Rebranding the Natural Order as “Misogyny”

TPTB are attempting to redefine the public’s perception of right and wrong.

Readership: Aliberals; Christians; Men;
Length: 2,400 words
Reading Time: 8 minutes

Introduction

Over the past few years, TPTB have tried to make us swallow the false notion that traditional nationalism is “rac!st“, and anything antifeminist (e.g. the Manosphere, masculinity, traditional marriage, SAHM’s) is “sex!st” and “misogynist“. Meanwhile, many weak-minded, NPCish, mass media consumers have jumped on the wagon. About one year ago, I picked out the latter slur, and wrote a post entitled, Revisiting Misogyny (2020 August 7), which deconstructed how “offense” is purported to be “abuse”. I also examined the ethical vectors and psychological tools that feminism uses to demonize Headship in general, and recast the blame onto men specifically.

This post revisits this topic and offers a few pertinent case studies that elucidate the machinations of mass rebellion.

misogyny everywhere

The Rebranding of Misogyny

An article at The New York Times explained the challenge that feminists have had in subverting the traditional/Christian social mores of America, and why they coopted “misogyny” as a socially coercive shame tactic.

“This understanding of misogyny became a commonly held idea among feminists: the issue was structural. Society was organized in a misogynistic way, even if its individual members didn’t see themselves as woman-haters.”

The New York Times: What does Misogyny look like? (2019-03-08)

The inside scoop is that this concept of society being “organized in a misogynistic way” is rooted in “the problem that has no name” (H/T: Betty Friedan in her book, The Feminine Mystique), a problem that we might now call Generalized Feminist Discontentment (GFD), and which we know is magnified by sexual promiscuity. Considering the fact that most women were generally happier under the old regime, it is a twist to call it misogynistic.

“Much like “racist” — which was once mostly used to describe certain sheriffs, politicians or neighbors — misogynist is now as often applied to the system of institutions that creates an unequal America as it is to individuals. In this broadened meaning, happily married men, men with daughters and women themselves can be implicated. The way the word is now used, you don’t have to hate women to be a misogynist, despite what Webster’s dictionary still says today.”

The New York Times: What does Misogyny look like? (2019-03-08)

For those of us who are still confused about why the word “misogynist” is being thrown at so many apparently decent people, the author makes this clear. Anyone who subscribes to the old regime in any way, anyone who is traditional, conservative, Christian, family oriented, or in a word, Godly, can now be thrown under the bus. It’s sad for us to find that feminists have had considerable success in their endeavors to criminalize order and spread their brand of GFD across the nation.

patriarchy vs matriarchy

The New Feminist Concept of Misogyny

An article that appeared in Vox: What we get wrong about misogyny (2020-03-07) reported a book by Kate Manne entitled, Down Girl: The Logic of Misogyny. According to the book summary at Amazon, Manne argues that… [emphasis mine]

“…misogyny should not be understood primarily in terms of the hatred or hostility some men feel toward all or most women. Rather, it’s primarily about controlling, policing, punishing, and exiling the “bad” women who challenge male dominance. And it’s compatible with rewarding “the good ones,” and singling out other women to serve as warnings to those who are out of order.

The definition of misogyny in the first sentence is close to being correct, but I would add that it is a practiced expression of cruelty, exploitation, hatred, and hostility. The way Manne phrases it reinforces the “men are evil” message that is being carefully matriculated into the public consciousness of the wider populace. But in fact, misogyny comes from other women as much as it does from men, and it can be institutionalized as well. For example, last year’s post argued that feminism is misogynistic because it uses lures of sexual liberation and power (AKA equality) to exploit and corrupt women through peculiar channels that are unique to women’s weaknesses. Manne’s addition in the remainder of the paragraph makes it quite obvious that the purpose of rebranding a patriarchal order as “misogyny” is to subvert God’s ordained order of Headship. Obviously, she/they have never tasted the delicious fruits of spiritual obedience, and their GFD has grown into spiritual rebellion, indicated by how they have called good evil.

Amazon’s summary buys into mythos (which is a commonly adopted approach to evince a lie) when it goes so far as to say,

“It’s also common for women to serve as scapegoats, be burned as witches, and treated as pariahs.”

Burning witches was common in the colonial town of Salem in the winter of 1693, but I’m hard pressed to come up with another example in recent western history.

the-misogyny-is-strong-with-this-one

To make a big lie go down easily, it must be personally identifiable, it must appeal to discontented desire, and it must be woven into the present. It must also be targeted at an audience willing to be deceived (see 2 Timothy 4:3-4). Therefore, in order to stoke up the mythos for this claim to be sufficiently convincing, Manne goes on to describe several present events to which this rebranding can be applied. Going on with the summary at Amazon,

“Manne examines recent and current events such as the Isla Vista killings by Elliot Rodger, the case of the convicted serial rapist Daniel Holtzclaw, who preyed on African-American women as a police officer in Oklahoma City, Rush Limbaugh’s diatribe against Sandra Fluke, and the “misogyny speech” of Julia Gillard, then Prime Minister of Australia, which went viral on YouTube. The book shows how these events, among others, set the stage for the 2016 US presidential election. Not only was the misogyny leveled against Hillary Clinton predictable in both quantity and quality, Manne argues it was predictable that many people would be prepared to forgive and forget regarding Donald Trump’s history of sexual assault and harassment. For this, Manne argues, is misogyny’s oft-overlooked and equally pernicious underbelly: exonerating or showing “himpathy” for the comparatively privileged men who dominate, threaten, and silence women.”

No witch burnings were mentioned (unless we count Hillary Clinton’s electoral defeat), but moreover, it is just as I described in last year’s post. The TPTB (and their pandy Manne) are using a broad brush in an attempt to expand the definition of misogyny by presenting a false association between patriarchy, misogyny, and various social ills related to human nature. By making this logical leap of faith, using classical conditioning and raw repetition, and sparking the inherent fear of mass anarchy, any manifestation of male authority, i.e. Headship, can be absorbed under this subtle redefinition of misogyny, and the baby can then be thrown out with the bathwater. Manne’s book is a perfect example of propaganda supporting this strategy. We can only assume that the purpose of drawing this association is to assert a false moral authority over non-liberal value systems (e.g. Christianity; gender roles; the traditional family structure), to calumniate them as being detrimentally archaic or depraved, and to leverage the ostracization of their practitioners on various levels of society through the machinations of the liberally ordered shame culture.

How Rebranding “Misogyny” is used as a Shame Tactic in a Power Play

To give the reader an example of how this power play is executed, I’ll present this speech from ex Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard.

Wise politicians know that a divided house cannot stand, but Gillard foolishly divided the house along the lines of male-female sex differences. The resulting leadership instability, political turmoil, and utter distraction caused by a speech such as this one is precisely why women were not admitted into politics before the early 20th century. If women are to be involved in politics, their first priority should be to bring unity and national inspiration, not turmoil. For example, Princess Diana was excellent at this and so her legacy continues to this day, in spite of the failures in her personal life.

Just as could be expected, nine months after this speech, following a lengthy period of leadership instability, Gillard lost the leadership of the Labor Party back to Rudd. Like a sore loser, she resigned from her position as Prime Minister the next day, and announced her retirement from politics.

Politics is dirty business, always has been, and that is never going to change. Gillard obviously couldn’t stand the heat, but instead of putting her personal discomfort aside and concentrating on making an appeal to national unity, she tried to destroy the oven, and only as a last resort did she get out of the kitchen. Note that she uses the phrase, “I’m offended” no fewer than 15 times within a 15 minute time frame. If a male politician ever used this phrase, he would be laughed to scorn. At 7:13, we see the parliament member sitting behind her stand up and walk out. At 8:05 another one follows him out. Even the women seen in the video, although they were acutely attentive, were also worried and bewildered.

Hillary Clinton, who was Secretary of State at the time, praised the speech as “very striking” with Gillard going “chapter and verse”. [Video of Clinton’s speech on Sexism: jump to 7:57 in the linked video for her coverage of Gillard; at 9:28 she states “chapter and verse”.] (Her choice of words indicate that she is a firm believer in the hoary scriptures of the Feminist Bible.) In turn, Clinton also lost the presidential election in 2016. Overall, it appears that having a Feminist platform and grasping at power through accusations of “misogyny” is a losing political stance. The reason is because it not only divides the house, but also the whole nation.

