Manly Men

The first time I ever had a reason to think that maybe the next generation of men coming along were a little light in the loafers, was when I hired a summer intern a dozen years ago. He was a college student hoping to become a lawyer or politician one day. He seemed like a bright and engaging kid, so we hired him. He was just going to be doing basic office stuff. Even if he was dumb as a dirt, it really did not matter. Just as long as he was not annoying or crazy, I figured I could get some use out of him.

Not long into his tenure, he came in late because he had a flat time and had to wait for someone. He did not know how to change a tire and he seemed somewhat amazed that people did know how to change tires. I began to notice that he did not do little things like hold the door for women or older people. He was unaware of things I just took for granted, like how to use a screwdriver. We had a small maintenance task on a piece of office gear and he watched me do it like I was conjuring spirits from the other world.

I have never wanted to be one of those old guys who complained about the younger generation. I think that is silly but talking with him and other people his age that summer, I started to wonder if maybe there was something to it. The main reason I started to change my opinion is he thought it was true. This is something I have bumped into a few times. It seems that many young men think previous generations of men were much more manly in some way. Apparently, it is not just a US thing. British boys think they are wimps too.

In fairness, it may be the fact that Millennials were raised in a culture that celebrated girls at the expense of boys. This stuff started in Gen-X, but it was not horrible for us. By the time the Millennials came along, schools and popular culture reeked of estrogen. It is perfectly reasonable for these males to assume that they were never trained to be proper men, even if they are proper men anyway. There’s also the fact that the boys today are told they are girls trapped in a man’s body and that boys should be wearing dresses.

Now, I certainly knew I had it soft compared to the old guys I remember as a kid. My grandfather’s one brother was at Guadalcanal. Another died in the Bataan. Just listening to the old timers talk about their youth made it clear that they were hard men produced in hard times. That is an extreme example. My generation did not have it hard, at least not that much tougher than the Millennials and now Gen-Z. It does not make a lot of sense for them to think they are a generation of pansies or for them to actually be pansies.

The flip side, assuming the young men today are wimps, is that this is the result of the feminization of society. That happened because the previous generations of men slowly ceded ground to the ladies. That process started in the 19th century when Protestant pastors teamed up with vinegar drinking lesbianism to get women the right to vote in Federal elections. Even today’s wimps know that was a terrible idea. How is it the tough guys of a century ago were so eager to hand the ballot to women?

The MGTOW¹/PUA² blogger Heartiste thinks it is soy in diets. The reliance on soy protein in modern Western diets is causing a drop in testosterone. I do not have low testosterone, even for a geezer, but I never eat soy. I do not eat processed foods, just meat and green vegetables. I have friends my age who do eat lots of prepared foods and they have gone on testosterone replacement therapy. It sounds implausible, but the European diet never included lots of soy, so maybe there is something to it.

There is some data showing that testosterone levels are falling in men. It is an age independent decline, which means levels are falling relative to the same age groups of previous generations. There is also the observed drop in sperm counts. One could be related to the other, but both could have some common root cause. The odds of that cause being blue-haired feminists screaming about their feelings is probably low, but culture cannot be ruled out entirely. Still, environment is the more likely cause.

There is also the modern habit of loading up young boys with psychoactive drugs so they do not act like young boys. This just started coming around when I was a kid, but we largely missed it. Millennials and Gen-Z boys were drugged as a matter of school policy. Giving young people these kinds of drugs is madness, but about 20% of males grew up munching on Ritalin and Adderall. It is reasonable to suspect that a youth spent high on stimulants is going to have a hangover effect into adulthood.

The diet and lifestyle explanation would cover the last few generations, but it does not explain why men a century ago started ceding ground to women. My grandfather’s generation had the very real fear of starvation. Men were still routinely killed on work sites and personal violence was a part of a normal man’s life. They never heard of soy or ADHD, but they were willing to open the door for women to take over the culture. For thousands of years men knew how to control their women. Then they did not.

Maybe there is some multi-generational cycle at work and the pendulum is about to swing the other way. It is hard to know as we struggle to understand trends that transcend generations. Maybe it is an evolutionary trigger built into humans. When times are good, the men get stupid, eventually bringing an end to the good times. Regardless, the fact is we have fewer manly men now. That is not a problem in a post-scarcity society, but if that changes, we may find a shortage of men to be a big problem.

¹ I am unreliably told that Heartiste may not be MGTOW. I am not all that clear on the definition in the man-o-verse, so apologies to Heartiste if I characterized him incorrectly.

² Hilariously, many men are upset at my calling Heartiste MGTOW, so I have amended the post.

193 thoughts on “Manly Men

  1. Low testosterone levels are intimitely tied to hyperglycemia. Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) patients have Low testosterone levels. Stress plus Hyperglycemia provokes hyogonadism, as witnessed in the high level of hypogonadism in police officers, where T2DM has the highest prevalence of any profession and the rate is higher than in the general population.
    Further, as comfort sets in, in a civilization, men, in general, the general risk they faced, is less essential, and what rules are Dominant personnality traits (IQ becomes irrelevant, as reflected in the degrading expressions of science, honesty, truth, ethics, etc…). This is what women depend on, dominant personality traits leadership juxtaposed with abuse of power as reflected in the “Law of Women” against the real Rule of Law. Only 15% of males display Strong dominant traits as reflected by the Dark Triad Traits of personality social science theory.
    For these “leading” males, empowering women is very lucrative; as for women, they are attracted by narcissistic and dishonest men, characteristics reflected in the personality traits of Narcissism, Marchiavelism and Psychopathy, the core traits of the Dark triad theory.
    If you are not blessed with dominant personaly traits…forget it, you are doomed to be enslaved by out of control spoiled ingratiated feminists…and eventually demographics will evolve into a 85% women and 15% male society…unless there is major disruption such as total technological failure frm a solar wind catastroph, or a magnetic repolarization of earth or a major meteorite hitting earth… or maybe a Nuclear war with North Korea…but even then!
    But despite all of this, if you simply want to feel a bit more manly again, cut all starchy foods from you diet..why? Because starch (amylose and amylopectine are glucose polymers) contributes to an excess of dietary glucose in the diet, source of hyperglycemia bouts, excess dietary glucose being at the core of the Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) pandemic (MetS includes T2DM, IBD, IBS and other multi metabolic inflammed diseased conditions). Limit alcohol also, another testosterone inhibitor.

  2. Some day he’ll come along…the man I love….and he’ll be BIG AND STRONG…the man I love.
    Those are some lyrics from a wonderful George Gershwin melody….look it up!

  3. I am so glad somebody finally can see that men these days are rather UN-manly…I was blessed for 4 years til last Spring with the romantic friendship of a very manly man..till the relationship ended , badly and sadly for me. He was totally verile….a country boy of the age today of 67….big and strong…built his own house, etc. I am asking God now for a replacement – another manly man….if there are any.

    Now, as for the female vote….my dear grandmother always said women didn’t need the right to vote….and I agree….in fact there are more women now who vote than men….part of the reason Obama got in when he did….but then the Christian voters woke up and got Trump in….and praise God for that….and HE is a manly man, for sure!

  4. My boomer dad and all of my boomer teachers (exclusively women and limp-wristed phags) instructed me to be a pussy. It took me about 10 years to correct this and I still live with some lingering effects. Dads stopped telling their sons to be men and everyone else reinforced this. Funny thing though, not getting laid woke me up to my problem. The rejections from young women saved me.

    • Bunny;
      You have a good point. And it’s worse for young male socialization into manhood than the reduced raw numbers you link might indicate at first look. This is because a good chunk of the lower overall numbers in your link are females (~15% IIRC – Up until the ’70’s the military was almost exclusively male). And the training standards have been lowered to accommodate females. I was there when it happened.

      But should the goal of the US military be male socialization much less enhanced female career opportunities_? I’d say no to both, though it’s a good thing that the former is an intended byproduct. We have a F’d up national military strategy but that’s a discussion for another day.

  5. I’m a bit old school. I’ve seen the older days when men could (and did) abuse the system – dumping wifey for younger version and leaving her with kids and no money and more often than not back then, no education or way to support herself and the kids in a meaningful way.

    So no intelligent woman would neglect getting an education and at least having some career just in case. And of course, if the man ends up being fine but becomes disabled, or dies, the career is invaluable.

    These days the pendulum swings the other way. Women take advantage of men sometimes bleeding them dry and denying access to the children.

    Also not good.

    The answer is not controlling the women (or women controlling the men) but people quit being so goddamned selfish. If you (male or female) can’t or won’t commit to someone throughout the raising of offspring, don’t get married period. Stay single and selfish.

    Men, quit trading in 45 year old Millie for 25 year old blonde Tillie. Women, you can’t screw every John, Dick and Harry and expect a steady Tom to settle down with you and provide for your children until you get bored.

    Most marital woes in normal circumstances (non drug, mental illness, alcoholism cases) are due to plain old selfishness.

    And as a woman, no way would I not have education. It’s too risky. And yet, I do see where it’s risky for a man too.

    Glad I’m married and old. My kids are raised and we’re in the home stretch of life. Somehow, in spite of ourselves, we survived.

  6. I would say the falling testosterone levels are due to environmental as well as cultural conditions. It is probably a short term adjustment to the existing conditions in the west. Aggression and risk taking are much less required than just 50 to 100 years ago. This might also explain the younger men’s perceptions. The production and utilization of testosterone is energy intensive so it’s decrease when not needed would be expected.

