I recently came across this video of a slam poetry Millennial guy protesting the phrase “man up.” I’ve talked before about how today’s younger men are turning into pussies, and my responses to these men’s irrational arguments. This video, while I don’t disagree with all of it, is emblematic of the complaints modern-day young men have about taking charge of their life and getting to work to fix or improve it.

Before I get into this, I want to make it clear that in many respects, young men do indeed have it worse than young men of prior generations. I have talked about this in great detail in all of my books and blogs. The slowly collapsing civilization, declining culture, left-wing politics, massive government overspending, and massive money printing and currency devaluation have all rendered things like making a living and getting (and staying) married more difficult for men than ever before.

Of course this is all true. My disagreement is not with the problem, but with men’s reaction to the problem.

1. Becoming a loser and hiding behind video games is not the answer.

2. Becoming more woman-like is not the answer.

3. Whining on websites about how much everything sucks is not the answer.

4. Looking a white knight to sweep in and fix all of your problems is not the answer, and it doesn’t matter if his name is Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump. (The systemic problems you want these men to fix can’t be fixed anyway.)

No, the answer is to adopt a system of success that works within today’s shitty, real-world realities, and get what you want, or at least most of what you want, despite today’s new problems. That’s what building an Alpha Male 2.0 life is all about.

The guy in the video gives “Ten Responses to the Phrase ‘Man Up.’” I will summarize and respond to each one. To get the full context, just watch the video. Here is his first response:

1. Fuck you.

Though it may not feel like it, usually someone telling you to man up is trying to help you. Rarely are they trying to insult you, attack you, or make you feel bad. They’re telling you that you need to get some balls so that you can fix whatever problem you’re currently experiencing.

“Fuck you” is an easy response, but try to remember that you’re saying that to someone who is legitimately trying to help you. For many years, I have been personally attacked and insulted by numerous men who I was actually trying to help, even if some of the blunt, tough-guy verbiage I used didn’t seem like help was being offered.

2. Not every problem can be solved by “manning up.” That won’t help chemical depression. The CEO who laid you off doesn’t care how much you bench.

If you define manning up as flexing your biceps, or bench pressing, or drinking beer, then you are correct. But you know that the admonition to man up is usually not given in that context. Usually, the context of “man up” means “take some fucking responsibility for yourself and get to work.”

As much as some of you fragile snowflakes hate to hear this, everything in your life is your fault. This is good news, not bad news. This means you have the power to fix, or at least dramatically improve, any problem you encounter.

So yes, manning up will indeed help you address your chemical depression. There are all kinds of effective treatments for chemical depression. Manning up means doing those things, rather than sitting around and whining about how much your life sucks.

And yes, manning up will indeed help you find a new job (or start a small business) much faster if you’re laid off. When you man up, you’ll suck it up and get to work to find a new source of income. Soon, you’ll have one. If you don’t man up, you’ll go on food stamps and play video games and your problem will continue.

3. You think that by saying “man up,” that instantly turns me into some kind of Superman. That’s bullshit.

Correct. If you man up, you’re still the same flawed man you were a few minutes ago. Manning up isn’t going to make you a million dollars next week or get you laid tomorrow.

However, taking responsibly for your actions and conditions and taking the action to solve/improve those conditions will eventually make you a better man, who lives a better life. It won’t happen instantly. It won’t happen tomorrow. It probably won’t even happen next month, but it will happen. It can’t not happen (unless you’re a complete, hopeless idiot).

4. Why free ourselves from our chains, when we can simply compare their lengths?

I can’t really answer this one, since in the video he completely contradicts his answer halfway through. Either he’s being sarcastic, in which case I agree with him (since, as I talk about in my book, getting out of the box is better than staying in the box, even if getting out of the box is painful), or he’s complaining that being manly for manliness’ sake is stupid, in which case I still agree.

5. No one ever says “woman up,” because women learned a long time ago that being ordered around by commercials, magazines, and music is dehumanizing. When will men figure that out?

Commercials? Um, do you mean those commercials that almost universally portray husbands and boyfriends as stupid and wives and girlfriends as smart and in-charge?

Do you mean the constant slew of Top 40 music that portrays men as being hyper-needy, oneitis-stricken beta males?

Are you seriously telling me that the mass media only “orders around” women and not men?

Are you fucking kidding me?

And you’re right; people don’t tell women to “woman up.” You know why? Because most of the time, if a woman requires some true heavy lifting (figurative or literal), she’s going to rely on either a man to do it or government to do it (which is mostly funded by men).

As I’ve talked about many times, most women don’t have to woman up. Boyfriends, husbands, friend zone guys, and/or the welfare state will take care of them. As a man, I don’t really have the option of going to Match.com and finding some woman who will marry me and pay most or all of my bills for me for the rest of my life. Women do. As a man, I don’t have the option of having a baby or two pop out of my body and getting free money from my government because of it for as long as I want. Women do. Et cetera. Of course people don’t tell women to “women up.”

6. The phrase “man up” suggests that competence and perseverance are uniquely masculine traits. This is offensive to both women and men who act more feminine.

Oh boy. This one has “Millennial” written all over it. No other generation in my lifetime, be it the World War II generation, the Baby Boomers, or my Generation X, each with all of their own problems, has never been this touchy or oversensitive about identity politics or the use of certain words.

I hear this kind of hypersensitive, pussy bullshit from the Millennial generation on almost a daily basis, and that even includes Millennials who are not going to college, as well as those who are more right-wing.

If I tell you to man up, and you immediately assume that I devalue women or less masculine men, you are either:

1. Hypersensitive beyond belief and require mental health counseling,

2. A college student, and need to drop out of college immediately before the politically correct brainwashing in your mind is made permanent or,

3. A lazy male bitch who is trying to make excuses to get out of taking charge of your life and getting to work.

7. How many boys have to kill themselves before this country acknowledges the problem?

What is the problem you’re referring to? Are you seriously telling me that parents are harder on boys now than they were decades ago, when your dad made you do chores every day and when you were hit with a belt whenever you talked back to him? Back when you had no internet, no computer, no smartphone, no movies at home, and no microwave oven?

Really, Snowflake? Are we really harder on boys now, in terms of telling them to man up, than in the 1930s?

Or are we softer on today’s men? A lot softer?

8. Boy babies get blue socks. Girl babies get pink socks. What about purple socks?

What’s wrong with society assigning a specific color to each gender? Is this really such a serious problem?

9. I want to be able to express myself emotionally. I want to have meaningful, emotional relationships with other people, including other men.

Finally, something we agree on. Yes, the angry, repressed, right-wing, overly-religious Alpha Male 1.0 father yelling at his son to “man up and stop crying” is not a good idea, and does more harm than good. Telling someone to man up and stop crying, or to stop feeling bad, is a waste of everyone’s time and doesn’t help anything.

However, telling someone to man up in order to get into action and get moving to solve or alleviate the problems that a man is having is not only warranted, but something we in our society don’t do enough of any more.

There’s nothing wrong with feeling bad if something bad happens to you. There is something wrong with feeling bad and sitting around, doing nothing about it other than complaining about it on the internet.

Feel bad all you want, but feel bad while you’re taking action to better your life. In other words, man up.

10. No.

You don’t want to man up? That’s fine. I’m an individualist, and I think everyone should make their own decisions in life and be allowed to do so. However, this means accepting the results of your decisions.

Refusing to man up is fine, but it also means:

1. You will never be happy. Your life will oscillate from shitty to mediocre for the rest of your days.

2. You will never be free. Your life will be forever controlled by men who have more money/power than you, and by women.

3. You will never live the life you really want. You will spend the rest of your life looking at other men who have what you want and burn with anger, jealousy, and sadness.

So sure. Don’t man up. Just sit around and complain about how much everything sucks, and how nothing is fair, and how women, or Muslims, or Trump supporters, or SJWs have screwed up your society. Just sit around like a child, playing video games and watching Netflix, and wait around forever for someone else to fix your problems, which will never happen.

Or, you could man up, and live the life you want, or at least close to it.

The choice is yours.

first date advice, first online date, online dating advice, meaning of an open relationship, alpha male traits

80 Comments on “Why Young Men Don’t Want to Man Up

  1. Interesting article BD! I remember the very day about 10 years ago when I decided to accept that everything in my life is my fault. Biggest turning point I’ve ever had.

  2. Great article BD. The most important part of the message is that it is each individual’s fault. Quite how that gets hammered home though is anyone’s guess.

    Happy New Year to you and all. 🙂

  3. this is a good post.

    after reading “the manipulated man” and “the polygamous sex” by esther vilar, and realizing the sad state of affairs of men-women power politics (women gets lots of stuff simply because they are the gatekeepers of sex).

    this post has lifted me up a bit, as being the master of your destiny is something that women cannot achieve being the lazy ass bums that they are (and is a better life for me, personally)

    Although this is a harder life to purse, it can be more fulfuling.

  4. Really, Snowflake? Are we really harder on boys now, in terms of telling them to man up, than in the 1930s?
    Or are we softer on today’s men? A lot softer?

    I laughed so hard at this one, hahaha. Unfortunately it’s sooo true, those whiners are everywhere. I’d also like to point that women were a lot harder on their kids a while back.
    I remember vividly my mom telling me after I graduated (had no job at the time): “you have two months to get a job, any job, or else you’ll come back to live with us and I will get you one of my choosing. My money is not free you know”. Talk about a wake up call, LOL.

  5. I’m surprised at just how ingrained college makes the beta-ness. I was talking with someone the other day and a chick had offered the dude a drink but he wanted something else so he said ‘get me a blank’ and then she acted offended and he immediately apologized for ordering her to do something. But he didn’t leave it there, insisting on apologizing a second time because ‘men are horrible’. The interesting thing about that was the chick refused to accept his second apology and directly said that men aren’t. It was a weird argument to watch; some guy trying to say ‘men suck’ and some chick saying ‘no they don’t’.

  6. I think I get where he’s coming from, which is that men for centuries have been marginalized and only allowed to express themselves in very limited ways. And he’s right. It’s time for men to take their power back, in a 2.0 way and living life on their own terms. I haven’t heard him talk about wanting to sit back and only play video games and doing nothing with his life and I don’t think that this is what he means. If he does, then I agree with your response. That’s the worst decision any man can make. But being a disposable ‘masculine’ male is just as bad, if not worse. I watched a good video yesterday talking about this… coping with it and moving forward. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ljl6Z9I4QTc

  7. Young men should embrace the reality.

    Tom Torero says “Suck it up”, it is a great episode from his podcast. Listen it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcSeo_xpMOw

  8. @Rick

    You have a twisted view of reality.

    “which is that men for centuries have been marginalized and only allowed to express themselves in very limited ways.”

    This is false. 70 years ago, during the second world war, there was no political correctness. If a man wanted to say something like “women are inferior to men in every way. No strength, no honor and no will to fight for our country so it is clear we are boss and they follow” – most people would have nodded.