Here, I don’t intend to cast judgment on any actions that could (or could not) be construed as an injustice, but only to say that addressing the kinds of “offenses” that Gillard brought up in this speech should be reserved for personal interactions and private conversations, not on the floor of national Parliament, and certainly not broadcast on prime time TV. This kind of brash impertinence sets a bad example that every woman in Australia will follow after. (See Esther 1:16-18.)

women should always be grateful

So you see, this rebranding is not only being talked about in books and on liberal internet articles, it is taking place at the highest orders of power.

Turning Things Up-Side-Down

Vox’s article included an interview with Manne in which she states,

“There are relatively few misogynists as brazen or as unapologetic as Donald Trump, partly because misogynists often think they’re taking the moral high ground by preserving a status quo that feels right to them. They want to be socially and morally superior to the women they target.

Manne’s last sentence is a projection that implies that she is feeling rather morally inferior for some reason and is resentful of the natural order.

In spite of all his moral defects, Trump is a man who is comfortable with his masculinity. He’s also quite adept at exercising masculine frame. This is precisely the trait that grants him leadership ability, and it is also what made him popular among his constituents — not his past sins. This is an important trait for a leader to have, because it shows that he firmly believes in God’s ordained order. He doesn’t need to waste his time arguing and quibbling to maintain “moral superiority” because he knows his authority (as a man) is written into the fabric of creation.

13 For it was Adam who was first created, and then Eve.  14 And it was not Adam who was deceived, but the woman was deceived and became a wrongdoer.

2 Timothy 2: 13-14 (NASB)
pence misogynist

In the interview at Vox, Manne states,

“I think most misogynistic behavior is about hostility toward women who violate patriarchal norms and expectations, who aren’t serving male interests in the ways they’re expected to. So there’s this sense that women are doing something wrong: that they’re morally objectionable or have a bad attitude or they’re abrasive or shrill or too pushy. But women only appear that way because we expect them to be otherwise, to be passive.”

I won’t deny that a lot of misogyny is directed toward women who violate patriarchal norms and expectations, but it isn’t done as part of a concerted mass conspiracy waged by men against women to control them and keep them in line, as she seems to think. The fact is that women who violate patriarchal norms are just being ugly on the spiritual plane of existence, and this is the characteristic element of feminism that fails miserably. Men can’t do anything in response to ugliness other than to react accordingly. As I wrote in last year’s post,

“Misogyny is a self-reinforcing cycle.  Women who conscientiously pursue the development of masculine traits invariably invite more misogyny onto themselves, especially when they use an aggressive masculine front to defend the lies and deceptions they have bought into via herd conformity.”

What Manne doesn’t seem to understand is that patriarchy is not about women being under subjection to men (which is an oft tainted violation of the hoary rule of equality), nor is it about women “serving male interests” per se, but rather, it’s a conformance to God’s created order — one that carries many inherent blessings to both men and women (blessings which are habitually downplayed, denigrated, or ignored altogether). God created women to be a companion and helpmeet for man, and if they fail to do that, or carry a resentful attitude about it, then they are doing something wrong and morally objectionable. But here we see that Manne goes to the opposite extreme with the mistaken notion that women can fight against God while expecting to become morally superior!

you-want-to-treat-women-like-men-misogyny

Again, this all comes back to the redefining misogyny to include any expression of God’s created order and rebranding it as oppression.

Concluding Statements

Following this modus operandi, we can see how modern feminism is truly the most misogynistic social machine in all of human history.  Now, every Christian who conforms to Biblical gender roles, Headship, and God’s created order can be denigrated as systemic abusers, when in fact, it is the accusers who are guilty of disorder and rebellion. This powerplay also undermines women’s natural source of support and security — societal order in general, and specifically men — and demands that women become what they are not — all the things which are traditionally assumed of men.  This fully explains why more women are clinically depressed and are more unhappy now than ever before.

That’s systemic misogyny!

Related

About Jack

Jack is a world traveling artist, skilled in trading ideas and information, none of which are considered too holy, too nerdy, nor too profane to hijack and twist into useful fashion. Sigma Frame Mindsets and methods for building and maintaining a masculine Frame
This entry was posted in Culture Wars, Discerning Lies and Deception, Feminism, Hamsterbation, Misogyny, Psychology and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

98 Responses to Rebranding the Natural Order as “Misogyny”

  1. cameron232 says:

    WRT relationships & marriage, current culture dictates the woman is the prize to be won by the man. I suspect the opposite should be the case.

    The current cultural attitude towards this accomplishes a sort of moral inversion. The woman in reality often picks/targets the man, but our practice of going through the ritual of the man proposing (on his knee which looks like groveling) and offering an expensive token reinforces this moral inversion – the woman being the prize and the man begging/groveling for the prize.

    For example, my wife will sometimes mention this. Not WRT our specific circumstances but just the general observation that “men ask women.” In realty, with she and I that was just a ritualized formality. She picked me, targeted me. She’s inverting what really happened just because of the current whiteknight practices and culture of women-are-the-prize. And yes, I think this attitude carries with it a perception of “moral high ground“ that can affect the relationship.

    I suspect women as a group would be happier, and marriages more successful, if we inverted our current understanding of things. Telling women her man is a prize to be won might help decrease female discontentment with the men available to them (probably the main cause of divorce). Yes – men will still have their primary relationship vice – the temptation to stray – we can and should deal with that too.

    I suppose someone will say that you both should be “the prize.” If someone wants to convince me that things can work that way – I’m all ears.

    Liked by 1 person

  2. cameron232 says:

    Here’s Lori Alexander displaying this attitude in her latest post:

    “It’s two becoming one flesh. Men don’t buy their wives. They win their wives!”

    She’s the prize to be won. No wonder they don’t make effort towards cultivating femininity, being chaste. She’s the prize. He’s the monkey performing for her/winning her.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Elspeth says:

      Some women are fully aware that their men are a prize catch.

      Liked by 4 people

      • cameron232 says:

        Yes, absolutely Elspeth. Just referring to cultural norms.

        I wish it could work both ways – that both spouses could see each other this way simultaneously. IDK maybe some can.

        Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      “No wonder they don’t make effort towards cultivating femininity, being chaste.”

      I’m pretty sure Lori Alexander is making big efforts towards teaching young women to cultivate femininity, and being chaste, and taking lots of slings and arrows for her efforts.

      Are you sure you’re criticizing the right woman?

      Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        Just lamenting the fact that “men winning women” seems to be the default assumption even among the very conservative bunch. Not attacking her personally. And yeah I realize it’s one line stripped out of one of her posts.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ Cameron

        You’re right, the woman being the prize is definitely the cultural norm. And, it’s not just our culture. You can find stories about brave, gallant, clever men defeating some villain and/or monster, and thereby winning the fair maiden, in pretty much every culture.

        I think the part that modern women miss (and Lori Alexander does not) is that in all those stories the fair maiden is worth risking life and limb. The wench and the harlot are not.

        Liked by 1 person

  3. Lastomod says:

    There just seems to be such a desperation these times. I am surprised I am handling it as well as I am.

    I went out yesterday afternoon evening. There was a small dive bar that was going to have some DJs spinning old two-tone, ska, boss reggae… and it was a gorgeous day. I figure, “Make the drive out, relax, listen to some good music, and meet people… I do need to get into a social circle out here of sorts.”

    The music was excellent. Kicked my Doc Marten feet up on chair, sipped a Red Bull, and then tonic water with lime… and scoped the scene. The only people that struck up a convo with me were the DJ’s. People were trashed, drinking… not just to get a buzz, or to enjoy a beer or three… but to get wrecked.

    I will admit, the weather was mild, and so very southern-California. The music… yeah, a nice cold Heineken or Red Stripe would have just tasted amazing. I know better, and have for 17 years now.

    Desperation… After a few hours, everyone was really drunk. Not “tee-hee”, or telling a funny story at the table… but there was almost an anger coming out. I found it odd because with this music, one cannot and should not be angry.

    Guards up so strong, and yet at the same time, the alcohol and times making people cold, rigid, and deflecting onto what they find stable. So many younger cats here so sexually frustrated… You know, at one time, the music might have been a release. But now it can only be enjoyed somewhat when enough drink is pounded down with it. Guys are afraid, not of women per say… but confused… Red Pill / Game / and advice, says one thing… At the same time… culture / sociology and political massaging says another, and these poor guys don’t know how to read the billion situations that could come out from talking to or approaching a gal.

    The women were no better. Most were a little overdressed for a Sunday afternoon / evening affair. All were focused on one or two guys there. They too seemed to get a bit more catty with each other as the afternoon / evening wore on… They were all hanging together at first, but then a few smaller circles formed, and you could tell… the jealously between them all was rising. An over-inflated self worth, and after a few hours of realizing that “she” was not getting that validation from Chad, all the anger and catty looks were being turned onto her fellow sisters.

