Honor

Since it appears that SPEEDAWGS infidelity thread has about run it's course, an interesting topic really paraphrased the whole discussion, and this was one of Honor amongst Men. With the constant reoccurring theme of moral perspectives and their bearing upon advice being tossed about, I thought that maybe Honor was really the core issue and not so much some cosmic puritanical morality steeped in religiosity. AENIGMA quoted POOK (assuming it's the real POOK) in that thread:

Vilar's Radicalism # 10

10) Masculinity and Honor is an Artifical System designed to manipulate men.
-
Thanks to women, everythingis labelled "masculine" or "effeminate," "worthy" or "unworthy." By imbuing all they do with sentimental and emotional values to such a degree that no one can remain unaffected by them, women have created for themselves a fool's paradise. Whatever they do is pointless compared with male achievements. And since they say so themselves, why should men quibble?



Of course, if men really wanted to, they could destroy this tissue of lies and replace the terms "masculine" and "effeminate" with "hard" and "easy".


...
It is simple to analyse this vicious circle: women invent rules, manipulate men to obey them and so dominate the male sex. Of course, these rules in no way apply to women themselves. The male sense of honour, for example, is a system invented by women who loudly exempt themselves from it. They renounce the concept of honour and, as a result, manipulate men.



In a recent television series, "The Avengers", there was a scene in which two antagonists were facing each other across a billiard table, a pistol in front of each of them. It was agreed that to give them each an equal chance, they should count aloud up to three and then shoot. The hero, however, grabbed his pistol and fired at the count of two, thus saving his own life. He chose to remain outside the system and was therefore in a position to manipulate the other who, although in mortal danger, preferred to stick to a system approved by society rather than to use his own judgement.


Pg. 59-61

What is a Man? Certainly not masculinity or honor. Vilar will later define exactly what man is.

But it is true that everything that is 'masculine' and 'honorable' is disadvantageous to men and advantageous to women. It is 'masculine' to lift heavy objects. It is 'honorable' to always be nice to women. It is 'masculine' to join the military. It is 'honorable' to help the mother-in-law at all times.

Even though readers of "Manipulated Man" know how this is advantageous to women, I do not think it has yet been internalized that IT IS ALL FAKE. MGTOW are still talking about 'honor' and 'masculinity' as if it means something. It should be noted that Shakespeare opposed honor and blunt masculinity. The movers and shakers of the past, the philosophers, the poets, the musicians, the artists, would today be called 'unhonorable' and 'unmasculine'. But since there was no Matriarchy in that time period, you can see why people were attracted to such fields and tried to study them.

It is time to let it go. Let Honor go. Let 'Masculinity' (though not testosterone) go. The manipulation of Honor is not that Honor is being used to serve females, it is Honor itself is a female construction. Why should we 'honor' politicians? The only 'honor' that should be recognized is that band of brothers between soldiers. But is that really honor? Not really. That does not fit ribbons or medals.

Don't try to be masculine but try to be who you are. Those who embrace who they are, their soul, their passions, strive to be You Inc., will naturally be confident. It is those that strive towards masculinity, towards its images and cliches, that end up becoming the biggest wimps.

Prior to the 20th Century, male friendships and companionships (these are close friendships, NOT homosexuality) were depicted in literature and the world. It is interesting that the only way men are allowed to be 'close friends' is under 'Honor' as in old war buddies. Male friendship is savagely attacked as 'effeminate' (and now 'gay') because it does not help women in the slightest. This conditioning is so deeply rooted that sharing a two bedroom apartment with a guy, it is not uncommon for that guy to say, "Look! I am just trying to save money! I don't sleep with him or anything!" As the Internet and MGTOW is showing, male friendship is our greatest strength against Matriarchy. No wonder it is considered the most 'unhonorable' and most 'effeminate' thing ever!

Click to expand...

To which JOPHIL opines:

jophil28 said:

He is wrong about the origins and practise of "honor". Just plain wrong.The article above is a weak conspiracy theory masquerding as Pook wisdom. The Pook lemmings will eat it up, no doubt.

Click to expand...

From an origins perspective I'm inclined to agree, but the concept of honor that men began has been MADE to serve a feminine purpose. I have no doubt that the principle of honor dates back from as long ago as we can track human civilization, but like so many other social foundation Men have instituted, the feminine will covertly position them to their own purpose. In this respect I'd say POOK was on to something.

