On Triggers and Bullies

Scott Alexander has a interesting post on triggers and safe spaces (h/t: Jim), in which he writes:

The rationalist community is a safe space for people who obsessively focus on reason and argument even when it is socially unacceptable to do so.

If you are the sort of person with the relevant mental quirk, living in a society of people who don’t do this is a terrifying an alienating experience. Finding people who are like you is an amazing, liberating experience. It is, in every sense of the word, a safe space.

If you want a community that is respectful to the triggers of people who don’t want to talk about controversial ideas, the Internet is full of them. Although I know it’s not true, sometimes it seems to me that half the Internet is made up of social justice people talking about how little they will tolerate people who are not entirely on board with social justice ideas and norms. Certainly this has been my impression of Tumblr, and of many (very good) blogs I read (Alas, A Blog comes to mind, proving that my brain sorts in alphabetical order). There is no shortage of very high-IQ communities that will fulfill your needs.

But you say you’re interested in and attracted to the rationalist community, that it would provide something these other communities don’t. Maybe you are one of those people with that weird mental quirk of caring more about truth and evidence than about things it is socially acceptable to care about, and you feel like the rationalist community would be a good fit for that part of you. If so, we would love to have you!

But if you want to join communities specifically because they are based around dispassionate debate and ignoring social consequences, but your condition for joining is that they stop having dispassionate debate and take social consequences into account, well, then you’re one of those people – like Groucho Marx – who refuses to belong to any club that would accept you as a member.

This would be a good time to admit that I am massively, massively triggered by social justice.

I know exactly why this started. There was an incident in college when I was editing my college newspaper, I tried to include a piece of anti-racist humor, and it got misinterpreted as a piece of pro-racist humor. The college’s various social-justice-related-clubs decided to make an example out of me. I handled it poorly (“BUT GUYS! THE EVIDENCE DOESN’T SUPPORT WHAT YOU’RE DOING!”) and as a result spent a couple of weeks having everyone in the college hold rallies against me followed by equally horrifying counter-rallies for me. I received a couple of death threats, a few people tried to have me expelled, and then everyone got bored and found some other target who was even more fun to harass. Meantime, I was seriously considering suicide.

But it wasn’t just that one incident. Ever since, I have been sensitive to how much a lot of social justice argumentation resembles exactly the bullying I want a safe space from – the “aspie”, the “nerd”, that kind of thing. Just when I thought I had reached an age where it was no longer cool to call people “nerds”, someone had the bright idea of calling them “nerdy white guys” instead, and so transforming themselves from schoolyard bully to brave social justice crusader. This was the criticism I remember most from my massive Consequentialism FAQ – he’s a nerdy white dude – and it’s one I have come to expect any time I do anything more intellectual than watch American Idol, and usually from a social justicer.

Scott hovers around a good point and gives it a light jab or two, but doesn’t go for the throat, so I will.

Bullying is not a regrettable by-product of social justice, social justice does not resemble bullying, rather:

Social justice is bullying.

The purpose of social justice is, was, and always will be bullying. Social justice warriors are bullies, nothing more, attempting to use social, economic, and, occasionally, physical force to enforce group conformity in favour of their ‘one true faith’ of ‘equality’.

SJ is the attempt of the weak and vile to force their abnormalities and disorders on the rest of us to make us as broken as they are. When we are all as pathetic as they are, we will all be equal.

To put it in social justice terms, the purpose of the non-normative discourse is to colonize and occupy white male space.

****

This is why you never give the SJW’s an inch. These are not simply well-meaning but broken people who need a bit of respect. These are not simply sensitive people who should be given a bit of compassion out of politeness. In normal life some minor accommodations to those naturally predisposed to sensitivity driven discourse is simple politeness, but SJW’s are not these types of people and they should not be given even the smallest of accommodations.

How can you tell that the SJW’s are bullies, rather than simply broken, but well-meaning people?

Simple, they seek to enter where they don’t belong. They purposefully seek out things to feel victimized.

A normal person who is sensitive to something (and might be worthy of some accommodation) generally seeks to avoid that something. As a trite personal example, I find emotional outbursts and certain forms of strong emotionalism uncomfortable; it could be fairly said, I am ‘sensitive’ to them. Because of this I tend to try to avoid situations where they occur and I avoid the type of people who are prone to them. It’s basic common sense.

