Patr333x blog

Costa Concordia

2012-01-21T15:55:00.000-08:00

A lot has been written in the manosphere about the accident of the Costa Concordia and the aftermath. Women seem to be complaining about the "Women and Children First" practice not being followed to their liking, while men have been commenting that after decades of feminism, it is no longer realistic to expect this. My take on this is a little different: I think the problem that women are having is that men were not rushing to sacrifice themselves for the women on board; this pokes holes in the ideology of feminism. In a push-comes-to-shove dangerous situation, a woman's "specialness" is just not apparent.

I don't think that women are complaining about a lack of gallantry, I think they are complaining about a lack of servile behavior from the men.

Redesign

2012-01-07T13:17:00.000-08:00

I am in the process of re-designing this blog. I will soon be making more frequent posts and basically starting this blog over.

Women helping the MRM.

2010-12-05T15:34:00.000-08:00

It seems women are turning up on various websites saying they want to help men with men's rights issues. These same women also proceed to tell men how they should fight their battles and use the typical shaming language that a feminist uses. The problem is that these women are condescending, thinking they have qualifications they don't really have to help men.

Women may be becoming more aware of men's rights issues, but it is usually when it begins to affect their own lives, through their sons, brothers or husbands. For many years, men have been treated unfairly in court while women said nothing. I am all for women helping if they are sincere, but it seems some women become activists only when the corrupt system affects their own bottom line. It seems women are only noticing these issues now that enough men have become angry; I have to ask, do women want to help or is this damage control?

I think women should offer help in men's rights action when they can, and I welcome their sincere input. However, since women don't go to jail for twenty years for rapes they never committed, I think the leadership of any men's rights work should be in the hands of men.

Weininger Quotes

2010-05-18T13:31:00.000-07:00

These are some of my favorite quotes from Sex and Character, by Otto Weininger:

"A poseur almost always interprets the actions of another person as poses."

"When deception suits her (often unconscious) wishes, a woman will become totally uncritical and lose all control over reality."

"A woman is never solitary, she knows neither the love or fear of solitude."

"Because woman does not perceive the other human being as a separate being she never suffers from her neighbor, and for that reason alone she can always feel superior to all human beings."

"A woman always lays equal claim to all the men in the world."

"One needs only to step out into the street to find that there is scarcely a woman whose face does not promptly give her away."

"Women often wait for, and if possible choose, that man who is able to confer the greatest value upon them- the most magnificent and most famous man, the first among all."

"Woman does not want the pure, chaste, moral man, but-somebody else."

"Hysterical women never reflect on themselves, they only want others to think about them and be interested in them."

"Every mother of her own children is the step-mother of all other creatures."

Deference

2010-02-21T16:24:00.000-08:00

"People who expect deference resent mere civility." Mason Cooley

I work under the idea that women are attracted to only the top portion of a given male population. I think that the percentage of that portion varies according to the individual woman; a super-model may only find 5% of given males acceptable, while a more average-looking woman may find 20% acceptable. The point is that women are much more selective in their mating preferences.

While it may be a woman's own business as to what she finds attractive, the problem is that she is NOT indifferent to those men she does not find accepteable. I believe many women simply expect deference from men that they don't find to be eligible mates. I think most of those "rejected" men would rather be ignored than obligated by a large portion of society to place women who detests them on pedestals. This is probably one of the many reasons men opt to go their own way. To me, this also explains why women do not often appreciate anything done for them. Women simply expect special treatment from men not on their mating radar. The problem is that most men don't want to waste resources on women who don't want them, men will often do exactly that however, if they are lead to believe that they are cared for.

To me, this explains some of the callous behavior of women in regards to cuckolding and the like. A woman is not concerned with a man's feelings even though they are married in part because she doesn't really view him as a separate person. To her, she and the "alphas" she is attracted to are human; the other men are subhuman.

A Vision of the Future.

