts on this blog in the last three weeks have linked to the site of the odious Ferdinand Bardamu. At least two have linked to Roissy. Kievsky recently hailed Roissy as “the greatest man of the 21st century” and called him “Da Man.”
Would the “game” proponents please carefully and precisely define the terms “alpha” and “beta”? Also explain why you believe such terminology is necessary and useful.
…”or the unmarried knocked up girl was sent to an aunt’s or a home and was forced to give the baby up for adoption.”
So here is an excellent example accidently provided by Spock of how the 50s WERE superior.
Far better for that out-of-wedlock conceptus (AND society) to grow up in a 2-parent home with a mom who’s actually around some of the time and a dad who provides necessities, encouragement and expectations than the pandemic of single-mom-and-her-underparented-urchin duos currently dismantling Western Civ.
WN and game theory in the same blog? Interesting combo.
H. Rock White:
>As far as the OP goes, there’s the additional option of seeking out
>women from countries which are not overrun by modern western
>feminism.
Finally, a topic where we agree completely. This picture is worth 1000 words on the subject: http://bit.ly/bGgs8s.
(SFW, but contains some non-white content.)
Hunter – you’ve already arrived at step #1 – you want a serious relationship, with a good woman. Not a Roissy Hook Up.
Follow your own instincts. Be a good White man. Your woman is out there. You’ll find her. Keep looking.
Hunter, “Animal House” is older than you are and Animal House is probably closer to life in the late 50’s early 60’s than this “Leave it to Beaver” dream world that never existed.
Realistically, elements of both existed.
But Beaver represented an ideal, a wholesome ideal. It was a world which rewarded attempting to discern the good from the bad and to act on the good. That real society might have fallen short is beside the point.
I was raised on 80s reruns of Beaver, and Mr. Ed and Father Knows Best and other similarly wholesome entertainment. I grew up in a neighborhood with neighbors and childhood friends and their families scarcely distinct from the world those shows represented. My upper-middle (and even upper) neighborhood (all white, 95% Ang-Sax) was situated on top of a one-square-mile hill, at the bottom of which was a working class neighborhood of similar size; although my family wasn’t at all wealthy (and certainly not Ang-Sax, lol), that those people were nothing like “us” and not only to be avoided but positively evil (I’ll never forget my shock at hearing one kid sing, “Oh come let us destroy Him”) was the attitude that governed me until well into high school. It’s probably true such television shows contributed to my being a judgmental little creep, so I can understand where liberal reformers are coming from.
But what message does television offer these days? Life is nothing but an endless series of problems that can never be solved until we admit our prejudices and resign ourselves to wallowing in pity until a strong female figure comes along to take charge and whip us into shape.
Here is an issue from my personal life.
I periodically go on Platonic dates with a twenty-something white woman. She is fairly healthy and could bear children. She and I get along well; we have the intellectual respect and deep conversations that are supposed to be part of romantic love. Her ethics are considerably more permissive than mine.
She is not at all attracted to me. I am more attracted to her mind than her body. She fills a wife-shaped hole in my social life, although she does not warm my bed and probably never will.
She is not terribly happy because she feels unable to open up emotionally or romantically to anyone. I am not happy leaving her alone. One way or another, her path and my path will separate. But not yet. Whether this is friendship or dysfunctional malingering, I do not know.
‘How do you go from adapting to the sexual marketplace to finding a worthy mate and getting into a serious relationship? It is like the difference between flying and landing.’
One way or another, I am “serious” about my dysfunctional Platonic friend. That commitment on my part may prevent me from breeding. I am emotional and committed, but emotions and commitment are not necessarily enough to produce a successful marriage.
@Denise: No ma’am, Presbyterian
HW,
I have been happily married to a traditional women for some years now. We knew each other from high school and both come from very conservative and fundamentalist Christian backgrounds.
During our courtship we went to movies, played family games, attended church, etc. Very innocent stuff. Of course, I was endlessly heckled about this from my more degenerate friends; however, seeing as how their relationships never worked out (for one reason or another) I can’t help but feel a little vindicated about my choices.
Randy Garver:” …No ma’am, Presbyterian”
Well, the Chinese are on to you guys too. Next to Jews, they hate Calvinists the most.
This topic could be expanded to include consideration of the historic role played by polygyny in non-White cultures as well as pre-Christian White cultures. Kevin MacDonald’s earliest research was on the role played by sexual mores in group evolutionary strategies. This is covered briefly by Virginia Abernathy in her foreword to MacDonald’s “Cultural Insurrections”, where reference is also made to the pioneering work of Robert Triver.
William Gayeley Simpson has also written at length about the relationship of human sexuality to White Nationalism in “Which Way Western Man”.
When looked at from a strictly racialist point of view, a case can be made for the eugenic advantages of a socially sanctioned outlet for “alpha” male procreativity in the form of polygyny. In White cultures, this idea found brief acceptance in early Mormonism and a more enduring expression among Vikings.