In the introduction to the Art of Seduction author Robert Greene explains why there was an original need for seduction to be developed into an art. For this we can look back to ancient civilizations where women were essentially a commodity. They had no OVERT external power to control their fates, but they excelled (and still do) at COVERT psychological internal power. The feminine's primary agency has always been sexuality and influence.

Much in the same way that each gender communicates, so too is their method of interacting within their gender. As Men we're respected when we keep our word, sacrifice ourselves (even to the point of disposability), solve problems rationally, say what we mean - mean what we say, and a whole host of other qualifiers that make us respectable and worthy of integrity. We must be OVERT and above board; and when we encounter a man who is COVERT in his dealings we call him 'shifty' or untrustworthy.

But it's just this OVERT masculine nature that women are only too ready to exploit. In combination with their sexual agency and influence they use OVERT male social interactions to position themselves. Cleopatra was an excellent example of this - sending armies to war by appealing to powerful men's pride and honor, while reserving her sexuality as a reward. Virtually every Feminine Social Convention is rooted in appealing to, or attacking male social institutions - a responsibility to honor being chief among them. The obvious example is of course "shaming" and the "do-the-right-thing" social contract.

In fact to be a "Man" has become synonymous with living up to a feminine imperative that's cleverly disguised as masculine Honor. It's not that women created Honor, but rather that they've recreated it to serve their purpose. In the 10 Commandments we're told not to commit adultery - don't sleep with another man's wife - which probably wasn't too hard to abide by when polygamy was the norm. In fact multiple wives was a sign of affluence, it used to be conspicuous consumption. Why then is polygamy a social perversion now? What changes occurred that made polygamy honorable into a very evil taboo?

Along with language and culture, social conditions evolve. What we think of as Honorable today are the result of centuries molding. It's very easy to romanticize about times when Honor among Men reigned supreme, and then lament the sad state of society today in comparison, but doing so is a fools errand. Honor in and of itself is, and should be, a foundation for Men, but it's only useful when we understand it in the perspective of how it can be used against us.

Rollo Tomassi said:

Honor in and of itself is, and should be, a foundation for Men, but it's only useful when we understand it in the perspective of how it can be used against us.

Click to expand...

My bpd ex, who gets by in life by manipulating men, loves the phrase "if you were a real man, you would ____" ....pay her bills, adopt her kids, buy her a pack of smokes, whatever she happens to want, that is what a "real man" should instantly provide. Her other favorite is to call her two respective baby daddies a "horrible father," which will guilt both of them into doing anything. And then there is the "he beats me" routine that she will take to a bar when she is single - every guy in the place falls immediately under her control. They will do anything to chivalrously save the poor girl. When the 'he beats me' gig wears thin, she will just go make out with the first available girl, which has a similarly effective manipulative result.

Honor has been bastardized by women and by society.

Pook made a great point: in his blog he mentioned how politicians now demand that we *honor* them because they are an authority. Why the hell should I honor a politican?

Honor thy parents - yes
Honor thy vote-mongering politican? Go to hell


A more subtle point is that honor is a *system.* In other words, there is reciprocity.

If your fellow solider is wounded in battle - it is expected that you risk your life to help save him - barring extreme circumstances. Likewise, if you are wounded, it is expected by you, by him and by EVERYONE that your friend risk his life for yours.

So it becomes very laughable when women try to *shame* men into doing honorable things because it is all about her, there is no system set up where she is expected to do the same

She says: 'Do the honorable thing - you should feel obligated to marry the single mother.'

Is she ever expected to do any *honorable* things? Are girls ever obligated to marry the single father, so the child has both a mother and a father?


But if there is no system of honor set up for a particular situation - then you have to create your own values that YOU adhere to, but you must be consistent to it.

For example, if all men agreed: 'I will not steal your gf. And is expected that you would not steal mine.' then I would have to honor that and follow it, even if I don't like it - since it is a *system.*

Now of course these days, not all men agree with that. Some men will steal your gf, others will even steal your wife - in this case where no universal system is set up - then it is now up to the individual to decide freely.

So for myself I have decided that I will steal someone else's gf if I like her, even if she is engaged. But I will NOT touch someone else's wife - that is dishonorable in my world. In the end, you have to be able to look at yourself in the mirror.

Leting aside all the paranoia about men being the victims of honor conspirations here, historicly speaking, in many cultures, even to this day, honor apply to women in many forms, and in many cases, it's a matter of life and death.