  7. The higher divorce rate plays a part. It’s harder to teach your son to be a man when his masculine/feminine parenting ratio is 25/75. And when you do have him, you feel guilty and go easier on him.

  8. Don’t forget the explosion of “single” mother led households. Boys learn when something is broken or you get a flat tire, “call the fix it guy.” One single mother I was dating was horrified when I showed her son how to jump start his car….. it was fine for me to do it but far to dangerous for her 17 year old son.

    • Generation Single Mom has has an impact on the demographic of the sport of football too.

      Parents don’t want kids playing, I wouldn’t and without a Dad at home who is a fan. younger people often have no interest in the sport.

      That viewership decline we often talk about is about the older audience, younger people often don’t watch period

  9. My speculation: When men’s day-to-day tasks necessary to ensure survival coincide with women’s expectations of what masculine men should do, the women have no need for feminist nonsense. As technology becomes more important, men’s work becomes less physical and more cerebral and thus less masculine in the eyes of female instinct. Women shit-test by asking to assume men’s roles to test their masculinity and men realize (mostly correctly) that the women *can* do those jobs but, having no prior experience, do not realize that they *should* not be allowed to.

  10. Boys aren’t growing up with fathers, so there is no one to teach them how to be a man and to do manly things like using tools and fixing things.

    Besides that, comfort and sexual excess weaken men bodily and weakens their will, specifically drive and ambition.

    So you get a soft boy who doesn’t know how to do anything and is just looking for his next masturbatory experience. It’s a formula for weak men.

  11. I have a 17-year-old son. He’s not a typical millennial as he plays football, lifts weights, likes to shoot and do that kind of stuff. But, with modern electronics he’s far less interested in some stuff that I was consumed with at that age – driving and machines.

    And he and his like minded friends seem to sense that they are now an oppressed minority. He is deeply skeptical of authority – because he believes everyone in charge is a crazy leftist who hates him (probably right), He’s also suspicious of women in a way that I wasn’t until much later in life.

    • > He’s also suspicious of women in a way that I wasn’t until much later in life.

      For Boomers, their experience with a nagging woman started with marriage. For Y/Z-ers, it began with their kindergarten teacher. So, yeah, makes sense.

      And deep distrust to authorities is the blessing.

      • For Y/Z-era, it started with watching their parents’ relationships. The examples that parents (or the absence of parents) set for their children are huge.

        Most of the fundamentally (but perhaps not immediately obviously) weirdo women I met in the past had really screwed up parents for their life examples.

    • Your son is wise for his age.

      As for a lack of interest in cars and machines.

      Modern cars are ugly, utilitarian and very hard to fix at home for the less talented. Young people also go out less on average than in the past. They aren’t especially welcome in most places and often being suspicious of women hardly need to go on many dates either. For my millennial friends, cars aren’t cool they are just tools

      Also re: changing tires, Many modern cars have no spare even a lousy temp spare. You are lucky to get a can of fix a flat. They’ve never been exposed. Besides that drivers really should have AAA

      As for machines, excluding lawn equipment, the main machines young people use are electronics, Many can’t be repaired and while a PC can be, odds are he won’t need to unless he builds it.

      The irony is modern machinery is far more reliable till it isn’t than you get a new one. This changes the way we interact with machinery and negates th need to be a fixit guy

  12. You cannot understand what’s happened to western women without a clear appreciation for the concept of a ‘sh*t test’.
    When women test men to see their fitness and dominance, it’s in a manner where they want men to ‘fail’. They want the man to be strong enough and single minded enough to simply ignore her emotional manipulations. This is ironic, because the female mind is more bifurcated than the male mind. On one level, she truly does want him to respond to her in the manner she indicates and will never admit otherwise because she doesn’t actually believe otherwise.
    But on another more primal level, she does not want him to respond. If he ignores her, she’s sometimes angry or upset, or hurt. These are genuine emotions for her. But in spite of them, she finds him more attractive when he ‘fails’ the test than when he passes it. If he acquiesces then she’s momentarily happy, but inevitably loses respect for him as a man.
    Feminism itself is a kind of cultural sort of sh*t test. And since we men of the west have not ignored our women, they are pushing it to yet another level, and another, and another and another. They will continue to do so until we respond the way men would.
    As I write this there are feminists publicly calling a soy boy comedian named Aziz Ansari a ‘sexual predator’ for mistakenly thinking that totally voluntary oral sex given to him by a woman after a dinner date would lead to penetrative sex.
    There is no level too ridiculous for sh*t tests.

    • There are societies where men are ignoring their women. I.e. Africa.

      I’m not against the theory, but really – was your granddad ignoring your grandmother’s wants and needs? Were XIX century Europeans disinterested in their women?

      Sure, some assertiveness is what Western men desperately need, but you miss the elephant in the room. Men listen to what feminists tell them not because otherwise feminists would yell. They do that because otherwise they will be punished by the State.

      Feminism is here because the State wants it. Emancipated women and emasculated men are perfect citizens: they never riot, and always pay their taxes on time. What’s not to like, eh?

      • It’s not that granddad was ignoring grandmother’s wants and needs, it’s that he instinctively understood that what she *said* she wanted or needed was not always what she *actually* wanted or needed. Now the state punishes men who act on this distinction.

        • Yep. But I think it was the State, who told the grandma what she should want, not the other way around.

    • Joe Katzman has an interesting take on things at the Daily Caller site. The whole political/social cesspool we are living in is really an effort by people to raise their social status by dumping on others in a calculated and strategic fashion. Not really a new idea, but the massive application of it is like nothing we have seen before. Aziz Ansari is currently the fall guy for feminist social climbing/social positioning. And Trump is the guy who is tearing it all down by not giving a shit.

      Since going out and hunting your supper and turning the viscious hordes away at the gate are lost and unnecessary skills, it is now shit-testing and social climbing that are the prominent skill sets. Trump ain’t buying.

  13. “Hard times make hard men” is a seminal quotation that should become a guiding principle in any discussion of how we get ourselves out of the mess we’re in. Our current environment utterly lacks real hardship and this absence is making us all weaker as a result. Our political leaders will do everything in their power to perpetuate this weakness (and the associated dependency) because that is how you buy votes and ensure incumbency. This downward slide is insidious (like a slow-growing cancer) and we will not clearly recognize the harm until very late in the metastasis.

  14. “He was unaware of things I just took for granted, like how to use a screwdriver. We had a small maintenance task on a piece of office gear and he watched me do it like I was conjuring spirits from the other world.”

    Too strange. I’m gearing up to swap out the front end of my wife’s Volvo this coming weekend. Struts, control arms, ball joints and tie rod ends. I expect it to take me an afternoon. Of course, I was born in the late ’50s.

  15. It’s not sustainable to deny suffrage based on sex. The vote should have been confined to land owners, or some other metric so that only those with skin in the game are allowed to vote.

  16. I don’t think it’s limited to the US, so I don’t think just culture explains it. The Taiwanese refer to their millennials as the “strawberry generation” (because they bruise easily), for example.

    Why did men cave and give women the right to vote? Have you been nagged incessantly for 50 years before? There’s your answer. It’s the “just shut her up and give her what she wants” strategy.

    Also, I think you have to factor in the large-scale shift to a service-based economy since the 1970s. Gen-X grew up in that in-between landscape where we still had to be able to fix things ourselves, but our parents also started to call specialists to fix things. As a kid, I knew how to fix and adjust my 10-speed, and I grew up taking toys apart and putting them back together just to see how they worked. (Good luck doing that with your PS4.) We cut our own wood to heat the house, and my dad cast his own bullets for our hunting rifles and competition rifles.

    When I was 17, I replaced the exhaust system and water pump on my ’78 VW by going to NAPA. Today, I wouldn’t even bother trying to do something like that on my F150 a) because my time is valuable to me, b) I have the money to pay somebody else, and c) well, trucks are a little more complicated today and I might void the warranty. But, most things that are in my strike zone to fix, I order the parts and fix it myself. In the last 2 years I’ve fixed my treadmill twice (new belt, new motor) increasing it’s lifespan to 15 years and counting, my vacuum twice, our floormate once, multiple repairs and extensions on PCs, replaced my iphone battery (no small chore), ordered and replaced the broken alumnum handles on my lawn mower, painted two large rooms in the house, etc. I’ve paid to have the house painted, the furnace repaired, regular tuneups, oil changes, etc. on our cars, deck repair, and a couple of electrical things that exceeded my meager wiring skills.

    But every time I fix something…my son has to help me do it. It’s nice to have the extra pair of hands, but it’s mainly because I want him to know how to fix things. Men ought to know how to fix things.

    I think that’s where the confidence problem comes in for a lot of young men. They are schooled in soft skills, and mommy skills, but not hard skills, fixing things, knowing how to do ACTUAL USEFUL THINGS in the world be it for their car, their house, gear they own, etc.

    They’ve been taught to throw it away and buy a new one. Much like how they’ve been taught relationships work: throw it out and buy a new one.

  17. “Maybe there is some multi-generational cycle at work and the pendulum is about to swing the other way. It is hard to know as we struggle to understand trends that transcend generations.”

