I'll need to return to this later to comment, as it will be quite lengthy. I've been fascinated for years by the Red Pill movement and their extension of MGTOW. There are many truths to be found within it, especially MGTOW, once you look past the bitterness and sometimes vehement hatred one finds there.
Women control sex, men control relationships. Men are somewhat more naive in this, I assume because of the strong biological handicap we have that makes the average man want to have sex with most females. It is a handicap, and many years ago I labeled it as men being slaves to their penis. I've watched from a young age many brilliant men brought down from this, and even myself have many burdens. My burdens and many others though are created by a government system that is designed to become surrogate husband to women (aiding them in escaping many consequences of poor choices) and view men as chattel to be forced into the service of women they have slept with.
I often peruse many threads I find entertaining that examine many womens approaches to online dating and their long list of unrealistic demands. They don't seem to understand a lot themselves, primarily that as they age they become more like men as far as not being pursued or found valuable by the small percentage of men their own biological handicap makes them a slave to.
The part where it's starting to hurt women who have been sold a false bill of goods is the pool of men who have been forced into servitude to previous women has grown, and many men who haven't are surrounded by men who have. The majority of men as they age will have built up something if it's not being redirected to women by the courts, and they don't see the juice being worth the squeeze.
I liked one guys view on it years ago.
If you have a jar full of M&Ms, and half of them are poison but they all look alike, do you eat one?
The idea that was given to many women that they could have sex and children while they are young and men would be lining up to be their fall back to help them evade the ramifications of those decisions dwindles with each year. Men are tired of being viewed as an asset bank who is tolerated until such a time as a better asset bank comes along.
Many women do SETTLE down once they hit that stage in life, and men have watched and realized that when one is settled for, there's a great chance one will eventually be replaced, and courts get involved and none of it is worth the squeeze.
An interesting standoff has developed making men and women enemies, all designed by those who would own us playing on our natural instincts to create this gulf. Over the last many decades women have been encouraged to run rampant, and we are now exiting the age of Kali as men are waking up quickly now and deciding to take their ball, say they are through playing and going home.
Another Red Pill saying here in the U.S. that I find significant is
If you want to know what they have planned for the rest of us, watch what they've been doing in the black communities.
I don't think many younger people understand that the single mom epidemic plaguing the black community is a recent phenomena. There was a time when the fathers were in those homes and the dynamics of house and community were much different than they are now. They tested the whole surrogate father idea on them before pushing it out into the rest of the nation.
This was supposed to be a short comment, and despite its length barely touches the surface.
Here is an interesting thread I read on Reddit. It's from a sub that dissects womens dating profiles. It's eye opening to say the least. The comment section is where the gold is found. It shows exactly how many men are invisible to women.
Ironically, I didn't realize this was a problem for most men until about 10 years ago. I've always been with a woman, and with the exception of the one I'm with now, have always been the one pursued by the women I've been with. I can say that some of the stereotypes men have of women and their demanded criteria aren't 100% set in stone based on my own handicaps.
if i send you some hive, can you convert it and send it to me as blurt tokens ??
Due to how complicated the laws are, coupled with overzealous money laundering investigations that can see ones assets frozen, I must decline doing this for you.
I will recommend that you utilize the exchange I was for converting my Hive to Blurt, Ionomy.
https://ionomy.com/
Offgridlife also used both them and Hive Engine, depending on who's cheaper.
If for some reason you have a reason you personally can't use an exchange you might try asking Offgridlife if he can do it. Based on his many trades and gifts he has extended to others, I'm left thinking either Canada (where he lives) is either much more lenient on Crypto, or he just doesn't care.
The U.S. (not sure if you're a resident or not) has laws for everything stifling individuals and small businesses from growing. Another example of this would be laws preventing folks like myself from having a giveaway for advertisement. The stance is there is no such thing as a giveaway, it is a sweepstakes and one must jump through lots of red tape and permits to hold one. All those "giveaways" one sees on social media could be prosecuted if the government wanted.
