Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'Men'.
Found 20 results
-
Currently 19 years old, deciding whether or not I should set myself up for the possibility of a family later on, or whether I should set myself up for being single for the rest of my life. Thoughts? Pros and Cons for each? I'm an Omega male so getting laid isn't an option.
-
I wasn't sure in which category to write this in. I'm a biochemist student and I work as a pharmacy technician to pay for my studies. I am seeing a growing and alarming pattern in the health system that I would qualify as social engineering. I will put my idea forward and then explain myself. I believe that health professionals, with the governments and the pharmaceutical companies, have been altering the behavior of the western people for at lease 3 generations. Before you dismiss this, saying I'm a conspiracy nut, let me state 3 arguments: - The baby boomers have been receiving' for most of their lives, constant prescriptions of benzodiazepines. So much so, that the majority of them are hooked on those drugs. Most of the research that has been done on the topic is not openly talked about. There is little funding to show its adverse effects and usually dismissed under the argument that they are old drugs that we try to avoid using these days and that the patients are already hooked on them so we are basically trying to make their lives more comfortable. In the case of self destructive patients and patients with anxiety, we measure the pros and cons. But people who work in pharmacies who see these patients every months, we see the side effects. These patients dont reason very quickly, they also have a weird reasoning. There is a nihilism to them. They dont worry about things that they really should worry about. And I want to make a parallel. These patients are pro big government. They are pro open borders. They are pro socialism. I think it is not too far fetch to think that a drug that is created to deal with anxiety would prevent people from feeling anxiety about the government's decisions. - My generation takes a lot of antidepressant medication. And most of these patients are girls. The boys receive a lot of Ritalin and Vyvanse. All of these drugs play on the mechanisms of dopamine and serotonin receptors. These chemicals regulate your mood, energy, your sex drive, everything. Look at my generation. They play computer all day. They drop out of school. They have no faith in the future. They avoid the opposite sex. They have low energy and are overweight. And they have absolutely no will to defend their way of life. - A growing trend I see is doctor informing the mothers that it is better to use powdered milk instead of breast milk to feed their babies. These formulas are soy base. This produces a large amount of estrogen in the baby's system. It is mostly harmful for boys. These hormones compete with testosterone. Paul Joseph Watson has made a very good video about #soyboy. I think everyone should watch it. I believe that doctors are deliberately trying to remove male dominant behavior, in our society, at a very young age. If you think I'm a conspiratard, that's fine. I am just stating what I have observed. And I believe we should explore this question, because doctors have been doing this shit for about 70 years now. And there is a correlation to be made with the slow downfall of our civilization. Thank you for listening
-
As discussed a lot in many of the Freedomain radio podcast In the realm of sexual market value men are desired for the resources they can bring in to the family and women are desired for their beauty and fertility. That's it generally, but how is a woman that has accumulated many resources of her own changed by being able to do what is desired for men to do. what does that do to the dynamic? Do they seek men with even more resources (Women dating up?) Does what they value in men change? Do they the tend to value something different in men other than security of resources, Do they tend to just desire men less because they can bring a sufficient or more than a sufficient amount of resources? WHat do you all think? If you are a woman who has accumulated resources like this what are your experiences. -
Note: As I typed this out I quickly realized I wasn't typing out an argument so much as a rant. Therefore I decided to post in the Self Knowledge section since I'd rather steer this into something more personally fulfilling and inspiring as I can't see this as being something worth arguing on an objective level. I have a very simple question: Which do you, the reader of this post, prefer? Or, which is the better of two evils? Incoming Islam or existing Statism? On one hand my religion and culture will be annihilated and I will be forced into slavery if I do not convert and join the horde, on the other I will be a lifelong tax serf for the Welfare-War-State and an ungrateful 50% whom receive portions of the money looted from me. On one hand women are under a true patriarchy, which I'd say as a man is greatly preferred to the matriarchy of the Welfare-Warfare-State (which I will abbreviate as WWS for simplicity). Considering these factors I'm tempted to either throw up my hands and say "screw it--they both suck. I'd rather wait for the inevitable meltdown to occur and join the side