    For what its worth (2 cents), I believe that humanity exists in a homeostatic system. I am anthropomorphizing here, but since there is homeostasis in your own body, I am extrapolating this to society. I use the analogy of opiate addiction to the unhealthy trends in society. Your neurotransmitters exist at specific concentrations in your body. If, for some reason, dopamine levels increase above the equilibrium levels, your body will stop manufacturing as much dopamine. Same with serotonin, endorphins, adrenaline, etc. With opiate addiction, the narcotic attaches to various neurological receptors, in the brain, intestine and other places. The various neurotransmitters affected are serotonin, which regulates sleep and appetite, dopamine, which plays an important role in mood, energy, attitude, and motivation, GABA, which acts as your calming neurotransmitter, helping you relax, and acetylcholine, for processing information and memory. Let’s just focus on dopamine, like r/K theory.

    The receptors at the site of activation can be deceived into inserting morphine into a dopamine receptor. They are not identical, but they have electrochemical activity at certain points on the morphine molecule that can imitate Dopamine. Your body interprets the high level of dopamine appearing at, say, pain receptors, as saying that no more dopamine needs to be released into the body. So it shuts down dopamine production. As long a morphine is in the system, it will believe that there is plenty of dopamine available. It takes a certain amount of time before dopamine production is curtailed and it also takes time to restart production of dopamine after the morphine is removed from the system. Withdrawal is the time period involved in clearing out morphine and ratcheting up dopamine production to equilibrium levels.

    This is just a thumbnail sketch. It is much more complicated than this and affects different organ systems differently. How I want to believe this resembles unhealthy social trends is that you have a functioning society that exists at “equilibrium”. Society is White, or White enough that small amounts of non-White individuals have no real effect. Men are men, women are sex-obj……I mean women. No one questions things because they “work”. If you inject some trend that demonstrably interferes with “equilibrium”, like female suffrage, it has a lag time in which it is laughed off, but over time it is accepted as normal. This will take decades, which is equivalent to the amount of time and dosage of opiates that are necessary to induce addiction. When society finally hits “bottom” and realizes how absurd letting women vote is, it will take several years of “falling off the wagon” before society says, “Fuck your feelings. Our country is going to hell. We are going to stop that.” If the addict/society doesn’t conquer their “addiction”, they will die. If they do conquer it, it will still take decades of reestablishing equilibrium until people say “This works. That didn’t”, and the time it takes correlates with how long your “drug abuse/social insanity” lasted. For what its worth.

    And disciplining women. Believe me, if you train them up in the way she should go, when she is old she will not depart from it. Women are much more ruthless than men about keeping women in line with ostracizing and expulsion from the herd. They will enforce the herd narrative quite effectively in a healthy society. We just have to get back to healthy society first.

  18. Being good and honest Christian men means we want to see everyone get a fair shake. It wasn’t right when drunken men beat their wives and kids and turned them out in the streets with nothing. It isn’t right when courteous and discrete queers got eaten to death for bein gay. It isn’t right when guys like Weinstein and Clinton molest women at work with impunity.

    But incrementalism is what it is. We went from tolerating marginal people and protecting victims to enabling and encouraging them. Today we are empowering lunatics. They often sanctimoniously try to rub our noses in it by saying ‘even in the bible it says thou shalt not judge!’. I wonder how many Christians actually READ the bible because it doesn’t say that at all. In fact, the message is to use judgement!

    I was raised in a prog family. I have since rejected all prog narratives, precepts, and ideology en masse. These folks are never happy, and their demands get nuttier every year.

    If I were to offer a solution, classical Christian conservative family values would redeem our young men. And our young women. They work.

  19. Z, I think we’re about the same age, so you may have similar experiences…

    When I was growing up, I had to mow our lawn and do a lot of other chores. By my memory, only wealthy people had a lawn service, or they hired neighbor kids to do theirs, if they didn’t have their own kids. Getting out and regularly doing manual tasks made us less likely to shy away from other manual tasks. Nowadays, nearly everyone has a lawn service (mostly Mexicans) and the kids are never tasked with any real manual jobs.

    So there may very well be a significant cultural aspect.

    • I went to a rich kid prep school and even the rich kids had summer jobs. They had cooler summer jobs than the jobs I had (re-tubing boilers), but they still had jobs. But, we may have been the last generation to have summer jobs and certainly after school jobs. In high school, I would go to practice, then go to a job for a few hours. I did my homework and then went to bed. That was pretty normal until recent.

      Maybe boredom is an issue. After school jobs were fun for kids. It offered independence and it broke up the normal routine of life.

      • My 16 year old boy works at the local vet’s a couple of afternoons/evenings a week after school, so we have a later dinner.
        I can think of few ways to better expose him to the dark realities of life.
        He did some life-guarding in the summer and was bored beyond belief. He won’t be doing that again.

      • Z, I have retubed boilers and was a “bellhole” welder working my way through college. If the boilers are coal or oil fired this is one of the dirtiest jobs extant. It is good to know you were once one of the “dirty fingernail crowd.

        • It took forever for the grime to get out of the nooks and crannies of my hands. It was also hot as hell. I’d lose ten pounds in a day, even while drinking plenty of water. I know what hell is like. But, it was the sort of job a teenager could get and it as better than flipping burgers.

      • I grew up on a farm and always had morning and evening chores before and after school. Spring and summer were time for field work, fence fixing and haying. Fall was harvest and silo filling. Winter was keeping the livestock fed and healthy.

        I felt sorry for my classmates who lived in town. They missed a lot of manly stuff that I was proud to be able to do.

      • Re-tubing boilers, chillers or heat exchangers and the unique problems with each job qualifies you as a master of creativity and adaptive problem solving. [if the repairs are on site and not in a fabrication plant]
        This ‘splains quite a bit about your nature…..

      • My old man was a real estate developer, we had a lot of money, but he put me to work starting in high school with an insulation contractor friend. Good money since we were on piecework and always a bare step ahead of the drywallers. But hammer stapling bats into cathedral ceilings in Florida in the summer was a good lesson in why grades mattered. Did it all through college.

  20. It seems to me to be the end of the Gramscian march through the institutions leading to the feminization of education.

    Men have been demonized, none want to be teachers (I was born in 1963 and had good male teachers at my state school, but there’s not many after me can say the same) and those that do have to behave like poofs.

    Also the throwaway economy combined with the impossibility of reparing anything nowadays means that simple skills like putting up shelves, or wiring a plug are outsourced.

    Paradoxically it has probably never been easier or cheaper to buy high quality tools but nobody under 40 knows how to use them.

    The politics of fear coupled with reduced fertility mean that kids nowadays rarely stray more than 100 ft from home. We used to be away all day cycling miles, climbing trees, fishing, coming home with knees bleeding.

    As you rightly say these are all consequences of the feminization of politics and political discourse.

    In the end I think it boils down to “first world problems”.

    We’re too comfortably off to make life difficult for ourselves.

  21. The word that men have forgotten is: “NO”.
    I use it regularly with both my wife and kid.
    I’m teaching the kid the millions of things that men can do and women have no clue about.

    As Camille Paglia said if it wasn’t for men we would still be living in grass huts,

    At the end of the day, men are bigger, stronger, faster and smarter.

  22. Tangential to Z’s article is this youtube video of a Millennial Job Interview of a female; it’s hilarious

    If this video even remotely portrays the millennial generation, then the USA is Fu*ked.

    Am I wrong in assuming that as a percentage of the male population there are now more gay guys than, say, prior to 50 to 75 years ago? Or is it just the publicity they are receiving that makes it appear there are more gay guys?

    Was thinking that prior to 1965 or so, the recommended diet was heavy in steak, eggs, milk; i.e., animal protein rich.
    Since about that time, the recommended diet has been heavy in carbs, fruit, veges and minimal animal fats/dairy.
    The result has been an explosion in obesity and diabetes (as a result of these foods messing with the hormone insulin).

    Could the extant dietary guidelines be influencing the feminization of males??

    • J.T.
      Having been there at the time I can say that “…prior to 1965 or so, the *deeply desired* [not ‘the recommended’] diet was heavy in steak, eggs, milk; i.e., animal protein rich.” FIFY.

      Mostly it was oatmeal/grits, mashed potatoes, hamburger helper, mystery meat, beans & franks, canned vegetables, PB&J or bologna-on-Wonderbread sandwiches, etc. Not that I’m complaining, mind you. As has been said elsewhere, the generation before ours actually missed meals and went to bed hungry as a regular thing.

      Whatever the cause of current obesity, going Paleo will not fix it. The past diet was actually poverty driven for many folks. Now, if you said that doing the poverty diet squared without doing the physical work the poor had to do in the past to earn it is a cause of obesity, I’d have to agree with you.

      • The fact they were so impressed by wonderbread is odd to me. These people were supposedly hardened and self reliant but lacked the skills to make their own bread? Homemade bread is very easy to make and tastes much better than any bread with preservatives. Keeps very well frozen as well.

        • Ivan;
          What you say about Wonderbread vs homemade bread is mostly true. But:
          – Wonderbread and its ilk were cheap and convenient. It kept pretty well due to added preservatives nobody worried about at the time.

          – Home-made bread was cheap but not very convenient (kitchens were small) and not everybody had the time or skill to make it. It doesn’t keep more than a day or so. Almost nobody had a largish freezer then.

          – Bakery made bread was convenient but not cheap and also didn’t keep. Bakeries were rare outside of cities and larger towns.