    I was thinking to myself as I watched this unfold… “Gonna be a girl fight here soon!”

    I was the oldest guy there. I figured I looked Rudeboy enough by my dress and attitude of just being out, listening to music… trying by subtle inaction to be a calming influence.

    It was almost 8 pm, and I decided to head home. I apologized to the one DJ. “If I had not come in Docks, I would have danced.” Shook hands, a few pleasant words… closed my account, and made sure all the DJ’s had a beer purchased by me. Tipped and left.

    I feel sorry for younger men. It was bad when I was coming up… but what happens when you have, not just the “bottom 20%” like me being useless to women from day one like it’s always been… but now when you get upwards to 80% being like this?

    Rollo, Game, PUA… none of that is going to help you. Because it still puts YOUR value on how women see you, and what THEY want from you.

    This scene was not even a “mainstream” one (the Rudeboy / Ska / skin scene is not mainstream)… and the division, being frozen-out, and this sexual polarization was full on. Most of the people here were in their twenties / early thirties. I won’t speak for these women… many were very cute (then again, I’m old and ugly…..and woman under 40 is ‘cute’ to me), but what will happen to them? And the men?????

    It will… for many, become a slow ride down into drink, lots of tattoos, and settling for anything that may give them a chance… a large / obese gal, a gal with plenty o kids / a gal with a rotten attitude / and shabby behavior towards him………

    I don’t know………. There is a soul dance on the 20th at this same place. I am going to make sure I come with proper shoes on. I plan to dance so I don’t have to see or watch this depressing outcome.

    I blame feminism, I blame the times, I blame our so shallow culture, and I also blame Game. This is the outcome. Social skills stunted, mediocrity made into high status, music not being enjoyed, and people so stuck on what they are supposed to do, instead of what they are supposed to be……

    You all wanted it 🙂

    It’s too bad… Some great music was played, all off 45 rpm… classic dance-hall, ska, two-tone and Rudeboy. From 1967.

    Liked by 2 people

    • cameron232 says:

      Somehow dad just met mom (when they were 18) in 1972 through friends and they had a happy, loving marriage until he died. He cleaned swimming pools, worked in a warehouse, etc. He didn’t have a “career.” He didn’t have “Game.” He wasn’t “top 20%.”

      Somehow I met my wife at about the same age. I didn’t have Game. I wasn’t top 20%.

      What can we do to go back to the circumstances that allowed those sorts of relationships to just happen?

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        I wish I had the answer. It’s been ‘Game Over’ for me since I was like twenty or whatever, but it seems now more and more are frozen out no matter what they do, learn, read, or what they are told by supposed experts.

        My take is that it will take a reset of sorts, not a full societal collapse… but a recession / depression that comes along with no, or very little government help (because they won’t have any money TO help). A conventional war, and not these brushfire / border skirmish / defending national interest wars… but “war for the survival of the country” type of war.

        Men are going to have to understand that this junk-science of Game, invented terms and treating women as a stimuli / response test-study is useless… and women will have to understand and ask themselves, “Okay, do I want it all, or do I want something of worth?”

        I am probably wrong in my assessment here. Game will have to go as well. If you are struggling to find a day job to pay the rent, one isn’t going to have time to go to the bar, the club, or cold approach on the street to “decode the secret language of women>”

        I wish I had the answer. I don’t, and many of these men are going to get really violent as they get older, or very, very angry… not at women… but at the men in this sphere. That, I know will happen.

        Liked by 3 people

      • Oscar says:

        “What can we do to go back to the circumstances that allowed those sorts of relationships to just happen?”

        You can join a community where that exact thing is currently happening.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        @Oscar, Yes, I’m sure that is a workable solution for some people.

        It seems there were other factors in the old days that allowed people to form good marriages. My parents weren’t Christian, let alone location-specific-fundie* (or whatever).

        Yeah I’d like everyone to become a serious Christian and move to Branson but I’d still like to see the many millions who won’t have good marriages.

        I don’t have the answers – it took quite a while to get into this situation – I’m sure it will take a while to (societally) get out of it. Maybe mass-poverty will be good for marriages.

        “fundie” not intended as a put down.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        “Yeah I’d like everyone to become a serious Christian and move to Branson but I’d still like to see the many millions who won’t have good marriages.

        I don’t have the answers – it took quite a while to get into this situation – I’m sure it will take a while to (societally) get out of it.”

        Agreed. But, over whom do I have the most influence? Society, or my family? For whom do I bear the most responsibility? Society, or my family?

        As much as I’d like to help all of society, the fact is that I can’t. But, I can help my family. And, it just might be that ultimately, the biggest positive impact we can have on society is to strengthen our families.

        Liked by 2 people

      • anonymous_ng says:

        “Yeah I’d like everyone to become a serious Christian and move to Branson but I’d still like to see the many millions who won’t have good marriages.”

        What on God’s green earth is so special about BFE Branson Missouri?

        It seems to be often held up as some modern day utopia for Christians. At least that’s the impression I get, and I can’t for the life of me understand why.

        Like

      • cameron232 says:

        Someone mentioned, sarcastically I think, denim skirt wearing Christian girls working at the Branson Chick Fil-A. I don’t know anything about Branson. It kinda started as a joke around here I think.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lexet Blog says:

        A couple of us familiar with the ozarks made it a joke. We did not mean for it to be taken seriously. In reality, things aren’t that much better in that region. The baptist pastor who was fired for making RP comments was from poplar bluff of all places.

        Like

      • Jack says:

        “The baptist pastor who was fired for making RP comments was from poplar bluff of all places.”

        Lexet, could you give us a link to the news on this story?

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ anonymous_ng

        Have you been to Branson?

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        You can’t. Changing the legal structure to incentivize marriage won’t do anything. Social media destroyed our culture and created ridiculous standards for behavior, income, beauty, etc.

        Game over for gen x-genz

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        Jack,

        Lexet’s referencing this story.

        https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pastor-stewart-allen-clark-on-leave-sermon-wives/

        I think DS covered it.

        Like

    • Jack says:

      Lastmod wrote,

      “Rollo, Game, PUA… none of that is going to help you. Because it still puts YOUR value on how women see you, and what THEY want from you.”

      Yeah, the fundamental problem with the PUA scene is that it still frames men according to their value to women — not to other men, not to society, and not to God.

      Liked by 6 people

      • redpillboomer says:

        “Yeah, the fundamental problem with the PUA scene is that it still frames men according to their value to women — not to other men, not to society, and not to God.”

        And, what does it get men in the long run? What does it get even Chad in the long run? …. I get it — why many men look up to, or are maybe even envious of these guys — the top 10% or whatever the figure is, but what does it get them in the long run? Life is still going to come at them too, in all it’s troubles and difficulties, and their lay count won’t help them any. Life is much more than p-sleeve for men. P-sleeve is nice, but it doesn’t do much for a guy except for some short term pleasurable experiences; and not all of them are pleasurable I’d imagine with some of these women these days.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lexet Blog says:

        There’s a reason why I listed PUA as a community that sits between BP and RP on my Mapping the Manosphere article.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ RPB

        “…and not all of them are pleasurable I’d imagine with some of these women these days.”

        Not to mention the risk of false rape accusations.

        Like

    • Femmy says:

      I think a lot of it has to do with where you live.

      When I moved from big city to smaller town, it was a cultural shock. Same state. Different life.

      Majority are married young.

      Churches on every corner. Shocking!

      Lots of sports. Sports is important here.

      A “normal” life progression.

      Easier to get ahead and live a good life.

      Best part: 1. No traffic. 2. I noticed the women are happier. Much happier than in big city.

      Liked by 2 people

      • cameron232 says:

        I have long suspected that small and mid sized towns are better places for the average guy (not the exceptional male) to look for a wife. Not perfect, but better.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ Cameron

        “I have long suspected that small and mid sized towns are better places for the average guy (not the exceptional male) to look for a wife. Not perfect, but better.”

        “Better” is the best we can do in this life, and it’s certainly better than “worse”.

        The biggest challenge most of us have with small towns is finding work, which is the challenge I’m having now. That, and the fact that literally thousands of people are moving where I want to go, which makes competition for jobs and real estate even more fierce.

        The acceptance of remote work helps some, but the kind of work I do requires me to be physically present much of the time.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Joe2 says:

        “I think a lot of it has to do with where you live.”