2010-01-08T13:43:00.000-08:00

I have this vision of the future: In a not-so-distant future, the government will mandate that everyone wear a T-shirt with a number on it; any number from one through ten. The government will decide which numbers are given out and to whom; the criteria will be designated by the government and will not be made public. There will be no hearings, your assigned number will be your number. Wearing the shirts will be mandatory and it will be a crime to try to present a number other than the one assigned.

Those with high numbers such as ten and nine, will do anything required of them by the government in order to keep their high numbers and any privileges that go with them. Those with numbers eight through six will do their best to cozy up to those wearing higher numbers than themselves, while they demand deference from those with lower numbers. Those with the lowest numbers will be discouraged but will have little power to do anything about their situation.

The number system will have the consequence of curtailing creativity, as those with lower numbers that can't be raised will hold back on their contribution to society as much as they can. Many will grumble about the situation from behind closed doors but no one will stick their neck out as that would be a risk of his own number.

A very, very few will actually question the right of the government to assign ranked numbers to people and force the wearing of them.They will not be heard among those with higher numbers too busy enjoying their advantages over the lower numbers to question the system.

Youtube

2009-09-20T13:49:00.000-07:00

These are some Youtube channels that I think have good content:

schopenbecq
misesmedia
outlaw2747
factory2590
MGTOW
themanonthestreet
wizardking78
pinegrove33
arguseyes
verlch
sauvecitobro2
antifeminismaus
champcreed
menareangrynow

Beauty

2009-09-01T13:57:00.000-07:00

We have often read of feminists claiming that women are "objectified" and judged on their appearance. Women often complain of the pressure they are under to look good. Women also complain of the treatment unattractive women get in society,while saying nothing about the treatment that unattractive men get. My problem with all of this is that women want to complain about discrimination only to have more ability to discriminate against others themselves.

What do most above-average looking women do? They pursue wealthy men. In the case of most women who complain about their appearance, what would they do if they could be granted stunning looks? I know what they would do, they would persue wealthy and attractive men. Women want more parity with their more attractive sisters so as to be able to have the same leverage in discriminating against that evil of evils: regular men. On top of this, they expect men to share in the pity-fest. To me, it just smacks of someone with plenty to eat complaining to a starving person that there is no gourmet food available.

Knaves

2009-08-26T16:58:00.000-07:00

Tennyson's poem, Idylls of the King, has a few lines that I think describes the attitude of many women. In a section titled, "Gareth and Lynette" has Gareth, about to become a knight doing duty as a kitchen knave and is sent by Arthur to assist Lynette. Lynette doesn't yet know the true background of Gareth.

"Ay, sir knave!
Ay, knave, because thou strikest as a knight,
Being but knave, I hate thee all the more."

"Fair damsel, you should worship me the more,
thus being but knave, I throw thine enemies."

To me, this is a good example of the way many women think: They don't look at actions, but instead focus on status and title. Later in the poem, Lynette does come to appreciate Gareth, only when she finds out his true title.

It has been my experience that women, (and many men also) will form an opinion very fast and stick with it, regardless of contradictory evidence. She doesn't care what a man does, she cares about WHO is doing it. I think this extends past relationships and even to interacting with co-workers and women in public. I think it is best for men to keep a low profile, keep their eyes open and not stick their necks out for anyone who has not proven themselves worthy.

George Sodini Discourse.

2009-08-06T17:11:00.000-07:00

I have not blogged in a while, but in light of the coverage regarding George Sodini and his shooting of a fitness center, I am being active on this blog again.
And that is just it: all of the feminist and men's rights blogs and internet video channels are ramping up with their take on this tragic event. Between Sodini's blog and Youtube channel, and all of the commentary by others on their internet outlets, much of the suffering involved with this event is seemingly for public consumption. The question is: What will become of it?

Many men have already come out in their own forums or in commenting on feminist blogs that Sodini's actions are inexcusable, which they are. Since Sodini is not likely to receive much sympathy, will this result in more scrutiny of mens rights blogs and channels? This event brings a lot of different issues concerning the sexes to the forefront. Where this discourse will lead is still too early to tell. Will anything be learned, I wonder, or will it be just more internet backbiting?