          Then there was the prestige of participating for the first time in history in an advertising-driven mass consumption economy. WWII created a mass production industrial plant. Mad men figured out how to put it to use.

        • As Al says, the convenience factor is huge. Prior to electric refrigerators, clothes washers, vacuums and store-bought bread, pasta and other staples, keeping a house was an enormous amount of work. Being able to just grab six loaves of bread that you didn’t have to make yourself was like a miracle.

          • Like Mom used to say, “that’s the best thing since sliced bread!”
            She was born in 1916.

            Her other great love: washing machines. Hated that washboard.

    • The media pushes gayness for social reasons and being soft is more socially acceptable these days.

      I’m a mild mannered guy , a huge nerd and people find me intimidating

      if you told younger me I’d be thought of in that way I’d have been flattered and laughed in your face

      That said some men are situationally gay and closeted gay, these guys are probably “out” now since no one really cares which inflates the number of gay men a bit.

  23. Yeah, Heartiste would vociferously deny he was MGTOW (Men Going Their Own Way). Adherents to that movement are prone to disengage from women, and refuse to accept the current-day rules of engagement at all. Heartiste is more PUA with a lot of pithy humor and references to research papers that confirm his hypotheses about intersexual dynamics.

    • PUA is the 20s/mid-30s game tops. After that, there’s another name for those people.

      He’s a guy with some talent. But yelling about the need of a reborn of the “white race” while fathering ZERO white children and damaging white women’s bonding abilities is .. well .. hm .. a bit inconsistent at the very least. If not outright malevolent.

  24. Don’t overlook how much men learn between 30 and 70 and then kid themselves into believing they knew all this when they were 20. They didn’t. My father was God’s own handyman and imparted the taste for self-reliance but not always the knowledge. I didnt start to become competent until I 1) got married, and 2) got poor.

    My wife was never a nag but she knew poor, and a polite way to say “I think we can do this”.

    • My WW 2 veteran dad started exposing me to carpentry, soldering, minor mechanical work, when I was in single digits. I built a treehouse completely on my own in second grade. I helped my dad build furniture, a grandfather clock (from a kit), do household carpentry, plumbing and electrical and automotive repairs. I can’t remember how young I was when I learned to change a tire — it seems like something I’ve always known. I built my own rabbit hutches, model rockets, toy boats and go-carts, all kinds of stuff. It was just the way a young man was raised then. I wasn’t remarkable (my cousin was the talented one — he became a boat builder), and my dad wasn’t by profession a carpenter or mechanic. As a man, you just knew that stuff.

      • Yeah i shoulda listened and watched more. That said, my daughters picked up enough know-how from me to know the value of know-how in themselves and men. Its about confidence, hopefully keeping all your fingers of course. The happiest and most stable young man i know followed his father around pretty much non stop for 15 years.

  25. Mother’s (and fathers) of boys need to become their advocates in the public schools. I experienced some of these problems with my own boys back in the day. I was told my son had ADD because he asked the teacher a question, which she refused to answer, seven times. At least he was persistent! Needless to say, I did not take the teacher’s recommendation to make that doctor’s appointment based on one incident. Every parent should be aware of the hurdles boys face in the feminized classroom atmosphere of today’s schools.

    • What many people don’t realize is that most public and private school teachers are not very smart, not well-educated and far too may are lazy. Heresy I know to some people’s ears but spend some time really talking with them about where they went to school, what accomplishments they had before they chose to become teachers, what their interests are outside of work, etc. The great majority did nothing to brag about, and after college (and maybe a failed attempt at a career somewhere else) chose “teaching” as a way to obtain secure employment for a middle-class wage and (in some states) generous benefits (CalTERS) is a prime example.

  26. It’s understandable in Europe, we effectively threw our best and brightest men into the industrial meat grinders of WW1 and WW2. It’s hard to comprehend the numbers of dead surpassed the entire population of Switzerland several times over.

    Many German towns and villages lost 100% of their service-age male populations. Considering the military only wanted those who are the most physically fit, it meant the gene pool for reproduction after the war was primarily those few who survived or were rejected from military service in the first place.

    Keep in mind, of the number of Germans killed during the war, the majority died in the Eastern front. At the end, we were left sending old men and boys. Visit any German WW2 cemetery and you’ll be surprised how many 15-years old and 65-years old you’ll find.

    After it was over, some fit, and many unfit men, were all that were left to re-populate Germany. A country that was dominated by a female-population gathering bricks to rebuild our country. And those women were not having it again. Politically it’s a man’s world from election to election, but German women rule the house for life. Never underestimate their silent influence in German policy.

    Now, most of Europe is run by women. It’s just one factor, and not the whole answer. But it says a lot about why our boys are still boys, and not men.

    I too am often confronted with these millennials who haven’t a clue about the world around them. Our coffee maker jammed up at the office a few days ago, so I took out a small Swiss Army pocket knife and was able to un-jam the coffee capsule. The young 20-s something graduate engineer watched me in amazement. He’s brilliant at Auto-CAD, but he doesn’t have a clue about which end of a screwdriver to use.

    • What about Spain? No WW1, no WW2.

      What about Russia? By your theory, with the most substantial toll in both wars, they should have the most emasculated men in Europe.

      • Spain had already been depleted by the men in dresses of the Vatican by the time they lost their pacific and new world holding in 1898. Those poor bastards had little else to give and Franco played his hand very well.

        Russia lost huge numbers, but to be fair they had even greater numbers to draw from. Modernization is a lot like being born I suppose, much pain and blood.

      • Sergey;
        Lots of death during the Spanish Civil War, (1936 – 39 IIRC).

        Good point about Russia, though. There’s a small body of theory out there that the Great Wars only ended in Russia with the death of Stalin in 1953 and that the mass casualties that he was so cavalier about were a major cause of the fall of the USSR in 1990. Broadly, the idea is that the Communist system was designed for full employment at > 200 million pop. and couldn’t be adjusted to function at < 170 million pop.

    • 25% of the graduating class of Oxford of 1914 were dead 4 years later.

      I had two great aunts who never married because there were no men.

      Both wars were astonishing acts of evil by the political filth.

      My sole bumper sticker

      “Rope, Politician, Lamppost
      Some assembly required”.

  27. To the topic of the post: late 19th century (end of victorian era) there was a strong expansion of productivity. This created the environment for society to swing ‘r’. The first noticeable consequence was the women’s vote. From there it went downhill fast.

    Thus imo the real process started 50 years before voting rights for women. It was made possible by the K->r shift.

    Today we face the exact opposite. Society is switching from r->K again. However its only the beginning. We are not nearly far enough along to start seeing the benefits of going K again.

    This is one of the things about Trumps precedency that irks me. Trump is too early. And he is too effective. He may in fact end up prolonging the r-phase. (Though the shift is going to happen – barring any unforeseen technological miracle)

  28. Something else to consider: changes in manufacturing and maintenance have made it to where people are less likely to be exposed to tinkering on things. Modern cars are notoriously harder to work on because of computerization. They also seem to like putting plastic shrouds around stuff so the most you might do is change the fluids on your own. (Though people certainly can/should know how to change a tire!) And smaller items are so cheaply made in China that it usually isn’t worth getting them repaired, or trying to work on them. I’ve opened up defective electronic items and found the wire insulation to be so poor that re-soldering parts is futile. And what can you do with a modern flat-panel solid-state TV set? If it stops working, you trash it and buy a new one. No fiddling with tubes like in the old days. Kids grow up never seeing anyone work on anything.

    One other thing: the lack of free-range childhood now. I’m also a Gen Xer, and I used to hop on my bicycle and just roam the neighborhood as a kid. That meant running into mean stray dogs, weird homeless people and so forth from time to time, and learning how to deal with them on your own.

    • Kodos;

      Re your first paragraph: It’s mostly about trade-offs and not any sort of nefarious plot.

      For cars it was government mandated emission and fuel efficiency standards that drove the computerization that killed being able to fix your car yourself. The electro-mechanical engine controls up through the ’70s had to be designed with large tolerances so that they didn’t (usually) fail suddenly and they could be repaired one part at a time. But you need tight design tolerances for fuel efficiency in particular.

      To illustrate what tight design tolerances in an electo-mechanically managed car bring on, consider the envy of all the teenage males in our town. He had an gorgeous British racing green V 12 XKE Jaguar. But all 24 (48_? I forget) valves had to be manually adjusted every 2,000 miles. The six vacuum-assisted side draft carburetors had to all be balanced at every oil change (3,000 miles in those days). Spark plugs had to be recapped or replaced every 12,000 miles. And on an on. Result: it mostly sat in his garage.

      For electronics, as capabilities and features multiplied, it became impossible to maintain quality standards aside from using robotic circuit board assembly and computerized testing. Sr managers would have preferred to still use machine-assisted hand assembly – You can’t furlough the robots if business takes a bad turn. But the then Japanese competition had figured out with both cars and electronics that they didn’t need the costly repair parts inventories and many repair technicians we had all been used to if they made their sets a lot better. So they did (the Brits never did figure this out) and we had no choice but follow. It’s really hard to sell a lower lifetime cost despite more frequent breakdowns, even if it were true (and it occasionally was).

      Once you have the robots in place, there was no reason not to ramp up the parts densities and so avoiding buying more robots, etc.

      I completely agree with your third major point about free-range kids. It’s hard to fathom. For one thing, close supervision of anything is mentally exhausting.