        My experiences with small towns (especially in somewhat rural areas) is that to be accepted you have to have some type of family connection to the area or you are considered an outsider. And the people there can become very petty over some inconsequential matter. Visiting a small town and living there are two different experiences.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ Joe2

        Meh. My wife and I have found that a plate of fresh chocolate chip cookies, or a loaf of fresh banana bread go a long way in a small town.

        Proverbs 18:24 “A man who has friends must himself be friendly.”

        Liked by 1 person

      • redpillboomer says:

        Same here. I live two hours south of Atlanta in middle Georgia. I’d add one thing to your list. The younger women seem friendlier here, no real bitch shields being raised as seems to happen up in Atlanta. I’m guessing the girls’ N-counts are reasonable down here, not virgins by any stretch of the imagination (well some might be), but I don’t think they’ve had 25 Chads in them. They don’t seem run through like they do in Atlanta.

        At the gym I work out at, they have a number of young women manning the front desk. All of them seem friendly. Even an older guy like me can flirt a bit with them, as long as it’s short, sweet to the point, and not creepy; some of them will flirt right back (and no, I don’t think it’s their ‘customer service training’; I think it’s them. It seems genuine and playful). For example, at the height of COVID, they took your temperature when you entered the gym. I’d always come up with some witty line about the temperature taking that would get them giggling; some would even have a come back line. It was fun. I’d say something like, “I’m not too hot for you am I?” One blonde with a great personality, she’d shoot right back something like, “No, but close to smoking hot, just the way I like it!” Big grin, playful expression. Can a man do that up in Atlanta? No way! Only Chad or Tyrone could get away with it.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        @ RPB

        Yeah, it’s not that difficult. You just have to be friendly, and home-baked goods make a big difference. Of course, having a wife that’s a great baker helps.

        I’ve lived in big cities, suburbs, small towns, and country (i.e., rural) in multiple countries. My favorite places to live are still in rural America. Obviously, there are pros and cons to each type of place, and each individual place. Only a complete moron would fail to see that.

        But, taking all the pros and cons into consideration, the best places I’ve ever lived are in rural America.

        Obviously, that won’t work for everyone, and I’m not telling anyone what to do. I’m just stating what my preferences are based on my experiences living in many different places in several different countries.

        Like

  4. feeriker says:

    “We can only assume that the purpose of drawing this association is to assert a false moral authority over non-liberal value systems (e.g. Christianity; gender roles; the traditional family structure), to calumniate them as being detrimentally archaic or depraved, and to leverage the ostracization of their practitioners on various levels of society through the machinations of the liberally ordered shame culture.”

    Done, and with the full and enthusiastic cooperation of what today passes itself off as “the church.”

    Liked by 5 people

  5. Lastmod says:

    “And the people there can become very petty over some inconsequential matter. Visiting a small town and living there are two different experiences.”

    Agree Joe. I came from not small town America, but Rural America. 800 people in my hamlet. The decay had already set it when I was coming up. The nearby big town was “Lake Placid” and only 2,500 people live there. The logging industry gone for a long time by them…paper mills gone. Tourism was a short summer season. Winter sports…yes…but it was not a “vacation / family resort” town with five star hotels, heated swimming pools, and tons of amenities that families DEMAND now (and then) when on vacation. The whole 15 million acre region is like this….

    Where I grew up it was a generation or so into full-blown modern welfare programs of the 1960’s. Teen pregnancy was VERY high in my region. Drop-out from school was high. Churches were empty and the ones open didn’t seem to be doing their job. The life goals of the guys and girls my age were to turn 18, have babies, get married (maybe), and for the guys “work on their cars” (Kid Rock in that Joe Dirt movie fit the stereotype perfectly of every young guy where I grew up…. or life revolving around deer hunting and fishing). The girls might have been cute… but were dumb and hardly “mom material”, and they all looked terrible by the time they were thirty.

    I didn’t find anyone there growing up more honest or dishonest than here in California.

    Many of them are petty, hate “NYC people” or “Canadians” but these people are the ones who do buy the vacation home and pay the taxes…… I would be welcomed back “guarded” since I did grow up there…. but many summer vacation home types come up from NYC in June to find their home ransacked and shot up with bullets.

    Liked by 2 people

    • info says:

      Teen pregnancy would be such a problem especially if they are 16-19 if they were married.

      People lament teen pregnancy but ignore the real problem. Which is unwed motherhood.

      Because it assumes that long-teen single motherhood isn’t a problem.

      Like

  6. Lastmod says:

    In my public high school, there was a special gym class for the pregnant girls….. most of which were 15-17. No shame. No one questioned it. It was rural, poor America and too many I grew up with had zero shame or qualms about living on welfare. Even if these 16 year old girls were “married” that would not make them a good mother. Most were sub-par parents. It was just a mindset of: have babies, maybe get married… and even if you do get married, go live on Welfare, or on the County, or both….. and get free medical, and get special head start programs for your kids. You’re home, you don’t work, neither does your boyfriend or husband….. Yet ALL your kids are academically not ready for school and are behind…of course they need a school meal program for breakfast and lunch….. an after school program (even though you effing live in the Adirondack State Park). They need a program for eyeglasses, and dental……. Mom is always in some of job program or a state funded “women self-esteem class” and of course WIC, and EBT, and rental assistance, and special program for low income people to get free electricity, free / reduced fees to register their car, Low income help for their dogs (always had five six, or seven dogs).

    But marriage at 16 would solve this?????? It wouldn’t. I grew up all around this. I saw it first-hand. This is the rural poor, and they are just as entitled as many in the inner city or barrio are.

    Like

    • info says:

      That’s the distorting impact of welfare speaking. As much as the breakdown of the patriarchal norms.

      Since it looks like they haven’t even learnt to be good women. Yet historically marriage at such ages didn’t result in your said dysfunctions due to breakdown of healthy culture.

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Lastmod says:

    Yeah…. There wasn’t a welfare system, or if there was, it was very basic…. or people had families. You had a family farm, a family run saw / lumber mill. You had a family run local general store / gas station. You had a family owned local car dealership…… feed / farm / ag store. Local stores can’t compete. The next town gives a HUGE tax break for Walmart. Local stores close. The papermill closes, the “higher paying” job in the region… So now all the support industries close, the company moves to Georgia….. and no, the workers were not given the option to move to Georgia……… Yes, all these people should have gone back to college to become doctors (rolls eyes).

    You also had to work, plain and simple. The frail industries left, welfare came in, and that was it, pretty much. And between 1980-2000, the largest transfer of private land that had been in families for generations went to The Adirondacks (and I can probably say parts of Appalachia in PA, KY, WV, and TN, as well). Locals lost it to taxes, foreclosure, and selling out to go live in a classic “white trash” trailer park, or else, all the land was sold to the State (to add on to The Adirondack Park) while they kept an acre with their now dilapidated house.

    But if we all just got married at 16 and 15…. there would be no problems like this. (Really now?)

    I am trying to be clear here. I mean, I lived this, grew up in this…. and you are all still saying, “Small town America has nice wholesome women, with traditional values and its a great place to live.”

    Stop making a “noble savagery” of this life. Again, I grew up in this….. and you still are doubling down. Like you all did when the big craze was to go to Russia, meet a virginal, devout Orthodox woman who was a nine on the looks scale, marry her….. and all your problems are solved.

    I actually know what I am taking about here.

    Liked by 1 person

    • Oscar says:

      “…you are all still saying, “Small town America has nice wholesome women, with traditional values, and its a great place to live”

      I live there now, and yeah, it’s a great place to live. We’re moving to a different small town, closer to family, with a stronger community, but where we live now is pretty nice.

      “Again, I grew up in this…”

      Have you ever considered the possibility that you’re not the only one who “grew up in this”?

      No one is “making a ‘noble savagery’ of this life”. No one is telling you to move, or to stay anywhere. You’re free to move, or to stay wherever you want. Good luck to you wherever you decide to move, or stay.

      Liked by 1 person

    • info says:

      “But if we all just got married at 16 and 15…. there would be no problems like this. (Really now?)”

      The small town phenomenon is part of the package deal with the rest of traditional sex roles. But the fact that all teen pregnancy gets lumped into the same negative category despite functional examples which involved being married to a good Man all throughout history then its a serious propaganda op.

      Like

    • cameron232 says:

      I was referring to middle sized towns like I came from, not Deliverance.