The SJW, on the other hand, purposefully goes out of her way to intrude in other people’s spaces where she knows she will be uncomfortable and condemn them for making her uncomfortable.

We can see that in Scott’s example above: an SJW tries to enter a rationalist community devoted to a safe space for dispassionate discourse and demands that everybody stop with the dispassionate discourse.

You can see it in all the women offended by RoK or Matt Forney. They intrude on a male space dedicated to masculine discussion, where they know they will be offended and feel ‘victimized’.  We can see this with SRS on Reddit, who intrude into RPR and act offended.

In real life, the colonization of male space can be exemplified by the current concerns of the military; the SJW types demand women be allowed into the military, then whine when the military doesn’t bend over backwards to cater to their every whim.

It would be like me going to an Emotions Anonymous (I was only mildly surprised that existed) meeting and demanding they all stop being so weepy and emotional. It would be simply wrong. It’s not my place to be there and, if I am there as a newcomer or guest, it’s not my place to demand they change for me.

This is who you can know the SJW’s are bullies. They refuse to live and let live; they barge into other’s spaces and demand that these spaces change for them.

Never accommodate them.

****

I’ve outlined a number of ways they attempt to bully their allies (and others) into conformity, but of all these, the trigger warning is the most insidious attempt at colonization.

Not only does the SJW demand you kowtow to her will in her own spaces, she demands you kowtow to her will in your own space.

****

As an aside, Scott, if you end up following the backlink and reading this, I know I still haven’t got around to addressing your response to my response to the antireactionary FAQ. I still plan to. Hopefully, eventually.

Advertisements

Alternatives to Game

Lately, discussion of game and Christianity has been occurring in the Orthosphere, led by GBFM, Donal, Zippy, and Cane. I don’t disagree with many of the conclusions of the anti-gamers. There is probably a lot of the placebo effect to “game”. Although, there is also evidence that dark triad traits, which game attempts to mimic, are attractive, while being a nice guy isn’t.

I do find though,  that a lot of the Christian, “is game acceptable?”, debate really boils down to defining “game”. Nobody comes to terms before discussion, so the conversation almost always turns into a bunch of people talking past each other.

I myself have gone back and forth on game.

Either way, chasing flags and notches is an empty, joyless, if sometimes pleasurable, way to live. Roosh’s personal reflections over the last year or so provide ample example of that. No Christian should participate in it, and, even according to game advocates, even most non-Christians are simply not suited for it and would be better of finding an average girl and marrying. “Game” in the gimmicky, manipulative, player sense is something to avoid; at best it is a stop-gap.

But, men should instead focus on building themselves up. Instead of focusing on gimmicks, men should focus on improving themselves and being the kind of man who would have the kind of life they desire. Focus on the core, what some call inner game, and you will be attractive to the type of woman you want in your life.

****

This being said, I don’t think all game is a placebo. While I avoid the immoral and gimmicky parts of game, some of the more straightforward and practical social skills and body language advice is useful.  One of the earlier posts which made me take Roissy seriously, was this post on contraposta. Simply standing differently, and having a way I could purposefully stand, did wonders for my confidence. Just off the top of my head, other such tactical posts that helped me immensely include Simon Grey’s eye contact post and Roissy’s statement-statement-question.

Little practical things like these can work wonders and give socially awkward men like me something firm to hold onto.

****

All this being said though, whether you are pro-game, or anti-game, there is something you can agree on. So, what if, as Zippy says:

Game (understood as the pickup artist’s toolkit specifically) is actually pretty lousy in terms of effectiveness, right on par with placebo.  Doing something (and learning from the experience, and being persistent, and building confidence) is far better than doing nothing; but once you extract taking action at all, persistence, confidence, and learning through experience from the equation, the part of Game that is left over (that is, Game itself) – at least according to the “best of the best” PUA themselves – doesn’t do much for your percentages.

Let’s say game is mostly a placebo. Let’s say that its only real effect is to give awkward guys something to latch onto so they have a place to start developing confidence and acting. Let’s say, game is simply doing something.

This leads directly to the question, what else is there? As I’ve said before:

There is nothing else.