      • Funny you mention Jaguars. Back in high school, one of my friends father was a huge Jaguar fan and used them to commute to work. His solution? Simply bought two of the same model. One green, one white. We used the same mechanic and inevitably whenever dropping one of our cars off…there was one of the Jaguars.

        • Sam;
          A couple of friends lower on the food chain were into Triumphs (TR 3’s IIRC). Fun to drive on a dry day (puddles tended to short out the ignition – had to get out in the rain with the spray can of either). Since they couldn’t afford the shop time, unlike your friend’s dad, and had to DIY, they owned three cars between them on order to be able to drive one consistently. The third sat up on blocks as a source for parts.

          You couldn’t go cross-country without a set of likely breakdown parts in the ‘boot’. That or you had to have a parts truck following you.

          Shame the Brits never figured out that, with large spaces to cross in the US, reliability was far more important than it was in the UK where one could usually walk to the nearest garage. They were among the first (semi) affordable foreign sports cars and they could have owned that market. Unfortunately for them the Japanese figured this out right away. One of my BOQ mates owned an Austin Healy 3000 and another had just purchased a Japanese Z Car. It was an exact copy of the Austin Healy, but unlike the AH, it ran without trouble.

  29. Z, often I think on why white men have given their women what they want. Conclusion: white men respect their women , are sensitive to their discontent. White men want their women to be happy. “Oh, honey, you want to be a army commando? Okay, try it.”

    Non white men treat their women like chattel.

      • Yez Z, white males under this bankster warfare model in the West are in trouble. But I regard this as a culling process. Robust whites are relocating. The rural-urban divide is accelerating. The jew power will have a tough time controlling them.

        You will notice the increased appeal to coloreds on TV US military recruiting ads. Jewry is building its genocide teams.

        The jew right now is causing the formation of hard core tribal whites. These survivors of the ongoing culling by faggotry, miscegenation, economic and genetic war, will end badly for the jew.

        The jew overrates himself. I can identify most jews immediately. They all are toxic.

        We whites hold the ace: we don’t need jews. Jews are parasites and they need us.

    • Maybe white men realized women are fully human and it was wrong to keep them in subjugation, just as they realized slavery was morally wrong?

        • I didn’t say equal in the sense I think you mean. Actually, I didn’t use the term equal at all. Furthermore, don’t humans have that certain je ne sais quoi that separates them from beasts? Men should be proud they ended slavery and the subjugation of women, it is to your credit.

      • But why do you think that women were in fact subjugated? Sure, there were numerous cases of domestic abuse a hundred years back. But is it different now? Is it even better? Is domestic violence less common? What about rape?

        Well, here are some stats for the UK:

        Women were not able to own property – correct.
        Women were unable to vote – correct.

        But there’s another group that is being treated like that. Yes, right now, in 2018. They are children.

        Now – are the kids subjugated? I say it’s the opposite: they are the most loved and cherished group in our society.

        But imagine for a moment a State-wide campaign to put the kids on par with the adults in every way imaginable. A campaign coupled with the stories of horrific abuse by parents against their children (there are THOUSANDS of those, some people are worse than animals) saying that this is the norm of a parent-child relationship, and we should put an end to it.

        Would you believe it? Do you think it will end up well for the kids?

        So, do you believe that “the Patriarchy” was really about *subjugating* women? Do you think that women had it worse, were less protected and not as happy?

        Think about it.

        • Women had it much better in the old system since they were a) cherished and protected by fathers and husbands b) fulfilling their biological roles as mothers.

          It’s no surprise so many women today are unhappy and on various anti-depressants.

          • > Women had it much better in the old system since they were a) cherished and protected by fathers and husbands

            Unless when they were not. And some women (i.e. overly masculine, ambitious, infertile or not maternal) have it better now. Life is complicated.

            My point was: do not trust everything you hear, even when they repeat it to you a million times since your very birth.

            Most men love women, and vice versa. That’s the magic of life. Survival of the species requires both sexes to cooperate and woe each other. So when someone says to you that one sex used to keep the other under the thumb (or does it now, i.e. in Saudi Arabia) – treat it with scepsis. It is probably complete bullshit.

          • The majority of women clearly got married, so the rest were the outliers.

            Who implied it was a system like Saudi Arabia? Women were certainly under the thumb of male dominated society and institutions (Patriarchy) but it’s not like they had to walk around with garbage bags over their bodies and such.

            Also, we can’t forget the role of Monasticism played for those who thought marriage wasn’t in the cards for them.

          • > Women were certainly under the thumb of male dominated society and institutions (Patriarchy)

            Were men no under the thumb of those same institutions?

            Were your grandmother under the thumb of your grandfather?

            I think that patriarchy is a fantasy. Some people like that fantasy and some people hate it.

        • Women are not children. Yes, the Patriarchy, if such a thing even ever existed-let’s call it the laws and mores of a particular society-did in fact have the effect, if not the precise intention, of subjugating women. Yes, women had it worse in terms of freedom and legal standing. As to happiness, overall, who can say? Women are most likely happier doing what comes naturally when that is a freely chosen option. I’m sure plenty of women in the past were absolutely miserable and some quite content. Same as today.

          • > Women are not children.

            I never said they are. I merely noted that the fact that children have less freedom than adults doesn’t mean:
            1) they are subjugated by adults;
            2) it’s bad for them.

            It is the same with the patriarchy. Women having fewer freedoms and responsibility does imply neither subjugation nor abuse.

            > Yes, women had it worse in terms of freedom and legal standing.

            Somalians have it much better regarding freedoms than Americans do. Their freedoms are effectively unlimited, as there is no authority to enforce any laws. Do they have it better?

            As for legal standing, see the example above. Do kids have it worse than adults do when it comes to legal status? Or do they have it much, much better?

            A small hint: the first federal prison for women was opened in 1927. There were 17 female-only prisons by 1940. There were 92 by 1990.

            When you CAN’T be sent to prison for a crime you commit because of your gentle sex – is it a subjugation? Or is it a privilege?

          • But what’s a “full person”? Is a black mama on a welfare check a “full person”?

            Or, going from the other end, wasn’t Queen Victoria a “full person”?

            Does it have anything to do with the suffrage and rights? Anything at all?

            How’s “woman, make me a sandwich” is different from “woman, make me an analytical report”? How’s a woman “chained” to the cubicle better that woman “chained” to the kitchen? How’s a woman that can’t have a job is better than a woman, who can’t do not have a job?

            “Equal rights”, “freedom”, “oppression” – they are all just words. Those words are there to push you in the right direction. They are going non-stop from every TV, every newspaper, every school teacher, every University professor.

            Now, what direction is this? And who does the pushing?

          • Yes, welfare mama and Queen Victoria are both full persons and should be acknowledged as such with attendant rights and responsibilities. I’m not at all saying careerists are better off than or superior to homemakers. I had the opportunity to be both a stay at home mother and a working outside the home mother. I vastly prefer being a homemaker. That’s rather beside the point of whether women should have suffrage.

          • > That’s rather beside the point of whether women should have suffrage.

            I never say they shouldn’t. I said there was no systematic subjugation of women by men, as there is no systematic subjugation of children by their parents.

            In fact, I think that women commanded more respect under the patriarchy that they are now, and that violence against women became widespread only with the dawn of feminism (“no shame in punching your equal”).

            I think we should stop lying about our ancestors. There is a chance your grand-grand-grand-dad was not a brainless animal, and your grand-grand-grand-mother was not his chattel. I’d say, there is even a chance that those guys – you know .. I mean, it’s hard to believe, but .. like, loved each other? And treated each other with respect? I know it sounds silly, but don’t you think it just might’ve been possible?

            As for “women never had a chance to hold a job”, and all the other glorious newly-acquired freedoms they never had – well, we can frame it any way we like, really. How about that: *under the patriarchy, men were lifetime providing utility animals for their wives*.

            It’s technically true. It’s obviously stupid. But if we’d start saying that in schools, Unis, newspapers and TVs, in a few years – it wouldn’t be.

  30. > it does not explain why men a century ago started ceding ground to women.

    I thought a lot about it.

    And my current persuasion is that feminism = MRA + the State-provided megaphone. It’s not an ideology, that was pushed by women to promote women interests. It’s a State program that exists to serve State interests. That’s why it was so overwhelmingly successful, while MRAs (who are effectively male feminists, the same branch of the extreme gender egalitarianism) are marginalised losers.

    So, is the feminism the State-sponsored ideology? Well, think about it. The European suffragettes “appeared” at the exact moment, when the Empires realised that the future wars would be mass draft wars: all men would be mobilised, and the country that can do this first and supply the front will win over others.

    Suffragettes were there to provide “supply the front” part. They were needed by the State to validate the “factory draft” for women to replace mobilised men at the machines. And boy how unexpectedly successful they were! No government in any significant European country was able to suppress them (although somehow the Muslims still do with hardly any effort)!

    But that was then. After two World Wars, in the Atomic era, the need for that disappeared, – and so did the women’s rights movement. Click – and there is no suffragette in sight for two decades, only good old housewives of the glorious 50s.

    Why it re-appeared in the 60s? It became evident that the future wars would not be mass draft wars, not after the hydrogen bomb was tested. Furthermore, the Green Revolution turned industrial-agrarian economics to entirely industrial, and then post-industrial. It was also a dawn of industrial robotics. It became apparent that the States no longer need as many human ants as they can have – to fight its battles, to work in the fields and to run the factories. In fact, they need less, much less – to provide better living standards while reducing the carbon footprint.

