I’ve had the chance to read C.S. Lewis’s “Surprised by Joy” recently, which detailed the journey which Lewis took from Atheism to Theism. Part of this journey was his yearning for the “joy” he had experienced as a young man and tried to repeat, returning to a similar “pleasing” activity.
He soon understood the mechanism of diminishing returns that all “pleasures” have. This is something that we in this age have seemed to have forgotten. What was surprising was that he was able to extrapolate that these brief moments of “joy” were all linked, irregardless to the “pleasure” at hand. Our brief forays into “joy” in this world are a reminder that we don’t control this. They are an echo of a greater “joy” which is clearly outside of our own hands.
We desperately try to use “pleasure” as a pabulum, a filler in replacement to “joy”. This always seems to backfire on us, as it turns into selfishness, “sin” and self-destruction. Pleasures themselves are quickly forgotten, but true “joy” stays with us always.
“Joys” are what God gives to us. “Pleasure” is what we attempt to give to ourselves. By giving God a chance to work, we have opportunity to receive “true joy”. Seeing a recent prayer come to fruition is one such “joy”, and this came from showing Christian servitude and care.
This “joy” is mine forever. Seeing a God-worked change in another, in someone who others would call an “enemy” is mine.
In days of yore, I was paying only AU$300 – 400 on my tri-annual webhosting fees. This figure increased to over AU$900, so obviously I decided to move hosts so as to reduce costs.
With other bills just around the corner – coming fresh from a recent root-canal surgery – reducing costs has become my focus in this early part of the new year.
In doing this move, I’ve come to recognize that I’ve drifted away from many things that were of interest to me. There were Bulletin Boards for MMO games, forums from a Clan I had a falling-out with, download files for FPS Shooter Servers. But it was the Megamek Files that got me really reminiscing.
I’ve always been a great fan of the Battletech Universe. And recently I bought a copy of the current Battletech Game. It has been fun to play a game or three during the week. But Megamek and Megamek.Net were something different.
Back then (circa 2006) I was a struggling Programmer with nothing to do thanks to poor choices in Employment, and I had poured a lot of my creativity into developing side web applications for this open source game which was based on the Battletech Universe.
I decided to have a go at setting up a web-based star map for the game, but quickly found out that a key file no longer existed in the directory. Reading through the .php file. It has been so long since I’ve even looked at programming that I could hardly understand what I had previously done in inspiration!
In Battletech, there is this term “LOSTECH”. It refers to any technology that had been lost during almost 300 years of near continual warfare in the Successor States.
These .php files are my own personal “LOSTECH”. Part of me wants to try to recover that which I have lost. Return to some of that inspiration and skill that I’ve surrendered in the 12 years of pure “Adulting”, knuckling down on the job and being a responsible taxpayer and earner. In the rush to do what was needed, I put away things that I wanted.
“LOSTECH” is a return to my dreams. A return to something I can look forward to.
I recently listened to the recently released Matt Forney After Hours – Down on Your Bended Knee.
It is about Leopold von Sacher-Masoch, the writer of the novel “Venus in Furs” which details the sexual perversion that later went on to become “masochism”.
If you are a man or a boy – particularly someone who is a product of a single-parent household – you need to listen to this podcast. It is vitally important to understand this dysfunction in the relationship between men and women.
A couple days after listening to this podcast, I was given a horrific realization that this model of relationship is the only path which single mothers drive their sons towards. Without the example of the negotiations between husband and wife to follow, sons see supplicating to women as the only way in which to please women. A great fallacy which is often repeated writ large in society – obey the will of women at all costs.
Women on the whole do not respect men who give them everything they want. Just look at my previous entry on The sad tale of Alexander Pettersson.
Society is about creating an entire under-class of male individuals (these aren’t men) who are masochists. All the while, women and the men of power whip you, stand on your neck and laugh at you for falling for the game they made you play.
When the novel is read properly, this book was never about lionizing this fetish, it was a warning against it. Severin, the main protagonist in the novel “Venus in Furs”, in all respects becomes a Sadist after becoming disgusted in the way he used to supplicate to the will of women.
The time-delay fuse on this podcast’s reaction in me was an eye-opener. As the realization above hit me I got really, really angry. Mostly because I could see myself as Severin, someone who used to toady to try to get affection from women. This was a strange form of anger. Not a little angry, but to a level that could justify murder. Was this realization how Serial Killers justify their killings?