Based on the type of topics I used to blog about, I try to make sure I dot all of my I's and cross all of my T's, not that it would save me if they decided to really come after me. But I still try to make sure just the same.
Like paying my taxes on Hive earned last year. I have a spreadsheet I use that records everything I'm doing earning wise. Which involves several variables (liquid and staked payout, trades from Hive to Blurt, vest inflation, transaction fees, etc) It's a pain, but one does what they must to disarm those who could be a threat.
One still has the slim chance of getting a good jury after the prosecutors have nulled as many good individuals as they can. If it ever came to that, I feel that being able to demonstrate I did my best to comply could work in my favor, even if it came down to a jury nullification scenario. It can get complicated enough for myself, and I don't want the added burden of performing financial transactions for another that can be misconstrued by overzealous "authorities" or be easily misunderstood by a jury.
zoiks
(IFF) you cannot be both loved and feared (THEN) it is better to be feared than loved. Men are generally fickle, afraid of danger, and greedy. When a prince benefits them, they will do anything for the prince, but when trouble comes, they will desert the prince. People will break ties of love if it is to their advantage, but fear of punishment they will never transgress. A prince must be careful not to make himself hated, even though he is feared; to do this, he must keep his hands off his subjects' property and their women. People will sooner forget the death of a father than the loss of an inheritance. However, when a prince commands an army, he must be cruel in order to control his troops.
In conclusion, people love at their own wish, but fear at the prince's will, so a wise ruler will rely on what he can best control.
I was pretty sure there was a quote somewhere about how killing a young man's father will insure their loyalty to the state.
I have generally disliked this tendency of others. When I was a teen/young man I associated more with men of other races due to how many of the other white men seemed to exhibit this cowardice more blatantly. Ironically, I believe some of the dynamics we see where minority men are more likely to be abused/beaten/killed by police is partially due to this. They are more likely to question/challenge the authority of the enforcers of the farm masters. I saw first hand when I was much younger that when one challenges their authority in such ways the anger that many officers feel when violently enforcing their will is color blind.
In some ways, one could liken it to where you said
They do a great job of separating the races from one another, and now men from their families. The devastation this plays on the development of the child, as well as the weakened structure of the family against the schemes of the state are so obvious. I wrote time and again how the CPS/Foster (un)care system targets weakened and financially destitute families (usually single mothers) to funnel the children into their system that INCREASES GREATLY the horrible abuses from sexual to incarcerated to mandated drugging etc they foist upon the lower strata.
As has become more obvious despite (or perhaps because of) the murders of whistleblowers, those at the top we are ALLOWED to see have not been very good at
I would add children to that sentence as well.
You don't see a lot of independently wealthy soldiers or police officers.
We pretend we need these violent emotionally repressed drones.
And then we blame-the-individual for being violent and emotionally repressed.
I tend to blame (I prefer the term credit) those who do violence with the actions they've chosen. I also am not prone to using low IQ as a qualifier to excuse it.
I understand the processes that lead to such moments, but refuse to excuse or justify when those who are abused in turn seek violence against innocent parties. Since I was a teen I saw a lot of savage violence, and felt a disgust that those people didn't target the people that had wronged them (if there was a genuine wrong that occurred). Be it courts, police, politicians, an employer, a parent etc. It just doesn't make sense in an extreme example of police murdering someone, so you begin beating and robbing innocent people while you destroy their property. Now if those same people had went after the police and the politicians and judges who passed the laws "authorizing" the abuse that enraged them, they would wish for one like myself to be on their jury.
I'm really surprised that we don't see more backlash than we do against the many oppressive programs, some of which are crimes against humanity level of abuse. I often wonder when we see someone was murdered, or their child was wrongfully kidnapped and placed into the foster system etc where the dad or brothers or sons are at that they got away with it.
this vid completely changed how i think of violence in society
I finished the video.