If you are an awkward, nerdy male, the only people willing and able to teach you practical advice for attracting women are the PUAs. I’ve checked. There is simply no one outside the manosphere teaching men how to meet a pleasant, moderately pretty girl for a stable long-term relationship.

I’ve read a number of Christian books and articles on dating, but they all assume a woman is attracted to you. They are either discussions of what kind of dating is appropriate and exhortations against sin or man up articles on how to avoid sex in relationships, how to avoid leading women on, and how to be firm in your intentions. There is almost no practical advice on how to actually attract a girl in first place so that the other advice has any relevance.

(For any Christian manospherians reading this, here’s a great book idea: write a guide to help awkward Christian guys attract a Christian wife. Market it in the Christian culture industry and you’d make a killing. I’d write it, but I’m not qualified at this point.)

Going outside the Christian stuff, everywhere else you look the socially awkward male is given the same advice: be yourself and be a nice guy, she’ll come… eventually.

Guess what?

We already do that: it doesn’t work. If it did work, we wouldn’t be looking for advice.

For women (and church leaders and others who may care): if you do not want awkward guys going to PUA’s for advice on attracting women, offer a viable alternative.

The only reason I started taking guys like Roissy or Roosh even remotely seriously was because they were the first people I found anywhere who gave enough of a shit to give some practical, useful advice. I haven’t adopted either game or playerhood, but I have tried some of their more morally neutral advice and it has been useful. (I’m now more influenced by the Athol/Dalrock approach).

How royally screwed up is it that self-proclaimed assholes like Roissy and Mentu are the only ones honest and selfless enough to give practical advice to the awkward guy looking for companionship (even if they mock us while they do it)?

Zippy, GBFM, Cane, and the rest can criticize game all they want, they might even be, probably are, right. But it doesn’t matter.

There is no alternative.

If I, as an awkward, nerdy Christian man, want practical, actionable advice on finding and attracting a nice Christian wife, game is the only place to go.

Without the game advice of these “low value dirt bags and sexual garbage collectors”, I never would have been able to approach this girl. I never would have gotten this date. I’ve had more dates in the last year than in my whole life prior, and a lot of it comes down to the advice and help I got from these “dirt bags.”

Without the advice and encouragement of them, without the practice from my previous dates, I probably would have awkwardly blown out the first date with the girl I’m currently courting.

None of these dates or approaches involved gimmicks, sleaze, or even anything resembling the popular perception of game. They were all simple, straightforward, well-intentioned interactions that nobody would or could think ill of.

But game advice gave me something to latch onto. It gave me practical steps I could take to improve myself. Was it a placebo? Possibly. But some of it was real. (The simple advice to not follow around a girl you like like a love-sick puppy alone was worth its weight in gold).

It was something practical I could do to improve myself and become better at social interactions with.

Roissy, Roosh, et al. may be self-professed degenerate scum but what is Zippy* providing?

This is the problem. What are the Christian man’s alternatives?

My Omega’s Guide was a start. I tried to make a practical guide to self-improvement anyone could use while avoiding “game”. Donal puts out a lot good theory, Chad’s stories are excellent sources of some Christian attraction principles put in practice, Vox throws out a fair amount of Christian game, and Athol puts out good, but non-Christian, advice for married men. A few other Christian blogs from my roll put out the occasional advice post.

Of these, Vox and Athol are the only names even remotely well-known and the only ones who have successfully found a wife and there sites is the gamiest and least Christian, respectively, of them all.

The awkward Christian man’s sources of information for attracting a wife without game are few unknowns who have plucked the pearls from the vast library of information the degenerates put out and have tried to apply it, but haven’t even found a wife for themselves.

So, give us something. Where is the church? Where is the help from the pro-marriage, anti-game moralizers to help us?

I don’t need another exhortation to man up, I’ve had enough of those. I don’t need another post telling me the greatness of marriage. I don’t need another lecture on servant-leadership; I’m drowning in those. I don’t need another sermon on avoiding fornication; I’ve been listening to those since before I knew what sex was. I don’t need more don’t do this, don’t do that; I need more do this.

Where is the practical Christian advice that will help me find a wife? Where can I find advice so the good Christian girl’s description of me to her friends isn’t “ew”?