C.S Lewis rightly said that “Satan always sends errors in pairs”. Where Masochism is bad, some men compensate by becoming Sadists in response. I recognized that I could not trust this anger within me. It was never “me” to being with.
I will take on what I have learned from this. Understand that this is the world made by Single Mother Families – a world divided by the polarization caused by this lack of positive masculinity.
Value yourselves guys, above what society and women say you are worth.
I recently watched a video from Dianna Davidson about the silence around the abuse case of Andray Domise.
After watching this, I had to pose a few questions about humanity in general, specifically our need to scapegoat and turn people into social-pariahs.
There is no quarter given, no nuance accepted for the human scapegoat, the social-pariah. No grievance too small to prevent you from being hoisted up to be sacrificed on the altar of social justice.
The need to create human scapegoats and social-pariahs fascinates me. History is replete with examples of the same thing, happening over and over again. There is no social “progress” while humans act this way. The echoes of this barbarism reverberate with us still today.
Why do we instantly reject the civilizing practice of the universal application of justice? Does this speak of a darker, sinister need that resides in the hearts of all people? Is this the flip side of the coin of our desire to feel accepted and included into human groups?
It is a deep question that few people are willing to investigate. Why do we act this way?
I’d like to give a shout-out to Sargon of Akkad for bringing to my attention arguably seven of the most harrorwing minutes of personal monologue I have ever heard. After hearing this, I am forced, no, compelled to give a response not only to Alex Pettersson, but to feminism and to Swedish Society at large.
I think at first glance, alot of MGTOWs will describe this man, rightly, as little more than a tragic/comedic caricature on the same level as Uncle Ruckus from the TV Show, “The Boondocks” written by Aaron Macgruder. Good show, I do highly recommend it.
Uncle Ruckus (despite being quite obviously African-American) completely rejects everything about being African-American. He is a sad figure who sees no value in being African-American, and to avoid an existential conflict, chooses to believe that he is not one. Though in all respects, Uncle Ruckus has not freed himself at all, taking on menial (almost slave-like) service work in and around the plush gated-community of Woodcrest to perpetuate the slave-master dynamic he fervently needs to justify his life, his identity.
I see some strong similarities between Uncle Ruckus and Alexander Pettersson and that would lead a lot of men in the manosphere to ridicule and deride the way Alex has surrendered all positive traits of masculinity. But in all fairness, we have to look at both characters with a great deal of pity. They are products of the environment in which they exist.
And I do emphasize the term “exist” because you don’t really “live” until you are able to completely accept who you are as a person. You don’t “live” until you have a positive, independent identity. This leads me to this very sad conclusion: The person that is known as Alexander Pettersson does not live any more.
He has become the toxic-dumping-ground for every negative stereotype ever referred to as masculinity. We often hear feminists decry women who won’t join their ranks as “internalizing misogyny”, just hearing one minute of Alex’s piece tells you straight away that this man has fully “internalized misandry”. He has personalized every negative generalization regarding manhood.
Alexander compares himself to the likes of George W. Bush, Vladimir Putin and every rapist, merely by sharing the same genitalia. But I think the worst part in Alexander’s story is that his self-loathing is completely undeserved. It is wasted on trying to appease “women”.
The women in Alexander’s life, erm, existence enjoy a life that has been bought with the day-to-day sacrifices of men, for-better-and-for-worse. These women have enough time to indulge in their favorite past-time, fantasizing about the men at the very peak of their masculine power. Whether it is the influential world leader, the international soccer star, captain of industry, or the thug in a dark alley who has his hand over the mouth of his victim telling her not to scream or she will get hurt. This power dynamic is very seductive to these women. This is the apextual fallacy that Alison Tiemann speaks about quite a bit. Women only focus on men that THEY SELECT. These men are qualified to be “men” because they hold power over women.
Yes. Selection.
Sexual selection of mates. This is their biology. This is their nature. They do their darnedest to try to hide it, but they can’t help themselves but fall into this pattern of hypocrisy. Alexander, you have bought into the “lie” that masculinity is only about this “power” that some men have and most men, obviously, do not. You have been given a few scant pieces of the jigsaw puzzle and been asked to form a qualified view on masculinity.
Alexander Pettersson, you do not know “man” at all. All you know are buzzwords and propaganda. You are incapable of forming such an opinion in the environment in which you exist. You can’t say you embody all manhood without acknowledging the other 95% of men who are not a part of the power structure, and who would never think about raping a woman. In the same vein, you are the man who installs the electrical wiring into a home, the man who lays the sewerage line in a busy city, the father who plays with his children on the front lawn, the peace-keeper in the middle-east who monitors a disputed border, you are also Mozart, Da Vinci, Van Gogh, Newton, Aristotle, Einstein, Gautama Buddha, Jesus Christ. Generations of men who lived and continue to live quiet and inspirational lives, slowly building the foundations of civilization.