      I originally said that it may be the case that the average guy would have better luck with finding a wife if he weren’t looking in DC, Bay Area, New York, Atlanta, etc. It could be that women in smaller areas have lower expectations/hypergamy.

      I was specifically thinking of the area I’m from which is a town of about 40,000 people with similar sized towns in the neighboring counties. Our county was maybe 150 -200K people. It’s much bigger now due to explosive population growth.

      [Video added by Jack for those who don’t know the reference to Deliverance.]

      Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        Understood Cameron, but one of the underlying themes in that movie (Deliverance) which was made in 1971? 1972?

        A theme was displacement

        That area was being “changed” to make life in the “new South” better for those who didn’t live “way up there” in that “small town” and countless others that were effected by this

        A new dam / hydo system was being built for power for Atlanta and other areas and it was displacing a way of life. In the dueling banjos scene…the yokel wouldn’t shake the suburbanites hand. The local sherriif at the end “Don’t you ever come back up here”

        From the meal in the guest house……fresh food, the talk at the table……the wholesome values being displaced……and of course the cost and price of what a man will do in the wilderness. Remember too, they all got into trouble when they “strayed off the main path”

        Liked by 1 person

      • Lastmod says:

        And in my region where i grew up……Great Scandaga Lake was created fifty years early for flood control and watershed for downstate. One of the big divides to this day in the war of words of “Adirondack v NYC / Long Island / Westchester County” is the creation of that lake and the Conklingville Dam.

        The other point of contention was building of the Adirondack Northway (I 87) in the 1960’s which opened up the region to tourism, and displacement of a way of life. Necessities yes. But at what cost, and who actually paid the price????

        Liked by 1 person

    • Lexet Blog says:

      Agree. I’ll take it one step further and state that people who think rural life is idyllic have their head up their @ss. Incredible poverty. Disgusting neighbors. Tons of drugs. Getting priced out because development increased your property taxes and because the threshold for a farm to be economically viable to support a family is in the millions now. Your kids will have to move out of town to support themselves.

      Like

      • Oscar says:

        “…people who think rural life is idyllic have their head up their @ss.”

        Did anyone say anything about “idyllic”?

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        Lexet,

        Look, there are advantages. Growing up I had the best backyard any kid, teenager, and young adult could EVER have asked for. 8 million acres of the Adirondack State Park. I miss the fall, and yes…. sometimes it got so quiet. No cars heard in the distance. No aircraft flying above. I never bought the “neighbor helping neighbor” thing. Good fences indeed make good neighbors… especially growing up in the country. You don’t and cannot understand this until you indeed live / lived it.

        People move out to the country and think, “I’ll just farm, and if these dumb people out here can do it, then so can I” mentality.

        There is horrible poverty. I went to school in the 1970’s with kids who didn’t have running water. One family got their beat-up house foreclosed, so dad pitched a tee-pee in their small pasture and the family lived there for years.

        Incest. It’s there. More than country folk would like to admit.

        Even when I was in college my parents gently told me, “You’ve got to move where the work is. There is nothing here anymore….. It was cheaper to live here when we moved here, and there was still a need for carpenters, and nurses…. but not anymore. Not at the wage we earn. A starting nurse makes half of what I do, the carpenters are no longer Union….. and the cost is so high compared to the wages.”

        People will cite the Amish, and Shakers in Upstate NY….. These are well established communities with generations of know-how behind them. There was a show about the Amish on PBS a few years back…. and even the younger ones cannot afford a farm anymore.

        Liked by 1 person

      • info says:

        @Lexet Blog

        For good or ill, it’s the cities that influence the rural, rather than the other way around. Drugs were popularized in the cities in the 60’s and spread out to the countryside.

        Welfare too, implemented by City folk and impacting the rural.

        Hence, why not only were the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah destroyed alongside the other cities the degeneracy impacted but also the countryside too which was burnt with burning sulfur.

        Until God restores his rule among those who are repentant who will be that healthy remnant. While the rest gets burnt away.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        “There is horrible poverty. I went to school in the 1970’s with kids who didn’t have running water. One family got their beat-up house foreclosed, so dad pitched a tee-pee in their small pasture and the family lived there for years.”

        No poverty, or homelessness in the big cities, right?

        “Incest. It’s there. More than country folk would like to admit.”

        No incest among all those inner city kids who don’t even know who their fathers are, right?

        Gimme a freaking break. Crime rates alone prove big cities are worse by far.

        Like

      • Lexet Blog says:

        There are more incest cases from rural areas than inner cities (black areas). I have had the misfortune of having to read appellate records on that sh!t. Some of the most disturbing fact patterns there are.

        Like

      • info says:

        @Lexet Blog
        And there are unrelenting efforts to corrupt the rural areas with rebellion and degeneracy as well from the cities:
        https://www.resilience.org/

        As shown by the insertion of ideologies like feminism or overthrowing patriarchy. And converting the country folk to liberalism.

        Liked by 1 person

      • cameron232 says:

        My grandparents lived on 40 acres in rural Florida. The next door neigbors who were half a mile away were drug dealers – as in 1980s Florida drug dealers who flew drugs in with planes. My uncle and his friend once found a huge bail of pot that got dropped by a plane. They kept it (and probably smoked it).

        But the drug dealer neighbors were very polite. They would say “howdy ma’am” or whatever to my grandmother when they saw her in the little store across the highway.

        We were told never to go over there.

        One thing about big cities is you have (in many cases) a lot of access to help, food pantries etc. Some of the most poverty stricken people in this country are rural Appalachian whites and rural blacks living near the upper Mississippi.

        I’ll state my opinion again. I think there are advantages to medium sized towns/cities. Mine was about 40,000 people.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Oscar says:

        “There are more incest cases from rural areas than inner cities (black areas).”

        Good luck knowing who’s related to whom when you don’t even know who anyone’s father is. Additionally, good luck getting a researcher to conduct yet another study that makes inner city blacks look bad.

        Also, it isn’t rural America that has murder rates that rival those of 3rd world hellholes. That would be big city America.

        https://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/murder-map-deadliest-u-s-cities/66/

        And it wasn’t rural American that burned all last year.

        Holy crap, man. Talk about a short memory.

        Like

  8. Lastmod says:

    Info says this.

    “The small town phenomenon is part of the package deal with the rest of traditional sex roles. But the fact that all teen pregnancy gets lumped into the same negative category, despite functional examples which involved being married to a good M an all throughout history, then it’s a serious propaganda op.”

    Yes, and in 832, 960, 1000, or 1214 AD people at that age were already heading into mid-life in most cases. And….Christianity was already ‘cucked’ by then with Chivalry evidently….. I digress.

    Demographics still show that people in rural America are leaving. Not because they are looking to ride the CC, not because they hate where they grew up… but for economics. There is no freaking work… or work that can support a “traditional” wholesome marriage with a standard of living / provision that modern Red Pill Christianity demands one must have.

    The people moving from California to Idaho, or Nevada are not the “small town gal” who wants to find a good Christian man. Its people with already established wealth, established educations, or inherited wealth that have the means to do this……. and then they turn it into the sh!thole they left. They mock the locals who didn’t have the means, genetics, IQ or anything else for that matter. They raise property values, demand better roads, street lights, and other amenities……… new schools, a better hospital close by instead of two hours away. Taxes go up, and other problems come, and the locals already there get blamed for being lazy. They get elected to the local village council or county board of supervisors and make life miserable. They want Walmart, and other chains to come in…… and suddenly the small town character is gone… The locals suffer for it, the people that move there to escape “big bad evil city” have no idea they were the cause of the new changes and problems. They have zero respect for what was there…….. People like me, HAD to leave. There was nothing there. Work at Walmart? Get a part time job in the tourism industry? Buy / work on a small dairy farm (the short growing season, combined with the fact the small family working farm is still going under…….). Renting or trying to buy a home….. most people who grow up rural inherit the house… and then sell it to MOVE out. If I, in 1995, decided to settle where I grew up……. then I was already priced out. People with more wealth who move from bigger areas have the LUXURY to move to these areas… and then look down on the people who live / grew up there.

    I’ve seen both sides of this where I grew up.

    As for rural America being left behind……… I saw it first hand, and growing up in this, I didn’t see really “good choices” by them either. The goal is to live on Welfare and pretty much not do much of anything. People like me LEFT. Not because we hated it…. but because we really couldn’t stay. The government created many of the problems rural / small town America faces today. I don’t find anyone there anymore wholesome or honest than I have met in California.