Without that, all the rest of this debate over game is just noise and thunder signifying nothing. Awkward Christian men will go the degenerate dirt bags, because our choices are either try to pick the occasional nugget of truth from the hedonists and hope we don’t become corrupted by them or live the rest of our lives in grinding loneliness and sexual frustration.

If you don’t like game, give us an alternative.

****

Being opposed to complaining without providing a solution, I will point any Christian men reading this and looking for answers to my Omega’s Guide. It should provide some good advice I’ve painfully learned through the last 7 or 8 years. At some point, I’m going to arrange it into a self-published ebook for easier distribution.

Once I’m married and can speak with real authority on the subject, I plan to write a book on finding and attracting a Christian wife (probably cribbing heavily from the Omega’s Guide). I might even try hocking this to the various Christian publishers.

****

* I realize this is unfair to Zippy, and mean no offence, he’s not making a relationship blog and he isn’t professing to, but neither is anyone else.


Lightning Round – 2014/01/15

How to be the boss, create a job, and have a soul.
Related: The world owes me nothing.

10 most important principles of leadership.

It is not that difficult to be better than most at something.

What will it take for you to change?
Related: Fix yourself by answering one question.
Related: Guide to being mediocre.

Premature aging: losing the will to live early.

Consider the source; its often more important than the advice.

RoK is attempting to address its decline.

Finding and making a conservative wife.

Submission and faith.
Related: What you are and are not owed.
Related: The corrosion of thankfulness.

What incentives does a man have to get married?
Related: Child support and the threat point.

Divorce as war.

Laura thinks red pill women are a trap.
Related: Simon Grey responds to Laura.

Women, memory, and emotion.

The definition of faith.

Subsidizing insanity.

The Catholic Church as an enemy of new ideas.
Related: Humour: 6 myths of the dark ages.

Neoreaction should be obscure.

Anissimov creates a huge Monarchy FAQ I have yet to go through, but looks good.
Related: The monarchist position on economics.

Machiavellianism and reaction.
Related: Noble and pragmatic aristocrats.

A very thorough review of Bryce’s ebook.

Demotism and lies.

The Cathedral and superstructures.

Vox is puzzled by being lumped into the DE.

Scharlach has an amusing conversation with an anarchist.

Conan, civilization, and barbarism.

More on the basilisk. And more.

Politics is a waste of time.

Post-literacy and the refusal to read.

Race and subspecies.

The failure of modern masculinity. (My previous reply still applies: incentives).

Height and attractiveness.

14 things no one will tell fat girls.
Related: 8 things girls can do to be more attractive.
Related: Identifying future fatties.
Related: 4 tests for future fatties.
Related: Weight and attractiveness in pictures.

Matt Walsh on chivalry. He needs to read this old post of mine.

Science: “As it turned out, having more sexual partners was associated with less stable relationships and less relationship satisfaction. “ Surprising.

Troll Panic: Power masquerading as powerlessness.

Sound wisdom for feminist economists.

A Christmas Carol on marriage.

Aristotle: Sparta and spoiled women.

Why profit is mandatory.

The demand for a living wage is a demand for slavery.

The return of the mancession.

The white ghetto.
Related: About poor fathers and single mothers.

The risk of future reprisal against Jews for their actions in the US.

Cards Against Humanity and the new Victorianism.

The environmental devastation of communism.

Mark Steyn on the trapped ice ship.

Wrap Rage.
Related: What people at Upworthy care about.

Just another example of media bias.

The War Nerd on the House of Saud.

Netflix’s problem.

(H/T: SDA, RPR, Vox, GLP)


The Original False Rape Claim

Here’s the story of Joseph who was sold into slavery by his brothers and his false attempted rape accusation:

Now Joseph had been taken down to Egypt. Potiphar, an Egyptian who was one of Pharaoh’s officials, the captain of the guard, bought him from the Ishmaelites who had taken him there.

The Lord was with Joseph so that he prospered, and he lived in the house of his Egyptian master. When his master saw that the Lord was with him and that the Lord gave him success in everything he did, Joseph found favor in his eyes and became his attendant. Potiphar put him in charge of his household, and he entrusted to his care everything he owned. From the time he put him in charge of his household and of all that he owned, the Lord blessed the household of the Egyptian because of Joseph. The blessing of the Lord was on everything Potiphar had, both in the house and in the field. So Potiphar left everything he had in Joseph’s care; with Joseph in charge, he did not concern himself with anything except the food he ate.