    This is true in other areas as well. Like “damn fucking stupid nigger cant do anything right – do this again and you are fired!” Nobody would have sued the man, nor called for a social media shitstorm back in the day.

    To sum it up, the marginalization of men is a rather new experience, dating back to the 90s or so.

    It may have something to do with our society becoming so rich, so cozy that men have become soft and weak. This guy is a perfect example for it.

    The best anser to the rejection of man-up has been provided by POB above:

    “I remember vividly my mom telling me after I graduated (had no job at the time): “you have two months to get a job, any job, or else you’ll come back to live with us and I will get you one of my choosing. My money is not free you know”. Talk about a wake up call, LOL.”

    THIS. His mother was fucking cool.

  9. @Maldek Perfect SP response haha. Beautiful. I wasn’t talking about P.C. Watch more of the content provided by Spetsnaz. It’s way too big of a topic to write this all down here.

    BTW Caleb, you say that the phrase is usually used to help someone, which is true. People like Roosh and his Neo Masculinity, tradcons, etc. all use this phrase as well. Meaning: get monogamous, get married (without signing a prenup), etc. in other words, MAN UP! Your version is the right one, but that version isn’t always meant by people.

    Have a good X-mas.

  10. Great analysis.

    A red-pill friend of mine just mentioned this video last night an how utter lost this guy is on the meaning of “man up” as we also discussed solid truths on this blog from Blackdragon. It’s amazing coincidence that this post appears just a few hours later.

    Is it hypocritical that this male, who disdains the idea of manning-up, even referring to the color of one’s socks as an gender identifier,  appears to tipify what he’s railing against — a black-clad bad-boy replete with bad-ass facial hair and masculine tats. Why not present his diatribe in a unisex, gender neutral purple sarong or toga, instead of identify with *Arab* women, who traditionally wear all black. This is obviously a cultural appropriation faux pas on his part, as I could not accuse him of purposely dressing his inner female simply based on his choice of shirt and hat color.

    I’d like to add another phrase to the cultural venacular, especially as it applies to this video:  de-douche.

  11. My gf has a friend zone orbiter. I finally got tired of the guy and my raging Alpha 1.0 came out. I’m working on my 2.0 but fell off the wagon. So, I call orbiter and I got a stream of millennial SJW whining. Reminded me of the Obama “pajama boy”. After about 2 mins I realized how ridiculous this was. This young guy couldn’t get laid to save his life. I thought about giving him the “man up” talk but figured it would be lost on him. I’m stunned at the generation of pansies the West is raising. Not my son, of course. He has always understood he will grow into a take-charge man, and has.

  12. BTW Caleb, you say that the phrase is usually used to help someone, which is true. People like Roosh and his Neo Masculinity, tradcons, etc. all use this phrase as well. Meaning: get monogamous, get married (without signing a prenup), etc. in other words, MAN UP! Your version is the right one, but that version isn’t always meant by people.

    Good point, but I think the phrase you’re talking about is “grow up,” more than “man up.” “Hey, stop fucking all these girls and grow up. Get legally married and monogamous and chop off your balls. That’s what a real man does.” The messaging is slightly different.

  13. Wow, The picture you added at the end is not only visually a nice picture but inspiring and related to this content. Good work

  14. You seem to think that the past is the present, or how things were can be brought back.  That the roles and responsibilities of men of old, can be forced onto men now, in a completely changed world.

    It has all changed, it is never going to be like it was.

    Man up?

    No.

  15. So yes, manning up will indeed help you address your chemical depression. There are all kinds of effective treatments for chemical depression. Manning up means doing those things, rather than sitting around and whining about how much your life sucks.

    THANK YOU!

    This is something more people need to hear. Mental health is an issue I care strongly about (mental health issues run in my family), I have issues with it and I’m very familiar with the stigma that comes with it.

    Getting treatment for a malfunctioning brain is no different than getting treatment for malfunctioning lungs (asthma), malfunctioning blood clotting (hemophilia), or broken bones.

     Yes, the angry, repressed, right-wing, overly-religious Alpha Male 1.0 father yelling at his son to “man up and stop crying” is not a good idea, and does more harm than good. Telling someone to man up and stop crying, or to stop feeling bad, is a waste of everyone’s time and doesn’t help anything.

    Agree completely. Repression of emotions just exacerbates issues, not helps them. I have a tendency to repress my emotions until I blow up, but I’ve put a lot of effort into talking about issues before it gets to that point (or just avoiding things that trigger negative emotions to begin with, which has mostly worked).

     

  16. First of all, the “Millenial” hit pieces are always annoying. Millenials are not a monolith, and apparently spans everyone who is currently 18-34 in the entire country. A low percentage are Social Justice Warriors or give much a crap about identity politics. When people talk about the “Boomers” or “Gen X” it’s usually not too flattering, either. Talking about generations is just another way people assign blame to everyone but themselves. Hell, the Boomers and Gen X raised the Millenials, so square that.

     

    Anyway, I agree that our country has become more pussified over time for various reasons.

    However there is a problem with the term “man up” and “alpha male” generally. It’s not identity politics or sexism like this terrible Slam Poet is stating. It’s the fact that pretty much every man has a different idea of what an “alpha male” is. Many men do think it’s an over-muscled brute who is highly reactive, angry, volatile, ego-driven, impulsive, pig-headedly stubborn, myopic, and violent. In the Middle East they probably think they need to “man up” to strap on a suicide vest.

    In that regard, the term “man up” is quite hollow and empty. And actually, back in my high school days, I remember it being a common means of manipulation between men. “Hey do this.” … “Hell no” …. “Oh c’mon, don’t be a pussy.”

     

    We do need to ‘man up’ in this country – but I think we’re still figuring out exactly what that means. Yes you have a lot of material on the subject, but your stuff isn’t exactly what’s blaring out the TV idiot box 24/7.

  17. Depression mostly comes from the inability to understand that you are to be blamed for your situation.

    People get into depression because something bad happens and they wonder why. “Am I such a bad person?” “Why this happened to me?” “I worked so hard but yadda yadda”. All kind of questions come pouring into you and you have no idea how to proceed and fix things or why these things happened in the first place.

  18. Bravo.

    I will say that college helped me man the fuck up. My degree led directly to an excellent job along with a sharper mind. Of course, there’s not that much room for social justice in mathematics.

  19. Dude has a wedding ring on, I can almost guarantee he is sick and tired of hearing ‘Man Up’ from his wife so he had to passive aggressively air out his feelings during slam poetry night.

  20. Depression mostly comes from the inability to understand that you are to be blamed for your situation.

    People get into depression because something bad happens and they wonder why. “Am I such a bad person?” “Why this happened to me?” “I worked so hard but yadda yadda”. All kind of questions come pouring into you and you have no idea how to proceed and fix things or why these things happened in the first place.

    Although I concur with the “taking responsibility” part, things are not that simple, specially when you’re young, still heavily influenced by your surroundings and dependable on others. Depression is a serious issue that needs to be addressed properly with the help of a professional. But if you’re depressed and not seeking that kind of help (to understand where your issues are coming from) then I fully agree it’s your fucking fault.

    To me the main problem is not the misuse of terms like “Alpha” or “man up”, nor the general whining or rants, but rather a complete lack of masculine role models. Young guys have absolutely no one to look after.

    The few known “Alphas” left in this world are too old or too vilified, and not being replaced properly. And it’s only getting worse with the massive pussyfication of men.

    Sadly we’re becoming a dying breed, almost like a secret cult of sorts…even so it’s guys like us who still get shit done on a daily basis, fuck women like they should be fucked and make other people happy by our masculine actions and leadership.

     

  21. Yes this is what I mean. In most cases depression comes from not understanding how the world works. If you understand and accept this automatically any problem you face will be dealt with action not depression.
    Young ones who have real guidance and not BS are very lucky. Having this is far better than growing up with a pile of money.

  22. Depression mostly comes from the inability to understand that you are to be blamed for your situation.

    and

    In most cases depression comes from not understanding how the world works. If you understand and accept this automatically any problem you face will be dealt with action not depression.

     

    I think we have a different definition of depression, which when I use that word I refer to clinical (brain chemistry related) depression which as nothing to do with blame, a bad situation or misunderstanding the world.

    Could have an incredible life with everything you could ever want, but then you experience anhedonia (unable to experience pleasure). Then the unavoidable obsessive thoughts about existential questions (what’s the point of anything). Then lethargy (can’t get out of bed, completely sapped of energy) and a whole host of other symptoms of depression.

     

    You are not to blame for your situation, anymore than you are to blame if you suddenly get brain cancer.

    The hard part is that the problem involves malfunction to the part of your body responsible for making rational decisions (the brain). In my experience though, the issues that prevent people from getting medical help with mental illness are either:

    A) Their ego prevents them from admitting they have a problem, in which case the “Man up” argument here applies. Drop the ego bullshit and just fix the problem. But they might also be on the verge of…

    B) They can’t even see that they have a problem or the illness is too severe and they’re too far out of touch with reality to make any rational decisions. Which there is very little you or anyone else can do at this point until they become a danger to themselves or others.

    However if you’re just talking about neurotypical people without a mental health issue being upset with the state of things in their life… I wouldn’t call that depressed, just whiny. Which is then where I’d agree with the “do something about it instead of complaining” mentality.

  23. Yes I believe we have different definition of depression. I’m not expert but in the last 20 years or so the numbers of men committing suicide has gone up. Do you think it has to do something with real depression or society and existential issues?

    Real depression comes from something very bad that happened to you in childhood and the memory is so intense that you cannot forget it(or some anomaly in your brain). Real depression is spread throughout your life. Whereas the depression I’m talking about is for few short periods in your entire life. These kind of depressions develop exactly because people build on expectations and when these expectations are not met they go “crazy”. Existential questions are normal but they are not a reason for depression. Most people suffer from this kind of depression, not the real one which is a disease.

  24. Could have an incredible life with everything you could ever want, but then you experience anhedonia (unable to experience pleasure). Then the unavoidable obsessive thoughts about existential questions (what’s the point of anything). Then lethargy (can’t get out of bed, completely sapped of energy) and a whole host of other symptoms of depression.

    I don’t really think men with incredible life and everything they really want will EVER experience depression(and I’m not talking about the real one). You have a huge misconception about really incredible life. A rich guy with a beautiful wife is not necessarily happy or has an incredible life. When he does not get sex from his wife, he wonders why. When his wife disrespects him even though he brings pile of money in the house he wonders why. Then when he experiences all the stuff you mention it is whining, not depression(at least the one you are talking about).

  25. If you want a good description of what actual depression is read this: http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2011/10/adventures-in-depression.html?m=1 and http://hyperboleandahalf.blogspot.com/2013/05/depression-part-two.html?m=1

    If you’re not talking about something similar, you’re talking about ‘feeling bad’ or some such thing.

    Whichever the case may be the ‘man up’ advice applies. You can’t will yourself out of (real) depression, but you can will yourself to seek help.

