If you believe that you are entitled, that women should obey, submit, serve, that unless you are buying sex by the hour, women should be sacrificing their own good to serve you, then red pill behavior comes naturally.
If, on the other hand, you believe that women are equals, then it seems obvious that you should treat them “fairly” – which is to say, as if buying sex by the hour. Even if you know the red pill intellectually, it seems horribly unfair that women should respond to you doing good to them by doing bad to you, and equally unfair that the more you demand from women, the more you get.
If you don’t know the red pill, but believe that women should submit and obey, you will naturally act red pill. If you do know the red pill, but believe women are equals, then doing what gets you laid will seem artificial, unnatural, repugnant, and immoral, and women will seem bad when such behavior works.
If you think of woman as equals, you cannot judge yourself to be a good man when you do what gets you laid, and you cannot judge a woman to be a good woman when you do what gets you laid, and then she obeys you, has sex with you, and serves you.
But such a woman is a good woman. Women are content to serve, and should be content. Only whores are equals, and equal women are whores.
Exactly so. But most all American men are programmed-through fear and various means- to regard women as equals or, really, better than equals. Getting laid via red pill tactics while remaining programmed blue pill results in exactly what you claim: disgust with women, apathy,etc. Heartiste glosses over this with a “fake it til you make it” strategy, but de-programming is one thing, belief is another. Having boys grow up with that sort of belief in America would require nothing short of revolution or full scale religious awakening.
Moreover, in American coastal cities, to get laid a guy should behave red pill in one-on-one situations, but would be absolutely suicidal to behave this way in social situations. This constant public/private tension in how to act and what to say eats away at everything. The fact that red pill even exists is not the sign of a promising future but a symptom of how hopeless our situation has become.
****but would be absolutely suicidal ****
Hyperbole, surely. Red pill can be subtle, you know, as long as you really internalize and believe it. Perhaps *especially* if you believe.
It’s funny what a person can, and cannot, internalize. I have certainly internalized the view that women are helpmeets. On the other hand, I cannot at all seem to really believe that young women get horny or have dirty thoughts.
Relative status: Here is a post linking to a video of young women getting horny and having dirty thoughts.
That women were given the right to vote is a very good reason why beta males shouldn’t have been given the right to vote, Holy Christ.
A.J.P.
that’s a weak sauce video.
here’s frothing at the mouth, falling down fainting and pissing their pants young female desire:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VLvTq6FdOj4
If you internalized it and believed it with relative ease, you did not take the red pill. For most ex-progs, taking the red pill is not a “subtle” experience, but a very painful mindfuck. One that continues for some time and even then will never result in the sort of adult that a more sane society would have produced naturally.
You can “internalize” all the game knowledge you want, it has a funny way of evaporating when you approach a stone cold 9/10.
I mostly agree with you. I had a very terrible time, about four years ago I would guess, of battling the red pill with all my ability. There are one or two well-known blogs or bloggers that would remember my difficulty in digesting the red pill in those days.
…women should be sacrificing their own good to serve you…
Your woman is your companion. She wants to serve and obey in exchange for validation and for you taking responsibility for her.
And yet feminists hate patriarchy, a system by which men protect women, and paternalism, what they call it when we take responsibility for their feelings. Derp.
They also hate traditional marriage, in which men are removed from the sexual marketplace, and hate how women are always being pressured for sex by every man they meet, which they call rape culture. Consent culture is rape culture. Derp.
So what’s a redpill man to do? Start by quietly behaving properly while loudly proclaiming that you’re acting like a full participant in consent culture.
You are not acting as a good man if you do what it takes to get laid, unless you’re doing it in the context of marriage.
And a woman who obeys you, has sex with you and serves you outside of marriage is not acting as a good woman.
Unless you define “good” as “in accordance with animal nature,” which is basically the World Star Hip Hop morality.
Marriage was possible when I was young, and I got married.
Marriage is no longer possible. Heterosexuals can only get gay married – a relationship that is legally and socially non exclusive and open. The man commits to support the woman, and to continue to do so while she is fucking someone else and not fucking him. One might join a church or synagogue that socially enforces the marriage contract, but as Dalrock observes, such are getting harder to find, and in our discussions of Jewish law, I get the overwhelming impression that you have not found one.
Without getting into personal details, I’m married, thank G-d. Almost everyone around me (of a reasonable age, meaning, over 23 or so) is married. Most families have a bunch of kids. Divorce happens occasionally, but the flaming disaster that is the typical American divorce is not common.
A (not the) key part of making this happen is that sex outside marriage is considered a shameful and bad thing for men and women. See Unwin. Obviously, it happens, but nobody flaunts it. When you and Roissy (who is an actual satanist-what else is his “god of biomechanics”?) and the rest flaunt it, you are playing a (very small) part in maintaining the downward spiral of your societies.
As for the comment you quote, treating women as equals is generally stupid.
They are not equals, they are counterparts.
Treating them as fuckable livestock, as meat puppets and fleshy entertainment, is not stupid but evil and degrading, to you and to them, and an insult to Him who made you and them.
And how many of those men are sleeping on the couch or living in the man cave?
Obviously, I respect their privacy and don’t ask the question directly. It is not only forbidden to discuss sexual matters explicitly (except when you are learning the Law, or in some sort of circumstance where it is required,) but it’s considered to be in very poor taste.
From my impressions? None. Denial of the spouse’s sexual needs is grounds for divorce in Judaism, but it is not even that.
It is also difficult for me to imagine people who tend to marry as virgins or nearly virgins, who have 6-10 kids over the course of a marriage, and who generally have strict sexual mores, alienating each other to the degree of sleeping on the couch or living in the man cave without divorcing. They do not have the scar tissue over their souls that is required to maintain this level of alienation with one’s spouse while staying married to them.