Rollo Tomassi said:

Since it appears that SPEEDAWGS infidelity thread has about run it's course, an interesting topic really paraphrased the whole discussion, and this was one of Honor amongst Men. With the constant reoccurring theme of moral perspectives and their bearing upon advice being tossed about, I thought that maybe Honor was really the core issue and not so much some cosmic puritanical morality steeped in religiosity. AENIGMA quoted POOK (assuming it's the real POOK) in that thread:

To which JOPHIL opines:
From an origins perspective I'm inclined to agree, but the concept of honor that men began has been MADE to serve a feminine purpose. I have no doubt that the principle of honor dates back from as long ago as we can track human civilization, but like so many other social foundation Men have instituted, the feminine will covertly position them to their own purpose. In this respect I'd say POOK was on to something.

In the introduction to the Art of Seduction author Robert Greene explains why there was an original need for seduction to be developed into an art. For this we can look back to ancient civilizations where women were essentially a commodity. They had no OVERT external power to control their fates, but they excelled (and still do) at COVERT psychological internal power. The feminine's primary agency has always been sexuality and influence.

Much in the same way that each gender communicates, so too is their method of interacting within their gender. As Men we're respected when we keep our word, sacrifice ourselves (even to the point of disposability), solve problems rationally, say what we mean - mean what we say, and a whole host of other qualifiers that make us respectable and worthy of integrity. We must be OVERT and above board; and when we encounter a man who is COVERT in his dealings we call him 'shifty' or untrustworthy.

But it's just this OVERT masculine nature that women are only too ready to exploit. In combination with their sexual agency and influence they use OVERT male social interactions to position themselves. Cleopatra was an excellent example of this - sending armies to war by appealing to powerful men's pride and honor, while reserving her sexuality as a reward. Virtually every Feminine Social Convention is rooted in appealing to, or attacking male social institutions - a responsibility to honor being chief among them. The obvious example is of course "shaming" and the "do-the-right-thing" social contract.

In fact to be a "Man" has become synonymous with living up to a feminine imperative that's cleverly disguised as masculine Honor. It's not that women created Honor, but rather that they've recreated it to serve their purpose. In the 10 Commandments we're told not to commit adultery - don't sleep with another man's wife - which probably wasn't too hard to abide by when polygamy was the norm. In fact multiple wives was a sign of affluence, it used to be conspicuous consumption. Why then is polygamy a social perversion now? What changes occurred that made polygamy honorable into a very evil taboo?

Along with language and culture, social conditions evolve. What we think of as Honorable today are the result of centuries molding. It's very easy to romanticize about times when Honor among Men reigned supreme, and then lament the sad state of society today in comparison, but doing so is a fools errand. Honor in and of itself is, and should be, a foundation for Men, but it's only useful when we understand it in the perspective of how it can be used against us.

Click to expand...

Rollo,

This is all very true. Honor has been co-opted by women as well as men. For example, when did the definition of 'teamwork' change to "why don't you make me look good at your expense"?

For me, honor has two parts, individual and shared.

The individual piece used to be taught to men by other men as boys endured rites of passage. In the 'civilized' world this has faded to obscurity. There are remnants of it in our lives and some preservation of it (my training was military). But even in the military, the 'raw material' is so compromised on the front end that it comes out half baked on the other.

As for the shared piece, well, its complicated (for me anyway). If you have a 'code' and no one else does, you will simply be a victim. Best if your code:

1) preserves you and allows standards and values that you and others get,
2) honors others (until proven otherwise),
3) adapts quickly.

This requires principles rather than rules. But even the principles must evolve. First principles may survive, they should. But ot at the expense of the one holding them.

I am learning to act as if no one (including me) has rules. As yet, I do not want to let my principles go. This is because they ground me and suggest ways to behave in most situations.

I can't and don't try to make others 'buy' my values. So I live them, pruning away those people and things that don't allow me to be me. I draw closer to those that seem to get me.

This does not protect you from anything or anyone. Its simply a way for me to have some markers as situations change. And they let me know if I'm being consistent with who I say and think I am.

As I tell my kids, honor yourself or suffer. When I operate consistent with my code, I'm happier, clearer and can live and let live. Not without pain mind you. For the lesson from my own unpleasantness is that there are large risks in living with a code. Maybe I was expecting protection from it. That's gone.

I find those with no rules or principles repugnant. So I don't put up with them. That's just me.

This should be an interesting discussion.

Tictac

In fact to be a "Man" has become synonymous with living up to a feminine imperative that's cleverly disguised as masculine Honor. It's not that women created Honor, but rather that they've recreated it to serve their purpose. In the 10 Commandments we're told not to commit adultery - don't sleep with another man's wife - which probably wasn't too hard to abide by when polygamy was the norm. In fact multiple wives was a sign of affluence, it used to be conspicuous consumption. Why then is polygamy a social perversion now? What changes occurred that made polygamy honorable into a very evil taboo?