    It’s your fault that you’re not seeking help when you’re faced with a problem you can’t deal with alone. Humans are a communal species, not a bunch of loners. Having that community support lets us solve more problems and build bigger things than we’d ever be able to solo. Sometimes you’ll be faced with a task where you need someone else to help you solve it — man up applies: take responsibility for the situation and do something to resolve it.

  26. Again real depression comes from two things: 1) Either by bad childhood experiences and 2) Brain damage(This is probably what the guy above talks about in the links you gave me).

    Any sort of depression because of: 1) You dump betas and visit the psychologist because you feel bad about them is not real depression 2) You were monogamous to women then getting a divorce after divorce after divorce eventually crippling your finances and feeling bad about it is not real depression…You get the point.

    The first instance is out of your control. The second instance is because you were clueless about how the world works and eventually this caught up to you. The feelings you have is because you spend your entire life believing in lies and now you have no idea how to deal with these lies. In the first instance there is no chance in the world that you can get out of it. In the second instance it is about you taking action and get out of it. The second instance is the reason for most suicides in the last 20+ years. This is because men grow up and lead their lives with increasing lies.

  27. We agree on points 1 and 2, they’re not real depression. I think we might disagree (or maybe not?) on the resolution and whose fault it is…

    If it’s real depression that it happened probably isn’t your fault, that you’re currently depressed also probably isn’t your fault. That you aren’t taking steps to resolve it is definitely your fault. The above links have her hiding inside surfing the web instead of realizing that there’s a problem that needs external help to resolve and doing something about it. It can be tough, but waiting for magic to happen probably won’t solve your problems. (Until, of course, people convinced her to seek professional help and things started getting better)

    If it’s not real depression and you’re just feeling down it may or may not be your fault, but you still need to take action to resolve the situation. If you think talking to a doctor is going to help, you might be wrong, but at least you’re doing something instead of waiting for someone else to solve your problems for you.

  28. Well I have much experience from people that are and were around me so the real depression is not your fault and you cannot do anything to get out of it(help will just give you a boost for a time, but will not help you in the long run).

    The latter one which is not a real depression(and people call it depression) is something you can avoid in the first place. The thing is you might feel REALLY bad two or three times in your life(And those instances are not your fault as you are learning about life) but these times you should sit down and understand why they happen. So you can avoid these situations in the future or have yourself more prepared psychologically. If you don’t do anything about it you will keep repeating mistakes, they will pile up and they will come at you when you are old enough to feel useless to do anything about them. I wouldn’t blame the young guy who was dumped by his first gf and committed suicide(as he was still learning about life and probably grew up to be weak), but the guy who was dumped 3-4 times and committed suicide because he got frustrated with life is at fault. Then people say he had depression because his last gf dumped him. The real reason is he committed suicide because he was a clueless guy and so proud to ask help or try to find the right information.

  29. So there are manosphere blogs telling people to marry without a prenup?

    Ghastly stupidity, or sadism, I wonder which of the two it is the most.

  30. Getting treatment for a malfunctioning brain is no different than getting treatment for malfunctioning lungs (asthma), malfunctioning blood clotting (hemophilia), or broken bones.

    Correct.

    People are so addicted to their own excuses. It’s sickening.

    the “Millenial” hit pieces are always annoying

    Facts often are.

    Millenials are not a monolith, and apparently spans everyone who is currently 18-34 in the entire country. A low percentage are Social Justice Warriors or give much a crap about identity politics.

    That doesn’t contradict one word I said in the above article.

    When people talk about the “Boomers” or “Gen X” it’s usually not too flattering, either. Talking about generations is just another way people assign blame to everyone but themselves. Hell, the Boomers and Gen X raised the Millenials, so square that.

    You don’t justify bad behavior by pointing out bad behavior from other sources.

    I have bashed the Baby Boomer generation on numerous occasions for over 25 years, going all the way back to my public speaking days in the 1990s. The Boomers are perhaps the worst, most damaging generation (so far) in the last 120 years. I also know that my own Gen X have very serious problems, particularly the promotion of single motherhood.

    Again, none of that changes one thing I said about the Millennial generation. The Millennials are the most pussified, hypersensitive generation to come down the pike in my lifetime, period, end of story, regardless of the other shitty generations we have. 50 years from now they may even end up being worse than the Boomers or the X’s (but I’m not saying that yet… let’s see how this country ends up when the fucking Millennials are in charge; not that I care, I’ll be far away by then).

    Dude has a wedding ring on, I can almost guarantee he is sick and tired of hearing ‘Man Up’ from his wife so he had to passive aggressively air out his feelings during slam poetry night.

    Haha! I didn’t notice that. Very interesting!

  31. 5. No one ever says “woman up,” because women learned a long time ago that being ordered around by commercials, magazines, and music is dehumanizing. When will men figure that out?

    Typical Millenial equalist mindset. He goes under the assumption that since we are equal, then what a man ought to do is the same for a woman. The female equivalent would be “Act like a Lady”, but women reject it far more fiercely, than men do, since it requires them to act in a way that appeals to men(how misogynist of us)

    7. How many boys have to kill themselves before this country acknowledges the problem?

    I understand where he’s coming from. Highest suicide rate among men are when they hit adulthood and in their mid 50’s. Both very fragile period of a man’s life. The problem is not telling a young man to “Man Up”. The problem is telling him that but at the same time considering masculinity as Toxic, where if you are a young man, you are a potential rapist, if you are an old man you are a potential pedophile, if you are husband, you are a potential woman beater, and if you are a father you are a deadbeat dad. The problem with society is setting high standards for men, without the resources and support to achieve those standards.

     

    9. I want to be able to express myself emotionally. I want to have meaningful, emotional relationships with other people, including other men.

    Again, he comes from the assumption that we are equal and if women are emotional and express their feelings, we should do it too. We are not wired the same way, we do not have the same needs, and even when we do, the priority for those needs is different. Women love to express their feelings and vent. They have the luxury to go around talk about how they feel without needing to take action. They have an entire society set up to cater to their needs. We as men, do not.
    We are action oriented. I remember one Sunday I had nothing to do so I decided to catch up with my mother over skype. We talked for hours, which I rarely do. I shared with her my thoughts and concerns about a few things in my life. At the end of the long chat she was happy that we talked and “connected”. I, on the other hand, had a MASSIVE, MASSIIIVE head ache. I couldn’t sleep well that night. I behaved like a woman, I vented and took no action. So stupid of me.

  32. The problem is not telling a young man to “Man Up”. The problem is telling him that but at the same time considering masculinity as Toxic, where if you are a young man, you are a potential rapist, if you are an old man you are a potential pedophile, if you are husband, you are a potential woman beater, and if you are a father you are a deadbeat dad. The problem with society is setting high standards for men, without the resources and support to achieve those standards.

    Well said.

    Again, he comes from the assumption that we are equal and if women are emotional and express their feelings, we should do it too.

    Yes. Another Millennial concept is that men and women are equal in all things, and to even suggest any hardcore differences is somehow harmful. So yes, many of the opinions from these people stem from this baseline assumption. I often forget about this (since the concept that men and women exactly the same and must therefore act the same is not only factually wrong, but an alien concept to me).

  33. I think the big difference here for the message of “man-up” is the medium.  Fellow men trying to help you better yourself might tell you to man-up to get you out of a rut and back on top.

    Man-up coming from a woman is a different animal.  It’s just a shaming tactic to get you to conform to her agenda which you are clearly not doing.  It’s just like any ultimatum from a woman-it comes from a place of powerlessness and fear.  My questioning your manhood, they can manipulate  less informed and weaker men.

  34. On depression and mental illness:

    I wholeheartedly believe that there is literally no such thing as mental illness or depression in any real biological, clinical, or medical sense. These are just metaphors we use for emotional or psychological problems, which do exist but are not physical, or just partially physical. And to the extent that they are physical, they can be cured with things like exercise, proper diet, orange juice, and sunlight.

    Mostly however, emotional or psychological pain is due to your personality, which you can change. If some people can’t change because they’re too weak, so be it. But that doesn’t mean that depression or so called “mental illness” has any scientific or medical basis for existing in the non-fictional world (it doesn’t).

    Real doctors use pathologists to prove the existence of real diseases. But to prove mental illness, psychiatrists use lawyers. Most mental illnesses can be cured by simply converting to another culture (which defines your condition as healthy) or reframing your mindset. When you go get professional “therapy” the “doctor” will do nothing but talk to you (which anyone can do), or prescribe you poison pills designed to correct an unspecified and immeasurable “chemical imbalance” which has never been x-rayed, scanned, studied, observed, or proven. These drugs cause actual chemical imbalances in the brain, thus leading to real psychotic behavior.

    As a friend of mine once put it, “If I take a drug preventing my heart from beating faster than normal, I can say that I have cured fear, since fear makes my heart beat faster. But if I disable my heart from beating faster, the next time I’m afraid, my heart will have to overcompensate and beat three times as fast just to counteract the pills, which will lead to a heart attack. Is it any wonder most depressed mass shooters were on anti-depressants? By disabling the sadness chemicals in their brains, the next time they were sad, their brains had to pump 10 times more sadness chemicals just to overcome the meds, which led to murder/suicide. Then the psychiatrists regret not prescribing a stronger dose. Morons.”

    As the brilliant mental illness myth exposing documentary “Generation RX” put it, “This nonsense will continue until a less medical, more philosophical, approach to the human personality finally prevails.”

    The myth of mental illness (in the clinical sense) is extremely dangerous and horrifying to any red pill libertarian for two reasons:

    1. It violates human rights.

    As libertarians, we believe that only a small government should have the right to use physical force. But today, we have two institutions which legally use physical force against us – the government and psychiatry. And psychiatry doesn’t have any Constitutional limitations. This means that all of your human rights fly out the window (including your right to an attorney, right to remain silent, right to not be tortured) if we simply substitute the word “punishment” with the word “help.” The myth of mental illness is simply used by non-libertarians to justify the application of force against those who do not wish to be forced, even going so far as branding certain unpopular political opinions as “mental diseases” like in the former Soviet Union. The concept of “mental illness” and “psychiatry” is really nothing but one big human rights violation, justifying anti-libertarian laws, such as laws against suicide, etc…

    2. It disempowers people and prevents men from becoming alphas by telling them that everything they’ve accomplished is the result of “chemical luck” and if they can’t accomplish something, it’s not their fault, but simply the result of uncontrollable chemicals. This is the opposite type of belief system that is conducive to living an alpha 2.0 lifestyle or long term happiness.

    TL:DR: There is no such thing as medical mental illness. The only thing that’s real is being a pussy!

    For more info on mental illness in light of the red pill, check out:

    http://www.antipsychiatry.org/

     

     

     

  35. BD,
    How would you handle this situation: you make more than your wife/OLTR and you both work full time, so she does most of the housework. Then she gets promoted and makes more than you, and insists you do most of the housework. It makes sense since she makes more money now. However, deep down you know that doing housework will make you less attractive to her, so relationship problems will ensue. And hiring third-party help is not an option.