Now Joseph was well-built and handsome, and after a while his master’s wife took notice of Joseph and said, “Come to bed with me!”

But he refused. “With me in charge,” he told her, “my master does not concern himself with anything in the house; everything he owns he has entrusted to my care. No one is greater in this house than I am. My master has withheld nothing from me except you, because you are his wife. How then could I do such a wicked thing and sin against God?” And though she spoke to Joseph day after day, he refused to go to bed with her or even be with her.

One day he went into the house to attend to his duties, and none of the household servants was inside. She caught him by his cloak and said, “Come to bed with me!” But he left his cloak in her hand and ran out of the house.

When she saw that he had left his cloak in her hand and had run out of the house, she called her household servants. “Look,” she said to them, “this Hebrew has been brought to us to make sport of us! He came in here to sleep with me, but I screamed. When he heard me scream for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house.”

She kept his cloak beside her until his master came home. Then she told him this story: “That Hebrew slave you brought us came to me to make sport of me. But as soon as I screamed for help, he left his cloak beside me and ran out of the house.”

When his master heard the story his wife told him, saying, “This is how your slave treated me,” he burned with anger. Joseph’s master took him and put him in prison, the place where the king’s prisoners were confined.

But while Joseph was there in the prison, the Lord was with him; he showed him kindness and granted him favor in the eyes of the prison warden. So the warden put Joseph in charge of all those held in the prison, and he was made responsible for all that was done there. The warden paid no attention to anything under Joseph’s care, because the Lord was with Joseph and gave him success in whatever he did.

 


Creeping Horror

Here’s a fun little test to either help internalize the creeping horror or introduce someone new to the mind virus.

The first step is to find a moderately obscure topic you would know far more about than your average English grad would. It can be anything: something related to your career, a hobby you’re deep into, your religion, an academic area you’ve studied extensively, or even pastel ponies. Choose something of which you have a deep knowledge.

You must avoid anything your average SWPL “knowledge-worker” would know; so avoid things related to coffee, indie music, HBO, pretentious literature, etc. (Alright, pastel ponies might not work). Also make sure to avoid anything overly subjective or too mainstream.

Having chosen your topic, look for articles in the mainstream news on the topic. Try the big ones: CNN, the NYT, the Washington Post, or, in Canada, the CBC. Having found a few articles from a few different sources read them.

Notice every time they are inaccurate, make a factual mistake, leave out something important, make a logical fallacy, write something that doesn’t make sense, or otherwise distort reality.

Having done this, think on the fact that every other topic covered by the media has errors to the same extent, except you don’t notice because you don’t know more about that topic than your average J-school graduate.

Then consider how you, and most everybody else, becomes informed about things they don’t know of.

This is where the horror sets in.

****

To let the horror creep in more, look to your career. Remember that obscure regulation nobody outside your particular occupation or industry would know of, the one that: made society worse, was borderline insane, the government had no business being in, allowed a person/company to rob the taxpayer, made your job more miserable than it should be, and/or was just pointless busywork to employ bureaucrats?

You probably never talked of it to anyone other than possibly the occasional rant to a friend or two or some co-workers.

Now think on the fact that there are thousands of other occupations and industries you are not employed in and where you would not be able to know that obscure regulation.

Give it a few minutes for the horror to dawn.


Lightning Round – 2014/01/08

Building willpower.
Related: Setting and achieving goals.
Related: Man needs structure and discipline.
Related: Victor kicking butt in 2014.
Related: The curse of the lazy sheeple.
Related: The net present value of effort.

The rules of leadership.

GBFM against game; Christian women shouldn’t need to be gamed.
Related: Donal responds on marriage and game and godly masculinity.
Related: GBFM responds.
From the comments: Leap probably says it best.
From the comments: The idea of sophroneo.
From the comments: Game is not the answer; changing women is.
From the comments: Rule, and if you can’t rule don’t marry.
Related: All men and women are given to sin; why is this surprising?

A story of true love, and of Eros and Caritas.