Click to expand...

hm ? In the culture that created the 10 commandments, polygamy was not the norm, and they had nothing to with western civilization at the time anyway. You guys always seem to forget the simple fact that values change according to the culture. What is the norm here and now, is a crime in other places in the world. That was even more true in the instable ancient world.
Things here are discussed in a too superficial manner.

I totally agree with you Rollo that women use concepts like honor, which is to me is part of the male psyche, to manipulate men. Women's agency is to manipulate the male psyche. Your view and explanation I agree with, but Pook was way off. It was only in more recent times could women reframe honor so easily. In the past one of the beliefs among men was that woman were not to be listened to. Women are such good manipulators though that I'm sure they still managed to do a fair amount of manipulating men even so. But today women have been given almost carte blanch to define what's honorable, right and even masculine. So it is true that honor among men at this point has been totally corrupted and exploited by women.

It's not that women use (or if anything, misuse) the concept of honor in order to manipulate men; they attempt to manipulate men by chiding them. When they're looking to make you do their bidding by hurling "Be a man!" or "a real man would..." that has nothing to do with honor at all - what precepts of honor are being called on? But it is all about jabbing at your ego, isn't it?

Don't forget the government's use of "honor" for the benefit of society but the detriment of the individual.

"The few, the proud, the Marines"

Instead of talking about how honor is misappropriated and misused by women, the government or others to beat you up, how about thinking about how it can work for you? This is the part of honor that can be taken back. And it cannot be taken from you.

Ticitac

Their is no honor in complaining that the evil world is stealing your fragile masculinity.

The real honor is claiming it by your actions in every day life.

So what if the average chump is a puzzy? You don't have to be.

So what if most chicks use all kinds of advanced jedi manipulation tactics? You don't have to comply. They only use those manipulation techniques because they work. I gauran-godd-damn-tee if anybody on this board could get into a hotties pants simply by saying " A real woman would blow me.."
trust me, you'd use those tricks as well.

True honor is living up to your own image of yourself, and fukk everyone else if they disagree, and fukk them if they define honor to thier own intentions.

Honor thyself is the only commandment you should follow.

fukk the rest.

The Titanic is sinking.

There are not enough lifeboats.

"Women and children first".

Children first? - ok I can wear that.
Women first as well? Why? We all know why.
Our stupid bloody "Honour".

Maybe Esther was right

taiyuu_otoko said:

Their is no honor in complaining that the evil world is stealing your fragile masculinity.

The real honor is claiming it by your actions in every day life.

So what if the average chump is a puzzy? You don't have to be.

So what if most chicks use all kinds of advanced jedi manipulation tactics? You don't have to comply. They only use those manipulation techniques because they work. I gauran-godd-damn-tee if anybody on this board could get into a hotties pants simply by saying " A real woman would blow me.."
trust me, you'd use those tricks as well.

True honor is living up to your own image of yourself, and fukk everyone else if they disagree, and fukk them if they define honor to thier own intentions.

Honor thyself is the only commandment you should follow.

fukk the rest.

Click to expand...

Absolutely! Unitil you have your internal code, you cannot have honor because you neither know how to honor yourself nor clue others in on your standards, values & expectations.

Tictac

ketostix said:

It was only in more recent times could women reframe honor so easily. In the past one of the beliefs among men was that woman were not to be listened to. Women are such good manipulators though that I'm sure they still managed to do a fair amount of manipulating men even so. But today women have been given almost carte blanch to define what's honorable, right and even masculine. So it is true that honor among men at this point has been totally corrupted and exploited by women.

Click to expand...

I'll meet you half way on this, but only because I think that in contemporary society we have a very different understanding of what Honor was, or was intended to be initially. One of the psychological undercurrents I see in most AFCs is a strong, self-righteous dedication to a very distorted conviction of Honor. A main tenet being a default respect for women; essentially an unearned Honor placed on a woman for no other reason than she's female. We learn this (usually) from the time we're children, "never hit a girl". Naturally, this has only been ferociously encouraged by the feminine since Victorian times because it served a latent purpose right up until on demand (feminine exclusive) birth control was offered, and then prompted the sexual revolution.