    Thanks,

    Brad

     

  36. The fact that you are doing housework is not making you unattractive. its the fact you are making less than her.

    women are psychopaths, when they don’t need you, you get thrown away.

  37. How would you handle this situation: you make more than your wife/OLTR and you both work full time, so she does most of the housework. Then she gets promoted and makes more than you, and insists you do most of the housework. It makes sense since she makes more money now. However, deep down you know that doing housework will make you less attractive to her, so relationship problems will ensue. And hiring third-party help is not an option.

    I already make a high income, so if she suddenly made more than me, hiring third-party help would indeed be the option, and that’s exactly what we’d do.

    If you want to take a hypothetical of a live-in couple who both make a lower income, let’s say $25K per year, and suddenly the woman makes $35K per year, then yes, she would have every right to demand he does more than 50% of the housework, assuming she starts paying more of the monthly bills than he does. However, if she took that extra $10K per year and shoved it into a savings account instead of supporting the household, then no, she can’t demand he do anything different.

    Who does the housework has nothing to do with gender and has little to do with income; it’s about which of them is paying most of the household bills every month. The one who pays less must do more housework, since that person is being financially supported to some degree. I explain this in item number 8 right here.

  38. The original article there sounds like it was written by a male feminist. I don’t know if he is a male feminist, but there’s clearly a lot of overlap.

  39. The original article there sounds like it was written by a male feminist. I don’t know if he is a male feminist, but there’s clearly a lot of overlap.

    I think it’s worse than that. I think the guy in the video is representative of the new normal of how most young men view the world.

    I’m not saying the vast majority of Millennials are hardcore SJW-leftists. I’m saying that the vast majority of today’s Millennial men watching that video would either be nodding in agreement or at least see nothing wrong with it.

  40. You seem to think that the past is the present, or how things were can be brought back.

    No. That is the opposite of what I believe.

    That the roles and responsibilities of men of old, can be forced onto men now, in a completely changed world.

    No. That is the opposite of what I believe.

    Do you see me telling men to get legally married and monogamous and have a bunch of kids and go work at a “good job” for the rest of your life?

    It has all changed, it is never going to be like it was.

    Correct.

    Man up?

    No.

    Then you’re fucked. Read the article above about what saying no to that means.

  41. I wholeheartedly believe that there is literally no such thing as mental illness or depression in any real biological, clinical, or medical sense. These are just metaphors we use for emotional or psychological problems, which do exist but are not physical, or just partially physical. And to the extent that they are physical, they can be cured with things like exercise, proper diet, orange juice, and sunlight.

    This is the mental stigma people with mental illness deal with, and is part of the problem in why they don’t seek treatment.

    The brain is a physical organ, and physical problems in the brain can easily manifest as emotional and psychological problems.

    Real doctors use pathologists to prove the existence of real diseases. But to prove mental illness, psychiatrists use lawyers.

    No, they use the DSM. Cognitive science is in it’s infancy, and psychiatry/psychology have more in common with proto-sciences (I’ve written about this here: http://blog.ethereal.engineering/2014/03/psychology-and-psychiatry-are-proto.html ). They are flawed, but evidence based.

    When you go get professional “therapy” the “doctor” will do nothing but talk to you (which anyone can do), or prescribe you poison pills designed to correct an unspecified and immeasurable “chemical imbalance” which has never been x-rayed, scanned, studied, observed, or proven.

    You are very incorrect on this. First off my doctor originally did genetic tests to determine if I have any markers that could contribute to issues (I have genes that reduce my ability to absorb vitamin B12 apparently) and blood tests to determine levels of the drugs in my blood.

    They know the pharmacological profiles of the drugs, and they have some level of understanding about the effects the receptors the drug has a binding affinity for will trigger.

    Eventually we might very well have receptor mapping in the brain, as there are some chemicals such as 2-(4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-[(2-methoxyphenyl)methyl]ethanamine which can be radiolabelled and is a highly potent full agonist for the human 5-HT2A receptor. Serotonin systems are strongly related to the expressed behavior of humans, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are a commonly used class of anti-depressants.

    Once we get to a level where receptors in individuals can be mapped along with reuptake rates calculated, we will be able to correlate the behavioral disorders with physically measurable results that a pathologist could diagnose.

    There are also several other avenues of treatment, and each person is different. You have SNRIs, SDRIs, SSRIs, NMDA antagonists, and some others I forget at the moment, as all the different classes of depression treating drugs. Each works better for different people, based on an underlying physical state of the brain we can’t yet measure yet.

    But we’re getting there.

    So when you say

    TL:DR: There is no such thing as medical mental illness. The only thing that’s real is being a pussy!

    I just say you’re ignorant, and reinforcing the negative stigma that leads to some people not seeking treatment. Don’t be a dick.

  42. Depression is like ADHD. There are actual, real cases of people who have it, but it’s way overdiagnosed, which leaves a lot of people skeptical and those who actually have it are treated suspiciously. Not cool. Everyone has periods of depression in their lives but that is not the same as having life debilitating clinical depression.

    In any case, it’s all too often used as an excuse. I had a rough childhood, parents that both suffered from depression and drug addiction and multiple other reasons that I could give as reasons to give up if I chose to. I choose not to- and I’m a woman so it’s not even “manning up”.

    People who are extremely successful almost always overcame reasons that other people would give for not being successful. It’s all relative.

  43. Context matters. An older man who has seen tough times telling a younger man “hey, man up, we got work to do” is not the same as a harpy wife screeching “MAN UP” at the husband she’s killing with stress on the installment plan. Neither are the same as a feminist with a broken fingernail who just losted all her GirlPower and needs a man to move her laptop or carry her mocha-soy-milk-latte to a different table, who suddenly orders the nearest male human to “man up!” and help her. In fact, “Man up” from any woman at all, maybe with the exception of a mother or sister, should be responded to with a long, loud, laugh followed by a backturn. Because girls don’t have the right to those words.

    Worse yet are the older White Knights in institutions like colleges or churches telling the millennial men “Man up! Marry those wonderful, wonderful women” which really means “ManUP and marry that slut!”. Yeah, so she can have her 1.9 children, then frivorce when the youngests is 4 years old and get all the White Knights to help her toss her man out of the house, sure, that’s a great deal. Anyone who hasn’t heard this form of “ManUP” hasn’t been around any of the traditional conservative white knights that are still quite common in a lot of parts of the country.

    With all that said, I don’t see that vid as representing all Millennial men, or all men. But maybe it does represent all slam poets – all emotion, no reason. Slam poetry is not exactly Socratic dialog.

  44. What represents a lot of men is whining and bitching and moaning on the manosphere about how bad they have it and how awful it is that women have any rights or work outside the home instead of catering to them all day- then in the next breath they start talking about how they shouldn’t have to pay for dates. It’s just ridiculous and as bad as any feminist hypocrisy. Then they complain about “sluts” and whatever happened to these virtuous women right on sites dedicated to trying to have sex with them on the first date. It’s all so absurd and ironic but of course it’s all the fault of women and how awful we are.

    They complain about being sucked dry for child support- yet out of all the single moms I know, not a single one is getting child support. I can include myself now since I haven’t gotten any in months. The truth is there are more women manning up nowadays than there are men- because women are usually left with the responsibility of taking care of children and we don’t have any choice. So yes, you will hear women telling you to man up. Man up and take responsibility for your children, man up and pay your bills, man up and do what men are supposed to do before whining that women aren’t playing their role. We can’t because we are too busy having to man up ourselves.

  45. Golly, looks like I triggered a Special Snowflake. Here’s Lovergirl’s latest problem: Her Radioman isn’t around.

    I wondered, could I really be faithful to someone like Radioman? I know he would want that. From what I know of his ex wife, she got BORED. Also, he struggles financially with all the child support he pays, having 3 children with three different women.

    How many foolish decisions can we see in just one paragraph?You still don’t have the authority to say “Man Up”, dearie. Nothing personal, there are quite a few men who don’t have that authority either.

  46. Um, that was a random guy I was sleeping with last February. Not sure what that has to do with anything. I didn’t talk to him for 8 months and now we have sex occasionally. He’s just a fuck buddy and not the only one. You’re not making any kind of point.

  47. What represents a lot of men is whining and bitching and moaning on the manosphere about how bad they have it and how awful it is that women have any rights or work outside the home instead of catering to them all day- then in the next breath they start talking about how they shouldn’t have to pay for dates. It’s just ridiculous and as bad as any feminist hypocrisy.

    I completely agree with you. I think women should go to fucking work and should have all the rights and responsibilities outside of the home as men. Therefore, unlike those traditional conservative manosphere guys, I have every right to complain that women expect me to pay for dates in order to have sex with them. It’s complete bullshit. She should pay for half, I should pay for half, period. It’s called equality, which is what women have been screaming about for decades.

    Of course I’m not stupid and I realize that kind of logic doesn’t fly in the real world, so I go ahead and pay for the entire date to avoid chick logic arguments and ASD, but, I focus on spending the minimum amount on cheap dates to get to sex with a new woman.

    They complain about being sucked dry for child support- yet out of all the single moms I know, not a single one is getting child support.

    Anecdotal and thus completely irrelevant.

    Millions of men pay child support, and the way the law collects child support is unfair to men in the extreme, as I describe in detail here.

    The truth is there are more women manning up nowadays than there are men

    I know, and this is a bad thing, not a good thing. This society is collapsing right now, right before our eyes because of it.

    because women are usually left with the responsibility of taking care of children and we don’t have any choice

    Incorrect. Women have a choice. They choose whether or not to have children, and choose the man to father those children, as I describe here.

    Everything in your life is your fault. Don’t ever say you don’t have a choice. You do, man or woman.

    Man up and take responsibility for your children, man up and pay your bills, man up and do what men are supposed to do before whining that women aren’t playing their role.

    I agree completely. At the same time, women should keep their damn legs shut when some loser wants to cum inside them.

    The fault regarding this child support stuff is not just men or women. It’s both.

  48. Men also made a choice to have a child but in many cases they are able to escape the responsibility whereas women are not. My choice to have children was made equally between my ex husband and I during marriage but now it is only me who has any responsibility towards them. Especially since I have “manned up” and make more money than my ex does in order to support said children. There is now virtually no chance of my collecting child support. I know a lot of single moms and don’t know any who are able to collect child support. Many men manage to wriggle their way out of that one and refuse to man up to their own choices. It takes two people to make a baby.

  49. @TA:

    This is the mental stigma

    It is actually the belief in the mental illness myth that causes stigma. Imagine someone saying, “I am mentally ill” vs. “I have some emotional weaknesses from time to time.” The latter statement is not stigmatizing and it’s something we can all relate to. But the former statement has lots of stigma to it, especially since it draws a fictional line between people who are “mentally ill” and “mentally healthy.”