    So the State took the course on reducing fertility, it still does. Enter the second-wave feminism.

    Watch closely what “feminism” really is. Not in words said, but in (State-sponsored) acts taken. They are two things:
    1) abortions, contraception and separating recreation from procreation;
    2) “keeping women out of the house”. Because a woman in the house, a housewife, is invariably always a mother.

    Another topic is “more women in Boards”. This one is obvious as well. First, it reads like “more feminists in Boards”, as not every woman counts. Second, feminist = state agent = party commissar. A feminist on a board meeting is effectively a party overseer over a private company.

    And men… A manly man is either a soldier or a rebel. No government needs the later. And now, most governments do not need the former either. Sexless, ball-less, toothless androgynous creature is just so much safer and easier to manage.

    Why have warrior ants if they don’t wage wars? Why do not have just an abstract universal ant? Isn’t the “warrior” part just irrelevant cultural construct? Hello, third-wave feminism and the final dissolution of masculinity.

    I could on, and on, and on. But you got the drift.

      • Sometimes it makes sense to rewind a bit more tape to get a clear picture. If you are interested and have some time to spare, try to dig up on suffragettes links with the UK government. After a century, they are harder to mask.

    • Western feminism exists for the same reason eunuchs were valuable to developed societies. We just consider ourselves too civilized to castrate men to produce eunuchs.

      The will to power is only granted to men in western countries on the basis of them having demonstrated some sacrifice of their masculinity.

    • “it does not explain why men a century ago started ceding ground to women.” This is the natural and unavoidable curve of democracy. Suffrage creep, then suffrage capitulation. Democracy did not take a wrong turn, this is in it’s coding.

      • It could only explain the US, France and Switzerland.

        But during the time of female suffrage, Britain and her Dominions were a constitutional monarchy.
        So was the Wilhelmine Germany.
        USSR was a totalitarian dictatorship (equal rights since 1917, no-fault divorce since 1917, state-provided abortions since 1920, female military regiments from 1917 to 1924).
        Etc. Etc. Etc.

        As I said, feminism looks like a handy tool for a “total war” scenario. Hence why it was adopted in rapid succession once Britain tested it.

        As the Wiki says: “At the commencement of the First World War, the suffragette movement in Britain moved away from suffrage activities and focused their efforts on the war effort”.

    • He’s in his 40s and not married. By that point, he’s either:
      1) MGTOW;
      2) loser;
      3) gay;
      4) not a real person (i.e. a woman posing as a man, or a literary character with a number of authors).

      • You have to be pretty stupid to enter a marriage contract these days. There is no need to invite the state into your personal relationships, especially with those default support and alimony terms. That doesn’t make one any of those three.

        • > You have to be pretty stupid to enter a marriage contract these days.

          Why? Because all women are bitches?

          I guess having kids is even more stupid – I mean wasting your prime years to spend your time and resources on raising some ungrateful parasites? Hello, it’s 2017. What type of idiot does that?

          (I am sarcastic, of course. I am also an Eastern European living in Western Europe, and so is my wife. Our experience is different. But with the attitude like that, your nation will cease to exist in a generation, so you’d better change it and fix the sex relationship.)

          • Again there is nothing you said that involves getting the state involved in your personal relationships. Hold a ceremony, go to a religious service, whatever. You would never sign the highly disfavorable legal terms in any other situation as a man.

            And demographics are such that the battle is already over. Those raising kids better come to terms with the fact they will be like South African whites, a permanently besiged minority.

          • I guess we all going to die then. Resistance is futile. That’s the spirit.

            As for the state involvement – sure, you don’t need one. But somehow co-habit statistically lasts less than a marriage, and creates more fatherless children.

            Maybe what we need is to ditch no-fault divorce rather than marriage?

          • I like your sarcasm here in this, sir.
            Boomers writ large seem to be embracing an overwhelmingly defeatist attitude. Because their great and wonderful talents turned out to only further cast the world into shithole status? Their vanity will not allow that their is a solution or betterment without them and beyond them.
            Our task as X and newer is to make sure we do a better job of knowledge transfer and enablement to the worthwhile young lungs we can find.

        • I answered to your other comment below.

          In short, like most Russians, I can’t stand hypocrisy.

          I think that the guy is talented. I was reading him back in 2007-2009, he was good. And he probably helped a lot of shy men to build up their confidence and get laid.

          But I do think he is a hypocrite, from the moment when he switched to promote “white America” idea. You want white America – you settle and raise a lot of kids with the same woman. You don’t do PUA in your late 40s.

          If he’d say: “World be damned, there’s nothing worth saving here. Enjoy the cheap pussy while you can, guys, and see the world burn” – I would have zero problems with that. That would be consistent.

          • Sergey, refreshing to hear this. I too get the impression many in the ‘sphere are stunted and just rehashing old ideas or trying to sell their books, old and new. Selling dreams of endless pussy at this point. Neither facing the decline head-on, nor taking concrete steps to reverse it – like you said, make lots of white babies, it’s really the only way. You ain’t gonna red pill masses of men and take away the female vote, or initiate some kind of coup de etat. Ain’t gonna happen.

          • I think a lot of us would agree that Heartiste’s site and his viewpoint has evolved considerably in the last 10 years.

  31. I have read several theories about this topic. Lower testosterone and sperm counts may be correlated with an abundance of leisure time. Men up until very recently spent most of their waking hours ensuring their own survival. The last 3 generations have seen a sharp increase in the state ensuring that survival, as pathetic as that existence might be. Even the most hard charging alpha overachiever is going to have a lot more free time on his hands these days. Human instinct may know the difference between hunting for survival and hunting for fun.
    I have also read that the explosion of synthetic female hormones since the invention of the pill has led to males’ increased exposure to estrogen and its detrimental effects. Anything more than the very minimal amount the male body produces for itself is terrible for the male body. If males are exposed to these hormones from a young age all the way into adulthood, it’s not unreasonable to suggest they will have a feminizing effect.

  32. I melt wheel weights to cast various bullets. The dross must be skimmed to render good alloy.
    Only through heat can the pot be purified. So, forward thinking man: seek to show the Zyklons that challenge and hardships are not to be shrunk from, but embraced. I’ve had fair luck with this, they detest boredom and will rally to self betterment. You have to show them the ROI though. Also, you won’t get them all, but you do not Need them all.
    Now go forth and build our improved version of the New Age Man, that they may scourge the very earth of soibois.

  33. One explanation is the birth of a nation state and the concept of total war. With mass conscription it was females that took over home management. Also constant warfare created a lot of crippled men who had to be taken care of hence the slow birth of welfare state.

  34. “Exhaustion” is my guess as to why the manly men back then gave up re: women voters. The lunatic Abolitionists didn’t go away after the Civil War; they just shifted gears to Women’s Suffrage. Since those freaks proved quite willing to cause a civil war to get what they wanted, the war-exhausted nation just gave up and gave it to them. The SJWs ye have always with you…

  35. The explanations of the observed biological phenomena are most likely multifactorial, and may involve sociological as well a biological causes. One that never gets considered is school size. In smaller schools sports participation is much higher. The ratio of muscle mass to fat plays a part in sex steroid metabolism as fat contains aromatase in higher levels, causing lower testosterone levels in some men. The more sedentary the lifestyle, the lower the testosterone level.
    Doing small jobs is activity that stimulates in ways we don’t understand fully. Shop classes are no longer required. Maybe they should be. Work outside the home should be encouraged, even if it’s done for free.

    • The lack of “handiness” is something I notice. It is remarkable to me how dependent younger men are on the services of other men. I never thought about the benefits of doing small tasks, particular with your hands. Maybe there’s some hidden physiological benefit of low-level activity. Obviously, exercise has a significant impact on mind and body.

      • Agree. I have worked at a SW house and even though these people could code a little (little!) they had no grasp of technology in general.
        I once had a co-worker who did not know about the thermodynamic laws! (he though it was possible to generate electricity from the airflow over a car due to driving). And that guy was not dumb, he just really did not know.

        • Rien;
          Wow. Was this person a EE by any chance_?

          In the service as early as in the ’90s I observed that compared to CE’s and ME’s, etc., EE’s were pretty helpless. One of them had our entire log plan on a laptop. One trip into the sand and it was all gone. Thankfully I had insisted on a hard-copy being produced ahead of deployment. Fortunately this was only an exercise.

          • I am not entirely sure of his education, but it was at the bachelor level in something related to software engineering. The thing that baffled me though was the lack of thermodynamics in his education. And a lot of other physics as well presumably.

            In his own field (Database) he was fit enough, but he had absolutely no knowledge outside it.

            Though I am a little older, we were apparently more broadly educated. And now that I am writing this, it kind of makes sense. In the past the job market was much broader. There was only 1 computer engineering class back then, and it covered everything from electronics and PLA’s to software languages. Including materials known-how and physics. But that had probably to do with the fact that at the time only about 5% of the people knew what computers were. So any job afterwards could literally involve any other technical field.

            While today the job market is much more fragmented and needs more specialists.

            Still, leaving fundamental out like that, there can be no excuse imo. I mean, come on, its not as if you need a three year education to understand databases!