Today, we still have women using male Honor in a manner that serves their interests, but it's contrasted with a sexually emphasized opportunism. A Man's responsibility shouldbe "Honoring" her as 'the fairer sex' while recognizing her 'independence'. The AFC gobbles this stuff up and in an effort to better identify himself with her ideals he begins to convince himself that he's unique in that he better exemplifies this false-virtue, this feminine defined sense of Honor than "other guys".

Rules of Engagement

Rollo,

I just posted this elsewhere. This is whay I try to do. It may be cracked but seems to work for me.

Tictac

Quote:
Originally Posted by ketostix
But there are rules in war and most all developed countries signed on to them. Many Nazi were hung, sentenced to prison and even today get captured. Sure sometimes people break them, but they are risking being held accountable.

There's rules in the mating game and always were. The basics like consent (the rule against rape) and age (age of consent).

How is no rules in the mating game really not just feminism? There's really no such thing as no rules, maybe less rules, but in any vacuum someone steps in. And that is what women have done. They are creating all the rules to the mating game. Aren't you really saying no standards for women? You might say you have your personal standards, but your standards against the world's (women's and their male cronies) doesn't seem like they are too enforcable. No women needs or cares to meet your standards when there plenty of other guys that don't make her.

I see the matter as men enforcing rules and standards that are favorable to them or women enforce their rules. No rules or standards in the mating gaming philosophy sure sounds like women hold all the cards and sounds like feminism to me. To me it's the exact opposite of "patriarchy". I guess you see it as a "mating game", and I see it as gender roles and what society expects for women to meet. Well society keeps piling the roles and expectations on men but none on women.

Keto,
Well reasoned and on point. I think that Guru1000's signature says "Are you willing to walk away?". That's the ultimate test of internal rules in civilized societies. The willingness and ability to do that is not without price or (sometimes) pain. It just helps you decide which is more important, your situation or your standards.

As for the rules of war, they are rarely honored in the moment. Its only after, when those who would enforce the rules show up and decide that somebody broke them. Its a futile effort to impose order on chaos. Many good men get sacrificed to that. But sometimes a really crazy bastard is found out. Is it worth it? It may be necessary but does not recognize just how crazy men killing one another over a piece of ground is.

The madness of combat really cannot have rules other than self-preservation and protection of your mates. And that's because you are trained to do it and you know your mates have got your back in the most real of life's games.

Its different when weapons aren't in play. You can and should walk away as soon as practical from those that would have you sacrifice yourself to their rules or engage in something with no rules.

Ultimately you never really know anyone. You can decide for yourself what is important to you and not let that go. And once a lover or a friend proves that you must sacrifice your honor to be with them, you decide which is more important and act on that.

Sic semper,
Tictac

Let’s see if I can add to this, by getting a list up here of potential shaming techniques to use a man’s sense of honour and in some sense male pride.

Women V Men:

“Are you a real Man”

“Where have all the good/quality Men Gone”

“He is weak for letting her rile him so”

“Only a weak man would have an affair”

“Real men don’t sleep around”

“Men should pay for dates or buy women drinks”

“Men don’t hit women”

“You don’t know how to treat a woman”

“A Real man would support his kids”

“If you where any kind of man you’d stand up for me”

“It’s a sign of man-hood to get married/it’s a sign of adolescence to stay single”

“A real man would support me”

“You’re the man of the house, so act like it”



Men on Men:

“It’s immoral to sleep with another man’s wife”

“Are you a man or a mouse”

“You shouldn’t talk to women that way, its disrespectful” (after the women did something to warrant some flack in return)

“Where is your code of honour”

“You should support your women it’s the man thing to do”


General:

“Think of the children”

“Think of your unborn baby”

“Think of the mother of your kid”

“what would your father think”

“Could you live with yourself”


Lets match some up:

A: Girl gets pregnant by mistake, she told you she was on the pill but was clearly lying:

“Think of your unborn baby”
“Could you live with yourself if you walked away”
“Are you a real Man”
“You don’t know how to treat a woman”
“A Real man would support his kids”
“A real man would support me”

Beta Response: Yeh I guess your right, I being a bit of a shi*. I should stick with the girl and support her. 5 years later he is stuck in a relationship he can’t stand, the women is in control, the kid is running rampant, the GF or Wife has piled on 20stone of pure fat, he feels like a shadow of his former self, it turns out 3 years later the kid wasn’t even his.

Alpha: You told me you where on the pill, your have an abortion or I’m leaving the country, I don’t like to be lied to or used. Or if he does decide to stay with her “I want a paternity test doing”.