    When I lived in West Germany as an exchange student (1986-1987) my German peers at 16 behaved, acted, and LOOKED much older than me. They drank, they smoked…… they had sex (lots of it)… All that was happening in the USA as well….. but it was just a general observation as well, that MUCH more was expected of them than their American peers of the same age.

    As for a “good” man… Jesus said no one was “good”.

    Liked by 1 person

    • anonymous_ng says:

      I recall an interview with Victor Orban the Hungarian prime minister when Hungary had put up fences to keep out the immigrants from Syria and the other parts of the middle east. He also made a comment that they couldn’t keep the kids on the farm. They all wanted to go to the big city.

      I remember thinking at the time “As it was, so it always will be.” The prodigal son didn’t want to stay on the farm. He wanted to run off to the big city.

      My ex-wife’s bridesmaid grew up in a small town in Montana. She said the only things to do were: sex, drugs, and alcohol.

      Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ anonymous_ng

        You brought up Branson, MO above, and asked why anyone would want to live there. I asked if you’ve been there. Have you?

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        I remember in the 1980’s…..there was a big shot family..not elite rich, or powerful…but yeah, well to do that moved into the Village of Keene, this is town where I grew up. The wife got elected as mayor (the first Democrat since the 1880’s or whatever). In the village and town….everyone now had to keep their lawns mowed, their fields cut if not using for hay….and you had to “prove this”

        Why? Because ticks are a big problem there, and tick spread Lyme Disease, and “the children” suffer the worst from this, and, and, and…..

        Ticks have been a problem in the North Woods since the times of French explorer Samuel Champlain. You live in the woods. the forest, a rural mountainous area…ticks are a fact of life here. Keeping your lawn mowed and field / pasture cut was an AESTHTIC thing. It had nothing to do with ticks. It was done to make the “po-trash” take responsibility for their property and to make the town prettier.

        I grew up there, hiked extensively there, camped there, bushwhacked there. Never had a tick on me. Why? Because I knew how to prepare for them and what to do from a young age.

        She also wanted a low income clinic to help the elderly, and the poor……well, the clinic got built and taxes were raised to “only pay for the facility” which was state of art back then. Then, the taxes got extended to “build a reserve fund” to keep the property in repair. Then they were extended to have a “meal program” and the tax just ended up staying, and it forced more people to use it because the cost keep rising, and the taxes were increased forcing more into a lower income level….

        But boy….she felt “so good about herself” and she talked down to everyone like a Boss Hogg figure in the South. The VA in Plattsburgh already had a shuttle for veterans. The local hospital in Lake Placid served everyone well enough, and then it was found out she was paid by The State (Cuomo Sr) administration to push for this. All done under the guise of “helping the poor” when in fact, they were already being helpoed. It created several high paying Union jobs, and benefitted few.

        The locals were stupid because they kept re-electing her and the newer folks liked that a “one of their own” was up here “fixing and cleaning up this town” (property values)

        Liked by 1 person

      • anonymous_ng says:

        Hello Oscar. I wish this platform made replies easier.

        I have not been to Branson.

        Perhaps my aversion to Branson is because the foundational story of the cult-like non-denominational church of which I was a member for eight years began in Branson.

        Or, perhaps it’s because of how Branson has become this cultural meme of being this evangelical Christian mecca. IDK. (In all fairness, I don’t know where this impression I have has come from)

        So, I just don’t understand why Branson instead of some small town in Iowa, or South Carolina etc.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ anonymous_ng

        Thanks for answering the question.

        I don’t know why Branson has captured others’ imaginations, but my family and I visit Branson frequently, and it’s pretty much awesome.

        Far from being in “BFE”, or a place where “the only things to do were: sex, drugs, and alcohol”, Branson is a great place for families, especially Christian families, and people visit from all over the USA, and Canada. All you have to do is look at the license plates.

        My kids’ favorite attraction in Branson is Silver Dollar City…

        https://www.silverdollarcity.com/

        … which I highly recommend as an alternative to Disneyland. Why give your hard-earned money to people who hate you, and want you dead, like the people who own Disney?

        There is literally an infinite number of attractions in Branson, from theaters, to comedy, to water parks, to rivers and lakes, to multiple roller coasters, to zip lines, to… I could literally go on for ever.

        Americana and overt Christianity are the norm there.

        https://www.google.com/maps/@36.6441762,-93.2178801,3a,75y,184.48h,78.59t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sKopHzKZIgwW4adK61nLUlQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

        There’s also a Christian university.

        https://www.cofo.edu/

        Unlike most Christian universities, College of the Ozarks has STEM programs – including engineering and nursing – along with the typical liberal arts that most Christian universities offer. The best part is that you don’t pay for tuition. You work for it.

        My family and I are friends with a couple families there, one has 14 kids, one has 11 (we have 10). Their kids are getting married in their early 20s. One of my friends employs a bunch of young men. One of them is an accountant. He’s 25, and graduated from C of O. His brand new bride is 22, and also graduated from C of O (they met there) with a nursing degree.

        Additionally, Branson never shut down during the WuFlu. They did mandate masks for a while, but a lot of businesses posted signs that said, “if you don’t wear a mask, we’ll assume you have a medical condition”. Wink, wink.

        Plus, it’s less than an hour from downtown Springfield, which is a city of 167K.

        Basically, people in Branson are actually doing what so many in the manosphere claim in impossible. What so many in the manosphere whine about, but do nothing to solve, people in Branson are busy doing.

        I don’t know about others, but that’s why I love Branson.

        Liked by 1 person

      • anonymous_ng says:

        @Oscar, thank you for expounding on the benefits of Branson. It sounds like you’ve found a place that fits you.

        I remember a fellow Lt when I was in the USAF talked about how much he and his wife loved Montgomery Alabama. I remember saying that I was glad they found it so as it would mean fewer people out West.

        Now that my youngest has graduated from HS, I’m going to travel around and see where else I might like to live than Nuevo California where I live now.

        Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ anonymous_ng

        thank you for expounding on the benefits of Branson. It sounds like you’ve found a place that fits you.

        You’re welcome. It’s actually our second choice. Too far from family to be our first choice. If your travels take you around that area, I’d highly recommend a stop. And drop me a note. I’ll buy you a beer.

        Like

      • info says:

        @Last Mod

        “Why? Because ticks are a big problem there, and tick spread Lyme Disease, and “the children” suffer the worst from this, and, and, and…..”

        That’s why there needs to be regular backburning of the habitat of ticks to kill them:
        https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-46377-4

        Regular fires used to keep tick populations in control.

        Like

    • feeriker says:

      [T]hen they turn it into the sh!thole they left. They mock the locals who didn’t have the means, genetics, IQ or anything else for that matter. They raise property values, demand better roads, street lights, and other amenities……… new schools, a better hospital close by instead of two hours away. Taxes go up, and other problems come, and the locals already there get blamed for being lazy. They get elected to the local village council or county board of supervisors and make life miserable.

      Exactly. Ketchum, Idaho is a notorious example of this. One could scarcely blame the natives if they were to go door to door, shotguns, kerosene, and rope in hand, lynching everyone they encounter who isn’t a native. The invaders have pushed the natives out of their own towns and made life intolerable.

      Like

      • Oscar says:

        @ feeriker

        One could scarcely blame the natives if they were to go door to door, shotguns, kerosene, and rope in hand, lynching everyone they encounter who isn’t a native.

        Is there any reason to believe we won’t get to that point? And, if we do, what’ll be big cities be like by then?

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        RIght. Now, where i grew up…..my parents moved into this region in 1970. It was the first “new” house that was built in the whole town since 1948. It was a modest house for the time. Not a mansion, or summer camp that was the size of a mansion. My father never wanted the dirt road paved which we lived on (and the last time I visited the old place before my dad sold it in 2014…it still was a dirt road). there were only three homes on this eleven mile road….

        My parents left people alone, and expected the same courtesy. The local pastor once from the Methodist church one night came by, I was a boy…..in his vestments. Had coffee with my parents at the dinner table, and he explained that he was there to solicit for a new roof on the church. This is how things were “done” up there back then. A polite visit. My parents pledged as well as most people did, and my parents were not practicing Christians. Today? Well, that church is now a “historical” landmark deemed by the county…so now the locals are not even responsible for the upkeep. Taxpayers are in the county and throughout the state are. Again, removing a “local” responsiblity to a nameless, faceless one……

        When the roof was finished, a pot luck / picnic was held on the green in front of the church. for the whole town. It was a lot of money for the time as recall.