You are also *all* of these men.
But what annoys me more than anything, is the erosion of your right to be judged only on the content of your own personal character and individual deeds. No one has the right to place guilt on another human being for anything other than their own choices and decision making. We can’t change the past, we can only influence the present and plan for the future. The whole “sins-of-the-father” caper was left in the Old Testament of the Bible. Feminism needs to stop harking back to these anachronisms.
If there is guilt, it should be placed firmly on the heads of the feminists in your life. They speak of equality, but only want privilege. They want rights, but will not accept any responsibilities. They mew and shriek how men have caused all the problems of the world, but yet will still accept every luxury, comfort and advantage that western life offers them. When will you realize that it is they who are projecting their own superficiality and guilt onto you? They are not egalitarians. They are self-serving bigots and totalitarians.
I know, Alexander Pettersson, that you are trying to become something that will make yourself less dangerous, less masculine, to gain approval from these women. What you are doing is wrong. In the end you will become something that is even less than a servant. You are on the path to become a Eunuch. The only Eunuchs I know are found looking after the households of female royalty. It is done to ensure that there is no chance that the Eunuch can be SELECTED sexually. Maybe you are starting to notice the patterns of “privilege” that the women in your existence exercise over you! They want you to continue to faithfully serve their cause, and yet denounce not only your right to hold a positive self-identity, but also your right to have children in the future.
Alexander Pettersson, you have a decision. You can continue to associate with these women who do not appreciate you, who detest you. Women who will turn you from an individual into a “stereotype”. If you do this, you will become a Eunuch, a house-slave, safe enough to associate freely with his Mistresses, his Princesses. Accept that you are indeed a lesser “inferior male” and make way for the men that your women-friends SELECT.
But I say this to you in all seriousness. Their sole claim is in their ability to give birth to the next generation, but is that enough to make them worthy of your presence? Is their continued mistreatment of you really worth it? Are they really giving you a positive identity and are they really accepting you as a human being?
Below is an email I sent off to the Journalistic Review Show on the Australian ABC called “Media Watch”,which airs at 9:20pm on Mondays. I wonder they will respond to my rant?
I write this particular email pondering the Journalistic Ethics of Aunty herself!
Are we to believe that it is ethically correct for a journalist to “parrot” stories that have not been factually checked?
Or are you into the same “filthy” Audience Retention Strategies that Commercial Stations use?
I speak of 7:30 show’s coverage of the #gamergate controversy recently. This was done on the 12th of November, 2014.
I would like to question whether there are *real* honest to goodness journalists on staff at the 7:30… ones that manage to put their ideological views aside, ones that will do the legwork and check both sides of the story?
The 7:30 Show has clearly breached several Journalistic Ethics Codes while covering this story.
Firstly, did any of the hacks at 7:30 bother to contact any US/Canadian Law Enforcement Agencies to *confirm*the veracity of the harassment Brianna Wu, Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkessian suffered?
I am pretty sure they didn’t.
Secondly, did any of the hacks at 7:30 bother to contact any US/Canadian Law Enforcement Agencies to *confirm* that the harassment Brianna Wu, Zoe Quinn and Anita Sarkessian originated from people that identify with #gamergate?
I am certain that they didn’t.
Thirdly, did any hack at 7:30 want to speak to any of the Australian #gamergate identities about our side of the story?
They sure as hades DID NOT.
I think this is a real test of the ethical standard of journalism within the ABC. Is the ABC about the truth any more? You know, that horrible thing called “the truth”. That thing that some Journalists have a very, very hard time to find.
The 7:30 show should start telling the truth, and stop peddling some fake narrative that #gamergate is all about misogyny.
#gamergate is all about Journalistic Ethics. A large portion of the Gaming Community have become seriously estranged from the Gaming Journalistic community. We do not appreciate it when Gaming Journalists don’t recuse themselves from writing about friends, lovers and financial interests. We do not appreciate when Gaming Journalists openly blackmail game developers to change their content to fit their ideological sensitivities. We do not appreciate when 10+ media outlets coordinate and release “stories” to decry *all* gamers as horrible misogynists all within the space of five hours. We do not appreciate when Journalists advocate violence against a group of people. We don’t appreciate when journalists say that #gamergate is about excluding women from gaming and game development.