Deti on what to watch out for when pursuing girls at church.

Some major life events in the sphere:

Congrats to Mr. and Mrs. Radio.
Related: Compare to this.

Best wishes to Sigyn, Loki, and Eisa (I guess Hel would be somewhat inappropriate).

God bless, Chad.

Aaron drops his new book. Review to come when Amazon.ca gets the hardcopy.

Manosphere commenter Deep Strength has started up his own blog.

Newer blogger redpillsetsmefree has had some rather good articles:
Hope is all men have for marriage.
On “bitter men”. Why men are “bitter”.
15 years to life.

A manosphere glossary.

Familial love and romantic love.

Feminists are ugly. Related.
Related: Lindy West at the airport.

Science: Misogyny is treating women like men.

On envy.

Fathers are the bulwark against tyranny.
Related: The Cathedral is beginning to realize fathers are important.

A way to black-knight: be the stay-at-home dad.
Related: Some benefits of a housewife.

Delayed reaction to incentives is worse than a strike.
Related: As expected, ridding the divorce system the worst abuses.
Related: The imputed income trap.
Related: Men need to resist.

The end game of the gamma male.

Beta males create hypergamy.
Related: How not to message a women.

“The hardest part of marrying for me, NOW, is knowing that my wife has been absent from my life all these years. Where has she been? Married to another man, being his helpmate instead of mine? Dating frivolously, spending time and attention with various men that were interesting to her?” This resonated.
Related: Ballista comments on why Christian men don’t pursue Christian women.

The cultural devastation of American women.

The usefulness of slut genes.

Why men are beginning to clue in.

A spot of fun: #FeministAutoCorrect

Why you should get big.

The PUA life is not for most.
Krauser’s game stats: read it and the comments to learn how much work goes into being a PUA.
Related: Why 2.7% is good.

Radish wraps up 2013 in neoreaction.
Related: Land rounds out 2013 in neoreaction.
Related: 2013 hate hoax round-up.

Why are US conservatives so obsessed with monarchies? More neoreaction in the media.
Related: Neoreaction picked up by the American Conservative. Twice.
Related: Neoreaction has been reduced to monarchy by the simple.
Related: CATO doesn’t seem to like reactionaries. Oddly enough, CATO regularly sends me updates on their stuff even though I never signed up for them.

Path to Legionnaire: Strategic.
Related: Free speech strategy.
Related: Operation Backslap.
Related: 2014, the time to start building.

Reactionaries need to be men of fire and steel.
Related: Accept risk.
Related: The merchant-warrior.

Foseti is reviewing Moldbug. Read it.

Reactionary koans.

Leftism as cancer.
Related: The reasons for the endless leftward movement.

Mapping out the Cathedral.
Related: The Cathedral and religion.
Related: The Cathedral, and institutions.

A list of thoughtcriminals purged by the left.
Related: Why is WordPress developer Kevin Conboy threatening to delete blogs he dislikes?
Related: Leftoids trying to silence Heartiste.

Advice for reactionaries on resting and being.

Bureaucracy and its growth.

This is what reaction looks like in Mexico.
Related: Josephine County banding together.

A good quote from Luciano Pellicani.

Neoreaction is both brahmins and vaisyas working together.

The Renaissance myth.
Related: The lies told of King Leopold II.

King Charles at RoK.

Derbyshire: The City of Brass.
Related: The Kipling poem.

Handle posits a form of electronic war.

Is Popehat in the prereactionary phase? I think he needs some Moldbug.

Coming soon to a country near you: pedophobia.

The options for the church are running low. Mass ex-communication is the best answer I can think of.

The United Church always finds a new bottom: Trayvon Martin nativity.
Related: Another day, another wolf in sheep’s clothing.

Evangelical dilemma: Wait for sex and wait to marry.

Some thoughts concerning hell.

The game of appearance.

A Catholic Christmas story.

Ecclesiastes has long been my favourite book of the Bible.
Related: The Four Loves by Lewis is something I should read.

The products of an emotion-led faith.

Humour: Local Church Full Of Brainwashed Idiots Feeds Town’s Poor Every Week

A creationist, an evolutionist, and a Darwinist walk into a bar

Seems there’s some kind of drama happening in the manosphere. I hate drama, but here’s a small rundown:
Seems it started at 3 Bromigos, not a blog I read regularly.
Ace thinks disagreement is good and even dregs can be prophets.
Sploosh plans to stay positive.