        Families in Ketchum ID probably have to make that not-so-hard-decision when they realize their home they they are probably still paying on or re-mortgaged and they owe 30K and new potential buyers from Seattle WA, or San Jose, CA want to pay 450K for it if they sell…….the choice isn’t really that hard is it?????? That family probably is struggling…..and their kids are not planning to stay or settle (again, what WORK is there besides service industry….and a town like that doesn’t need 500 Union carpenters, nor 1500 auto-mechnics (yeah…”just enter the trades, plenty of work…”)

        Saw this in the 1980’s where I grew up, and my visits in the 1990’s..wow……so many NEW homes, the old one demolished / bulldozed and some grand summer camp owned by NYC, Boston, or Montreal people; while the locals that are left are living in ramshackled homes, or trailer parks….working part time at a few jobs / seasonal……

        Like

    • info says:

      “Yes, and in 832, 960, 1000, or 1214 AD people at that age were already heading into mid-life in most cases. And…. Christianity was already ‘cucked’ by then with Chivalry evidently….. I digress.”

      Not true. most deaths are of children and babies. But if a person survives until their 20’s they can live quite long.

      As for Christianity getting cucked. The Eastern Orthodox managed due to their separation from the West to be insulated from Chivalric cuckoldry.

      Like

      • Oscar says:

        The days of our lives are seventy years;
        And if by reason of strength they are eighty years,
        Yet their boast is only labor and sorrow;
        For it is soon cut off, and we fly away.
        Psalm 90:10

        Moses wrote that 3,500 years ago. The idea that people only lived to 30 in ancient times is nonsense.

        Like

      • info says:

        @Oscar

        Exactly. So that former explanation of why people married younger falls flat in light of the evidence.

        Like

  9. Lastmod says:

    I am an “armchair prepper”

    No, I don’t have the “bug-out” location. Nor do I have the means to bunker in for two years….nor am I an expert marksman with fifty-thousand rounds of ammo, and I am ready to “take em all on” (all the military needs to do in that situation, if it came to that is to just blow up your place)

    When I lived in Fresno, I belonged briefly to a prepper group / club (yeah, I’m guilty). Many of them had a camp (a finished home that looked rustic) or larger home up in the mountains at Bass Lake, Shaver, Huntingon…up in the mountains.

    Their “go to” reasoning on everything was “well, I’ll just drive up to my home up in…..” and of course, anyone living in a city would be dead, killed, and eaten alive by roaming gangs.

    I grew up rural. In the mountain, and I TRIED to explain………..to zero success.

    “Look, great……the SHTF happens, you load up the nice new SUV, dog, kids, wife, your (cough) virginal daughters boyfriend…..heading to the camp / bug out location. Let me tell you something. If it got that bad, or things were declining FAST….the locals who ALREADY live up there will have your place commandeered. Plundered. Looted. You think they are going to sit around while this is happening….thousand of people fleeing to the hills….a place with limited resources already? No, these good ol boys who live up there are going to knock trees on to the roads. rip culverts out of smaller roads. Move junk cars and block roads…….and are suddenly not going to “care” if you pay taxes up there, and expect “your private property rights” be respected. The locals who live up there KNOW who lives up there full time and who doesn’t, and if that time came……..you probably would never get to this location….if you did, you would find a bunch of good ol boys already there, armed….and could easily send you back down into Fresno or kill you.”

    Of course I am scoffed at “well, these folks are law abiding, respect the consitution types…..”

    In a real life or death situation…..the country / rural folk are not going to allow “city folk” or people who don’t LIVE there…not just for a few weeks in the summer…….come up and live in their new, modern, well stocked home while they starve or die. Not going to happen”

    Again, told I “didn’t know what I was talking about”

    Arrogance rules. Practical reality again shot down.

    Like

    • anonymous_ng says:

      Pretty much this all day.

      I have a couple ebooks by a man who lived in Buenos Aries in 2002 when the government closed all the banks. He wrote that the police weren’t there to keep you safe from the criminals, but certainly showed up if you defended yourself. He also wrote that people out in the country had things much worse than people in the city. Criminal gangs would attack people living in the country. The country folk were outnumbered and outgunned.

      Then, to you point about absentee owners – https://www.hcn.org/issues/53.1/south-economy-when-covid-hit-a-colorado-county-kicked-out-second-home-owners-they-hit-back

      Like

      • feeriker says:

        The USSA is not Argentina.

        Like

      • Lastmod says:

        I agree. That is why many people from these rural / small town wholesome-american-value-christians WILL get overrun very quickly. It won’t be the local pastor in jeans and a plaid flannel shirt being a “leader” in those times.

        It will be Buddy from the trailer park who didn’t have much to begin with but has a simon-pure intellect for survival. Buddy likes to camp, fish and hunt. Properly butcher animals, deer and the like…and he hauls it out from MILES in the forest, even in winter.

        It will be Brenda Lee who owns a small farm that she got from her dad. Brenda was never too pretty for the boys, but she works hard, and she’ll burn that farm when the hungry hoardes from suburbia arrive “just me and my wife, the kids….we believe in neighbor helping neighbor…we just want some food”

        Brenda Lee will get on her horse and ride over the ridge through the deer paths to other people who will help her, as it burns and the suburban familes and other arriving from the city stand there not knowing what to do. Brenda knows she can plant next year…she has stuff stashed, and the land needed a good burn anyway. Good for the soil.

        Billy who served two terms in Iraq didn’t have the intellect nor the drive to get above E-3 in the military but after his discharge he came back home and there was really nothing left here in his hometown. He doesn’t hate the military, he hates the people who sent him there. He builds / repairs cars in his spare time with his friends, knows how to weld, is a farm hand during hay season / bailing. He’s been running a stihl on his grandfathers property over on Watson ridge knowing the sheffiff won’t bother him out there He takes the slightly anarchist notion of, the government cannot tell you what to do with your corn. Some eat it, some sell it and some drink it. He’s been making money on the side with this operation….

        It won’t be some local pastor. It won’t be the village mayor, or local county supervisor. It will be people like I mentioned above here.

        Rural America isn’t going to suddenly buy this “more room / we’re all Americans” nonsense if it gets that bad. Do you LIVE here? Not vacation…LIVE here?

        They won’t take kindly to strangers, or your fifty thousand relatives and friends now showing up

        Like

      • info says:

        The way to deal with Criminal Gangs in the countryside is the same solution to the Barbarians the Gauls.

        What the Romans did:
        https://infogalactic.com/info/Gallic_Wars

        Meme video:

        Like

    • Lexet Blog says:

      The mountain folk in CA won’t last a year. They’ll be cut off and smoked out.

      Like

      • Lastmod says:

        I agree….. and growing food in that thin, rocky soil with a short growing season won’t help either. Sure, you have an alpine valley here and there. The Sierra mountain folks will have to return to the ways of the Miwok tribe….. pounding pine nuts into flour, fishing, and curing fish, grubs, and worms. The winters are brutal up there…. even where you don’t get 20 feet of snow.

        That is why the homes / camps / bug-out places owned by folks in Fresno, San Jose, Los Angeles and San Diego up there are going to be ransacked… taken over, plundered and or burned before most of them arrive when / if it goes down… and to prevent these folks and everyone else showing up, they will fell trees on to roads. They will knock down bridges or block them with boulders, junk vehicles, and anything else they can find. Many of them will have “no problems” with shooting people who arrive and DON”T live there. I can attest to this, I grew up in mountain country.

        Liked by 1 person

  10. feeriker says:

    Is there any reason to believe we won’t get to that point?

    No.

    And, if we do, what’ll be big cities be like by then?

    You don’t even want to imagine what that will look like.

    Out here in my little “redneck” corner of unincorporated Tucson, Arizona we’ve had exactly three out-of-state newcomers to the neighborhood in the last three years – Californians. HOWEVER –and this is extremely important– they are NOT “cultural Californians.” At all. In fact, if you didn’t know their personal history, Commiefornia is the LAST place you would think that they were from. They are as determined to resist the woke urban nonsense as any of the rest of us here, and, like yours truly, are geared up to do it.

    Incidentally, Commiezon is defiling the desert by building a mega-warehouse distribution center 10 miles down the road from us. I (and all of my neighbors) look forward to seeing it reduced to a smouldering ruin once the shooting starts.

    Like

    • Oscar says:

      @ feeriker

      *Is there any reason to believe we won’t get to that point?*

      No.

      *And, if we do, what’ll be big cities be like by then?*

      You don’t even want to imagine what that will look like.

      Exactly.