Look, you can completely ignore this email and confirm every nagging suspicion I’ve had about modern journalism is undeniably true.
Or you can prove that the ABC is a bastion of the truth, no matter how ugly, or how outside of the progressive narrative it is.
At least watch this YouTube from Australia’s most vocal #gamergate identity, Socks.
I will warn you that people are getting sick of Journalists. #gamergate should be a wake-up call to journalists from ALL media. Audiences can bring real consequences to media outlets.
We trust you to bring us the truth.
We don’t want you to force feed us ideological narratives.
Having been born in the 70’s, outside of wedlock to a Catholic Father and a Presbyterian Mother, the rather tender subject of being a “bastard” comes up. Back in the day, most people still attended churches and being part of the community and the social fabric was very important to most people.
“Bastard” is a word that still is an insult, but does not carry its former sting in this modern age, but why?
It is a legal term to denote a child born out of legal wedlock and thus outside the path of inheritance from the Father. But it was also used a lot in Christian circles too, particularly within the Catholic Church. If my mother is to be believed, my father had me and my twin brother declared as “bastards” in the eyes of the Catholic Church. But my mother said many other disparaging things about my father too, so I am inclined to take that with a grain of salt.
In the 70’s it was still a social Taboo for a woman to have children out of wedlock. It has only been in the intervening years that it has become socially acceptable for women to take this course of action. Branding a child as being illegitimate has lost its deadly intent. If 30 – 40% of all boys are not in line for any inheritance, it fails to become an insult to be used to socially injure and exclude, especially when they become a social demographic.
In past days it was a real social slur to call someone “illegitimate”. Take a listen to this song from the 60’s:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Li5SeswcCp4
There were serious consequences for people bringing children into this world outside of the protection of marriage before the 70’s. And it is only now in this modern age that we see how bad the outcomes for boys from single mother homes actually are. There are real, quantifiable implications for boys raised in an environment without a supporting father in the picture.
Something more sinister is actually happening, though. We are de-emphasizing the importance of male lineage, male inheritance and male continuance.
Should these things be unimportant? I say they are vitally important! Our fathers and our forefathers are the chains on which males can hold fast to the anchoring identity of being “men”. Women have deliberately cut the chains to the very anchors that boys need to secure their identity as men.
No wonder why boys from single mother homes feel so adrift! Why boys are so eager to do everything that “Mummy” says, and believe everything that “Mummy” states.
They don’t know where they came from, ergo, they don’t know who they are!
Part of being a MGTOW, or a Man Going His Own Way, is that Iron-Clad resolve to do just that. Be your own man. Do your own thing. Experiment. Push the limits and try new things out. All the while acknowledging that you are also taking risks too.
I recently tried something a bit too radical recently. Waay Too Radical. Something that was too emotionally charged and something now I think I am going to regret. But I guess we can’t try the limits without going outside of the boundary from time to time. It is outside of the boundary that we are challenged as people, that we grow and we learn. Sometimes it is a step forward, a leap in consciousness and understanding, and sometimes it is a step backwards, an error, a misstep, an overreach.
I made a mistake.
I own it.
I accept the consequences of my actions. And I realize that I have probably lost a lot of respect in the community because of it.
But I am resolved to stay in this community, come “hell or high water”. I am sure my commentary over the last couple of years has been valued by a few people. If I did not continue to do so, I would be doing a disservice to the others in the community. All voices in MGTOW are valuable. Even the voices of MGTOWs who make stupid mistakes from time to time. They now have the benefit of Experience!
I also look at this as a push to do more as a MGTOW and as a person who can write. I really should blog a bit more, maybe even do a video or two.
I’ll be catching you guys in the comments section as normal…
Not even in this modern and safe environment. We can remove ourselves from physical harm, craft our environment so that we reduce environmental and natural risk to a bare minimum. But we can’t escape our emotions. Emotions are used by our biology in response to stimulus with the external world. They are part of the human condition. They are also very necessary for our continued healthy existence. Anger, fear, love, lust, sadness. A veritable spectrum of emotional responses. We just can’t escape them.
Understanding that we are, indeed, creatures possessing both logic and emotion, we come to noticing the recent video about a woman walking around New York City, showing street harassment.
Naturally, this only shows a little less than two minutes of this woman receiving cat-calling, propositioning, compliments. A distillation of about 10 full hours of this woman walking around New York City. The brevity of this footage says a lot about how frequent this behaviour is in her travels. In no means did she receive all this attention throughout her walk. It happened only in a few instances. But that is the intellectual dishonesty of this particular video. It was never meant to present logical evidence.