Again, it is difficult for someone who was born and raised in a rat-infested dungeon to avoid modeling all animals as a sort of deformed rat. I myself had a very hard time when I was getting into this society, because I thought that these people were putting me on. Then after a while I thought that they were putting a show on for their kids. Then I thought they were putting a show on for each other. Eventually I realized that they were putting on a show for G-d, and that the alternative is Roissy or Sex in the City.
It is natural, by the way, for most people to avoid doing things that are considered shameful and despicable by their societies. A healthy human being has sexual desires. When their only non-shameful and despicable outlet for these desires is their spouse, and when they believe that satisfying these desires with their spouse is a great and holy thing, while not satisfying their spouse’s desires is a violation, the couch and man cave are not really on the table.
And then keep in mind that with a normal, mentally healthy person, when you marry as a virgin (or even if you don’t, if you haven’t accumulated massive scar tissue) sex leads to deep emotional pair bonding. When you have a bond like that with someone, supported by the religious framework, you do not kick them to the couch.
“socially enforces the marital contract”
What does your synagogue, your social circle, do when a woman disregards the marital contract?
In which way?
In any way – they all work out the same. If a woman does not respect her husband and obey him, she will probably sleep with someone else. If she sleeps with someone else, she will probably refuse to sleep with her husband. Any one sin is a pretty good indicator of all of the others.
If a woman publicly disrespects her husband, or cheats on him, I assume she will be ostracized. He will divorce her for the latter.
I really have no firm idea, because these behaviors in public in religious Jewish society are about as common as enjoying a pork sandwich-it’s not done (and by the way, people generally adhere to societal standards not because they fear specific and formal punishment but because they fear disapproval.) What keeps us from scratching our balls on formal occasions?
What goes on behind closed doors, I have no idea, any more than I know about the contents of people’s refrigerators. I assume that just like the vast majority of people who refrain from eating pork in public (because they choose to be part of a society which follows the Torah) don’t eat it at home, the vast majority of women who behave properly towards their husband in public do so in private.
Really? Yet somehow, strangely, the divorce rate for Orthodox Jews is not much different to the divorce rate for everyone else.
So there are a lot of people that should be being ostracized, but are not.
If divorce is occurring at about the same rate as in the surrounding society, it follows that the behaviors that lead to divorce are occurring at about the same rate as in the surrounding society.
>Yet somehow, strangely, the divorce rate for Orthodox Jews is not much different to the divorce rate for everyone else.
Source? I have not been able to find any figures.
Anecdotally-I am not seeing this in my community.
Divorce is not unheard of, but not common.
The behavior I’ve seen from American non-Jewish women in public is unheard of.
“you are playing a (very small) part in maintaining the downward spiral of your societies.”
There is absolutely zero incentive for a male to get married in the West in 2016, so we play the cards we’ve been dealt, which means withholding commitment and taking advantage of women. To go along with the current state of marriage would be to give legitimacy to a broken system where women are given 100% of the power the moment you say “I do”.
“[Roissy’s god of biomechanics] is satanism”
Could you be any more of an insufferable pedant? It’s a metaphor.
From what I’ve read on here about your views on women you seem to not stray too far from the stereotype of the dweebish effeminate Jew, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and ask anyway: is there anything Roissy has written about that you disagree with on a factual level (not a moral one)? Do you deny the laws of attraction?
What provoked this comment was a comment on another blog
If he had believed that women were not his equals, not the same, should not be treated as he should be treated, such self destructive behavior would not have come naturally, and he would still be married.
“…that is what came naturally.”
He still doesn’t get it. Without googling the quote, I’m guessing he’s from a pozzed society, fed an exclusive diet of blue pills. I’m sure terrible-two-year-old commentator displayed a very different picture of what “came naturally.”
He probably thought that grabbing her ass would lower her self esteem and make her feel objectified and dirty, which it would, if she were a whore sleeping with him on a temporary time-share basis.
And she felt deep down inside that he was treating her like a whore and didn’t understand why she felt degraded.
>Unless you define “good†as “in accordance with animal nature,†which is basically the World Star Hip Hop morality.
LOL, good one, this one actually made me laugh, really.
Neat. Now do one on white supremacy…
A.J.P.
Why all the constant filtration, “Jim”? You’re a computer programming interviewer, sprucing up a simple blog like this one would be a piece of cake should you care to do it. Italics feature would be a nice one for the commenters here to have…
Best regards,
A.J.P.
Thanks for this.
@Jim
“If you believe that you are entitled, that women should obey, submit, serve, that unless you are buying sex by the hour, women should be sacrificing their own good to serve you, then red pill behavior comes naturally.”
How does one instill that mindset?
Jim is wrong about the mindset because he’s a degenerate who sleeps with other women. It’s easy for men to consider their woman as their companion, like their dog. Like dogs, women can be very loyal if you treat them right. And if you don’t grab their ass and validate them as they need, they will find a nigger pimp that will.
Your hamster does not want to eat sausage and will get sick of you try to force the issue. Give it fresh greens, like carrot scrapings and asparagus ends.
For some reason, we have “consent culture”, in which every man looks at every woman as a possible provider of sex, and no man takes responsibility for her feelings, or tries to protect her. Women feel degraded by this.
The preferred solution is to teach men not to want sex. Which works as well as eating carbohydrates to lose weight.
The Nazi has it right.
[…] Jim Donald has a couple pearls. First, briefly, Believing in male supremacy will make you more attractive to women. And then an installment on holiness spirals: The goal is soft genocide. Unless stopped, the […]
[…] Jim’s Blog’s “Believing In Male Supremacy Will Make You More Attractive To Women&#… […]