What I miss most about the single life....

[TheMonkeyKing]

they did their part in their society but were not emotional invested.

This is spot on. The emotion clouds judgement, especially when at work.

 

[Glumix]

Why would I fight for a country that despise men and contributes everyday for its own degeneration? The only fight that we can fight nowadays is the fight for self-improvement. We are in a similar state that the romans when the Empire was falling; all the great men of the time were stoics, they did their part in their society but were not emotional invested.

That's a pretty limited view of the world.

It's like to be a great man you have to change society. Not every great men changed society. Just choose your fight. And you can be a great man at your own level, that is what the stoics also teach.

You see only self-improvement because your read only about self-improvement.

 

[CuddleJunkie]

That's a pretty limited view of the world.

It's like to be a great man you have to change society. Not every great men changed society. Just choose your fight. And you can be a great man at your own level, that is what the stoics also teach.

You see only self-improvement because your read only about self-improvement.

Not at all, I'm a philosopher, I read all kind of stuff haha. And of course you don't have to change society to be a great man, my grandpa was a construction worker all of his life, and he's a great man, he built a truly strong family, he built the 3 houses he has, etc. What I am saying is that the things that make us feel good about our provider side are no longer avalaible, we only have the option to develop our alpha side now. And for a reforming beta like me that means hard self-improvement for a couple of years.

Anyhow, you made a really good point with the "you see only self-improvement because you reaed only about self-improvement". I've experienced a lot of frustation in the past when reading alt-right books, and not so much anymore. So you are right, too much of one thing and you start seeing the world only through that lens.

 

[Glumix]

What I am saying is that the things that make us feel good about our provider side are no longer avalaible, we only have the option to develop our alpha side now. And for a reforming beta like me that means hard self-improvement for a couple of years.

Still, you say that those stuff are not available anymore but I am not sure what you are talking about. You can build houses, business, become a great philosopher, write books, etc...

Is your grandpa still alive? If so, go talk to him about that. I am 99% sure he has built houses for himself, not to provide, but simply because he loved to build houses.

It's not the houses you give to the girls, it's the energy you have. It seems that for you, providing = giving stuff, but it's about giving masculinity, not stuff.

 

[CuddleJunkie]

It's not the houses you give to the girls, it's the energy you have. It seems that for you, providing = giving stuff, but it's about giving masculinity, not stuff.

Maybe you are right, I still have a lot of work to do in unplugging myself, so maybe I'm expresing beta desires.

 

[fastlife]

It's not that women like being masculine--they absolutely despise it--and they despise themselves and the men in their lives for making them step up to fill that role. But femininity is a luxury, it's a state that can only exist in the presence of masculinity--whether that's a strong father or brother or leader or lover.

You can't be submissive if there's nothing to submit to--it'd be incredibly counterproductive to survival. The more insecure the girl, the harder it'll be for her to submit to anybody--but even she'll be much happier to the extent that a man refuses to submit to her.

You're not going to find the product you're looking for premade by western society in the SMP. But you can find better raw material; it'll be up to you to build her.

As a man you can still build, you can still provide, but you have to do those things for yourself first; the greater context won't reward masculinity or doing something against the grain--so you have to build your own context first.

Every man whose ever significantly improved a society had to fight that society first every step of the way to implement that improvement. Society isn't interested in your personal potential--to the extent that that personal potential doesn't immediately align with that society's shortsighted aims for maintaining the status quo.

 

[Glumix]

It's not that women like being masculine--they absolutely despise it--and they despise themselves and the men in their lives for making them step up to fill that role. But femininity is a luxury, it's a state that can only exist in the presence of masculinity--whether that's a strong father or brother or leader or lover.

You can't be submissive if there's nothing to submit to--it'd be incredibly counterproductive to survival. The more insecure the girl, the harder it'll be for her to submit to anybody--but even she'll be much happier to the extent that a man refuses to submit to her.

You're not going to find the product you're looking for premade by western society in the SMP. But you can find better raw material; it'll be up to you to build her.

IMO, there is no step up to fill a role for survival, they use the power and freedom we give them because they LOVE it. They just don't understand that with that power and freedom come a lot of responsibilities and they HATE those.
And those responsibilities are the Man's jobs to provide, to give direction, be the authority, create fun and adventure, etc...

They are in a constant state of ambivalence with that, torn between that power and freedom, and the ensuing obligations.

But I agree that men MUST refuse to submit at any cost. And they must feel pride and power in that refusal, not fear.

 

[CuddleJunkie]

You're not going to find the product you're looking for premade by western society in the SMP. But you can find better raw material; it'll be up to you to build her.

As a man you can still build, you can still provide, but you have to do those things for yourself first; the greater context won't reward masculinity or doing something against the grain--so you have to build your own context first.

Every man whose ever significantly improved a society had to fight that society first every step of the way to implement that improvement. Society isn't interested in your personal potential--to the extent that that personal potential doesn't immediately align with that society's shortsighted aims for maintaining the status quo.

You just motivated the fuk out of me.

 

[fastlife]

IMO, there is no step up to fill a role for survival, they use the power and freedom we give them because they LOVE it. They just don't understand that with that power and freedom come a lot of responsibilities and they HATE those.
And those responsibilities are the Man's jobs to provide, to give direction, be the authority, create fun and adventure, etc...

They are in a constant state of ambivalence with that, torn between that power and freedom, and the ensuing obligations.

But I agree that men MUST refuse to submit at any cost. And they must feel pride and power in that refusal, not fear.

Just because rationally their survival is more or less provided for, doesn't mean that they're secure or that they're biological instincts don't long for that security. But in the absence of anything greater to submit to, of course they love the freedom of not having to submit to someone they don't perceive as being someone worth submitting.

And let's face it--what do most men have worth submitting to, if they're just performing a predesignated role in a society that will ensure the woman's survival with or without his direct input? OK, so you work 60 hours a week to be able to own the house society says you should own; you buy the car society says you should buy; but buy submitting to you she's still just submitting to society--and society will make sure she has that house and that car even after she's done with you (assuming you marry/impregnate her or to the extent that that society has conditioned other men to also provide her these things).

But she's not looking for that--she's looking for a narrative to drive her life and to give her identity. She's looking for a world--a pre-made world--for her to inhabit. Why do you think women are the top consumers of television drama? Isn't that an alternate world for her to submit to, even vicariously? Why do you think women are the top participators in social media? Another alternate reality she can submit to. Travel? Christ, she gets to submit to a world other people made in a language she can't even understand that she has no role in other to exist. Why do privileged attractive girls leave the comforts of their home to join ISIS? Why will women join a cult that jeopardizes their life and their freedom? Why will women chase the bad boy whose so self-absorbed he'll barely even register her existence? Why are revolutionaries and dictators always surrounded by the hottest women, some of whom are from the privileged class that'll eventually be overthrown?

If women loved freedom so much, why give up that freedom for those things? Well, if those things provide a more secure reality (i.e. one that she cannot question, control, or otherwise alter--that give her a sense of identity and purpose beyond live, laugh, love or 'you go girl'). Now, all of those examples are a bit subversive and destructive--but your world doesn't have to be--just take a look at creatives--artists, musicians, writers, self-made businessmen, entrepreneurs, even if they aren't successful, typically have females throwing themselves at them for a chance to enter their world. But you could even just be the guy who works a blue collar job her likes, goes fishing with his boys on the weekend, and doesn't give a damn whether a woman likes how he spends his time or not--even that's a world that females can submit to; he role is predefined; and even if you can't provide her the nice house, the nice car, there are plenty of women who'll happily submit to that reality.