I really liked it, and already knew a lot of what he spoke of without having read the books and studies he mentioned.
At the end, he mentioned the mob mentality (in connection with Trump) was what they feared, as it transforms the masses into animals. In a recent conversation I had here with Rycharde on the individual as opposed to the masses, I mentioned a belief I think might be the cause in regards to the masses and the way they transform.
https://blurtter.com/blurt/@practicalthought/quppng
If you will continue reading down in the back and forth I think you might appreciate it.
Thanks for sharing this video. It's always a pleasure to see studies presented that are a confirmation of what one holds as true from personal observation/feeling.
∴
Yes, I see so much I've witnessed already being affirmed in just the first 4 minutes.
Insider/outsider group dynamics. You can see this play out despite the forced efforts at integration/inclusion. If you watch how groups act, you can see this is not natural for us, as you will see majorities choose segregation into their groupings, often by race.
In the red pill community, it is acknowledged that men are human doings, women are human beings. Men are only valued for our utility. Women are valued for simply being. Men are the builders and caretakers/protectors of society, despite the push to say it isn't so. I have suspected for years this is done on purpose to make societies more easily controlled. Men have been neutered and separated from their roles, castigated that attempts to make claims based on that responsibility are toxic. More harmful is many of these roles (parenting, seeking to ensure justice, protecting and even building without permission and fees) are punishable now as crimes.
He mentions in one mating ritual that 3/4ths of all matings in one group was with only 4 males. This is an interesting validation for what men in the red pill see. Now that women are encouraged to be free in their selection, they in many cases all chase the same small subset of men.
This is interesting as we see the push back from men. I believe that it was observed by smart alpha men in the advanced nations (before they were advanced) that if they were to share the women, it would give the majority of men a reason to help them build empires. They would have a stake by having children to build for. Childless men who have no woman cares little for the most part about many of the things that make up society.
We are seeing this unravel now as the more women demand they will only be with a certain group of men, they are having lots of children that many of this alpha group refuse to take care of. Most of these men will not settle for one woman, they have a harem of women waiting.
The majority of men are finding themselves subsidizing this via taxes and in many cases being tricked into supporting this through deception where they are settled for, but often love bombed until the legal contract of union is signed. Then they find themselves slaves to supporting this dynamic. There is a growing push back occurring, seeing men tired of being disposable assets/slaves.
None of this is leading to a good ending, because as noted, the alpha males in many cases don't care and we are seeing more women and their illegitimate being subsidized for their choices by the state. The state who only exists by majority rule. Once the boiling pot reaches a certain speed, the men who still have a spine react. Even if in some cases it means dropping out and doing as little as necessary to get by.
Now what I will say is that (I hope this is acknowledged although not sure due to political climate it can be) like with all animals with variations, there are differing levels (as an average, not outliers) as to the aggressiveness of the men in terms of territoriality. I've mentioned (not sure but think it was to you) that one of the reasons I believe men of color are targeted with violence by the enforcers of the owners of the human farm are because they are more prone to resistance, and often willing to match violence with violence. Unfortunately they can often include others who are innocent of the offenses they bristle against.
Will continue watching now, although not sure I will have time to finish today. Might comment more afterwards.
Just under a quarter of U.S. men between ages 40 and 50 were childless, and about 17% had never been married by the time they were in their 40s. Both figures were noticeably higher than for women who had reached middle age. Just under 16% of women between ages 40 and 50 were childless, and 14% had never been married, according to the report.
There were also noticeable differences in workforce participation between fathers and mothers with young children. Nearly 90% of fathers whose youngest child was under age 6 were employed, while that figure was only around 60% for mothers, according to the report. There was no difference between the sexes for childless men and women.
https://www.stgeorgeutah.com/news/archive/2019/06/16/apc-census-reveals-percentage-of-us-men-who-are-fathers/#.YM84HOhKh9O