        • Not to pick nits, but it IS possible to generate electricity from the airflow over a car due to driving. For example, one could mount a small turbine on the surface of the vehicle to generate electricity. This would not violate any law of thermodynamics.

          The laws of thermodynamics tell us there can be no NET gain of energy from the turbine.

          Al, below, is pretty spot on. Electrical engineers, computer engineers, and computer science majors frequently don’t have to take thermodynamics or any basic chemistry or materials science. Hence, many of them are lacking in basic common sense in the realm of the sciences.

          • No only would there not be a NET gain, but there would be a huge NET loss. Cars are not very efficient. It would be far more efficient to burn the gas in a generator and turn it directly into electricity.

      • Z Man;
        Agree: One benefit of doing small tasks around the house yourself is that it exercises your spacial intelligence capabilities and project management skills. Most men don’t get to do that at work any more. And you can lose yourself doing something not-work-connected that has short-term gratification.

        It is also useful for mentally assessing your skills and learning new ones. For anybody there are some tasks best left to the pros but quite a few that you can do yourself, if necessary.

        Besides all this there are the bragging rights. And you are usually, but not always, saving money.

      • When you spend the first 30 years of your life either running a farm or working for farmers you have to learn to do stuff. Carpentry, plumbing, electrical, engine repair, welding. When you and your community depend on agriculture, post scarcity is a hairs width away from not being post.

        You don’t call a guy unless it’s a friend or relative. They typically teach you how to do whatever it is, so that you are the guy next time. Watching someone fix a bailer, that knows how, is amazing.

        My father in law had a forge on his farm. He not only could fix most anything he could make the parts. I still know men like that but most of them are over 60.

        • Very true,

          The thing is but almost no one lives on farms, the US population is over 80% urban mostly service workers.

          Few people have the time or inclination to develop mechanical skills or really much of a need for them in day to day life.

          I have some skills and basically rarely if ever use them. Simply. modern equipment is also quite reliable till it it isn’t the paradox being better gear, less skilled people

    • Doc;
      Interesting point re school size size promoting more athletic participation. I’d say the elimination of recess is also highly important. A lot of Schools have gotten rid of PE too, I understand. It’s just one more example of the insanity of the Feminine Imperative: Boy’s PE requires more male teachers, women hate the chaos of recess, etc. Bottom Line: More recess = less ADHD meds needed (if any really are).

  36. How do you explain that women seem to be getting more masculine? Drudge has a link this morning about “the epidemic of female sex addicts”!

    • Most likely, it is the number of sex partners early in life. Women are wired to pair-bond with sex partners and this drive is strongest early in life. Lots of casual sex in high school and college means an inability to bond with a male later in life. Female promiscuity has been a catastrophe for the West.

      • Spend some time with the MGTOW material and on places like Chateau Heartiste. Their term for this is “the cock carousel”.

        Women can now sleep around with (almost) impunity and not pay the price for it – either socially or thru pregnancy. This – combined with the whole “go to college and get a career” life path that is heavily promoted in society – leads them to avoid marriage. Shows like “Sex and the City” – heavily promote a carefree city lifestyle made up of great social events, sleeping around with random great looking men , buying shoes, and having a “great career”.

        Hard to give that up when all of your friends are doing it and Cosmo says it’s the way to live.

        All of a sudden you’re 35 years old – your friends are drying up – the men aren’t as interested any more – and so you start thinking about marriage. Except most men don’t want to come in second place behind a couple dozen other guys. Plus 35 year old women have much higher chance of fertility problems than say a 20 year old. For a lot of men – that’s a no win situation. Plus a 35 year old woman who’s been stewing in that culture is going to resent how her life ended up – and blame the man.

        I’ve seen a number of women follow this path. Maybe not the sleeping around piece of the puzzle ( I think that is mostly confined to city dwellers where there’s a high population of people in small space and hence an easy environment to meet multiple sex partners) – but the whole school – career – oh shit I’m 35 ! .. thing.

        • > leads them to avoid marriage

          Sorry, what? Leads them, *the women*, to avoid the marriage? Like, the typical Western man in his 20s dreams about the wedding? Like, it’s men, who say “where are we in this relationships? Why won’t you marry me?”

          Honestly, would you marry a 19 years old virgin at the age of 21 to have four kids with her by the age of 30? She is raising them while you out working to provide for all six of you?

          Because if you not, if you’d rather prefer to have some fun until you settle in your mid-30s than you should be happy with the status quo. Because it’s your cock in that carousel, and you wouldn’t mind a ho or ten to sit on it.

          It takes two to tango. And an awful lot of men LOVES that tango.

          • “Honestly, would you marry a 19 years old virgin at the age of 21 to have four kids with her by the age of 30? She is raising them while you out working to provide for all six of you?”

            That’s pretty much what I did — she was 20 and I was 23, though. Five kids. No regrets. Thirty-one years later I’ve had an awful lot of fun in my life, and I have five fantastic children I’m very proud of.

            Both men and women are victims of the propaganda that has told them that “settling down” and having kids is the end of a “fun” life.

      • > Female promiscuity has been a catastrophe for the West.

        How can there be such a thing that specifically *female* promiscuity? I can understand male-only promiscuity – gays are numerous, and they copulate a lot.

        But female? Isn’t there a man who had sex with a stranger for every woman, who had sex with a stranger? Are we in a double-standards territory here?

        And if female promiscuity is a problem, maybe we should just stop having sex with them, and marry virgins at 16? Would that solve a problem? Would men accept this solution?

        (Me, personally, I’m married early, had kids and stay married. I think there’s no perfect solution, and the social history of the mankind is creating new problems by trying to fix old ones).

        • Good Point which many of the manosphere miss.

          A slut’s N is wholly dependent on the number of MEN that sleep with her. There’s an intellectual dissonance in place when people decry female promiscuity while simultaneously lauding male.

        • Good point. And something I remember questioning a couple of decades ago. Used to be you could pretty regularly find ” average number of sexual partners of men vs. women ” type articles in the media.

          It was usually something like : ” The average number of sexual partners of men is 10 by the age of 25 and for women it’s 3 by the age of 25″ – or something like that.

          It doesn’t take a lot to figure out either one of two things is happening: Either it’s all a lie ( my personal opinion) – or – there are some women out there who have hundreds of sexual partners (also a definite thing IMHO).

          The more recent stuff I’ve seen claims that female average sexual partners is going up (probably what’s really going on is they’re not lying about it any more). The other effect that you’ll see mentioned in places like Heartiste and in the MGTOW stuff – is that polygyny is probably also increasing.

          A couple of decades of female empowerment , media like Sex and the City, combined with giving everybody a gold star when they were kids – has led a lot of women to have a much higher opinion of themselves than they likely deserve. The way I see this effect explained in places like Heartiste is: women have all started thinking they DESERVE to be dating the hottest guy in the room. And they won’t settle for anything else. I have definitely seen this mindset amongst some of the 40 something (single) females I know. They’re in their 40’s – and still thinking that they’re getting a rich CEO to swoop down and save them from cat lady status.

          And the problem for women as they get older – is that men get older too – and wiser. I know a lot of guys who started to really smarten up in regards to women once the testosterone started to subside in their 40’s and into their 50’s. So you’re got single women – who men their own age won’t go near – it’s not worth the investment.

          Also – with everybody being on the internet now – even high school age males have access to the horror stories and experience of older males in regards to females. Again – go spend some time amongst MGTOW and places like Heartiste and you’ll find a lot of young males who are like “fuck this”. Their attitude is that they make good money – have a good life – do what they want when they want – and their experiences with women – which coincide with what they read from older men about what happens over time – lead them to the conclusion that getting too far involved with women is a very dangerous thing indeed if they want to have a sane and prosperous life.

          Women then pile on by doing things like the #MeToo movement.

      • The emphasis on liberty over duty, on consumer of citizen has been a catastrophe to the West

        The core ideals of the Enlightenment lead to technological attainment which lead to complexity which will lead to a complexity trap than a catabolic collapse

        Its self correcting though, a society in the process of such a collapse will slowly but surely fall apart until equilibrium is achieved

        There is no real solution as no one will be able to basically make society less complex, basic things like tight immigration control are too hard much less tough stuff like economic management and limiting the franchise

        The only real choice we have in the matter is how bad it will be and poorly handled near human extinction is not off limits

    • News flash-like men, sort of, women in general have never been averse to sex. Nymphomania is not a new term, first use was in 1702 per the dictionary. When the male or female sex drive is not positively channeled in a society, you get…? As for an epidemic, well, there are fewer inhibiting factors these days for any sort of sexual behavior.

      • There’s an awful lot of people out there saying that unconstrained female sexuality is FAR worse for society than out of control male sexuality. This even includes people from the feminist spectrum like Camille Paglia.

        Again – referencing MGTOW and Heartiste: If you go look you’ll find a lot of ink spilled about how it seems like the female part of the population is trending towards polygyny. They all think they want to bang the hottest alpha in the room. And won’t settle for anything less. Until that is – they hit the wall and cat lady status is staring them in the face (into the abyss). That’s when they figure out they’ve got to settle down and find a man (sucker) to support them.

        Who is going to buy into a woman who’s in her 30’s – been around the block quite a few times – and has now timed out of the game?

        Look at societies that allow few men access to a multitude of women. That’s where this is all headed if current trends continue.

        • Being steered towards Islam- including rampant buggery, molestation, and the MeToo seclusion of women.