most aligned with my self interest" or give preference to he Muslims since as a man I'd be better off with them than the WWS. Maybe I'm just salty because male slavery in the West has gotten me pissed off again, maybe I have a point in saying Islam is slightly better than the WWS, or maybe I'm completely overlooking the benefits of the WWS (like hobbies to escape reality and the ability to join the White Flight out of the ghetto)...but I know I have point in suggesting that as a man Islam is better than the WWS. I'm not arguing that Islam is better than the West because any idiot would know otherwise. The West is the Best. However the West had died decades ago. Now the Occident is some disgusting degenerate dystopia on the Slow Train to Nowhereland. Am I the only one tempted to grab a Koran and join the heathens? Am I missing something vital (like the likelihood of my decapitation by association? Which frankly isn't a big minus given how shit life is likely to be for me anyway)? -
Scenario: A woman wearing slutty clothes, goes into the dirtiest bar and flirts with the sleaziest looking man. She gets drunk with him, goes back to his house, flirts with him a little and things go too far. He begins to try to have sex with her, she says no, but he doesn't listen and she is raped. Background: Recently my girlfriend and I have been debating this idea of the nature of responsibility in the situations leading up to a rape occurring. It began with her stating that she should be able to wear whatever she wanted when walking down the street. I told her that I didn't want her wearing sexual things without me because that may lead to "bad things" happening to her. I said that she is free to do it, but she has to understand that there are consequences for her actions (even if that can lead to rape at the most sever level). I tried to compare it to a person walking into a bear infested forest with meat wrapped around them and being eaten by a bear, or a guy walking down a dark ally with $100 hanging out of his pockets and getting robbed. At this point she told me that I am comparing apples and oranges and that a woman who is raped "never has any responsibility" for putting herself in that situation. Question: 1. Does the woman have any responsibility for the rape occurring? 2. If she does have a responsibility, can her actions here, or in any other scenario ever take away responsibility from the offender? 3. Does this mean I am telling her that she/women in general cannot wear whatever they want? Thoughts? -
I've heard Stef say men verbally abuse each other to help acclimatize each other to verbal abuse. That strikes me as the "we bullied you in high school in order to make you stronger". Bullies don't bully for your benefit because I don't remember mine doing post-game surveys and asking me for feedback. It's 100% sadistic. When I started going hard in the FDR a year ago, my self attack habit totally vanished. I used to do it at least 3 times a day and now I can't even imagine self-attacking. I got rid of my "friends" who were verbally abusive and with the friends I had remaining I never again made passive aggressive remarks or insults out of "playfulness", and none of our conversations dithered in value. They turned more serious and whole. I can see honest no-sugarcoat feedback as the closest thing to what he's talking about but I can't make the leap into "verbal abuse can be helpful". Was this just a colloquial hunk of wisdom Stef was giving out or does it have some rational backing?
-
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-18/melbourne-university-opens-up-jobs-to-women-applicants-only/7426704 Hmmm "Equal opportunity act allows for positive discrimination" ...anyone else see something OFF with that... lol -
Link to the article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-36266753 What are your thoughts?
-
I am not a parent yet, and I'm not sure that this technically falls under "Peaceful Parenting" but it certainly has to do with parenting and I've been giving this a lot of thought lately for some reason. What is the best way to teach a kid about sex or to explain where babies come from? I think there are some general principles and objectives that we can agree to from the start: You shouldn't lie about it no matter what their age (e.g. no talk of storks) However, you shouldn't get into details that aren't age appropriate either (e.g. showing college level anatomy books to 5-year-olds) You should aim to impress upon the kid that this is serious business and not to be taken lightly. Sex can ruin lives and emotionally destroy yourself or others when abused. At the same time they shouldn't be left with that puritanical guilt thing (like I was to some extent). By the time the kid is in their late teens they should understand the basics of sexual market value theory. Both male and female teens should be taught about what quality men and quality women ACTUALLY want in a partner. They should be made aware of the different types of sexual predation that can be practiced by both men an women. Most importantly, your child should feel comfortable coming to you with any questions or issues that come up. Does anybody have any disagreements, amendments, or critiques of this so far? I'm still working on these ideas so I'd appreciate your feedback.