It was meant to evoke an emotional response in the viewer. Here we have a woman, a particularly attractive woman. A woman walking alone. Walking through some tough neighbourhoods being accosted by dangerous looking men. Men want to jump through the screen and try to protect the woman from the harassment. Women put themselves in that position of alone-ness, receiving what is 10 hours worth of street harassment in just two minutes of watching.
Viewers don’t take in the time frame over-which this all occurred. Viewers don’t take into context the rarity of such a beautiful looking woman walking through that particular neighbourhood. The Viewers are left with the impression that for 10 hours straight, this woman was subject to 10 hours of guys breaking social conventions and being down-right creepiness
This is all just emotional puppet-mastery. The Con is Complete.
There are now feminist legislators who are rapidly and rabidly looking to put new laws in place to protect women from such street harassment. But in all fairness, the street harassment is subjective, and dependent on the woman in question. She may look at the behaviour as empowering. She has been able to attract the attention of these men in the streets,unlike other women who may have just passed by without notice. Again, this is completely dependent on the emotional state of the woman in question and her motivation at the time.
Was this woman in any real and physical danger?
Probably not.
What the video makers are doing instead are promoting the “fear” of being physically in danger. They are authoring a narrative of “re-endangerment”. It is a pretty clever ploy. And it is this videos ability to play out on the emotions of its viewers that bothers me a lot.
Our emotional state is not necessarily the reality. Fear of physical danger is not the same as being in physical danger. But this is the landscape we are in. There are powers out there that continue to peddle these Threat Narratives, primarily because they allow the writers of these narratives the ability to promote a suitable re-action to the newly presented “re-endangerment”.
I live in Brisbane, Australia, and right now I am having a long weekend, thanks to the G20 Conference being in town. Earlier this week, we were given the news that Russia had sent several Warships into the Coral Sea (and in International Waters). I see no threat from Russia in these moves, but many in our press are overplaying the danger these warships present. This has all the hallmarks of yet another Threat Narrative. And on cue the press has cultivated the politically appropriate response. Australian Warships have been sent out to shadow these vessels.
Threat Narratives are so easily recycled. The Russian Threat to the fledgling colonies of Australia was all the rage back in the 1880’s. Fort Lytton at the mouth of the Brisbane River was created primarily to stop the threat of Russian Incursion. I find it completely ironic that 130 years later, FINALLY the Russian are justifying the existence of Fort Lytton! And even now, I don’t believe those Russian Warships will make any further moves towards Australian Waters. There is no real threat.
But in creating a threat, it is the people who craft the threat who benefit from it. Just imagine the profit that was made by the makers of the old 6 inch muzzle-loading guns that sit idle at Fort Lytton, the Construction companies that were paid good money to lay in the concrete for the emplacements, the officers and men who derived a living from protecting the Colony of Queensland from the spectre of a Russian Incursion into the Capital of Queensland. Their existence was there not to stop any real and credible threat, but as a way of placating the emotional fears of the populace.
We need to realize that as certain parties continue to craft threat narratives, they slowly shift the goal posts of legally acceptable behaviour. They are slowly drifting away from reality, into the realms of Emotional Subjectivity. This hands too much power into the hands of those who will be protected from such emotions. In this is a real danger of thought policing, censorship and freedom of expression.
Always question the motives of anyone who wants to evoke the emotion of “fear” in you, because they will always “have” a solution that maximizes the power and the profit into the hands of the person who is doing this.
Woah… Sezchuan Stirfry got the old dream factory going last night.
It was a strange dream.
I was going to this college or school for some sort of event, but had left my wallet at the institution. I had already walked to a trainstation. I told someone at the station, and they enlisted the help of this middle-age man and his pretty skanky looking blonde wife to drive me back to get my wallet so I could get back in time for the train. He looked like the usual dapper middle-aged chap, I think he had a hat on. But the woman was in a blowy, almost see-through short-cut dress that seemed completely inappropriate for the location. She was a fair bit older than me, a faded beauty to be sure.
The dream started out as if we were driving an enclosed car, but it morphed into a convertible. Strange, I know!
But on the way to the Institution, the car lost control and it was flung up very, very high into the air. I almost fell out of the car as it was flying, but I managed to get back in. The driver then said, “Well, you’re still going to die”. And still high enough to say my past prayers…