    Perpetrators of the mental illness fiction created the stigma by drawing that line, and now they’re whining that being crazy isn’t socially acceptable, so they’re offering more of the same medicine for a cure.

    people with mental illness deal with,

    You know what would end the stigma? Admit that “mental illness” doesn’t exist and that we all have emotional hang ups and weaknesses. Erase that fictional line between us and man up!

    and is part of the problem in why they don’t seek treatment.

    Treatment? What treatment? Medieval barbarism like “electroshock therapy” and chemical lobotomies aren’t “treatments.” They’re human rights violations. If my “stigma” helps people avoid that “treatment” and steers them towards manning up instead, I’m glad.

    The brain is a physical organ, and physical problems in the brain can easily manifest as emotional and psychological problems.

    But you must have scientific proof of a problem with the brain. There must be evidence of a brain lesion or some kind of injury; something we can see in an MRI, CAT scan, etc… Otherwise, this is just meaningless speculation.

    No, they use the DSM.

    Which is one of the most nonsensical books of fiction ever written. Have you ever tried reading that thing? They classify normal human behavior as mental illness. Children who struggle with math the DSM labels as having “arithmetic learning disorder.” Teenagers rebellious against their parents – “teenage rebellion disorder.” In the 1950s, there were only about 6 so called “mental illnesses” recognized. Now the DSM has hundreds, all predicated upon medicalizing normal human imperfections. I was sickened when I first investigated the DSM.

    Cognitive science is in it’s infancy,

    Uh huh.

    and psychiatry/psychology have more in common with proto-sciences They are flawed, but evidence based.

    So what’s your position on involuntary commitment to mental institutions without a right to an attorney, without a right to remain silent, without a presumption of innocence until proven guilty, without a right to a fair trial, without a right to face and cross examine your accuser, without a right to habeas corpus, without a right to be protected from cruel and unusual punishments (shock therapy, chemical castration etc…)?

    What’s your position on all of these human rights violations perpetrated by psychiatrists with condescending “we’re here to help you” smiles on their faces?

    The belief in psychiatry and mental illness is fundamentally anti-libertarian and anti-red pill.

    You are very incorrect on this. First off my doctor originally did genetic tests to determine if I have any markers that could contribute to issues (I have genes that reduce my ability to absorb vitamin B12 apparently) and blood tests to determine levels of the drugs in my blood.

    This isn’t psychiatry then. You’re describing legitimate medical research that can be performed by real doctors, not psychiatrists. Show me something distinctly psychiatric AND legitimate, or only something useful that a psychiatrist would do, but would be foreign to a real doctor.

    They know the pharmacological profiles of the drugs, and they have some level of understanding about the effects the receptors the drug has a binding affinity for will trigger.

    These poisons claim to fix a “chemical imbalance” in the brain. When psychiatrists prescribe these poisons, they do it only after having a convo with you for 30 minutes. They usually don’t insist on tests of any kind. You can go to five different psychiatrists and get five different diagnoses for five different mental illnesses, which will result in you receiving five different prescriptions for five different poisons. Psychiatrists give out these things like candy on Halloween and even ask the “patient” what drugs he wants.

    There is no “chemical imbalance brain scan” that one takes to determine the nature of the imbalance, the cause of the imbalance, or the scientifically premise extent of the imbalance, and therefore, the proper dose of the specific medication to counteract it while measuring your progress with ongoing regular brain scans. That would be science. Current psychiatry, by contrast, is medieval hocus pocus.

    Eventually we might very well have receptor mapping in the brain, as there are some chemicals such as 2-(4-iodo-2,5-dimethoxyphenyl)-N-[(2-methoxyphenyl)methyl]ethanamine which can be radiolabelled and is a highly potent full agonist for the human 5-HT2A receptor. Serotonin systems are strongly related to the expressed behavior of humans, and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are a commonly used class of anti-depressants.

    But different people need different amounts of these brain chemicals to be normal. How do you know the proper balance of these brain chemicals for a specific person? – which may very well be different from the proper balance that another person needs of these same brain chemicals to be normal in accordance with his different personality!

    Once we get to a level where receptors in individuals can be mapped along with reuptake rates calculated, we will be able to correlate the behavioral disorders with physically measurable results that a pathologist could diagnose.

    And how would you define a “behavioral disorder?” Sounds totalitarian to me (or at least anti-libertarian).

    Also, the brain is a holistic organ. By balancing out one imbalance, you may very well create another, which may be detrimental for the continued existence of someone’s personality as it is. This is especially true for teenagers and little children whose brains are still forming. How do you what how their chemicals are supposed to look? How do you know what’s normal, especially when two equally happy people may have different balances of chemicals inside their brains corresponding to their different personalities?

    This is all very arrogant and dangerous.

    There are also several other avenues of treatment, and each person is different. You have SNRIs, SDRIs, SSRIs, NMDA antagonists, and some others I forget at the moment, as all the different classes of depression treating drugs. Each works better for different people, based on an underlying physical state of the brain we can’t yet measure yet.

    Well if you can’t even measure the problem, and therefore, don’t even know if there even is an imbalance (or if there is, what is its precise extent) then you have no business giving out pills that “correct” a potentially fictional imbalance based on guess work resulting from a 30 minute conversation.

    But we’re getting there.

    Well let us know when you do. Until then, accept the possibility that nothing is 100 percent physical if it has to do with the human personality.

    I just say you’re ignorant, and reinforcing the negative stigma that leads to some people not seeking treatment. Don’t be a dick.

    Being a dick is better than being a pussy (credit: Team America, World Police). I’m saying two things:

    1. The concepts of psychiatry and mental illness are human rights violations. As such, these concepts can only exist in non-libertarian societies.

    2. The only one reinforcing “stigma” is you by telling emotionally weak people to NOT take charge of their lives, but instead submit to the victim mentality that is mental illness. You are encouraging them to see themselves as permanently “mentally ill,” thus creating the concept of “the other.” By contrast, I’m saying that psychiatry’s division of “mental illness” and “mental health” has no reality. This means there is nothing to be stigmatized about. Just man up!

  50. Take it from another Millennial–Millenials ain’t shit. I find it hard to relate to some of my generation the older we get. Having a tumblr for many years (still have one), being black and a woman, taking feminist classes in college (which was a joke then and a joke now), I had to make the CHOICE (because it is a choice) to not become a snowflakey, whiny, reactive but inactive, entitled adult and actually do something about things in my control, take responsibility for my choices, enjoy men for who they are, and have goals. Enjoy life! But I’m pretty individualist so it was easy.

  51. It takes two people to make a baby.

    That is exactly what I said in my comment to you, which is why you can’t just blame men for this.

  52. Manning up means different things to different people. I think Caleb been better of saying “Young men are less solution oriented than previous generations” which may or may not be true.

    Another Headline that might be more honest with the current situation:

    “Young men lack strong male role models, feel defeated” Just listen to that goof ball in that youtube video talk, hes on the verge of crying.

     

    P.S.  Anyone who does Slam Poetry is a retard, doesn’t matter what generation they’re in.

     

     

     

  53. @Jack

    There must be evidence of a brain lesion or some kind of injury

    That’s an extremely simplistic view of biological dysfunction. An organ can be extremely dysfunctional without the problem being reducible to “lesion”, “tumor”, etc.

    Otherwise, this is just meaningless speculation

    Says you ? How well-read are you in modern neuroscience ?

    But different people need different amounts of these brain chemicals to be normal

    and

    the brain is a holistic organ. By balancing out one imbalance, you may very well create another

    That’s reminiscent of the anti-science relativistic postmodernist garbage we hear so much in Western Europe. It’s the new religious dualism: the brain isn’t like the body, the brain is irreducible, the brain is holistic and not amenable to deep scientific understanding and reverse-engineering, nature is [the god we worship and fear in replacement of Yahweh because we actually never really got over religion] woops I mean mysterious and inaccessible and vengeful, etc.

    This is all very arrogant and dangerous.

    See my previous sentence.

    Well let us know when you do. Until then, accept the possibility that nothing is 100 percent physical if it has to do with the human personality

    Dualism is scientifically dead. Some philosophers of science I respect do think the mind is not material, but they admit that it is entirely causally determined by physical causes; even when a thought causes other thoughts and emotions, that’s still describable in terms of electrochemical patterns, not some mysterious immaterial thing arising from matter and engaging in retro-causation on its hardware. But that doesn’t save the kind of implicit dualism you believe in; it has been killed a hundred times over the past century.
    There is no hard distinction between brain dysfunction and kidney dysfunction, only degrees of complexity. That of course creates problems with the definition of disease and “where to draw the line”, but those are problems – and admittedly difficult ones – , not unsolvable dilemmas. Believe it or not there is no consensus whatsoever on the definition of health, yet we’ve done enormous progress in improving human health over the past few centuries.

    By the way, I admit that psychiatry is largely pseudoscientific. But that’s also true for when Kepler described the movements of the planets (ellipses and inverse square laws and whatnot) without having a lawful framework for why they are how they are: that only became possible when Newton came along and explained gravity, yet that doesn’t mean Kepler’s work was illegitimate. We just need more work – which is being done right now – to bridge the gap between psychological concepts and material neuroscientific knowledge of the brain; but we don’t rush in to conclude that the subconscious has no physical reality; as a matter of fact, it has become increasingly certain that an enormous part of our brain processes including those linked to our conscious decisions occurs without our being aware of it.

    There is no version of this where you come up on the right side of genuine scientific progress, and believe me, this one can’t be handwaved as “leftist scientists telling us lies”, since leftists actually often hate neuroscience and biology in general. Oh no it can’t.

  54. Speaking of depression, there’s a quote by David Foster Wallace that makes a pretty good point about how misguided it is to think suicidal people “weren’t suffering as much as a person with a physical illness” or weren’t worthy of help:

    “The so-called ‘psychotically depressed’ person who tries to kill herself doesn’t do so out of quote ‘hopelessness’ or any abstract conviction that life’s assets and debits do not square. And surely not because death seems suddenly appealing. The person in whom Its invisible agony reaches a certain unendurable level will kill herself the same way a trapped person will eventually jump from the window of a burning high-rise. Make no mistake about people who leap from burning windows. Their terror of falling from a great height is still just as great as it would be for you or me standing speculatively at the same window just checking out the view; i.e. the fear of falling remains a constant. The variable here is the other terror, the fire’s flames: when the flames get close enough, falling to death becomes the slightly less terrible of two terrors. It’s not desiring the fall; it’s terror of the flames. And yet nobody down on the sidewalk, looking up and yelling ‘Don’t!’ and ‘Hang on!’, can understand the jump. Not really. You’d have to have personally been trapped and felt flames to really understand a terror way beyond falling.”

    Extreme, knife-through-the-belly psychological pain does not require damage to the brain as traditionally defined.