    • It’s called r/K theory. In periodes of ‘r’ men become feminized, women become more masculine. Even to the point of role-inversion.
      More on this eye-opening stuff at the anonymous conservative website.

      • I am not sure you get r/K right.

        r is “spray and pray”, K is a parental investment.

        The sure sign of r is mass fatherliness. Typical r is American Black community. I wouldn’t say their men are “less masculine” than whites.

        • If I had to pick a typical r, I would choose the SJW.
          Blacks are not less masculine than whites because the majority of both are r.

          • Sterility has no impact on r/K. The mechanism are still in place, even when sterile. r/K is mostly shaped by biology and very early childhood.

            But most of the SJW are artificially sterile, through sexual preferences. They have inverted sexual preferences (gay & lesbian) as a consequence of ultimate r-selection.

    • Drudge is a joo. Of course his reports cause demoralization and complicate our problems. Intention. A joo is an energy parasite. White male response: turn more cynical against women. Divorce rates up. More spending on lawyers, cars, drugs and toys.

      • If someone is truly under control, i.e., restrained, dominated, commanded, are they in a position to refuse?

        • In most societies in the world, the men remove their protection from women who violate the societal norms. Yet I don’t see women being raped in their streets.
          Western women are demanding to be protected while they demean and abuse the men who provide the protection. This isn’t going to end well for you.

          • This realization is one of the things that is at the core of the MGTOW movement (if you want to call it that). MGTOWs recognize that the deck is stacked against men – because women want all of the old stuff (protection and support) – as well as all of the “new” stuff (sleeping around, “equal” rights – etc). This creates a combination that basically screws men over and puts them into a no win situation.

            If I had to come up with a quick way of encapsulating what I perceive the MGTOW movement believes, it’s the same as WOPR (that computer from the 80’s movie Wargames) :

            A strange game.The only winning move is not to play

      • Men can control women too by refusing to f**k them.

        I’ve spent a decent amount of time watching MGTOW content on Youboob and reading MGTOW related content on places like Heartiste.

        There’s numerous guys in there saying that refusing a woman who is blatantly making it obvious she wants to f**k – is one sure way to drive them up the wall. I know in my own personal life I’ve done that a few times – and it makes the less attractive ones depressed (can’t give it away) and the more attractive more confident ones – it can really piss them off.

        The words ” how dare you refuse me” is a common response I’ve seen a few times.

        Men – most men – even the good looking alphas – are experienced with getting rejected on occasion. Women however – except maybe the most unattractive – perceive rejection of offers of free sex in a completely different way than men do.

        • This is absolutely true. Modern women have conditioned themselves to believe they are the gatekeepers of sex. Which in many cases has been true. It’s an easy system to hack if you can resist the temptation.

          • The ability to resist temptation has always been a source of power. Resistance to temptation = resistance to corruption. I think even women (at least some women) understand that this means a man who will not sell you out.

            However I think that a lot of “modern” women have bought into the all encompassing modern culture so thoroughly that they simply cannot understand why a man would resist the pussy. They’ve been sold that they have the ultimate power because they have the pussy. And far too many men have bought into it.

            Being told “I’m not buying what you’re selling” – when they thought everybody wanted it, completely up-ends their world view.

            The ability to resist temptation – also equals self control. Which far too many women seem to completely lack.

            The ability to go MGTOW means you’re monkey wrenching the system.

          • In basically all areas, not giving a shit is hugely empowering. Recall the Johnny Paycheck song, “Take This Job and Shove It”.

      • > Women control men by refusing to f**k them. Men control women by refusing to protect them.

        Thank God there are always streak-breakers, who get all the fun.

        • It was argued by Madame de Deffand that women are never stronger than when they arm themselves with their weaknesses, but feminists detest their own instincts and seek to replace them with the rotting corpse of masculinity.

      • Resorting to violence is an unsophisticated method of gaining control.

        I’m young enough (old enough?) – to have been fully exposed to all the manner of feminist crap that has manifested since the 1960′
        s. The old propaganda was that women are more verbal than men, women use both sides of their brains – etc. Women were also supposed to be able to outwit men because they couldn’t overpower or out-violence them.

        So you’ve got the classic brains vs. brawn struggle.

        What power does a woman have over a man who can out-brain AND overpower them?

        None. Except maybe selling the pussy.

        Now what power is left when a man says ” I’m not buying”

        They have a real problem don’t they? Especially since (despite all of the propaganda that a woman can do anything a man can do) – I think most women realize that they CANNOT do everything a man can do. Women don’t build cities. Women don’t invent things. Women by and large are wholly reliant on men to exist in a modern technological society. They are even more reliant on men to exist in a society that is not dominated by machines. They may deny it openly – but I haven’t met a single woman in my entire life who doesn’t turn to and expect help from men to solve problems in her life.

        The last and final piece is genetic. I have seen a number of the MGTOW people point this out. Women only have the X chromosome. Men have X and Y. So which gender is ultimately more expendable? In a world where artificial wombs are a technological possibility – which would likely be invented by men – who suddenly becomes the genetic loser?

        Seems to me that modern women are really poking the male tiger in the same manner that BLM idiots are poking the white tiger. And neither group really has full comprehension on how their behavior may ultimately come back to bite them in the ass pretty severely.

      • Christian men were permitted to lightly beat and rape their wives until relatively recently. It’s not so much the punishment that keeps women in line but the authority and dread over them which maintains their respect and attraction.

        • If a woman acts like a lady she should be treated as such but if she acts like a child she should be treated like a child. A switch or a belt placed properly on her backside will actuate a great change in attitude.

    • “Control” is always out of fear. Women should not be “controlled”, and neither should be men. What’s needed is mutual respect based on the joint promise of support.

      If a person wants a human doll he can beat on sadistic impulses and command as he wishes with a threat of violence – he’s mentally ill and should be isolated. By other, stronger men.

      • And then let’s all hold hands and sing kumbaya. It’s funny how you equate control with beatings and sadism. Why is that?

        • I say what I mean, when I want.

          Shaming men on their stance when you don’t like it is a female behaviour 101 though.

          As for control, do you control a person you trust – say, in the professional environment? Would you control your 18yo son if he’s no a junkie, criminal or a piece of shit? Would you control your surrounding all the time if you are not afraid of being attacked?

          As for “beatings”, well control always imply “… or else”, negative reward, a punishment. What type of punishment might it be between a man and his woman I wonder? From what I witnessed, it’s either cut her out of money or beat her.

          As for me, I don’t have to “control” my wife in any way. But neither I have to beg. I just need to say.

          But then I prove my position with my daily actions.

          • “As for “beatings”, well control always imply “… or else”, no that’s called a “threat”. Look up the definition of control then get back to me. Nowhere does it imply beatings or sadism.

          • Why would I care about a dictionary definitions is there are methods of control specified in this very thread? Check it out: Scold’s bridle, “back of a man’s hand”, all the good stuff.

            But do enlight me. You want your girlfriend to make you a sandwich. She is not inclined to do so. What methods of control (=”authoritative or dominating influence”) will you use to persuade her to act on your will?

          • A “beating” is not the same as a slap or “back of the hand”, nor Is it sadism. Look up what “White Knighting” is, cuz that’s what you’re doing. And it’s pathetic

          • > Look up what “White Knighting” is, cuz that’s what you’re doing. And it’s pathetic

            You chose to ignore the reference to Scold’s bridle, a sadistic torture device. Such selective perception of reality is a clear feminine trait.

            You avoided answering my question by launching an ad hominem attack – yet another demonstration of a typically female behaviour. (“I cheated because you don’t care about me.”)

            I will repeat it: how would you, personally, control a woman? By that point my guess would be “by nagging her to death”.

    • Control is over rated. I know how to do shit, and my wife appreciates that I know how to do shit that she cannot do. She likes that I listen to what she thinks (she’s smart, and is right a lot), and I ask for her opinions, even if I wind up doing what I think is best. I discipline the children along with her, and I don’t take long trips leaving her by herself to do the mommy’s work. She likes that I do manly things and am just fine doing manly things without her, even if sometimes she wishes I would stay home and do something around the house.

      Smacking people around, as others have suggested, is no answer. It’s cowardly and stupid. You want to “control” women, don’t be a dickhead, know how to do things, be strong and confident, earn a good living, and when she asks for something, you salute smartly and go fucking do it.

      Control. oy.

      • Many women are prone to misbehavior. However, punishment by physical means is usually not necessary, but sometimes on occasion it is.

        Of course this tool in the tool chest has been taken away from men, so they have to deal with misbehaved women in other ways.

      • Who pretend to be submissive/docile but will get you by the short and curlies quicker than any American miss can.

    • The source of control is the same that exist on the dance floor. Women want to be led. Now women raise men who don’t know how to do that. I know you know this Why are you even asking the question?
      Happy Acres–Men: “We want to protect you.”
      Women: “We don’t care what you want, we demand not to need to be protected.”

    • Submission is the spark that ignites the conflagration. Control varies according to the experience and evolution of the man. Ultimately, the submissive is always the one in control.

    • A man who will let them go instead of sucking in will have infinitely more control. I have been married three times, I told each one that if she made me happy I would make her happy…but if she made me miserable I promised I would make her twice as miserable. The first two didn’t believe me and they lasted 3 weeks and 8 months in that order. The third believed it and we have been happily married for 17 years.

Comments are closed.