B: your wife is putting on weight and looking like a fat warpig – when you look at her your balls shrivel up inside your stomach – to say your disgusted is an understatement, you catch the eye of the hot young 24 year old naighbour:

“Could you live with yourself if you walked away”
“Are you a real Man”
“You don’t know how to treat a woman”
“A Real man would support his kids”
“He is weak for letting her rile him so”
“Only a weak man would have an affair”
“Real men don’t sleep around”

Beta: Yeh I’m being a dic* - that neighbour wont find me attractive, plus I need to honour our vows, she is my wife after all, so what If we don’t have sex, we still do x y & z, in a way I am happy.

Alpha: My wife’s fat? No way, that wont happen. Or if by some miracle she did pile on the pounds (after having a kid) “hey honey, I’m sure that hot young neighbour wants a piece of my sexy as*” – she reminds me of you in your hot size 10 lycra outfit”.


C: You’re in a bar – you’re out with your mates, you meet a cute girl, little do you know she is manipulating you for money and drinks, you turn to one of her female friends:

“Are you a real Man”
“Where have all the good/quality Men Gone”
“Men should pay for dates or buy women drinks”

Beta: Yeh your right, here there’s a tenner get you and your friend a drink – sits there for ten minutes neither girl comes back, or if he is lucky (or unlucky) gets a 2nd date where he pays for all full meal, the cab ride home (hers only) then goes home to pat himself on the back for being such a gent.

Alpha: Lol, you buy me a drink.

D: Your wife is caught fuc*ing the next door naighbour, you have two kids to her:

“He is weak for letting her rile him so”
“You don’t know how to treat a woman”
“A Real man would support his kids”
“You’re the man of the house, so act like it”
“Think of the children”

Beta: She keeps fuc*ing the guy, he tried to win her back due to the shaming tactics and the challange to his male honour and pride. If he leaves, he gets taken to court, for the 'sake of the children', his monthly pay-check is cut in two, which he knows 50% of that is not for the kids at all, its to pay for her to fuc* her new found lover in his marital home.

Alpha: You'd make a great couple. Works to secure his assets so he does not get raped in courts, makes action to look after his kids, without his partners input or if he seeks it, its for visitation and he nevers lets her dictate when or how he can see his kids, he lays ground rules down for the new man to follow, or else. 5 months later he is seen around town with a hot young 21 year old blonde. He buys a sports car, he has more money and more freedom. He missed his old life and is daily contact with his kids, but he is building a new one up and a better one. his wife looks in and 6months later, she is begging him back, he refuses ofc!

Esther Vilar wrote the authoritative work on this..."The Manipulated Man".

It's a real eye-opening book. It's kind of funny, though...it seems that although "honor" is a means of manipulation, it's this sense of "honor" which has built the great things of this world. It's like although it's a form of servitude to submit yourself to a higher purpose, be that a genuine one or something artificial (God, women, etc), it's also something to be "proud" of.

Without "honor" to drive men to the acts of creation, conquest, etc...where would we be right now? Probably still in a hunter-gatherer culture. Think about Napoleon Hill and his idea of "sexual transmutation". The way that sexual energy, the desire to please a woman, is transmuted into the energy to build civilizations.

It's a hard line to walk. It's definitely best that man is aware of the manipulative influences he operates under...if for nothing else, then perhaps so he can CHOOSE which purposes or morals or ideas to serve.

In that way, he at least becomes master of HIMSELF. And perhaps can fabricate his own "honorable causes" to become a leader of others.

Honor is tied into self-control; that a person will adhere to whatever rules they set for themselves. People both respect it and prey on it. A man that can be trusted will always be condiered secure and stable. When someone knowingly does wrong and then appeals to your sense of honor, that's a form of manipulation. It's like how a group of dirty cops will send in the clean cops to arrest someone who crossed the dirty cops. Another would be when a woman slaps a guy and then chastises him about thinking about hitting her back.

The trap men run into is that they don't know where honor ends and self-respect or preservation begins. There has to be point where you ask yourself is your honor going to be worth losing your respect or life over? There's few things in life making yourself a matyr for in life, so try not sacrifice yourself for any little thing. So to sum it up: live life doing the honorable thing because you'll have fewer regrets at the end, but don't be the world's doormat.

What is the difference between honor and respect? Seems to my overly simplistic self that respect is earned, and honor is assumed, possible earned, possibly unearned.

Respect is how much you're valued either by yourself or someone else. Honor is how closely you follow a belief system. Either respect or honor can be earned or expected and sometimes the terms are used interchangeibly.