Rape culture was manufactured to wage unjust war against men.

The saving SF from strong female characters wrap-up.

Humour: Her “worst online dating profile ever” is only slightly removed from your average OKC profile.

The baffled spinster.
Related: Choice for women: 14 years of fun or a family life.

Go, help stamp out online harassment.

Average women will kiss 15 men and have her heart broken twice before marriage.

Teachers love your children more than you do.

PIV is always rape, but still not the most insane thing she’s written.

Amusing gender-swapped fairy tales.

Black-knighting at Occidental and in Italy. More examples in the comments.

Wife tries to frame husband with child pornography.

The pay gap is higher where maternal leave is greater. Shocking.

An evobio account of gay male-straight female friendships.

Science: Gun laws don’t work.

Robber’s Cave experiment.
Related: A sinking opinion of humanity.

The Rolling Stone is openly supporting communism.

Manufactured intelligence.

Liberals lack a moral core.

Every leftist politician should, once a year, be forced to walk alone at night through a vibrant neighbourhood.

Seems Hollywood has noticed Christians are a big market, but it seems disappointment is inevitable.

Vox’s holiday survival guide.

Reverse mortgages and the boomer’s irresponsibility.

Fourth times a charm: Spanish national bank destroys investors thrice.

Female marines can’t do 1 pull-up. (Male marines do 3).
Related: Do feminists accept that women are physically inferior?

Matt is right in what he says, but wrong in his opposition. We should support women in the military: it will reduce the military’s effectiveness for whenever the state decides to unleash it on the populace. Also, once a half-dozen women come back from some sandy wasteland as naked, raped, bleeding corpses, maybe some people will wake up to reality.

The increase of sociopathy in America.

Global warming scientists trapped in ice. Heh.

The Christmas truce, a display of western unity.

Holiday Satire: The economics of Christmas. Vox has one.

An infographic on talking to the cops.

Why you can’t trust political “fact-checkers”. Politi-Fact lies about its lies.
Related: 10 worst fact-checks of 2012.
Related: The end of ethics.

A tale of a union.

My Cousin Vinnie and random gibberish accepted in conference paper.

The zoo hypothesis of reality TV.

Humour: The stupidity of “viral” websites.

On creepypasta.

Searching for time travellers.

(H/T: SDA, Rex, Land, Jim, Vulture, GLP, Patriactionary, Phineas, Radish, GCBH, Instapundit, Duck, Anissimov, Goldstein, McInnes, WH,


Avoiding Damaged Goods

My holiday break is ending, so next week we should get back to regular posting. For now, here’s a comment from jack (h/t: Society of Phineas) in response to a woman asking “Am I “Too Damaged” to Have a Godly Marriage One Day?” It resonated strongly with me.

As a Christian, I have noticed one thing. Christian girls make “mistakes” with the exact same type of men that non Christian women do. Bad boys. “Hot guys”. Athletes. Musicians.

In short, the small contingent of men who really have what it takes to melt her butter, as they say.

I waited during my teens and early twenties for the girls to learn that these guys were only toying with them. I would have accepted being second choice.

But, receiving attention from such men only convinced the girls that they were tantalizingly close to landing such a man, if they just got the process down better. These are the girls buying Cosmo to learn tricks to “win his love”.

This took me through my late 20s. I would have accepted being third choice.

But by now, the standards were only raised: “I’m done settling for being treated like crap by hot but jerky guys. From now on, I will insist on hot GOOD guys.” This begins the “born again virgin” phase, or the phase of temporary celibacy, where they focus on their careers and wait for Mr Tall/Dark/Dreamy to materialize. Along the way, they may satisfy the occasional physical need with a discreet hookup. I began to weary, but still tried to keep my spirits up, thinking that I could be fourth choice.

By their mid-30s, they start to waver on their standards, and begin talk of “settling”. Use of the term settling occurs because it is not acceptable to admit that their standards were unrealistically high, so they have to couch the discussion in a way that makes them appear to be magnanimously considering a man that was once far, far beneath their “standards”.