      All the whining about small town this, and redneck that won’t amount to a hill of beans then. The snobs whining about rural America will wish they were living there, and the people who already live them won’t let them.

      That’s why we’re moving to where my wife’s relatives live.

      What about people who don’t already have relatives there? One possible solution is to move in, greet all your neighbors with fresh-baked goods, and start making friends. But, that has to happen years before the shooting starts. The sooner the better.

      And, by the way, I don’t need to imagine what big cities will look like. I’ve already seen it, just not in the USA.

      Like

    • Lastmod says:

      I am fully aware that if / when it gets that bad……I would at first have to find “the sweet spot” to get out of here. If I had to bug out, it would have to be on foot, pack….over the San Gabriel mountains, and back into the San Joaqine Valley. Going out towards San Bernadino would put me in the desert. No way. That is a death sentence.

      Looking over maps, it would have to leave during dusk, or very early, early morning….and I would follow power line paths or rail or aqueduct. The issue is WATER. I am an experienced backpacker but without water, and you cannot pack a weeks worth (hell not even more than days worth with you) you’re toast.

      If it got that bad….getting a car out of the greater LA areas is not even a consideration. It would have to be on foot. It’s roughly 75-80 miles down into Bakersfield from Pasadena, and that would be the best bet (gamble) and that would not be easy.

      Scott knows I am sure the crossing out of the LA area to the “big” valley is long, rugged and lacks water as well…..

      My situation, I would have to find people who could use my skills. I have cut plywood to cover my windows on my apartment to at least slow a break-in if it came to that (can tack and bolt to the window frame, and the blinds will close in front of this to make it look like someone is holing up inside. I do have have more food than most, and I have reinforced the door to my apartment already. The standard supplies, fuel, and the one closet has an extra water tank….and bottled water…..

      The issue is for me in the end…..WHEN do you decide “you must leave” and that is crucial…..because if you leave too late, would eb an easy target to overpower, leave too early and order is restored but everything you did have is gone….

      Like

  11. Oscar says:

    Off topic: why national judgement is coming.

    https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/government-funded-scientists-sought-aborted-194852180.html

    Researchers at the University of Pittsburgh received at least $2.7 million in federal funds to study fetal organs and attempted to retrieve half their samples from the aborted babies of minorities, according to documents released Tuesday.

    The National Institutes of Health has overseen experiments on fetal tissue at the University of Pittsburgh since 2015, from aborted fetuses ranging from six to 42 weeks, or two weeks past what is widely considered to be full-term.
    ………..
    “The NIH grant application for just one of Pitt’s numerous experiments with aborted infants reads like an episode of American Horror Story,” Daleiden said. “Law enforcement and public officials should act immediately to bring the next Kermit Gosnell to justice under the law.”

    From Fox.

    https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pittsburgh-fetal-tissue-project

    In 2015, Pitt told HHS that it has been “collecting fetal tissue for over 10 years … includ[ing] liver, heart, gonads, legs, brain, genitourinary tissues including kidneys, ureters and bladders.”
    ………
    Kelly said that as project manager, she worked to develop “a pull-down menu of baby body parts for researchers to choose from to submit to the tissue bank, so that we could send the body parts to them.”
    ……..
    Earlier this year, Pennsylvania’s state legislature held a hearing in which members discussed an experiment involving grafting fetal scalps, containing “full-thickness human skin,” onto rodents.
    …….
    “If the fetus’ heartbeat and blood circulation continue in a labor induction abortion for harvesting organs, it means the fetus is being delivered while still alive and the cause of death is the removal of the organs,” reads a press release from his Center for Medical Progress. Typically, abortion procedures rely on digoxin to kill a fetus. However, both that and dismemberment tactics can ruin viable tissue intended for donations.

    Dr. Mengele was an amateur.

    Liked by 1 person

    • feeriker says:

      “Dr. Mengele was an amateur.”

      He certainly is the archetype for today’s “physician,” no matter how much self-righteous hypocrites love to hate on his memory. Today’s “doctors” might not (yet) be as overtly murderous as was Mengele, but their abandonment of medical ethics in pursuit of profit and professional self-aggrandizement will lead them right into his shoes.

      Liked by 1 person

    • locustsplease says:

      I have always said they would murder children on a playground. There is no line the govt drew an imaginary line years ago but it does not exist and we all know it.

      Like

  12. thedeti says:

    From an embedded source quote:

    “Rather, it’s primarily about controlling, policing, punishing, and exiling the “bad” women who challenge male dominance. And it’s compatible with rewarding “the good ones,” and singling out other women to serve as warnings to those who are out of order.“

    Translation: Misogyny is now: (1) confronting and challenging women who act like b!tches; (2) avoiding relationships with b!tches; and (3) “rewarding” with relationships women who like men and who aren’t b!tches.

    So… if you avoid a bitch, you’re a misogynist. If you confront a bitch and tell her not to be a bitch, you’re a misogynist. If you find a non-bitch and get into a relationship with her, you’re a misogynist.

    Liked by 3 people

  13. thedeti says:

    It has now become “misogyny” to say…

    “I want and expect things from my relationships with women.”
    “I expect my wife to have sex with me.”
    “My wife has moral and relational duties to me. She is obligated to do and be certain things to and for me.”
    “There are certain boundaries you cannot cross with a husband.”
    “The husband is the head of the home.”

    These things are now hate speech and thoughtcrime.

    Liked by 6 people

    • Lastmod says:

      Depends on who you are Deti. There are several men here who could demand these things and it would be zero problem….. But most men? Yeah….. they just don’t get that option. Is it fair? No. But we can all read books, and listen to some tell us how easy it is for men to get into the top 10-20%, and it will still be assumed if a woman is above “7” in looks, she must be ready to be a wife and a mother…. It’s common knowledge here, and she will be easy to train, teach, lead, micromanage….. and if she has one red flag, anything… toss her to the curb. She’s “no good” and keep dating several women, because that unicorn is everywhere but she doesn’t exist 😉

      Liked by 1 person

  14. feeriker says:

    “The locals were stupid because they kept re-electing her…”

    Are you sure about that? Could it be that her “re-elections” were an early example of “Trumping?” Honestly, this sounds like the type of woman that no self-respecting person in a small town would vote for even ONCE, let alone re-elect.

    Like

  15. Lastmod says:

    You must remember, the rot had already set in here by the time the 1980’s arrived. Also many of the summer residents claimed this address at their home address so they got to vote here, and with NYC / downstate a sure thing for Democrats, register to vote up here to get more of their own in locally.

    Yes, many of the people in my area were that stupid

    Like

  16. elspeth says:

    Because it’s funny and true, especially since SAM did not kneel when he floated the marriage idea, as he pointed out when I shared this with him. As if I don’t remember:

    Liked by 1 person

    • elspeth says:

      So the man and I discussed this again, and he pointed out that Western men haven’t always been like this. That we (collective we, cultural we) have decided that John Wayne, Richard Roundtree (Shaft), and Bruce Lee were caricatures of manhood is in some ways an unfortunate development. Not that he condones Richard Roundtree’s cinematic sexual exploits; he does not.

      In one sense they were literal caricatures (as actors), and most men were not like that. However, many men had at least some of those characteristics because it was expected and understood that at the very least, a man needed to be able to protect his own. And this was true we suspect, world wide, not just in the U.S.

      Now that we have softened men and hardened women, we try to mitigate that by pretending that masculine, confident men aren’t real and have never been real; that they are just caricatures to be mocked. But that was not always the case. Historically, kneeling was a sign of submission and subjugation, including among Europeans in the west. The lesser kneels to the greater. Kneeling to propose marriage is a very modern convention, because the woman as the greater is a very modern development.

      So while this guy’s Ghanian mother raised a good point, the truth is that this “Western man’s tradition” isn’t really a tradition of the west or its men but one of modernity which has intensified in postmodernity. It is too bad that it has become embraced by Western men.

      Liked by 1 person

  17. elspeth says:

    “…anti-femininity, achievement, eschewal of the appearance of weakness, and adventure, risk, and violence – can be psychologically harmful to men and boys…”

    That is stunningly damaging and stupid. Just when I think I cannot be left incredulous.

    But… where have all the good men gone?

    Like

  18. Pingback: The Feminine Secret | Σ Frame

  19. Pingback: She don’t need no man! Except… | Σ Frame

  20. Pingback: Love begins where perfection ends | Σ Frame

  21. Pingback: A Nugget of Truth about China and Taiwan | Σ Frame

  22. Pingback: Disclosing the Taboo of Masculine Sexuality | Σ Frame

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s