While Sodini's actions were inexcusable, I can't help but wonder if this event will lead to further social marginalization of those who lack social skills. While Sodini's example is an extreme one, I can't help but wonder if this will lead to unconstructive stereotyping, such as was seen after the Columbine shootings with those wearing dark trenchcoats.

I personally hope this event triggers at least some rational discourse on the issues involved, and not just used as fuel for propaganda on all sides, though I am sure there will be some of that. I just hope that among the media noise that there will be an opportunity for people to stop and think about a few things. I don't think this situation is as simple as it seems. Sodini was clearly disturbed, but writing him off as "crazy" and a "woman hater" somehow seem too simple. I think we now have a chance to discuss some of these issues in a new light without resorting to common finger-pointing.

This is a tough situation for anyone writing on men's rights; I obviously can't defend him, but we need to discuss this in ALL of its facets. I don't think the public can just dismiss him, and those like him, as "losers" and "crazy". As we have seen, the ramifications are all too serious.

Appearances

2009-01-06T11:37:00.000-08:00

One frustrating thing about dealing with feminists and with many women in general is that they seem to have a hard time getting past outer appearances. Women date good-looking losers, feminists cite false statistics, weak men, (manginas) defend immoral women. I used to think that there was this large scale inability for many people to see past appearances, but I realized later that many people willfully refuse to do so.

When a man lies about another man, it is often really a way to lie about himself by contrast. If he declares, "I am intelligent" or "I am more intelligent than Jim is" he may be called upon to back that up; if he says, "Jim is stupid", then it will be Jim who is questioned. It is implied that the other man is smarter because he cast himself in the role of Jim's critic. This offers no proof of intelligence and that is the point: to state a position without having to back up the assertions. If a person agrees with him that Jim is stupid, they both can be in collusion and feel superior, for they have found a scapegoat in Jim and merit is never a part of the eqaution in situations like these.

We find this a lot with the statements of feminists; they will accuse men of every evil imaginable and by doing so, claim a moral high ground by doing no more than pointing an accusing finger at others. When feminists accuse men of being immoral, it is a good way to take the spotlight off of their dating drug dealers and having multiple abortions. Their criticism is largely a pre-emptive move against any criticism they may encounter themselves. Feminists have appointed themselves watchdog over men and thus have implied authority. If men question feminism, they have to go against an authoritarian structure that is largely false.

If I point out a defect in you, I have not really proved anything about my own ability, but I have claimed an authoritarian position by default. While you begin to state a defense, you forget that my argument was based on presupposition to begin with.

The problem feminists have is that if they begin to look at the world more realistically, without the male bogeyman, they may have to look at themselves a little more honestly. If it turns out the dragon was an illusion, claims of being the dragonslayer and the rewards that come with it go out the window.

Chivalry

2008-12-09T13:23:00.000-08:00

A topic that comes up often in MRA discussion is chivalry, when it comes up, I always think of something I dealt with when I was younger. Whenever I walked into a building, if a woman was behind me, (actually, if anyone was behind me) I would hold the door open for her, as I was taught to do. Some women actually thanked me, but most gave a sort of grunt and hurriedly moved on; one even rolled her eyes when I held the door. I decided that maybe women appreciated that behavior in men that were more attractive than I was, or at least men who were older. I decided to accept my situation and stopped holding doors in most cases. I let women get their own doors and simply decided I wasn't going to bother anyone.

What I noticed next puzzled me for quite a while. After I stopped holding doors, women acted as if I were rude. It seemed I was damned if I did, and damned if I didn't. Then it occured to me: women perhaps wanted everyone to hold open doors, but only wanted to acknowledge a certain few of the men who did so. From what I observe, women do not appreciate any thing that might be regarded as chivalry from men they do not consider attractive; instead they expect those men to perform chivalry as duty. It is only appreciated as a self-initiated act when the man has enough attractiveness or social status.

To be honest, I am all for holding a door for anyone behind me, but I really am not interested in reinforcing my "low-status" to some woman whose position over me is largely in her head.

Men's Rights

2008-07-13T13:53:00.000-07:00

This blog will focus largely on men's rights, but will cover many other topics as well.