I began to balk at the idea of fifth choice, especially when I was being regarded as a sort of last resort, a better-than-nothing option.

To the original question:

No ones sin takes them too far to achieve redemption. No one is beyond God’s love or the chance for a Godly marriage. We all damage ourselves through the sins that we allow into our lives.

The question is not whether you are “too damaged” to have a Godly marriage. The question is whether you have damaged your ability to love the kind of man you can get. What the Lord has declared clean let no man call unclean. Your sin, like mine, is washed away.

The hardest part of marrying for me, NOW, is knowing that my wife has been absent from my life all these years. Where has she been? Married to another man, being his helpmate instead of mine? Dating frivolously, spending time and attention with various men that were interesting to her?

I have spent 20 years making a successful life for myself without the benefit of a wife, her company, companionship, counsel, or intimacy. Is it fair for her to move into my life having built none of it? What man has benefited from her companionship and affection while I have worked alone?

This then, is the real issue. It is not whether a woman is too damaged to have a Godly marriage. It is whether her neglect of Godly men has left them malnourished and wounded, and whether these men are suitable for marriage any longer.

Malnourishment, left untreated, cannot be reversed, no matter how much food you feed that person. And right or wrong, I would always resent the fact that other men were having the benefit of her affection and company when she was young.

Godly men are not appliances that can be tucked away in a closet until they are need because the bad-boy-charming-jerk plan is not working. We are living beings who need care, same as you.

Emphasis mine. I’ve written about not marrying an older women multiple times before. My other reasons were generally rational ones, but on a purely emotional level, how could one not resent a “wife” who was spending her time and love with other men or on other things when your young heart was rending itself from loneliness? At least a young woman has the excuse of being too young to have been there with you.

You, decent young man who have built a life for yourself, have too much value to waste on such a woman. If she wasn’t there when you needed her, she does not have any claim on you now that she needs you.

Also related to part of the comment, Vox recently pointed out women always seem to be trying to fix the sociopath, never the decent, awkward, lonely young man.


What’s in a Name?

The best way to identify the goals and predict the actions of a leftist or bureaucratic (redundancy) organization is to assume they are the opposite of what the name of the organization would imply if the organization were named honestly.

Thus, an organization with social justice in its name is generally both both rending social bonds and committing mass injustice.

A leftist organization with community in the name is usually destroying said community.

An organization evoking peace is generally dedicated to spreading chaos.

A leftist organization labelled Christian can generally be found destroying Christian values and hollowing out churches.

A leftist organization with prosperity or anti-poverty in its name will be creating as much poverty as possible.


Science vs. Norse Mythology

Happy New Year’s!

Instead of Lightning Round, here’s a cartoon.


The Monarch and the Poor

Calvin on the monarch and the poor:

“As God had promised to extend his care to the poor and afflicted among his people, David, as an argument to enforce the prayer which he presents in behalf of the king, shows that the granting of it will tend to the comfort of the poor. God is indeed no respecter of persons; but it is not without cause that God takes a more special care of the poor than of others, since they are most exposed to injuries and violence. Let laws and the administration of justice be taken away, and the consequence will be, that the more powerful a man is, he will be the more able to oppress his poor brethren. David, therefore, particularly mentions that the king will be the defender of those who can only be safe under the protection of the magistrate, and declares that he will be their avenger when they are made the victims of injustice and wrong. . . .

“But as the king cannot discharge the duty of succouring and defending the poor which David imposes upon him, unless he curb the wicked by authority and the power of the sword, it is very justly added in the end of the verse, that when righteousness reigns, oppressors or extortioners will be broken in pieces. It would be foolish to wait till they should give place of their own accord. They must be repressed by the sword, that their audacity and wickedness may be prevented from proceeding to greater lengths. It is therefore requisite for a king to be a man of wisdom, and resolutely prepared effectually to restrain the violent and injurious, that the rights of the meek and orderly may be preserved unimpaired. Thus none will be fit for governing a people but he who has learned to be rigorous when the case requires. Licentiousness must necessarily prevail under an effeminate and inactive sovereign, or even under one who is of a disposition too gentle and forbearing. There is much truth in the old saying, that it is worse to live under a prince through whose lenity everything is lawful, than under a tyrant where there is no liberty at all.”