-
this is an excerpt from my blog i've been sitting on for a while preface: i will be using the terms “man” and “woman” in a general sense, though i understand that there are some exceptions, just like a horse by definition has 4 legs, but sometimes they are born with 3, however that doesn’t make that animal not-a-horse. so please, contain your exceptions until the end. theory: the use of the word “objectification” (labeling) is a woman’s way of saying she feels uncomfortable in the face of the fact that a man is sexually attracted to her, or another woman. but instead of being honest about her own discomfort, she uses the term “objectification” to turn the blame on the man. just like how a priest uses the term “sin” to turn the blame on other people when his prophecies and predictions don’t come true. the words “sin” and “objectification” are nearly identical in practice because neither are rationally defined by an external method, and instead are used to absorb anything that the user feels uncomfortable in response to, and then masquerades this as a universally applicable concept, not a personal preference. there is, of course, nothing wrong with being uncomfortable. i encourage everyone to speak up about things that make them uncomfortable, with the understanding that your discomfort does not generate an obligation in other people to cater to it. what is wrong, however, is lying. claims of objectification are dishonest, because objectification is not defined by any objective standard, just like pejoratives. since there are no objective standards for detecting objectification, any claims of objectification are dishonest because no proof is possible until there are objective and testable hypothesis for determining the presence of objectification. for a better explanation of why it is a lie, see my article about the dishonesty of pejoratives. so if claims of objectification are dishonest, what is the incentive for their use? here is a utilitarian cost-benefit analysis: benefits: 1. causes man to feel moral dilemma over being attracted to a woman, thus pausing his pursuit. if he is a good man, he will take a while to process this moral dilemma, or he may disregard the claim, because he does not know what is meant by objectification. 2. woman eliminates what she believes to be the source of her discomfort in the short term. 3. woman discovers a short-term degree of power to mitigate the amount of attention she receives. costs: 1. a good man will continue to be confused about whether or not his own attraction is objectification or not, possibly causing long-term harm to other romantic investments. 2. man associates the confusion with the woman, instead of the foggy concept of objectification. 3. the woman drives away good men who can detect this strategy. after this strategy is foiled, she must either invest in a new social group or a new strategy for mitigating male attention. what are your thoughs? do you have anything to add or correct?
-
In response to Stef's "The Truth About Makeup" video I've published a video on the male equivalent of makeup. Hope you enjoy! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CqsjnLvd62Y&feature=youtu.be -
Let me start off by Thanking Stefan for the books, that he has written. They have helped me a great deal. I am NOT trying to be cruel or mean. I am just telling the truth as I know it. So please forgive me if my wording or grammar are a little off. Stefan, Please Read. It will be short. I do not think you/Stefan knows what a MGTOW is. There's a lot of MGTOW that are married with kids. I hope you/Stefan did not pick MGTOW as a topic just because it is a large group of people/men. To learn more about MGTOW, I would start with Spetsnaz https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbbeOA5K7Hhc3I2vWG1jZ0w and work my way out from their. I think MGTOW like Sandman and Barbarossa are Interesting, But not in the same frame of mind as MGTOW like Spetsnaz. What is being talked about here is Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, suicide 4to1 vs woman, social exclusion, woman using the state to destroy men, western civilization clasping because woman have used the state so much to kick the shit out of man, They are with drawing from woman by the 100s of millions, etc, etc, etc. This a civil rights issue. This is very, very real. And this is horrifying. Just look up the statistics. 