  55. Perfect..this even goes for women too.we really do spend so much time botching about stuff and never try to change.

  56. @Gil Galad: I disagree. I can understand the jump in those situations. And its mostly because those people were living their lives based on a lie. A perfect example is Robin Williams. Being famous and rich doesn’t make you happy or even aware. The problem is that these people do not need psychologists, they need someone to punch them in the face really hard and tell them how things really are. They might come to their senses they might not. But they need the right person to guide them with help, not someone feeding them with more lies.

    The real depression though does not come out of bad situations. It hits at you even if you are currently at your best days of your life. It does not discriminate.

  57. @ hey hey: I think I get your point, but where we disagree (or where you disagree with Foster Wallace) isn’t essential to the point I was making, mostly as a response to Jack’s dismissal of depression. You’ll get the context from the earlier comments.

  58. That’s an extremely simplistic view of biological dysfunction. An organ can be extremely dysfunctional without the problem being reducible to “lesion”, “tumor”, etc.

    You must have an objective way of defining “dysfunction.” If there is nothing physically detectable in the brain that can be determined as “dysfunctional” which you can show me on a scan, then you have no scientific basis for claiming that there is something wrong with the brain.

    Says you ? How well-read are you in modern neuroscience ?

    Ignoring your elitist smugness, how well read are you in commonsense? If you want a more science-based critique of the mental illness fiction, check out the link that I posted above to antipsychiatry.org.

    That’s reminiscent of the anti-science relativistic postmodernist garbage we hear so much in Western Europe.

    There is nothing relativistic or post-modernist in anything I’m saying. I’m saying that there is no evidence for mental illness (in the biological/clinical sense) and that psychiatry is nothing but a program for violating human rights. Post-modernists and relativists don’t believe in human rights, or anything of an objective or scientific nature.

    It’s the new religious dualism: the brain isn’t like the body, the brain is irreducible, the brain is holistic and not amenable to deep scientific understanding and reverse-engineering, nature is [the god we worship and fear in replacement of Yahweh because we actually never really got over religion] woops I mean mysterious and inaccessible and vengeful, etc.

    You’re putting words in my mouth as usual. The human personality isn’t reducible to physical laws or pure biology. To say otherwise is to treat human beings the same way you’d treat a car in need of an oil change, which is exactly how psychiatrists treat their “patients.” Pure philosophical materialism is incompatible with the concept of human rights or the distinction between living and non-living. Your nihilistic beliefs can only lead to an absolute dystopia in which humans are seen as no more valuable than rocks (which is indeed the attitude of psychiatry).

    Dualism is scientifically dead.

    HAHA! You REALLY need to get out of the blue pill world. Stop confusing science with scientists. Mainstream scientists have an agenda. These are the same people who believe in “climate change” and are supported by university professors who believe in population reduction via genocide.  Something being “dead” in the mainstream blue pill world means nothing to a man who is fully awake.

    Some philosophers of science I respect do think the mind is not material, but they admit that it is entirely causally determined by physical causes; even when a thought causes other thoughts and emotions, that’s still describable in terms of electrochemical patterns, not some mysterious immaterial thing arising from matter and engaging in retro-causation on its hardware.

    See above.

    But that doesn’t save the kind of implicit dualism you believe in;

    1. There is nothing implicit about my dualism.

    2. My dualism does not require “saving” from the mainstream sheeple whose fake science is funded by ideologues providing the research grants to support a pre-determined purpose.

    it has been killed a hundred times over the past century.

    Again, something being “killed” in the mainstream world means nothing to someone who has taken the red pill and is fully awake.

    There is no hard distinction between brain dysfunction and kidney dysfunction, only degrees of complexity.

    Wow! You’ve really swallowed all the mainstream koolaid haven’t you!

    That of course creates problems with the definition of disease and “where to draw the line”, but those are problems – and admittedly difficult ones – , not unsolvable dilemmas.

    A disease is an objective and observable dysfunction of the human body. That’s it!

    Believe it or not there is no consensus whatsoever on the definition of health, yet we’ve done enormous progress in improving human health over the past few centuries.

    Health is the absence of disease.

    By the way, I admit that psychiatry is largely pseudoscientific. But that’s also true for when Kepler described the movements of the planets (ellipses and inverse square laws and whatnot) without having a lawful framework for why they are how they are: that only became possible when Newton came along and explained gravity, yet that doesn’t mean Kepler’s work was illegitimate.

    The difference is that Kepler didn’t imprison people against their will, lobotomize them, or physically torture other human beings. Psychiatrists do.

    We just need more work – which is being done right now – to bridge the gap between psychological concepts and material neuroscientific knowledge of the brain;

    No, we need less work. The more work you do on that front, the more human life is cheapened and degraded on the alter of materialism. Most psychiatrists laugh at the idea of human rights and civil liberties. The last thing psychiatry needs is “more work.” Instead, it needs to be abolished.

    but we don’t rush in to conclude that the subconscious has no physical reality;

    No, you rush in to conclude the opposite. The basic premise of psychiatry is philosophical materialism. It’s based on the false idea that energy is fictional and only physical matter exists.

    There is no version of this where you come up on the right side of genuine scientific progress,

    No version of what? Scientific theories pre-approved by the establishment? I have no desire to be on the right side of what the controlling oligarchy refers to as “genuine scientific progress.” Their “genuine scientific progress” leads to genocide.

    and believe me, this one can’t be handwaved as “leftist scientists telling us lies”, since leftists actually often hate neuroscience and biology in general. Oh no it can’t.

    How about fatalistic fascists telling lies? Is that better? Seriously, spend some time on antipsychiatry.org.

  59. Speaking of depression, there’s a quote by David Foster Wallace that makes a pretty good point about how misguided it is to think suicidal people “weren’t suffering as much as a person with a physical illness” or weren’t worthy of help:

    What does “worthy of help” mean? If by “help” you mean violating a man’s free will and human rights by preventing his suicide via physical force and imprisonment, then you are a tyrant. The worst type of tyrant is one that has a condescending smile on his face while insisting that this is for “your own good.” At least the tyrant who hates me will limit his control over me to my actions. But the tyrant who loves me will try to twist the screws in my brain to get me to conform to his thinking. Thus, psychiatry is the most chilling tyranny humans have invented.

    Extreme, knife-through-the-belly psychological pain does not require damage to the brain as traditionally defined.

    Exactly. This is in line with what I said about there being no such thing as mental illness (in the biological sense). The problem with your version of “empathy” is that you wish to use it to violate human rights, as you’ve admitted on the other blog when you said that freedom of speech should be limited to prevent “emotional violence” against fragile snowflakes as if someone can experience emotional distress that they didn’t, on some level, consent to just like a physical punch to the face. This is totalitarian thinking.

    as a response to Jack’s dismissal of depression.

    I wasn’t dismissing depression or anything else. I was dismissing the false idea that emotional pain and psychological problems have biological or chemical causes within the body.

  60. If there is nothing physically detectable in the brain that can be determined as “dysfunctional” 

    You will soon be satisfied then, given that lately scientists have literally began to extract/rebuild mental images and memories from the brain. Who knows, maybe there are loved memories you have trouble recalling and thus will try to benefit from that technology when it matures, instead of saying these things should be banned as you probably would.
    Your “mind independent from physical phenomena” is being disproved, not in the future, but right now.

    elitist smugness

    If you were making claims about how dark matter is actually very small pink horses flying through the cosmos, I would also ask you how well read you are in modern physics, and you would call that elitist smugness if you were similarly emotionally attached to the idea of pink flying horses. As I will repeat below, you don’t care about the concept of expertise whenever it tells you something you don’t like; everything is solved by one more conspiracy theory to add to the stack.
    If elitism means trying to know what you’re talking about and expecting contradictors to do the same, then I’m an elitist to the bone. How can anyone not be an elitist in your weird sense ? Is it better *not* to try to read more and question people when they look like they haven’t ?

    You’re putting words in my mouth as usual

    No I’m not. That you treat “Nature” exactly like religious fanatics view God is beyond any doubt, you have repeatedly proven it in our previous debates. This is not an exaggeration or a loose analogy: you are truly taking the judeo-christian concepts and replacing “god” with “nature” at every occurrence, reproducing the exact same patterns and then calling yourself nonreligious or atheist or whatever.

    Pure philosophical materialism is incompatible…etc, etc

    I answered that reasonably thoroughly in a previous exchange, not gonna say it again.

    get out of the blue pill world

    I’d bet all my money that in any controversial issues that don’t push your hot buttons, you would have far, far higher standards of evidence than “that’s a blue pill lie, that’s a leftist conspiracy, look at this and this, it proves it”. Did you actually make a thorough investigation, read at least a dozen books from both sides of the debate, search for you biases and try to eliminate them, before you came to this conclusion – and to the general conclusion that any proposition you don’t like but that has “scientists” on its side must be a conspiracy ? (but as with my question about how well-read you are in neuroscience, you will evade and say I’m a condescendent elitist. It’s so easy.) Again, I would bet money that you did much, much less than this and wouldn’t even bother to read twenty pages of dissenting argumentation. Your bastardized version of the red pill is basically “see all the stuff you thought was true and that Jack dislikes ? It’s actually false. Take the pill and wake up.”

    The last time I gave you detailed arguments on a similar subject, you literally said “I refuse to engage in those thoughts”, barring a memory mistake on my part. You refuse to go through the actual thought processes necessary to truly assess an argument, and then you confidently express a certitude about the argument, “because it’s dangerous and leads to anarchy” or something (one more similarity with religion. Back when I was religious we were taught to avoid certain thoughts because they lead to loss of faith; needless to say, I didn’t avoid those thoughts. No hypothesis should be dismissed solely based on its alleged bad consequences, that’s not just bad logic, it’s absence of logic, and you’d look better if you left it to leftists – pun unintended). There’s a reason I said I’d put money on this.

    It’s based on the false idea that energy is fictional and only physical matter exists

    Hahahahahaha ! Talk about willingly revealing that you haven’t bothered to inform yourself (“I don’t know shit about it but I know it’s wrong”).

    If by “help” you mean violating a man’s free will and human rights by preventing his suicide via physical force and imprisonment

    No, I am 100% against physically hindering a person (and “physically” would also include insidious legal stuff) from committing suicide. In fact, I might agree that private agencies providing organized means of committing a controlled and painless suicide should be legal.

    what I said about there being no such thing as mental illness (in the biological sense)

    “in the biological sense” highlights our fundamental disagreement which isn’t going away, so I’m leaving that as it is.

    The problem with your version of “empathy” is that you wish to use it to violate human rights, as you’ve admitted on the other blog

    I copypasted what I *actually* said on the other blog:

    You know, as much as I lean towards free speech absolutism, sometimes I think those who want to put some limits on it have a point […] I’m just testing my current brainstorming, not expressing a definitive opinion I don’t have yet (in fact I wouldn’t have commented if I were more confident: I need the feedback and disagreement). Ethics are a bitch, lol

    The very concept of entertaining a thought, being in doubt, asking for feedback and discussion, seems alien to you; looks like truths are self-evident and certitudes are just there for the taking, and those who haven’t yet managed to do that are monsters and tyrants.