At first blush, polygyny is seen as oppressive to women. I’m not sure this is necessarily true, depending on the amount of social status attributed to it by the surrounding culture. I suspect that monogamy is most strongly supported by “beta” males. In many ways, monogamy resembles the application of democracy to reproductive strategy. It’s egalitarian.
Not surprisingly, the Catholic Church was the most powerful antagonist to pagan European polygyny, “which it enforced through various social controls, including rules that prohibited concubinage and prevented bastards from inheriting wealth. At the formal level, the result was to regulate at the group level the sexual behavior of wealthier, more powerful males. In effect, the social control , or discipline, imposed by the society as a whole was able to compromise the interests of and individual wealthy male and his immediate biological relatives” (foreword to Cultural Insurrections, page iv).
“How do you shift gears though? How do you go from adapting to the sexual marketplace to finding a worthy mate and getting into a serious relationship? It is like the difference between flying and landing.”
First off, you should not be in a sexual marketplace to begin with. Certain animals operate this way, if you know what I mean. The marketplace you mention is nothing more than a trap. A trap that keeps a mans mind polluted with lust. Clouding his judgment, ruining his reputation, and weakening his body.
Thinking you are “flying” while living to serve your hedonistic urges is one clear sign your judgment is clouded. Slumming it, would be more the term I would call it.
If there were more virtuous men, maybe there would be more virtuous women.
The problem is that “alphas”, as described by Roissyites, are often the least intelligent and least responsible. In Eastern cultures where polygamy was common, it took men of substantial wealth (which implies, at least to some extent, some intelligence and shrewdness) to keep many wives.
But I do like, at least from a purely rhetorical point of view, of calling this the ultimate form of “alphaness” – a man who is capable of procuring many women, keeping them, impregnating them, and ensuring that all the children grow up and prosper. That’s a far cry from the “here today gone tomorrow” “alpha” that Roissy and friends talk about.
For those who think polygamy is completely different from sexual promiscuity, it is not. Polygamy is historically the most common in the Tropics, and among the less developed species-just as sexual promiscuity is.
Both sexual promiscuity and polygamy, require an ability to be unfaithful and have the natural resources for offspring to survive without a father’s help.
Yes. In a any hypothetically polygynous society that might arise, “Alpha” would be culturally defined by the society that “espoused” it.
David Lane has written on this topic as well. I’ve seen it on the web, probably at AllFatherWotan, or something like that. I believe it was his contention that White society would re-emerge in a polygynyist form after the Revolution.
Harry Enfield – Women know your limits
The only game blog that I read is Ferdinand Bardamu. And that is because he sometimes writes about racial issues. Mike Capatano and Gregory Hood read Roissy.
Steve,
While primitive, hedonistic polygyny has been most egregiously accompanied by low investment child rearing in tribal regions of the tropics there are other possibilities for the future.
Imagine, for example, four racially minded and altruistic beta-bachelors living in a relatively temperate clime, (e.g. central Virginia), who pool their resources and devote their lives to the rearing of offspring produced by a mutually admired, Alpha male of their own race, sired in a more tropical region of their country, (e.g. Pearl Mississippi).
Spock is an insouciant libertine trying to rationalize his own degenerate worldview. His list of things which make the “modern world” better than that of the past are things which are irrelevant to the life of our people. His depiction of our late, great high culture as filled with in-the-closet sexual degeneracy has no basis in fact. His denial that our culture has been deliberately subverted and cheapened to the level of subhumanity is brazen mendacity. He’s no different than the other insufferable modern know-nothings like Marxists and Liberals who continually try to critique our history.
Idealizing, then making those ideals into reality, is the essence of being Aryan. A Jewed little degenerate wouldn’t know the first thing about it and is not worth wasting time arguing with in any case. You cannot give the soulless man a soul.
Spock says: “And most important! The last thing you want to go back in time to is the scary foods of days of old. Dishes like this:
http://www.candyboots.com/wwcards/rosyperfection.html”
I’ll take that over the chemical laden, over processed, msg/hfcs soaked frankenfoods that fill store shelves today.
“Remember back in the old days there was no:”
“Internet” – Most of us remember life before the internet and it wasn’t that bad.
“South Park” – Who cares if the trashiest show on TV wasn’t around?
“Good Rock Music” – There wasn’t any rap music either.
“Cell Phones” – No rude idiots talking loudly on their cellphones in public either.
“Fast Food” – Funny, there weren’t as many corpulent lard balls either.
“24 Hour Supermarkets” – What, you mean the grocery store employees actually got Sundays off? How terrible!
“So, think real hard before you dream about wishing for the more dismal time of frigid women who made dinner in a jello mold,” – Real home cooked meals were the norm in those days.
“TV was the Lawrence Welk Show,” – I’ll take Lawrence Welk over MTV any day.
“and you and your wife are sleeping in separate twin beds,” – Now who’s getting his vision of reality from an old sitcom?