2/3 of all Japanese men have withdrawn from woman/the state. I do not have all the statistics for all the countries of western civilization. But if you look them up I think that you will be shocked. I live in the U.S.A, White Males are the only race and sex that have laws written to sexually and racially discriminate against them. The small group of good woman vs large group of good men would destroy millions of men if they took your/Stefan's advice to get married and have kids. Stated differently, there are not enough woman that will not destroy men using the state. Therefore millions off men are left out in the cold and are damaged from woman using the state. suffering from Post-traumatic Stress Disorder, Social Exclusion, Poverty aka Homeless. What should they do? If men are married or single, why not Men/Man Going Their Own Way? Being seen as a human, a man and not a utility or a thing. This is a very large subject. please take a deeper closer look before going out half cocked. Please talk to good representatives of the MGTOW community before Judging them. Of what I know about the Freedomain community. I am sure Stefan and the community will take a closer look. Thank you. -
I listen to The Art of Manliness Podcast every now and then and I came across this interesting conversation about biological origins of male aggression. I immediately thought of the FDR shows I've heard on the topic and wanted to share. What do you guys think? http://feeds.soundcloud.com/stream/173724074-artofmanliness-86-demonic-males-with-dr-richard-wrangham.mp3
-
Munk Debates - Be it resolved men are obsolete…
stMarkus posted a topic in Reviews & Recommendations
http://www.munkdebates.com/debates/gender-in-the-21st-century I haven't really come across feminists expressing their views before so it was interesting for me to see what they have to say. Yet it quickly became obvious that their views lack substance, their talking points were repetitive, boring and vacuous. And of course it's deeply ironic how both the pro and con sides of this ostensible debate are feminists and this is considered a proper medium to discuss the role of gender in the 21st century. For juxtaposition, a text of Stefan's speech about feminism: http://pdfsr.com/pdf/feminism-speech.pdf. -
A really interesting video showing the attitude of violence against men by women filmed in Fitzrovia, London - the 'creative industries' centre of London and hence home to some the most well educated and intelligent men and women in the world. http://www.trueactivist.com/this-is-what-happens-when-the-public-sees-a-woman-abusing-a-man/
-
I watched a video where Stefan mentioned a book called "Men's Fear of Women" however, I can not find it on amazon or searching for it via google. I was hoping you would know the book and the author he is referring to. Here is the exact point when Stefan mentions it http://youtu.be/BlIrmHOfeA8?t=20m59s I'm assuming it might be this one but I really want to know for sure - http://www.amazon.com/dp/0156304198/ref=rdr_ext_sb_ti_hist_1
-
This is a recent one that was audio only, and since I'm typically getting new content thru youtube I almost missed it. Maybe you're the same way. Anyway, this is a great podcast. FDR#2577 – Are Women Held Morally Responsible? http://cdn.media.freedomainradio.com/feed/FDR_2577_Female_Responsibility.mp3
-
Conscription is a remnant of slavery and it's still going on in Western Europe.
-
I'm just curious what all y'all think about masculinity, specifically how you'd define it. This is the dictionary definition for masculine: "having qualities or appearance traditionally associated with men, esp. strength and aggressiveness." There are some masculine virtues like courage, assertiveness etc that are also sometimes considered feminine virtues (among many other examples), and yet I totally feel more masculine when I am courageous and assertive. There are some male stereotypes that a lot of guys take to be how they measure their masculinity like in how split off from their feelings they are, or how they drunk they can get or in an obsession with sports statistics etc. But these things are not things that would give me that same sense of masculinity. Those things actually put me off. I also notice that I have a strong bias to say that the values I practice in my life make me masculine. And of course people project a model of masculinity that was their father or other male role model growing up. So, I'm curious. How do you determine what masculine means for yourself? Or if you are a woman, how do you see masculinity? Is it really as simple as muscles and body hair? I don't think so, but what do you think? Also these podcasts are really good: FDR 444 Anti-Masculinity pt1 FDR 445 Anti-Masculinity pt2
-
Book link Excellent, concise book on what masculinity is and what it means to be good at being a man. It has really helped me appreciate the value of my own masculinity and how to embrace it and why I should. Here's a blog post from the author's website where it includes a recording of a presentation that covers a few of the topics from the book.