    Since, as I said, there is no changing your mind about philosophical stuff (dualism and all that), I propose dropping that part. For the rest, I’ll be here if you have more to say.

  61. Edit: before you refuse to admit that you did evade my question and point to the antipsychiatry website again, remember that when I asked you how well-read you were in modern neuroscience I was responding to this “But you must have scientific proof of a problem with the brain. […] Otherwise, this is just meaningless speculation”. That’s why I then pointed to what brain imaging actually can do today, why not knowing this requires being oblivious to progress in neuroscience, and why obvious brain trauma in the traditional sense is more than obsolete as a definition of “something wrong in the brain” (or even for another organ, pretty much). The brain is now known at a much finer scale, not just due to more detail, but to recognition of its working patterns and what kind of thoughts and sensations correspond to each.

  62. More stuff I didn’t address:

    The more work you do on that front, the more human life is cheapened and degraded on the alter of materialism

    Wait, wait…is this a confession that physicalist science works ? Why else would there be any risk that human life be “degraded” (which I don’t believe at all, but I’m going with your premises here), unless that work was really making deeper and deeper discoveries, and that “human personality” is reducible to physical and biological laws ?

    These are the same people who believe in “climate change”

    I wrote this comment some time ago,

    Let’s see if you pass the test of scientific falsifiability: what kind of evidence would change your mind about climate change ? […] if there is no scenario in your mind where your denial of climate change could be rebutted by facts, then you’re automatically conceding that you’re taking this on faith. Is there any ability for your brain to entertain the hypothesis “climate change is being used by lefties for immoral goals, and climate change is true” ? […] Hell, do you even believe that the climate was ever different in geological time […] ? Humans can make species extinct, but change the climate, nah, the Universe will prevent them ’cause Nature’s wisdom or something

    , to which you didn’t respond. Until you refute those objections, what you’ve been saying on the subject is (see below) nothing more than that, “saying things”, not arguing.

    About the way you seem to view this: from reading you, one would imagine that scientists are just dudes “saying things”. You do realize that regardless of whether they are lying about stuff, they also make, you now, rational arguments ? (or irrational if you disagree of course. The point is that an argument – like one against dualism – isn’t something you can call a lie, because it is a reasoning, not a factual claim: you have to refute its logic). Do you even accept that a belief can *potentially* be proved to be logically unsound ? Or will I just get another “I refuse to engage in such thoughts”  if I point out inconsistencies ? All the lies and conspiracies in the world mean nothing if a belief is massively contradictory to begin with.

    And that’s why you can’t just read what scientists are merely “saying”, that lends itself too easily to a knee-jerk “I don’t like that, it must be false” reaction, and why there is no susbtitute for actually giving a fair hearing (ie books) to these people. But no, that’s too elitist.
    NB: if by any chance you actually want to read a really interesting guy who might qualify as a scientific dualist, try David Chalmers (The Conscious Mind, etc). His approach is more elaborate than to just call materialists “blue pill” or pro-establishment and call it a day.

  63. You will soon be satisfied then, given that lately scientists have literally began to extract/rebuild mental images and memories from the brain. Who knows, maybe there are loved memories you have trouble recalling and thus will try to benefit from that technology when it matures,

    No, I won’t. That is a sickening invasion of privacy. Cataloguing in a computer a person’s most private and intimate thoughts/memories is probably one of the most despicable things I’ve ever heard of.

    instead of saying these things should be banned as you probably would.

    No, it shouldn’t be banned, as long as you’re reconstructing legitimate memories instead of implanting false ones or artificially “enhancing” the natural brain.

    Your “mind independent from physical phenomena” is being disproved, not in the future, but right now.

    No, it’s not.

    If you were making claims about how dark matter is actually very small pink horses flying through the cosmos,

    This is beyond patronizing and beneath my dignity to even respond to.

    As I will repeat below, you don’t care about the concept of expertise whenever it tells you something you don’t like; everything is solved by one more conspiracy theory to add to the stack.

    I’ve given you a website which disproves everything you’re accusing me of. The problem is that what you want from me is very inappropriate for this blog. Yes, I could go in to all of my research and explain to you in minute detail why I think the way I think, what all of my sources are, all the books that influenced me towards these conclusions, and so forth, but this would lead to book long essays and a complete hijacking of everything this blog stands for. People here don’t want to read all this shit. It’s grossly off topic! You want me to “nerd out,” get super technical, and micro. I’ll do that on sex-related topics, because that’s what this blog is for, but not all of these nerdy subjects which you can’t get enough of here (I still don’t believe you get laid).

    I’ll say it again, if you truly want a more science-based argument in favor of my reasoning, go to the website I provided and you will discover more scientific sources supporting the argument that mental illness is a myth than you’ll know what to do with. But instead, because I refuse to “nerd out” with you on a blog dedicated to sex, you simply dismiss my beliefs as having no scientific merit and label me as a conspiracy theorist. You’re free to do that if you want. I’ll be over here being right.

    No I’m not. That you treat “Nature”exactly like religious fanatics view God is beyond any doubt, you have repeatedly proven it in our previous debates. This is not an exaggeration or a loose analogy: you are truly taking the judeo-christian concepts and replacing “god” with “nature” at every occurrence, reproducing the exact same patterns and then calling yourself nonreligious or atheist or whatever.

    If you dismiss humility and a recognition that humans aren’t gods who have the arrogant right to reshape the universe in their own image and disregard the laws of nature, then I see you as a very dangerous person who thinks he’s a god, or wants to become one some day. This is a flaw with your denomination of atheism which mine has fixed. I don’t believe in any gods, but this means that humans aren’t gods either. You disagree with the latter half of the previous sentence and equate humbleness in front of this vast universe and the frowning upon human god-complexes as “worshipping the universe like a god.” This disagreement is intractable. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

    I’d bet all my money that in any controversial issues that don’t push your hot buttons, you would have far, far higher standards of evidence than “that’s a blue pill lie, that’s a leftist conspiracy, look at this and this, it proves it”.

    I have evidence, but most of it is beyond the scope of this blog. I gave you a website to start your own investigation and red pill awakening.

    Did you actually make a thorough investigation, read at least a dozen books from both sides of the debate, search for you biases and try to eliminate them, before you came to this conclusion – and to the general conclusion that any proposition you don’t like but that has “scientists” on its side must be a conspiracy?

    Pretty much, yes. But I also reject independent rationalism just like I reject independent intuition. I harmonize my rationality with my intuition and make holistic conclusions.

    Your bastardized version of the red pill is basically “see all the stuff you thought was true and that Jack dislikes ? It’s actually false. Take the pill and wake up.”

    LOL! Okay.

    The last time I gave you detailed arguments on a similar subject, you literally said “I refuse to engage in those thoughts”,

    Yes, because this blog isn’t a geek party.

    Hahahahahaha ! Talk about willingly revealing that you haven’t bothered to inform yourself (“I don’t know shit about it but I know it’s wrong”).

    The heart of psychiatry is indeed materialism. Even some psychiatrists are saying that “consciousness is an illusion.” These are dangerous men who need to be stopped if human rights are things we care about or wish to defend.

    “in the biological sense” highlights our fundamental disagreement which isn’t going away, so I’m leaving that as it is.

    Indeed. You’re a materialist and a nihilist, whereas I’m neither.

    You know, as much as I lean towards free speech absolutism, sometimes I think those who want to put some limits on it have a point […] I’m just testing my current brainstorming, not expressing a definitive opinion I don’t have yet (in fact I wouldn’t have commented if I were more confident: I need the feedback and disagreement). Ethics are a bitch, lol

    The only possible argument against free speech is the one SJWs are making – that there is such a thing as “emotional force” or “emotional violence” that takes away people’s free will. That argument enables human weakness by saying that weak snowflakes shouldn’t develop a thicker skin or be told to grow up, but should be recognized as victims of having their free will taken away from them by the emotionally overpowering nature of other people’s words, because they’re too weak to be uninfluenced by those words. That is glorifying loserhood.

    The very concept of entertaining a thought, being in doubt, asking for feedback and discussion, seems alien to you;

    No, I just have my limits for trolling on a seduction blog.

     

  64. Edit: before you refuse to admit that you did evade my question and point to the antipsychiatry website again, remember that when I asked you how well-read you were in modern neuroscience I was responding to this “But you must have scientific proof of a problem with the brain. […] Otherwise, this is just meaningless speculation”. That’s why I then pointed to what brain imaging actually can do today, why not knowing this requires being oblivious to progress in neuroscience, and why obvious brain trauma in the traditional sense is more than obsolete as a definition of “something wrong in the brain” (or even for another organ, pretty much). The brain is now known at a much finer scale, not just due to more detail, but to recognition of its working patterns and what kind of thoughts and sensations correspond to each.

    If a person has a brain disease, then there must be some objective science to it. There must be something wrong with the brain that you can point to on a scan. That’s all I’m saying.

    Wait, wait…is this a confession that physicalist science works ?

    No! It’s a confession that liars lie.

    Why else would there be any risk that human life be “degraded” (which I don’t believe at all, but I’m going with your premises here), unless that work was really making deeper and deeper discoveries, and that “human personality” is reducible to physical and biological laws ?

    You are so naïve about the way the world works and think that powerful people (or scientists funded by powerful people) make discoveries in good faith. More study and research into psychiatry will lead to more (deliberately) false perceptions, thus furthering materialism. The oligarchs behind the throne who can financially and socially make or break any scientist ask themselves, “how can I make these puppet scientists say what I want them to say?” And, “how can this evidence be twisted to support our agenda?” That’s the real world, kid, not a much of humble scientists truly uncovering the mysteries of the universe as cool headed logicians. If they tried that, powerful people would bankrupt them. That’s why psychiatry needs to be abolished instead of researched more.

    Let’s see if you pass the test of scientific falsifiability: what kind of evidence would change your mind about climate change ?

    A complete depoliticization of the topic. I’d also have to ignore the fact that ice caps are melting on Mars and Europa (one of Jupiter’s moons) due to increased cyclical solar flare activity , as well as the evidence that the UN and NGOs are massaging scientific claims about climate change to make it seem more alarming for the purposes of carbon taxes and one world government. When scientists who expose the global warming myth as fiction are excommunicated, bullied, and not even debated, I know there is an (anti-white, anti-capitalist) agenda here.

    Also, did you know that in the 1970s, scientists had a consensus on global cooling and claimed the world was going to be one giant ice cube by the year 2000?

    Is there any ability for your brain to entertain the hypothesis “climate change is being used by lefties for immoral goals, and climate change is true” ?

    Sure. But the scientists who say it’s a lie are censored, silenced, and bankrupted. This type of censorship tells me that those being censored are right and the pro-climate change hippies/pagans/Earth worshippers are afraid.

    Hell, do you even believe that the climate was ever different in geological time

    Yes. But the difference is cyclical and nature made.

    Humans can make species extinct, but change the climate, nah, the Universe will prevent them ’cause Nature’s wisdom or something

    LOL!

    About the way you seem to view this: from reading you, one would imagine that scientists are just dudes “saying things”. You do realize that regardless of whether they are lying about stuff, they also make, you now, rational arguments? (or irrational if you disagree of course. The point is that an argument – like one against dualism – isn’t something you can call a lie, because it is a reasoning, not a factual claim: you have to refute its logic). Do you even accept that a belief can *potentially* be proved to be logically unsound ? Or will I just get another “I refuse to engage in such thoughts” if I point out inconsistencies ? All the lies and conspiracies in the world mean nothing if a belief is massively contradictory to begin with.

    Dude, you’re saying things that are beyond the scope of this blog for me to even get into (seriously, get laid). Just follow the money when it comes to these scientists.

    if by any chance you actually want to read a really interesting guy who might qualify as a scientific dualist, try David Chalmers (The Conscious Mind, etc). His approach is more elaborate than to just call materialists “blue pill” or pro-establishment and call it a day.

    My approach is more elaborate as well, but inappropriate for this blog. Seriously, get laid.

  65. That is a sickening invasion of privacy

    Not if the subject is willing. But that’s another debate.

    This is beyond patronizing

    That line and equivalents is really your favorite way out of tight corners. I’m not hot on continuing to ask why it’s bad or insulting to try to be informed and call people out when they express certitude on a subject where they seem clearly uninformed.

    I’ve given you a website

    I answered why that wasn’t the appropriate rebuttal in my other comment.

    I refuse to “nerd out”

    I’m not asking you to nerd out, I am betting – based on multiple very strong clues that slipped from you – , that you are in fact very ill-informed about stuff you say is false.

    but not all of these nerdy subjects

    Depression was brought up, and on *that* subject you said something I disagreed with, and soon it was obvious that the disagreement stemmed from philosophy, so I chose not to waste time and directly address that. You can choose not to have this discussion.

    frowning upon human god-complexes

    To me, this is like the “sex addict” SJW accusation. Some months ago I told you “If I want some more cake, I’m just some dude; if I want some millions, I’m just a dude who’s maayyybe a little greedy; but if I want more decades of life, or maybe an upgrade that would allow me to read books a few times faster, or a full-immersion VR to hang out in Middle Earth, then I’m a megalomaniac with a god complex”. I just fully reject double standards on when “wanting more” is appropriate and when it isn’t. Tons of things we take for granted today can be argued to be unnatural body/brain enhancements. We are just retrospectively myopic.

    I have evidence

    About a subject and a thesis – or rather a family of theses – that you’ve shown you deeply misunderstand.

    “I refuse to engage those thoughts” / because this blog isn’t a geeky party

    No no no, in context, you meant that you would purposely avoid thinking about certain arguments because they seemed to lead to unwanted conclusions. But maybe I shouldn’t hold you to things you said long ago, let’s drop it.

    You’re a materialist and a nihilist

    In the strong sense, I’m probably neither. When I attacked *your* dualism and said that “dualism is dead”, I wasn’t including some less simplistic, less 19th-century style types of dualism that do manage to make a bit of a case today. But it’s like admitting that such and such super subtle theologian may not be entirely wrong: that is not in any way a concession to the more traditional believers, whose type of faith is definitely wrong.

    No, I just have my limits

    You’re putting my words out of context, maybe not on purpose. I meant that I was being unsure, I wasn’t asking you to express doubt or whatever. The allusion was that you seem to always attribute certitude to me even when I clearly state the opposite.

    If a person has a brain disease, then there must be some objective science to it. 

    Admittedly giving one more argument/example would do me a disservice because I’ve made my point about progress in neuroscience, but wth: there is (has been for 2-3 years I think) a new type of brain implant that significantly alleviates symptoms of ADHD. I don’t know if ADHD is one of the conditions you consider as non-illnesses (no brain injury is detected in subjects), but my general point is that the gap is being bridged, slowly, between imprecise constructs of psychology and concepts relevant to the material understanding of the brain in which medicine can now intervene.

    did you know that in the 1970s, scientists had a consensus on global cooling

    Which is still possible, just less likely than the opposite. The best that can be done is to try to predict better, not admit to some metaphysical impossibility of prediction, or absurdly state that there is no amount of gaz emissions that can change the climate (or are man-made emissions magically rendered incapable of causation in your view? What quantity is the threshold that begins to have effects on the climate?) You’re also forgetting that the 1970s and the 2010s aren’t just two epochs of objectively equal credibility: our ability to model the climate in the past forty years has increased by a factor of literally millions, and one of the reasons better supercomputers are being built is to run more complex and reliable models.

  66. I don’t think it’s as simple as BD (or any man we’d respect) to say ‘well yeah – pull up your bootstraps and man up, it’s for your own good, and the only alternative is losing in life, and being jealous of those who have more than you…’

    I have more money than I’ll ever be able to spend, unless I change my lifestyle to one of spending more than I (passively, primarily) earn, which I don’t find rewarding anyway. I have a great ocean-front property, travel whenever I feel like it 4-6 months/year, am more-or-less-retired, and have the fail-safe ‘night out’ blueprint – if I’m feeling horny – of either finding a girl for sex, or having a couple escorts at the ready to be ‘donated to’. And…so what? After this past year, I lost the ability to trust anyone. ANYONE.

    Without being able to trust anyone, what is the fucking point? I’ve gone full nihilist. The only person in my family I trust is an ex-pat brother who is red-pill – yet himself is volatile as fuck and prone to untrustworthy bursts of behavior, just destructive inappropriate ‘fuck you’ type stuff.

    What’s the point in having any mission if you view other human beings through a crimson pill lens? Realizing that your own parents, your own wife/GF/OLTR don’t actually give a fuck about you, but only how you make them feel – when your whole life has been lived with their interests and concerns in mind. It’s like holy shit, I’ve been virtually the only one, all this time, to actually care about others? Well that’s shot to hell now. As I said a couple months back, I do find some kind of ‘mission’ in my drinking habit – chatting with down-and-out drunks and putting a little light back in their eyes. But do I even mean it? I mean to cheer them up, sure. I can be incredibly charming and charismatic, and I enjoy being that way socially, but I’m more cynical than all the darkest comedians save for perhaps George Carlin and Bill Hicks (holy shit, were they both overflowing with hatred for everyone).

    You can go and ‘do you’ and achieve all this money and pussy and other multifarious shit, great. And that amounts to….putting your nose back into Jordan Peterson’s recommended reading list and trying to figure out what the fuck any of it is good for.

    Speaking of Jordan Peterson, guy literally broke down yesterday on his new video. We’re all fucked, my friends and foes.

  67. I don’t think it’s as simple as BD (or any man we’d respect) to say ‘well yeah – pull up your bootstraps and man up, it’s for your own good, and the only alternative is losing in life, and being jealous of those who have more than you…’

    Yes it is. Your personal, individual social problems don’t modify that global stance.

  68. Captain fantastic, BD.

    You spend years chronicling how almost everyone in this society claims to be monogamous.

    You spend those same years chronicling how almost everyone is a fraud in their claim of adhering to monogamy.

    I speak frankly of the nihilism that results from taking people at their word vs. watching their actions.

    I logically connect almost all people’s hypocrisy to a fundamental destruction of trust in our society – and specifically, with me personally.

    You respond with a facile dismissal of this simply being my ‘individual social problems’.

    Um, maybe not. Because maybe if you got fucked over by Pink Firefly OR any other woman, you’d have a certain image to maintain whereby you’d never frankly tell us about the pain and suffering it caused you.

    Jordan Peterson is brave, in that sense. This brilliant red-pill prophet is broken, which we only get to witness because he has had the courage to be vulnerable with all of us.

    I don’t know of one single red pill author apart from him that would ever have the balls to do the same.

  69. A smart friend of mine shared this video featuring Simon Sinek and his views on Millenials & their issues. I think he’s spot on (first hear of this guy; will check his works).

    Video is quite long, but I think it’s worth the 15 min it takes to listen to it (put it in the background and just listen, you do not need to actually watch it).

     

  70. maybe if you got fucked over by Pink Firefly OR any other woman, you’d have a certain image to maintain whereby you’d never frankly tell us about the pain and suffering it caused you

    I can’t get fucked over by a woman, because I follow my own advice and never get monogamous with one, never combine finances with one, never co-own debts or assets with one, etc, etc. Read the section called “The Wolf” here.

    If that doesn’t help, and you want to keep being an angry nihilist because you keep exposing yourself to harm from women, then isn’t the blog for you, and you really should go read someone else.

    A smart friend of mine shared this video featuring Simon Sinek and his views on Millenials & their issues.

    Yeah, I’ve seen that. It’s dead on accurate.

  71. The problem I have with the phrase is that it’s a blatant attack on a man’s character.  Usually used as an attempt to cow him or manipulate him into doing something that goes against his personal interests.  If someone thinks that a course of action will benefit a man; then they should simply state their case.  The weight of their argument should stand on it’s own.  Without the need to resort to personal attacks.

    Even more galling is the fact that the less masculine someone is, then the more likely they seem to be willing to attack other peoples’ masculinity.  Only while hiding behind a computer of course.  Single mothers demanding more resources from men without offering anything in return love to resort to this personal attack.  As do fat nerdy social conservatives and sjw’s.  People who aren’t willing to meet me at the local MMA gym and go 3 rounds with me, and who haven’t so much as touched a firearm in their life; have no business questioning my masculinity.  Especially women and weak feminized men.

  72. The problem I have with the phrase is that it’s a blatant attack on a man’s character.  Usually used as an attempt to cow him or manipulate him into doing something that goes against his personal interests.

    As other commenters have already pointed out, there are two kinds of “man up” statements: one from a traditional conservative, SJW, or older women that’s an attempt to keep you in line with Societal Programming, and one from another man who is trying to get you to improve your life.

  73. I agree with Rick Axis that you don’t want to be some disposable male. However, as far as spetznaz is concerned, I disagree with a video that he put up (about always approaching the ugly girl). He said that he got rejected by a woman, and it made him depressed for a week. During his description, he said that he approached like a perfect gentleman, and the woman didn’t seem to want to have anything to do with him. I said something about his perfect gentleman approach, and then I stopped watching the rest.

Leave a Reply

To leave a comment, enter your comment below. PLEASE make sure to read the commenting rules before commenting, since failure to follow these rules means your comment may be deleted. Also please do not use the username “Anonymous” or “Anon” or any variation thereof (makes things too confusing).

Off-topic comments are allowed, but Caleb will ignore those.

Caleb responds to comments in person, but he only does so on the two most current blog articles.

Related Posts

Begin typing your search term above and press enter to search.